Part 1.

I. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY

This document describes the University of Oregon's campus plan for academic productivity and educational reform, based upon the goals and general directions set forth in the University's Progress Report of December 1993 [Appendix A].

In brief, the University's three primary productivity planning goals are to:

•  o Provide University Educations to More Oregonians;
•  o Capitalize and Build On Existing Strengths; and
•  o Create Financial Stability.

To help as many students graduate as possible, within given resources, our plan concentrates on student retention and shortened time to degrees. The fundamental idea is to increase the responsibility students have for their own learning, and then to provide them with the means to accept the added responsibility. Specific strategies include the effective use of technology, together with a variety of curricular and pedagogical changes designed to facilitate learning and speed student progress. Taken in isolation, each change would be a minor adjustment to a large educational operation; collectively, however, these changes represent a substantial new direction for the University of Oregon. We describe these initiatives in more detail below.

This plan is designed for implementation at three levels. The first level is based on revenue currently anticipated for the next three years. Funding for the second level will include an additional Educational Technology Fee of $50 per term, charged to all students and dedicated to the enhancement of educational technology to support and improve instruction. The third level depends on the implementation, in two stages, of a $100 per term Undergraduate Resource Fee, charged to all undergraduates and dedicated to enhancing quality, retention and success in undergraduate education. The small increments in funding from one level to the next yield major increases in academic productivity.

The process that led up to the December 1993 Progress Report included extensive faculty participation in nine working groups. The University's productivity planning process was further broadened this winter to include a half-day retreat for department heads, deans and members of key faculty com- mittees, followed by extended discussions in each department. This broad-based review led to a consensus affirmation of the Progress Report's goals and to specific departmental propos- als for activities in support of those goals. While the Productivity Plan given here necessarily restates and ampli- fies many of the Progress Report's points, it does not replace that report, which forms part of the record of the University's position on academic productivity planning.

Besides reaffirming the goals stated in the Progress Report, the Productivity Plan given below also includes examples of specific actions proposed in the ten areas that the report identified as promising substantial productivity gains, and it calls attention as well to several new ideas that have come forth from the campus review. This plan sets productiv- ity targets at each of three funding levels and explains how the University will measure and report progress toward those goals.

At several points in this plan we include cautionary notes, as well as some discussion of the difficulties to be overcome in fully developing the proposed initiatives. The intent of these observations is to be constructive, but realistic. The plan's success depends upon taking into account the actual people and institution to which it applies.

II. GOALS, THEMES AND PROMISING AREAS

A. Primary And Operational Goals

The Progress Report sets forth the University's three primary productivity goals, with associated and supporting opera- tional goals: Primary Goal 1. Serve the increasing numbers of Oregonians who are qualified for and need university educations.

Operational Goals

•  1 (a) Decrease students' time to degree;
•  1 (b) Retain a higher proportion of students to degree completion;
• 1 (c) Maintain and enhance the quality of educational programs offered;
• 1 (d) Provide courses of study appropriate to Oregonians' needs;
•  1 (e) Increase on-campus resident enrollment by 2,000 students by the year 2002;
•  1 (f) Develop the capability to offer an additional 25,000 student credit hours to Oregon students who are not present on the campus.
•  1 (g) Create a seamless articulation with the public schools, community colleges and other institutions of higher education in Oregon.

•  2 (a) Develop more learning communities; increase personal academic interactions between students and faculty members, and between students and their peers;
•  2 (b) Increase participatory learning and student engagement in the learning process;
•  2 (c) Strengthen links between the undergraduate curriculum and graduate, professional and research programs.

•  3 (a) Recruit and retain capable students in sufficient numbers to meet productivity and budgetary requirements;
•  3 (b) Maximize State support by responding to the State's higher education needs;
•  3 (c) Maximize support from external sources, including private gifts;
•  3 (d) Assure students that programs in which they enroll will be stable;

These general and specific goals derive from our analysis of the present and future situation at the University and in the state of Oregon, under the following assumptions:

•  o Until 1997-1998, total financial resources available for educational expenditures will remain constant (increasing only at the rate of inflation);
•  o By the 1997-1998 academic year overall enrollment will increase by 1,200 students;
• o The available resources will allow us to maintain the current faculty size and quality, and the current physical plant;
•  o Nonrecurring capital funds of about $10 million will be available over this period to allow investment in educational technologies and related areas that will increase productivity;
•  o Beginning in 1997-98, financial resources will increase approximately in proportion to further increases in student enrollment;
• o By the year 2002, on-campus head-count enrollment will reach approximately 19,000 students; approximately 12,000 of these will be Oregon residents;
• o An additional 25,000 SCH will be offered to Oregon students through joint programs in Portland and elsewhere, and through distance learning;
• o Throughout this period, the proportion of the University of Oregon's total budget supported by State general funds will continue to decline, reaching less than 15%, perhaps less than 10% by 2002.

C. Underlying Planning Themes

In the light of our assumptions, a thoughtful review of the University's productivity goals leads us to a planning frame- work based on three main ideas:

•  o Retention of qualified students,
• o Promotion of a sense of community, and
• o Emphasis on student learning.

One proven way to encourage students to continue in school, and to get more out of their experience, is to give them a sense of belonging to an educational community. The UO already has a number of excellent programs that foster student communities, and this experience will be invaluable in developing a more widespread community atmosphere.

The opposite face of retention is attrition. At many institu- tions, attrition is seen as a natural, and even desirable, part of the academic picture, and courses with high failure rates are used as filters to warn students away from special- ized advanced programs in which they are unlikely to succeed academically. The University's goal is to have students en- roll in classes in which they can expect to succeed, rather than fail but take up seats and resources that others could use. Our emphasis on proper placement based on sound advising aims to match students and resources productively.

Advising is just one tool for reducing attrition. Teaching strategies that increase student learning also increase their success rate. Teaching students how to learn new material is a key part of our academic productivity plan which will support the goal of retention as well as provide students with tools they will need to succeed after graduation.

The link between filling seats with successful students and increasing the emphasis on learning is one example of the connection between academic productivity and educational reform. In the present context, productivity must be enhanced by getting more results from fewer resources. How do we get the most value from each dollar? Quality is key to the answer. Our ability to attract and retain students and to meet the State's needs depends critically on maintaining--and indeed enhancing--the quality of our academic programs. The University is committed to increasing academic productivity. Doing more of the same with less money would reduce quality. Thus the only possible way to increase productivity is to do business somewhat differently, i.e., to engage in what are called educational reforms.

D. Promising Areas For Educational Reform

The Progress Report identified ten general areas that promise to address the University's operational productivity goals.

• o Mechanisms to Speed Progress Toward Degrees.
• o Summer School and Short Courses.
• o Credit for Achievement.
•  o Three Plus Two Degrees.
• o Enhanced Master's Programs.
• o Participatory Learning.
•  o Group Learning.
• o Curricular Streamlining and Departmental Changes.
•  o Increased Use of Technology.
•  o Off-Campus Programs and Distance Learning

III. EXAMPLES OF PRODUCTIVITY-ENHANCING STEPS

A. Departmental Initiatives

All of the academic departments at the University have en- gaged in productivity planning, in some cases for more than a year now. Following the January retreat, department heads prepared brief statements of ways in which their units are responding to the initiatives laid out in the Progress Report. The examples below give a small sample of the ideas they submitted. In a number of cases, the proposals are already in place or well on their way to being implemented. Others listed are still in the preliminary development stages or represent departmental intentions. The proposals in the first group are organized according to the list of promising areas set out in the Progress Report. Other proposals listed later in this section deal with issues raised by the faculty that cut across the whole subject of productivity improvement.

The total number of constructive proposals put forward by the departments is overwhelming. Although no single large change will solve the University's productivity problems, the modest gains from the many changes proposed, taken all together, add up to truly significant progress. Moreover, the changes are distributed throughout the University and form part of a collective new faculty approach to achieving our goals.

1. Mechanisms to Speed Progress Toward Degrees

More Intensive Courses. Nearly all departments have completed reviews of their courses, with the goals of increasing quality and depth. In many instances it has been possible to redesign courses to include an extra credit hour of work, so that, for example, a course formerly offered in a 3-credit format for three terms might now be offered as a two-term 4-credit course or expanded to four credits each of the three terms. One peda- gogical advantage of such a shift is that a full-time student will be able to concentrate on fewer courses each term.

What has come to be called the 3- to 4-credit shift is con- sistent with an increase in emphasis on student responsibil- ity for learning, especially at the upper-division level, where the added work component typically corresponds to activities outside the classroom.

Streamlined General Education Requirements. Changes in the University's general education requirements corresponding to the 3- to 4-credit shift will permit stu- dents to satisfy those requirements sooner, with fewer (but more substantial) courses. Moreover, students will need fewer total courses to graduate, no matter what their fields of study.

Guaranteed Course Access. The English department, for example, will guarantee seniors access to courses required for the major. The College of Business will allow undergraduate majors to register for a whole year's core courses at a time, with guaranteed access to courses that yield a business degree within two years of admission to the major. Both of these departments will be addressing serious current access problems.

Admission To The Major. The School of Journalism and Communication will permit premajors to apply for major status a year sooner than previously and will ease requirements for admission to the nonprofessional major in communication studies. These are just two examples of the removal of bottlenecks.

2. Summer Session and Short Courses

Expanded course offerings. Most departments plan to extend their summer course offerings to serve more students, particularly in high-demand general education courses and courses required for majors and minors. The Mathematics department will offer two requirement- satisfying sequences in intensive format, so student can complete whole sequences in a summer. Some departments, such as Sociology, will offer more required major courses in the summer. The range of courses available across the board will increase substantially, making Summer Session an attractive option for students seeking to accelerate their studies.

Interdisciplinary programs. The English and Romance Languages departments will offer interdisciplinary summer language institutes, and planning is under way for institutes in other languages. Russian is cooperating with Planning, Public Policy and Management and the College of Education to develop an interdisciplinary summer program.

Short courses and workshops. A number of departments have created, or plan to create, short courses to offer not only during the summer but also between sessions or in conjunction with regularly scheduled classes. For example, the International Studies Program has developed one-week intensive summer courses, to serve the community as well as regularly enrolled students. The School of Architecture and Allied Arts will have summer workshops in arts administration, short courses in Landscape Architecture, and an institute for rural development. The School of Music is developing computer-enhanced short courses in rudiments of music (preparatory for majors) and music-writing software. In another mode altogether, Geography has in place a videotape- based minicourse on water resources and is working on film series supplements to regional geography courses.

3. Credit for Achievement

The Russian department is creating a self-learning program in the major, based on a standard reading list. English is also developing independent study options for majors. The School of Music proposes to expand its present use of credit by examination by devising tests in such areas as music history. Architecture is exploring ways to assess physics preparation for structural engineering. International Studies will accept evidence of third-year language competence (though without giving credit). Both Mathematics and Geography are investi- gating ways to offer self-paced lower division courses.

These are just some of the ideas brought forward now by the departments. The University has for many years allowed students to satisfy requirements and meet prerequisites by demonstrating knowledge without taking classes. In the case of transfer students or those with Advance Placement courses, credit toward a UO degree is often awarded as well, and it is also possible to get credit in some courses by passing chal- lenge examinations. The University is now looking at ways in which credit by examination can be made even more widely available. Since the essence of a university course is con- tent in a recognized academic area, credit for achievement will be confined to subjects in which the University offers courses.

The University is committed to the goal of creating a seam- less articulation with the public schools, community colleges and other institutions of higher education in the state. The University is participating in statewide efforts to plan for implementation of the Certificates of Initial and Advanced Mastery in the public schools, and will be prepared to accept students with those credentials when they are in place. Indeed, students whose preparation is based on the principles of mastery and individual responsibility for learning will be especially well suited to take full advantage of the emphasis on learning that is at the heart of our productivity plan.

4. Masters Degree Programs

A number of departments plan to develop new masters programs or to augment existing ones. For example, Biology is consid- ering how to expand its applied masters program into such areas as biotechnology and conservation biology, where stu- dent demand appears high and underutilized resources are available. Music has in mind a performance certificate gradu- ate program for students seeking an intensive conservatory- style experience. The School of Architecture and Allied Arts plans to offer a masters degree in Arts Administration (in conjunction with Music) as well as a degree in Recreation, Tourism Management and Design. Mathematics and Russian pro- pose to revitalize their once-flourishing summer masters programs for teachers.

Mathematics is reviewing its regular masters degree require- ments as well, to make them easier to complete in a single year. Political Science, Psychology and the College of Education are also exploring the idea of a "Four plus One" package consisting of a strong undergraduate major followed by a year of graduate study for a masters degree.

Changes such as these in masters programs enhance productiv- ity in several ways. They obviously speed time to degree, typically by a factor of two, since students usually take two years now to complete masters programs, even though they satisfy most of their requirements in the first year. By moving students through the masters programs more quickly, the University is able to offer its programs to more stu- dents. Making the masters programs more attractive also helps increase enrollments in graduate and senior-graduate courses, which may have excess capacity now, or which may be offered infrequently now owing to low enrollments.

The Three plus Two programs described in the Progress Report carry the Four plus One idea one step further, by admitting students to graduate programs after only three years of undergraduate study. In effect, they allow undergraduate students to advance as rapidly as possible and to credit their advanced, graduate-level courses toward masters degrees. Setting up such programs is largely an administra- tive matter, since the courses involved are already in place. A number of departments have shown interest in working out the details of such programs.

Gains in productivity at the graduate level, though they affect relatively small numbers of students, are especially significant illustrations of how to take fullest advantage of the expertise of faculty at a research university. Moreover, national trends indicate that the masters degree is increas- ingly becoming a standard credential in many fields, so that productivity increases at the masters level today will be magnified in the years ahead.

5. Participatory Learning

In this plan we use the term "participatory learning" to describe educational activities that give students hands-on opportunities to apply their classroom learning, or that lead to scholarly collaboration with faculty. Taken broadly, the term also includes a variety of faculty-supervised indepen- dent study activities. Several departments already have successful internship programs, some of which will be expanded. Other programs are being developed, in order to give as many students as possible the chance to gain experi- ence applying academic knowledge. In fields for which intern- ships are not readily available in the Eugene area, students will be given more opportunities for faculty-supervised independent study or for on-campus applications. For example, the Biology department will increase the number of its under- graduate research students by 25%.

Well-supervised participatory learning opportunities are labor-intensive for faculty. The Sociology department reduced its cost per student by designating a single faculty member to coordinate supervised field studies, but the need to provide adequate direction sets limits on such a strategy. In order to develop the full potential for participatory learn- ing at the University it will be necessary to commit addi- tional faculty resources. In some fields also, for example in Geography, student research opportunities are limited by available equipment or other physical constraints.

6. Group Learning

As noted above, the University has several successful programs based on learning communities, i.e., social group- ings designed to build a sense of community into the learning environment. Group learning, itself, is a related but dis- tinct activity, in which students are expected not only to interact socially but to work collaboratively. It may also involve mixing inexperienced students with senior ones who act as facilitators.

Several departments are already using group learning as a significant part of their instruction. Mathematics now teaches the standard calculus courses in a format with a substantial component of group learning in the classroom. Biology used NSF funding to develop highly successful ways of incorporating small groups into the large lecture experience, and Computer and Information Science, also with NSF assis- tance, is redesigning its core courses to encourage teamwork, as well as to promote retention of women and minority students.

Mathematics and Women's Studies have also had good success in using advanced undergraduate facilitators in courses for non- majors. Students enrolled in the courses and their student guides all benefit academically from the interaction. Influenced by the success of these models, a number of other departments are considering developing similar opportunities for student cooperation.

7. Curricular Streamlining and Departmental Changes Nearly every department has offered substantial proposals in this category, an indication of the overall faculty commit- ment to academic reform. Some plans would primarily benefit students majoring in the department, while others would open up programs to nonmajors.

Changes related to majors. Several departments propose to accept more students as majors. In some instances student demand already exists, while in others the departments have plans to recruit to match capacity. Departments have various proposals for providing more upper-division courses for their majors. Some plan to allow students to substitute similar courses taken in other departments. Others intend to combine lower-division classes in order to free up faculty to teach advanced courses in sections of appropriate size. As a way to reduce barriers to graduation, some departments are reducing the number of required courses while at the same time increasing required course credits and learning expectations or changing the courses required for the major,.

Changes for nonmajors. A number of departments and professional schools are design- ing new service courses for nonmajor undergraduates. For instance, the departments of East Asian Languages and Literatures and of Dance propose to increase enrollment in their courses by admitting nonmajors, and the professional schools of Law, Music, and Art and Architecture will offer special service courses to nonmajor undergraduates. Redesigning general education packages from three 3-credit courses to two 4-credit courses will also benefit nonmajors.

8. Increased Use of Technology in Instruction Several departments submitted specific proposals for using computer or video technology to improve instruction. The majority, however, expressed interest in applying technology more extensively, but were unsure how to begin. Development and implementation of instructional technology raise a variety of issues that are discussed in a separate section later in this plan.

9. Off-Campus Programs and Distance Learning

The Progress Report listed programs in Business, Journalism, Computer Science and Architecture that are being delivered in the Portland area. Journalism is also developing a program for delivering premajor required materials by Ed-Net to other OSSHE campuses or to community colleges. The School of Music has plans for a collaborative program to provide fifth-year music education courses to students at WOSC, and has devel- oped a proposal for delivering music education to teachers and workers in daycare facilities throughout the state. During the next few years the University will dramatically increase the number of courses and programs it offers off campus.

One exotic application of technology to distance learning is the use of electronic mail to communicate with International Studies student interns in the South Pacific region. Closer to home, the technology and materials developed for distance learning can also be used by students living on campus or in the Eugene area who are enrolled in regular University classes. Such students will have both the opportunity to take part in campus life and the advantages of the latest technology.

(Continued in Part 2) [Submitted by: Charley Wright
Tue, 29 Mar 94 14:54:31 PST] [Copyright 1994, University of Oregon]