Meeting Date: 
March 2, 2018
Date: 
Fri 03/02/2018 9:00 am to 10:30 am
Location: 
TBD
Minutes: 

Voting members present: Nancy Allen, Vipin Arora, Marita Barth, Raven Chakerian, Amanda Kirk, Stephen Redfield
Voting members absent: Cheridy Aduviri, Wes Prebeck
Ex-Officio members present: University Libraries – Stefanie Buck
Guests present: Cub Khan, Jeff Sherman, Karen Watte

Announcement

  • Talk and Workshop with Dr. Ann Taylor, Assistant Dean of Distance Learning and Director of the John A. Dutton e-Education Institute in the College of Earth and Mineral Sciences at The Pennsylvania State University.
    • Beyond eSETs: better ways to evaluate teaching
      • March 5, 2:00 to 3:00 PM (MU Horizon), Taylor will discuss how teaching evaluation scores (eSETs) should and should not be used for improving teaching or informing hiring decisions. From 3:30 to 5:00 PM (MU Horizon), Taylor will host a workshop (bring laptops!) about using feedback to improve your own teaching. Sponsored by the President’s Commission on the Status of Women.

Introductions

  • The new Online Education Committee (OEC) Faculty Senate Executive Committee Liaison, Jeff Sherman, was introduced to the committee and he offered his support of our work.

Role of Online Education Committee

  • A brief discussion was held to clarify the role of the OEC in terms of representing student interests. The Committee reread the standing rules and established that, despite the committee’s role to represent the interests of faculty as members of the Faculty Senate, the committee’s work is also related to students. “The Online Education Committee considers and provides recommendations to the Faculty Senate on a wide range of philosophical and technical issues considered important to faculty and students related to the role of online and hybrid education in meeting the academic mission of Oregon State University” (from OEC standing rules).

Survey

  • Discussed process for analysis of survey results
    • Stefanie shared some information she was able to gather from the Qualtrics charts generated in the survey report (available in OEC Canvas site)
    • Karen let us know that the Ecampus Research Unit is willing to help with the analysis but needs information from us. Specifically: What are the expectations for data analysis? What should they focus on? The following ideas were discussed:
      • Sort results by who has taught online and who hasn’t
      • Sort results by who has developed an online course and who hasn’t
      • Sort results by who has taken Ecampus “Teaching an Online Course” training or Center for Teaching and Learning Community and who hasn’t
      • Look for trends in responses for those currently teaching online or not teaching online
      • Look for trends of negative/positive comments by college
      • Gather information about the TA experience teaching online
      • Patterns within comments
      • Check to see if certain colleges were more inclined to select “my subject cannot be effectively taught online”
      • Lack of time and compensation came up a lot in the comments as obstacles to online teaching for faculty: how can to document this and what does it tell mean?
      • Are some colleges more concerned about transparency of funds distribution for online teaching? Are some colleges more concerned about intellectual property?
      • Do instructors, Teaching Assistantss, or Tenure Track Faculty less/more often have positive/negative comments
      • How many respondents selected only online teaching (no on-campus or hybrid teaching)? How are their responses different?
      • Tends in comments regarding ideal online peer reviewer
      • Revisit goals from survey:
        • (1)Establish what the most important topics are with regards to online and hybrid education from the perspective of OSU faculty in order to inform the Faculty Senate Online Education Committee’s work (Q16, Q17, Q18, Q19-especially look at trends in comments for these questions)
        • (2) Determine if faculty are evaluated for their online and hybrid teaching and by who (Q19-25)
        • (3) Determine what impediments may inhibit faculty from developing and/or teaching online and hybrid courses (Q8 & Q10, Q12-look for trends in comments)
    • Determine any secondary findings of interest
      • Are there any trends within certain colleges?
      • Are there any trends within certain groups: instructors, tenure track, TA’s, etc.?
      • Correspondence between course development experience and positive/negative comments about online teaching?
    • Pull out request for follow up, questions and other items in need of follow up from within comments
    • Others ideas: repeat the survey in several years and see if attitudes have shifted; compare our findings with data from surveys from other universities
  • Discussed how survey results can be shares and distributed. There have been some requests for follow up and some interest in shared results expressed with in the survey comments areas.
    • It was suggested that the committee ask for advice from the Ecampus Research Unit as to the best format for sharing results
    • A time line was discussed: the committee would like to share results before the end of the school year
    • Thank participants, offer research that addresses common concerns, offer answers when possible, acknowledge complex issues without immediate answers

Online/Hybrid Awards/Recognition Sub-Committee Report – Nancy Allen, Raven Chakerian, Karen Watte

  • Sub-committee met March 1
    • Will meet again April 12
  • Currently compiling a best practices document for departments to guide them in assuring that Ecampus faculty and students are being equally included and considered for opportunities available to on-campus faculty/students.
  • Have been researching existing awards and scholarships across campus and evaluating them for potential barriers for Ecampus students/faculty.
    • Have documented an overall lack of opportunities for Ecampus participation
    • Lack of visibility of Ecampus faculty/students for nominations
    • Some scholarships specify they must be for Oregon residents or Oregon High School graduates
  • Have recommended that Ecampus offer funding for stipends in association with awards established and housed within individual colleges that are specifically for Ecampus excellence
    • Per Shannon Riggs, this idea is quite possible
    • Looking into the potential to pilot such an award within one college

Online Peer Review Sub-Committee Report – Cheridy Aduviri, Vipin Aurora, Stefanie Buck, Raven Chakerian, Cub Khan, Stephen Redfield

  • Sub-Committee met February 12
    • Next meeting early April
  • Currently drafting guidelines/tool kit for best practices for online/hybrid peer reviews
  • Considering different models from other organizations/institutions to inform their work (QM, Center for Teaching and Learning, Penn State model)
  • Considering research on the topic to inform their work
  • Focusing primarily on online peer reviews with the intention to move on to hybrid peer reviews next
  • Cheridy provided a brief overview of the work that has been done by the sub-committee so far in a short screencast: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1gBG92FEyCYqI8T0v5mKKdLFM4DXVjyNo/view
  • Discussing where to distribute guidelines: potentially through the Promotion & Tenure Guidelines page
  • Want to wrap up their work by June 15

Promotion & Tenure Sub-Committee Report – Marita Barth, Stefanie Buck, Raven Chakerian

  • Sub-committee met February 7
    • Will meet again before next OEC meeting
  • Currently drafting guidelines for online faculty going up for Promotion & Tenure
  • Discussed creating both a written document and a video with the guiding information
    • Ecampus will help with the creation of the video
  • Discussed distribution outlet:
    • Faculty Senate Promotion & Tenure Committee stated “there is no specific path” to getting the documents approved for distribution through the Promotion & Tenure Guidelines but if the committee sends it to them, they can put their “committee’s approval on it and figure it out from there” (from committee chair Gary DeLander)
    • Online Education Committee Website is another possibility

Ongoing/Pending/Follow-up Items

  • Next Meeting
    • Watch for a doodle poll for April/May meeting
  • Subcommittees
    • Meet in March/early April
  • Survey
    • Analysis of results, distribution of results
  • Membership
    • Still waiting for an Ex-officio member from the Center of Teaching and Learning to be officially added to the committee. (Sent email to Vickie 1/15)