Strategic Distance Learning Leadership in Higher Education Dr. Pam Northrup Interim Dean, College of Professional Studies Associate Provost, Academic Innovation University of West Florida Introduction In 2010, enrollment in distance learning courses across 2,500 colleges and universities in the US rose by one million students bringing the number of students taking online courses to approximately 5.6 million. This increase represents the largest ever year-to-year increase (Allen & Seaman, 2010). This widespread increase indicates that nearly 75% of institutions report that economic issues have increased the demand for online courses. Times have changed so much in the past 3-4 years with public institutions receiving less money from the state to operate, with stimulus funding going away and with more students on our virtual doorstep. This new normal in higher education requires institutions to rethink core mission and how to bring in funding to the institution without overburdening the student, without significant faculty and staff layoffs, while maintaining competitive advantage. At the same time, faculty, chairs and college deans are still concerned about rigor and larger class sizes for both face to face and online students. According to Christenson (2011), distance learning is a disruptive force in higher education with focus on teaching and a new business model emerging to support and ultimately it is a key strategy to increase enrollments. In addition to student enrollment increases, distance learning as a disruptive technology and faculty continuing to express desire for quality at all costs this new normal is gaining significant attention from institutional presidents, provosts, from statewide bodies such as Boards of Governors and at the national level with new Integrity Guidelines for compliance. This paper will focus on strategically leading distance learning as a key institutional strategy through these times of significant change in higher education. The New Normal in Higher Education Many institutions have been wrestling with exactly what this means in terms of higher education costs vs values coupled by inflation. This translates into inflated tuition dollars educating the same (or similar) number of students as in previous years with less support from the state. In Florida, state support has declined significantly in the past 3-4 years and at present, state support is at 50% of full time equivalent (fte). Historically, state support was much higher along with more dollars available for requests for new dollars (translated into new faculty lines, new buildings, new projects, etc.). According to Stephen Laster, CIO of Harvard Business School this translates into the real question: Is this higher education cost basis sustainable? No one sees the trend going back to business as usual but rather trying to determine what pressures will continue to be on higher education institutions to be more efficient with their financial and human resources (Grush, 2010). According to David Gergen, Harvard JFK School of Government, we re not going to spend our way out of this budget crunch, we re not going to tax our way out of it. We re going to have to innovate our way out of it as a country. (TIA-CREFF) The sentiment exists on campuses across the country. At the University of West Florida, the leadership team, led by the President, has been holding New Normal retreats for the past academic year to try to figure out our new normal for higher education. Many creative ideas have emerged; importantly to this discussion is the rationale to continue to invest in distance learning as a long term strategy for the institution. This may include more expansive marketing, more possible program areas geared toward specific audiences (such as the military s request for shorter duration courses) and really thinking beyond the traditional campus experience for students that are non-traditional learners. So, for many institutions across the country as Copyright 2011 The Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System 1
evidenced by the over 1 million NEW distance learners in higher education in 2010, this is an institutional strategy for many. Grappling with the Existing Normal Within a College The federal stimulus provided a two year intermission from budget cuts and layoffs. With the federal stimulus going away, institutions are faced once again with contemplating its operational model to better meet core mission. At the University of West Florida, distance learning has been recognized as a significant multiplier for enrollments. As an institution that is at the tip of the panhandle with another state to its west and north and the Gulf of Mexico to the south, it was decided many years ago that distance learning would be a focus of enrollment growth and access to higher education and it has paid off with over 25% of all enrollments campus-wide coming from distance learning students. Investments were made to create 23 programs fully online with faculty incentives, incentives to colleges for enrollment growth, consistent and ongoing faculty support and student support. Much has been accomplished in the seven years since this decision was made, institutionally. Within the College of Professional Studies at UWF, 55% of all enrollments are taught through fully online courses. The policies and practices of establishing distance learning and institutionalizing it as a core priority was done at the institutional level where the larger infrastructure and support was put in place. As a guide for the institution, the Academic Technology Center developed an active conceptual framework to support systemic distance learning using it as the framework to engage each level of the institution in planning and continuous improvement to meet university-driven goals. The framework includes alignment to institutional mission, quality curriculum, faculty support, student support and continuous improvement (Northrup, 2004). The conceptual framework (http://uwf.edu/atc/index.cfm) represents literature and best practices in the field. UWF s conceptual framework was crafted based on Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) Definitions and Principles for Distance Education, Western Interstate Commission on Higher Education and the Southern Regional Electronic Board (SREB), Sloan-C Consortium s Pillars of Effective Practice for Distance Learning, and the Department of Defense Principles of Good Practice and Quality Matters. Each document has a common goal of framing quality systemically and has similar areas of alignment. Continuous quality improvement is also evident in each of the documents, with Sloan-C representing a solid framework of metrics and progress indices. What is evident by viewing distance-learning quality as a set of interconnected parts all working together to achieve a common goal is the ability to look not only at the discrete parts, but also the interconnectedness of the components (Northrup, 2009). With a robust conceptual framework in place, The College of Professional Studies Dean has taken the metrics within the institutional framework to personalize it to the level of a college and academic unit. To do so, the Dean established a college-level Distance Learning Task Force to spend the year reviewing institutional best practices, reviewing college level data, surveying each respective academic department and surveying the college faculty to determine next steps for supporting distance learning within the college. Although much has been done institutionally to shape best practice, most decisions about adjunct usage, faculty training, course development and offerings, student advising and faculty evaluations are handled within the college, most occurring within the academic department itself. As a college with high distance learning student enrollments, it was anticipated from the outset, that this faculty driven task force would identify areas that still required resolution although there would be best practices resident within the college itself. Although this seems like a logical next step, the level of planning within an academic unit and even within a college to consider how distance-learning programs are implemented is a challenge. Taking into account unit accreditation requirements, such as NCATE within the college and the role of continuous improvement for teacher preparation programs presents opportunities to better align what the institutional Copyright 2011 The Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System 2
policy frames to the needs of a Professional Education Unit that emphasizes such things as clinical practice in multiple locations, including virtual school student teaching. Considered also are data collection and monitoring for all program areas emphasizing the role of the chair and the expectations for reporting in annual reports at the departmental level. Finally, the role of a faculty member to teach an online course taking into account how quality can be achieved, how student identity is verified and how assessment can be purposeful and align to institutional policies for academic integrity. It truly is where the rubber meets the road in systemic planning for distance learning. Findings from the College Level Task Force Findings within the College of Professional Studies resulted in six primary areas of interest to include administration, student access and support, faculty/adjunct support, the role of the faculty member, instructional environment/ course quality and technology usage. Based on the institution s conceptual framework for distance learning, there were both best practices and areas of need still existing within the college to strengthen the distance learning experience. Although our students were achieving equal grades face to face or online and were completing courses at impressive rates (88-100% course completions based on program), there are still areas of improvement needed. The table below identifies the indicators within the six primary areas of interest that are to be addressed in upcoming strategic planning for the College. Table 1. Areas of Interest for College-Level Distance Learning Success Interest Area Indicators Interest Area Indicators Administration Evaluation of courses Realistic course assignments Student Access and Student experience Student opinion (recognition) Accommodation of student needs Advising Faculty/Adjunct Required adjunct training Required faculty training Compensation Instructional Environment/Course Quality Office hours Learning outcomes achievement Creativity Inconsistency across courses Organization Student engagement Academic Integrity Technology Usage LMS issues edesktop Web conferencing Pulling in external content Software available Role of the faculty member Presence in course Feedback Design skills Development skills Ability to teach online As a result, there were several recommendations made that will be incorporated into strategic planning for the upcoming year within the college to support faculty, adjuncts and students. In these times of core mission focus, strategic budgeting and planning and the new normal, any focused effort must be tied to direct needs and to increase the overall virtual footprint of the college. Growth without a solid foundation and continuous improvement would not result in desired ends. Our faculty are very committed to quality Copyright 2011 The Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System 3
online courses and ultimately wish to grow their skill sets. However, tolerance for courses that are not well designed or not well supported (faculty presence, engagement and feedback) will no longer be allowed. This requires academic chairs to monitor closely student evaluations and to be more attuned to what is happening in online courses as well as face to face courses. Ultimately, taking a proactive approach to training, using Quality Matters as a benchmark for quality online courses and supporting faculty and students is the tactic to be taken within our College. The notion of continuous improvement by using data, selecting key interventions for improvement and judging success is the strategic model that will be used. Overall decisions were made as follows: 1. Train all faculty in best practices for teaching online to establish quality in all online courses. This will include student engagement, student presence, self-directed learning, the role of the faculty member, student, and the promotion of academic integrity and ongoing instructor feedback. 2. Recognize faculty and adjuncts who have demonstrated high standards for online learning. 3. Promote high quality online advising. 4. Expand knowledge base of chairs to provide evaluation of online teaching through annual evaluation channels. 5. Collect data by program, monitor and make continuous improvement. 6. Initiate more focus on blended learning programs. 7. Provide and support a service structure for online services delivery (beyond regular service hours). 8. Build strong departmental plans for when and how distance learning is being used to provide access to students and monitor plan (through data collection protocols established college-wide). 9. Expand marketing efforts for online programs beyond institutional marketing. 10. Make a conscious effort to hire adjuncts early to provide mentoring and adjunct training. Conclusion If distance learning is truly to disrupt the academy, there are many tactical things that must be in place to include looking at the business model to support distance learning, the type of faculty that are tasked to teach online, the efficiencies that can be gained through strategic partnerships and new models to expand access to teaching and learning. Regrettably, at most institutions, there are still tactical tweaks that need to be made to make this type of transformational effort a success. In the interim, better understanding the needs of individual faculty, departments and supports for non-traditional learners must be in place and monitored continuously. References Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2010). Class differences: Online education in the United States. Babson Survey Research Group. Needham, MA. The Sloan Consortium. Christensen, C. M, Horn, M. B., Caldera, L., & Soares, L. (2011). Disrupting college: How disruptive innovation can deliver quality and affordability to postsecondary education. Center for American Progress. Retrieved from: http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/02/disrupting_college.html Grush, M. (2010). Higher education IT in the New Normal. An interview with Stephen Laster. Campus Technology. Retrieved from: http://campustechnology.com/articles/2010/04/28/higher- Education-IT-in-the-New-Normal.aspx?Page=1 Moore, J. C. (2005). The Sloan Consortium quality framework and their five pillars. Sloan-C Consortium. Retrieved from http://www.sloanconsortium.org/publications/books/qualityframework.pdf Northrup, P.T. (2004). A guide to quality distance learning at the University of West Florida. Retrieved from http://uwf.edu/atc/quality.htm Copyright 2011 The Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System 4
Northrup, P. T. (2009.) Studio e TM : Building a framework for online course quality with faculty professional development. Proceedings from the 25 th annual conference on Distance Teaching and Learning, Madison, WI. PRNewswire. (December 3, 2010). A new normal for higher education in the 21 st century announced at the TIAA-CREFF Institute 2009 higher education leadership conference. Retrieved from: http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/a-new-normal-for-higher-education-in-the-21st- century-announced-at-the-tiaa-cref-institute-2009-higher-education-leadership-conference- 78410507.html SACS. Best practices for electronically offered degree programs. Retrieved from http://www.sacscoc.org/pdf/commadap.pdf Southern Region Education Board (2004). Principles of good practice: Foundations of quality for Southern Region Education Board s electronic campus. About the Presenter Dr. Pam Northrup is the Interim Dean for the College of Professional Studies and Associate Provost for Academic Innovation at the University of West Florida. She has spent several years leading the integration of innovative technologies for teaching and learning. Most recently, she is involved in developing a highly immersive curriculum for the National Flight Academy. She has been involved with the U.S. military in deploying mobile devices to service members for the continuation of academic coursework while deployed. She also has spent a number of years developing and implementing online programs with direct responsibility for leading an innovative center that designs, develops and implements online learning. Address: University of West Florida 11000 University Parkway Pensacola, FL 32514 E-mail: pnorthru@uwf.edu URL: http://uwf.edu/atc Phone: 850-474-3255 Fax: 850-474-3205 Copyright 2011 The Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System 5