Center for Teaching and Learning 2010 Staff Retreat Report · 2011. 10. 19. · Center for Teaching and Learning 2010 Staff Retreat Report The Center for Teaching and Learning conducted

1

Center for Teaching and Learning 2010 Staff Retreat Report The Center for Teaching and Learning conducted its annual staff planning retreat December 8‐9, 2010. All Instructional Team members, Technical Team members, and all CTL Faculty Fellows attended.

Contents

Retreat Objectives ................................................................................................................. 2

Institutional Profile and Issues and CTL’s Operational Climate ............................................. 2

Assessment of CTL Accomplishments for 2010 .................................................................... 3

Evaluation of Faculty Needs Assessment and Review of Provost’s Goals............................ 3

Evaluation of Program Planning Models ................................................................................ 5

Objectives, Methods and Strategies for 2011 ........................................................................ 6

Increase Collaboration and Awareness ................................................................................. 8

Improve Support Processes .................................................................................................. 9

Provide Effective Academic Technologies ........................................................................... 10

Gathering and Assimilating Data ......................................................................................... 10

Improve Student Outreach and Preparedness (Without Mission Creep) ............................. 12

Revisions to Mission Statement (To Be Determined) .......................................................... 13

Revision of the Strategic Plan .............................................................................................. 13

Appendix A: Instructional Programs Data – 2010 Calendar Year Summary ....................... 16

Appendix B -- CTL Technology Usage ................................................................................ 19

Appendix C: 2010 Faculty Needs Assessment .................................................................... 21

2

Retreat Objectives

1. Review institutional profile, institutional issues, and CTL’s operational climate to establish baseline for strategic and tactical planning discussions.

2. Review and assess CTL’s 2010 accomplishments in light of 2010 strategic plan. 3. Evaluate faculty needs assessment data from CTL’s 2010 faculty survey and review the

Provost’s plans for 2011. 4. Study selected, research‐based program planning and development models; identify

concepts, processes and principles in the models that can enhance CTL program effectiveness.

5. Combine findings from data evaluation and program planning models to drive development of goals, objectives and action steps for 2011.

6. Identify innovative methods and strategies for program delivery and evaluation. 7. Aggregate and summarize findings, and determine impacts on CTL strategic plan. 8. Strengthen commitment to teamwork, shared responsibility and mutual respect.

Institutional Profile and Issues and CTL’s Operational Climate

1. UNC Charlotte Institutional Profile ● Rapidly growing urban university with large commuter student population. ● Many students first in family to attend college. ● University in process of transitioning to research institution with emphasis on

becoming a premiere urban research institution ● Although in transition to research institution, teaching remains highly valued;

University faculty care deeply about teaching 2. Institutional Issues

● While transitioning to research institution, University seeks to maintain strong focus on student learning outcomes

● Large reductions in state funding creating serious budget impacts, impacting programs and class size

● Enrollment continues to rise ● SACS reaccreditation process underway ● Enrollment growth, increased class size driving accessibility and other compliance

issues 3. CTL Operational Climate

● Although part of ITS, CTL focuses on instruction (techniques & technologies), and serves a bridging role between instruction and technology.

3

● Currently in process of filling an empty position in instructional team. ● Institutional budget reductions require effective growth and delivery of services with

same personnel, and potentially fewer resources. ● CTL generally well regarded across campus. ● Moodle transition highly successful; rapid growth in breadth and depth of utilization.

Assessment of CTL Accomplishments for 2010

1. Instructional Programs ● CTL events had a strong faculty participation rate: 1367 signups for 250 events over

the course of the year plus an additional 251 faculty 1:1 consultations. The summer “Intensive Week” is the largest single program.

● CTL partnered with 16 different departments on campus to deliver customized programs.

● Innovative formats for programs included video tutorials, webinars, podcasts, blogs, online workshops, roundtables, community of practice websites, classroom observations, and “open swim” sessions.

● Large course redesign continues to be a priority for the university and CTL, with $157K in funds disbursed directly to faculty in 2010 through the Summer Institute and two rounds of Redesign Grants.

● The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning program also disbursed $75K to faculty for SOTL projects, and CTL launched a revamped SOTL website.

● See Appendix A for information and data about specific instructional programs. 2. Technical Systems Performance and Utilization

● Technical systems data show consistent growth in use of CTL supported technologies, with Moodle adoption greatly outstripping all other supported technologies. By December 2010 nearly every UNC Charlotte student used Moodle regularly, and faculty utilization increased by more than 70% over Spring 2010 levels. This development was in keeping with 2010 strategic goals of growing use of learning management systems by faculty.

● Dramatic growth in Moodle usage placed significant strain on existing Moodle infrastructure, and will require reassessment and improvement of environment.

● See Appendix B for information and data about specific technical systems.

Evaluation of Faculty Needs Assessment and Review of Provost’s Goals

4

1. Faculty Needs Assessment Data

● 192 respondents or approx. 14% of all faculty. ● Faculty are overwhelmingly satisfied with CTL programs, with 90‐95% agreement on

each of the following: (a) The information and training provided were useful and relevant, (b) The information and training were easy to integrate into my classroom, (c) The presentation was informative and engaging, (d) The experience was worthwhile.

● Faculty expressed interest in critical thinking and student development issues plus technology based professional development opportunities.

● Faculty are more willing to come to summer events than found in previous needs assessments.

● Workshops, departmental workshops, and downloadable web materials remain the most popular forms of professional development.

● Faculty time and workload commitments hinder participation with CTL. ● See Appendix C for information and summary analysis.

2. Provost 2011 Plans and Implications for CTL ● Provost has established student retention as number one goal. To achieve this goal

the institution must do a number of things: a. Strive to ensure success of freshmen and transfer students; b. Create a new advising system; c. Strengthen and extend the 49er Finish Program (an initiative that systematically

identifies, recruits, and supports students who have stopped out of the university after earning a majority of the credits needed to complete a degree).

● Budget remains an unknown variable, but clearly resource availability will tighten, and institution will see impacts such as the following: a. Increased enrollment but fewer faculty and TAs; b. Increasing number of large enrollment courses; c. More reliance on online and blended strategies to effectively deliver instruction; d. Increased use of eTextbooks and digital content.

● Provost plans impact CTL in a variety of ways: a. Online and Blended strategies, growth in large enrollment courses, and

reductions in faculty and TA numbers place more emphasis on Moodle, Kaltura and other CTL supported technologies for managing and delivering instruction, and require attention to CTL instructional offerings;

b. eTextbooks and digital content require assessment of delivery technologies and standards;

5

c. 49er Finish Program and new advising system will drive tighter integration of Moodle and other class management technologies with student records and other systems;

d. Provost’s goals will drive additional growth in Moodle use, and students will require greater help using Moodle.

Evaluation of Program Planning Models

1. Evaluation of Models (Caffarella, Kotter, Knowles, Beal) ● Caffarella’s “Interactive Model of Program Planning” emphasizes a non‐sequential

planning model comprised of twelve distinct activities and seven basic assumptions. After evaluating the model in brief, CTL found the following most appropriate to CTL planning process: a. Evaluation of context (central to Caffarella model) facilitates clear understanding

of needs and priorities, problems and issues, and opportunities, but proper evaluation of context requires establishment of strong metrics.

b. Implementation of metrics documents results for accountability, drives continuous improvement, and provides a basis for needs‐based, systematic decision‐making.

c. With understanding of needs derived from context, planners can design instructional models and toolsets, build stakeholder buy‐in and construct wider partnerships with the community, but building support and partnerships also requires development of appropriate marketing plans

d. Marketing plans must also include effective communication of value. ● Kotter’s strategic planning model includes some elements found in the Caffarella

model. For instance, it emphasizes continually checking progress, and calls for consensus building and stakeholder buy‐in. The Kotter model also emphasizes embracing the role of change agent in planning. CTL found the following components of Kotter particularly instructive: a. Drive change by development of a sense of urgency. Technology implementation

and retirement can drive sense of urgency. b. Change needs drive planning, but change must be strongly anchored in culture of

institution. So, screen needs through planning unit’s philosophy, feasibility of change, and individual interests, and understand characteristics and demographics of students in the planning process.

6

c. Certain things may be uncontrollable. CTL has no control over state budgets, for example, and rapid changes in technology are outside CTL control. Planning must compensate with flexibility.

d. Maintain sense of urgency with short‐term wins and accomplishments, and communicate the value of these wins.

● Knowles focuses specifically on adult learners, and emphasizes learners as learning resources. Adults are self‐directed and possess extensive reservoirs of shareable experience and knowledge. Adults seek more immediate applications of knowledge, and require learning be tailored to the tasks associated with their social roles. These concepts help CTL understand how to plan technical and instructional delivery systems in a couple of ways: a. Instructional activity should be more targeted to specific need, and should

facilitate collaborative learning among participants; b. Technical systems must facilitate collaborative learning among users.

● Beal incorporates elements of the planning models discussed, and focuses on the following components: a. Using iterative evaluation to build continuous improvement; b. Maintaining awareness of social systems; c. Commitment to action within larger audience, and develop a shared vision with

that audience; d. Develop a plan of action.

2. Possible CTL Activities Arising Out of Discussion of Models: ● Foster a “change becomes norm/inevitable” culture within CTL, and present this

culture externally. ● Continue to convey sense of urgency. Most urgent need now is, given increases in

utilization, to improve Moodle performance. Leverage increases in performance into short‐term win, and implement smaller enhancements on shorter cycle to create additional short‐term wins.

● Evaluate existing evaluation methods and instruments and develop change plans.

Objectives, Methods and Strategies for 2011

1. Develop Creative Marketing Strategies ● Market upwards to senior leadership in order to insure administrative awareness

and buy‐in for CTL program as follows: • Position Moodle as mission critical (using research data to support CTL value) to

administration and faculty, and reinforce and grow the environment.

7

• Collect appropriate metrics and provide these data as appropriate to reinforce criticality of program and build support.

• Make the “elevator pitch” whenever possible. ● Leverage news media including the following outlets:

a. Student newspaper, b. Faculty features in Campus News; c. “Did you know?” on wide screen displays in library; d. Radio spots; e. Online newsletter.

● Develop Teaser/Just‐in‐time/Brief Hybrid Training. Examples include the following: a. 15 minute “drive‐thru” training for faculty; b. A set of brief hybrids that last an hour; c. Department specific BHW’s. d. Video testimonials after workshops ‐‐ BFI

● Perform departmental outreach by a. Conducting 1:1 BHW’s at department meetings across campus; b. Create faculty departmental technology highlights; c. Work with departments to develop showcases; d. Host series of brown bags; e. Conduct demonstrations in academic areas.

● Produce creative media and digital content to reinforce instructional goals and promote CTL program: a. Consider implementing these video tactics using multiple deliver methods (such

as YouTube, iTunesU, Webinar formats, etc): ○ Video micro‐lectures; ○ 30‐min webinars; ○ Captioned slide animations; ○ Vidcasts; ○ Bi‐weekly video in Teaching with Moodle; ○ “Mythbusters” – ripoff video ads; ○ Video testimonials for the CTL web site; ○ Ad hoc Flip camera clips; ○ Develop Database of Videos in Moodle

b. Establish social media feeds in Twitter, Facebook and other social networks.

2. Improve Moodle Tool Set to Encourage Deeper Adoption

8

• Moodle usage broad, but shallow, characterized by use of forum, quizzing, syllabus, and grade book.

• Deeper adoption includes use of other plug‐ins and video. Encourage deeper adoption using the following approaches: a. Harvest low hanging enhancements fruit (labels, choice, scheduler, attendance,

etc.). b. Then attack other issues (lesson, video, use of digital content, group grading). c. Continue

3. Pursue Workshop Innovations to Increase Workshop Attendance, Applicability • Connect signups to Outlook to insure reminders and a spot on individual calendars. • Continue use of strategic workshops. • Develop department‐specific workshops based on departmental needs. • Engage in creative marketing per strategies outlined earlier. • Consider BHW during departmental meetings. • Group multiple topics into one workshop. • Develop shifted schedules for workshops to provide more attendance opportunities. • Develop a structured workshop process that might include the following:

a. Develop set of “Prerequisites” for CTL workshops; b. Create faculty readiness workshops/quiz; c. Implement a “train the trainer program” for Moodle and other CTL‐supported

technologies and instructional programs, and create an instructor certification process that includes some reward;

d. Consider a Quality Matters style certificate with rewards; e. Include awards/recognition for prof. development/completing workshops; f. Develop “Tip of the Day” notifications and allow subscriptions; g. Create informal roundtables with set discussion topics (For example: “Exploding

myths”/How to deal with student issues e.g. effectiveness of punishment).

Increase Collaboration and Awareness

1. Increase Faculty Collaboration • Form faculty partnerships that might include the following:

a. Faculty expert‐led training sessions and workshops; b. Workshops developed and presented jointly with faculty; c. Teaching circles led by faculty; d. Book discussion groups on current themes (led by faculty and/or CTL staff

members);

9

e. Campus‐wide presentations led by faculty and/or CTL staff members; f. Use graduate assistants to lead sessions; g. Create a one week exchange program with other institutions; h. Increase one‐on‐one consultations on a specific topics and skills, and possibly

engage faculty to consult with one another. 2. Improve Collaboration with Campus and Community

• Cultivate a stronger partnership with Atkins Library • Engage in department level workshops. • Develop a group of liaisons with specific department and programs. • Consider developing a series of conferences that might include the following:

a. Technology showcases; b. On‐campus teaching conference or teaching with technology conference; c. A CTL conference hosting multiple sessions at once;

• Regenerate interest in SOTL a. Market the importance of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning; b. Tell faculty about benefits of SOTL research, and increase faculty awareness of

what they don’t know; c. Identify weaknesses in faculty pedagogy and tools; d. Work with departments or colleges to identify issues for research topics; e. Promote SOTL at department level: Research about D/W/F rates, and give

internal awards for incorporating into instruction; f. Seek SOTL proposals at end of workshops; g. Use SOTL to improve course development through the following:

i. Course development competitions; ii. New example courses;

iii. Year‐long program with new faculty on a wide range of topics to help them get adjusted;

iv. Incentives for faculty, including TLT awards, and contests and awards for best new tech ideas.

• Engage more fully with community: a. Focus on engagement with Charlotte‐Mecklenburg Schools and Math and

Science Centers b. Develop “pair and share” (Kingston, NCSU);

Improve Support Processes

1. Improve resolution success rate for tier 1

10

• Reorient support culture to stress that support not about answering questions, but about insuring faculty and students get things in a timely manner

• Conduct tier 1 training training • Develop a saner metric on time to answer, by showing how affects students,

instructors, class as whole • Analyze Helpdesk tickets for main details issue analysis feed into project election

Provide Effective Academic Technologies

1. Convey mission critical nature of Moodle and redesign Tech Infrastructure for improved performance and reliability

2. Expand support of Mobile devices 3. Complete Accessibility/Compliance remediation 4. Research and implement new technologies wherever appropriate

Gathering and Assimilating Data

1. Capturing Data • Pursue the following feedback gathering strategies:

a. Utilize surveys and polling to determine Moodle satisfaction, function, usability, feature additions.

b. Conduct surveys at certain points in semester. c. Utilize simple 2‐question survey for all workshops, and use just‐in‐time”

evaluations on “just‐in‐time” deliveries. Make surveys short and easy, and consider prizes for filling out evaluations.

d. Use the following tools and instruments: i. SurveyShare ii. Survey Monkey iii. Online Polls iv. For/Text to text message polling v. Did you find this tutorial helpful? Yes/no vi. “Like” on Facebook vii. Digital comment box viii. Focus Groups and Interviews (by groups, faculty, departments)

moderated by faculty moderators ix. Phone survey 5 minutes x. Telephone interviews xi. Follow‐up calls

11

xii. 1:1 with Deans xiii. Focus groups with students xiv. Follow‐up brownbags xv. Go around the room – one thing you’ve learned from workshop

e. Conduct reviews as follows: i. External evaluators ii. Internal Reviews iii. Team of student tech evaluators (similar to Moodle CE) iv. Testimonials, including video testimonials from students and student

journal about online experience f. Regularly Examine and Evaluate Log Data:

i. Use log data to reach students ii. Teaching with Wimba, Moodle web analytics iii. CTL Website analytics

g. Conduct regular trends research: i. Search trends ii. Conduct video research (informal testimonials) iii. Consider execution of a Longitudinal Studies including:

1. Quantitative Methods/survey before and after – longitudinal 2. Longitudinal study of students (4 year period) or own “NSSE” 3. Longitudinal study of faculty over 5 year period

h. Analyze Data i. Develop strategy for project management and data analysis ii. Match objectives to outcomes iii. Correlate student satisfaction and/or achievement w/faculty workshop

attendance iv. Create a set of benchmarks using industry standards/benchmarks (other

schools) i. Report Data

i. Compile impact updates that include weekly statistics, including use of Moodle Tools and course activities

ii. Line Scores/Performance Reporting iii. Develop a scoreboard/dashboard on login screen iv. Consider delivering reports on iPhone/iPad “Roambi” v. Improve longitudinal reporting vi. Conduct peer review

j. Make Data‐Driven Decisions i. ID topics and methods for faculty development

12

ii. Look at match between topics and appropriate methods. Look at relationships among topics to create “new” workshops

iii. Expectations written out at beginning of workshop iv. Use performance data to set baselines and establish specific performance

goals such as “by 2013 we will have…” v. Finding measures for program success

Improve Student Outreach and Preparedness (Without Mission Creep)

1. Improve Student Support • Develop online student orientation • Create “open swim” for students • Develop student “drive‐thrus (15min)” and take them to different buildings for

execution. • Assess Student Preparedness using the following potential methods:

a. Smarter Measure b. Focused assessment sessions c. Student tech skills/preparation/retention modules in Moodle d. Measure skill sets by developing internal competency assessment, Student

readiness quiz/workshop; use to identify learning needs e. Execute readiness pre and post tests f. Create Readiness Surveys g. Perform Outcomes assessment reporting (Moodle)

2. Improve and Expand Student Resources and Training • Pursue JIT learning • Explore creating a Learning With Moodle online course • Complete SOAR integration with Moodle • Expand support of Mobile devices • Improve student training modules and provide to faculty for inclusion in course • Create a Moodle “quick start” guide for students (hard copy laminated index card,

etc), and extend to faculty in form of Job aids for faculty/students (laminated quick start, etc.)

• Create a system of “Tips” for students: Student tip‐of‐day, “tips” that any faculty can add to online, BHW podcasts for students, IGame…w/winner

• Expand or establish partnerships with student‐focused departments: a. SOAR b. Student Computing

13

c. GTAs, DE, UCAE, OASES,WRC d. Connect advising system to Moodle to generate at risk student e. University College – Freshman Seminar f. Education dept. graduate student projects

• Consider new methods of Student and Campus Outreach: a. Targeting freshmen (to use LMS better) b. Flash mob c. Moodle Day d. Improvements in Mobile Access e. Student outreach pizza lunches f. Student on CTL Advisory Council

Revisions to Mission Statement (To Be Determined) ● A separate “word‐smithing” team was suggested to revise this. ● Possible statement elements:

○ “Our mission is to ensure teaching excellence in UNC Charlotte faculty and maximize learning in our students.”

○ “To ensure teaching excellence and maximize student learning” ○ “Committed to teaching excellence in our faculty to ensure our student learning”

Revision of the Strategic Plan Goals and Objectives:

1. Provide professional development opportunities for faculty and graduate teaching assistants. Examples would include: Regularly scheduled and customized interactive workshops Online, self‐paced instructional materials Individual, group consultations Web based events such as podcasts and webinars Faculty showcases Summer Institute New Faculty / Summer Intensive Week Just‐in‐time, five‐minute workshops Roundtables and other informal gatherings Fundamentals of College Teaching for TAs

14

Classroom/peer observations Faculty award nominee roundtable series Large course redesign Mini‐conferences and symposia

2. Engage faculty in teaching excellence in traditional, online, and blended pedagogy to

enhance student learning.

Research, evaluate, and communicate best practices in teaching and learning Identify and develop priority programs that will impact faculty development and

student learning Promote accessibility as a best practice in all teaching venues. Provide and maintain scholarly resources in support of best practices, including the

CTL Professional Development Library Share information from professional journals, online resources with faculty and

instructional staff on innovation in teaching and learning Create venues to collaborate with faculty, staff, and peers to identify emerging

technologies and evaluate their instructional applications, costs, and benefits.

3. Develop and expand the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SOTL) grants program.

Administer SOTL Grants process with faculty SOTL Committee Create venues for sharing teaching research on campus Provide Web and print resources in support of SOTL Collaborate with faculty in SOTL activities, such as negotiating IRB process and

budgets, writing grant proposals, and presenting at conferences

4. Identify, develop, and sustain enterprise level instructional technology systems.

Improve and expand transparent, faculty‐driven, Moodle enhancement process Ensure stable and reliable user experience for all platforms Secure adequate resources for technical sustainability, based on projected growth

and capacity data Build and maintain benchmark requirements for vendors and ITS to ensure optimum

system reliability and performance Explore options for transitioning current Opscan center to online course evaluation

system Establish the scope of support for research and administrative uses of instructional

technologies

5. Collaborate with campus constituents to support the university’s strategic teaching and learning initiatives.

15

Identify programs, tools, and services that support constituents’ teaching and learning needs.

Partner with colleges and departments to develop specialized programs and resources

Maintain a faculty advisory group to support the work of the Center and collaborate with distributed IT staff within colleges and other units

Create and maintain interest groups for teaching and learning initiatives such as professional learning communities

Collect and analyze data for planning future programs and evaluating existing programs

Streamline methods for clients to reach help/support resources

16

Appendix A: Instructional Programs Data – 2010 Calendar Year Summary Workshop Totals

• 1367 Faculty Signups • 250 Workshops

Workshop Breakdown

• 110 Moodle Related – several levels o Teaching With Moodle o Moodle Open Swim o Advanced Moodle Workshops

• 44 Wimba Related • 43 Other Technologies

o Smart Podium o Web 2.0 o SurveyShare o Clickers o Video

• 53 Classroom Pedagogy o Active Learning o Lecture & Discussion o Assessment o Fundamentals o Student Issues

New Faculty Intensive Week [August, Back to School Event]

• 192 Signups • 21 Workshops

Customized Departmental Programs [16 Different Departments, *Multiple Events]

• Atkins Library/ Reference Librarians* • American Studies* • Bioinformatics • Engineering GTAs • CLAS* • Counseling Ed • Charlotte Teachers Institute* • Distance Ed* • Fulbright Scholars

17

• GAANN* • Graduate School* • International Programs* • Language and Culture Studies* • Language Resource Center* • Multicultural Academic Services/ University Center for Academic Excellence* • Women's and Gender Studies

New Formats in Instructional Programs/Professional Development Opportunities

• Summer Institute ‐ Team Concept • Roundtables (5) • Online Workshops/Webinars (39) • Podcasts (21) • Blog Posts (84) • Open Swim (38) • Video Tutorials (15+) • Self‐led instruction/documentation (CTL site and Moodle) • Community of Practice sites • Classroom Observations

Tier I Escalations to Consultations [i.e., only those that were initiated at Help Desk]

• 251 Total • Moodle: 51% • Wimba: 32% • Clickers: 8% • Bb Vista: 4% • Web 2.0: 2% • Smart Podium: 2% • Other (Respondus, Panopto, Google Apps): 2%

Large Course Redesign Program

• Summer Institute – 11 teams • Round I Grants – 10 teams, $50K • Round II Grants – 3 teams, $83K • 3 New Redesign Projects

o Physics o Chemistry o Psychology

• Community of Practice Site in Moodle Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SOTL) Program

• 12 Grant Applications

18

• 9 Funded for $75K • New, Comprehensive SOTL Website

o Intro/Examples/Resources o What is SOTL? o Grants o Abstracts of past winners + links to full proposals (PDF) o Journals

19

Appendix B -- CTL Technology Usage

Number of Faculty and Courses in Moodle Fall 2010 Statistic Spring 2010 Fall 2010 Increase

Total courses (all courses created in Moodle) 5,620 6,065 445

Courses available to students (41.8% of created courses are active; 75% increase since Spring 2010) 1071 2272 1201

Total instructors (All instructors are enrolled automatically in Moodle) 1,474 1,605 131

Active Instructors or instructors in courses available to students (39.8% of all instructors enrolled active in Spring; 64.5% of all instructors enrolled active in Fall)

586 1035 449

Total students 23,396 24,790 23,396

Students in courses available to students (72% of all enrolled students active in Spring; 88.9% of enrolled students active in Fall)

17004 22048 5044

Unique Users and Peak Usage in Moodle As of Fall 2010

Statistic Spring 2010 Fall 2010 Increase

Total unique users 21,105 26,363 5,258

Peak daily usage ‐ unique users 10,078 14,935 4,857

Peak daily usage ‐ discrete activities 193,962 311,581 117,619

Average daily activities per user 15.9 17.8 1.9

Moodle Adoption Rates by College ‐ Fall 2010

College Courses

available to students

Total courses Courses

available to students

Academic Services 6 (33.3%) 18 6 (33.3%)

College of Arts and Architecture 104 (21.6%) 482 104 (21.6%)

College of Business 106 (35.3%) 300 106 (35.3%)

College of Computing and Informatics 64 (19.2%) 333 64 (19.2%)

College of Education 177 (39.4%) 449 177 (39.4%)

College of Engineering 167 (22.0%) 759 167 (22.0%)

College of Health and Human Services 151 (46.7%) 323 151 (46.7%)

College of Liberal Arts and Sciences 785 (29.6%) 2,649 785 (29.6%)

Counseling and Health Services 2 (7.1%) 28 2 (7.1%)

Graduate School 1 (33.3%) 3 1 (33.3%)

University College 33 (54.1%) 61 33 (54.1%)

Combined courses (unknown dept/college) 280 (42.4%) 660 280 (42.4%)

20

Total 1,876 (30.9%) 6,065 1,876 (30.9%)

Other Technologies Fall 2010 (Kaltura Numbers Not Included)

Survey Share Accounts Other software

Total Number of Free (No Cost) Accounts 56 TurnItin 58

Total Number of Pro Accounts 350

Respondus (Not Lockdown Browser) 68

New Requests In 2010 85 Blackboard 208

Camtasia

Studio

Available Free (No Cost) Accounts 755 Clickers

Availabile Pro Accounts 107 Google

Apps

Wimba Opscan**

Total Active Rooms 1210 Number of

Scan Jobs 1462

Moodle Rooms 854 Number of

Sheets Run 154750

Faculty/Staff Rooms 236 Course Evals 16

Blackboard Rooms 55 Unique

Users

Student Rooms (Fac/Staff Sponsored): 42

Other 23

**Data only avail for 1/1 to 4/6 and

8/24 to

12/6

WEBSITE STATS Tech Team Documentation

Total Number of Pages Generated 434 FAQS 40

Videos 3

WEBSITE CONTENT HIGHLIGHTS Moodle How‐Tos 14

CTL BLOG 75

FAQS 63

WORKSHOPS 139

MOODLE HOW‐TO 17

PODCASTS 21

21

Appendix C: 2010 Faculty Needs Assessment 192 respondents or approx. 14% of all faculty Confidence interval approx. ±4 to ±7 Representative sample: respondents came from all colleges, ranks, yrs of experience Average Completion Time = 11 Minutes, 33 Seconds

1) What is your position? Response Ratio

Professor 16%

Associate Professor 23%

Assistant Professor 19%

Clinical Professor 3%

Lecturer 25%

Adjunct 14% Key Point

• 25% lecturers + 14% adjuncts = lots of respondents with teaching as primary role

3) How many years have you been teaching?

Response Ratio

0-2 10%

3-5 17%

6-10 15%

11-15 19%

16-20 10%

21+ 28%

4) How many years have you been teaching at UNC Charlotte?

Response

Ratio

0-2 20 %

3-5 25%

6-10 21%

11-15 9 %

16-20 9%

20+ 15%

Key Points

• Good spread • Many in late career • Time at institution shorter than time teaching • Almost half have been here for 5 yrs or less

22

23

5) Before arriving at UNC Charlotte, did you receive any formal training for college level teaching? (Please check all that apply.)

Response Ratio

Yes, as a teaching assistant. 50 %

Yes, as a faculty member. 22%

Yes, as a graduate student with no teaching duties. 13%

No, I have not had training for teaching at any level. 22%

No, but I have had training for teaching K-12. 12%

Other 14%

Key Point

• 21% had no form of teacher training at all

6) In which of the following semesters have you used resources from or attended training with the Center for Teaching and Learning? (Please check all that apply.)

Response Ratio

I have no experience with the Center for Teaching and Learning. 24%

Fall 2010 33%

Summer 2010 20%

Spring 2010 35%

Fall 2009 35%

Summer 2009 19%

Spring 2009 27%

2008-2009 School Year 32%

2007-2008 School Year 24%

Prior to 2007 Fall Semester 26%

1 Respondent Skipped question #6 99 %

Key Points • 25% have no experience with us • 33% have been here this Fall • Experienced users go way back • Repeat customers are the norm

24

7) How satisfied were you with the following aspects of your experience with the Center for Teaching and Learning? Please rate only aspects that are applicable to your experience.

Responses

Agree (Strongly/Slightly)

Disagree (Slightly/Strongly)

The information and training provided were useful and relevant.

95% 5%

The information and training were easy to integrate into my classroom. 94% 6%

The presentation was informative and engaging. 91% 9%

The materials offered a clear summary of current research on the topic.

81% 19%

The experience was worthwhile. 94% 6%

Totals 91% 9%

45 Respondents Skipped question #7 138 Responses Total

Key Points

• Faculty are overwhelmingly satisfied with their experiences with CTL • Current research is up from last time by nearly 10% [note: question doesn’t ask if

they want current research, only if it was provided] • Common likes:

o Hands on o The staff o 1:1 experiences o Hearing from colleagues in other depts. o Departmental sessions

• Requests: o Want to contact CTL w/o going through Help Desk

• Same comments reiterated in other open ended areas

25

9) Rate your interest in receiving more information and training about the following instructional methods. (Please check all that apply.)

Responses

Currently Using

Interested in Using

Would Attend Workshop

Unsure/Need More Information

Not Interested

Effective Lecturing Techniques 20% (35) 22% (38) 31% (55) 17% (30) 23% (41)

Facilitating Classroom Discussion 26% (45) 18% (31) 29% (51) 16% (28) 21% (37)

Collaborative Learning 18% (31) 16% (29) 28% (49) 20% (35) 21% (37)

Designing and Assessing Projects 12% (21) 19% (33) 29% (51) 15% (27) 25% (44)

Using Portfolios for Assessment 7 % (13) 14% (25) 19% (34) 13% (23) 41% (72)

Teaching Fully Online Courses 12% (21) 22% (38) 29% (51) 7% (13) 30% (53)

Engaging Large Classes 15% (26) 14% (25) 24% (42) 9% (16) 35% (62)

Problem Based Learning 12% (21) 19 % (34) 30% (53) 18% (32) 19% (33)

Incorporating Peer Review 16% (28) 15% (27) 25% (44) 16% (29) 26% (45)

Active Learning Techniques 24% (42) 21% (37) 38% (66) 12% (21) 14% (25)

Teaching Blended/Hybrid Courses 14% (25) 22% (38) 38% (66) 12% (21) 23% (41)

Totals 15% (308)

18% (355) 28% (562) 14% (275) 25% (490)


Key Points

• Response for “Would attend Workshop” is very good; over 25% in all but one category

• Active Learning remains high at 38% • Hybrid/blended also high at 38% • “Not interested” peaks with “Using Portfolios” at 41%, but there is still an

audience

26

11) Please indicate your familiarity with and interest in the following web-based instructional and technological media. (Please check all that apply.)

Responses

Successfully Using

Need Technological Help

Need Pedagogical Help



Not Interested

Moodle 59% (106) 21% (38) 11% (19) 20% (37) 5% (9) 7% (12)

Incorporating Wikis 7% (12) 21% (38) 13% (23) 24 % (44) 15% (28) 31% (56)

Managing Blogs 4% (7) 19% (34) 12% (22) 19% (35) 14% (25) 40% (72)

Creating Podcasts 4% (7) 24% (43) 12% (21) 25% (46) 12% (22) 36% (65)

Creating a Course Website 25% (46) 22% (40) 6% (10) 28% (51) 8% (15) 18% (33)

Posting Course Notes Online 40% (72) 12% (22) 3% (5) 11% (20) 8% (14) 24% (43)

Social Networking 8% (15) 8% (15) 7 % (13) 15% (27) 15% (27) 44 % (80)

Online Teaching 17% (31) 15% (28) 9% (16) 27% (48) 11% (19) 29% (52)

Web 2.0 Tools 9% (16) 14% (25) 7% (12) 22% (40) 24% (44) 24% (44)

Totals 18% (312) 16% (283) 8% (141) 20% (348) 12% (203) 26%

(457)

Key Points • Most successful technology tool is Moodle. • Somewhat more lukewarm about these tools, overall, than techniques in

prev. Q. • Interesting: would attend workshops on wikis and podcasts (but this

doesn’t match experience) • “Course website” could be a marketing angle: “Using Moodle as Your

Course Website”

27

• “Not interested” peaks with Blogs and Social Networking at 40-44%, but there is still an audience

28

12) Please indicate your familiarity with and interest in the following instructional and technological media. (Please check all that apply.)

Responses

Successfully Using

Need Technological Help

Need Pedagogical Help



Not Interested

Clickers 10% (18) 17% (30) 9% (16) 24% (43) 13% (24) 37% (67)

Smart Podium 72% (128) 9% (16) 4% (7) 12% (22) 4% (7) 8% (14)

Creating and/or Using Video

27 % (49) 23% (41) 6% (10) 25% (45) 10% (18) 23% (42)

Using Screen Capture 23% (42) 18% (32) 3% (6) 21% (38) 20% (35) 17% (31)

Using Anti-Plagiarism Tools 13% (24) 22% (40) 6% (11) 30% (55) 16% (29) 17% (30)

Using Lecture Capture 5% (9) 20% (36) 6% (10) 26% (46) 27% (49) 21% (37)

Web Conferencing with Wimba 9% (16) 19% (34) 6% (11) 23% (42) 15% (27) 31% (55)

Mobile Devices 4 % (8) 11% (19) 6% (11) 22% (39) 27% (48) 33% (60)

Totals 18% (314) 16% (283) 5% (93) 23% (391) 16% (269) 22% (374)

4 Respondents Skipped question #12

179 Responses Total

Key Points

• Most successful technology tool is the Smart Podium with 72% (and few would attend a workshop about it).

• “Not interested” peaks with Clickers and Mobile Devices at 34-37% [students may disagree?]

• “Need pedagogical help” on Q. 11, 12 is low across the board with 5-8% avg.

29

13) Would you attend a seminar that gives an overview of technological tools available and possible ways to incorporate them into your classroom?

Number of Respondents

Response Ratio

Yes 146 81%

No 34 19%

Key Points • This seems incredibly positive. • Marketing would be key. • “Seminar”? Maybe creative formats could be called for.

14) Do you feel your students are adequately trained to use instructional media and technology such as Moodle? [Student Train]


Response Ratio

Yes 105 58%

No 75 42%

3 Respondents Skipped question #14 180 Responses Total 98%

Key Points • Moodle has made a huge impact: two years ago, under the BB regime,

these numbers were flip-flopped, exactly: 58% NO and 42% YES. • Watch this over time for trend to continue. • Speaks to ease of use of Moodle, student characteristics, and our efforts in

these areas.

17) How interested are you in receiving training in the following aspects of test construction?

Responses

Very Interested

Somewhat Interested

Not Interested Totals

Constructing an Effective Test 22% (40) 29% (52) 49% (88) 180

Writing and Grading Essay Tests 18% (32) 28% (49) 54% (96) 177

Writing Effective Objective Tests 20% (35) 29% (52) 51% (91) 178

Totals 20% (107) 29% (153) 51% (275) 535

Key Point • Data skew towards being less interested in assessment, but there is an

audience.

30

18) Are you interested in receiving training in the following areas regarding the assessment of student learning?

Responses

Very Interested

Somewhat Interested


Grading Group Work 27% (47) 34% (60) 39% (68) 175

Giving Constructive Criticism 27% (48) 33% (57) 40% (70) 175

Assessing Student Portfolios 16% (28) 27% (47) 57% (98) 173

Using Informal Assessments 17% (29) 41% (71) 42% (73) 173

Gathering Student Feedback 27% (46) 38% (66) 35% (60) 172

Totals 23% (198) 35% (301) 43% (369) 868


Key Points • Strongest interest in grading group work, giving constructive criticism. • Data skew towards being less interested in assessment, but there is an

audience. • Portfolios seem to evoke strong negatives.

19) Are you interested in training related to the following aspects of planning your course and objectives?

Responses

Very Interested

Somewhat Interested


Creating and Using Rubrics 27% (47) 35% (60) 38% (66) 173

Developing Goals and Objectives 16% (28) 31% (53) 52% (89) 170

Designing a Course and Syllabus 15% (26) 27% (47) 58% (99) 172

Clarifying Expectations 19% (32) 36% (63) 45% (78) 173

Using Student Feedback to Make Changes 20% (34) 39% (67) 41% (71) 172

Totals 19% (167) 34% (290) 47% (403) 860


Key Points

• Rubrics are most popular

31

• Overall, same as above—some audience but skews towards less interest

32

21) How interested are you in receiving additional training to help you support your students in the following areas?

Responses

Very Interested

Somewhat Interested


Increasing Academic Integrity 37% (63) 37% (63) 25% (43) 169

Developing Students' Professionalism 46% (79) 37% (64) 17% (29) 172

Assisting Underprepared Students 50% (85) 31% (53) 19% (32) 170

Improving Critical Thinking Skills 57% (98) 29% (51) 14% (24) 173

Improving Writing Skills 50% (85) 30% (52) 20% (34) 171

Promoting Classroom Civility 27% (46) 30% (51) 43% (72) 169

Managing Disruptive Students 20% (34) 31% (51) 49% (82) 167

Engaging Diverse Learning Styles 32% (55) 38% (66) 30% (51) 172

Motivating Students to Complete Readings 40% (67) 31% (52) 30% (50) 169

Motivating Students to Attend Class 27% (44) 32% (53) 41% (68) 165

Managing Large Classes 25% (42) 24% (40) 51% (85) 167

Helping Students Be Successful Online Learners 29% (48) 31% (51) 40% (65) 164

Totals 37% (746) 32% (647) 31% (635) 2028


Key Points • Mixed bag, but helping faculty develop students seems to have decent

support. • Improving critical thinking skills is big. • Support for writing skills and underprepared students: we are not in a

position to directly impact these two, but an opportunity may exist for us to partner with UCAE.

• Disruptive students and managing large classes garnered largest negatives.

33

23) To what extent are you currently aware of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SOTL) research (i.e., gathering evidence about student learning in your classes and reporting/publishing the findings for peer review)? (Please check all that apply.)

Number of

Respondents

Response Ratio

I am aware of SOTL research. 65 45%

I am interested in learning more. 65 45%

I would attend campus events that highlighted this type of research. 43 29%

I have engaged in it myself. 22 15%

I am considering conducting this kind of research within the next 12-24 months. 16 11%

I think researching best practices in teaching in my discipline is valuable to me. 59 40%

I think researching best practices in teaching in my discipline is valuable to UNC Charlotte. 63 43%


Key Points • Awareness is up almost 10%. • Value questions are down 10%.

24) I would like additional support in the following areas: (Please check all that apply.)

Number of

Respondents

Response Ratio

Conducting Teaching and Learning Research 54 69%

Publishing Teaching and Learning Research 42 54%

Venues for Sharing Teaching and Learning Research with Others on Campus 36 46%

Going Through the Institutional Review Board Process 16 21%


Key Points • Only 43% even answered this question. • Raw numbers show an audience for how to conduct SOTL research,

including publishing and sharing.

34

25) I am interested in using the following methods to improve my teaching:


Response Ratio

Classroom Observations OF Peers 50 49%

Classroom Observations BY Peers 49 48%

Informal Roundtable Discussion 70 68%

Informal Personal Review 43 42%


Key Points • Only 56% answered this question. • Raw numbers show an audience for how observations, roundtables. • Informal roundtables are called for.

27) When would you prefer to attend professional development events? (Check all that apply.)

Responses

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Totals

8:00 am - 10:00 am 18% (28) 17% (27) 14% (23) 19% (30) 18% (28) 5% (8) 144

10:00 am - 12:00 pm 28% (45) 28% (44) 29% (46) 30% (47) 28% (45) 6% (9) 236

12:00 pm - 2:00 pm 28% (45) 28% (45) 26% (42) 30% (47) 24% (38) 5% (8) 225

2:00 pm - 5:00 pm 23% (36) 26% (41) 24% (38) 27% (43) 21% (33) 4% (6) 197

5:00 pm - 7:00 pm 13% (20) 14% (22) 11% (18) 14% (22) 8% (12) 3% (5) 99

Totals 19% (174) 20% (179) 19% (167) 21% (189) 17% (156) 4% (36) 901


Key Points • 10:00-5:00 is most popular. • Numbers show some support for early AM and late PM. • Monday and Friday are just as popular as any other day.

35

28) What is your preferred length for professional development opportunities?

Responses

Very Interested

Somewhat Interested


60-75 Minutes 78% (120) 18% (27) 4% (6) 153

75-90 Minutes 30% (43) 51% (74) 19% (28) 145

90-120 Minutes 15% (20) 36% (48) 48% (64) 132

Half Day 16% (23) 31% (43) 53% (74) 140

Full Day 4% (5) 17% (21) 79% (97) 123

Weekend Retreat 2% (3) 17% (21) 80% (99) 123

Online Tutorials (pre-recorded) 41% (56) 36% (50) 23% (32) 138

15-30 Minute Single Topic Webinars 43% (58) 33% (44) 24% (32) 134

Totals 30% (328) 30% (328) 40% (432) 1088


Key Points • Workshops need to remain about an hour. • Faculty are very interested in short webinars. • Very interested in quick, self-paced instructional workshops that they can

do on their own time. • Look at the raw numbers for half-day. Could be a new thing for us.

Summer? Explore this.

29) In which of the following semesters are you most likely to take advantage of professional development opportunities?

Responses

Most Likely

Somewhat Likely

Least Likely Totals

Summer 51% (76) 21% (31) 28%

(42) 149

Fall 38% (59) 46% (72)

15% (24) 155

Spring 47% (76) 43% (70) 9% (15) 161

36

Key Points • Summer is up by 10%.

37

30) Professional development can take many forms. In which of the following are you likely to participate?

Responses

Very Interested

Somewhat Interested

Not Interested

Individual Consultation 32% (48) 45% (67) 23% (35)

Informal Classroom Observations with Feedback 22% (32) 35% (50) 43% (61)

Small Group Activities 19% (27) 45% (65) 36% (51)

Workshops 46% (74) 41% (66) 13% (20)

Customized Departmental Workshops 42% (65) 35% (54) 23% (35)

Product Demonstrations 27% (41) 40% (60) 33% (49)

Peer Demonstrations 30% (44) 43% (63) 27% (39)

Weekend Institutes/Retreats 7% (10) 21% (30) 73% (106)

Web-Based Resources (Downloadable Materials) 40% (61) 41% (62) 19% (28)

Web-Based Discussion Groups with Faculty 18% (27) 35% (52) 46% (68)

Informal Discussions with Colleagues 33% (49) 55% (82) 13% (19)

Structured Discussions Focused around a Topic 35% (52) 48% (71) 17% (26)

Guest Presenters 34% (51) 46% (69) 21% (31)

Lecture Series 24% (35) 40% (59) 36% (53)

Online Tutorials 41% (63) 39% (60) 20% (30)

Webinars 37% (55) 31% (46) 33% (49)

Totals 31% (734) 40% (956) 29% (700)


Key Points • Workshops were most popular at 46%. • Dept. workshops were second at 42%. • Web-based materials and tutorials are also very popular – 40-41%. • Other innovative approaches seem to have somewhat more moderate

support.

33) Whatthat prevprofessioopportunTeaching

Limited T

Workload

Time of E

Location

Lack of NEvents/S

Lack of SChairs, DAdminist

Lack of R

Lack of N

9 Respon

Key Poin• T• L

35) Whatcampus e

Larg

Key Poin• E

t are some ovent you fromonal developnities with theg and Learni

Time

d

Events

of Events

Notification aServices

Support fromDeans, or Upration

Relevant Top

Need for Ser

ndents Skipp

nts Time, worklLocation, m

t is the best events? (Ch

Cent

Paper F

Cam

ge LCD Disp

nt: Email is kin

of the barrierm participatinpment e Center for ng?

about

m Departmenpper

pics

rvices

ped question

load are bimarketing,

way to inforheck all that

Email

ter Website

Flyers/Poste

mpus News

plays Aroun

ng. How ca

rs ng in

Resp

ProhPartic

27%

24%

11%

5% (7

7% (

nt 3% (5

7% (

5% (8

n #33

iggest issurelevance

rm you abouapply.) [Info

ers

nd Campus

an we leve

ponses

ibits cipation

StHiPa

(47) 57

(40) 57

(18) 34

7) 10

11) 9%

5) 9%

11) 9%

8) 16

ues at 81-8are not iss

t rm] Num

erage this?

trongly inders articipation

7% (98)

7% (95)

4% (55)

0% (16)

% (14)

% (13)

% (13)

6% (23)

174 Re

84%. sues.

mber of Resp

173

21

8

17

18

?

Slightly Hinders Participatio

14% (24)

17% (28)

47% (77)

24% (37)

27% (41)

10% (15)

42% (64)

28% (41)

esponses To

pondents

on

Has no Effect onParticipa

2% (4)

3% (5)

9% (14)

61% (93

56% (85

78% (11

42% (63

51% (75

otal

Response

99%

12%

5%

10%

10%

38

n ation

Total

173

168

164

3) 153

5) 151

17) 150

3) 151

5) 147

e Ratio

%

%

%

%

s

39

Two Summaries: Topics and Formats Topic Would Attend / Very InterestedImproving Critical Thinking Skills 57% (98) Assisting Underprepared Students 50% (85) Improving Writing Skills 50% (85) Developing Students' Professionalism 46% (79) Motivating Students to Complete Readings 40% (67) Active Learning Techniques 38%(66) Teaching Blended/Hybrid Courses 38%(66) Increasing Academic Integrity 37% (63) Conducting Teaching and Learning Research (SOTL) 34% (58) Engaging Diverse Learning Styles 32% (55) Effective Lecturing Techniques 31%(55) Using Anti-Plagiarism Tools 31%(55) Problem Based Learning 30%(53) Facilitating Classroom Discussion 29%(51) Designing and Assessing Projects 29%(51) Online Teaching 29%(51) Helping Students Be Successful Online Learners 29% (50) Promoting Classroom Civility 28% (49) Collaborative Learning 28%(49) Creating a Course Website 28%(51) Giving Constructive Criticism 28% (49) Grading Group Work 27% (49) Creating and Using Rubrics 27% (49) Gathering Student Feedback 27% (48) Motivating Students to Attend Class 27% (47) Using Lecture Capture 26%(46) Creating Podcasts 25%(46) Capturing and Using Video 25%(45) Managing Large Classes 25% (44) Incorporating Peer Review 25%(44) Engaging Large Classes 24%(42) Incorporating Wikis 24%(44) Clickers 24%(43) Web Conferencing with Wimba 23%(42) Mobile Devices 22%(39) Web 2.0 Tools 22%(40) Constructing an Effective Test 22% (40) Moodle 21%(39) Using Screen Capture 21%(38) Managing Disruptive Students 21% (37) Writing Effective Objective Tests 20% (35)

40

Managing Blogs 19%(35) Using Portfolios for Assessment 19%(34) Clarifying Expectations 18% (33) Writing and Grading Essay Tests 18% (32) Developing Goals and Objectives 16% (28) Designing a Course Syllabus 16% (28) Social Networking 15%(27) Smart Podium 12%(22) Posting Course Notes Online 11%(20) Methods “Very Interested” Workshops 46% (74) Informal Roundtable Discussion 44% (70) Customized Departmental Workshops 42% (65) Online Tutorials 41% (63) Web-Based Resources (Downloadable Materials)

40% (61)

Webinars 37% (55) Structured Discussions Focused around a Topic 35% (52) Guest Presenters 34% (51) Classroom Observations OF Peers 33% (50) Informal Discussions with Colleagues 33% (49) Classroom Observations BY Peers 33% (49) Individual Consultation 32% (48) Peer Demonstrations 30% (44) Product Demonstrations 27% (41) Lecture Series 24% (35) Informal Classroom Observations with Feedback 22% (32) Small Group Activities 19% (27) Web-Based Discussion Groups with Faculty 18% (27) Weekend Institutes/Retreats 7% (10)

Documents

Center for Teaching and Learning 2010 Staff Retreat Report · 2011. 10. 19. · Center for Teaching and Learning 2010 Staff Retreat Report The Center for Teaching and Learning conducted