This part of the report contains Preliminary Conclusions from some
of the working groups.
Part 1 of the report contains the Executive Summary and Introduction, including a statement of goals.
Part 3 contains the remainder of the Preliminary Conclusions, including sections on Technology and Assessment, as well as an account of Next Steps and a Final Word.
UNIVERSITY OF OREGON PRODUCTIVITY PLANNING PROGRESS REPORT
December, 1993
PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS
PROMISING DIRECTIONS
Up to this point the emphasis in the process has been on developing ideas, with less attention paid to constraints. Most of the dozens of proposals that have come forth focus on improving quality, both for its own sake as one output measure of the University's productivity and because of its value in attracting and retaining students. Although some of the ideas for quality improvement can be implemented without enhancing or shifting resources, most would require investment of human capital and of money, perhaps from dedicated funds or from internal reallocation.
The attached reports from the working groups contain proposals that have surfaced during their meetings, as well as thoughtful preliminary analyses of their assigned study areas. Some suggestions may have only minor impacts on the University's overall productivity. Others, though, collectively offer hope of building productivity to the level required by our fundamental goals. We list here several major areas that seem most likely to lead to substantial gains. Some will require little in the way of resources and others obviously a great deal; for some it is hard to estimate costs.
"Summer academy" programs can be developed around courses that bring high school students up to University of Oregon admissions standards or give them a head start on college requirements. This concept could include graduate programs as well, so students could complete prerequisites for a graduate program before they formally enrolled during the regular year. Overall, the effect would be both to attract students and to shorten time to degrees.
Both the academies and short courses offer the opportunity to build a sense of community among students as well, especially if that goal is explicitly a course expectation.
Summer session programs and short courses promote greater use of physical plant, but they require additional faculty time and they present special incentive problems, both for the individual and for the institution. Whether taught by regular faculty or adjuncts, such programs will need to generate enough money to cover staffing costs, at the very least. For this reason we have instituted a higher summer session fee for nonresident students. o Credit for Achievement. [Goal 1(a)] (See the report of the Articulation working group for a more complete account.)
Student learning and performance are what matter, not time spent in the classroom. To speed progress toward degrees by providing alternatives to scheduled classes, the University of Oregon must develop and articulate clear policies for awarding credit through demonstrated competence. Specific high school courses or alternative study programs that develop as part of Certificates of Advanced Mastery might be designated as acceptable for college credit (i.e., transfer credit). As part of this procedure, University departments will need to review credit policies for examinations within their disciplines to determine whether more credit is justified for any of them. It may also be possible to develop competency examinations to award credit in advanced courses.
The University currently gives credit through Advanced Placement courses, the College Level Examination Program and Credit By Examination. Each of these programs should be expanded as feasible and desirable, thus increasing significantly the number of options high school students have to earn college credit prior to traditional college admission. Coordinating new policies and practices with those of KP12 schools, the community colleges and other institutions of higher education will require special care.
Mastery testing and competency-based credit are not new ideas at the University. They acquire a special significance now in the light of the increased emphasis on student learning as an outcome of educational productivity. The University will need to review and update its policies in these areas, taking into account recent research on testing and measurement. One possibility might be the expansion of the University's testing center into a regional testing office, to develop procedures and tests suitable for University of Oregon use and to act as a communication link between University departments and external groups. o Three Plus Two Degrees. [Goals 1(a), 1(c), 1(d), 2(c), 3(a)] (See the report of the Graduate/Professional Education and Research working group.)
As a research university with strong professional schools, the University of Oregon is well equipped to offer five-year programs leading to the master's degree, by way of accelerated bachelor's degree programs. In such programs a select number of qualified undergraduate students would be admitted to master's programs after their sophomore or junior years. These students would then complete the M.A./M.S. in a 3+2 configuration, earning both baccalaureate and master's degrees in five years. In addition, the Law School is considering a 3+3 program leading to the J.D. degree. Mechanisms would need to be established for advising undergraduate students about the new programs. Direct admission of undergraduate and transfer students to these tracks should also be possible. Accelerated degree programs of this sort not only shorten student time to degree, but they also explicitly tie the undergraduate program to the University's research and professional strengths. o Enhanced Master's Programs. [Goals 1(c), 1(d), 1(e), 3(a), 3(b)] (See the report of the Graduate/Professional Education and Research working group.)
The University has the capacity to enroll more students in master's degree programs. Reasons for not doing so vary from department to department, and include the high cost of such students in the laboratory sciences and the comparatively low tuition returned to the institution. We will examine our departmental and interdisciplinary master's programs, with the goal of finding ways to increase availability without disproportionately increasing resources committed to them. Master's degrees are increasingly seen as desirable employment credentials, so enhancing these programs will increase the number of successful university graduates available for professional employment in Oregon. Strengthening and broadening master's offerings will also add to the attraction of the 3+2 programs mentioned above. o Participatory Learning. [Goals 1(b), 1(c), 1(d), 2(a), 2(b), 2(c), 3(c)] (See the reports of the Participatory Learning and Graduate/Professional Education and Research working groups as well as of the UEPCC.)
Many students at the University of Oregon already take part in learning activities that involve them directly with faculty or community professionals, activities such as internships, practica, research or other scholarly activity with faculty, senior theses, capstone seminars, and departmental honors programs. We have identified and will be evaluating a number of instructional models, including some innovative programs, that foster hands-on experience for advanced undergraduates. Such programs have been particularly successful in the professional schools; our goal will be to make the opportunities available to a wide variety of students. The chance to take part in such programs should help motivate students to stay in school, as well as prepare them for employment after graduation. We also expect that a number of the programs developed will include experience working in teams, which will contribute to a sense of community. o Group Learning. [Goals 1(c), 1(f), 2(a), 2(b)] (See the reports of the Learning Communities and Innovative Teaching working groups.)
Fostering increased student involvement by systematic introduction of student interaction groups is one of the University's operational goals. The use of groups in instruction not only enhances student learning but also reinforces a sense of community. In addition, groups offer the potential for increasing the student share of responsibility for learning, by using faculty primarily as facilitators and guides, rather than as information purveyors, thus allowing them to instruct more students.
Some University departments already use small groups effectively in large classes, and their experience can provide models for developing similar teaching methods elsewhere. One surprising observation already is that group dynamics work well in distance learning situations, where interaction between students is electronic.
Some of the most successful models for group learning are based on the use of advanced students as facilitators and assistants. Group members respond well to student leaders, and the facilitators learn the material as one only does by participating in its teaching. We will explore ways to use student group leaders effectively in a variety of courses. o Curricular Streamlining and Departmental Changes. [Goals 1(a), 1(b), 1(c), 1(d)] (See the UEPCC report.)
Departments and the University administration can take a variety of steps to remove barriers and to encourage students to focus their course work successfully. Several of these have already been taken, including most notably the elimination of the elaborate cluster requirement for general education and the reduction in hours required for graduation following elimination of requirements in health and physical education. Next year the UEPCC plans to reexamine the whole topic of general education requirements. o Off-Campus Programs and Distance Learning. [Goals 1(a), 1(c), 1(d), 1(f), 2(b), 3(b)] (See the reports of the Graduate and Professional Education and Research, Articulation, and Technology working groups.)
Communication tools such as EdNet and the Internet and the availability of powerful desktop computers now allow the University to deliver its academic resources throughout the State in a variety of educational formats. We are committed to taking advantage of the new opportunities, not only to make University of Oregon courses available more widely but also to develop joint programs with other institutions.
Short courses and weekend workshops at off-campus locations are traditional types of outreach educational activities that will be even more successful when students and faculty can stay in contact electronically after they have physically separated. Programs already in place in the professional fields of Journalism, Architecture and Business can serve as models for developing the electronically extended classroom experience.
Technology is the key ingredient in new joint programs such as the Network for Engineering and Research in Oregon being developed in cooperation with Oregon State University and the Oregon Joint Graduate Schools of Engineering. Both instruction and research will benefit from our ability to link faculty and students on different campuses with communications modes that range from electronic mail to multimedia and interactive video.
Distance learning programs present natural opportunities to develop courseware and electronic libraries, resources that can benefit students on campus as well. We expect that it will also be possible to market such resources overseas--in effect, to develop educational exports. Closer to home, the experience and equipment needed to deliver programs at a distance will also let faculty members and students on campus communicate in new ways.
All of the major recommendations that we have listed have a common theme: improvement of program quality. In that respect, all of them support the operational goals 1(c), 3(a), and 3(b) aimed at attracting students and building State commitment. The professional dedication to quality shown in these proposals is a hallmark of the University of Oregon faculty that epitomizes the institution and that will ultimately be responsible for the success of our academic productivity plans.
(This is the end of Part 2. Part 3 contains the remainder of the Preliminary Conclusions, including sections on Technology and Assessment, as well as a discussion of Next Steps and a Final Word.)
[Submitted by: Charley Wright
Thu, 16 Dec 93 12:03:41 PST] [Copyright 1993, University of Oregon]
| Web page spun on 25 June 2002 by Peter B Gilkey 202 Deady Hall, Department of Mathematics at the University of Oregon, Eugene OR 97403-1222, U.S.A. Phone 1-541-346-4717 Email:peter.gilkey.cc.67@aya.yale.edu of Deady Spider Enterprises |