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

2. FINAL PROPOSAL FORMAT Due 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

3. FINAL PROPOSAL FORMAT Due 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.

4. 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

5. READINESS CRITERIA What were we looking for in institutional responses? Collaborative response not by one person Evidence to document your responsenot yes

6. READINESS CRITERION #1 Course Choice What impact would redesigning the course have on the curriculum, on students and on the institutioni.e., why do you want to redesign this course?

7. NATURAL SCIENCE Canton: Biology Cobleskill: Botany Stony Brook: Biology Stony Brook: Physics

8. SOCIAL SCIENCE Buffalo State: Economics Oswego: Economics Oswego: Psychology

9. QUANTITATIVE Monroe CC: Elementary Algebra Old Westbury: College Algebra Oswego: College Algebra Niagara CC: Statistics Onondaga CC: Info Systems

10. HUMANITIES Canton: Writing Erie CC: Developmental English Fredonia: Spanish Potsdam: History

11. 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

12. READINESS CRITERION #2 Redesign 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?

13. 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)

14. READINESS CRITERION #3 Assessment Plan Which assessment model do you think would be most appropriate for your redesign? Why?

15. 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)

16. 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.

17. READINESS CRITERION #4 Cost Savings Plan Which cost savings strategy do you think would be most appropriate for your redesign? Why?

18. 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).

19. 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).

20. LABOR SAVINGS TACTICS Substitute (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

21. 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.

22. 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

23. 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)

24. Instructional Costs per Hour

25. Traditional Course Preparation

26. Traditional Course Delivery

27. COST-PER-STUDENT

28. IN-CLASS TO OUT-OF-CLASS

31. READINESS CRITERION #5 Learning Materials Are the faculty able and willing to incorporate existing curricular materials in order to focus work on redesign issues rather than materials creation?

32. READINESS CRITERION #6 Active Learning Do the faculty members have an understanding of and some experience with integrating elements of computer-based instruction into existing courses?

33. READINESS CRITERION #7 Collective 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.

34. FOR MORE INFORMATION www.theNCAT.org

35. INNOVATIVE COURSE REDESIGN PRACTICES Creating "Small" within "Large Undergraduate Learning Assistants Freshmen Dont Do Optional Modularization New Instructional Roles Avoiding Either/or Choices

36. 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.

37. 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.

38. 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

39. FINAL PROPOSAL FORMAT Due 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

40. FINAL PROPOSAL FORMAT Due 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.

41. 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

42. 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.

43. NCAT CORPORATE ASSOCIATES Blackboard Cengage Learning (Thomson Learning) Houghton Mifflin McGraw-Hill Pearson Education

44. THE REDESIGN ALLIANCE Second Annual Conference When: March 16 – 18, 2008 Where: The Rosen Centre Hotel Orlando, Florida Hotel Reservation Deadline: February 14, 2008 Meeting Registration Deadline: February 29, 2008

45. PROGRAM CONSULTANTS Carol Twigg ctwigg@theNCAT.org Carolyn Jarmon cjarmon@theNCAT.org 518-695-5320 *PLUS PCR and R2R PARTICIPANTS*