1. Think about these two questions and discuss with fellow attendees! Then we’ll present! What are the major educational initiatives on your campus? What ways can IT units and faculty partner to advance these initiatives?

2. Leila C. Lyons, Director, IT User Services George H. Watson, Associate Dean, College of Arts and Sciences Martha Carothers, Associate Director, Office of Undergraduate Studies University of Delaware Partnerships for Educational Reform

3. Who’s Who and What’s What! Information Technologies (IT) Information Technologies  User Services User Services PRESENT  University Media Services University Media Services Problem-Based Learning and ITUE Problem-Based Learning ITUE Center for Teaching Effectiveness (CTE) Center for Teaching Effectiveness General Education Initiative (GEI) General Education Initiative

4. About the University of Delaware Land-grant, sea-grant, space-grant, urban grant institution 1070 faculty (80% full time) 21,238 students  16,548 undergraduates (15,580 FT)  3,395 graduate students (2,519 FT)  1,295 professional and continuing studies students http://www.udel.edu/main/aboutud.html Fall 2004

5. Technology More than keeping systems running How can IT align with the institutional mission, particularly the education of students? How do we reach faculty and empower them to use technology in teaching and learning?

6. Faculty Support PRESENT – a teaching and learning resource center for faculty PRESENT  Physical and virtual Learning management system (WebCT) Instructional design Staff and graduate student support Technical advice and consulting

7. A History of Partnerships Faculty Institutes for Teaching, Learning and Technology Technology Assistance Grants to faculty (esp. in ITUE) interested in active learning methods Course Redesign grants that led to further partnership with CTE and General Education Initiative

8. Institute for Transforming Undergraduate Education ITUE was created in 1997 to promote reform of undergraduate education through faculty development and course redesign. It was initially funded by the NSF program on Institution- Wide Reform of Undergraduate Education, subsequently by the Pew Charitable Trusts, internal sources, and additional grants. ITUE Fellows receive hands-on experience in employing active learning strategies, particularly problem-based learning (PBL), and effective use of technology in their classrooms.

9. What is Problem-Based Learning? PBL prepares students to think critically and analytically, and to find and use appropriate learning resources. PBL is a learning approach that challenges students to “learn to learn,” working cooperatively in groups to seek solutions to real world problems. “The principal idea behind PBL is that the starting point for learning should be a problem, a query, or a puzzle that the learner wishes to solve.” Boud (1985)

10. What are the Common Features of PBL? Learning is initiated by a problem. Problems are based on complex, real-world situations. All information needed to solve problem is not initially given. Students identify, find, and use appropriate resources. Students work in permanent groups.

11. Overview Problem, Project, or Assignment Group Discussion Research Group Discussion Preparation of Group “Product” Whole Class Discussion Mini-lecture (as needed) Assessment (when desired) The Problem-Based Learning Process

12. A Typical Day in a PBL Course

13. ITUE – Faculty PBL training from practitioners Collegial environment Ongoing peer support Funding and recognitions through grants Provide faculty who ask, “How can I make learning more active?”

14. ITUE Technology Assistance Grants Grants staff and student time to apply active learning to a specific course. Awarded to new ITUE fellows.

15. Collaborative Workspace Similarities between PRESENT and PBL classrooms Flexible furniture Flexible equipment

16. Other IT/Faculty Collaborations ITUE three-day institutes using WebCT. PBL Clearinghouse. WebCT discussion group training co-taught by faculty and IT in PBL format. Wireless notebook carts for PBL classrooms.

17. Wireless collaborative space

18. Course Redesign Grants Situate internal grant process within General Education Initiative (GEI) context Outline criteria, online features, and development support for grant process Highlight benefits and challenges

19. Overview of General Education Initiative (GEI) 1996: Faculty Senate Ad Hoc Committee on GEI 1998: Ad Hoc Committee report – faculty initiative Fall 2000: 3-year pilot to implement and assess part of GEI (First-year experience-LIFE, Pathways courses, Capstone experience, Discovery Learning experience) 2000: GEI grants and CTE High Tech grants 2001: General Education Institute Fall 2003: Report of pilot to Faculty Senate Fall 2003: Coordinate grant program with IT Spring 2004: Faculty Senate Resolution regarding GEI 2004-2005: Grant program implementation

20. GENERAL EDUCATION OVERARCHING GOALS Translation To consider general education as a total coherent experience and to organize the University of Delaware's academic resources to optimize the learning environment Implement and sustain via instructional grants

21. History of Grant Programs Center for Teaching Effectiveness (CTE) General Education Initiative (GEI) Information Technologies (IT) w/ funding from Provost 2001-02Advanced & Emerging Technologies LIFE, Pathways and Capstone Courses Student Assistants 2002-03Advanced & Emerging Technologies LIFE, Pathways and Capstone Courses Technology Enhanced Course Redesign 2003-04Center for Teaching Effectiveness and General Education Initiative Technology Enhanced Course Redesign

22. 2004-2005 Grant Program Combined CTE, GEI, and IT grants Coordinated expertise to review proposals and support funded projects Streamlined and more efficient grant application process Encourages faculty to be as creative as possible in their thinking One review committee appointed by the Provost w/ sub-level reviewers

23. Institutional Context of Grants Infuse gen ed goals into dept. curricula Ensure sustainability of gen ed goals Enable faculty ownership of ge ed curriculum Offer faculty incentives to participate and remain involved Provide formal recognition in reward structure

24. 2004-2005 Grant Focus Address three targeted general education goals: oral and written communication quantitative reasoning service-learning Innovative student-learning focused pedagogy: problem-based learning active learning approaches technology Substantial transformation or enrichment of existing courses Development of new courses embedded in curriculum Encouragement of interdisciplinary, cross-disciplinary, and faculty collaboration

25. Features of Grant Process Call for proposals (up to $20,000 per project) Grant website with online templates Faculty grant preparation sessions Pre-proposal stage Review process Invitation to final proposal Final proposal submission Grant implementation (July 1 – June 30) Project follow-up (mid-year and final report)

26. Grant Proposal Format Project description -- impact on student learning -- complement current methods: active learning, PBL, technology -- impact on department, college, university goals -- utilization of existing resources Implementation -- timeline, stumbling blocks, sustainability Assessment -- student learning and project effectiveness Funds requested -- total amount, department, college contributions Support of department chair and Dean

27. Core Evaluation Criteria Advancement of general education goals Impact on student learning via active engagement Sustainability Evaluation of student learning / project effectiveness Budget request with justification Incorporation of feedback from pre-proposal

28. Timeline Early December 03Call for proposals Mid-Nov & DecemberGrant preparation session End of January 04Pre-proposals due Mid-MarchFinal proposals due Mid-AprilAwards announced Early JulyFunds available End of January 05Mid-term reports due End of JulyFinal reports due

29. Faculty Support General Education Institute Grant preparation session Feedback on pre-proposal Consultation with content experts: -- oral and written communication -- quantitative reasoning -- service learning Consultation with instructional technology, instructional design, assessment, media, information resource experts Access to previously funded proposals and PIs Access to online resources

30. 2004-2005 Summary of Grants 27 applications -- 16 oral and written communication -- 3 quantitative reasoning -- 8 service learning 16 invited to submit final proposal 10 grants awarded -- 4 oral and written communication -- 2 quantitative reasoning -- 4 service learning 23 faculty, 8 departments, 870 students impacted (approx.) 14 courses, 1 practicum, 1 program involved

31. Successes Faculty projects advance general education goals Faculty retain ownership of department curriculum because gen ed goals are embedded in curriculum Promotes collaboration Coordination of internal grant opportunities Effectiveness and efficiency of online process Consultation and development support -- preparation -- proposals -- implementation Faculty project showcase - General Education Institute

32. Challenges Application stage -- budget template -- assessment -- focus faculty on one gen ed goal Support faculty effectively in implementation Tracking grant activity and impact once funds expended – sustainability Assessing long-term impact

33. IT Support Lessons Learned To change the curriculum, we need to change how faculty perceive teaching and learning. We infuse the campus culture with a variety of ways for faculty to learn about pedagogy and to reinforce that learning. Partnerships with faculty can help with faculty readiness.

34. Elements Encourage both Pedagogy and Technology Adoption Administrative Vision Robust Technological Infrastructure Partnerships Faculty Development/Encouragement Institutional Support Support Staff

35. Revisit our questions and discuss What are the major educational initiatives on your campus? What ways can IT units and faculty partner to advance these initiatives?