To Cbe or not to cbe? A college considers competency-based education University of North Carolina CBE Summit 2017 Presenters: Teresa Raetz, Ph.D. & Juliana Lancaster, Ph.D.

A brief review of GGc First four-year, public institution chartered in Georgia in last century Access institution Upper 50% on majority of 10 NSSE benchmark scores Small class size, averaging 21 Intrusive advising for students at risk; every student assigned a mentor or advisor FTFT retention = 69 percent Highly diverse student population

Extremely rapid growth Student and Faculty Headcount over Time

Highly diverse demographically

Highly diverse on other measures

Cbe model reviewed: direct assessment No classes, credit hours, semesters, etc. Degrees = groupings of competencies Earn credit through transferring credits, mastering competencies, and prior learning assessment Learn through accessing resources provided, working at own pace Faculty roles: content specialist, subject matter expert, and coach

Focal questions for review What problems does CBE address? Who are CBE students? What does the empirical evidence show about CBE programs? What are CBE’s potential pitfalls?

Focal questions for ggc’s decision Mission and culture re: technology in the student experience, innovative models, role of faculty, and holistic development? Strategic goals and how would CBE programs fit? Does CBE take you where you want to go? Current problems or opportunities that CBE would remediate or advance? Funding for program development? For technology infrastructure? Administrative home for CBE programs?

Group discussion time

Group Discussion questions What does your institutional mission say and what does your culture advance about the use of technology in the student experience, innovative models, the role of faculty, and development of the whole student? What are your institution’s strategic goals and how would CBE programs fit? Does CBE take you where you want to go? What problems or opportunities currently exist on your campus that CBE would remediate or advance? Development costs are estimated to average 25% above typical course development costs. What funding is available to develop these programs on your campus? What funding and resources exist to create or supplement the existing technology infrastructure needed to offer the usual portfolio of student services (e.g., student accounts, registrar, etc.), instruction, testing, and student communication in a CBE environment? Where would you administratively “house” CBE programs on your campus? Incorporated into existing departments/units or create a separate unit only for CBE programs?

GGC’s final decision Mission and culture re: technology in the student experience, innovative models, role of faculty, and holistic development? Mission pros: Innovative use of technology Increased scheduling flexibility Variety of course delivery options Mission (and vision and operating principles) cons: Faculty and staff actively engage students in various learning environments Faculty serve as mentors and advisors Programs that enhance academic, social, and personal development Multicultural environment Holistic development

GGC’s final decision Lack of fit with vision, mission, and operating principles Lack of fit with strategic goals and funding No CBE programs Recommendations: Make GGC more adult friendly (more night and evening courses, hybrid courses, etc.) Use more PLA Competency transcript

Final thoughts