From pmoss at osrhe.edu Wed Mar 2 08:17:35 2005 From: pmoss at osrhe.edu (Moss, Phil) Date: Wed Mar 2 08:17:43 2005 Subject: [Ae-math] The Learning MarketSpace Message-ID: <0BDB11CB2543BA45884F59CBDF86C52139D938@SHRIKE> I think I've shared some previous items from Carol Twigg's electronic newsletter. Her viewpoint message in the last issue has some relevance to our work related to Academic Efficiency. I've also included some other excerpts, and the instructions on how to subscribe for those interested. ************************************************************************ ********* 1. THE CAT VIEWPOINT * A Billion Here, A Billion There American higher education continues to be challenged by the need to control or reduce rising costs. Many have observed that both the cost and price of higher education continue to outpace the rate of inflation. As a U.S. House Education and the Workforce Committee report notes, "While some point to state budget cuts or a poor economy as the source of rising tuition, the fact is that college costs have been steadily and relentlessly increasing for more than a decade-even during the 90's economic boom-and that tuition increases have persisted regardless of circumstances and have far outpaced inflation year after year, whether the economy has been stumbling or thriving." In contrast to higher education, most industries have been able to take advantage of the capabilities of information technology to increase productivity-and in doing so, increase quality of service while reducing costs. The injection of information technology into the U.S. economy in general-with the notable exceptions of education, health care and the legal profession-is a major contributor to the disparity between the general rate of inflation and higher education's cost increases. An important contributor to the rising cost of higher education--perhaps the key contributor--is an outmoded, labor intensive delivery model coupled with an outmoded set of assumptions about the relationship between cost and quality. It's not that higher education has avoided information technology. For most institutions, however, new technologies represent a black hole of additional expense rather than an investment that leads to increased productivity. Readers of this publication are aware that the National Center for Academic Transformation (NCAT) has established a solid track record of success and has created an initial proof-of-concept: that technology can be used to improve student learning while reducing instructional costs if we redesign the way in which we organize collegiate instruction. The Program in Course Redesign (PCR) offers persuasive data showing how this can be done. In addition to offering a broad solution to the cost/quality trade-off in its redesign methodology, the program offers numerous specific solutions that can be adapted by colleges and universities across the board. The question naturally arises, would the implementation of NCAT's redesign methodology offer a well-considered, practical alternative to the current postsecondary cost dilemma facing the nation? The answer is yes-but it needs to scale. What would be the impact on the cost of higher education if all colleges and universities in the U.S. adopted NCAT's methodology to redesign their top 25 courses? Our calculations indicate that the cost of instruction would be reduced by approximately 16 percent annually. At the same time, student learning and student retention would be improved. Here's how we derive that figure: --50% of community college enrollments and 35% of four-year enrollments are in the top 25 courses. --Half of all higher education enrollments are at community colleges and half are at four-year institutions. --Given the proportion of two-year vs. four-year colleges in the U.S., about 42.5% of all higher education enrollments are in the top 25 courses. --The average cost reduction of the 30 PCR projects that used NCAT's redesign methodology is 37%. --37% of 42.5% = 16%. It is difficult to pin down exactly the dollar value of that savings since estimates about the total amount of higher education expenditures and the E&G portion of those expenditures seem to vary, depending on the source. Here's one way of estimating what the impact on all higher education spending would be: --The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) says that total higher education expenditures are 2.3% of the U.S. GDP, which was about $10 trillion in 2002. --If 2.3% of the U.S. GDP is spent on higher education, total higher education expenditures in the U.S. = $230 billion --If the portion devoted to instruction averages 35%, the cost of instruction = $80.5 billion --16% of $80.5 billion = $12.9 billion per year --$12.9 billion = 5.6% of the overall cost of higher education Whatever the right number, as Everett Dirksen once observed about the Federal budget, "A billion here, a billion there, and first thing you know you're talking about real money." Can NCAT's redesign methodology be applied to parts of the curriculum other than the top 25 courses? Absolutely. Any course that is taught by more than one faculty member is a potential target for redesign. The University of Hawaii at Manoa, for example, recently analyzed its campus enrollment patterns and found more than 120 courses with enrollments exceeding 100 students taught by more than one faculty member for a total enrollment of 34,534. Any of these courses can benefit from NCAT's redesign methodology to improve learning and reduce costs. Even courses taught by single faculty members can benefit from many of the redesign approaches in order to reduce costs. Using some of the automation techniques and differentiated personnel strategies used in the redesign projects, for example, would enable faculty members to increase their course loads without increasing their workloads. Employing a course assistant to deal with the nonacademic aspects of courses--with or without the addition of instructional software use where available--would allow each faculty member to teach an additional course beyond current course loads. Applying those same strategies would also permit an increase in class size in high-demand, bottleneck courses, again with no increase in faculty workload. What should those concerned about the future affordability of higher education-particularly those in leadership positions-do with the knowledge that it is possible to reduce costs and improve student learning by redesigning our traditional methods of instruction? First, we need to change the national conversation about what is possible. Once we break the higher-quality-more-money nexus, we can unleash the creative energies of hundreds-indeed thousands-of faculty, professional staff and administrators to work on redesigning courses. Second, we need to establish redesign programs in states, in higher education systems, in community college districts, and in institutions in order to provide both a framework and incentives for institutions to begin the process. By initially partnering with NCAT to replicate the process used in the national PCR, states, systems, districts and individual institutions will be able to develop internal capacity to support this process on an ongoing basis. Third, we then need to build incentives into the ways in which we fund higher education-at the national, state and local levels-to accelerate an ongoing redesign process that emphasizes measuring learning outcomes and instructional costs and rewards those who make constructive changes and penalizes those who do not. The biggest challenge higher education faces in the coming decade is addressing the challenge of providing a cost-effective, high quality education for all Americans who can benefit. As Russ Edgerton has said, "For many Americans, what is at stake is nothing less than the continued viability of the American dream." The solution is not to throw money at the problem. The solution is to work together to re-think the ways we teach and the ways students learn. By building on technology-based, learner-centered principles, we can create a twenty-first century higher education system that will serve our nation well. --Carol A. Twigg ************************************************************************ ********* During fall 2004, Georgia State University conducted a pre-pilot of its math redesign project with six sections. The goal of the pre-pilot was to select a common text and mathematical software (previously, each class used a different book and software package.) After careful consideration, the team selected Precalculus by Lial, Hornsby and Schneider and MyMathLab from Addison Wesley. During the fall, the team held workshops to discuss the project and to prepare and inform faculty about how to use the software. To learn more, contact Margo Alexander at malexander@gsu.edu. At Louisiana State University (LSU), the redesign of college algebra is moving along very well. The LSU team profited from visits to both the University of Alabama and the University of Idaho. During fall 2004, the team tested MyMathLab in four large sections and one smaller one and has been working with the publisher to incorporate some needed additional features. During the spring 2005 pilot, students will spend a minimum of 2-3 hours per week in a computer learning lab; each of seven sections of ~40 students will also meet once a week with an instructor in a focus group. A second pilot in fall 2005 will involve three different groups of about 1000 students each, one with a larger emporium which is now being remodeled and equipped, one in sections of about 40 with TAs, and one with larger sections of around 170 taught by experienced instructors. LSU anticipates moving to full implementation in spring 2006. To learn more, contact Jimmie Lawson at lawson@math.lsu.edu. Seton Hall University (SHU) is redesigning precalculus math and psychology. The math team is coordinating efforts with the Department of Freshmen Studies as well as the Equal Opportunity Program to establish a more accurate placement system. The team is also establishing an orientation for tutors and instructors and a course web site. SHU is also beginning a pre-algebra course redesign. The primary issue facing the psychology redesign is to identify software to supplement the Blackboard in order to improve mastery quizzing. The team has selected QuestionMark Perception, but various implementation and systems elements have taken longer than anticipated and still need to be completed. The team anticipates using the software in early January in the pilot phase. A more thorough evaluation of the previous version of the course has begun, which will allow for more specific and focused efforts to improve the success rates of the students. For more information about either redesign project, contact middleda@shu.edu. Two math faculty from the University of Missouri-St. Louis (UM-SL) visited the University of Alabama and returned with a clearer understanding of what issues they need to address in the redesigned course. During fall 2004, most of the faculty teaching College Algebra started using computer-based homework, creating a core of faculty familiar with the software. Use will continue in the winter and the summer. The UM-SL has allocated a large unused area to be converted over the next six months - for the Mathematics Technology Learning Center in time for the fall 2005 full implementation. The campus is making financial arrangements for refurbishing this area and acquiring networked computers. This is a major commitment on the part of the campus, and the team feels that having reached this stage is a strong achievement. The course pilot will be offered in spring 2005 to a smaller section (55 students) due to lack of suitable computer facilities. For more information, contact Teresa Thiel at thiel@umsl.edu. The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC-CH) has enrolled about 75 students in its spring 2005 redesigned precalculus algebra pilot. The team has created MathPort, a facility located in a student residential hall, which will be open Monday through Friday between 12:00 pm and 8:00 pm for face-to-face assistance, exam preparation, or proctored exams. Because all undergraduate students at UNC-CH are required to own laptops, students will use their own laptops in the MathPort to work on their day-to-day assignments via network ports or the wireless access system. MathPort will also offer optional lectures for students who prefer traditional forms of content delivery. The MathPort facility will be coordinated by the Director of Teaching Training for the Mathematics Department and staffed by graduate teaching assistants and undergraduate tutors. Quizzes and exams will be automatically graded with TestGen and posted to Blackboard, so that students will be able to continually monitor their progress throughout the course. To learn more, contact Charlie Green at green@unc.edu. Both of the redesign projects at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro (UNCG) are on schedule. Math faculty have received training in the use of the MyMathLab. At UNCG's request, Prentice Hall (Pearson) is coding the review section of the textbook into MyMathLab, and Addison-Wesley (Pearson) is adding an additional 150 problems to MyMathLab. These additional materials will then become available to other users of the software in the future. The statistics redesign team has selected a new software package, E-STAT Pack, developed by W.H.Freeman and the Statistics Department at Brigham Young University. UNCG has also significantly expanded the face-to-face help that will be available for both precalculus and statistics students in comparison to its original proposal. The general university tutoring service will provide additional assistance, and the team has scheduled several more blocks of computer lab time for instructors. To learn more about either redesign, contact Ray Purdom at rcpurdom@uncg.edu. Wayne State University (WSU) is ahead of most R2R projects due to prior preparation. Beginning in spring 2005, all Basic Algebra students at WSU will take the course in the newly designed Math Emporium. This new lab houses 100 student computers and was built in time for the fall 2004 term. Nearly 1000 students were enrolled in the newly designed course in the fall. The new model allows some students to move more quickly through the materials, completing the course at their own pace. Approximately 80 students finished the class early, one as early as the third week! Students also appear to be more engaged with the material; instructors report fewer disruptions caused by disengaged students. A number of challenges remain, but the team believes most are related to "start up" and can be easily overcome with time. Student orientation will be redesigned to become more interactive, and a number of logistical problems related to due dates will be addressed. The team is optimistic that all issues will be resolved by fall 2005 and has begun discussing a redesign for Intermediate Algebra. To learn more, contact Sandra Yee at sandra.yee@wayne.edu or visit the project web site at: http://www.lib.wayne.edu/geninfo/about/grants/roadmap_to_redesign/ . * To subscribe to The Learning MarketSpace, send a plain text e-mail message with the subject line left blank to mailto:listproc@lists.rpi.edu . In the body of the message, type SUB LFORUM-L your name. Copyright 2005, The National Center for Academic Transformation. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.onenet.net/pipermail/ae-math/attachments/20050302/10aed1bb/attachment-0001.html From pmoss at osrhe.edu Fri Mar 4 12:27:32 2005 From: pmoss at osrhe.edu (Moss, Phil) Date: Fri Mar 4 12:27:30 2005 Subject: [Ae-math] 2005 MERLOT International Conference Message-ID: <0BDB11CB2543BA45884F59CBDF86C52139D966@SHRIKE> Some of you may have already seen this -- I hope some of you (or some of your colleagues) may consider submitting a proposal. While the deadline is around the corner (a week from Monday), I'd encourage your participation if there is interest. Phil __________________________________________________________ ****Reminder - DEADLINE for Proposals - March 14, 2005**** 2005 MERLOT International Conference "Engaging the Global Community - Looking Over the Horizon" July 25-28, 2005 - Nashville, TN ________________________________________________________ IMPORTANT LINKS To submit a proposal: http://conference.merlot.org/conference/2005/call_for_proposals.php General Conference Information: http://conference.merlot.org/ Registration site opens April 1, 2005 Hotel and Travel Information: http://conference.merlot.org/conference/2005/travel.php ________________________________________________________ INVITATION Hosted by the Tennessee Board of Regents, the MERLOT International Conference will be held at the at the Renaissance Nashville Hotel and Nashville Convention Center in Nashville, Tennessee, July 25 - 28, 2005. The Conference provides forums for learning about shared content, peer reviews, learning objects, standards, and online communities. We welcome participation by the entire international higher education community. Individuals are not required to be affiliated with a MERLOT institution to attend or present at the conference, nor do presentations need to address MERLOT specifically. Presentations from those engaged in the faculty development issues surrounding the MERLOT collection, use and evaluation of digital learning materials in the context of other projects are encouraged and welcomed. The conference theme and tracks are geared toward the following audiences: * Faculty * Instructional Designers * Provosts, Deans, Department Chairs * Technical Support Specialists * Librarians * Faculty Development Professionals * Members of Professional Organizations * Authors of Instructional Materials * MERLOT Users & Potential Partners * Authors of Digital Learning Materials ________________________________________________________ PROGRAM ACTIVITIES All proposals are peer reviewed and selected by the Program Committee for inclusion in the conference program and proceedings website. The program includes: * Keynote speakers * Invited speakers and workshop leaders * Pre-conference workshops * Interactive Sessions * Demonstrations/Posters * Corporate Showcases & Demonstrations * Papers * Classics and Editors' Choice Awards ceremony * Design Review Sessions ________________________________________________________ BUDGET and PLANNING INFORMATION Early Bird registration deadline: May 31, 2005 MERLOT Partner Early Bird Registration fee: $225.00 (US) Non-partner Early Bird fee: $450.00 (US) Corporate Early Bird Fee: $600.00 (US) Registration includes opening reception on July 25, lunches on July 26 and 27, refreshment breaks and all sessions except pre-conference workshops, which are an additional fee. Hotel rate: US$135.00 per day, single or double occupancy. This special rate is available 3 days prior and 3 days after the conference, based on availability. ________________________________________________________ DEADLINES **** Proposals - March 14, 2005**** Author Notification of Proposal Status: April 1, 2005 Early Registration: May 31, 2005 Conference: July 25 - 28, 2005 Questions about MERLOT International Conference? Email: MERLOTConference@merlot.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.onenet.net/pipermail/ae-math/attachments/20050304/4ec499c2/attachment.html