AQIP Annual Report September 2004 During the 2003-2004 Academic Year,…

AQIP Annual Report
September 2004

During the 2003-2004 Academic Year, the sub-committees formed in 2002 from the 48
member AQIP steering committee, and responsible for studying each AQIP action item,
met on a regular basis to discuss the feasibility of the various action items and developed
strategies and plans for their implementation. Many of the sub-committees worked
collaboratory and shared information for the development of their particular project.
During the year, the sub-committees completed "inventories" of the activities already
being performed at the institution that addressed the individual action projects, and new
initiatives were also started as a result of the sub-committee's activities. At the end of the
year, the sub-committees communicated many recommendations for the implementation
of the action projects and also made suggestions of the university area or division that
would be responsible for these activities. The following sections describe each
committee's progress. Further details and the sub-committee reports can be found at:
http://www.ohiou.edu/provost/accreditation.html

ACTION PROJECT ONE

A. Describe the past year's accomplishments and the current status of the project.

The Action Project One sub-committee revised the Action Project to reflect and
emphasize measurable outcomes directly related to educational activities that are key to
the Ohio University educational mission, and define educational engagement and student
responsibility for engagement. The Action Project now reads: Develop, implement, and
assess strategies that foster individual responsibility of first year students regarding
their attitudes and behaviors towards learning, research and creative activity.

The sub-committee gathered information to review (such as the National Survey on
Student Engagement ­ NSSE ­ and Faculty Survey of Student Engagement ­ FSSE ­
results) and worked collaboratively with other project groups from AQIP to seek focus
group information from Ohio University students and faculty. Analysis of these data was
used to determine the areas that Ohio University is making adequate progress related to
first year engagement and identify areas that are in need of improvement. Analysis of the
NSSE data was used to set benchmarks for which improvements could be measured.

From the analysis of the data, it was determined the Ohio University first-year student
engagement levels are not necessarily at a troublesome level within the institution. In
fact, current data indicate that students experience improvement in educational
engagement as they work through their courses of study.

From analysis of the NSSE and FSSE data, several items emerged as areas of strength at
Ohio University in terms of first-year student engagement. These engagement items
were noted by faculty as an important and frequently done task, and first-year students
report doing this task more than their peers:
   · Use email to communicate with an instructor.



                                                                                            1
   ·   Prepared two or more drafts of a paper or assignment before turning it in.
   ·   Contributed to: Speaking clearly and effectively.
   ·   Contributed to: Understanding yourself.
   ·   Emphasize: Providing the support you need to thrive socially.
   ·   Quality: Your relationships with other students.

Other items were identified by the sub-committee as areas where Ohio University is
performing adequately:

   ·   Asked questions in class or contributed to class discussions.
   ·   Discussed grades or assignments with an instructor.
   ·   Received prompt feedback from faculty on your academic performance (written
       or oral).
   ·   Worked harder than you thought you could to meet an instructor's standards or
       expectations.
   ·   Coursework emphasizes: Applying theories or concepts to practical problems or
       in new situations.
   ·   Discussed ideas from your readings or classes with others outside of class
       (students, family members, coworkers, etc.).
   ·   Had serious conversations with students who are very different from you
       (religious beliefs, political opinions or values).
   ·   Coursework emphasized: Memorizing facts, ideas or methods from your course
       and readings.
   ·   Included diverse perspectives (different races, religions, genders, political beliefs)
       in class discussions or assignments.
   ·   Put together ideas or concepts from different courses when completing
       assignments or during class discussions.
   ·   Talked about career plans with a faculty member or advisor.

Additional items were identified as areas for improvement at Ohio University for first-
year students. These items were identified by faculty as being important and frequently
done, however first-year students did not report doing them as much as their peers.

   ·   Worked on a paper or project that required integrating ideas or information from
       various sources.
   ·   Coursework emphasizes: Analyzing the basic elements of an idea, experience, or
       theory.
   ·   Coursework emphasizes: Synthesizing and organizing ideas, information, or
       experiences.
   ·   Coursework emphasizes: Making judgments about the value of information,
       arguments, or methods.
   ·   Make a class presentation.
   ·   Worked with other students on projects during class.
   ·   Worked with classmates outside of class to prepare class assignments.



                                                                                            2
   ·   Used electronic medium (listserve, char, group, internet, etc.) to discuss or
       complete an assignment.
   ·   Had serious conversations with students of a different race or ethnicity other than
       your own.
   ·   Came to class without completing readings or assignments.
   ·   Contributed to: Solving complex, real-world problems.
   ·   Contributed to: (Your) contributing to the welfare of your community.

With the aid of the Office of Institutional Research, the sub-committee identified the
following courses within the institute as being heavily enrolled by 1st year students and as
a result could be targets for improvements in student engagement. These courses were
identified as:
                        CHEM 151
                        COMS 103
                        ECON 103, 104
                        ENG 151
                        HLTH 202
                        IART 117
                        MATH 113, 163A
                        PHIL 101
                        POLS 101
                        PSY 101
                        SOC 101

The sub-committee made the following recommendations in order to address the areas
where Ohio University could make significant improvement with regards to first-year
student engagement.

   ·   Ohio University instructors of first-year students should make efforts to address
       the items listed above in the "area for improvement" section in their courses.
       Implementation of engaging activities and setting expectations for students to
       engage in these activities are necessary if responsibility for learning is to be
       transferred to first-year students. Courses (as listed above) which are heavily
       populated with first-year students should be especially targeted to improve
       educational engagement. Implementation of these items may be prevented by
       numerous barriers, most notably large class size, where the responsibility for
       learning is shouldered by students.

   ·   The instructors of first-year students must be the leaders in the first-year student
       engagement effort. They should be actively recruited to serve on committees,
       task forces, and projects where goals for educational outcomes of first-year
       students are identified.

   ·   Models such as the Faculty Learning Communities (FLC, collaborations between
       faculty teaching large classes in which the subject material is related) are



                                                                                              3
       recommended so that teachers of first-year students can identify classroom goals
       and strategies and offer support to one another as implementation progresses.

   ·   It is recommended that support be given, with a series of small grants; faculty
       initiatives that identify meaningful ways to assist first-year students in taking
       responsibility for their learning and to enhance the engagement of first-year
       students in educational endeavors.

   ·   Teaching Colloquia focusing on ways to effectively engage students in their
       learning, promote strategies to incorporate activities such as meaningful papers
       and presentations, and encourage a commitment to promote student responsibility
       for their learning should be offered to faculty and graduate teaching assistants
       (TAs) who teach first-year student courses. Course credit could be given to the
       TAs who participate in the colloquia.

   ·   Develop "summer projects" for incoming students that prepare them for engaged
       learning and follow up with the project throughout the year or beyond. These
       activities could involve faculty and TAs who are or have participated in FLCs and
       teaching colloquia.

   ·   The NSSE and FSSE instruments should be administered each year so that
       progress toward the goal can be monitored with consistent measurements.

B. Describe how the institution involved people in work on this project.

The sub-committee was inclusive with members from all constituency groups at the
institution including, faculty, students and administration. The members also reported the
actions of the committee to and collected feedback from the constituencies they
represent. The committee also worked collaboratively with the other Action Project sub-
committees throughout the year. The sub-committee is confident that the lines of
communication were extensive and that the awareness of the Action Project was
extensive across campus.

C. Describe your next planned steps for this Actions Project.

Continue to improve expectations as well as attitudes of first-year students regarding
active educational engagement.

Encourage and continue to expand development and involvement in the Faculty Learning
Communities (FLC).

Develop teaching colloquia for faculty and TAs who instruct first-year students, focusing
on ways to effectively engage students in their learning experience.




                                                                                           4
Institute a series of "Best Practice Grants" that will encourage Faculty to develop
innovative methods to assist first-year students in taking responsibility for their learning
and to enhance the engagement of first-year students in their educational endeavors.

The NSSE and FSSE instruments will continue to be administered to monitor progress
towards the goal of increasing student engagement.

D. Describe any effective practice that resulted from your work on this Action Project?

The university community continues to develop a strong culture of emphasizing student
engagement, especially in the first year.

A first-year summer reading program has been developed at the institution. Students are
given their reading assignment during Precollege Orientation and will be required to
participate in peer lead discussion groups during the newly instituted "Welcome Week"
for first-year students. Welcome week will be held for the first time in September of
2004, one week before fall term begins.

E. What challenges, if any, are you still facing in regard to this Action Project?

Accurate data analysis, so informed decisions can be made.

Challenging the proper campus group(s)/divisions to expand or institute many of the
recommendations of the subcommittee.

Making the proper budgetary decisions to move forward on the key recommendations of
the committee.

ACTION PROJECT TWO

Develop and Support Faculty and Future Faculty Involvement in Enhancing Active
        Student Engagement in Learning, Research and Creative Activity

   A. Describe the past year's accomplishments and the current status of the project.

The members of the AQIP Action Project 2 sub-committee met on a regular basis and
focused their deliberations on the recommendations proposed in the sub-committee report
issued during the spring of 2003. Throughout their deliberations, the following topics
were considered:

   ·   Whether the earlier recommended actions were practical and feasible.
   ·   Whether the earlier recommended actions would adequately address the goals
       articulated in the Institutional Profile Workbook:
           o Developing a shared understanding among faculty of the importance of
               developing a learning-centered research university that fosters student
               engagement and active learning at all levels.


                                                                                               5
         o Designing and implementing development programs that provide
             opportunities for faculty to sharpen their skills in designing active learning
             experiences with a particular attention on undergraduate and graduate
             research activities as a mechanism for engagement.
         o Realigning faculty reward systems so that individual faculty goals overlap
             with departmental and institutional goals in promoting active learning
             environments, student engagement in and out of the classroom, and the
             successful implementation of the new General Education Curriculum.
   ·   Whether additional actions were needed to realize the articulated goals.

The recommendations which were made by the sub-committee in 2003 were analyzed
and categorized as: 1) Completed, 2) Unfeasible/unnecessary or 3) Underway or will be
undertaken.

The sub-committee also identified the groups responsible for performing or overseeing
these actions, and the assessment measures by which the success of these actions could
be measured. The sub-committee feels the actions which have been completed; underway
or future endeavors will enable and empower faculty to expand their pedagogical reach
and will strengthen the University Community's awareness of, and commitment to, the
principles of student engagement and active learning.

The goals recommended by the sub-committee in 2003 were reviewed during the past
year and the accomplished activities related to the goals are summarized below.

Goal 1: Publicize importance of active learning and student engagement.
   · A university AQIP website has been created.
   · Feature articles about active learning have been published in the Ohio University
       publication Outlook.
   · Colleges and departments have been encouraged to add an AQIP link to their
       websites.

Goal 2: Educate the university community about what it means to be a learning-centered
university.
   · The annual "Spotlight on Learning" and Richard Paul workshops, which focus on
       innovative ideas to increase student engagement and active learning is continuing
       and being broadened in scope.

Goal 3: Faculty development activities and rewards designed to encourage the
development of a learning-centered university.
   · The university will begin to encourage the funding of 1804 proposals that
       emphasize student engagement.
   · The institution has created a Best Practices Grant Fund through the Office of the
       Provost to support faculty curricular and pedagogical development.
   · Plans are to continue financial support for undergraduate research through the use
       of the Provost Undergraduate Research Fund (PURF).



                                                                                          6
   B. Describe how the institution involved people in work on this project.

The sub-committee was inclusive with members from all constituency groups at the
institution including, faculty, students and administration. The members also reported the
actions of the committee to and collected feedback from the constituencies they
represent. The committee also worked collaboratively with the other Action Project sub-
committees. The sub-committee is confident that the lines of communication were
extensive and that the awareness of the Action Project was extensive across campus.

   C. Describe your next planned steps for this Actions Project.

Goal 1:
   · Articles in national and regional media regarding active learning and student
        engagement at Ohio University will be published.

Goal 2:
   · The "Spotlight on Learning" and Richard Paul Workshop series which focuses on
        innovative practices for student engagement will be continued.
   · Seminars and workshops for new graduate teaching assistants will be provided
        focusing on methods to promote student engagement.

Goal 3:
   · The institution will continue to encourage involvement of undergraduate/graduate
        students in faculty-directed research and creative activity projects.
   · Support for the "Best Practices Grants" will be continued to aid learning centered
        curricular and pedagogical development by Ohio University Faculty.
   · Departments and Colleges will be encouraged to review their Promotion and
        Tenure and merit processes to assure that employment of pedagogical efforts by
        faculty to increase student learning and engagement are recognized and rewarded.

D. Describe any effective practice that resulted from your work on this Action Project?

An increase in the campus awareness of active learning and student engagement practices
through the media and campus workshops such as the "Spotlight on Learning" and the
Richard Paul Workshop series.

Increases in the funding opportunities through the 1804 Grant Program and the creation
of the Best Practices Grants to fund innovative ideas by faculty for student learning and
engagement.

E. What challenges, if any, are you still facing in regard to this Action Project?

While improving, convincing the faculty as a whole of the merits of active learning and
student engagement continues to be a challenge. Addressing these ideas in the curriculum
and the classroom requires a significant amount of change in thinking and procedure
which is always difficult for some to accept.


                                                                                            7
Allocating monetary resources for new initiatives is difficult in these hard budgetary
times.

Addressing the faculty perception that current tenure and promotion guidelines and
expectations do not recommend or reward participation in professional development
directed towards improving student engagement and learning practices.

ACTION PROJECT 3

    Provide residential programs and instructional spaces that facilitate student
              engagement in learning, research, and creative activity.

   A. Describe the past year's accomplishments and the current status of the project.

The sub-committee met on a regular basis, replaced the student members of the sub-
committee who had graduated and refined the project's purpose statement.

Innovations in classroom design and technology were explored through presentations by
vendor representatives from Steelcase and Polyvision.

The sub-committee consulted with university staff responsible for related planning and/or
coordinating ventures (Enrollment Management Committee, Information Technology
Council, Learning Initiatives Committee, Presidential Mission Planning Teams) and also
coordinated efforts with university staff responsible for functions being reviewed by the
committee (classroom renovations, space management, classroom technology, facilities
management, residence life, university center, facilities planning).

Given the expansion of the team's project at the request of the Provost, the sub-
committee was divided into three groups or "teams", each with its own charge and
membership. Tasks were assigned to each group to facilitate the transition. The charges
of the three teams were as follows:

Instructional Facilities Team: Determine how the current instructional space renovation
process might be altered to result in instructional space that more effectively fosters
student engagement in learning, research and creative activity.

Residential Facilities Team: Determine how the current residential facility renovation
process might be altered to result in residential space that more effectively fosters student
engagement in learning, research and creative activity.

Residential Program Team: Determine how the current residential program might
effectively foster more student engagement in learning, research and creative activity.




                                                                                            8
The assigned tasks for all of the teams was to develop a common understanding of the
role of the facilities/program for learning, determine measures for success and assess the
current status of campus planning and development in the three areas.

Two university staff members were recruited into leadership roles for the teams: Ann
Kovalchick agreed to chair the instructional facilities group and Dale Tampke agree to
chair the residential program group. Terry Hogan, overall chair of the sub-committee,
chaired the residential facilities group.

   B. Describe how the institution involved people in work on this project.

The sub-committee was inclusive with members from all constituency groups at the
institution including, faculty, students and administration. The members also reported the
actions of the committee to and collected feedback from the constituencies they
represent. The committee was also closely aligned with campus groups responsible for
institutional planning (Enrollment Management Committee, Information Technology
Council, Learning Initiatives Committee, Presidential Mission Planning Teams) and
facilities planning and utilization (classroom renovations, space management, classroom
technology, facilities management, residence life, university center, facilities planning).

   C. Describe your next planned steps for this Actions Project.

Explore effective and efficient ways to align and integrate continuous improvement
initiatives as envisioned by this AQIP action item into new or existing university
planning and administration divisions. This would involve integrating continuous
improvement initiatives as envisioned by AQIP into new or existing university planning
and administration and transitioning initiatives from the more "artificial" entities into the
emerging "authentic" entities. For example:

       Shifting efforts related to instructional space to the Instructional space
       subcommittee of the Enrollment Management Committee and the Instructional
       space subcommittee of the Information Technology Council. Though both are
       relatively new, it appears that they will have a continued university life and that
       their charge aligns with the action project 3 purposes.

       Shifting efforts related to improving the residential program to the First Year
       Experience Council. This group, which is evolving from the Learning Initiatives
       Committee was the subject of a recent campus retreat and is poised to provide a
       more holistic approach to engaged learning. It would consider the first year
       residential experience in the context of the overall first year experience.

       Shifting efforts related to improving residential facilities to an emerging working
       group that is focused on short and long term planning for residential facilities.
       This group includes representatives from Facilities Management, Residence
       Auxiliaries, Residence Life, Student Senate, Student Affairs and Facilities
       Planning. With the expansion of membership and a growing acceptance of



                                                                                             9
       learning as a focus, this group is poised to assume the responsibilities of the sub-
       committee.

The residential life programs will continue to be assessed and evaluated regarding their
impact on student engagement and active learning.

Best practices in residential programs at institutions similar to Ohio University will be
identified.

A plan for residence hall and building renovations will be adopted that incorporate the
principles of the action project and maintain faculty, student and staff involvement in
these plans.

Campus-wide emphasis will be placed on efforts to engage students in community
service and civic responsibility.

D. Describe any effective practice that resulted from your work on this Action Project?

The expansion of the Residential Learning Communities (RLC) continues at Ohio
University. During the last two years, the number of RLCs has increased almost two fold
(from 11 to 21) and the number of students enrolled in an RLC in the 03-04 academic
year totaled 239. This growth continues, as the number of RLCs being offered in the 04-
05 academic year will accommodate a maximum of 405 students. In addition, every
college on campus is now participating in an RLC in one fashion or another. This
program maximizes student engagement efforts as well as active learning in a large
campus environment.

Refinements of the RLC's have been made on campus, which make these programs more
attractive to Ohio University students and increase student/student and student/faculty
engagement. Mackinnon Hall currently houses two sections of an RLC. Efforts are being
made to house first year Fine Arts majors in Mackinnon and have an apartment available
in the hall for visiting faculty/artists to the university. Some renovations to the hall are
also being made to better serve the Fine Arts students. A portion of the RLC will be
reserved for Fine Arts students, but also have students from other majors living in the
hall.

Creation of residence halls which maintain a scholastic emphasis. In the 02-03 academic
year, Read Hall was converted to a scholastic emphasis residence hall in order to promote
academic engagement within the student population. The success of this experiment, as
judged by its popularity with students, has been expanded to a second residence hall
(Johnson Hall). Both residence halls are full for the 04-05 academic year. A guest
apartment in both halls will also be used to house academic scholars visiting campus.

Last year, an energy conservation initiative was piloted at the university which was
highly successful. Residence hall staff members were required to participate and strongly




                                                                                            10
encourage residential students to become involved. These initiatives emphasize civic
responsibility and engagement in the community.

E. What challenges, if any, are you still facing in regard to this Action Project?

Transitioning the initiatives that have been created as result of the sub-committees work
into "authentic" entities will be a major challenge. This will require the right campus
group or groups to champion these efforts. It will be important in the future that facilities
that are built or renovated will be done so with the mindset of supporting a learning
environment that emphasizes student engagement, research and creative activity with
faculty and fellow students.

Maintaining faculty involvement in residential programming has in the past and will
continue to be a challenge.

Advancing programming initiatives in times of further budget reductions.

ACTION PROJECT 4

The AQIP Action Project 4 sub-committee began its work in November 2002 with the
original charge of "Implement a revised general education program in the context of
enhanced student engagement." During the 03-04 academic year, this charge was revised
in a more stylistic manner to now read: Implement a revised general education
program designed to ensure that students acquire deep, lasting learning through
their engagement in learning, research, and creative activity. At the end of the 02-03
academic year, the sub-committee identified a set of recommendations to be enacted in
order to facilitate the implementation of the new general education program. The sub-
committee met more infrequently during the 03-04 year to review the progress being
made on the earlier recommendations. The sub-committee reports that the General
Education Council was responsible for the majority of the specific tasks associated with
implementation of the new program.

   A. Describe the past year's accomplishments and the current status of the project.

A process was developed where departments and schools submitted a "rough draft" of the
courses they perceived as eligible to count as general education courses. Over 1300
courses were submitted, which allowed the Council to specify the areas in the new
program where there might be a shortage of courses.

The General Education Council also defined a process for the approval of extant courses
based on three questions: (1) How does the content of the course address the content of
the general education category? (2) What will students do in learning the content of the
general education category? (3) How will student learning be measured/assessed in the
context of the class?




                                                                                           11
A web-based course approval system for the General Education Program has been
designed. This system ran into expected technical difficulties during the 2003-04
academic year, and unfortunately the necessary refinements based on faculty feedback
did not get made in a timely way. Those refinements are now complete, and the system
should be operational by mid-August 2004.

   B. Describe how the institution involved people in work on this project.

The sub-committee was inclusive with members from all constituency groups at the
institution including, faculty, students and administration. The members also reported the
actions of the committee to and collected feedback from the constituencies they
represent. The committee was closely aligned with the General Education Council and
also worked collaboratively with this group throughout the year. The chair of the
General Education Council was a member of the sub-committee. The sub-committee is
confident that the lines of communication were adequate and that the awareness of the
Action Project was extensive across campus.

   C. Describe your next planned steps for this Actions Project.

The General Education Council will analyze the data obtained from the existing course
survey completed last year to specify the areas in the new program where there might be
a shortage of courses. This information will be communicated to the faculty through the
academic departments and Faculty Senate.

With strong encouragement from the upper administration and the colleges, academic
departments will begin to submit existing and develop new general education courses for
approval using the new web based approval process which should go live by mid-August
2004.

Advisory committees to oversee approval of courses in the categories of Mathematical
and Logical Thinking, Oral Expression, Aesthetics Perspective, Culture Perspective,
Ethics Perspective, and the Science & Technology Perspective will be formed. The
extant Committee for Writing Across the Curriculum will serve as the advisory
committee for the category of Written Expression. Advisory committees for the
categories Breadth of Knowledge and Research and Creative Activity will be drawn from
membership of the General Education Council.

A plan will be devised to educate faculty in how to advise students in the transition
period to the new general education program. Development of this plan will entail
meeting with faculty from each college to prepare them to advise students concerning the
new general education program. These meetings should begin in Fall 2004, and the
resulting plan will be reviewed and approved by the General Education Council during
the coming year.

The institution will create a central office that would be responsible for faculty
development and for instructional and technological support. This office will be



                                                                                        12
strategically created by combining all or parts of existing offices, centers and services
which currently operate on campus. These units include The Center for Teaching
Excellence, The Center for Innovation in Technology for Learning and part of the staff
from Instructional Media and Technology Services currently housed in the Alden
Library. These offices and services will be aligned with one another and under the
supervision of one director.

D. Describe any effective practice that resulted from your work on this Action Project?

The creation of a web based system for the general education course approval process is
now complete.

The basic framework for implementation of the General Education Program is now in
place and momentum across campus is being built for the implementation of the program.

E. What challenges, if any, are you still facing in regard to this Action Project?

The institution will need to develop an assessment plan to gauge the efficacy of the new
general education program. Establishment of such a practical assessment plan would need
to be in place for the commencement of the program in Fall 2006.

Implementation will require working within existing structures to ensure a smooth
transition to the new general education program.

The institution must work to ensure that faculty understand the new general education
program and begin to recognize the importance of participating in faculty development
opportunities that ideally will help to create a learning culture where student engagement,
even in large lecture courses, is a significant goal and where assessment is valued.




                                                                                            13