Proposal for the Establishment, Elimination, Or Alteration of Academic Units

Proposal for Creation, Elimination, or Alteration of Academic Units

Answer the appropriate questions below to eliminate or shrink a unit:

1. What is the name of the unit? Provide a brief history or justification for the change or elimination.

We request elimination of The Center for Academic Excellence (CAE) and the Center for Online Learning (COL).

Office of Academic Innovation (OAI) will provide services currently provided by CAE and COL.

We request creation of Office of Academic Innovation and declare it to be a significant academic unit.

The Center for Academic Excellence was established in 1996 with the mission to provide leadership and support for teaching, learning, assessment and community-university partnerships.

The Center for Online Learning was established by administrative action in 2010 in response to the need for leadership and support for partially and fully online learning (see: http://goo.gl/Jrn5t). As COL was not created after review by EPC and approval by Faculty Senate, technically it does not need action to abolish, but we recognize the interest faculty have in this issue and in the interest of transparency we wish to engage in this process even though a formal recommendation may not be necessary.

As faculty increasingly work within a variety of learning environments (online, hybrid, classroom and community-based), OAI is designed as a single unit that combines the expertise and services of COL and CAE and addresses the current gaps in services and support available to faculty. OAI will also support institutional initiatives like reTHINK PSU. As this unit will provide services and support to the faculty it has will be established as an “office”. The term “center” is appropriate for a unit that is engaged in interdisciplinary basic and applied research and is directing significant effort to attract and secure non-state funding.1

2. How will this elimination or alteration help Portland State University to achieve its themes/goals?

The attached Policy Document addresses this question.

3. What are the objectives and planned outcomes for the alteration or elimination?

COL and CAE will cease to exist as independent units. The attached Policy Document outlines the expected outcome for OAI.

1 See OUS Policy on Centers and Institutes available at: http://www.pdx.edu/sites/www.pdx.edu.oaa/files/oaa_Centers-Institutes Policy.docx 4. What will happen to significant activities that are currently being performed by the unit?

Although the key activities from both CAE and COL will continue, the merger will allow for (1) elimination of any redundant or overlapping services between the two units and (2) new activities that are the result of the combined expertise of both units. OAI would offer a range of services that are described in the Policy Document in Appendix 1.

COI will continue to provide support for faculty scholarship that has been previously provided by CAE.

5. Indicate the expected percentage of time and resources that will be allocated to each activity. Please include, if appropriate: courses to be offered, course development, research performed, community partnerships built, other (specify). This includes activities that will continue to be performed by this unit and those shifted to other units.

The attached Policy Document outlines the expected capacity allocated to each service.

6. Why is a change needed to achieve these outcomes?

a. What other units are impacted by this elimination or alteration? Meet with these units and include documentation on the outcomes of these meetings.

In January 2013, the Vice Provost for Academic Innovation and Student Success established a subcommittee comprised of staff from the Center for Academic Excellence and the Center for Online Learning whose charge was the creation of a vision, mission and values for the new unit. The committee framed its process with the following questions: 1. How can the center support PSU in the context of reThink PSU: Provost’s Challenge, as well as multiple changes facing higher education in the coming years? 2. What services are essential? 3. What structure is needed? 4. If a new unit is created, what should its vision, mission and role be?

The process for answering these questions proceeded in the following stages: 1. Center staff conducted over 80 one-on-one interviews with faculty, administrators and staff. 2. Two public events were held in which 50 additional participants gave feedback on center services, structure and mission. In addition, an online feedback platform was developed and publicized, with over eighty participants actively discussing proposals and suggestions for the future office. 3. The Interim Director of Teaching, Learning and Assessment and Interim Director of Pedagogy and Platform attended campus-wide meetings of department chairs, academic deans, and student affairs directors to discuss administrators’ perspectives on the role of the center.

Once feedback from the combined efforts was compiled and synthesized, primary themes and suggestions were utilized to create a long-term vision for the proposed office. Services were developed to support the vision and mission. Separate subcommittees developed recommendations for processes, structure and space. b. Why is a separate or changed identity and/or structure key to success in meeting the objectives and planned outcomes?

One Office will increase the visibility and accessibility of services available to the faculty. For instance, faculty will no longer need to visit different locations on campus to find support for their teaching efforts. The Office of Academic Innovation will now integrate the instructional technology support services previously hosted at the IDSC on Broadway.

As faculty increasingly work within a variety of learning environments (online, hybrid, classroom and community-based), the combination of the expertise of both units will best serve the campus now and in the future.

The strategic importance of encouraging academic innovation that responds to rapid change in a disruptive context requires a level of service, staffing, and type of support that the Office of Academic Innovation is designed to provide.

c. How will these outcomes be measured and assessed? What benchmarks will be used to determine the success of the unit?

Attached Policy Document lists outcomes for OAI.

7. What is the proposed new structure of the unit if it is not being eliminated? Examples include: Where will it be housed? Will it become a separate administrative unit? Will it have its own support staff? How will faculty become affiliated with the unit? Will faculty FTE be assigned to the unit? What is the likely faculty composition (% tenure-track, % fixed-term, % adjunct)? According to what rules will faculty be evaluated for P&T?

The attached Policy Document outlines the new structure of the unit, including the new services, space, and staff allocation. The recently approved space committee request is also attached.

8. When would the change or elimination be enacted? What is the period of time for the unit to operate (if it is not permanent)? Describe how the unit may evolve or expand.

The change would be enacted as soon as possible. The Office may expand depending on the strategic priorities of the university; specifically, the capacity of the course/program design team could temporarily increase in the framework of reThink PSU and the Provost Challenge.

9. What additional resources are needed for the change? What is the new level of resources needed to support the now smaller unit? What will happen to reassigned resources? What revenue will the unit generate? a. Budget: Please see the attached budget request filed for CAE and COL. These requests will be combined for OAI. Budget documents submitted to OAA on April 29, 2013 as part of the budget planning process are attached. b. Space: Space committee has assigned a space for the combined unit. The space request approved by the Space Committee is attached. c. Staff: Please see the attached Policy Document for details of staffing levels and organizational structure. d. Support Services: We expect support services to be centralized and to grow to serve the mission, vision and services of OAI. 10. List the individuals proposing the change and their affiliations.

Request prepared by:

Johannes De Gruyter, Interim Director, Pedagogy and Platform Janelle Voegele, Interim Director, Teaching, Learning and Assessment Date: May 1, 2013

Approved by Sukhwant Jhaj, Vice Provost, OAA Date: May 8, 2013 Approved by UBC Chair:______Date:______Approved by EPC Chair:______Date:______Approved by Senate Presiding Officer:______Date:______Approved by Provost:______Date:______

Signatures are required of administrators at each level above that of the immediate supervisor that approve the project prior to submission to EPC.

Appendices 1. Policy Document 2. Budget Document (submitted to OAA on April 29, 2013 as part of the budget planning process) 3. Space request approved by Space Committee (approved May 6)