WORKSHOP II:Planning for Course Redesign• Review of Workshop Homework• Innovative Course Redesign Practices• Break-out Sessions: Redesign Plans• Preparing the Final Proposal

FINAL PROPOSAL FORMATDue April 18, 2008

• Abstract• Application Narrative

– Redesign model: how you will embody the Five Principles

– Learning materials: what you plan to use– Assessment strategy: how you plan to

measure student learning– Cost reduction strategy: what you will do

with the savings– Five Critical Implementation Issues: how

you will address – Timeline: pilot in spring 2009; full

implementation in fall 2009

FINAL PROPOSAL FORMATDue April 18, 2008

• Tools and Forms• Assessment Forms (2)• Course Completion Forms (2)• Course Planning Tool (CPT)• Course Savings Summary Form (CSS)• Course Structure Form (CSF)

• A draft of your CPT will be due on 4/4/08.

• Grant awards will be made on 5/15/08.

http://www.theNCAT.org/R2R/R2R_Planning_Resources.htm

• Five Models for Course Redesign• Five Principles of Successful

Course Redesign• Five Models for Assessing Student

Learning• Cost Reduction Strategies• Five Critical Implementation Issues• Five Course Redesign Proposals• Assessment Planning Forms• Course Planning Tool• Course Savings Summary• Course Structure Form• Planning Checklist

READINESS CRITERIA

• What were we looking for in institutional responses?

• Collaborative response—not by one person

• Evidence to document your response—not “yes”

READINESS CRITERION #1Course Choice

• What impact would redesigning the course have on the curriculum, on students and on the institution—i.e., why do you want to redesign this course?

NATURAL SCIENCE

• Canton: Biology• Cobleskill: Botany• Stony Brook: Biology• Stony Brook: Physics

SOCIAL SCIENCE

• Buffalo State: Economics• Oswego: Economics• Oswego: Psychology

QUANTITATIVE

• Monroe CC: Elementary Algebra• Old Westbury: College Algebra• Oswego: College Algebra• Niagara CC: Statistics• Onondaga CC: Info Systems

HUMANITIES

• Canton: Writing• Erie CC: Developmental English• Fredonia: Spanish• Potsdam: History

FACTORS YOU CITED REGARDING HIGH IMPACT

• High drop-failure-withdrawal rates• Student performance in subsequent

courses • Students on waiting lists• Growing enrollment pressures• Lack of consistency in multiple sections• Disparate range of student skill levels

READINESS CRITERION #2Redesign Model

• Which redesign model do you think would be most appropriate for your redesign? Why?

• What aspects fit your particular discipline and your particular students?

CHOICE OF MODEL• Still exploring: Onondaga CC (Info Systems)• Supplemental: Canton (Biology), Niagara CC

(Statistics), Oswego (Economics), Stony Brook (Biology)

• Replacement: Buffalo State (Economics), Cobleskill (Botany), Erie CC (Writing), Fredonia (Spanish), Oswego (Psychology), Potsdam (History), Stony Brook (Physics)

• Emporium: Old Westbury (College Algebra), Oswego (College Algebra)

• Buffet: Canton (Writing), Monroe CC (Elementary Algebra)

READINESS CRITERION #3Assessment Plan

• Which assessment model do you think would be most appropriate for your redesign? Why?

FIVE MEASUREMENT METHODS

• Common Finals: Niagara CC, Monroe CC, Old Westbury

• Common Content Items: Buffalo State, Canton (Bio), Cobleskill, Oswego (Psych), Potsdam

• Pre- and Post-Tests: Oswego (Econ and Algebra), Stony Brook (Physics), Onondaga CC, Fredonia

• Multiple Methods: Canton (Writing), Stony Brook (Bio)

A WORD OF CAUTION• More is not better.• “Common indicators of success would include

withdrawal rates, failure rates and average grades.” • “Also included would be student evaluations of

their educational experience.” • “While the scope NSSE would probably make it an

inappropriate choice, a smaller scale engagement survey could provide valuable data about the relevance of the course work for students.”

• “Focus groups of faculty from other departments will evaluate how well-prepared students are in their courses requiring course knowledge.”

READINESS CRITERION #4Cost Savings Plan

• Which cost savings strategy do you think would be most appropriate for your redesign? Why?

EIGHT HAVE A COST REDUCTION STRATEGY

• Increase section size to accommodate growth (2).• Increase section size and decrease the number of

sections (2).• Increase section size, decrease the number of

sections and change the mix of personnel teaching the course (2).

• Combine 3 courses into 2 and reduce the number of sections (1).

• Combine 2 courses into 1 and reduce the number of sections (1).

EIGHT DO NOT HAVE A COST REDUCTION STRATEGY

• No plan – “may be able . . . .” (1).• Hope that retention will produce

savings (3).• “Paper savings” - took the first step

but not the second (4).

LABOR SAVINGS TACTICSSubstitute (in part or in whole)

• Coordinated development and delivery and shared instructional tasks

• Interactive tutorial software

• Automated grading • Course management

software • Peer interaction or

interaction with other personnel

• Online training materials

• Individual development and delivery

• Face-to-face class meetings

• Hand grading• Human monitoring and

course administration• One-to-one

faculty/student interaction

• Face-to-face training of GTAs, adjuncts and other personnel

• Step 1: Complete the CPT.• Step 2: Translate “saved” hours to one

of the cost savings strategies. • Reducing time spent by individuals is

an enabler that allows you to choose a cost savings strategy.

• If you stop at the first step, you create what NCAT calls “paper savings.”

• Paper savings = A workload reduction for individuals but not cost savings to the department or institution.

COST REDUCTION EXAMPLE

Traditional• Each instructor

teaches 1 section • Section size = 25• Time spent = 200

hours

Redesign• Time spent = 100

hours• Options:

– Each instructor = 2 sections of 25

– Each instructor = 1 section of 50

COURSE PLANNING TOOL

A decision-making tool that enables

institutions to compare the

“before” activities and costs (the

traditional course) and the “after” activities and

costs (the redesigned

course)

Instructional Costs per Hour

Faculty TAs/GAs

Salary $89,538 Salary $32,618% devoted to instruction 50% % devoted to instruction 50%% devoted to this course 50% % devoted to this course 50%$ devoted to this course $22,385 $ devoted to this course $8,155

Contact hours for course 30 Contact hours for course 116Out of class hours 140 Out of class hours 244Total hours 170 Total hours 360Cost per hour $132 Cost per hour $23

Support Staff $ per Hour Position #1 $19#2 $29#3 $12#4 $7

Traditional Course PreparationFACULTY TAs/GAsHourly rate =$132 Hourly rate = $23

I. Course Preparation # of Hours Total Cost # of Hours Total Cost

A. Curriculum DevelopmentB. Materials AcquistionC. Materials Development 1. Lectures/presentations 60 $7,900 464 $10,510 2. Learning materials/software 3. Diagnostic assessments 4. Assignments 5. Tests/evaluations 12 $1,580 88 $1,993Sub-Total 72 $9,480 552 $12,503

D. Faculty/TA Devmt/Training 1. Orientation 240 $5,436 2. Staff meetings 15 $1,975 120 $2,718 3. Attend lectures 240 $5,436Sub-Total 15 $1,975 600 $13,590Total Preparation 87 $11,455 1152 $26,093

Traditional Course Delivery

II. Course Delivery # of Hours Total Cost # of Hours Total Cost

A. Instruction 1. Diagnose skill/knowledge level 2. Presentation 30 $3,950 3. Interaction 30 $3,950 1048 $23,737 4. Progress monitoring Sub-Total 60 $7,900 1048 $23,737

B. Evaluation 1. Test proctoring 11 $1,448 32 $725 2. Tests/evaluation 12 $1,580 648 $14,677Sub-Total 23 $3,028 680 $15,402Total Delivery 83 $10,929 1728 $39,139

TOTAL 170 $22,384 2880 $65,232Support Staff = $3805

GRAND TOTAL $91,421 Total # of students 350Cost per student $261.20

COST-PER-STUDENTErie CC Dev Eng $609

Stony Brook Physics $462

Stony Brook Biology $356

Oswego Econ $342

Cobleskill Botany $339

Monroe CC Elem Alg $316

Niagara CCC Statistics $315

Oswego Col Alg $279

Onondaga CC Info Sys $250

Buffalo State Econ $183

Old Westbury Col Alg $182

Fredonia Spanish $159

Potsdam Eur History $155

Potsdam US History $122

Canton Bio 101 $112

Canton Bio 102 $88

IN-CLASS TO OUT-OF-CLASSInstitution Course In-Class Out-of- Total Ratio

Hours Class Sheet 1 Out/In

Monroe CC Elem Alg 60 76.5 137 1.28

Oswego Col Alg 135 192 327 1.42

Cobleskill Botany 480 720 1200 1.5

Fredonia Spanish 42 76.5 118.5 1.82

Buffalo State Econ 38 76 114 2

Canton English 45 90 135 2

Oswego Econ 504 1008 1512 2

Old Westbury Col Alg 60 131 191 2.18

Onondaga CC Info Sys 405 891 1296 2.2

Potsdam US History 45 110 155 2.44

Potsdam Eur History 45 110 155 2.44

Niagara CCC Statistics 45 149 194 3.31

Stony Brook Physics 140 482 622 3.44

Stony Brook Biology 234 806 1040 3.44

Erie CC Dev Eng 45 175 220 3.89

Canton Bio 102 210 822 1032 3.91

Canton Bio 101 126 622 748 4.93

IN-CLASS TO OUT-OF-CLASSInstitution Course In-Class Out-of- Total Total Sects

Hours Class Sheet 1 Sheet 2

Buffalo State Econ 38 76 114 114

Monroe CC Elem Alg 60 76.5 137 136.5

Potsdam US History 45 110 155 155

Potsdam Eur History 45 110 155 155

Stony Brook Physics 140 482 622 1243 2

Erie CC Dev Eng 45 175 220 880 4

Niagara CCC Statistics 45 149 194 1552 8

Erie CC Dev Eng 45 175 220 3080 14

IN-CLASS TO OUT-OF-CLASSInstitution Course In-Class Out-of- Total Total Sects

Hours Class Sheet 1 Sheet 2

Oswego Col Alg 135 192 327 327

Canton Bio 101 126 622 748 748

Canton Bio 102 210 822 1032 1032

Cobleskill Botany 480 720 1200 1200

Onondaga CC Info Sys 405 891 1296 1296

Canton English 45 90 135 184 1.36

Old Westbury Col Alg 60 131 191 194 1.02

Fredonia Spanish 42 76.5 118.5 1904 16.07

Oswego Econ 504 1008 1512 3436 2.27

Stony Brook Biology 234 806 1040 9604 9.23

READINESS CRITERION #5Learning Materials

• Are the faculty able and willing to incorporate existing curricular materials in order to focus work on redesign issues rather than materials creation?

READINESS CRITERION #6Active Learning

• Do the faculty members have an understanding of and some experience with integrating elements of computer-based instruction into existing courses?

READINESS CRITERION #7Collective Commitment

• Describe the members of your team, the skills they bring to the project and what their roles will be in both the planning and implementation phases of the project.

FOR MORE INFORMATIONwww.theNCAT.org

INNOVATIVE COURSE REDESIGN PRACTICES

• Creating "Small" within "Large“

• Undergraduate Learning Assistants

• Freshmen Don’t Do Optional

• Modularization• New Instructional Roles• Avoiding “Either/or”

Choices

ASSIGNMENT

• Each table will consider one practice.• Do you think this is a good idea? Why or why

not? • If you were to implement the practice, what

benefits would it offer? What challenges would it present?

• What needs to be taken into account in implementing this practice?

• Choose one person to report back.

COURSE REDESIGN PLANS

• We have broken your teams up so that each team member can present and get feedback.

• Each person will present a five-minute summary of the model your team has chosen and how you will implement the Five Principles of Successful Course Redesign within it. (5 minutes)

• Each person will receive feedback from the table group. (10 minutes)

• Identify any questions about the process and choose someone to report back.

FIVE PRINCIPLES OF SUCCESSFUL COURSE REDESIGN

#1: Redesign the whole course#2: Encourage active learning#3: Provide students with

individualized assistance#4: Build in ongoing assessment

and prompt (automated) feedback#5: Ensure sufficient time on task

and monitor student progress

FINAL PROPOSAL FORMATDue April 18, 2008

• Abstract• Application Narrative

– Redesign model: how you will embody the Five Principles

– Learning materials: what you plan to use– Assessment strategy: how you plan to

measure student learning– Cost reduction strategy: what you will do

with the savings– Five Critical Implementation Issues: how

you will address – Timeline: pilot in spring 2009; full

implementation in fall 2009

FINAL PROPOSAL FORMATDue April 18, 2008

• Tools and Forms• Assessment Forms (2)• Course Completion Forms (2)• Course Planning Tool (CPT)• Course Savings Summary Form (CSS)• Course Structure Form (CSF)

• A draft of your CPT will be due on 4/4/08.

• Grant awards will be made on 5/15/08.

http://www.theNCAT.org/R2R/R2R_Planning_Resources.htm

• Five Models for Course Redesign• Five Principles of Successful

Course Redesign• Five Models for Assessing Student

Learning• Cost Reduction Strategies• Five Critical Implementation Issues• Five Course Redesign Proposals• Assessment Planning Forms• Course Planning Tool• Course Savings Summary• Course Structure Form• Planning Checklist

FIVE CRITICAL IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES

• Prepare students (and their parents) and the campus for changes in the course.

• Train instructors, GTAs and undergraduate peer tutors.

• Ensure an adequate technological infrastructure to support the redesign as planned.

• Achieve initial and ongoing faculty consensus about the redesign.

• Avoid backsliding by building ongoing institutional commitment to the redesign.

NCAT CORPORATE ASSOCIATES

• Blackboard• Cengage Learning

(Thomson Learning)• Houghton Mifflin • McGraw-Hill• Pearson Education

THE REDESIGN ALLIANCESecond Annual Conference

When: March 16 – 18, 2008Where: The Rosen Centre Hotel

Orlando, FloridaHotel Reservation Deadline:

February 14, 2008Meeting Registration Deadline:

February 29, 2008

PROGRAM CONSULTANTS

• Carol Twigg

ctwigg@theNCAT.org

• Carolyn Jarmon

cjarmon@theNCAT.org

518-695-5320

*PLUS PCR and R2R PARTICIPANTS*