1. Course Redesign Initiative Jack Dempsey University of South Alabama jdempsey@usouthal.edu

3. Principles: Improve Quality Increase Cost Efficiency

4. Research Support USDOE meta-analysis* “Students who took all or part of their class online performed better, on average, than those taking the same course through traditional face-to-face instruction.” “Instruction combining online and face-to-face elements had a larger advantage relative to purely face-to-face instruction than did purely online instruction.” *Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies, Washington, D.C., 2009.

5. Research Support NCAT projects* (redesign 30 institutions) 25 of 30 signif. increases in learning (others NSD) Majority reported increased course- completion and lower DFW rates Avg. cost reduction 37% *National Council on Academic Transformation.

6. Course Redesign Initiative Focus –High enrollment courses –eLearning usually blended format

7. Scope U. South Alabama 37 redesign proposals (first round) affecting estimated 4,400 undergrads NCAT 30 institutions 30 course redesigns affecting 50,000 students nationwide

8. Course Redesign Initiative 37 faculty Proposals respond to SVPAA’s call Up to 18,000 annual course enrollments in 2011 Most pilots start fall semester

9. Type of Redesign

10. Models of Redesign Proposed

11. Course Redesign Initiative Fall 2010 Numbers RedesignTraditionalTotal Instructors65 132 Sections165122287 Enrollment483239808812 * 34 total redesign courses for Fall 2010

12. Quality and Cost Efficiencies operational cost reductions – combined sections – Fewer part-time Instructors & GAs – faculty reassignments

13. Quality and Cost Efficiencies Creative eLearning technologies – lecture capture – interactive instructional materials from publishers – online tutoring – guided examples – team case studies – expert guests

14. Quality and Cost Efficiencies Active on-campus learning sessions – Structured team-based problems – Cases and inquiry learning scenarios – Oral and project presentations – Large group content review – Strategic quizzing; practice tests – Critiques and discussion

15. How we will measure? Improve Quality Obtaining Data – Parallel Sections (Traditional and Redesign) – Baseline "Before" (Traditional) and "After" (Redesign) – Focus groups Comparison of Methods – Student Success rates – Common Final Exams – Common Content Items Selected from Exams – Pre- and Post-tests – Student Work Using Common Rubrics Cost Reduction cost per Student salary/credit hour production increased course enrollment capacity reduction in part-time instructors and GAs

16. How have we supported? Professional Development NCAT and Sloan-C Conferences and workshops - 3 groups of faculty OLL & PETAL workshops Two-day Instructor Bootcamps Course Redesign Website Evaluation assistance Redesign Academy (3 days w/ honorarium) Redesign Faculty Get-Togethers Direct Support Institutional tools (iTunesU, Camtasia Relay) Personal Tools (laptops, software) E-Learning Assistant Program

17. Risks & Rewards Wildflowers or Weeds?Principle-guided Innovation