Table Of ContentDOCUMENT RESUME
IR 020 371
ED 446 742
AUTHOR
Twigg, Carol A.
Improving Learning and Reducing Costs: Redesigning
TITLE
Large-Enrollment Courses.
Pew Charitable Trusts, Philadelphia, PA.
SPONS AGENCY
PUB DATE
1999-00-00
NOTE
29p.
PUB TYPE Reports - Descriptive (141)
EDRS PRICE
MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage.
Case Studies; *Computer Uses in Education; Conferences;
DESCRIPTORS
Educational Development; Educational Environment;
Educational Planning; *Higher Education; *Instructional
Design; Instructional Development; Instructional Innovation
ABSTRACT
On July 15-16, 1999, a group of 20 higher education leaders
gathered in Roanoke, Virginia to participate in an invitational symposium on
the topic of "Redesigning More Productive Learning Environments." The goal in
Roanoke was to examine the validity of the conceptual framework that
undergirds the projects being implemented in the Pew Grant Program in Course
Redesign. The purpose of this program is to encourage colleges and
universities to redesign their instructional approaches using technology to
achieve cost savings as well as quality enhancements. This paper, like the
discussion in Roanoke, builds on the existing theory of how to redesign more
productive learning environments, which is well established. Discussion
focused on specific ways to implement the theory, drawing upon the experience
of large-scale redesign projects from Virginia Tech, the University of
Wisconsin-Madison, Rio Salado College, the University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign and Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. By iterating between
the planning methodology and actual implementations, the intention was to
draw lessons that can be used as a guide to practice throughout higher
education. This paper represents the result.
(AEF)
Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made
from the original document.
THF PEW LEARNING AND TECHNOl OGY PROGRAM
U S DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Office of Educational Research and Improvement
PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND
EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION
DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS
CENTER (ERIC)
BEEN GRANTED BY
This document has been reproduced as
received from the person or organization
originating it
C.A. Twigg
O Minor changes have been made to
improve reproduction quality
TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES
Points of view or opinions stated in this
INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)
document do not necessarily represent
official OERI position or policy
Cente'
cadmic
Traits prriratiok
AT RENSSELAER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE
2
Improving Learning and Reducing Costs: Redesigning Large-Enrollment Courses
by Carol A. Twigg
© The Pew Learning and Technology Program 1999
Sponsored by a grant from the Pew Charitable Trusts.
Center for Academic Transformation
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
Troy Building, Third Floor
110 8th Street, Troy, NY 12180
518-276-6519 (voice)
518-695-5633 (fax)
http://www.center.rpi.edu
3
Preface
William Massy, Jack Wilson, Robert
program is to encourage colleges and
On July 15-16, 1999, a group of 20
Zemsky, and me, all of us advancing
universities to redesign their instruc-
higher education leaders gathered in
essentially the same argument. Despite
tional approaches using technology to
Roanoke, Virginia to participate in an
the existence of a good theoretical base,
achieve cost savings as well as quality
invitational symposium on the topic of
those ideas have had very little impact
enhancements. Redesign projects focus
"Redesigning More Productive Learning
within the higher education community.
on large-enrollment, introductory
Environments." This was the first of the
courses. There are, of course, many
recently created Pew Symposia in Learn-
A major contributor to this minimal
other ways to improve quality and
ing and Technology, whose purpose is
impact is that those in higher education
reduce costs in higher educationsome
to conduct an ongoing national conver-
who sincerely want to address this
of which use technology and others
sation about issues related to the inter-
complex issue may not be convinced that
which do notincluding efforts at the
section of learning and technology.
it can be done or may not know how to
program level, the institutional level and
do it. Two things are needed: 1) a com-
The discussion in Roanoke consisted
the interinstitutional level. Our discus-
prehensive planning methodology (a
of two kinds of participants. The first
sion, like the grant program, had as its
roadmap or a cookbook, as some have
group had practitioners, faculty mem-
focus the course level, specifically the
called it) that can guide course redesign
bers, and campus administrators who
introductory course level for reasons
for multiple institutions, and 2) exam-
have undertaken large-scale redesign
that are articulated in this paper.
ples of practice that prove the theory.
projects. The second group had national
Rather than rehash either the reason for
Among the questions considered at the
and campus leaders who are intensely
taking action or the theory that points
symposium were the following: What
concerned about the issues of quality
the way, our discussion focused on
prior experience and investment makes
and cost in higher education and are
specific ways to implement the theory,
an institution ready to engage in
looking to information technology as
drawing upon the experience of four
redesign? How are the new learning
an innovative resource for constructive
large-scale redesign projects at Virginia
paradigms organized? How can they be
change. By blending the macro and
Tech, the University of Wisconsin
improved? What benefits do they offer
micro views of the issues, we hoped to
Madison, Rensselaer Polytechnic
for students, for faculty and for institu-
arrive at a common understanding.
Institute, and the University of Illinois
tions? What is the best approach to
In higher education, we traditionally
at Urbana-Champaign. By iterating
helping faculty adapt to a different style
have assumed that high quality means
between the planning methodology and
of educational delivery? What are the
low student-faculty ratios and that large
actual implementations, our intention
elements necessary for successful imple-
lecture/presentation techniques are the
was to draw lessons that can be used as
mentation? Are there best practices that
only low-cost alternatives available to
a guide to practice throughout higher
we can draw upon to serve as models for
us. New models are emerging, however,
education. This paper represents the
other disciplines and institutions? Will
that show that it is possible to improve
result.
these redesigns scale beyond a particular
learning while simultaneously reducing
class or institution?
the cost of instruction. We can indeed
This paper, like the discussion in
have our cake and eat it too.
Roanoke, builds on the existing theory
Our goal in Roanoke was to examine the
of how to redesign more productive
validity of the conceptual framework
learning environments, which is well
established. Much has been written on
that undergirds the projects being imple-
mented in the Pew Grant Program in
this subject by Robert C. Heterick, Jr.,
D. Bruce Johnstone, Charles Karelis,
Course Redesign. The purpose of this
3
THE PEW SYMPOSIA IN LEARNING AND TECHNOLOGY
Quality, Cost and Information Technology
Faculty are only one of many resources that are important
A major problem that continues to confront American higher
to student learning. Once learning becomes the central focus,
education is that of rising costs. With the average cost of
the important question is how best to use all available
attendance consuming a substantial portion of the median
resourcesincluding faculty time and technologyto
family income, what is at stake for many Americans is
achieve certain learning objectives. Rather than asking faculty
nothing less than the continued viability of the American
to work harder, we need to enable them to work smarter.
dream. The stakes are high for higher education as well.
Caught in a closing vise between new demands for enrollment
Responsible members of the higher education community
and declining rates of revenue growth, colleges and universi-
have an interest in lowering the cost of instruction as long
ties must figure out a way to do more with less.
as such an effort does not result in a reduction in quality.
Different stakeholders are interested in reducing costs for
Recognizing that tuition increases can no longer be used as a
different reasons. Some are concerned with reducing the cost
safety valve to avoid dealing with the underlying issues of why
to societysuch as the level of state and federal allocations to
costs increase so much, campuses have begun the hard work
higher education; others want to reduce the cost for students
of cost containment. But after sharpening priorities, some-
and their parentssuch as the level of tuition and fees. Both
times making tough choices in light of those priorities, and
of those views tend to come from stakeholders outside the
asking everyoneadministrators and faculty aliketo work
institution.
harder, campuses are still groping for ways to wrestle costs
under control.
Within the institution, there are other reasons for wanting to
reduce costs. The belt-tightening activities of the past decade
At the same time, colleges and universities are discovering
have left many institutions with almost no discretionary
exciting new ways of using technology to enhance the process
funds; life on many campuses has an almost austere quality.
of teaching and learning and to extend access to higher edu-
Institutions are faced with the pressure to invest more in
cation to new populations of students. For most institutions,
information technology but many are hard-pressed to find ad-
however, new technologies represent a black hole of addition-
ditional funds for such investments. Finally, those in higher
al expense as students, parents, and faculty alike demand
education most threatened by the growth of private sector
access to each new generation of equipment and software.
competition need to find more cost-effective methods of
Most campuses have bolted on new technologies to a fixed
operation in order to maintain their position in the new
plant, a fixed faculty, and a fixed notion of classroom instruc-
marketplace.
tion. Under these circumstances, technology becomes part of
the problem rather than part of the solution of cost contain-
Assumptions that get in the way
ment. By and large, colleges and universities have not yet
Having said that, a series of assumptions about the relation-
begun to grab hold of technology's promise to reduce the
ship among quality, cost, and information technology
costs of instruction.
dominates the current discussion, making it difficult to find
Containing costsand making use of new technologies to
a solution to the problem. Three of these assumptions are:
help contain costsrequires a fundamental shift in thinking.
Improving quality means increasing cost.
)0-
It requires one to challenge the fundamental assumption of
the current instructional model: that faculty members meet-
Conversely, controlling costs means reducing quality (for
ing with groups of students at regularly scheduled times and
example, relying on large lecture courses); increasing the use
of adjuncts, teaching assistants (TAs) and other part-time
places is the only way to achieve effective student learning.
faculty; or, most drastically, laying off faculty. Very few people
Rather than focus on how to provide more effective and
in higher education believe that it is possible to increase
efficient teaching, colleges and universities must focus on how
quality and reduce cost at the same time.
to produce more effective and efficient student learning.
IMPROVING LEARNING AND REDUCING COSTS: REDESIGNING LARGE-ENROLLMENT COURSES
ments in a restricted number of courses, one can impact
Adding information technology to the mix only
increases higher education's cost.
literally every student in the institution.
Very few believe that investments in IT can generate a return
In addition to having an impact on large numbers of students,
on that investment, not only in terms of increased quality but
there are other advantages of such a focus. First, large intro-
also in reduced costs.
ductory courses are good prospects for technology-enhanced
redesign because they have a more or less standardized
The use of IT in higher education may even
curriculum, outcomes that can be easily delineated, and
threaten quality.
content over which faculty are less possessive. Second, by
This belief generally stems from the fear that IT will be used to
targeting those courses, what is widely regarded as a prime
reduce costs by reducing human contact (or replacing human
area of ineffective teachingthe large lecture coursewill be
contact). This fear gets expressed in a variety of ways: the
improved. Third, those courses serve as foundation studies for
American Federation of Teacher's recent ad campaign about
future majors. Successful learning experiences in them will
the "Five-Minute University;" the breakdown-in-community
influence students to persist in key disciplines like the
argument; and the no-proof argument"no one has shown
sciences. Finally, because those courses are feeders to other
that technology can improve learning." Since education is a
disciplines, acquiring a deeper foundation and mastery in
human or social practice, and it has primarily been practiced
them will help students make a successful transition to more
in face-to-face settings, physical contact becomes the primary
advanced study.
enabler of learning.
Finally, introductory courses absorb a significant amount of
In contrast, we will show how redesign using technology-
resources. Despite the common wisdom that packed lecture
based or learner-centered principles can offer a way out of
halls and low-paid graduate teaching assistants equal the most
higher education's historical trade-off between cost and quali-
cost-effective way to deal with large numbers of students,
ty. Many experts on the subject have pointed out that moving
those who have examined the matter know that lecture-based
away from our current credit-for-contact mode of instruction
courses are not cheap. This is especially true when they are
is fundamental. Some approaches employ a greater reliance
combined with discussion sectionsemployed by most
on asynchronous, self-paced learning modes while others take
institutions to give students some opportunity for interac-
place in a traditional, synchronous classroom setting but with
tionas well as laboratories. In many institutions, intro-
reduced student/faculty contact hours. Both rely on shifting
ductory courses are taught in multiple section models by
faculty time-on-task to the technology or lessening the labor-
individual faculty members, quite costly given the large
intensive quality of instruction. In each case, they are designed
number of sections required. Controlling costs in those
to transfer the locus of activity from the faculty to the student:
courses can result in a significant return to the institution.
the focus is on student problem solving and interactive learn-
ing rather than on presentation of material.
In order to be successful in redesign efforts, one must pay
attention to three critical interrelated elements:
A strategic focus
>
the importance of readiness at both the institutional and
In order to have maximum impact and to achieve the highest
course level,
possible return on one's investment, redesign efforts need to
the need to focus on improving student learning, and
have a strategic focus. Like the Pew Grant Program in Course
)1-
Redesign, the symposium had as its focus large introductory
the need to do detailed financial planning.
)11-
courses with high enrollments. Why concentrate on those
What follows is an elaborated discussion of each of these.
courses? Studies have shown that undergraduate enrollments
are concentrated in relatively few academic areas. At the
community college level, about 50 percent of student enroll-
ment is concentrated in just 25 courses. The course titles
include introductory studies in English, mathematics,
psychology, sociology, economics, accounting, biology, and
chemistry. Those same 25 courses generate about 35 percent
of enrollment at the baccalaureate level. By making improve-
5
THE PEW SYMPOSIA IN LEARNING AND TECHNOLOGY
Case Study: University of WisconsinMadison
Individualizing Instruction in Introductory Chemistry
The University of WisconsinMadison is in the process of
assess students' knowledge in much smaller
)1.-
redesigning its two-course general chemistry sequence.
subject-matter chunks;
About half of the freshman class enrolls in the fall semes-
>
provide students with feedback and direction that
ter (about 2300 students), and more than a third enroll
will allow them to make up for specific deficiencies
in the spring semester (about 1700). There are eight
by means of extra work and effort;
sections of the course of about 250-350 students per
help students learn to identify their own deficiencies
section. Each section is taught by one professor, assisted
and do their own remediation, a good habit for life-
by eight TAs. Students attend two one-hour lectures, two
long learners to develop;
one-hour discussions, one two-hour lab and one one-hour
quiz/exam session per week.
incorporate examples and information from other
The traditional course faces the following academic
disciplines that will help students see the applica-
tions of the chemistry they are learning; and,
problems.
Inconsistent student academic preparation
>-
provide a means by which chemistry can be
>-
in chemistry
reviewed by students in subsequent courses.
Inability to accommodate different student
The impact of the course redesign on student learning
)0-
learning styles
will be assessed by comparing experimental and control
groups, such as online and traditional sections, in terms
Inadequate student interaction with learning
)1*-
of student performance on course tests and final course
materials
grades; administering a national exam designed to test
Difficulty in tracking multiple student experiences
conceptual understanding; tracking course completion
and retention rates; and evaluating student success in
A 15 percent rate of failures, D grades and drops
subsequent courses.
Inability of students to retain what they have
Significant savings can be achieved in the time spent by
learned
faculty and teaching assistants in the general chemistry
Inability of students to apply chemical principles
course, which translates to significant cost savings. By
to other disciplines.
substituting technology-based materials for time spent by
faculty and teaching assistants, UW-Madison expects to
The course redesign involves eliminating one lecture and
reduce the cost-per-student from about $257 to $185, a
one discussion period per week and substituting for them
reduction of 28 percent. Because this course affects
a modularized system of online, diagnostic homework
4,100 students per year, this saving translates to annual
exercises, tutorials, and quizzes. This system will allow
savings of approximately $295,000.
students to determine what they do not know and then
study intensively those areas where they are weak. The
homework will define the content students must master
each week and will provide students with directions to
other materials, including text materials and computer-
based tutorials, that will help them achieve mastery.
Quizzes will test students' mastery of the material each
week. Out-of-class activities will prepare students to make
the most of in-class interactions with TAs and other
students.
The redesigned course will:
enhance quality by individualizing instruction,
thereby addressing the problem of varying
student backgrounds;
6
7
.
IMPROVING LEARNING AND REDUCING COSTS: REDESIGNING LARGE-ENROLLMENT COURSES
I
The institution must view technology as a way
Not all institutions are ready to engage in large-scale redesign
to achieve strategic academic goals rather than
using technology. Experience has taught us that certain insti-
as a general resource for all faculty and for all
tutions more than others have progressed farther along the
courses.
learning curve of what is required in order to create these new
learning environments. Because of their prior investments
Almost every college and university in the country provides
and experiences, some institutions are, in essence, more ready
some kind of support for faculty to integrate technology into
to engage in successful redesign efforts. What follows is a list
teaching and learning. Most, however, stop there without
of preconditionsor readiness criteriathat must be in
thinking more deeply about how the use of technology enables
place before an institution is able to implement such an effort
the institution to achieve its strategic goals. Fewer still focus
successfully.
on specific elements of the curriculum to achieve maximum
impact. Does your institutional strategic plan differentiate
The institution must want to reduce costs and
between general support for faculty and students and strategic
increase academic productivity.
applications of technology in the academic program?
It is questionable how many institutions really want to reduce
Several universities have made integration of IT into the
or control costs. Many, for example, believe that rich inputs
teaching and learning process a central strategic goal. Such
are characteristic of high quality and have built their reputa-
integration has strong support from both faculty and campus
tions on that view. Others recognize that increasing academic
executives. In each instance, the campus has gone beyond
productivity is key to their future prosperity and have made
crafting an IT plan, to thinking about IT in the context of
public statements to that effect.
institutional planning. A few campuses have moved to target
For many institutions the prospect of increased enrollment
specific, strategic parts of the curriculum. While continuing
demands without a commensurate growth in resources is the
to provide general support for instructional technology, these
driving factor. For public institutions, declining state support
institutions have taken an important step in moving beyond
also contributes to the desire to increase productivity. Some
the support-whoever-walks-in-the-door approach that
institutions' operating budgets have remained flat at levels
characterizes most campus efforts.
that existed in the mid-1980s. They face the challenge of
In contrast, campus-planning weaknesses can easily be
offering quality instruction to a steadily growing student body
spotted when generalities predominate planning statements.
with limited resources and with reduced staff. To do so, many
Many campuses express the desire to integrate appropriate
are investigating the use of technology to achieve more
technology into the academic program without defining
efficient and cost-effective instructional delivery.
what is appropriate. Other seek to use technology to achieve
Numerous institutions throughout the country face similar
academic goals without making explicit what those goals
predicaments. Some, unlike those mentioned above, prefer to
are. Some want to reconceptualize undergraduate education
hope for better financial times rather than deal with higher
but are woefully silent when it comes to defining how they will
education's new economic reality. They are like alcoholics in
do it. Many see technology use as a means to encourage
denial. To be successful in using technology to reduce costs,
collaboration as if collaboration like innovation is an end
institutions must begin by owning the problem. Just as the
in itself. Collaboration for what purpose? To what end? And
only alcoholics who can be helped by Alcoholics Anonymous
almost everyone wants to use technology to support
are those who want to stop drinking, so too must institutions
excellence.
want to reduce costs in order to take the next step.
7
8
THE PEW SYMPOSIA IN LEARNING AND TECHNOLOGY
A substantial number of the institution's faculty
The institution's goal must be to integrate com-
members must have an understanding of and
puting into the campus culture.
some experience with integrating elements of
Ubiquitous networked computing is a prerequisite to
computer-based instruction into existing courses.
achieving a return on institutional investment. One really
Some faculty may have a great deal of enthusiasm for large-
does have to spend money to make money. The University
scale redesign but little prior experience in this area. It is
of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, for example, describes itself
difficult to complete a successful large-scale redesign project
as a computing-intensive campus. What characterizes a com-
by starting from scratch. Having experience with integrating
puting-intensive campus?
smaller IT elements into courses helps faculty to prepare
Anatole France said, "Those who don't count, don't count." In
for large-scale redesign efforts. Some experts have said that
this arena, his comment has merit. Unlike many institutions
13 to 15 percent of the faculty constitutes critical mass.
who have established initiatives without specific milestones,
Once again, knowing the numbers matters. Less-developed
computing-intensive campuses know the numbers. They
campuses can only cite goals and plans for faculty involvement
know the level of network access and personal computer
or participation in training and development workshops
ownership (or availability) for students and faculty on their
without any clear idea about how such training experiences
campuses because their goal is saturation; the numbers tell
translate into new kinds of learning experiences for students.
them how far along they are in achieving that goal.
The institution must have a demonstrated
Until all members of the campus community have full access
commitment to learner-centered education.
to IT resources, it is difficult to implement significant redesign
What are some indicators of institutional commitment to
projects. A robust IT infrastructure is a necessary prerequisite.
learner-centered education? Implementing teaching-learning
The institution must have a mature information
models where (1) the locus of activity has shifted fundamen-
technology (IT) organization(s) to support
tally from the instructor to the learner and (2) student en-
faculty integration of technology into courses
gagement independent of time and location is not only per-
or it must contract with external providers to
mitted but also promoted would be one example. Non-tech-
provide such support.
nology-based commitments to student-centered learning also
How does one characterize a mature organization? It means
constitute evidence.
that the IT organization can provide more than technical
Community colleges often have a clearer commitment to
support. It has an understanding of the goals and objectives
learner-centered education than other sectors because of the
of the institution's academic programit can see the big
emphasis of their missions. For example, part of Miami-Dade
picture. More advanced IT organizations include instructional
Community College's mission is to "provide accessible,
design capabilities and have specific experience with support-
affordable, high quality education by keeping the learner's
ing course redesign.
needs at the center of the decision-making process." The
College recognizes that students are different and, therefore,
Not all campuses need to develop their own in-house units.
should have available a variety of modalities that support their
Another approach is to contract with one of the growing num-
academic, personal and career development.
ber of external service providers who have specific expertise
in developing online learning environments. Campuses today
Some institutions demonstrate their commitment to learner-
no longer develop their own administrative applications.
centered education by pointing to the range of pedagogical
Instead, they turn to contractors, not only to develop sophisti-
practices they use to address the variety of student learning
cated and integrated modular administrative systems, but
styles. These include distance learning, self-paced modules,
also to help implement and manage such systems. Before
learning communities, and collaborative learning. Others
starting down the path of growing their own instructional
show their commitment to learner-centered education by
products and services, campuses should think carefully about
providing anytime-and-anywhere connectivity to a virtual
whether to build or buy. They should also take care not to
learning environment, enabling both traditional and distant
learners to access teaching and learning resources, tools and
confuse technical support with instructional design support,
student information.
whether its source is on or off campus.
8
9
IMPROVING LEARNING AND REDUCING COSTS: REDESIGNING LARGE-ENROLLMENT COURSES
)0.
>-
instituting a calling program for first-time students
Even though the entire campus may not have embraced a
to ascertain if they are experiencing difficulties.
learner-centered viewpoint, different types of indicators can
be found that show movement in that direction. Promoting
The institution must recognize that large-scale
active learning approaches through faculty retreats and
course redesign using information technology
internal funding programs are examples of ways to involve
involves a partnership among faculty, IT staff,
dedicated and experienced instructors in the diffusion of
and administrators in both planning and
learner-centered approaches.
execution.
Substantive changes in the way courses are offered cannot rely
The institution must have established ways to
on faculty initiative alone. They are systemic and involve
assess and provide for learner readiness to
changes in such institution-wide areas as policy, budgeting,
engage in IT-based courses.
administrative procedures, and infrastructure. Institutional
Learner readiness involves more than access to computers
policy regarding things like class meeting times and contact-
and to the network. How computer literate and network savvy
hour requirements will require revision. In some instances,
are your students? Does the institution have processes in place
obtaining governance approvals may be a prerequisite.
that enable them to gain these competencies if they are
While innovative faculty members have developed new
lacking? Readiness also involves access to support for such
methods and materials over many years, administrative
things as using navigation tools and course management
initiative is required to bring development opportunities to
systems. In addition to technical proficiencies, students need
the attention of the wider faculty and to provide the infra-
to be aware of what is required to be successful in technology-
structure and support that enable people to commit their time
intensive courses. Does the institution have processes in place
to course redesign. Curriculum oversight committees must
that assist them in making wise choices and that prepare them
learn to expect and encourage innovative course designs that
for success?
break the traditional mold by providing flexible scheduling
Making a major change from face-to-face instruction to online
and contact requirements.
learning involves far more than learning to use a computer.
In many cases, traditional budgeting processes do not
Like all of us, many students are set in their ways after a
welcome innovation and may need to be changed. Registrarial
lifetime (albeit brief) of passive instruction. They need prepa-
procedures such as registration and classroom assignment
ration in making the transition to more active learning envi-
systems may need to be adjusted. Redesign may also require
ronments that are technology based. Some students instinc-
additional or unusual equipment purchases and deployment.
tively flourish in those new environments while others require
Personnel policies regarding how instructors of nontradi-
direct intervention and assistance from faculty and staff.
tional courses are compensated may require revision. How
Among the possible ways to assure learner-readiness are:
an initial large-scale redesign might benefit other courses in
the institution also needs to be considered. The lesson of
listing technology requirements for Web-based
successful redesign is that faculty and administrative collabo-
courses in schedules;
ration is required even in the planning stages.
creating opportunities for students to assess the skills
Institutions that have not recognized this interdependence
that are necessary for success in Web-based courses;
view redesign as primarily a faculty matterfrequently as an
establishing Web-based or in-person orientation
individual faculty member's task for his or her particular
processes;
coursewith some support from the IT organization. Such a
creating tutorials for first-time online students;
view will inevitably resign institutional advancement to, in Bill
Graves' apt phrasing, "random acts of progress" rather than
administering student learning styles assessments
)0.
substantive accomplishment. And inevitably these efforts will
to help students determine what delivery modality
be under-supported and incapable of generating a return on
(print, mixed/media, Web-based, or in-person) to
institutional investment.
enroll in for a particular class;
distributing student surveys to determine interventions
)10.
that will help first-time online students; and,
9
10
