1. Pedagogical Standards and Sustainable Distance Education Programming Karen Gersten Associate Provost for Academic Programs and Faculty Development Laura J. Evans Dean, Evelyn T. Stone University College

2. Session Overview Strategic planning process: Focus on academics Effective instructional design elements Assessment –Course level –Program level Core Value: Without a strong academic core, an online program is not sustainable.

3. Strategic Planning Components Alignment with institutional vision and mission Clear program expectations Market potential Organizational change required to launch and sustain distance learning Implementation plan Quality assurance measures Financial planning

4. Program Success and Assessment: Critical Connections Identify program goals in strategic planning stage –Academic –Enrollment –Financial Study pedagogy of online learning Know best practices Develop policies for development and teaching Establish assessment guidelines and protocols –Course –Academic program –Distance learning program

5. External Benchmarks: Guideposts for Distance Learning Programs Blackboard and the National Education Association Benchmarks:Blackboard and the National Education Association Benchmarks –24 Measures of Quality in Internet-Based Distance Learning (2000) Sloan Pillars of Excellence –Student Satisfaction –Access –Learning effectiveness –Faculty satisfaction –Institutional cost effectiveness Best Practices for Electronically Delivered Programs: Eight Regional Accrediting BodiesBest Practices for Electronically Delivered Programs: Eight Regional Accrediting Bodies –Institutional Context and Commitment –Curriculum and Instruction –Faculty Support –Student Support –Evaluation and Assessment

6. Application of Standards: Guiding Principles for RUOnline

7. Pedagogical Principles Goal is student learning; program focus is teaching not technology. Each course needs learning outcomes based on the course, its position in the academic program, and institutional mission. Active learning is better than passive learning. Prompt feedback is essential. Course design and facilitation have to honor diverse ways of knowing. Expectations have to be clear including expectations for participation — quality and quantity. The classroom is the learning space; materials should be incorporated into the classroom. Learning resources have to be accessible from the learning space.

8. From Theory to Practice: The Portal Environment Classroom and Community

9. Course Development: Essential Elements Planning –What am I trying to do? –How am I trying to do it? –How do I know if I did it? Connectivity –With the content –With each other –With the faculty

10. Design Principles Chunked information Organization to aid learning Visual interest Formative assessment Tools of engagement in Blackboard

11. Course Design Sets Class Tone Easy access to organization and learning tools Visual interest and humor Content organized to Facilitate learning

12. Learning Outcomes in Assignments

13. Assessment Tool Linked to Assignment

14. Class Assessment: How Do I Know I Did What I Said I Would Do? Individual assignment 1.Pop-up internal comments 2.Narrative comments with links to writing support 3.Rubric with highlighted cells

15. Assignment Level: Rubrics as Teaching Tools

16. Assessment at the Course Level Online learning is an academic delivery system, not an academic program. The goal is to achieve defined learning outcomes and to ensure levels of learning comparable to face-to-face classrooms. Course assessment –Clearly defined learning outcomes for each course –Course assessment measures linked to outcomes –Assessment tools/teaching tools (available at start of course and linked to defined learning outcomes) –Comparative assessment

17. Comparative Course Assessment: Online and Campus-Based Same instructor, same course, same semester Points25 10 Project 1 Project 2 Assign 1 Assign 2 Assign 3 Quiz 1Quiz 2Quiz 3Quiz 4Quiz 5Quiz 6 Mean Online21.1 7.98.68.36.57.47.26.38.27.3 Campus18.0418.97.69.27.85.96.45.65.37.26.7

18. Same Course, Multiple Sections From Iverson, Colky, & Cyboran, (forthcoming), E-learning takes the lead: An empirical investigation of learner differences in online and classroom delivery.

19. Program Assessment Enrollment trends Course completions Comparable learning outcomes and achievement Student evaluations Faculty evaluations Involvement of academic leaders in course development and oversight Institution-wide standards Financial contribution

20. Enrollment Trends: Necessary but not Sufficient Measures of Success SemesterHead Count Credit Hours F0177261 SP02230789 F022971008 SP034391593 F035571959 SP046582451 F047692727 SP058282883 F059333162 SP06*10323498

21. Student Evaluation Trend Analysis

22. 100-Level200-Level300-Level400-LevelAll Levels RU Online On- Campu s RU Onlin e On- Campus RU Onlin e On- Campu s RU Online On- Campus RU Online On- Campus A35.3%29.8% 39.5 %41.9%46.1%46.8%61.1%66.5%49.6%48.3% B20.9%28.1% 24.3 %30.2%26.5%32.0%8.2%20.8%20.1%27.5% C10.8%17.5% 13.5 %14.6%11.8%13.3%1.1%2.8%8.6%11.3% Other Pass*0.0%4.5%0.5%0.2%0.6%0.2%20.8%5.3%7.1%2.6% D3.6%5.0%5.4%2.9%2.7%1.9%0.3%0.4%2.3% F12.9%8.7%6.7%5.2%7.5%3.0%4.3%1.6%6.6%4.2% Other Unsat*0.0% Incomplete *16.5%6.3% 10.1 %5.0%4.9%2.8%4.2%2.4%5.8%3.8% Course Completion Rates and Grade Comparisons Some studies roughly estimate that students enrolled in distance education are twice as likely to drop out than on-campus students (JALN, Dec. 2004). A Chronicle of Higher Education article in 2000 reported that “no national statistics exist yet about how many students complete distance programs or courses, but anecdotal evidence and studies by individual institutions suggest that course-completion and program-retention rates are generally lower in distance-education courses than in their face-to-face counterparts” (Brady, 2001, p. 352).

23. Financial Success –FY2004: RUOnline generated 10 times its budget in tuition revenue –Contribution margin increased from 23% in FY2003 to 51% in FY2004 –FY04 Credit tuition generated: $3,504,408 –Fiscal Year 2006 to date: Credit tuition (fall & spring only)$ 3,772,582 FY 06 annual expense budget - $ 450,554 $ 3,322,028

24. Achievement of Institutional Goals/ Alignment with Institutional Mission Goals –Extend the University's reach –Expand the University ’ s name recognition –Develop new student markets –Augment campus-based classes –Contribute to the University ’ s financial strength Mission –Social justice: Provide educational opportunities to all academically qualified persons –Achieve academic excellence

25. Measures of Program Success 1. Core values 2. Academic standards 3. Outcomes-based assessment 4. Accountability

26. Let’s Talk… Karen GerstenLaura Evans kgersten@roosevelt.edulevans@roosevelt.edu