Encouraging Collaboration and Preventing Course Duplication in an RCM Budget Model

UNIVERSITY LEADERSHIP COUNCIL Encouraging Collaboration and Preventing Course Duplication in an RCM Budget Model

Custom Research Brief

Research Associate Melinda Salaman

Research Manager Ehui Osei-Mensah

May 2012 Education Advisory Board 2445 M Street NW ● Washington, DC 20037 Telephone: 202-266-6400 ● Facsimile: 202-266-5700 ● www.educationadvisoryboard.com 2 of 11

3 of 11

Table of Contents

I. Research Methodology ...... 4 II. Executive Overview ...... 5 III. Preventing Course Duplication across Colleges ...... 6 IV. Encouraging Academic Collaboration ...... 9 V. Establishing Memorandums of Understanding...... 11

4 of 11

I. Research Methodology Project Challenge Leadership at a member institution approached the Council with the following questions:

What are the reasons that administrators at other institutions encourage colleges to collaborate in the development and delivery of academic courses or programs?

Since an RCM budget model traditionally encourages independence and competition between colleges, how do administrators incentivize colleges to either exclusively specialize or collaborate on academic endeavors?

Have administrators observed a decline in the number of duplicate academic courses and programs at the institution since the inception of these policies or incentives?

How do faculty members from different colleges agree to develop the content of a joint course or academic program? Specifically, how is course content developed to be relevant to students enrolled in different colleges across the institution?

How are institutional funds allocated across colleges that collaborate to develop and deliver an academic course or program?

Project Sources Education Advisory Board’s internal and online (www.educationadvisoryboard.com) research libraries

National Center for Education Statistics [NCES] (http://nces.ed.gov/)

Research The council interviewed business administrators at mid-size public and private institutions of Parameters higher education. A Guide to the Institutions Profiled in this Brief

Approximate Enrollment Institution Location Classification (Total/Undergraduate) North: Research Universities (high University A 20,500 / 14,000 Midsize City research activity) South: Research Universities (very University B 15,000 / 6,500 Midsize City high research activity) West: Research Universities (very University C 23,000 / 20,000 Midsize City high research activity) North: Research Universities (high University D 15,000 / 12,500 Small Suburb research activity) Midwest: Research Universities (very University E 27,000 / 21,000 Large Suburb high research activity)

5 of 11

II. Executive Overview

Key Observations To discourage academic units from creating duplicate courses, administrators should ensure that the Responsibility Center Management (RCM) budget model discourages unnecessary course expansion and establish a rigorous course review process to identify any duplicate courses. Duplicate courses are not a significant problem at the majority of contact institutions; contacts surmise that this is a result of policies in place that discourage colleges from developing courses in areas outside of their expertise. At institutions that divide tuition revenue from a course between the college of instruction, the college of enrollment, and even the college which grants the degree, contacts note that this split-revenue model provides an incentive for administrators to send their students to another college for instruction in a course that is not offered, since revenue will still be collected for the student’s enrollment. In the event that college develops a course that duplicates the content of another course on campus, contacts suggest establishing a rigorous course review system to prevent these courses from being offered.

There are several reasons that a college may opt to participate in the development, but not the delivery, of an academic course or program. If college administrators identify an interest and need among students for coursework that is outside of the college’s area of expertise (i.e. there are no faculty in the college equipped to teach the course), contacts suggest sending students to another college at the institution that offers the appropriate instruction. As a result, students will be well-prepared for the remainder of coursework in their discipline, administrators may act as consultants to influence the content of the courses instructed to their students, and—in a split-revenue budget model—the college continues to collect a percentage of tuition revenue of enrolled students taking courses at other colleges.

Senior administrators should participate in meetings between college deans regarding joint academic course or program offerings. Across contact institutions, contacts recommend that senior administrators join deans’ meetings to provide an explanation of the RCM budget model, assure deans that the central administration values interdisciplinary work, and provide central funding to support interdisciplinary projects that promote institutional strategic goals. Since successful interdisciplinary programs generally begin with faculty interest in the disciplines, contacts strongly advise that senior administrators refrain from actively leading deans’ meetings about academic collaboration.

There is no standard memorandum of agreement to guide the logistic, academic, and financial components of collaborative academic offerings. Across contact institutions, administrators allow college deans to discuss the course content, delivery method, and relative contributions that each unit will make to an academic offering and decide appropriate revenue allocation agreement based on these contributions. Many contacts indicate that revenue allocation should be the first point decided between the involved deans, though one contact stresses that the intended learning outcomes and measurement of academic quality should be decided first.

6 of 11

III. Preventing Course Duplication across Colleges

Identify Establishing a Rigorous Course Review Process to Limit Duplication

Unnecessary According to contacts at University D, when an RCM budget model was first introduced at Course the institution, there was widespread fear on campus that academic units would create duplicate courses in order to increase college revenue. Contacts report that this unnecessary Duplicates duplication has not yet occurred, and suggest that a rigorous course review system limits duplication in course content, and even in course title.

Course Review Process

New course Review by Review by Review by Review by developed by department college provost's university faculty committee committee office senate

At University D, all new courses must be reviewed according to a standard university review process, which includes review at the department-, college-, and university-level. After a new course is reviewed and approved by the appropriate committees within the relevant academic department and college, the course must also be approved by the Provost’s office, and finally a curriculum committee within the university senate.

Inter-Departmental Review and Approval

At University E, a newly-developed course with content that may duplicate another course must receive written approval from the relevant college administrators. For example, administrators from the business college creating a “Business Statistics” course that may overlap with the content of an “Introduction to Statistics” course in the college of arts and sciences must receive a letter or email of approval from administrators in the college of arts and sciences.

Final Stage of Review and Approval University Senate In the final stage of approval for a newly-developed Curriculum Committee at course, the curriculum committee within the university University E senate reviews copies of the proposed syllabus and Meets every month course materials, and considers whether the course is a Includes representatives duplicate of any course on campus. If a newly-developed from across campus course at University E fails to receive written approval Separates into two groups from the appropriate units on campus, this matter will be to arbitrate graduate and arbitrated by the institutional curriculum committee. A undergraduate courses duplicate is not offered on campus. separately

Major-specific Courses Offered Across Colleges

Contacts at University D assert that major-specific courses with similar content (i.e. an introductory statistics course offered in the college of arts and sciences and a business statistics course offered in the business college) should be permitted if the courses are fundamentally distinct in course content. As long as the institutional curriculum committee determines that the content of a new course is specific to an academic major and has distinct learning outcomes, contacts assert that administrators should allow the course to be taught.

7 of 11

Examine Understanding the Root-Cause of Course Duplicates on Campus Incentive Contacts suggest that any institution concerned about course duplicates first consider the incentives created by their budget model. A traditional RCM budget model which distributes Structure within tuition revenue to the unit of instruction encourages colleges to expand their course offerings, RCM Budget likely creating duplicates across campus. Contacts at University A assert that a split-revenue budget model that divides tuition revenue between multiple academic units discourages Model colleges from rapid course expansion. At University A, administrators allocate 75 percent of tuition revenue to the unit of instruction and 25 percent to the unit of enrollment. Administrators at University C allocate 50 percent of tuition revenue to the unit of instruction, 30 percent to the unit of enrollment, and 20 percent to the unit from which a student earns a degree. In an era of limited institutional funding, contacts suggest that academic units are unlikely to invest significant funds to offer new, duplicate courses when the alternative is to enroll their students in courses offered by other academic units and receive a percentage of the tuition revenue.

Split-Revenue Budget Model Discourages Unnecessary Duplication Contacts at University A provide the following example to emphasize the incentive structures under each type of RCM budget model: Traditional RCM Budget Model: When the unit of instruction receives 100 percent of tuition revenue, administrators in the business college consider offering business- specific language courses to attract and receive the tuition revenue of students who might otherwise have enrolled in language courses at another college. Split-Revenue RCM Budget Model: When the unit of enrollment receives a percentage of tuition revenue, administrators consider the cost of offering a new course relative to the revenue received. Since language instruction is not within the business college’s area of expertise, administrators would have to hire a professor to teach the course and forgo the opportunity to hire a business professor, a significant investment and a significant loss, respectively. However, since administrators expect a percentage of tuition revenue when sending their business students to another college for instruction, administrators are not likely to create a duplicate course and instead opt to send students to another college for instruction.

According to contacts at University D, senior Disadvantages of Duplicate Emphasize administrators can limit the inclination for academic Courses to Emphasize Drawbacks of units to duplicate courses through their relationships Leads to unnecessary Duplicate with college deans, and through deans’ relationships administrative costs to with one another. Because the dean typically has the colleges and the university. authority to create or refuse the development of an Courses in May confuse students and academic course, contacts suggest that it is important cause them to enroll in Administrative for administrators to focus their effort on conversing several duplicated courses with deans and explaining the disadvantages of Rhetoric over their academic careers. duplicate courses on campus.

8 of 11

Communicating Effectively with College Deans through Regular Meetings

At University D, the provost, senior vice provost for academic affairs, and associate provost for academic administration participate in a weekly meeting with all of the college deans. Once a month, the remaining academic administrators from the provost’s office join this meeting. In these meetings, administrators describe the strategic initiatives, goals, values, and mission of the institution, and emphasize that the role of any college dean is to further these institutional priorities within each academic college. Contacts add that college deans also participate in half-day or full-day retreats each semester with the president’s cabinet to discuss institutional goals and encourage deans to understand their role in furthering institutional strategy.

Topics Discussed During a Deans’ Meeting Contacts explain that deans’ meetings typically include the following components: As per the request of the new provost at University D, each dean meeting begins with thirty minutes of informal conversation over breakfast pastries and coffee, to facilitate personal interaction between deans and encourage them to view one another as colleagues, as opposed to competitors. Senior administrators present institutional values, goals, and strategies. Administrators ask college deans to highlight academic offerings and college programs that align with the institutional strategic plan.

9 of 11

IV. Encouraging Academic Collaboration

Promote Encouraging Collaborative Course Development Collaboration in Contacts at University E report that all undergraduate students at the institution must fulfill a the Development writing requirement by enrolling in two English courses at the college of arts and sciences. In of an Academic addition, students are also encouraged to enroll in an upper-level course within their major discipline that has been designated as a writing-intensive course. College deans typically Offering support this writing requirement for several reasons, listed below.

Advantages of Allowing One College to Assume Responsibility for Course Delivery

 Student preparedness: Since the college of arts and sciences houses faculty members with an expertise in writing instruction, the introductory writing courses will endow students with the basic writing skills necessary to succeed in any academic program at the institution.

 Steady, reliable revenue: Colleges can rely on the steady revenue received from enrolling their students in courses in another academic unit, without a significant investment of resources on their part.

 Opportunities for consultation: There may be opportunities for collaborating in the development of a course curriculum, even if one academic unit is responsible for its delivery. Contacts at University E explain that prior to the introduction of the writing intensive requirement at the institution, administrators in the business college objected to a ‘Business Writing’ course offering in the college of arts and sciences. Lacking faculty within the business college that were willing or able to teach another iteration of the course, administrators instead decided to consult with faculty in the college of arts and sciences delivering the course, to ensure that the course content facilitated the appropriate learning outcomes.

Interdisciplinary Programs Typically Attract Large Numbers of Students In an era of declining state appropriations and rising cost of supplying quality higher education, institutional administrators primarily rely on student tuition and fees to support campus operations and academic programs. As such, senior administrators must ensure that students are satisfied with course offerings, so they will enroll in high numbers and bring revenue to the institution. According to contacts at University C, it is important for any new interdisciplinary program to start with faculty members taking note of students’ interest in a particular field or set of topics. Because of their regular interaction with students, faculty members are best-suited to observe students’ primary academic interests, and create a successful academic program that will attract large numbers of students to enroll.

Participating in Meetings about Academic Collaboration

Several contacts recommend that senior administrators participate in interdepartmental meetings in order to identify potential sites of academic collaboration and avoid pushback from college deans. Contacts describe the following services (on the next page) that senior administrators may provide in a meeting with college deans about academic collaboration.

10 of 11

Services Senior Administrators Provide in Deans’ Meetings about Collaboration

 Answer questions about coordination and budgeting: Senior administrators may act as resources for college administrators and faculty participants, who may be confused about the RCM budget model or the administrative procedures for creating interdisciplinary academic offerings. Contacts at University C highlight the benefit of having a senior administrator dedicated to interdisciplinary studies on campus, who may provide resources and information on coordinating interdisciplinary offerings.

 Assure stakeholders that senior administrators will monitor interdisciplinary projects, to ensure that all parties benefit from the arrangement. Contacts at University A indicate that college deans and faculty are sometimes anxious about establishing interdisciplinary academic programs for fear that there may be negative outcomes for their college. To assuage these fears, administrators can offer to monitor the process to ensure that the benefit of collaboration (i.e. increased student enrollment) is shared by all parties involved.

 Provide financial support to interdisciplinary projects that advance institutional goals. If senior administrators have sufficient funds at their disposal, contacts suggest that administrators participate in meetings with deans and offer to partially or fully fund an interdisciplinary program that may advance a particular goal within the strategic plan. This precedent may incentivize further interdisciplinary projects.

Encouraging Collaboration with Little Central Administrative Funds Contacts at University D note that at many institutions with an RCM budget model in place, the central administration holds very little funding to support programs that advance strategic priorities. Central administrators can, however, assert influence and advance strategic goals through institutional policy. For example, the provost’s office at University D is responsible for approving faculty hires into tenure-track positions. In the past year, the provost announced that new tenure-track hires would only be approved if the individual demonstrated interest in interdisciplinary studies. This policy encourages deans from different colleges to jointly search for and hire faculty, and eventually create interdisciplinary academic offerings.

Establish Clear Contacts at University C note that while administrators should encourage the development of collaborative academic programs, they must also determine a set of conditions to indicate Conditions for when the program is more costly than the value it provides, and therefore should be Eliminating an eliminated. Contacts enumerate the following strategies to ensure that an interdisciplinary Interdisciplinary program is kept to high standards.

Program Strategies to Ensure Academic Quality in an Interdisciplinary Program

 Establish a regular schedule for program review.

 Articulate the metrics used to assess academic quality (e.g. research output, student enrollment figures, etc.).  Discuss the goals of the interdisciplinary program. To prevent discontent, contacts suggest that all interested individuals are included in conversations about the goals and conditions that warrant an elimination of the program.

11 of 11

V. Establishing Memorandums of Understanding

Customize Formalizing an Academic Collaboration Memorandums Contacts indicate that all academic collaborations start with a strong institutional culture that promotes interdisciplinary work. Contacts at University B note that this culture can be of Understanding developed through administrative rhetoric, strong faculty relationships, and the promotion of interdisciplinary research. According to contacts at the institution, faculty members who have conducted research together are likely to translate their work and findings into the classroom, and may eventually create an interdisciplinary academic offering. To formalize the process, academic collaborations typically end with a memorandum of understanding (MOU) that is tailored to the specific characteristics of the course or program created. No contacts report a standard MOU to guide the curriculum development, delivery model, or revenue split of a jointly-developed academic offering. Academic Collaboration Process

Culture of Faculty engage Faculty Deans Deans discuss interdisciplinary in cross-unit create create arrangement collaboration conversations program an MOU

Topics Discussed at a Deans’ Meeting When Creating an MOU

Although contacts do not describe a standard MOU used to guide the academic, financial, and logistical details of an interdisciplinary course or program, the list below provides a set of questions that must be answered during a deans’ meeting about the arrangement.

 Who is responsible for creating course content and/or the academic curriculum? Since interdisciplinary academic offerings are born from faculty interest and conversation, representatives from each involved unit share responsibility for developing the content of an academic course or program. In a situation where one unit assumes total responsibility for the course, faculty or administrators from another unit may act as consultants in the content development.

 Which faculty member will be responsible for teaching the course to students? Contacts at University D indicate that within an interdisciplinary academic program (e.g. major, minor, concentration, etc.), the faculty member who teaches a particular course receives the full percentage of tuition revenue allotted to course instruction. This revenue allocation model creates an incentive for colleges to participate in the interdisciplinary program by sending faculty to teach these courses. For the sake of fairness, contacts indicate that all involved units may have teaching responsibility for an equal number of the courses within the academic program.

 How will tuition revenue be disbursed among units involved in an interdisciplinary academic offering? Contacts note that the disbursement of tuition revenue primarily depends on the resources that each school devotes to an interdisciplinary academic offering. As such, contacts report that revenue-sharing agreements are not standardized, but instead customized to the particular contribution that each involved unit makes to an interdisciplinary course or program. According to contacts at University C, a major challenge in revenue disbursement is considering the opportunity costs that each college assumes when a faculty member teaches an interdisciplinary course as opposed to a course within their home college. Contacts at University B note that in some cases, colleges charge a fee to the interdisciplinary programs that request faculty to in order recoup the predicted loss in revenue.