University of Wisconsin System Faculty Collaboratives Work Plan – March 2015
FACULTY COLLABORATIVES
University of Wisconsin System Team Work Plan
VERSION: March 31, 2015
Please draft your work plan before the first project meeting, February 18-19, in Kansas City. At that meeting the
teams will share, review, and revise the plans individually and collectively. According to the project timeline, we
request that you submit your work plan to us in March 2015. Please note that we expect work plans may
continue to evolve in year two of the project and extend into year three. We hope that the version you submit in
March will be a solid working plan that can be shared in the Toolkit.
The following outline includes recommended sections. Please be welcome to modify the outline to suit your
project.
Sections:
1. Statement of Purpose and Goals for the Faculty Collaboratives: a brief statement on the project in the context of
your state or collaborative
The Faculty Collaboratives (FC) project works to integrate multiple, existing quality educational attainment initiatives, embodied in
the University of Wisconsin System’s LEAP Wisconsin initiative. It raises the currency of student learning outcomes and proficiencies
as key measures of student success by engaging UW System faculty and instructional academic staff (IAS) in giving students agency
and self-direction, and in establishing learning environments that are high-impact, transparent, integrative, inclusive and equityminded.
1
University of Wisconsin System Faculty Collaboratives Work Plan – March 2015
2. Project Outline:
The following sample outline, for your consideration, comes from the first draft of the Utah work plan.
I.
Operations






Rebecca Karoff, Senior Special Assistant to the Senior Vice President for Academic & Student Affairs, is the UW System
Project Lead.
Peggy James, Professor of Political Science at UW-Parkside, is the Innovation Hub Director, working with the System
lead to oversee the project, including the establishment and direction of the campus-based and virtual Innovation Hub.
The Innovation Hub will be physically located in the UW-Parkside Teaching & Learning Center and under the
direction of Jim Robinson, who will work with Peggy and the LEAP Fellows to fulfill the Hub vision.
o The draft Hub vision is included as Appendix A to this document.
o Hub web design, platform and support is being addressed by the project leads.
o D2L site set up for clearinghouse among project leads and fellow.
Five LEAP Fellows have been selected from among UW System faculty and instructional academic staff to advance
faculty participation, collaboration and leadership in AAC&U’s family of proficiency-based, change initiatives.
o Call for Fellows was issued in mid-February with due date of mid-March.
o Review Committee met March 18 to determine selection: see Appendix B for list of Fellows.
o LEAP Fellows will comprise team to AAC&U Integrative Learning Institute in July 2015.
A LEAP Wisconsin Steering Committee convened, comprised of project leads, LEAP Fellows, UW provosts, associate
and assistant vice chancellors, deans, faculty, and others.
o The charge of the LEAP Steering Committee is two-fold:
 Conduct assessment of the UW System’s decade-old LEAP Wisconsin initiative from March-December
2015; and
 Provide guidance for Faculty Collaboratives project and, thereby, direction into the System’s future LEAP
work.
See the attached MBO (Management by Objectives – Appendix C) for initial plan for Year 1 tasks, organization,
outreach and meetings of Hub Director, LEAP Fellows, State Project Lead, and other constituent groups.
2
University of Wisconsin System Faculty Collaboratives Work Plan – March 2015
II.
Content: How will the team work with the large-scale proficiency initiatives identified for the project in the state
or collaborative? Consider a state or collaborative plan that aims to develop, in the words of the Utah draft, a
“distinctive set of contributions to the resource base, all in some way responding to the Lumina 2025 goal and
LEAP by improving quality in our teaching and student learning.” Who are target audiences or constituencies?
What activities do you envision?
Faculty Collaboratives as an inherently integrative project for LEAP goals and principles, whether one is new to LEAP or has been
“leaping” for over a decade as we have in the UW System.
In Wisconsin, we anticipate that the Hub Director and LEAP Fellows will:
1. Conduct an environmental scan of where we are as a System on the proficiency initiatives:
a. Determine what we are doing and how we can build upon it;
b. Identify what is missing, i.e., needs assessment;
c. Determine who needs it, i.e., audience identification for the proficiency initiatives, UW-focused but with applicability
to faculty and staff at institutions throughout the country.
2. Fellows will work independently and collaboratively on the proficiency initiatives (PI):
a. For each PI, we need to think through, why are we doing this/do we want to do this. I.e., what “problem” do they solve
that we have?
b. Bring in equity/equity-mindedness as a proficiency initiative for all.
c. Develop online tutorials for each PI as an introduction.
d. Think about whether we want to develop certificates for faculty and staff who want to be “certified” as competent in
the PI.
3. Engagement and capacity-building:
a. Hub as dynamic center and active network, not a static repository.
b. Professional development: conduct large events and smaller, scaffolded ones (perhaps towards a “train-the-trainer”
model, the online tutorials, or both).
i. A systemwide conference to launch the FC project and begin professional development around the proficiency
initiatives is being planned for September 2015.
c. Use technology in bolder ways: Hub as a digital ecosystem, not a website.
d. Think about a “network the networks” model to scale up collaboration and expertise.
3
University of Wisconsin System Faculty Collaboratives Work Plan – March 2015
e. Rinse and repeat throughout three years of project and into future.
4. Assessment: identify “gold standard” metrics for the work, by which we can collect good data, measure progress, and—
overall—improve upon the traditional and limited metrics for student success used throughout the country.
a. Stay focused on student outcomes and gains made in traditional measures like retention and graduation, and work to
make visible the impact and/or connections to LEAP work and proficiency initiatives in those outcomes.
b. Ensure strong focus on equitable outcomes in terms of access, participation, progress and success, and excellence.
c. Building on the System’s strengths and capacity in CBE and outcomes-based curricular reform, make
competency/proficiency the currency for student learning, not seat time and credit hours.
d. Include student work as a new, gold-standard metric by which we measure quality and student success through a focus
in the FC project on Signature Assignments.
Additional principles and goals for UW System:
 Position LEAP front and center as the UW System’s quality educational attainment agenda, driven by the proficiency-based
initiatives designed to improve student success—critical in the budget, political, and changing leadership context we are in.
 Equity-mindedness as a watermark for all that we do on behalf of students and public higher education in Wisconsin. We must
redouble efforts to operationalize.
 Work to advance the goal of changing the Promotion & Tenure process and criteria to incorporate SoTL as operationalized in
FC project.
 Use AAC&U staff as often as possible, and their resources.
o Explicitly connect our work to the LEAP Challenge
o GEMs report with design principles and guidelines from work groups.
 Use NILOA consultants and site as often as possible.
3. Logic Model. Consider the utility of a logic model to guide your work plan. Use a “backward-design” approach,
working backward from the outcomes. See the Indiana draft logic model at
http://leap.aacu.org/toolkit/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Indianas-FC-Project-Logic-Model-draft.pdf
4
University of Wisconsin System Faculty Collaboratives Work Plan – March 2015
Here is the basic structure of the model:
Inputs
Outputs
Activities
Participants
identify
align w/ each
timeline
activity
Short
identify timeline
Outcomes/Impact
Mid
identify
timeline
Long
identify
timeline
Please see the attached MBO (Management by Objectives – Appendix C) for initial plan for Year 1 tasks, organization, outreach and
meetings of Hub Director, LEAP Fellows, State Project Lead, and other constituent groups. The LEAP Fellows and Hub Director
may develop a logic model moving forward.
4. Assessment Plan: The Faculty Collaboratives grant proposal makes a commitment to self-study. How can you
discover more about what faculty in your state and collaborative know and how they are engaged in the large-scale
proficiency initiatives we are working to advance? For your state or collaborative work plan, please compose a brief
narrative of what you would like to assess, together with bullet points or outline (as you prefer).
We ask that you describe, outline, or design a landscape analysis. The landscape analysis will be further developed at
the first project meeting. Include a list of statewide faculty affiliate groups or networks that you hope to engage in your
project. You might also note any institutions that are making notable advances with LEAP-related initiatives and a list
of individuals to engage in the work of building the project and assessing its growth.
The logic model may be keyed to the emerging assessment plan for your state project.
AAC&U’s required reporting on the project in your state and collaborative will form part of the assessment plan. The
project survey and interviews conducted by AAC&U will also contribute to the overall assessment plan. In addition and
with your advice, AAC&U will develop a project rubric. We know, however, that each state or collaborative has its own
assessment or other evaluative goals. We want to be sure that you have the opportunity to address assessment in the
5
University of Wisconsin System Faculty Collaboratives Work Plan – March 2015
context of your own project. We also want to prompt innovation in state or collaborative self-study. Can your state do
something innovative with data analytics, for example? How innovatively can you study the growth of networks?
In the next two months, the State Project Lead, the Hub Director and the LEAP Fellows will develop an assessment plan keyed to
the FC project goals, and that will be a supplement to the preliminary plan for the LEAP Wisconsin Assessment referenced below.
We will develop both short- and long-term metrics for the Hub Director and LEAP Fellows so they meet their responsibilities, and
for the Hub creation.
Please see Appendix D for the preliminary plan for the LEAP Wisconsin Assessment, intentionally aligned with the Faculty
Collaboratives project.
Please see the attached Appendix E for the survey sent to LEAP Wisconsin Assessment Steering Committee members. The
survey serves as the landscape analysis for Faculty Collaboratives. The survey will be adapted and distributed to a number of
constituent groups throughout the UW System, including: members of SAGLA (the UW System Advisory Group on the Liberal
Arts), members of the OPID Council (the UW System Office of Professional & Instructional Development), Teaching & Learning
Center Directors, L & S Deans, GE Directors, Assessment Coordinators, and others.
5. Timeline: Please include a state/collaborative timeline that aligns with the project timeline.
Please see the attached MBO (Management by Objectives – Appendix C) for initial plan for Year 1 tasks, organization, outreach and
meetings of Hub Director, LEAP Fellows, State Project Lead, and other constituent groups. The LEAP Fellows, Hub Director and
State Project Lead will continually refine this moving forward.
6
University of Wisconsin System Faculty Collaboratives Work Plan – March 2015
Appendix A
The Wisconsin Innovation Hub is the effective center of an active network; even thought it might be a focal point, it is
not a static repository of information. While we may begin with the collection of available resources, the hub is much more
dynamic than a virtual library. There are minimally 6 characteristics that can make our HUB a driver of innovation in
Wisconsin:
1. Multiple access points with smart pointers to tools relevant to the needs of faculty and academic staff throughout the
state,
2. Early and continual connections with hubs in other states,
3. The ability to route, or network, users and tools with potential affinity groups throughout the state,
4. A capability to allow for the processing of information and tools by all users- perhaps through a chat site, or open
access blog. Feedback solicitation, invitation to participate.
5. A commitment to make information relative to all levels of an academic program – from the assignment level to the
course, from the course to the program, from the program to the college, from the college to the institution, and from the
institution to the state.
6. A meaningful connection to student learning, demonstrated through signature work that reflects the intentional
integration of the learning environment.
We need to do as much as possible as we create and maintain the hub to ensure that it attracts information, disseminates
information, establishes connections for its users, and adapts dynamically to changes in technology, information, and
users so as to retain its currency in all of the following initiatives:
Degree Qualifications Profile
Tuning
LEAP VALUE rubrics/ MSC: A Multi-state Collaborative to Advance Learning Outcomes Assessment
General Education Maps and Markers (GEMs)
7
University of Wisconsin System Faculty Collaboratives Work Plan – March 2015
The Hub Design illustrated below is one that allows users to pursue information on specific proficiencies, obtain a holistic
view of each participating institution in terms of its experience across these proficiencies, and (in a 3D model) appreciate
the depth of the institutional experience in particular areas throughout the proficiencies. Institutional mapping is
dependent upon a matrix of initiatives by activities by institutions. Each cell represents a piece of information categorized
by the variables of the matrix. For example, Institution B contains information on each proficiency variable as well as
information on the types of activities being practiced on that variable. We see that Institution B, as an example, is the
closest of all three institutions to approaching signature work in the implementation of VALUE rubrics.
Additionally each cell of the matrix, while allowing us to obtain a visual representation of the entire collection of material in
the HUB, also contains Smart pointers. These pointers (links) can point to pathways emanating from a particular location
or connect one location to another.
8
University of Wisconsin System Faculty Collaboratives Work Plan – March 2015
Proficiency initiatives are conceptualized as vectors (perhaps progressively operationalized) and are populated by
activities and/or artifacts associated with that particular vector (refer to the VALUE rubrics vector). These may include, but
are not limited to, SoTL, Curricula, HIPs, Assignments, Assessments, and Signature Work. While these areas in the
proficiency initiative have yet to be fully developed in terms of their relationship to each other, one early way to rank them
in a linear progression across the vector might be through their connection to student learning. Thus, SoTL, while
valuable, may not be immediately and directly related to student learning outcomes, whereas signature work, by its very
nature, is isomorphic to the student experience.
We have identified four proficiency initiatives that are most relevant to the state of Wisconsin – DQP, Tuning, a modified
conceptualization of GEMS, and VALUE rubrics. We have added another vector to the group that will represent a unique
signature for Wisconsin – in the tenth year of LEAP, Wisconsin is undergoing an impact assessment to determine the
contribution of our LEAP commitment to student learning and to spotlight the quality of work that has been done in this
area. So, while our HUB will be comparable to others participating in the Faculty Collaborative project, it will also have an
identity unique to the Wisconsin experience.
Finally, the center of the mapping represents the ‘welcome center’ of the hub, although this should not be the only way to
enter the hub. The Welcome Center houses mini tutorials, inter alia, that introduce each initiative to the user. This can be
considered as the main entrance to the HUB, but certainly not the only one.
As we develop the HUB, we are conscious that the design, while allowing a large amount of work to be collected into one
place, must also be organized and meaningfully connected. FC fellows will agree on items that will help organize
information, artifacts, and activities as they are collected; content will be curated as it is collected; and the HUB itself will
interactively accommodate additions and integrative suggestions by users.
Sustainability of the HUB requires an ability to interact dynamically with new users and new innovations, applications, and
institutionalizations. However, searchability based on organizational themes should be allowed to balance the organic
development that we hope to encourage in the HUB. Therefore, we are very conscious of the need to embed in the HUB
processes that encourage new ideas even while monitoring the progress of existing programs and activities. The
challenge is to encourage innovation, support application, and honor the maturation of initiatives.
9
University of Wisconsin System Faculty Collaboratives Work Plan – March 2015
Appendix B
LEAP Fellows
Timothy Dale
UW-La Crosse
Assistant Professor of Political Science &
Public Administration
Heidi Fencl
UW-Green Bay
Professor of Natural & Applied Sciences
(Physics)
(One-year Appointment)
Caroline Geary
UW-Fox Valley
Associate Professor of Chemistry
Tracy Slagter
UW-Oshkosh
Interim Director, University Studies
Program; Associate Professor of Political
(Acceptance Pending)
Dale Splinter
Science
UW-Whitewater
Associate Professor of Geography
Appendix C (attached)
MBO (Management by Objective)
10
University of Wisconsin System Faculty Collaboratives Work Plan – March 2015
Appendix D
PRELIMINARY PLAN – LEAP Wisconsin Assessment
Evaluating LEAP Wisconsin, the UW System’s decade-long Liberal Education Initiative
Charge
UW System President Ray Cross has charged Rebecca Karoff, Senior Special Assistant to the Senior Vice President of Academic & Student
Affairs, with conducting an assessment of the UW System’s more than ten-year-old Liberal Education initiative, LEAP Wisconsin. The resulting
report will be shared with UW System leadership, institutional leadership and the Board of Regents.
LEAP Wisconsin Steering Committee
With the support of the Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs, a steering committee has been convened to determine the scope of and
process for the assessment, and will also be involved in conducting the assessment. In addition, the Steering Committee will provide direction into
the System’s future LEAP Wisconsin work, including its newest project, Faculty Collaboratives, a Lumina-funded, AAC&U project focused on
building faculty capacity around proficiency-based reform efforts. The Steering Committee has 20 members from 12 (of 15) UW institutions,
including provosts, assistant and associate vice chancellors, deans and associate deans, assessment coordinators, faculty and others.
Members are expected to participate in monthly phone meetings and 2-4 in-person meetings throughout the duration of the project.
Timeline (anticipated)
LEAP Assessment: February-December 2015
Faculty Collaboratives: Winter 2015-Summer 2016
Assessment Areas (likely and potential)
Likely and potential areas to be surveyed, catalogued and assessed include:
 Value-added of, and/or what difference System leadership has made on the initiative in Wisconsin (information requested by President
Cross);
 Programmatic assessment at System, institutional, and national levels (LEAP conferences, activities, events, outreach and advocacy in
Wisconsin and nationally);
 Institutional curricular reform efforts (adoption of learning outcomes, curriculum mapping, General Education revision, implementation of
high-impact practices or HIPs, gateway course reform, integration of academic and student affairs, etc.);
 Evidence of the impact of LEAP Wisconsin on student learning and success (student data disaggregated across student populations, use of
VALUE rubrics and other assessment practices, DQP use);
 Policy changes motivated by and/or contributing to LEAP (curricular and assessment policies, faculty rewards system, program
development and evaluation, systemwide adoption of learning goals and quality framework, accountability reporting, Board of Regents,
etc.);
11
University of Wisconsin System Faculty Collaboratives Work Plan – March 2015

Budgetary decisions motivated by and/or contributing to LEAP (funding towards curricular revision, student affairs and support,
professional development, outreach and advocacy);
Preliminary Guiding Principles
1. The assessment process will work to capture the breadth and distinctiveness of each UW’s LEAP work, recognizing that not all the change
work focused on student success engaged in by the UW System is called LEAP or was motivated by it.
2. Inputs and outputs, as well as process and products will be identified and assessed.
3. Recognizing that UW institutions are already engaged in significant assessment work of their own, efforts will be made to limit the burden
on UW institutions throughout this process, including limiting surveying of faculty and staff.
4. Mixed methods assessment will be used, including, as appropriate, qualitative (surveys, focus groups of faculty, staff and students), and
quantitative methods.
5. Existing metrics already in place at UW institutions and UW System will be used, and additional metrics will be identified, as appropriate.
Alignment with the Faculty Collaboratives Project
 The Faculty Collaboratives project is designed to identify, evaluate, and disseminate existing and emerging UW System and institutional
student engagement initiatives focused on preparing students for meaningful lives and success in the 21st-century knowledge-based, global
society.
 Four LEAP Fellows appointed to advance faculty participation, collaboration, and leadership in AAC&U’s family of proficiency-based,
change initiatives.
 LEAP Fellows will serve on the Steering Committee.
Background
LEAP Wisconsin is:
 the University of Wisconsin System’s quality agenda and a blueprint for the essential learning UW students should have as they prepare to
take their places in the 21st-century knowledge-based, global society;
 a shared conversation about the purpose and value of liberal education throughout the UW System and parts of Wisconsin;
 a broad and coordinated set of activities, delivered statewide through campus action and public advocacy and outreach; and
 a way to be intentional about achieving Inclusive Excellence, the joint pursuit of equity and excellence as a shared responsibility and core
to the mission of the UW System.
In 2005, the Association of American Colleges & Universities (AAC&U) named the University of Wisconsin System its pilot partner in moving
its Liberal Education and America’s Promise—or LEAP—Campaign forward. Wisconsin thus became the first pilot state for AAC&U’s public
advocacy and campus-based activities known as the LEAP States Initiative. Since that time, the UW System and institutions have instituted
curricular and co-curricular reform efforts and convened scores of discussions, meetings, forums, and conferences focused on LEAP and the role
of public higher education—in Wisconsin and beyond—in the 21st century global society.
12
University of Wisconsin System Faculty Collaboratives Work Plan – March 2015
LEAP and Inclusive Excellence are critical components of the UW System’s goals for quality educational attainment. Their shared purpose helps
to realize the System’s abiding commitment that more—and more diverse—students have access to, persist through, and complete high-quality
undergraduate degrees.
LEAP Steering Committee – February 2015
Convened to provide leadership on the assessment of LEAP Wisconsin (the UW System’s Liberal Education Initiative), the AAC&U Faculty Collaboratives
grant project in which the UW System is playing a lead role, and the future of LEAP Wisconsin.
Name
Institution
Title
Email
1
2
3
Greg Cook
Paula DeHart
Meridith Drzakowski
UW-Whitewater
UW-Stevens Point
UW-Stout
cookg@uww.edu
pdehart@uwsp.edu
drzakowskim@uwstout.edu
4
Jennifer Fager
UW-Eau Claire
5
6
Joe Foy
Scott Furlong
UW Colleges
UW-Green Bay
7
Peggy James
UW-Parkside
8
Julia Johnson
UW-La Crosse
9
Rebecca Karoff
10
Bev Kopper
UW System Office of
Academic & Student
Affairs
UW-Whitewater
Associate Vice Chancellor
Assessment Coordinator
Assistant Chancellor for
Planning, Assessment,
Research & Quality
Director of Assessment and
Professor of Education
Associate Vice Chancellor
Dean, College of Liberal
Arts & Sciences; Professor
of Political Science
Professor of Political
Science; Faculty
Collaboratives Hub
Director
Associate Dean, College of
Liberal Studies
Senior Special Assistant to
the Senior Vice President
kopperb@uww.edu
11
Greg Lampe
UW Colleges
12
Jim Robinson
UW-Parkside
Provost and Vice
Chancellor
Provost and Vice
Chancellor
Director, Teaching &
Leaning Center
fagerjj@uwec.edu
joseph.foy@uwc.edu
furlongs@uwgb.edu
james@uwp.edu
Jjohnson2@uwlax.edu
rkaroff@uwsa.edu
greg.lampe@uwc.edu
James.robinson@uwp.edu
13
University of Wisconsin System Faculty Collaboratives Work Plan – March 2015
13
Glendali Rodriguez
UW-Stout
14
Dale Splinter
UW-Whitewater
15
Angie Stombaugh
UW-Eau Claire
16
17
Carleen Vande Zande
Jolanda Vanderwal
Taylor
UW-Oshkosh
UW-Madison
18
19
Dev Venugopalan
Nancy
Westphal-Johnson
UW-Milwaukee
UW-Madison
20
Joanne Wilson
UW-Platteville
Associate Vice Chancellor
for Academic Affairs
Associate Professor of
Geography
Director, Center for
Teaching and Learning and
Professor of Nursing
Associate Vice Chancellor
Chair, Department of
German and Professor of
Dutch
Associate Vice Chancellor
Senior Associate Dean,
College of Letters &
Science
Assistant Vice Chancellor
rodriguezg@uwstout.edu
splinted@uww.edu
stombaam@uwec.edu
vandezac@uwosh.edu
jvtaylor@wisc.edu
dv@uwm.edu
westphal@ls.wisc.edu
wilsonj@uwplatt.edu
Revised March 18, 2015
Appendix E – See Attached LEAP Wisconsin Assessment Survey
14