League for Innovation in the Community College

Walmart Foundation Awards League for Innovation $3.5 Million to Support Job Skills Training

2013-05-22T02:05:10Z

Grant will support middle-skills training for low-income adults and older youth and design a competency development and documentation model

May 22, 2013 - Chandler, Arizona. Low-income adults and older youth looking to improve their prospects for better paying jobs may get that opportunity at 12 U.S. community colleges as part of a new grant-funded project supported by the Walmart Foundation.

The Walmart Foundation has awarded a $3.5 million grant to the League for Innovation in the Community College for a second Walmart Brighter Futures Project. One of the project’s goals is to provide low-income adults and older youth the skills necessary to obtain middle-skill jobs enabling them to become financially self-sufficient. The second goal is to develop a model that will provide project participants with confidence that they have acquired the skills needed by employers and that will empower them to document those skills and communicate them effectively to employers.

Throughout the 2.5 year project, a cohort of community colleges will provide training and support services to move low-income, low-skill workers into middle-skill jobs. To achieve the project’s overarching goal, adults and older youth will need to upgrade their skills and obtain credentials that match the skills required for 21st century jobs.

“The League is honored that the Walmart Foundation has chosen our organization to provide the leadership for this important work,” said League President and CEO Gerardo E. de los Santos. “Once again, community colleges are seen as the responsive segment in higher education to address the workforce and economic development needs of the nation.”

The project builds on the foundation laid by the League’s initial Walmart Brighter Futures Project, in which eight U.S. community colleges provided job readiness skills, credentialed job training, and other services to more than 8,300 dislocated workers.

“The Walmart Foundation supports programs that provide people with ways to improve their lives through workforce readiness, job placement and support services,” says Julie Gehrki, senior director at the Walmart Foundation. “We are proud to continue our work with the League for Innovation, which expects to help 9,000 workers gain the necessary skills for today’s job market through this continued partnership.”

Andrew Meyer, Vice President for Workforce Development at the League, will serve as the project’s director.

According to Meyer, “We know there is a strong correlation between the level of education and credential attainment and employment in low-income jobs. By training low-income individuals for middle-skill jobs, there is a stronger likelihood that those individuals will move closer to becoming financially self-sufficient.”

Meyer also pointed out that, “The community colleges selected to participate in the Walmart Brighter Futures project will be conducting important work that will change the lives of many individuals.”

Selection of community colleges to participate in the project is expected to be completed by mid-August.

About the League
The League for Innovation in the Community College is an international organization dedicated to catalyzing the community college movement. The League hosts conferences and institutes, develops web resources, conducts research, produces publications, provides services, and leads projects and initiatives with more than 800 member colleges, 160 corporate partners, and a host of other government and nonprofit agencies in a continuing effort to make a positive difference for students and communities. Information about the League and its activities is available at www.league.org.

Contact:
Andrew Meyer
meyer@league.org
League for Innovation in the Community College
1333 S. Spectrum Blvd., Suite 210
Chandler, AZ 85286
Ph. (480) 705-8200, ext. 233

Member Spotlight: Helena College University of Montana

2013-05-01T09:05:31Z

Access to Success

Kristin Grue doesn’t teach a typical high school English class, and maybe it’s because she doesn’t teach in a high school, or to typical students. Grue is a teacher for the Access to Success program at Helena College University of Montana. The program aims to re-engage youth who have dropped out of high school, by bringing them to college.

Access to Success is a high school diploma completion program with an emphasis on earning a professional certificate or degree while completing high school requirements concurrently. All coursework is provided in an adult learning environment. The program is housed on the Helena College campus. Eligibility is limited to those between the ages of 16 and 21 who do not have a high school diploma, are not currently enrolled in school, and meet minimum reading levels. Students begin Access to Success as part of a small cohort group. Maintaining small class sizes is essential to creating a supportive environment. All students begin by taking a course titled Strategies for Success while concurrently taking course prerequisites for their high school diploma or career path. Each student is supported through individual case management. Students also have access to all the college support services provided on campus.

Bringing together school district personnel, college personnel, and community members to identify the needs of the community was the first step in creating the program that serves as a model dropout recovery/reengagement program in the Helena community. The innovative partnership with the Helena public school district is the only program of its kind in Montana.

Program director, Kari Sutlovich, is delighted with the success of the program since its inception in 2008. “The faculty and staff here are supportive and encouraging. They really embrace our students. We’re integrated into everything.” Students who drop out of high school often bear the stigma of not being able to handle high school or academic rigor. Not true, says Sutlovich. “A typical high school history class is delivered in one academic year from September to May. Because our students have schedules similar to a college student, we are able deliver that same history class in one semester.”

Access to Success provides just what its name suggests. When presented with access to higher education, an estimated 45% of Access students continue on to pursue certificates or degrees at Helena College, with many ultimately transferring to four year colleges to further their education. Elizabeth Stearns Sims, Dean of Student Services at Helena College, is proud of the fact that students earn a high school diploma rather than a GED. Program graduates participate in the college’s commencement ceremony each May. “When students cross that stage and receive their diploma, they realize a new sense of accomplishment. Many times, that sense of accomplishment is what drives them to enroll at our college. They already feel at home on our campus, so why not continue on to complete their college degree?” Because students take both high school and college courses, Stearns Sims emphasizes that you cannot tell the difference between an Access student and a Helena College student.

Bill Noland enrolled in Access to Success after choosing to leave high school two years ago. “Enrolling in Access is probably one of the best decisions I’ve ever made. I love it here. If it weren’t available, I might have looked into getting my GED, but I doubt it.” Then he beams and says, “I’m getting my high school diploma in May!” Noland explains that in high school he’d “gotten in with a bad group of kids” which led to his grades going downhill. “Then I got in trouble with the teachers and I felt like they didn’t like me, so I slacked off. Eventually I just gave up.”

When asked what makes this program different than high school, Bill said, “The way that the classes are spaced out. I have time to do my homework and do it well. It’s actually harder work than I was doing in high school, but my grades are better than they’ve ever been. This doesn’t feel like a job or something you’re forced to do. This is something I want to do.”

Bill intends to enroll in the Automotive Technology program at Helena College in the fall of 2013 and pursue a career as an automotive technician. “You know, I’ve always heard that a GED is just as good as a diploma. I don’t agree. When you’re applying for a job, I think the GED applicants go further down in the pile than the high school diploma applicants. Now, I’ll have both a high school diploma and a college degree. I never dreamed this was possible.”

Member Spotlight: Phoenix College

2013-05-01T09:05:13Z

Phoenix College Math Professor Innovates for the YouTube Generation

Reach students where they live—on social media. Practice makes perfect. Show it, don’t just tell it. Finances should not be a barrier to education.

Phoenix College math professor James Sousa says all of the above motivated his creation of the Mathispower4u! website and blog. Mathispower4u provides free mini lessons and example videos with no ads. The website is organized by course and topics from arithmetic to calculus and beyond. The blog can be searched by topic. The videos make learning mathematics available to students anytime and anywhere with an Internet connection.

Initially, Sousa created 18 tutorial videos through a Title V mini grant and developed some additional Open Educational Resources (OER) through his participation in the spring 2010 grant-funded professional learning community, Beta Boot Camp. From these initial projects, he has continued, on his own time and at his own expense, to push the limits of this medium. He has published more than 2,500 instructional videos, which he hosts at a dedicated website and blog, in addition to a dedicated YouTube channel with more than 10,000 subscribers worldwide. His uploaded videos have reached more than five million views to date.

Sousa creates and uploads all of these videos himself. It works out to more than 800 videos a year and 15 videos a week! Yes, you’ve got the math right.

With the typical professor’s work load of teaching, grading, advising, committees, and keeping current academically, how does Sousa find the time?

His response, “If you want to do something, you will make the time to do it.”

Sousa admits that it can be challenging to get students interested in the material so he has made it his mission to make learning math more available, easier to understand, and engaging to learn. He keeps things fresh by implementing new techniques, ideas and technology in his classroom.

The professor continues to pioneer OER in the form of open platform courses, textbooks, and resources. All the courses he currently teaches use OER materials including an eBook, video tutorials, and online homework with instant feedback. This means all the students leave the first day of class with all the resource materials they need to succeed. The only cost for the course materials is for students who prefer to print out the free eBook.

And there is more. “I'm also holding online office hours,” states Sousa. “It provides the student with an online environment offering live audio, chat, file exchange, whiteboard, and desktop sharing. The technology is always changing and improving. I feel it is my responsibility as a professional to continue to investigate and implement the best technology into my online and face-to-face classes to foster student success.”

The instructional videos are also used in his face-to-face classes. He wants his students to have resources outside of class and having these teaching videos “removes obstacles for their success.” He has combined his teaching videos with an open source online textbook and assessment package. His videos include mini lessons and screen captures. He incorporates this with an OER textbook, Flexbooks, which can be edited to fit his teaching objectives. For every example, he links to the relevant teaching videos. As a result, his students can access his course content on-demand and receive instant feedback from the system.

Two years ago, he implemented a modified flip curriculum, in which students watch his teaching videos outside of class as part of homework and use precious class time for problem solving, active learning, and group activities. This approach allows individuals to learn at their own pace.

At last year’s Arizona SciTech Festival, Sousa offered a Massive Open Online Course, whimsically known as a MOOC, and will do so again this year. The arithmetic/pre-algebra course was available free to anyone in the world.

In addition to stellar reviews from students, Sousa was recognized with Phoenix College’s Distinguished Teaching award. He received a trip to a professional conference for the opportunity to share his techniques with other faculty, and was awarded a $250 scholarship in his name to give to a deserving student of his choice.

Sousa also received the Sony Technology Scholarship, by Sony Inc., to update his technological equipment and resources. In 2012, he was honored with an Employee Recognition Award from Maricopa Community Colleges and an Award of Excellence from the National Institute for Staff and Organizational Development.

Asked about what it takes to accomplish all this, Sousa said, “With hard work and dedication, I believe most goals can be accomplished. I have the opportunity to make a difference in the lives of students and I find it very rewarding to help them succeed in their educational and career goals.”

Partnering for the Future: Foothill College Program to Train Thousands of Teachers in the Philippines

2013-05-01T09:05:49Z

May 2013, Volume 8, Number 5

By Reginald Duhe

Foothill College, located in the high-tech heart of California’s Silicon Valley, has partnered with the Philippine government to present a custom professional development program that focuses on training educators throughout the Philippines to use today’s technology to transform student learning across the country. This program focuses on student-centered learning, educational technology enrichment, and collaborative professional development experiences.

The program centers on training teachers to use today’s technology to enhance the current science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) curriculum in the Philippines. “Our partnership with Foothill College will allow us to rapidly impact the adoption of technology in our classrooms, creating an immediate transformation in the way we prepare K–12 students to compete and succeed in today’s workforce,” says Honorable Ma. Rachel J. Arenas, Representative, 3rd District, Pangasinan Region, the Republic of the Philippines.

The program includes an intensive two-week institute, and a six-month mentorship project that will follow nearly 4,000 educators as they incorporate the proven tools, content, and techniques that will help them transform the way they teach and the way their students learn for generations to come. Throughout the 2013–2014 school year, these newly trained educators will impact more than 120,000 students across the Pangasinan region, which represents more than 65 percent of all the students in the region.

The partnership is the collaboration between Foothill College, the curriculum design and instructional team at the Krause Center for Innovation (KCI) at Foothill College, and the Philippine Department of Trade & Industry led by Marciano A. Paynor Jr., Consul General of the Philippines in San Francisco; Michael Alfred V. Ignacio, Trade Commissioner, Philippine Trade & Investment Center–Silicon Valley; and Philippine Congresswoman Rachel Arenas.

The innovation of this program lies in KCI’s integrated instructional design and custom-built courseware, which has been fully customized to enhance the existing national Philippine curriculum.“The future of the global economy depends upon a workforce that is proficient in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM),” said Foothill College President Judy C. Miner. “Foothill College is proud to deliver this educational professional development program that is designed for rapid deployment and replication across the Philippines. We are committed to contributing to the global education of K–14 students, helping them to develop mastery in STEM-related subjects. We are passionate about helping students worldwide to develop critical-thinking and problem-solving skills, and encouraging communication, collaboration, creativity and innovation to enable them to fill the jobs of the future.”

Managed by the Foothill College Center for Training & Professional Development, the curriculum for this program leverages the expertise, experience, and faculty of Foothill’s unique education training facility, the Krause Center for Innovation (KCI).

Since 2000, the KCI has served as a regional hub for Silicon Valley educators, providing professional development for more than 15,000 educators. The KCI empowers educators to transform their teaching practice through the use of technology that engages and challenges students.

The ultimate goal is to improve student performance and learning. This global project will allow the KCI staff the extraordinary opportunity to take this proven educational training beyond Silicon Valley.

“Congresswoman Arenas and her delegation visited the KCI last spring and were impressed with how we are changing the practice of teachers through the use of today’s technology,” said KCI Executive Director Gay Krause. “After 13 years of training thousands of educators on campus at the KCI, this program represents KCI’s global expansion and allows for an unprecedented rapid deployment in every school in the Pangasinan region. To meet demands of this project, we have assembled an outstanding global team of talented educators who are leading the training and working with the Philippine government to impact their curriculum development over the next decade. We are proud to partner with visionary Filipino leaders for this thrilling—and global—teaching and learning opportunity.”

Foothill College

Founded in 1957 with the hallmark of educational opportunity for all, Foothill College is recognized internationally as one of the most innovative community colleges in the U.S. Each 12-week quarter, Foothill College offers more than 1,000 course sections and enrolls approximately 15,000 day, evening, and online students. Currently, Foothill College offers more online classes than any other San Francisco Bay Area community college. Since 1981, the Center for Training & Professional Development at Foothill has provided training, professional development, internships, and job placement with our community partners, including some of the world’s leading technology companies, Fortune 100s, and government agencies. Foothill's training center has an impressive history of solving training challenges with customized professional and workforce training programs to help individuals meet the demands of a 21st century workforce.

The Krause Center for Innovation at Foothill College

The Krause Center for Innovation at Foothill College (KCI) has served the professional development needs of K–14 educators since 2000. The vision of the KCI is to be the premier educational technology professional development center for teachers and administrators in public and private schools throughout the United States. The mission of the KCI is to develop and provide high-quality professional development courses and programs for K–14 educators, training them to use innovative educational technology solutions that promote meaningful teaching and learning for today's students. The KCI focuses on innovation through educational technology, with an emphasis on science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education. Through its professional development, the KCI provides practical experience in integrating media-rich, Web-, and computer-based technologies into the curriculum. By applying its three core values—innovate, educate, and empower—the KCI prepares educators to pass their enhanced knowledge and abilities onto their students to improve student engagement and learning outcomes.

Click here to learn more about Foothill College.

Click here to learn more about the Krause Center for Innovation at Foothill College.

Reginald Duhe is the director of the Center for Training and Professional Development at Foothill College.

Opinions expressed in Innovation Showcase are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the League for Innovation in the Community College.

Creating Student Success by Supporting Faculty Performance: The Missing Link in Current National Efforts

2013-05-01T08:05:41Z

May 2013, Volume 26, Number 5

By Adrianna Kezar and Daniel Maxey

Leaders in community colleges are being challenged to graduate and transfer more students. Many national projects and initiatives are aimed at supporting this effort, including Achieving the Dream, Completion by Design, Next Generation Learning Challenges, and Global Skills for College Completion. As a result, student success and completion are among the top priorities of institutional leaders. Often, campus efforts focus on support programs, supplemental instruction, and new models of remediation, and tend largely to emphasize the roles of staff and student affairs professionals.

In these discussions and efforts to promote student success, we often hear very little about the role of faculty and the way we are organized to support faculty performance that shapes student outcomes. Scholars, such as Vince Tinto, demonstrate that the new demographic of students are largely working commuters with minimal time on campus outside of classes. Tinto emphasizes the need to integrate support into classrooms and the key role of faculty for student success. While faculty are increasingly important, campuses have stopped investing in full-time faculty and are hiring largely non-tenure track (NTT), or adjunct, faculty (Kezar & Sam, 2010). As they hire this new group of faculty, campus leaders are doing little to create new policies and practices to support them. Additionally, poor campus practices, such as late scheduling of courses, do not allow for preparation, further impairing faculty performance.

A large and growing body of research has emerged demonstrating that poor faculty working conditions and policies are negatively shaping student outcomes. For example, Ehrenberg and Zhang (2005) compared institutions with large numbers of NTT faculty to institutions that utilize fewer NTT faculty members, and identified lower graduation rates at institutions that relied more heavily on more adjuncts. Jacoby (2006) also examined graduation rates, but focused on individual faculty rather than institutions and found that as students took more courses with part-time faculty, their graduation rates decreased. Carrell and West (2008) found that students who take courses with adjunct faculty members perform significantly worse in follow-up courses compared to students who take courses with tenure track faculty. Furthermore, Eagan and Jaeger (2009) and Jaeger and Eagan (2009) found that increasing exposure to part-time faculty in the community college sector negatively affected the likelihood that students would transfer to four-year institutions. In addition to outcomes like graduation, transfer, and future performance, studies of NTT faculty instructional practices suggest that part-time faculty are less likely to use active learning, student-centered teaching approaches, service learning, educational innovations, and culturally sensitive teaching approaches (Baldwin & Wawrzynski, 2011; Banachowski, 1996; Jacoby, 2006; Umbach, 2008). Part-time NTT faculty members have fewer contact hours (e.g., office hours) with students (Benjamin, 2003). We can no longer ignore the faculty’s role in student’s success, nor can we ignore that the makeup of community college faculty roles have fundamentally changed. In response, our institutional structures and culture need to shift to support that new reality.

The Delphi Project on The Changing Faculty and Student Success was created to generate discussion about the impact of faculty on student performance, and to develop leadership to address this issue nationally. It also aimed to bring the faculty back into the discussion about student success. While faculty were once a mainstay of discussion in higher education, they are largely ignored now as a human resource and a significant part of learning, the core mission of the institution. Ironically, teachers are known to be the most important element in learning in the K-12 sector, but once a student turns 18, teachers are largely considered unimportant (Linda-Darling Hammond, 2005). And, of course, research shows this is flatly wrong. Student-faculty interactions have long been one of the most significant indicators of students outcomes documented in books such as Pascarella and Terenzini’s tome, How College Affects Students (2005). Faculty-student interactions are one the five Community College Survey of Student Engagement benchmarks. While the evidence of the impact of faculty is large, the effort among institutional leaders to harness or shape this key lever is quite marginal. In fact, by ignoring the faculty and creating such difficult conditions for them to work in, we have effectively made one of the most important levers for learning impotent.

The Delphi project engages stakeholders across higher education, including disciplinary societies, national organizations like the League for Innovation, unions, academic leaders, policymakers, accreditors, and other key groups, in a discussion about how faculty has evolved to largely non-tenure track (with limited or no support) and the implications of this change for student success and outcomes. It is important to note that while our focus began on student success, stakeholders have also identified troubling institutional outcomes, such as the decline of shared governance or governance in general, less curriculum development, limited academic freedom, loss of institutional memory, and decline in collegiality. While community colleges have long had part-time faculty, the numbers have increased in recent years. Furthermore, we have not always understood the links between faculty performance and faculty policies like orientation, professional development, and mentoring. Now that we know policies impact performance, we need more intentionality around policies and practices to support faculty who can then enhance student success.

The Delphi Project and its national leadership group have also identified how institutions tend to approach support for faculty in a fragmented and non-systematic way. One department might decide to invite part-timers to meetings. Another might provide funds for professional development. The overall institution might encourage NTT involvement in governance by having two spots on the senate reserved for part-timers and creating a policy that the center for teaching and learning should be open to all faculty. This hodgepodge of policies is often developed without coordination across the institution or specific goals in mind. It also evolves over time, based on different individuals’ initiative, and there is usually no overall examination of policies and practices aimed at ensuring that NTT faculty are true partners in the education process. The principal investigator of the Delphi Project, Kezar, has conducted many different studies of adjunct policies on campus that demonstrate the existence of this haphazard approach. Most campuses point to two or three policies in place as shining beacons of progress and of having addressed adjunct needs. Institutional leaders need to be more thoughtful and comprehensive in planning. Do institutional policies for adjuncts support the goals of student engagement, completion, and success? And, in fact, in order to meet these goals, a comprehensive review of ALL faculty policies is needed. Successful campuses will bundle policies together to meet certain key institutional objectives like student completion.

Consider the issue of student engagement, and how several inter-related policies need to be implemented to accomplish this objective. A first key area related to engagement is having time to meet with students during office hours. If NTT faculty are not paid for office hours, then they will not be available for student questions and student advising. Faculty members will also be unable to meaningfully engage students if they do not have an office space in which to meet with them. In addition, professional development needs to be offered that focuses on student engagement in teaching, which will help faculty be more successful in their classroom instruction. For example, NTT faculty members can be introduced to high-impact practices, such as active and collaborative learning, service learning, multicultural education, learning communities, and student-centered teaching approaches, that have all been found to significantly improve student engagement. Some of these high-impact practices require time outside the classroom to most beneficially utilize the strategy. Therefore, some time may have to be allocated and paid for that is outside the classroom. Lastly, institutions will need to look at their evaluation process, because many rely heavily on student evaluations for rehiring adjuncts each semester. It will be hard for NTT faculty to experiment with high-impact practices if doing so can result in their being fired or not rehired next term. It is important to bundle the strategies together because they all impact each other and the ability for faculty to truly engage students. This is just one example; we have identified ways to bundle practices to meet the goals of retention and graduation as well.

In order to conduct a thoughtful examination of the working conditions and support for NTT faculty members, The Delphi Project has created campus guides that can be used by task forces set up by academic leadership on campuses. These detailed guides identify all of the areas that need to be examined to support adjunct faculty in becoming more successful and improving their performance. On The Delphi Project’s website, click on the Resources and Tool Kits for Campus Communities link under Access Our Resources. These resource guides are aimed at academic leaders in order to help them imagine a process of inquiry on their campuses that will work to support change.

The Delphi Project has paired each guide with short case studies of campuses that have undergone change to illustrate some of the strategies that might be used to create support for adjunct faculty. The Delphi website also contains data summaries about the rising numbers of NTT faculty members, research documenting how growing numbers of adjunct faculty negatively shapes student outcomes, and a list of policies needed to ameliorate the decline in student success. There is also a list of example policy changes from campuses. While these may not all be exemplary policies or practices, they provide examples so people can begin to imagine what changes might look like, as well as what institutional leaders to contact for advice about particular policies they are considering.

While much of The Delphi Project’s current resources focus on NTT faculty support, the organization is also addressing the question of what the faculty, as a whole, should look like in the future. The current three-tiered (full-time NTT, part time, and tenure track) system is just not working. What might a new faculty of the future look like that best supports student learning? The Delphi Project is working with its stakeholders to examine models that might better meet institutional needs. We encourage you to stay connected with us as these ideas emerge in 2013. We also encourage you to dialogue with us if you have ideas to contribute to this important discussion. We know that the best ideas often come from leaders on the ground. We offer the following summary of recommendations for academic leaders in community colleges.

Major Recommendations:

Set up a campus task force to examine the faculty.
Use guides and resources from The Delphi Project site to conduct work in a comprehensive way.
Encourage dialogue on campus about what faculty roles, policies, and practices are needed to support student learning.
Consider bundling policies to achieve student success.
Make faculty a priority in planning and strategy.

Conclusion and Key ideas

Our hope is that institutional leaders will establish a process to systematically examine the faculty on their campuses and how their roles are defined in ways to support student learning, as well as the particular policies and practices in place for each type of faculty. We also want to encourage more intentionality as it relates to planning for the human resources on campus. Why don’t campuses have systematic and detailed staffing and support plans for faculty? As a labor-intensive enterprise, to ignore such a large portion of the individuals responsible for student learning seems reckless and unethical.

References

Baldwin, R., & Wawrzynski, M. (2012, June 1). Contingent faculty as teachers: What we know; What we need to know. American Behavioral Scientist, 11, 187199.

Banachowski, G. (1996). Perspectives and perceptions: The use of part-time faculty in community colleges. Community College Review, 42(2), 49-62.

Benjamin, E. (Ed.). (2003). Exploring the role of non-tenure track instructional staff in undergraduate learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Bettinger, E., & Long, B. (2006). The increasing use of adjunct instructors at public institutions: Are we hurting students?” In R. Ehrenberg (Ed.), What’s happening to public higher education. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press for the American Council on Education.

Bettinger, E., & Long, B. (2010). Does cheaper mean better? The impact of using adjunct instructors on student outcomes. Review of Economics and Statistics, 92(3), 598-613.

Bland, C., Wersal, L, Vanloy, W., Jacott, W. (2002). Evaluating faculty performance: A systematically designed and assessed approach. Academic medicine. 77(1), 15-24.

Carrell, S., & West, J. (2010). Does professor quality matter? Evidence from random assignment of students to professors. Journal of Political Economy, 118(3), 409-432.

Eagan, M. K., & Jaeger, A, J. (2009). Effects of exposure to part-time faculty on community college transfer. Research in Higher Education, 50, 168-188.

Ehrenberg, R. G., & Zhang, L. (2005). Do tenured and tenure-track faculty matter? The Journal of Human Resources, 45(3), 647-659.

Jacoby, D. (2006). Effects of part-time faculty employment on community college graduation rates. The Journal of Higher Education, 77(6), 1081-1102.

Jaeger, A., & Eagan, M.K. (2009). Unintended consequences: Examining the effect of part-time faculty members on associate’s degree completion. Community College Review, 36, p.167-194.

Kezar, A. & Sam. C. (2010). Understanding the new majority: Contingent faculty in higher education. Volume. I ASHE Higher Education Report Series. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Darling-Hammond, L. (2005). A Good Teacher in Every Classroom: Preparing the Highly Qualified Teachers Our Children Deserve (Editor, with Joan Snowden). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (2005). How College Affects Students. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Tinto, V. (2012). Completing college; Rethinking institutional action. Chicago, IL; University of Chicago Press.

Umbach, P. D. (2007). How effective are they? Exploring the impact of non-tenure track faculty on undergraduate education. The Review of Higher Education, 30(2), 91-123.

Umbach, P.D. (2008). The effects of part-time faculty appointments on instructional techniques and commitment to teaching. Paper presented at the 33rd Annual Conference of the Association for the Study of Higher Education, Jacksonville, FL.

Adrianna Kezar is Associate Professor for Higher Education in the Rossier School of Education and Associate Director of Earl and Pauline Pullias Center for Higher Education at the University of Southern California. She is the principal investigator on The Delphi Project on the Changing Faculty and Student Success.

Daniel Maxey is a doctoral candidate and Dean’s Fellow in Urban Education Policy at the University of Southern California.

Opinions expressed in Leadership Abstracts are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of the League for Innovation in the Community College.

Practitioner Packets from CCRC: Translating Community College Research into Practice

2013-05-01T08:05:25Z

May 2013, Volume 16, Number 5

By Georgia West Stacey

Over the past several years, the Community College Research Center (CCRC), housed at Teachers College, Columbia University, has conducted extensive research and generated dozens of publications on college readiness, online education, developmental education, student supports, and other issues relevant to community colleges. Of course, this research is more effective when it gets into the hands of the educators who are working every day to help students reach their goals. But there are countless community college administrators, faculty, and staff members who -- busy with the day-to-day demands of their jobs -- are not able to stay abreast of research that might be relevant to their work. The result is that there continues to be an innovation-dissemination, or research-to-practice, challenge in the community college field.

It is with these practitioners in mind that CCRC has begun to package our research from across studies in a few, brief, easily digestible publications. These practitioner packets are designed so that community college administrators, faculty, and staff will be able to easily review findings—and the implications and recommendations stemming from these findings—without having to read through numerous papers.

We have now completed three of these practitioner packets: What We Know About Dual Enrollment, Designing Meaningful Developmental Reform, and What We Know About Online Course Outcomes. Although the content of each packet varies, all three synthesize and summarize research from numerous CCRC studies and provide insights and recommendations that have emerged from these findings.

What We Know About Dual Enrollment

The dual enrollment packet is geared towards practitioners considering implementing or expanding dual enrollment programs. It presents outcomes data from studies on dual enrollment programs in Florida, New York, and California; presents a case study of how one dual enrollment program increased participation of low-income and underrepresented students; and lays out guiding questions to consider when designing a dual enrollment program.

Designing Meaningful Developmental Reform

The packet on developmental education reform is designed for community college practitioners who may be embarking on developmental education reform at their colleges. It reviews some of common impediments to reform, summarizes our findings on developmental education assessment, placement and acceleration, and presents case studies.

Also included in the packet are answers to frequently asked questions about CCRC’s studies examining how well college assessment tests predict students' college performance, and a PowerPoint presentation with key data points that can help guide stakeholder discussions.

What We Know About Online Course Outcomes

Finally, our online education packet summarizes CCRC findings on student outcomes for fully online community college courses, and offers recommendations from our qualitative studies of online education to help faculty and administrators improve online education at their colleges.

Our hope is that these publications make our research more accessible and actionable for practitioners in the field who dedicate their days to helping students achieve the promise of a great college education. They are free and available for download at our website http://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu.

As researchers at CCRC continue to develop practitioner packets on other broad topics—non-academic student supports and pedagogy—they welcome your thoughts on those that have been completed, and on ways in which future packets could more effectively serve your needs as educators. Tweet CCRC at @CommunityCCRC or friend CCRC on Facebook.

Georgia West Stacey is Communications Specialist at the Community College Research Center, Teachers College, Columbia University, in New York.

Opinions expressed in Learning Abstracts do not necessarily reflect those of the League for Innovation in the Community College.

Member Spotlight: Snead State Community College

2013-04-01T01:04:24Z

Snead State Honors the Past While Planning for the Future

Snead State Community College has been educating students in the small town of Boaz, Alabama, since 1898. To celebrate its history and prepare for its future, the college recently completed a $7 million renovation project of the Administration Building. Originally designed by Magaziner, Eberhard & Harris of Philadelphia beginning in 1921, the neoclassical style building is the oldest, most architecturally significant, and most cherished building on campus.

After being forced to vacate due to safety concerns, services once offered in the building were relocated. Working from the campus master plan, architects, contractors, and builders restored the once stately show-piece with modern conveniences and technologies while maintaining its historical features. The renovation is the latest building upgrade to the 114 year old institution.

The north wing of the building houses the auditorium that was named for William Fielder, president of Snead Seminary from 1914 to 1931. Construction of this auditorium was particularly significant in Snead State’s history. Dr. Fielder worked diligently to build closer ties with the City of Boaz and used the new venue for the benefit of the entire community. Fielder Auditorium became the place for public lectures, plays, and musical performances. That tradition continues today.

The auditorium has a 412-seat capacity and is, once again, being used as a lecture/recital hall. Wasting no time in utilizing the beautifully restored space, the Gerhart Chamber Music Festival was held in the auditorium only two days after the ribbon cutting. The space has also held student organization induction ceremonies, and hosted presentations from the college’s Music Department and Community Choir.

The 29,519 square-foot Administration Building also includes nine classrooms, seven faculty offices, the president’s office, and academic support offices. A catering kitchen and commons/banquet room was added to provide a gathering area for students and a place to support college events. Also included in the redesigned building is a cyber-library. The library, available to students, faculty, and the general public, is home to 73,000 eBooks, Nooks, and Kindles for lease, as well as laptop and desktop computers.

In support and recognition of the building’s past, a Heritage Room was created. This climate-controlled room safeguards historical items and allows for the display of photographs, artifacts, and other college memorabilia for the enjoyment of students and the community alike.

“The future for Snead State – ‘The Grand Old School’ – is certainly a bright one. And it is bright because of the giants who preceded us and on whose shoulders we stand,” said Snead State president, Dr. Robert Exley. “Our founders, Rev. E.B.L. Elder and his wife Anna Elder saw a life-changing school established by the Methodist Episcopal Church named the Boaz Academy. Their stewardship and leadership is characterized by their devotion to improving the lives of others. They displayed a remarkable vision for what was coming. It is now our responsibility to see what they have seen and to go even further with achieving great things.”

Click here to learn more about Snead State Community College.

Member Spotlight: Iowa Western Community College

2013-04-01T01:04:14Z

Iowa Western Partners With Leading Robotics Integrator

Iowa Western Community College announced an exciting partnership in spring 2012 that is expected to bring immediate benefits to students seeking careers in the high-tech field of robotics. Officials with Ellison Technologies Automation signed on with the college to help train the next generation of robotics technicians at its sprawling facility in Council Bluffs.

“We have 64,000-square feet of lab space right here for Iowa Western students to utilize,” said Greg Olenick, vice president and general manager of Ellison Technologies. Ellison Technologies offers quality CNC machine tools and robotic automation solutions to North American manufacturers. “We will be using the newest technology available, including advanced robotics and other equipment which will be a key benefit to Iowa Western and its students.”

Ellison Technologies Automation is a recognized leader in industrial robotic system integration. For more than 29 years, Ellison Technologies Automation has been meeting unique challenges by designing, manufacturing, and programming turnkey robotic automation systems for a myriad of manufacturing applications. The company designs and builds factory automation systems for large component robotic welding, palletizing (boxes and bags), assembly of larger mechanical devices, material handling, material removal (thermal and rotating media), machine loading /unloading (general machining, large casting, multi-machine, diecast, press tending including press brakes), and large integrated systems with multiple part processes.

Iowa Western began accepting applications in fall 2012, and interest has been high for the associate’s degree program. Robotics and automated systems technologies are producing one of the world’s fastest growing career opportunities for highly trained, skilled technicians. Students spend about half of their time in the classroom learning applied robotics, robot controller maintenance, electronics, circuits, and programming. The other half of their time is spent applying their laboratory projects in the lab at Ellison Technologies, working with the same high-tech robots and controllers used by today’s leading manufacturing firms.

Graduates of this program will be qualified to assemble, install, program, troubleshoot, and maintain robotics and automated systems equipment as technicians in many industries, including manufacturing, biomedical, government, and food processing. In addition, students can apply the skills they learn to other career fields, including electronic systems and equipment, telecommunications, and power distribution.

“We would not have been able to offer this exciting career field without the important partnership with Ellison Technologies,” said Iowa Western president, Dr. Dan Kinney. “This is a great example of how the college can work with area business leaders to provide excellent career opportunities for students.”

Olenick said the timing for this program is good because of the aging workforce in America. “There is definitely a demand and need for employees in this field,” he said. “The workforce is shrinking because the Baby Boomers are retiring. It is estimated that by 2018 there will be 70 million leaving the workforce, and only 40 million workers coming in. There is a gap that we need to fill.”

According to Olenick, students entering the Robotics Program will be energized by the state-of-the-art technology used in industry today. “The jobs that robots are replacing are non-desirable, heavy lifting/unsafe in the industry and ones that young people are not interested in filling,” he said. “Robots are helping businesses to fill these jobs and to become more efficient. Helping our customers compete locally and globally is our mission, and this new training program will not only be good for Iowa Western but for our customers who will benefit from hiring skilled robotics technicians.”

Iowa Western has gone another step further in ensuring the viability of this growing program by announcing a large construction project that will begin in spring 2013. Following the successful passage of a $22.5 million bond referendum, college officials are presently drawing up plans for a new 80,000 square foot engineering building on campus that will house Robotics in the future.

Click here to learn more about the Iowa Western Community College Robotics Program.

What a World: How to Bring It to Your Students

2013-04-01T01:04:20Z

April 2013, Volume 16, Number 4

By Tara Ebersole and Rachele Lawton

The Global Education program at the Community College of Baltimore County (CCBC) began several years ago with a small group of individuals who embraced the increasing interconnectedness and diversity of the world and wanted to transform their students into global citizens who would be able to navigate that world. This required the development of a framework that would bring the world to CCBC’s students. Today, Global Education is a collegewide initiative that encompasses many promising practices in teaching and learning.

Defining the Terms and Reviewing the Literature

To begin, CCBC had to conceptualize global citizenship in a way that resonated with its own culture. Therefore, global education was conceived as an umbrella term that integrated various components, including: (1) multicultural education, which focuses on equity for diverse students from different cultures; (2) intercultural competencies, which involves successful interaction and communication with people of various backgrounds; (3) international education, which refers to activities that transcend national borders to engage both domestic and international students; and (4) global studies, which takes an interdisciplinary, curricular approach to developing global perspectives.

CCBC also learned that various higher education organizations supported the concept of global education. The American Association of Community Colleges, for example, recognized that society is adversely impacted by the lack of global perspectives and foreign language skills amongst students today; therefore, global/intercultural education is one of its five strategic action areas (2013).

Similarly, the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) identified essential globally oriented learning outcomes in their College Learning for the New Global Century report (2007). The AAC&U also conducted a national survey of employers and employees who were recent college graduates to determine the need for global perspectives and intercultural competencies in the workforce (Hart, 2007). Findings indicated that many employers feel that too many recent college graduates do not have the global skills necessary for success today, and many employees believe that college did not prepare them well for success in today’s global economy. Global issues was third in a list of learning outcomes ranked according to priority by recent graduates.

Finally, in the American Council on Education report, Building a Strategic Framework for Comprehensive Internationalization, Olson, Green, and Hill (2005) acknowledged that students are unprepared to live in an increasing global society. Therefore, they recommend internationalizing the general education curriculum with measurable outcomes, and supporting this effort with faculty development.

Assessing Student Learning Outcomes and Conducting an Inventory

CCBC has a rich history of assessing student learning outcomes through multiple processes. As a result, data obtained through multiple assessments were used to identify how much global learning was occurring and which aspects of global education should be prioritized. First, general education learning outcomes are assessed through the use of an analytic rubric with multiple criteria, which is applied to a common graded assignment. One criterion is cultural appreciation, and data from up to 2007 revealed that across the disciplines, scores were lowest in this and faculty were least likely to assess it.

In addition, in 2006 a pilot project was implemented whereby faculty were asked to determine which of four core areas (communication, problem solving, global perspectives and social responsibility, and independent learning and personal management) they were teaching and assessing most. The results of these self-assessments identified global perspectives and social responsibility as the weakest area.

Finally, in the past, CCBC graduates were asked to participate in graduation exit surveys. Students self-assessed their knowledge of multiple topics at the beginning and end of their education at CCBC. Results indicated that students viewed their knowledge of other cultures as the least improved topic when they graduated from CCBC.

The results of these assessments indicated that a new approach would be necessary in order to help students become global citizens. At the time, CCBC had several initiatives in place that were global in nature, including international travel, service learning/civic engagement, international/ESOL students, and the celebration of International Education Week. There were also many courses offered that, by the nature of their disciplines, had an international focus, though there were still many more courses with the potential for internationalization. Committees to support international efforts and enhance the development of intercultural competencies existed, but they were not centralized, so communication between groups and coordination between activities was not well-facilitated. Though all noteworthy, these efforts were not enough to ensure global learning for all students, and because they were disconnected, a gap analysis could not be completed without a full inventory of existing international programming. It was, therefore, determined that the development of a Global Education program that could provide a comprehensive, holistic and interdisciplinary approach to education in the 21st Century was necessary.

Establishing a Global Education Advisory Board and Creating a Framework

A proposal to develop such a program was submitted to and approved by CCBC’s administration in 2008. Because Global Education was seen as a college-wide initiative, individuals from many areas of the institution were asked to provide representatives for the Global Education Advisory Board (GEAB). GEAB was designed as an overarching body to develop and coordinate all aspects of Global Education at CCBC, including identifying a budget, setting priorities, establishing subcommittees, providing a venue for collaboration and communication, reporting progress, and ensuring continuing program evolution and assessment.

GEAB began to provide a centralized platform for Global Education, which included the formation of related subcommittees. Current subcommittees are Professional Development, Community Outreach, Global Connections, Curriculum, and Social Justice and Peace. Many areas of CCBC are represented on the subcommittees, which work toward supporting and developing initiatives and ensuring that college-wide global programming exists. The subcommittee structure is reviewed biannually to ensure that the needs of Global Education are being met.

Developing the Programs and Requesting Additional Support

The GEAB co-chairs and subcommittees have collaborated to create a number of global programs for both students and faculty/staff. A faculty/staff workshop series titled Developing Global Citizenship was developed and offered through the Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning. Workshops, which are facilitated by experienced CCBC faculty and staff, cover topics such as global studies, intercultural competencies, and intercultural conflict resolution. The workshop series culminates with a global project that participants develop and implement, either in their classes or in another area of the institution. Participants must also present their project and then submit it for approval, after which they may earn graduate equivalency credit.

As another form of professional development, faculty members are eligible to apply for a Faculty International Travel (FIT) grant, which is a competitive, internal mini-grant that supports international travel. Applicants must propose a travel-related project that will broadly impact the CCBC community.

An important global offering for students is the Global Distinction program, which honors and recognizes individuals who have completed a globally intensive curriculum. This program was developed with Howard Community College and has been recognized through two national awards, the Andrew Heiskell Award for Innovation in International Education and the Diane Hacker Reaching Across Borders award. Criteria include 15 credits of courses identified as globally intensive, including World Language courses, participation in international activities, and a cultural immersion experience. Faculty are also encouraged to globalize their courses in order to increase options for students pursuing this program.

Another means of globalizing the curriculum is through the Intercultural Dialogues program, which involves international student visits to courses in various disciplines. This program creates dialogue between domestic and international students on a variety of topics and facilitates an open exchange between individuals whose backgrounds differ. Students enrolled in the targeted courses ask questions, and instructors may communicate with student visitors beforehand to tailor the dialogue to their curriculum. Intercultural Dialogues provide a simple way to introduce a global element into any course.

As these global initiatives at CCBC began to emerge and evolve, it became clear that an advisory board alone could not provide a sufficient level of support. Therefore, reassigned time was provided to hire faculty members to coordinate Global Initiatives (internal initiatives including the Global Citizenship workshop series, Intercultural Dialogues, and the Global Distinction program) and Global Studies (external initiatives including credit-based travel and international partnerships). These faculty coordinators and the two co-chairs of GEAB form CCBC’s Global Education Steering Committee, which plans advisory board meetings and provides overall leadership for Global Education.

Assessing Progress and Planning for the Future

CCBC’s Global Education program is currently in its fourth year. Though determining its impact will require time, there have been some promising developments. Surveys from the Developing Global Citizenship workshop series and testimonials from FIT grant recipients indicate that faculty members are applying new knowledge and experiences to enhance global perspectives within their classrooms. Students who have participated in the Global Distinction and Intercultural Dialogue programs have provided qualitative data to suggest that they, too, have grown personally and academically as a result of their engagement in global initiatives. Finally, some preliminary and comparative General Education assessment results suggest that more faculty are assessing cultural appreciation, and that students may be developing global perspectives at a higher rate than they did in the past.

There is still much work to be done, and Global Education will continue to evolve as new objectives are identified. While GEAB acknowledges that the global economy is one aspect of Global Education, it also strives to bring peace and social justice issues and intercultural understanding, which are important tenets of global citizenship, to the forefront of the global education agenda. GEAB also hopes to develop more partnerships, both local and global, and to enable more students to travel for credit and for experiential learning.

Some long term goals are to improve scores on General Education assessments, increase enrollments in globally intensive courses, and offer more professional development opportunities for faculty and staff. However, GEAB is still determining how to fully assess the transformative learning potential and impact of each existing global initiative, which is an evolving process.

Conclusions: What has CCBC Learned?

It is possible to establish a comprehensive Global Education program that has a meaningful impact without a budget or a director if there are passionate, committed individuals willing to serve as resources. CCBC has demonstrated that the creation of such a program should be within the reach of most community colleges. Initially it is important to consider what global means in each institutional context, to conduct research, and to examine data that can be used as a baseline to develop a rationale. It is likely that most institutions already have some existing global initiatives, and taking an inventory can help align those efforts and reduce the need to reinvent the wheel. Then, a group that can provide leadership for the creation of a workable framework needs to be established, at which point the implementation of new initiatives can begin.

Administrative support is necessary for the sustainability and evolution of any program, and it may be easier to justify requests for support once some goals and outcomes have been achieved. Fortunately, CCBC’s administration has recognized the importance of global education and has been a steady source of support. While the Global Education program in its current iteration began as a bottom-up, grassroots effort, it has now found a home in the administrative structure under the Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning. The college’s ultimate goal is to establish a Center for Global Education which will continue to develop global citizens within the CCBC community.

References

American Association of Colleges and Universities. (2007). College learning for the new global century: A report from the National Leadership Council for Liberal Education and America’s Promise. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.aacu.org/leap/documents/GlobalCentury_final.pdf

American Association of Community Colleges.(2013). Who we are. Retrieved from http://www.aacc.nche.edu/About/Who/Pages/default.aspx

Olson, C., M., Green, M., & Hill, B. (2005). Building a strategic framework for comprehensive internationalization. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.

Peter D. Hart Research Associates, Inc. (Hart). (2007). How should colleges prepare students to succeed in today’s global economy? Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities. Retrieved from http://www.aacu.org/advocacy/leap/documents/re8097abcombined.pdf

Tara Ebersole is Professor of Biology and STEM Liaison and Rachele Lawton is Associate Professor, ESOL, and Chair, Reading & Language Department, at the Community College of Baltimore County in Maryland.

Opinions expressed by the authors of Learning Abstracts are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of the League for Innovation in the Community College.

The Case for On-Time Registration

2013-04-01T12:04:37Z

April 2013, Volume 26, Number 4

By Terry O’Banion and Cynthia Wilson

In the past decade, the policy of late registration—allowing students to continue registering during the first week (or more) of class—has come under scrutiny in the community college field. Advocates for late registration have argued for continuing this decades-old aspect of community college culture based on access and revenues. By keeping the doors open one more week beyond the deadline, colleges increase opportunities for more students to enroll in college, and more students mean more revenue from increased FTE or ADA. These arguments have held sway without question until very recently, when an increasing number of colleges, along with several larger research studies, have identified late registration as a barrier to student success. Findings from a recent survey of community college CEOs suggest that late registration is on the decline and may be disappearing as a common practice.

In late 2012, the League for Innovation in the Community College (League) surveyed 525 community college CEOs, who are members of the League’s Alliance, on the current status of late registration. One-hundred and thirty CEOs responded to the survey for a return rate of 25 percent, and although the response rate is low, the results may suggest trends in late registration that should be considered by community college leaders. While typically cloaked in the terminology of eliminating late registration, the trend may be shifting to one better described as requiring on-time registration—and doing so for all the right reasons: increases in student enrollment, persistence, and success; innovations in options for learners; improvements in faculty and student services staff satisfaction; and, yes, increases in revenue.

In the League survey, 33 percent of the respondents indicated their colleges no longer provide opportunities for students to register late. Thirty-six percent indicated they were beginning to think about eliminating late registration, and only 13 percent indicated they had no plans to eliminate late registration. To the extent these figures reflect community colleges across the nation, it is clear that the practice of late registration is on the decline and may soon be eliminated in a majority of the nation’s colleges.

For colleges that had already eliminated late registration, the survey asked respondents to indicate the year this action was taken (see Table 1).

Table 1. Year Late Registration Was Eliminated

Year Eliminated		% Response
2008-2009 or earlier		6.1%
2009-2010		4.6%
2010-2011		6.9%
2011-2012		9.2%
2012-2013		6.9%

According to these data, the move to eliminate registration began fairly recently; of the respondents, only 6.1 percent eliminated the practice prior to 2009. The data are too limited to identify a trend, but there are still a few months left in the 2012-2013 academic year; if the number increases for that year, it may be appropriate to declare a trend that colleges in the last three years are increasingly terminating late registration. A number of respondents added comments indicating that in 2013 they plan to eliminate late registration.

Apparently the issue of late registration is a topic of discussion and action on many community college campuses. Even colleges that have not eliminated late registration have made some changes in the policies and practices related to late registration, as indicated in the following comments:

Late registration is discouraged but allowed in extenuating circumstances.

Students in developmental education may not register late; others may only register for those classes that have not met.

Previously, we allowed 10 days of late registration, reduced it to 5, and now allow only 2.

Modularizing courses with multiple entry and exit points made late registration irrelevant.

We offer more late start and mini-term courses.

Students may register after the first class has met but not after the second.

We allow documentable exceptions, but these are not routine.

College leaders who had eliminated late registration were asked why they did so. The four most frequently indicated reasons are listed in Table 2; respondents were asked to check all applicable reasons from a list provided in the survey, and “other” was an option.

Table 2. Reasons for Eliminating Late Registration

Reason	% Response
We knew from experience that it did not help students.	36%
We reviewed research that indicated students who register late were less likely to be retained or complete goals.	22%
Our teaching faculty indicated that it interfered with early class sessions.	22%
Our student services staff indicated it created problems with assessment, orientation, advising, financial aid, and registration.	20%

These responses suggest that faculty and student services staff have long believed there were problems with late registration, and are beginning to be aware that research supports their intuition.

The practice of late registration has been studied for more than three decades, and results have strongly indicated that it is detrimental to student success. In a study by Smith, Street, and Olivarez in 2002, 35 percent of new students who registered late were retained to the next semester, compared to 80 percent of those who registered on time. The study also found that new students who registered on time for their courses withdrew from 10 percent of their course hours, while those who registered late withdrew from 21 percent of their course hours. In 2007, Keck, in a study of the relationship between subject areas and late registration in one community college, found that in math and science courses 17 percent of the students who registered on time were unsuccessful as measured by the final course grade; 44 percent of late registrants were unsuccessful. In the social sciences, only 7 percent of timely registrants were unsuccessful, while 41 percent of late registrants were unsuccessful.

In 2010, Patricia Goodman conducted a major study of 2,159 first-time, full-time students who enrolled in one of the colleges in the Kentucky Community and Technical College System in the fall 2008 semester. She concluded that “…students who registered late for their courses were less likely to persist through their first year of college.” The study examined predictive behavior of students related to persistence through their first year of college based on three variables: (1) course registration time; (2) transfer-orientation; and (3) income level. Of these three variables, course registration time had a direct, significant relationship to student persistence, and specifically, late student registration appeared to have a direct relationship to the lack of persistence during the first year of college.

The problem for students is not difficult to understand. The most at-risk students tend to register late at a time when the system is most overloaded and least capable of meeting their needs. In a 2005 study, Zottos found that low-performing students were more likely to register late. While at-risk students need more time and attention, late registration occurs at a time that provides less time and attention.

College leaders who had eliminated late registration were also asked to indicate the results of doing so. Asked to check all that apply, the results are reported in Table 3.

Table 3. Results of Eliminating Late Registration

Result	% Response
We offered students an opportunity to register for late-start, shorter term, or accelerated classes if they missed the registration deadline.	28%
Our faculty indicated a greater degree of satisfaction.	26%
Our student services staff indicated a greater degree of satisfaction.	26%
We had no or very few complaints from students.	24%
We offered students an option to register late if they met certain strict conditions.	8%
We experienced a loss of enrollment and revenue for the next academic year.	8%

According to these data, the impact of eliminating late registration is almost all positive. Colleges have options for assisting students who do not meet the deadline, and there is considerable value for the college in increasing the satisfaction for faculty and staff. Only 8 percent of the colleges indicated a reduction in enrollment and revenue, and this might have been prevented with better planning and communication. One president commented that as a result of eliminating late registration, “Enrollment increased to record levels.” Colleges that have experienced a reduction in enrollment and revenue have indicated that these reductions were temporary.

All respondents, whether they had eliminated late registration or not, were asked “Would you recommend eliminating late registration?” Their responses are indicated in Table 4.

Table 4. Recommendations for Eliminating Late Registration

Recommend?		% Response
Definitely not		5%
Probably not		13%
Neutral		17%
Probably		24%
Definitely		35%

Only 5 percent of respondents were definite in their position not to eliminate registration, while 35 percent were definite in their view that it should be eliminated. Fifty-nine percent indicated probably or definitely that late registration should be eliminated as a practice in community colleges.

In this limited survey of community college presidents, it is clear that late registration is an issue being addressed by the nation’s community colleges. Many of these leaders are struggling with the philosophical and humane issue of how to keep the door of opportunity open for their students and with the practical issue of how to maintain and increase revenue. The colleges that have eliminated late registration keep the doors open by adopting innovative course structures such as modularized courses with multiple entry/exit points, late-start courses, and mini-courses; and they maintain enrollment and revenue by careful planning and timing. Eliminating late registration is likely to lead to increases in retention and completion, and it surely leads to increased faculty and staff satisfaction.

The Case for Requiring On-Time Registration

The case for requiring on-time registration is strong. Colleges that redesign their registration and intake procedures to eliminate late registration will

Improve persistence and retention rates for their students;
Send a message to students and to faculty that learning and instruction are important every day and every week of the term;
Establish expectations for students to meet deadlines and live with the consequences of their decisions, which may translate into improved workforce habits for some students;
Permit faculty to begin the process of instruction the first day of class without the interruption of swirling students; and
Realize increased revenues based on FTE and ADA as persistence and retention rates are increased.

For colleges that want to plan for requiring on-time registration, the following guidelines will be helpful:

Appoint a college-wide committee to study the issue and make recommendations. The committee should review and summarize the national research on the impact of late registration, complemented by a review of local research and perceptions of the college’s faculty and staff.
The committee should create a rationale for adopting a policy of on-time registration that reflects the values, needs, and resources of the college.
College leaders should use this opportunity of change in the college culture to explore and experiment with integrated models of student services, accelerated learning models that enroll students in intensive but shorter periods of time offered throughout the year, and the application of technology to support these efforts.
A marketing plan should be prepared and implemented that communicates the change and the new registration processes and deadlines to all stakeholders, including enrolled students, new and prospective students, full-time and adjunct faculty, staff and administrators, area high school counselors and administrators, and relevant community agencies and groups. College materials that include information about registration will need to be updated to reflect the changes.
The office of institutional research should design programs to assess the impact of the change on students and the institution including enrollment, student success, revenues, and satisfaction.

As community colleges gear up to implement new policies, programs, and practices to ensure they are meeting the goals of the Completion Agenda, now is the time to terminate the policy of late registration and institute a new policy of on-time registration. Even if colleges do not plan to embrace the Completion Agenda, their students and faculty will greatly benefit by a change in the registration deadline—the day before the first day of class—that supports students and faculty in their efforts to successfully navigate the educational enterprise.

References

Goodman, P. (2010). Persistence of first-time, full-time Kentucky Community and Technical College students: A predictive study on three key variables. (Doctoral dissertation). Walden University.

Keck, K. (2007). Community college retention: The role of late registration policies. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from Dissertations & Theses: Full Text. (Publication No. AAT 3275960).

Smith, A. B., Street, M. A., & Olivarez, A. (2002). Early, regular, and late registration and community college student success: A case study. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 26(3): 261-273.

Zottos, G. (2005). The impact of late registration on academic outcomes of urban community college students (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from Dissertations & Theses: Full Text. (Publication No. AAT 3180484).

Terry O’Banion is President Emeritus of the League for Innovation in the Community College, Chair of the Graduate Faculty at National American University, and Senior Advisor, Programs in Higher Education at Walden University.

Cynthia Wilson is Vice President, Learning and Research, at the League for Innovation in the Community College.

Opinions expressed in Leadership Abstracts are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the League for Innovation in the Community College.

Teaching Speech Online: It Can Be Done

2013-04-01T12:04:02Z

April 2013, Volume 8, Number 4

By William Wade and Jason Donner

West Kentucky Community and Technical College (WKCTC) in Paducah, Kentucky, began and maintained an online speech class over a two year period beginning in the spring term of 2001. Constance Frank, the speech teacher at the college in those years, had some good experiences and some bad ones when we first tried to offer the techniques and processes of Basic Speech online. The technology was new and consistency was not the rule. VHS tapes, micro and mini cassettes were available, and every video maker had a different player and a different tape format. According to Professor Frank, “Students had to mail videotapes by snail mail to me. This was cumbersome and lacked the immediacy I believe public speaking students need regarding feedback to speech delivery.” Postal mail was not the most efficient means of transporting the speech between teacher and student and, for the sake of economy, the tapes had to be returned to the student, adding to delay and confusion. Another problem was the variety of the equipment itself. “Students were responsible for providing their own equipment for recording their speeches. Such cameras were more expensive at that time and came in many sizes and shapes.”

In 2001-2002, Professor Franks required online students “to contract each speech with a real audience. For example, deliver a speech to a church group, school, business work group, etc. Many times students did not arrange appropriate contracts or would change what they were doing… One time, I had a student actually deliver a speech to no one in particular in a bar!” Failure to deliver a speech to an appropriate group would negatively influence students’ grades, but as Franks explained, “by the time I received the tape, too much time may have passed to be able to make up a speech done incorrectly.” Because of the restrictive nature of the equipment, transportation of material, time delays, and confusion, we discontinued the offering of online speech after the end of the spring term 2002.

Eleven years have made a significant difference in what we offer online and how we offer it. Jason Donner, a full-time faculty member at WKCTC, is currently teaching an online speech course. In the fall of 2012, he began his third semester of teaching this online class, having developed the course content and honed the processes over the previous four semesters. Although teaching speech online may have some inherent challenges, it can also have some advantages over a face-to-face speech class. If a student is indeed learning how to make a speech, the format of an online class lends itself to helping the student learn procedures and see strengths and weaknesses.

Donner began course development by creating a hybrid, or blended, course, which he taught for several years before bringing it to full online stature. In the period of experimentation and research, and with the technology blended with his physical class, Donner was able to observe what did and did not work. He determined where the students benefitted from the use of technology and where technology got in the way more than it helped. An excellent example of online advantage came in the form of video-recorded speeches. The software Donner uses is a product of Cengage Publishing, Speech Studio 2.0. In this software, the instructor can work from an established rubric or modify that rubric to meet individual needs, provide feedback for individual speeches, and create assessments that record into a grade book. The course can be managed within Speech Studio, and assessments can be forwarded into course or lesson management systems. The instructor can also allow students to evaluate each other’s speeches.

Donner grants students access to the class several days in advance of the start date to allow them to see course content, study processes, try out software, and gather needed materials. Since the class is online, each student must own or have ready access to a computer, and must have a video recording device such as a video camera or a webcam. Each student must gather an audience for his or her speech. A minimum audience for a graded speech is eight viewers, and other parameters for audiences are defined at the beginning of the course. Exceptions can be made upon request, as when a student requested that some of his viewers attend his speech virtually via Skype.

The speech is given in a controlled environment, saved to a computer hard drive, and submitted to Speech Studio. Once delivered, the instructor can log in and view the speech. Comments, reactions, and suggestions are made beside the speech and are time stamped so the student can jump to the comment. If a student is seen by the instructor to lose the attention of the audience, the instructor can stamp the moment to help the student see where and how it happened. This technique would be difficult to replicate for a live, unrecorded classroom speech. Other obvious advantages include going over weak areas several times, getting input from other students, and seeing strengths in a given point in the speech process.

In his fall 2011 online speech class, Donner required several campus visits to answer questions and strengthen all aspects of the class. That class had 20 students. In the 2012 spring term, he taught his first fully online class and required no campus visits. During the summer 2012, he taught his second fully online class, which had thirty students. Two sections of the online course in fall 2012 had thirty students each. Donner has reviewed the statistics for the fall 2011 class and spring 2012 class, and finds the success rates to be approximately 87% for both, only slightly lower than the 92% success rate for his campus-based speech classes. A student is considered successful if he or she earns a C or higher.

Materials for the class are reasonably priced. A required Cengage text, costing $20, is used to gain insight into the speech-giving process. The Speech Studio 2.0 software is $33.00. At less than $60, the total cost for the book and software is a bargain when compared to the costs of other classes.

For further information about WKCTC’s online speech courses and Cengage Speech Studio, contact Jason Donner at West Kentucky Community and Technical College.

William Wade is the retired Dean of Online Learning at West Kentucky Community and Technical College.

Jason Donner has taught speech at West Kentucky Community and Technical College since 2000, and has been full time since 2010.

Opinions expressed in Innovation Showcase are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the League for Innovation in the Community College.

Colleges Take Note: New NGLC Grants for Secondary Ed

2013-04-01T09:04:59Z

In the fall of 2013, Fayette County Public Schools, in Lexington, Kentucky, and the University of Kentucky will join forces to open a brand new high school in an effort to improve both college readiness and college completion. The STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics) Academy will adopt a hybrid instructional program that includes self-paced, personalized online learning with real-time assessment data collected in e-portfolios. The university and the school district have received an “Innovation Waiver” from the state to allow flexibility in seat-time requirements and a competency-based approach. Some students may matriculate into the University of Kentucky after two years while others will need four years to truly be ready for college-level work. High school teachers will work closely with faculty members who will provide training across a range of instructional innovations including project-based learning, performance assessment, and online delivery.

This exciting, innovative partnership in Kentucky is just one of the recipients of EDUCAUSE’s Next Generation Learning Challenges grants for breakthrough models, which were awarded last year at both the secondary and postsecondary levels. This week, EDUCAUSE and NGLC are thrilled to announce that we will be awarding a fourth wave of grants totaling $12 million to help launch new, breakthrough secondary schools that propose bold models to deliver personalized, blended, and competency-based education. NGLC will award 20 Launch Grants of up to $450,000 for new schools planning to open in the Fall of 2013 or 2014. In addition, we will award 30 Planning Grants of $100,000 to school developers in the early stages of planning, intending to open new schools in the fall of 2014 or 2015. For more detailed information, please see the NGLC Wave IV Request for Proposals (RFP).

NGLC is looking for new school developers such as school districts, charter management organizations, universities, non-profit and for-profit organizations, state agencies, and other individuals and institutions that propose innovative, bold models to dramatically improve student outcomes. We define a Breakthrough School as having the following characteristics:

Student-centered: To meet the diverse learning needs of each student every day and to empower students with skills, information, and tools they need to manage their own learning;
Competency-based: To enable students to move at their own optimal pace and receive credit when they can demonstrate mastery of rigorous material; and
Blended: to optimize face-to-face and technology-delivered instruction in group and individual work.

A key requirement of our Breakthrough School model is that after the start-up phase, schools will be able to be self-sustaining on recurring public revenue at current or lower spending levels.

In Wave IV of funding, with grant deadlines on April 22, 2013 and December 2, 2013, we are looking to encourage a diverse portfolio of innovators to apply for a grant, especially those who represent institutions of higher learning in partnership with local schools. We encourage EDUCAUSE members who are deeply involved in working with their local secondary schools to learn more and to consider applying for a grant. If institutions have already proposed and secured approval to open a new school, consider applying for a Launch Grant. For others who are earlier in the planning stages, we encourage you to apply for a Planning Grant.

While the STEAM Academy in Kentucky is still in the early stages of development, it holds great promise for addressing the critical issues of college readiness and completion and demonstrating a new model of how secondary and post-secondary institutions can work together. Join us as we pioneer more personalized, mastery-based approaches to learning in order to dramatically improve outcomes for students.

The first grant application deadline is April 22. Apply today!

Member Spotlight: Butler Community College

2013-03-04T10:03:29Z

Early College Health Sciences Academy

South-Central Kansas high school students interested in careers in health-care professions have found a low-cost, high impact way to get a head start on their college education. The Butler Community College Early College Health Science Academy (ECHSA) offers an exceptional opportunity for students to integrate the last two years of high school with the first two years of college. The academy, which began in 2011, prepares students for healthcare careers and immerses them into the college experience. Students must meet specific admission requirements and class size is limited. The two-year program allows students to earn a significant portion of their associate degree while still in high school, which could allow them to enter a four-year college academically as a college junior upon high school graduation.

The ECHSA facility has been specifically renovated for the program. It includes a state-of-the-art science lab and technology enhanced classrooms equipped with smart boards. The Allied Health classroom houses two hospital bed stations and simulation mannequins that allow students to practice hands-on skills in their field of interest.

The ECHSA has benefited from the Kansas Career and Technical Education Initiative. Signed into law in July 2012, the initiative provides tuition-free college credit to high school students for a significant portion of the ECHSA program. In fact, thirty hours of the program’s fifty-six hours are provided to the students at no cost because of this new law!

Strong partnerships with area professionals and institutions have been a significant part of the ECHSA’s success. The program is housed at USD #394 – Rose Hill. The Rose Hill school district provides all the core class textbooks to students—no matter where their home school is located. The Delta Dental Kansas Foundation is also a strong partner to the ECHSA. Recently, the Foundation awarded $20,000 to provide scholarships, equipment, and supplies. KU Medical Center Area Health Education Center and the ECHSA have built a strong relationship of collaboration. As a result, two annual events, Camp Med and Journeys/Destinations, have been created to provide opportunities for students to interact with health care professionals and gain hands-on experiences in their career interest areas. In addition, a strong cadre of area health professionals supports the ECHSA by providing job shadowing opportunities, mentoring students in their interest area, and serving on the advisory board.

The program has proven to be very successful. Since its inception in 2011, the number of ECHSA students has grown sixty-four percent. ECHSA students have been very successful academically; 100% of the students have passed the CNA licensing exam, and a significant number of the students are already employed in health-related positions, where they are gaining experience while benefitting financially. ECHSA students are able to move into health/science careers earlier and be better prepared for success than traditional high school students.

Early college expansion plans are already underway at Butler Community College. Three additional early college programs are in the development stage and projected to start in fall 2013.

For additional information about the Early College Health Sciences Academy, contact Dr. Marcy Aycock, ECHSA Director, at 316-776-9429.

Click here to visit the ECHSA website.

Click here to visit our Facebook page.

Member Spotlight: Brookdale Community College

2013-03-04T10:03:17Z

Brookdale Community Foundation Comes up BIG

As part of its ongoing mission to develop and manage private philanthropic support for the college, the Brookdale Community College Foundation secured a $100,000 donation from a new donor (who wishes to remain anonymous) to augment institutional and Foundation funding of the Brookdale Innovation Grant (BIG) program. The donation will be allocated at $10,000 annually for ten years. The BIG program is designed to promote innovative solutions to institutional challenges.

“Brookdale is committed to advancing student learning and achievement through innovative teaching, a dynamic curriculum, a supportive learning environment, and activities to promote student engagement,” reports Dr. Maureen Murphy, President. “To further its commitment to students, the college and the Brookdale Foundation offer the Brookdale Innovation Grant (BIG) competition to enrich and improve the teaching and learning process. This donation fortifies our commitment to BIG and demonstrates the significant role the Brookdale Foundation plays in supporting institutional priorities.”

“The donation was a result of a year-long cultivation spearheaded by the Vice President of Development and Government & Community Relations and our former Interim President,” reports Tim Zeiss, Executive Director, Foundation & Alumni Affairs. “We presented this first-time donor with a few options for his consideration and BIG resonated with him. He now wants to make an even more significant donation, so we are working on a larger scale proposal.”

Proposed projects must be based on current research, demonstrate a clear benefit to the college, and address an issue of broad significance. Projects must also align with college priorities as detailed in the Educational Services Operational Plan and 2013-2017 Jubilee Plan. The broader themes shown in these documents include: inspire student success; maximize resources; optimize Brookdale partnerships; and leverage Brookdale’s excellence. Projects may be individual or collaborative; focus on one discipline, be interdisciplinary, or be cross-divisional; and address a single challenge or multiple challenges.

Applicants may focus their projects on these broader themes or on more specific objectives, such as:

Integrate technology and pedagogy
Integrate curricular and co-curricular activities
Implement activities that empower the whole student
Help close achievement gap
Enhance first-year experience
Promote diversity
Ensure dynamic pedagogy engages students in scholarship
Respond to workforce development needs and demand occupations
Maximize internal and external partnerships
Partner in economic and educational vitalization throughout the County

The BIG program is open to all regular employees (those whose position includes benefits). Annual funding includes $10,000 from the donor gift, $5,000 from the Brookdale Foundation operating budget, and $10,000 from the college budget. The maximum award is $3,000 and the college anticipates funding 8-12 projects. The deadline for applicants is late March. Recipients will be selected by a committee comprised of college representatives and Foundation Trustees, and announced at Faculty Day in May.

The BIG program is administered by the Office of Grants & Institutional Development under Laura Qaisaunee, Director, and the Brookdale Community College Foundation under Tim Zeiss, Executive Director, Foundation & Alumni Affairs.

Click here to learn more about the Brookdale Innovation Grants (BIG) program

Walden Is Offering $25,000 Scholarships for Higher Education

2013-03-04T09:03:01Z

In 2013, Walden University’s Richard W. Riley College of Education and Leadership is offering more than $370,000 in scholarships to new students. You still have time to take advantage of this opportunity and apply for Walden University’s Terry O’Banion Leadership Scholarship.*

The Terry O’Banion Leadership Scholarship awards $25,000 scholarships toward one of the following advanced degree programs in higher education and adult learning offered through The Richard W. Riley College of Education and Leadership:

Ph.D. in Education
Doctor of Education (Ed.D.)
Education Specialist (Ed.S.)
M.S. in Higher Education
M.S. in Adult Learning

The deadline to submit your application is July 15, 2013.

Visit http://www.league.org/membership/walden.html for more information or contact an enrollment advisor today at 1-866-492-5336 to request a scholarship application form.

*Only one scholarship or grant benefit may be applied to tuition.