|
Report of the Graduate School Ad Hoc Committee on Distance Learning
Approved by the Graduate School Executive Committee 5/26/98
Introduction
The Graduate School Ad Hoc Committee on Distance Learning was
appointed by Vice President and Dean Mark Brenner of the Graduate School
in January, 1998, with the charge "to examine the Graduate School's
present policy governing distance learning initiatives, and to recommend
a new policy reflective of current technologies, including the Internet
and the World Wide Web. The Graduate School's present policy consists
of principles and guidelines for the distance delivery of graduate courses
and programs that were established in 1977 and reaffirmed in 1989. The
intervening years have of course witnessed a technological revolution
and the emergence of extraordinary capabilities to teach distance learners."
At the committee's first meeting, Vice President and Dean Brenner elaborated
on his charge to the committee by identifying three principle areas in
which guidance is needed:
- (1) What are reasonable criteria for graduate level course delivery
using distance learning technologies, with emphasis on the articulation
of general principles and identifying examples?
- (2) What are reasonable criteria for graduate program delivery using
distance learning technologies and what are appropriate means for providing
such graduate programs, at what level (Masters and/or Ph.D.), and in
which graduate programs?
- (3) What are reasonable criteria, principles, and standards governing
distance learning collaborations (e.g., the Minnesota/Madison collaboration)?
Vice President and Dean Brenner further stated that the committee's
charge is basically the same as that of the Odland Committee (1976); not
only to develop criteria governing learning initiatives, but also to do
so in such a way as to promote technology enhanced learning. A complete
membership list for the committee is included in Appendix B at the end
of the report.
The committee met on a nearly weekly basis from January 27,
1998 to April 21, 1998 to review and discuss existing distance learning
programs and courses approved through the Graduate School, to hear presentations
by individuals currently active in graduate level distance learning efforts
(e.g., Kent Morrison, Vice President for Academic Affairs at Walden University,
and Ann Hill Duin, Vice Provost for Instructional Technology and University
Partnerships at the University of Minnesota.), and to discuss
the wide range of issues inherent in the committee's charge. The committee
notes that this report is only part of a much larger re-evaluation of
distance and technology enhanced learning currently taking place at the
University of Minnesota, within the state of Minnesota, nationally, and
internationally. This report builds on and is consistent with University-wide
guidelines and principles for distance learning outlined in the University
of Minnesota Distance Education Council's 1997 strategic planning report
on Distance Learning and Information Technologies at the University of
Minnesota and the follow-up tactical document Technology Enhanced Learning:
Operating Guidelines and Procedures for Distance Education from the Office
of the Executive Vice President and Provost, specifically addressing those
general principles and issues relevant to distance learning at the graduate
level, while also acknowledging those more global items relevant to distance
learning at all levels of higher education as addressed in the aforementioned
documents.
These efforts are in response to the changing perceptions of
what graduate education is, i.e., how it is delivered, where it is delivered,
when it is delivered, by whom it is delivered, and to whom it is delivered
(C. Beere, K. Morrison, and R. Smith, The Impact of Technology on Graduate
Education: Opportunities and Challenges for the 21st Century, '97 Beijing
International Conference on Graduate Education, Beijing, China, 1997).
This report acknowledges the reality that these perceptions are becoming
increasingly molded by market factors and that Universities are no longer
the only places where people can obtain advanced knowledge, critical thinking
skills, and participate in a community of scholarship. At the same time,
it emphasizes the need to balance this carefully with the traditional
values inherent in graduate education, so as to preserve the quality and
integrity of all the graduate programs offered by the University of Minnesota.
The continually changing landscape of distance learning (both in terms
of learning pedagogy and delivery technology), the wide diversity of graduate
level programs at the University of Minnesota, and the increasing merger
of distance and resident learning programs through technology enhanced
learning, require that the report emphasize general guiding principles
and outline critical issues, without constraining graduate distance learning
efforts by specific criteria which will rapidly become outdated. To these
ends, the following section outlines general guiding principles for all
graduate level distance learning courses and programs at the University
of Minnesota. It is followed by specific recommendations, including implementation
of a uniform and consistent review process for proposed distance learning
courses and programs and establishment of a standing Graduate School Committee
on Distance Learning designed to promote and enhance the delivery of quality
graduate level distance learning programs at the University of Minnesota.
The report concludes with a detailed discussion of those issues that need
to be carefully considered and addressed by all faculty in the design,
approval, and implementation of graduate level distance learning efforts.
General Principles
Delivery of graduate level programs by distance learning should
be viewed as an inherent part of the land grant mission of the University
of Minnesota, enhancing its teaching, research, and service mission when
carefully and appropriately implemented, and as an enabling resource for
meeting the ever increasing education needs of the state, the region,
and the nation. However, this effort must at all times be consistent with
the goals and values unique to graduate education, and with the tradition
of quality and integrity inherent in graduate programs at the University
of Minnesota. In particular, University of Minnesota graduate level distance
learning programs must strive to maintain the same level of interactivity,
development of critical thinking skills, generation of new knowledge,
and community of scholarship inherent in its resident graduate programs.
While the modes by which these goals and values are achieved may vary
significantly between the resident and distance learning components of
the same program, and indeed even between different programs, their successful
integration into all graduate level efforts is critical to the overall
quality of the graduate education experience at the University of Minnesota.
In the planning of graduate level distance learning courses
and programs, the appropriateness and viability of such efforts must be
carefully considered. In a time of increasing competition and decreasing
institutional resources, University of Minnesota graduate programs must
focus on those efforts which are most consistent with their long range
goals, build on their unique strengths and capabilities, address clearly
delineated needs, and foster a spirit of cooperation with neighboring
institutions. Graduate level distance learning efforts should be viewed
as a complement to on-campus resident programs, and not solely as an enterprise
unto themselves. They should generally be the natural extension of already
existing resident programs, being held to the same graduate education
goals and values, levels of quality, and standards of accountability inherent
in resident programs.
The quality of graduate programs at the University of Minnesota
is fundamentally represented and most successfully insured by its graduate
faculty. Hence, distance learning initiatives should be measured in effectiveness
and quality under guidelines similar to those utilized for on-campus programs
and courses. The criteria for this evaluation should be developed within
individual graduate programs, consistent with the program's mission and
goals, and clearly delineated to the program's faculty. As distance learning
modes become more pervasive and institutional review is delegated to the
normal process, it is incumbent on the graduate faculty to maintain high
standards, both individually and at the program level.
Graduate level distance learning courses and programs must
involve substantial participation by regular graduate faculty at all stages,
i.e., during their development, approval process, and implementation.
Participation of regular graduate faculty in the teaching of distance
learning courses is deemed critical in assuring high quality graduate
level distance learning efforts at the University of Minnesota. While
utilization of adjunct faculty for teaching distance learning courses
may important in some instances for staffing these programs, this should
only be on a very limited basis, and then only under the close supervision
of regular graduate faculty.
Specific Recommendations
Recommendation 1: The Committee recommends that the
process for approving graduate level courses and degree programs to be
delivered, either in part or solely, through distance learning should
follow the normal Graduate School process for approval of new or substantially
modified resident courses and degree programs. In particular, for 8xxx
level courses and graduate programs by distance learning, the courses
and programs should originate from graduate faculty in the appropriate
program and be approved by the entire graduate faculty in that program,
by the appropriate Graduate School Policy and Review Council(s), and,
in the case of degree programs, by the Graduate School Executive Committee.
Non-8xxx level courses delivered through distance learning and which are
to be included in graduate degree programs should be approved through
the normal approval process of the budgetary college originating the course.
For these purposes, a change in delivery mode from only resident to either
a mix of resident and distance delivery or only distance delivery would
constitute a substantial modification requiring approval through the normal
process. In all cases, a copy of the course or program proposal and approval
documents should be submitted to the Graduate School for informational
purposes. As an aid in preparation and review of such proposals, Appendix
A suggests items specific to distance delivery for consideration as part
of the normal proposal preparation and review process.
Recommendation 2: The Committee recommends that the
Graduate School establish a standing Graduate School Distance Learning
Committee (for the indefinite future) that would focus on the evolving
demands that distance and technologically enhanced learning systems place
on University of Minnesota graduate program offerings. This committee
would be comprised, at least in part, of faculty members having experience
in the development and delivery of courses and programs using contemporary
technologies. The committee would be charged with:
- (1) Ongoing educational and administrative policy review to ensure
that acceptable standards of educational quality are met, that administrative
and bureaucratic barriers to utilization of distance and technology
enhanced learning are minimized, and that student, faculty, and institutional
needs are considered in policy and program development.
- (2) Advising the Graduate School's Policy and Review Councils and
Graduate School Executive Committee on matters pertaining to distance
and technology enhanced learning. This committee should also be consulted
on the development and implementation of support services and internal
consultative networks in this area.
- (3) Helping to disseminate information on course development and program
structuring to faculty members and programs exploring their options
in this arena, and serving a mentoring role for such faculty and programs
in the development and implementation of their initiatives in distance
and technology enhanced learning.
An example of the committees charge, relevant to all three
of the above areas, would be regular review and updating of the lists
of issues discussed in Appendix A for informing the development and review
of proposals for distance delivery of graduate degree programs and courses
Additional Issues in Graduate Level Distance Learning
In the case of graduate level distance learning courses and
programs, all stages of their development, from generation of the original
proposal through subsequent approvals, to final implementation, must be
informed by a wide range of issues inherent in delivery by distance and
technology enhanced learning. This section is intended to serve as a guide
to some of these critical issues. The first part outlines those issues
which are of particular concern in graduate level education and are directly
addressable within the structure of the Graduate School. The second part
lists additional issues which, while still of critical concern, are more
generic to the whole higher education distance learning effort and are
only completely addressable in a larger context. While in a few instances,
recommendations are made concerning specific issues, in most cases the
issues are simply delineated as ones that must be carefully considered
in the design and implementation of a distance learning experience at
the graduate level. The goal of this section is not to constrain the development
of graduate distance learning efforts, but to create an informed environment
for their development along diverse lines as educational pedagogy and
enabling technologies evolve.
Graduate School Issues:
Policy Issues: There are a range of policy issues related
to distance learning at the graduate level which impact on the very nature
of the graduate educational experience and need to be appropriately resolved.
- (1) Faculty-student and student-student interaction is an issue that
must be satisfactorily addressed by any graduate level distance learning
program, particularly in doctoral programs and, to a lesser degree,
in masters programs. The appropriate mix of various modes of interaction,
e.g. in-person, video-conferencing, web-mediated, etc., needs to be
carefully considered. For example, graduate programs that develop distance
learning to the extent that students can satisfy most of their graduate
program without attending on-campus classes need to evaluate carefully
the potential loss of quality that could arise.
- (2) Transfer of credit from other institutions (either of course work
taken in the traditional on-campus mode or by distance learning) should
be consistent between resident and distance learning programs and should
include in a substantial way a majority of course work from the University
of Minnesota. It is recommended that transfer criteria currently in
place for course work taken outside the Graduate School at the University
of Minnesota continue to be applied to all graduate programs, both to
resident and distance learning. At its discretion, any graduate program
may impose a more restrictive policy as it deems desirable. Exceptions
might be appropriate in the case of Graduate School approved collaborative
degree programs.
- (3) Admissions procedures and administration processes should be similar
and admissions requirements and approval processes should be the same
for resident and distance learning programs.
- (4) Programs must keep abreast of the level of acceptance and special
requirements of their discipline's accrediting bodies as pertains to
the delivery of courses and programs through distance learning. It is
the program's responsibility to ensure that external accreditation standards
are satisfied.
Programmatic Issues: Distance learning initiatives need
to be measured in effectiveness and quality under guidelines similar to
those currently in place for on-campus programs and courses. The criteria
for this evaluation should be developed within individual graduate programs.
- (1) Under distance learning formats, the decisions as to whether students
seeking to register for an individual course have the necessary prerequisites
should fall to the instructor or graduate program, as is the usual situation
for resident students. Individual graduate programs may wish to treat
students who have been accepted to a graduate program differently than
students who are registering under adult special status. It seems desirable
that preference for registration be given to registered graduate students
if limitations of class size become a concern.
- (2) With the development of distance education initiatives, it is
clear that existing guidelines for cross-institution collaborative programs
need to be examined. Distance education involving other institutions
greatly complicates matters of advising, degree granting responsibilities,
institutional sharing of tuition revenues, and reviews of faculty qualifications
for shared teaching responsibilities. The establishment of programs
that involve such collaborative efforts is not easily accomplished and
will require considerable involvement with the University administration.
Initially, faculty should be encouraged to work with peer institutions
where arrangements already exist, such as the CIC collaboration. However,
regardless of whether current administrative ties exist, it is certain
that the development of distance education curriculum will require significant
time commitments for faculty who are adopting this format. Thus, adjustments
in faculty teaching schedules may be necessary for significant developments
of distance education initiatives. The implementation of a home institution
model in which students participating in cross-institution collaborative
programs and courses register for such courses through their home institution
has proven to be one technique that successfully addresses many of these
issues.
Delivery Issues: The delivery of graduate education
through technologically enhanced systems hinges on two key pivots around
which future policies and decisions will revolve.
- (1) As more and more "vendors" enter the arena of distance
education, and as the characteristics of the post-graduate student body
continue to diversify, the University will be forced to reconsider its
position in the educational marketplace. One particular critical issue
which must be noted and addressed is the point of just what, if anything,
the University and its graduate faculty would be "delivering."
We have traditionally oriented our faculty and instructional offerings
around the delivery of graduate programs. However, given the forces
noted above, there will be an accelerating tendency, if not outright
demand, for graduate and professional level courses and modules which
may be more or less independent of graduate degrees awarded by the University.
- (2) A second critical issue is the changing nature of the relationship
between the institution, the graduate faculty (singular and plural),
and the students. This issue encompasses concerns about mentoring and
instructional relationships in both traditional "high residency"
degree programs and in the classroom itself. We note that the delivery
of graduate education through technologically enhanced systems will
almost certainly impact the types of relationships graduate faculty
have traditionally valued as essential components of advanced education.
Thoughtful discussion and consideration must be given to examination
of this valuation as well as to alternative ways of ensuring quality
and maintaining standards which reflect appropriately on the University
of Minnesota.
In the context of both these items, it needs to be acknowledged that:
- students enrolling in distance education courses may be pursuing degrees
from other institutions, or may not be pursuing degrees at all;
- employers and other "third-parties" may emerge as intervening
forces in education, just as they have in the "managed" health
care system;
- if the University or individual programs choose to pursue technologically
enhanced learning systems in an aggressive way, new marketing and administrative
systems will be necessary to compete effectively;
- many difficulties and decisions must be faced, step by step, in the
areas of student tuition (especially for "partnered offerings"),
of academic credit, of overall degree and program requirements, of residency
expectations, of course eligibility requirements, of testing and student
assessment procedures, and frequency and scheduling of offerings, among
others; and
- that the cost-effectiveness of such offerings must be carefully evaluated
(That is to say: What is the actual institutional and faculty cost of
developing and delivering such courses/programs relative to the demand,
the income derived, and other benefits?).
Student Support Issues: The availability of effective
and comprehensive student services is paramount to the success of any
graduate education effort, especially when delivered through distance
learning. The following issues are of particular concern in this context.
- (1) One-on-one advising and mentoring is one of the defining characteristics
of a graduate education. In the implementation of graduate programs
through distance learning, every program must ensure that mechanisms
are in place to accomplish this activity at a level comparable to that
occurring for on-campus students, while recognizing that the mode of
interaction may vary between programs and between on-campus and distance
learning participants.
- (2) Active participation in a community of scholars is another key
characteristic of graduate education that must be effectively supported.
While the appropriate use of information technologies can facilitate
the necessary student-faulty and student-student interactions, involvement
of students and faculty at a level commensurate with that occurring
in on-campus programs will take careful planning and implementation,
and must involve appropriate training and support in use of the communications
media.
- (3) Given the research and experiential nature of graduate education,
access to and effective utilization of university resources, such as
libraries, laboratories, and clinical/field work experience, is another
critical characteristic of the graduate experience. Consequently, careful
consideration must be given to these issues, including a support structure
for comprehensive and timely delivery of these support services to distance
learners. It is essential that each graduate program consider the level
of support needed for effective implementation of its curriculum and
the availability of such support to distance learners.
- (4) While access to computing services is an issue in all of distance
learning, it has aspects which are unique to graduate education. For
example, the higher level of interaction with faculty and other students
expected in graduate programs may require more advanced and complicated
communications technologies. In addition, the utilization of specialized
hardware and software systems only available through the University
will often be required for graduate level course work and research.
In both cases, not only must the technology be easily accessible to
the distance learner, but they must have ready access to a dependable
technical training and support system.
Faculty Policy Issues: The major issue to be addressed
is that of quality vs. cost, particularly in terms of faculty workload
and support for distance learning initiatives. Of critical importance
is the maintenance of quality through the continued use of University
faculty for graduate program offerings, and, for the most part, for specific
courses.
- (1) To encourage the participation of regular Graduate School faculty
in distance learning activities, appropriate support structures must
be implemented. For example, faculty who wish to develop courses for
distance learning (e.g., Web-based courses), and who lack the technical
expertise, might be effectively supported by partnering with support
staff with the needed expertise to develop a course. This issue is especially
important with graduate faculty in a major research institution like
the University of Minnesota, given the faculty's diverse commitments
to teaching, research, and service.
- (2) Future "partnering" with faculty from other institutions
will certainly be one way of addressing faculty workload issues, while
making optimum use of scarce resources. In this regard, the Graduate
School should examine the current policy concerning appointing faculty
external to the University to examining committees and as advisors.
It is recommended that a separate graduate faculty category be established
for such individuals, with both associate and full graduate faculty
classifications within this category. Graduate faculty in this category
would be allowed to serve on graduate committees and as graduate advisors,
but would not be allowed to participate in Graduate School governance.
This recommendation recognizes the value of sharing knowledge in distance
initiatives with other institutions, while addressing the issue of competition
for students and faculty between institutions. It is further recommended
that, in all cases, the majority of any graduate examining committee
consist of regular Graduate School faculty, exclusive of those appointed
to this new category.
- (3) An important questions is: How can we best take advantage of the
opportunity to connect with students outside the region and, yet, maintain
the integrity of the graduate programs here? The place to start may
be within the CIC and MNSCU, with pilot projects that examine such parameters
as startup time, student contact time, evaluation responsibilities,
grading, workload distribution, compensation, copyright, materials distribution,
and ownership of materials. The proposed Distance Learning Committee
within the Graduate School would be a logical group to evaluate such
pilot efforts.
- (4) The issues surrounding faculty compensation loom large and remain
essentially unaddressed at this point. For example. hiring qualified
adjunct faculty to offer a specific and required course within a program
could be cost effective and well worth the effort; it could be based
on enrollment and contact time, using much the same mechanism now in
place.
Although these issues surrounding faculty policy are complex,
the committee recognizes the need to address them as soon as possible,
basing further discussion on data gathered from those faculty who have
had some success in attempting to resolve various problems related to
developing and teaching courses using distance learning strategies.
Global Issues:
In addition to the above issues which are of particular concern
in graduate level education, there are a host of additional issues which,
while still of critical concern, are more generic to the whole higher
education distance learning effort and are only completely addressable
in a larger context. The following list is meant only to serve as an indicator
of this broader range of issues, all of which have a bearing on graduate
level distance learning efforts. The reader is referred to University-wide
guidelines and principles for distance learning outlined in the University
of Minnesota Distance Education Council's 1997 strategic planning report
on Distance Learning and Information Technologies at the University of
Minnesota and the follow-up tactical document Technology Enhanced Learning:
Operating Guidelines and Procedures for Distance Education from the Office
of the Executive Vice President and Provost for more complete details
on these issues. The committee suggests that the proposed Graduate School
Distance Learning Committee undertake as one of its tasks the careful
review of these items, with the purpose of championing Graduate School
concerns with respect to those efforts across the University at large.
- Resident versus non-resident tuition: The distinction between resident
and non-resident students for purposes of tuition is certainly an impediment
to distance learning efforts and the committee recommends its elimination.
- Contact time and student prep time per credit: What do these mean
in the context of distance learning and how are they monitored?
- Faulty/student ratio: What are appropriate faculty/student ratios
in courses and programs having a significant distance learning clientele?
Laboratory and practicum experience: How can these be structured and/or
modified for delivery through a distance learning program?
- Student performance evaluation: What evaluation methods and procedures
are most appropriate in a distance learning setting? How is student
confidentiality maintained and student integrity (e.g., cheating) monitored?
- Delivery method: What are the appropriate pedagogies for content delivery,
with respect to the topic area, the distant learner's expectations and
needs, and the delivery technology? What is the appropriate mix of delivery
technologies?
- Registration support: Is accurate and clear advertising of distance
learning courses and programs available? Is a streamlined registration
system and support for fees payment and cancel/adds easily accessible
to distance learners?
- Student diversity: Are issues of special fees, financial aid, and
the concerns of students with disabilities clearly addressed for distance
learners?
- Faculty support structure: Is assistance for course and program development
widely and readily available to faculty considering the implementation
of distance learning initiatives? Is this support structured to optimize
the use of faculty time?
- Promotion/tenure: Is the involvement of faculty in the development
of distance learning courseware, courses, and programs adequately reflected
in promotion and tenure procedures?
- Conflicts of interest: Is the creation and/or teaching of distance
learning courses/programs and advising through other institutions an
allowable activity for regular University of Minnesota faculty, or is
it a conflict of interest? Should this issue come under the University's
policy on faculty consulting?
- Copyright/intellectual property issues: How do copyright laws and
University policies on intellectual property apply to the ownership
of distance learning educational materials and the distribution of materials
through distance delivery?
Concluding Remarks
In view of its charge and the increasing importance of distance
and technology enhanced learning locally, nationally, and internationally,
and after careful review and consideration of the issues involved, the
Graduate School Ad Hoc Committee on Distance Learning proposes a major
revision of the University of Minnesota's Graduate School Policy on Distance
Leaning. Throughout these deliberations, the committee's goal has been
to encourage the development of graduate level distance learning initiatives,
while retaining the traditional values inherent in graduate education,
so as to preserve the quality and integrity of all the graduate programs
offered by the University of Minnesota. Our efforts have focused on eliminating
unnecessary barriers to program implementation, on "mainstreaming"
the approval process, and on providing a permanent venue for advice and
support on distance learning issues in the Graduate School. At the same
time, the continually changing landscape of distance learning, the wide
diversity of graduate level programs at the University of Minnesota, and
the increasing merger of distance and resident learning programs through
technology enhanced learning, have required that this report emphasize
general guiding principles and outline critical issues, without constraining
graduate distance learning efforts by specific criteria which will rapidly
become outdated.
In all cases, the committee felt that the quality of graduate
programs at the University of Minnesota is fundamentally represented and
most successfully insured by its graduate faculty. Hence, distance learning
initiatives should be measured in effectiveness and quality under guidelines
similar to those utilized for on-campus programs and courses. The criteria
for this evaluation should be developed within individual graduate programs,
consistent with the program's mission and goals. This is reflected in
our first recommendation that the process for approving graduate level
courses and programs delivered through distance learning should follow
the normal Graduate School process for approval of resident courses and
programs.
The committee also believes that there is a strong need for
a permanent forum within the Graduate School's structure for ongoing educational
and administrative policy review of distance learning initiatives, for
advising the Graduate School's Program and Review Councils and Graduate
School Executive Committee on matters pertaining to distance and technology
enhanced learning, and for facilitating the development and implementation
of distance learning initiatives by graduate faculty. This is reflected
in our second recommendation, that the Graduate School establish a standing
Graduate School Distance Learning Committee which would focus on the evolving
demands distance and technologically enhanced learning systems place on
University of Minnesota graduate program offerings.
Appendix A
Issues Relevant to Degree Program and Course Approval Processes:
Experience to date indicates that there are unique aspects
of graduate degree program and course delivery by distance learning that
should be considered in the proposal preparation and approval process.
Consequently, as an assistance in the preparation and review of proposals
for graduate degree programs and courses to be delivered by distance learning,
it is suggested that, as part of the normal process, the following lists
of issues specific to distance delivery be considered. These lists should
be considered only as suggestions to help inform the process, and not
as rigid guidelines. Inclusion of items in the lists, and indeed the existence
to the lists themselves, is a dynamic process that should be regularly
reviewed and modified by the proposed Graduate School Distance Learning
Committee.
Issues for New or Substantially Modified Graduate Degree Programs:
It is suggested that the following issues specific to distance
delivery of graduate degree programs be considered:
- Need for the program, especially with regard to its delivery by distance
learning.
- Objectives of the program, including a discussion of how this program
is consistent with the goals of the originating program(s), appropriate
for delivery by distance learning, and qualitatively equivalent to resident
programs.
- Relationship of the program to existing resident programs and to other
distance learning initiatives.
- Anticipated program audience/participants, especially with regard
to size, demographics, academic preparation, course prerequisites, etc.
- Level of student-faculty and student-student interaction appropriate
to the program and necessary for the establishment of a community of
scholars, including a discussion of how and by what means this level
of interaction will be maintained in the distance learning environment.
- Mechanisms to be utilized in facilitating the supervision and mentoring
of graduate degree students at a distance.
- Procedures to be implemented for overseeing and monitoring distance
learning program quality consistent with resident programs.
- Classification (regular, adjunct, etc.) of faculty involved in the
design and delivery of the program.
- The impact of this distance learning program on existing graduate
programs supported by the participating faculty, including the effects
of this program on faculty workloads.
- Inclusion of significant faculty-student and student-student interaction,
as appropriate to a graduate level programs, and a discussion of how
this interaction will be fulfilled in the distance learning environment.
Issues for New or Substantially Modified 8xxx Level Graduate
Courses:
It is suggested that the following issues specific to distance
delivery of 8xxx level graduate courses be considered:
- Designation of a course coordinator who is a regular member of the
graduate faculty and who is responsible for the design, delivery, and
evaluation of the course.
- Consistency of this distance learning course with the objectives of
the originating graduate program.
- Relationship of this course to existing resident course/programs,
as well as to other distance learning efforts.
- Anticipated course audience/participants, especially with regard to
size, demographics, academic preparation, etc.
- Expected course enrollment and plans for limiting enrollment.
- Delivery technologies to be utilized, including their suitability
with respect to course content and pedagogy.
- Access to course materials, including texts, course packets, course
web sites, course videos, etc., as well as library and laboratory resources.
- Level of student-faculty and student-student interaction appropriate
to the program, including a discussion of how and by what means this
level of interaction will be maintained in the distance learning environment.
- Strategies to be used in evaluating student performance.
- Course evaluation procedures and measures, and a discussion of how
these will be used to improve overall course effectiveness.
Appendix B
Committee Membership:
- Prof. David Born
- Alexi Ditter
- Prof. Stephen Downing
- Prof. Douglas Ernie, Chair
- Nan Kalke
- Prof. Kathleen Krichbaum
- Prof. Judith Lambrecht
- Prof. Donald Siniff
- Vice Provost Ann Hill Duin, ex officio
- Prof. George Green, ex officio
- Associate Dean Stephen Hedman, ex officio
- Prof. James Perry, ex officio
- Vicki Field, Graduate School Staff
- Karen Starry, Graduate School Staff
|
