Shared Modular Course Development: a Feasibility Study
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
University of Windsor Scholarship at UWindsor Centre for Teaching and Learning Reports Centre for Teaching and Learning 6-2014 Shared Modular Course Development: A Feasibility Study Alan W. Wright University of Windsor, [email protected] Beverley Hamilton University of Windsor, [email protected] Joy Mighty Carleton University Elaine Scharfe Trent University Bill Muirhead University of Ontario Institute of Technology See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ctlreports Part of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Commons Recommended Citation Wright, Alan W.; Hamilton, Beverley; Mighty, Joy; Scharfe, Elaine; Muirhead, Bill; and Vail, Susan, "Shared Modular Course Development: A Feasibility Study" (2014). Centre for Teaching and Learning Reports. https://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ctlreports/1 This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the Centre for Teaching and Learning at Scholarship at UWindsor. It has been accepted for inclusion in Centre for Teaching and Learning Reports by an authorized administrator of Scholarship at UWindsor. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Authors Alan W. Wright, Beverley Hamilton, Joy Mighty, Elaine Scharfe, Bill Muirhead, and Susan Vail This book is available at Scholarship at UWindsor: https://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ctlreports/1 Shared Modular Course Development: A Feasibility Study A Ministry of Training, Colleges, and Universities Productivity and Innovation Fund Initiative June 2014 Acknowledgements We gratefully acknowledge the contributions of many people from the University of Windsor, Carleton University, Trent University, University of Ontario Institute of Technology, and York University. University of Windsor Project Champion: Alan Wright Project Lead: Beverley Hamilton Nick Baker Jennifer Patterson Joe Branget Gregory Paziuk Graham Fawcett Jessica Raffoul Michele Gnanamuttu Allyson Skene Phil Graniero Jennifer Stanton Erika Kustra Jennifer Stefanczyk Peter Marval Nadia Timperio Abby Nakhaie Martin Vaughan Carleton University Project Lead: Joy Mighty Gaby Etchverry Andrea Noriega Patrick Lyons Laura Ravelo Trent University Project Lead: Elaine Scharfe Danielle Divenanzo Brent Morrison Krista Forsyth Mary-Jane Pilgrim Scott Henderson Gillian Tibbetts University of Ontario Institute of Technology Project Lead: Bill Muirhead Christine Cairns Marj Rempel Jaymie Koroluk York University Project Lead: Susan Vail Ramjeet Harinarain Celia Popovic Michael Longford Karthiga Sandrasri Natasha May External Consultants Roger Bryan, KPMG Gordon Joughin, Queensland University Rob Kingyens, eCornell For more information, contact Alan Wright at [email protected] Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................5 I. Project Overview ........................................................................................................................6 Context ...............................................................................................................................................................................6 Project Purpose ..................................................................................................................................................................6 Project Deliverables ..........................................................................................................................................................7 II. Project Methodology..................................................................................................................8 III. Report Overview ...................................................................................................................... 9 IV. Definitions ............................................................................................................................... 11 Hybrid and Shared Course Design ................................................................................................................................11 V. Findings .....................................................................................................................................13 Finding #1: Institutions need compelling reasons to collaborate .......................................................................13 Finding #2: Incentives for engagement must be understood across systemic layers ....................................... 16 Finding #3: Successful SCD initiatives share common characteristics ............................................................... 18 Finding #4: Different organizational models for SCD serve different purposes ............................................... 24 Finding #5: SCD adds value: financial modeling remains challenging .............................................................. 27 Finding #6: Context is critical ................................................................................................................................... 29 VI. Hybrid Course Design: Exploring the Case for Collaboration ..................................................46 Hybrid Course Design as a Match for Needs in the Ontario Context ................................................................. 46 Status of Hybrid Course Development in Ontario ................................................................................................. 47 Institutional and Collaborative Readiness in Ontario: An Inter-institutional View ...........................................48 Challenges ......................................................................................................................................................................52 Discussion ......................................................................................................................................................................55 VII. Recommendations: A Consortial Approach to Shared Course Design for Ontario Universities .....59 Phase 1: Preliminary Study ........................................................................................................................................ 60 Phase 2: Consortial Consolidation ............................................................................................................................ 61 A Parallel Agenda: Recommended Directions for Provincial Action .................................................................. 62 References .................................................................................................................................64 Appendix A - Shared Course Initiative Case Studies: An Overview ...........................................71 Appendix B - Evaluation Frameworks .....................................................................................103 Appendix C - Collective Agreements and Academic Governance: Implications for Shared Course Development .........................................................................................129 Appendix D - Collaborative University and College Programmes ...........................................139 Appendix E .............................................................................................................................145 Shared Courses Institutional Inventory - Administrative .................................................................................... 146 Shared Courses Institutional Inventory - Cultural ................................................................................................ 150 Shared Courses Institutional Inventory - Pedagogical .......................................................................................... 151 Shared Courses Institutional Inventory - Technical ............................................................................................... 154 Executive Summary This project evaluated the viability of shared course development (SCD) and identified the necessary baseline mechanisms, principles, policies, and procedures for future joint course development collaborations. Although collaborative course design is still relatively new in Ontario, our institutionally-based project teams identified and researched a number of successful examples from Australia, Canada, Europe, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States. These successful models demonstrated the transformative possibilities of blended learning, expanded course variety, maintained or enhanced the breadth of course offerings, and reduced institution-specific development costs while maintaining delivery autonomy. They also focused on enhancing student learning and produced momentum for instructional improvement and course re-design among collaborating institutions. This report concludes that there is considerable value to the development of collaborative institutional cultures in and of itself, and that collaborative capacity will become an increasingly important core competency in the more differentiated and change-oriented university sector that is emerging. Context appears to play a key role in the frequency and sustainability of successful SCD collaborations. SCD has been most successful, and its products most sustainable, in contexts where policy frameworks, infrastructure, and resources facilitate or demand collaboration, institutions share common curricular understandings and quality assurance practices, and there are mechanisms for stakeholder and employer