1. REDESIGNING STUDENT LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS

2. TODAY’S DISCUSSION  Overview of the Methodology and Findings of the Successful Redesign Projects  Proven Models for Successful Redesign  Principles of Course Redesign  Readiness Criteria

3. TRADITIONAL INSTRUCTION Seminars Lectures

4. “BOLT-ON” INSTRUCTION

5. WHAT’S WRONG WITH THE LECTURE? Treats all students as if they are the same Ineffective in engaging students Inadequate individual assistance Poor attendance and success rates Students fail to retain learning

6. WHAT’S WRONG WITH MULTIPLE SECTIONS? In theory: greater interaction In practice: large class size In practice: dominated by the same presentation techniques Lack of coordination Inconsistent outcomes

7. WHAT DOES NCAT MEAN BY COURSE REDESIGN? Course redesign is the process of redesigning whole courses (rather than individual classes or sections) to achieve better learning outcomes at a lower cost by taking advantage of the capabilities of information technology.

8. PROGRAM IN COURSE REDESIGN To encourage colleges and universities to redesign their approaches to instruction using technology to achieve cost savings as well as quality enhancements. 50,000 students 30 projects

9. WHY REDESIGN? Look for courses where redesign will have a high impact – let’s make a difference: High withdrawal/failure rates Students on waiting lists Students turned away – graduation bottleneck Over enrollment of courses leading to multiple majors Inconsistency of preparation Difficulty getting qualified adjuncts Difficulty in subsequent courses

10. TEAM EFFORT IS KEY Each team included – Administrator – Faculty experts – Technology expertise – Assessment assistance

11. All Types of Institutions Public Private Research Universities Comprehensive Universities State Colleges Community Colleges

12. SUMMARY OF RESULTS 25 of the original 30 showed improvement; 5 showed equal learning 24 measured retention; 18 showed improvement All 30 showed cost reduction Results in subsequent national and state and system programs have continued to show comparable results

13. WHAT HAPPENS TO THE SAVINGS? ~$3 Million Annually Stay in department for continuous course improvement and/or redesign of others Provide a greater range of offerings at upper division or graduate level Accommodate greater numbers of students with same resources Stay in department to reduce teaching load and provide more time for research Redesign similar courses Miscellaneous – Offer distance sections – Reduce rental expenditures – Improve training of part-time faculty

14. WHAT DO THE FACULTY SAY? “It’s the best experience I’ve ever had in a classroom.” “The quality of my worklife has changed immeasurably for the better.” “It’s a lot of work during the transition--but it’s worth it.”

15. REDESIGN MODELS Supplemental – Add to the current structure and/or change the content Replacement – Blend face-to-face with online activities Emporium – Move all classes to a lab setting Fully online – Conduct all (most) learning activities online Buffet – Mix and match according to student preferences Linked Workshop – JIT workshops linked to college level course

16. REDESIGN CHARACTERISTICS Redesign the whole course—not just a single class Emphasize active learning—greater student engagement with the material and with one another Rely heavily on readily available interactive software—used independently and in teams Mastery learning—not self-paced Increase on-demand, individualized assistance Automate only those course components that can benefit from automation—e.g., homework, quizzes, exams Replace single mode instruction with differentiated personnel strategies Technology enables good pedagogy with large #s of students.

17. SUPPLEMENTAL MODEL Maintain the basic current structure Change the content so that more is available on line Change interaction so that students are interacting more with the material Change the use of the time to reduce or eliminate lecturing and increase student interaction

18. BIOLOGY University of Massachusetts CHALLENGES Inconsistent student preparation Poor class attendance Lectures that repeated the contents of the textbook High dissatisfaction with course by both faculty and students

19. BIOLOGY University of Massachusetts Continue to have large class meetings Require short pre-tests before the start of the first class each week and these are available for the entire term as review Receive small number of points for taking the online quiz Provide 24/7 online study materials Include small group interactions during class focused on applied biology problems Class periods are now used to discuss biology problems, rather than lecture

20. BIOLOGY University of Massachusetts Student Outcomes In spite of more difficult questions, scores on exams in the redesigned course averaged 73% vs. 61% in the traditional course. 23% of the exam questions in the traditional model required reasoning or problem solving skills vs. 67% in the redesigned course. Attendance averaged 89.9% in the redesigned course vs. 67% in the traditional course.

21. REPLACEMENT MODEL Blend face-to-face with online activities Determine exactly what activities required face-to-face and reduce the amount of time to focus only on those activities in class Provide 24/7 online interactive learning materials and resources Include online self-assessment activities with immediate feedback

22. ENGLISH COMPOSITION Tallahassee CC Diverse Student Population Many students still in need of remediation Many class hours used to review grammar skills High inconsistency among sections Poor success rates (<60%)

23. ENGLISH COMPOSITION Tallahassee CC GOAL: Student Centered Learning Environment Individualized diagnosis and prescription Active participation Meaningful writing assignments Collaboration Flexibility

24. ENGLISH COMPOSITION Tallahassee CC Traditional 3000 students annually in sections of ~30 ~50% lecture ~50% discussion High inconsistency among sections High use of full-time faculty to help increase consistency Redesign 3000 students annually in sections of ~30 Taught in computer labs Interweave writing and reading Menu of reading & writing activities Discussion board for Peer Collaboration SMARTHINKING tutors

25. ENGLISH COMPOSITION Tallahassee CC QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS Individualized programs of study Immediate feedback Increased time-on-task Decreased feedback time on writing assignments More time for writing activities, conferencing, collaborative activities, critiques, & discussion More time to explore ideas, and develop critical thinking skills More time for one-on-one and small group conferencing

26. ENGLISH COMPOSITION Tallahassee CC OUTCOMES Increased success rates, 60.7% in traditional and 68.4% in redesign Increased time on task Writing about literature Increased communication and interaction about writing

27. COMPUTER LITERACY Arizona State University GOALS Update content and delivery Cover modern methods and technologies Promote self-directed learning Use modern learning environment and technology to deliver course Reduce cost Decrease delivery costs – efficient sustainable delivery structure for ~2200 students each term

28. COMPUTER LITERACY Arizona State University Updated Content Traditional Course  4 paper-based, multiple choice exams based on computer technology too introductory for today's tech-savvy students  12 assignments in Microsoft Word, Excel, and FileMaker Pro, submitted in hard copy Redesigned Course  9 online quizzes demonstrating understanding of modern computing concepts  7 self-guided learning assignments applying computing concepts and computer-driven problem solving techniques, submitted via various online methods  4 major projects requiring substantial independent inquiry, submitted via various online methods

29. COMPUTER LITERACY Arizona State University Updated Delivery Traditional Model  2 lectures per week  Open lab hours for assistance, staffed by TAs and graders  Assignments turned in hard copy during lecture – graded by graders, and returned hard copy during lecture  Paper-based, multiple choice exams completed in lecture Redesign Model  1 optional lecture per week, all content on Blackboard  Scheduled guidance in lab, staffed by Undergraduate Learning Assistants (ULAs)  Discussion board available for assistance daily  All assignments, quizzes and projects submitted via the Web

30. COMPUTER LITERACY Arizona State University Learning Outcomes: Traditional Sections  Average of 26% of students earned 70% or more Redesigned Sections  Average of 65% of students earned 70% or more, on a demonstrably more difficult course Cost Reduction : a reduction from $50 to $35 per student, which is a 30% savings.

31. EMPORIUM MODEL Move all classes to a lab setting Permit the use of multiple kinds of personnel Allow students to work as long as they need to master the content Can be adapted for the kinds of students at a particular institution Allow multiple courses the same time Include multiple examples in math

32. EMPORIUM MODEL

33. COLLEGE ALGEBRA University of Missouri – St. Louis CHALLENGES Inconsistent student academic preparation Success rates sometimes as low as 50% Inadequate student retention Inconsistent student outcomes, since taught in multiple sections

34. COLLEGE ALGEBRA University of Missouri – St. Louis Traditional course – 3 50-minute lectures to 35-40 students in each section weekly Redesigned course 1 75-minute session with 75 students weekly to provide overview, assignment review, troubleshoot, and keep students on track 2 75-minute required labs in Math Technology Learning Center weekly Interactive software with videos, examples, exercises, homework and low stakes quizzing Individual assistance when needed

35. COLLEGE ALGEBRA University of Missouri – St. Louis OUTCOMES Increase in number of students earning A or B, from 32% in traditional to 56% in redesign Decrease in DFW rate from 36% in 2002-03 to 21.6% in 2005-06. Cost savings of 30% Now piloting redesign of Calculus and Statistics using the redesign model in the same Math Lab

36. DEVELOPMENTAL READING Northeast State Technical Community College Problems to Solve High failure and withdraw rate in Developmental Reading (up to 45% semester average) High failure and withdraw rate in Developmental Reading (up to 45% semester average) “One size fits all”; lack of individual assistance; instructor centered “One size fits all”; lack of individual assistance; instructor centered Hindrance to students’ timely progression through college Hindrance to students’ timely progression through college Small classes and high cost Small classes and high cost Annual enrollment ~450 students Annual enrollment ~450 students

37. DEVELOPMENTAL READING Northeast State Technical Community College Redesign Reading Emporium Weekly meeting to learn study skills, note taking and other useful skills Students required to spend 2 hours in the lab with assistance available Using MyReadingLab with diagnostics, individualized study plan, quizzes and readings

38. DEVELOPMENTAL MATH Northeast State Technical Community College Average Gains on the Nelson-Denny Reading Test (Difference between Pre- and Post-test Scores) Traditional – 11 points Spring 08 Pilot – 15 points Fall 08 Full Implementation – 21 points

39. FULLY ONLINE MODEL Moves all or most of the learning environment online Provides access to anyone, anywhere, anytime – on demand Allows international groups of students to interact easily and learn from each other

40. FINE ARTS Florida Gulf Coast University CHALLENGES Significant inconsistency among multiple sections Difficulty finding either faculty or adjuncts with the breadth of knowledge in all of the humanities Poor performance in this course that is required by all freshmen Growth in students and no money for new faculty

41. FINE ARTS Florida Gulf Coast University Each module covers one aspect of the Humanities Each module is designed and monitored by a faculty expert in that academic area One course coordinator manages the course of 400+ students each term Undergraduate peer tutors and adjuncts guide discussion groups and evaluate longer papers 24/7 interactive learning resources are available anytime, any place

42. FINE ARTS Florida Gulf Coast University Traditional 25 sections (~30); 6 sections (~15) = 800 Taught mainly by adjuncts “Course drift” $132 cost-per-student Redesign Single section (~950) Taught by 1 faculty, 1 course coordinator, 20 preceptors Consistent & coherent $81 cost-per-student Average exam scores increased from 70% to 85% Number of A’s/B’s increased from 31% to 75% DFW rate decreased from 45% to 11%

43. BUFFET MODEL Assess each student’s knowledge/skill level and preferred learning style Provide an array of high-quality, interactive learning materials and activities Develop individualized study plans Built in continuous assessment to provide instantaneous feedback Offer appropriate, varied human interaction when needed

44. STATISTICS Ohio State University CHALLENGES Previous redesign using IT increased the cost Students had highly variable learning styles Lectures were poorly attended 20% of the students repeat the course each quarter even though most have satisfactorily completed initial modules Too many emails for faculty Faculty time was used inefficiently Inconsistency among sections

45. STATISTICS Ohio State University Students use online assessment by Felder and Solomon. There are multiple routes to established outcomes for each module. Students are assisted in thinking about how they approach learning and what mode is easiest for them. Students file a learning plan for each module. Various kinds of learning activities using websites, software, video lectures, small group discussions, individual and group projects.

46. STATISTICS Ohio State University OUTCOMES Redesign students had greater success on common exams (mean = 78.3) than traditional students (mean = 70). The number of students needing to retake the course was reduced from 33% to 12%. Cost reduction from $191 per student in the traditional to $132 per student in the redesign

47. LINKED WORKSHOP MODEL Retain basic structure of the college-level course, particularly the number of class meetings Replace remedial/developmental course with just-in-time (JIT) workshops Design workshops to remove deficiencies in core course competencies Workshops consist of computer-based instruction, small- group activities and test reviews to provide additional instruction on key concepts Students individually assigned software modules based on results of diagnostic assessments Workshops facilitated by students who have previously excelled in core course; students trained and supervised by core course faculty JIT workshop activities designed so students use concepts during next core course class session, which in turn helps them see the value of the workshops and motivates them to do workshop activities

48. DEVELOPMENTAL MATH Austin Peay State University Student Success Rates College CourseBeforeSLA Fund of Math32.4% 69.9% Elem Statistics22.4% 52.5%* * Higher than the success rate for students with 19-22 ACT subscores

49. FACULTY BENEFITS Increased opportunity to work directly with students who need help Reduced grading Technology does the tracking and monitoring More practice and interaction for students without faculty effort Ability to try different approaches to meet different student needs Opportunity for continuous improvement of materials and approaches

50. Program in Course Redesign (PCR) – 30 institutions Roadmap to Redesign (R2R) – 20 institutions Colleagues Committed to Redesign (C2R) – 60 institutions State and System-based Programs – 80+ institutions

51. QUANTITATIVE Mathematics – Developmental Math – Pre-calculus Math – College Algebra – Discrete Math – Introductory Algebra – Elementary Algebra – Beginning Algebra – Intermediate Algebra – Linear Algebra Statistics – Business Statistics – Introductory Statistics – Elementary Statistics – Economic Statistics Computing – Computer Programming – Information Technology Concepts – Computer Literacy – Information Literacy – Tools for the Information Age

52. SCIENCE – Anatomy and Physiology – Astronomy – Biology – Ethnobotany – Chemistry – Geology SOCIAL SCIENCE – American Government – Macro and Microeconomics – Psychology – Sociology – Urban Affairs

53. HUMANITIES – Developmental Reading – Developmental Writing – English Composition – Communication Studies – Understanding the Visual and Performing Arts – History of Western Civilization – Great Ideas in Western Music – Spanish – World Literature – British Literature – Women and Gender Studies PROFESSIONAL – Elementary Education – Education: The Curriculum – Engineering Technology – Organizational Behavior – Public Speaking – Accounting – Nursing

54. A STREAMLINED REDESIGN METHODOLOGY “A Menu of Redesign Options” Five Models for Course Redesign Five Principles of Successful Course Redesign Cost Reduction Strategies Course Planning Tool Course Structure Form Five Models for Assessing Student Learning Five Critical Implementation Issues Planning Checklist

55. WHAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING THAT WE HAVE LEARNED ABOUT QUALITY AND COST? The factors that lead to increased student learning and increased student retention are the same as those that lead to reduced instructional costs!

56. FIVE PRINCIPLES OF SUCCESSFUL COURSE REDESIGN #1: Redesign the whole course – Quality: Eliminate “course drift”; greater course coherence and quality control – Cost: Eliminate duplicate effort; create opportunities for alternate staffing

57. FIVE PRINCIPLES OF SUCCESSFUL COURSE REDESIGN #2: Encourage active learning – Quality: “Learning is not a spectator sport.” – Cost: Reduce faculty preparation and presentation time; reduce grading time (e.g., interactive software, peer learning teams)

58. FIVE PRINCIPLES OF SUCCESSFUL COURSE REDESIGN #3: Provide students with individualized assistance – Quality: Students get help when they are “stuck” and stay on task rather than giving up: software tutorials, F2F in labs or help rooms, “beep a tutor,” SMARTHINKING – Cost: Apply the right level of human intervention: peer tutors, course assistants

59. FIVE PRINCIPLES OF SUCCESSFUL COURSE REDESIGN #4: Build in ongoing assessment and prompt (automated) feedback – Quality: Enables practice, diagnostic feedback, focused time on task – Cost: Good pedagogy with large numbers of students; individual and group assessment; faculty spend time on what students don’t understand

60. FIVE PRINCIPLES OF SUCCESSFUL COURSE REDESIGN #5: Ensure sufficient time on task and monitor student progress – Quality: Self-pacing vs. milestones for completion; points for engagement – Cost: Course management systems can reduce costs while increasing oversight

61. READINESS CRITERIA What does it mean to be “ready” to do a major course redesign? Is your institution ready? Which courses are “ready”—i.e., are good candidates for a comprehensive redesign?

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

63. FACTORS TO CONSIDER WHEN THINKING ABOUT HIGH IMPACT High drop-failure-withdrawal rates Student performance in subsequent courses Students on waiting lists Student complaints Other departmental complaints Lack of consistency in multiple sections Difficulty finding qualified adjuncts

64. 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?

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

66. ASSESSMENT GOAL To establish the degree to which improved learning has been achieved as a result of the course redesign.

67. ASSESSMENT PLANNING Step 1. Establish the method of obtaining data. Step 2. Choose the measurement method.

68. ESTABLISH THE METHOD OF OBTAINING DATA Baseline “Before” (traditional) and “After” (redesign) Parallel Sections – Compare traditional sections and redesigned sections

69. CHOOSE THE MEASUREMENT METHOD: FIVE MODELS A. Comparisons of Final Exams B. Comparisons of Common Content Items Selected from Exams C. Comparisons of Pre- and Post- Tests D. Comparisons of Student Work using Common Rubrics E. Comparisons of Course Grades using Common Criteria

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

71. COST SAVINGS GOAL Create cost savings that can be used to sustain ongoing redesign, to fund future operations and to free up resources for program and/or institutional priorities.

72. WHAT’S YOUR ENROLLMENT SITUATION? Is your enrollment growing or projected to grow? Is your enrollment stable or declining?

73. ACCOMMODATE ENROLLMENT GROWTH Increase the number of sections. Increase the section size. Change the mix of personnel teaching the course. Mix and match for greater savings!

74. RIO SALADO COLLEGE Pre-Calculus Math Traditional 4 courses taught by 4 instructors Student interaction = each instructor $49 cost-per- student Redesign 4 courses taught by 1 instructor Student interaction = interactive software, 1 course assistant, and 1 instructor $31 cost-per-student

75. U OF TENNESSEE Spanish Traditional 57 sections (~27) Adjuncts + 6 TAs 100% in class $167,074 ($2931/section) 1529 students @ $109 Redesign 38 sections (~54) Instructor-TA pairs 50% in class, 50% online $56,838 ($1496/section) 2052 students @ $28

76. STABLE COURSE ENROLLMENT Reduce the number of sections and increase the section size. (Reduce the number teaching the course.) Reduce the number of graduate teaching assistants (Only 9 of 30 projects!) Change the mix of personnel teaching the course (Adjuncts, undergraduate learning assistants.) Mix and match for greater savings!

77. FAIRFIELD UNIVERSITY General Biology Traditional 7 sections (~35) 7 faculty 100% wet labs $131,610 $506 cost-per-student Redesign 2 sections (~140) 4 faculty 50% wet, 50% virtual $98,033 $350 cost-per-student

78. 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?

79. 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?

80. 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.

81. NCAT PLANNING RESOURCES http://www.thencat.org/R2R/R2R_Planning_Resources.htm

82. THE REDESIGN ALLIANCE Fall Events Increasing Student Success in Developmental Mathematics Co-sponsored with Tennessee Board of Regents October 16, 2009 in Nashville, TN Getting Started on Course Redesign Co-sponsored with UNC-Chapel Hill November 13, 2009 in Chapel Hill, NC

83. THE REDESIGN ALLIANCE Fourth Annual Conference When: March 28-30, 2010 Where: The Rosen Centre Hotel Orlando, Florida For more information, see http://www.thencat.org/RA.htm

84. REDESIGNING STUDENT LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS Carolyn Jarmon, Ph.D. cjarmon@theNCAT.org www.theNCAT.org