AGENDA ITEM NO: 10.1
UNIVERSITY COUNCIL
PLANNING COMMITTEE
REQUEST FOR DECISION
PRESENTED BY:
John Rigby, Chair, Planning Committee
DATE OF MEETING:
Sept. 21, 2006
SUBJECT:
University Learning Centre approval
DECISION REQUESTED:
That Council approve the University Learning Centre as a Type B
Centre.
SUMMARY:
The learning needs of students have been served by a variety of programs at the college,
department, and program levels. The impact of larger class sizes, more varied program and
course offerings, accessible digital technologies, a growing emphasis on and interest in
interdisciplinarity, increased cultural diversity, and a greater emphasis on research has given rise
to a number of academic and administrative structures which now require more coordination. A
centralized focus on learning for both faculty and students is now proposed through the new
University Learning Centre.
The University Learning Centre will be the primary organizational structure demonstrating the
University of Saskatchewan's commitment to teaching and learning. It will work collaboratively
with colleges, departments, and administrative units to coordinate and conduct programs and
initiatives which enhance student success, nurture teaching excellence, yield research
opportunities, and support University-wide goals to improve the student experience and to deliver
high quality educational programs. The University Learning Centre will serve as an umbrella
under which two components will co-exist: One component focuses on Student Success (the
ULCSS) and the other component on faculty and instructional program development (the Gwenna
Moss Centre). Some existing and new programs for students will be brought within the ULCSS,
while others will continue to operate within academic and service units in cooperation with the
ULC. The mandate of the Gwenna Moss Centre will expand from its current role and the Director
of the ULC will be leading the Gwenna Moss Centre.
At its April, 2006 meeting, Council reviewed several new organizational structures recommended
by the Outreach and Engagement Foundational Document. Council approved a motion which
endorsed the terms of reference and objectives for the New Learning Centre, with the proviso that
a more complete proposal would be brought forward for Council approval by September 30,
2006. This Centre is now called the University Learning Centre.
In accordance with Council procedures, the Centres Subcommittee has reviewed this Centre
proposal and has agreed to recommend its approval. The Budget Committee reviewed the
budget projections and also voted to support the proposal. The Planning Committee discussed the
proposal and has agreed to recommend that Council approve this Centre.
ATTACHED: Council policy describing types of centres
Proposal documentation and memos.
2
Planning Committee
Sept. 21, 2006
Council Policy describing Types of Centres
As described in the University of Saskatchewan Policy on Centres, approved by Council in
December, 2003
Type A
Type A Centres are those that are organizationally part of one college, and report
to a Dean, and do not involve substantial resources. These Centres involve
activities that complement and enhance the work of primarily one college, and
could involve multi-disciplinary and multi-faculty work. The activities of such
Centres should be congruent with approved College Plans and would be
established with the Dean’s endorsement and Council approval. Responsibility
for funding of these Centres rests with the college. (Informal association of
faculty that have no claim on tangible resources, but use the University name or
facilities should make known their objectives to the relevant dean.)
Type B
Type B Centres are those that involve activities beyond the scope of a single
college and/or involve significant resources and will require the endorsement of
the Deans involved, the appropriate Vice-President (usually the Vice-President
Research) and Provost’s Committee on Integrated Planning (PCIP) before
seeking the approval of Council. These Centres are organizationally part of the
University and are subject to University management and control, reporting to a
designated Dean or an appropriate Vice-President (usually the Vice-President
Research).
Type C
Type C Centres are Centres that are incorporated and legally distinct from the
University, and which have academic/research implications for the University.
These Centres must have the authorization of the Vice-Presidents and secure
Council approval before being recommended to the Board of Governors. These
Centres may be either a cooperative relationship involving the sharing of
resources, or a landlord-tenant relationship, reflecting the academic interest of the
University in the Centre’s activities and recognizing the University’s community
obligation to promote the greatest community use of its faculties and resources.
These Centres will report on their academic and research activities to a Dean to
the extent possible, and/or to an appropriate Vice-President. A financial report
must also be provided to the Vice-President (Finance and Resources) for the
Board, and all legal requirements of incorporated entities met.
Type D
Type D Centres are legally incorporated entities, established to support the
activities of the University, but which have no academic focus. Such Centres
may be proposed by a college or administrative unit, and their establishment
would require the approval of the Vice-President Finance and Resources, PCIP
and the Board of Governors. Type D Centres would report on an annual basis to
the Vice-President Finance and Resources and through that office to the Board.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Planning Committee Members
FROM:
John Rigby, Chair, Centres Subcommittee and Chair, Planning
Committee of Council
DATE:
August 25, 2006
RE:
Proposal for a University Learning Centre
______________________________________________________________________
The Centres Subcommittee met on August 22 to review the proposal for a University
Learning Centre with Dr. Jim Greer, Acting Director for the proposed University Learning
Centre and Ms. Pauline Melis, Director of Institutional Planning.
The Subcommittee was impressed with the ambitious view offered by the proposal and
the vision described for the Centre. The Centre will combine service-oriented activities,
which will embrace a number of units, together with research and scholarly work activity.
Although the Centre’s service orientation is further developed at this time than the
scholarly activity envisioned for the Centre, the University Learning Centre will exist as a
unit with strong academic ties across the institution. Research and scholarly work will be
conducted within the Centre by both the Gwenna Moss Teaching and Learning Centre
(GMTLC), and the Centre for Student Success, and the ULC will also facilitate and host
research carried out by others. The Subcommittee therefore concluded that although
the proposal for the University Learning Centre may be unique in its dual orientation,
Type B approval for the Centre is appropriate.
The Subcommittee also considered the governance model proposed for the centre and
suggested a revised model. The document proposed the Gwenna Moss Teaching and
Learning Centre be part of the University Learning Centre to ensure flexibility for crosscutting responsibilities. However, to ensure the mandate and focus on instructor
development for the GMTLC remains well defined, the Subcommittee suggested the
GMTLC remain a separate entity with a direct reporting relationship to the ULC. Rather
than incorporating the GMTLC within the ULC, the ULC will then function clearly as an
umbrella organization, combining both faculty and student interests. Given the broad
nature of the activities envisioned for the centre and the multiple reporting relationships,
the Subcommittee also requested an organizational chart be prepared to accompany the
proposal. A preliminary budget has been submitted for the 2007 fiscal year, and a
detailed budget is anticipated pending review by PCIP.
The Subcommittee further requested the proposal be reviewed in conjunction with the
Centres Policy and Guidelines to facilitate consideration by Council. Although the
required elements outlined in the Policy are implicit, a clear statement of the impact,
relationship and consultation undertaken as detailed within the Guidelines is requested.
The Centres Subcommittee supports the creation of the Centre as a Type B Centre
under the framework of centres defined within the Centres Policy. The subcommittee is
confident in asking the proponents to submit a revised proposal directly to the Planning
Committee without further subcommittee review.
__________________________________
John Rigby, Chair, Centres Subcommittee
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Planning Committee Members
FROM:
Alison Renny, Chair, Budget Committee of Council
DATE:
September 11, 2006
RE:
University Learning Centre Budget Review
______________________________________________________________________________________
The Budget Committee met on September 8 to review the budget proposal for the University Learning
Centre with Dr. Jim Greer, Acting Director for the proposed centre. The start-up budget proposed for the
ULC for 2006-07 formed a separate request which was not reviewed by the Budget Committee. However,
Dr. Greer noted the start-up budget comprised of a request for the placement of key staff over the coming
months to ensure the doors of the ULC open in January 2007, as planned.
The committee reviewed the budgetary outline for annual funding for the ULC, with the realization that the
budget request is presently under review by PCIP, and the total amount of funding and its breakdown has
not yet been finalized. The $1.2 million annual budget is envisioned as a five-year budget, with salary
increases accounted for within the University’s base budget. Although some new positions are provided
for within the budget, much of the present activity which will occur under the ULC is subsidized by soft
funds and volunteer work. The proposed annual budget would stabilize the Centre’s operation, permitting
many of these positions to become part of the core budget.
Of the $1.2 million in annual funding requested, approximately $320,000 would comprise new funding
beyond existing sources of revenue. Sources of revenue include the Gwenna Moss Teaching and Learning
Centre, Extension Division, the Student Enhancement Fund, and the Academic Priorities Fund. The
committee viewed the intent to seek future revenue through endowed funds as positive, and noted that
endowed funds are presently committed to the capital renovations for the Centre.
The committee considered the scope of activities envisioned within the Centre as outlined by Dr. Greer and
agreed the annual budget requested is a realistic portrayal of the funds required in order for the ULC to
fulfill its envisioned mandate. The direct commitment of the University to teaching and learning through
the University Learning Centre was supported by members of the Budget Committee, and the following
motion carried unanimously.
Motion: That the Budget Committee supports the annual budget projection of $1.2 million to
operate the University Learning Centre.
__________________________________
Alison Renny, Chair, Budget Committee
The University Learning Centre
August 31, 2006
Executive Summary
Responding to the needs of students, faculty, and staff and to the general directions provided in
the Integrated Plan, this proposal recommends the creation of a new University Learning Centre
(ULC) to support and enhance teaching and learning at the University of Saskatchewan and to be
an active advocate for exemplary practices and innovations in teaching and learning on campus
and beyond. Addressing the teaching and learning needs of both instructors and students, the
ULC will work collaboratively with colleges, departments, and administrative units to coordinate
and, where appropriate, conduct programs and initiatives that: complement and augment
existing efforts, enhance student success, nurture teaching excellence, yield research
opportunities, and support University-wide goals to improve the student experience and to deliver
high quality educational programs. The ULC will be the primary organizational structure
demonstrating the University of Saskatchewan’s commitment to teaching and learning. As such,
the ULC will be prominently featured in the Teaching and Learning Foundational Document
(anticipated December 2006) and will build and deliver initiatives that support its goals. The ULC
will expand programs based on demonstrated success, changing needs, and emerging research
as it is phased in to full implementation. The Gwenna Moss Teaching and Learning Centre
(GMTLC) will continue to exist and will operate with an expanded mandate within the ULC. The
ULC will be housed centrally in the ground and first floor of the Murray Memorial Library. It is
anticipated to begin operations, on a modest scale, in January 2007, with a more comprehensive
array of initiatives for both students and faculty beginning in the 2007/08 academic year.
Context
Like many other institutions of higher education in Canada, knowledge creation and
dissemination are paramount priorities for the University of Saskatchewan. This University is, and
must always be, a learning community – a place where knowledge is valued and learning is
encouraged and supported. Active advocacy of learning was envisioned in the Integrated Plan
and will be reflected in the Teaching and Learning Foundational Document currently under
development. The Gwenna Moss Teaching and Learning Centre (GMTLC) laid an important
foundation by creating a central focal point within the University to serve the teaching needs of
faculty. However, the learning needs of students have been attended to by a plethora of
programs with overlapping mandates and clienteles sponsored at the college, department, and
program levels. The impact of larger class sizes, more varied program and course offerings,
accessible digital technologies, a growing emphasis on and interest in interdisciplinarity,
increased cultural diversity, and a greater emphasis on research has given rise to a number of
academic and administrative structures which now require more coherent and concentrated
effort. A central focus on learning, for both faculty and students, is now proposed through the
new University Learning Centre (ULC). Yet, as we do this, we acknowledge the fine balance that
must be struck between creating a central unit addressing cross-campus needs and providing a
common resource that collaborates with, coordinates, and supports the diversity of learningrelated initiatives in colleges, departments, and service units across the campus.
Research indicates that many students entering university in the first decade of the 21st century
have different expectations than those of only a decade ago. For example, students entering in
2006/07 will have been accessing electronic information, manipulating images, and creating
media since kindergarten. They are more diverse in experience, culture, and preparedness than
students of two or three decades ago. Where faculty may be somewhat amazed at carrying
around an entire music collection on an I-Pod, or one’s life works on a memory key, our students
are often ill equipped, and equally amazed, when faced with the expectation to learn effectively
from a three hour lecture supported by chalkboard notes. Complicating this is both the influx of
young faculty with high technological expectations and the simultaneous loss of decades of
experience as some of our best faculty instructors retire. The current situation is also
complicated by the fact that these changes are occurring at a time when, increasingly, our ability
to attract and retain high quality students and faculty is being challenged by demographic forces
beyond our control.
In recognition of these challenges, universities in Canada and elsewhere are developing programs
and initiatives which support and enhance the teaching and learning experience of students, in
addition to maintaining and enhancing programs and initiatives directed at faculty and other
instructional staff. Some (e.g. University of Guelph) have developed specific programs which
support student retention goals (such as peer mentoring and support programs for courses which
are essential to degree progression and completion). Others (e.g. University of Calgary, UBC)
have devised certification programs for new faculty to launch teaching careers through specific
guidance and mentorship. Others (e.g. Waterloo, Athabasca) have identified ‘niche’ programs or
areas, such as ‘service learning’ or ‘elearning’ in which students and faculty both might obtain
valuable information, assistance, and support in developing and delivering innovative educational
courses and programs. At other universities these programs are developed in collaboration with
many groups, but a Library presence is usually a unifying feature. Perhaps this is because
libraries historically represent a space for learning, a repository of learning resources, and a place
to address student needs for intellectual socialization. Libraries, for their part, have also been
anxious to participate in a wide variety of crucial learning initiatives partly because their roles are
transforming but also because they are able to provide a central place or facility in which
students can come together to study, learn, or work.
The University of Saskatchewan has a strong track record of independence in curricular design,
program innovation, and instructional methodology and a broad array of pedagogical approaches
are applied at both the undergraduate and graduate levels. Each of these initiatives, at an
individual and unit level, has substantial merit and the ability to create transformational
experiences for students. However, when aggregated at the University-level, it is difficult to
discern organizational commitment to the student experience, to innovative approaches to
curricular design, to effective teaching, or to experiential learning opportunities of all types. To
provide a more coherent experience for all students who attend the University of Saskatchewan,
existing curricular reform and innovation at the course, program, and curricular level can be
supported and enhanced by using existing resources more effectively, by assembling talent in a
centre where experts in instructional design and innovative approaches to teaching and learning
reside, and by making this expertise more generally available to the university community.
Through the consultation process followed to date, we have learned that the ULC must become a
place for learning – both for students and faculty. It is perceived as an essential tool in ensuring
a rich educational experience for our students by providing the necessary supports and skills to
ensure that they are intellectually stimulated by the learning experience they obtain and
equipped to become productive members of society. The ULC is also essential in ensuring that
faculty and instructional staff acquire the necessary skills and supports to provide a high quality,
stimulating, challenging, educational experience to our students; to learn about and apply new
approaches to teaching and curricular design in their course and program offerings; and to
exercise the opportunity to engage in research about teaching and learning.
The University Learning Centre: Vision
The ULC is envisioned to be an academic support unit whose mandate is to champion the quality
of the educational experience offered by the University and promote student and faculty success
in a variety of teaching and learning environments. It will sponsor and encourage initiatives for
both student and faculty learning. For students, this means access to programs and initiatives
that are both remedial and formative to their educational experience, both within and beyond the
classroom. For faculty and other instructional staff, this means access to resources, programs,
and support initiatives which are informed by new and emerging practices in teaching and
learning. The ULC will provide facilities, resources, and opportunities for improving the teaching
and learning environments and should itself be a resource for the entire University of
Saskatchewan community. This will require focus on four broad goals:
¾
¾
¾
¾
Providing specific programs and services to support learners and instructors;
Promoting and sharing known methods for learner and instructor success in the university
environment and beyond;
Engaging in new research and development activities related to teaching and learning; and
Applying emerging innovations to support learner and instructor success and anticipated
learning outcomes.
These goals will be realized through activities that serve student learning and personal success;
teaching-career development for faculty, sessional lecturers, graduate students, and instructional
staff; support and resources for curriculum, program development and innovation; and access to
learning resources.
Initially, the ULC will draw together existing programs and services which provide remedial
support to students as well as develop a limited number of initiatives which provide opportunities
to students to enhance their educational experience. Student success in university, retention in
programs, and preparedness for post-university employment will be important goals of the ULC.
Because faculty and instructor development in teaching and overall attention to instruction are
equally important goals, the ULC will initially draw on the programs and initiatives currently
sponsored by the GMTLC but, as it evolves, the ULC will undoubtedly build additional programs
and services which address emerging needs of faculty and instructional staff. It is envisaged that
every program or major activity of the ULC that has a face-to-face physical presence should also
have a “virtual” presence. This includes online help-desks and online resource repositories to
support students and instructors.
How the existing academic and service units across campus participate in the ULC’s endeavours
is critical to the centre’s success. While incorporating some of their current activities directly in
the ULC is desirable, the more important goals are cooperation and collaboration. For the centre
to be truly successful, mechanisms need to be established to enable existing academic and
service units to share the best in research, practice, and application. The ULC will need to work
effectively with student organizations as well and student involvement in the ongoing
development of the ULC is crucial to its success. The ULC must strive to achieve a strong level of
cooperation and coordination with the USSU, the GSA, and the various college and department
student societies.
Time Frame
Given the challenge of integrating existing programs, developing new programs, and providing
appropriate space to house these activities, the ULC will be developed in three phases. Phase
One is planned for January 1, 2007 with successive activities implemented in two further phases.
Building on both the Learning Commons currently existing in the Library and on the GMTLC, the
ULC will be located in expanded physical space in the Main Library. Phase One of the ULC will be
a composite of existing entities (such as the Learning Commons and the GMTLC) along with
selected new initiatives. Phase Two will provide additional new programming as well as an
increased profile and presence for the ULC. Phase Three is anticipated to provide further
programming and innovation including an increased focus on research on teaching and learning.
All of the initiatives, new and existing, while discrete to some extent because each has a
particular mandate, are intimately interconnected as each supports the advancement of others
and the overall goals of the ULC.
Programs (Existing and New):
1. Supporting Student Learning and Personal Development
The University Learning Centre for Student Success (ULCSS) will be the centerpiece
for the University Learning Centre’s student initiatives. The ULCSS will act as a central
coordinating body for all types of learner support programs and initiatives, work in
cooperation with existing programs, and initiate new and complementary programs to ensure
student success in university and beyond. In so doing, the ULCSS will become the home for
a number of programs to support student learning, student retention, student leadership,
and student transitions into and out of the University.
Initially, it is envisioned that many existing programs, services, and resources will be drawn
together into the ULCSS. For example, the University Writing Centre and the Math Help Desk
will move into the ULCSS in January 2007. In addition, the Learning Commons currently
located in the Library and the various help desks currently operating in conjunction with it
will be collaboratively integrated with the ULCSS. For other services, the ULCSS will act as an
‘umbrella’ providing opportunities for synergy and collaboration, supporting independent
identities within broad University-wide goals. For example, the Aboriginal Student Centre
(ASC) will retain its current presence and profile, yet it is anticipated that students would be
encouraged to take advantage of the programs and services available at the ULCSS and
individual programs offered by the ASC.
While the importance of effective communication in varied forms of literacy (verbal, written,
mathematical, visual, and technological) is at the base of a sound education, the ULCSS will
assist students to develop a variety of additional skills. Opportunities for skill development
will be explored in as many of the following areas as can be managed:
♦
Study Skills: These are of first stage importance and require some physical space and
access to workshop rooms. Services may include writing training, research training,
making lecture notes, planning a presentation, citation, study techniques, time
management, etc. There is a good deal of overlap between various services:
communication and cooperation is crucial. Programs and initiatives in this area could be
partially run through the peer learning initiative (described below) but the online
resources currently available through SESD should be fully utilized.
♦
Information Literacy Skills: These are also of first stage importance and will require
physical space for workshops. It is possible that initiatives in this area may be an
offshoot of study skills, but it will clearly be important to work with the University Library
which already have developed online resources. It is possible that curricular design
might include a for credit or required course/program based on small assignments: web
search, catalogue search, database search, bibliography construction, article analysis,
website analysis, etc.
♦
Technology Skills: These are of second stage importance and may require dedicated
physical space. There are a number of technology training opportunities available
through ITS and they should continue to be run, but these logically deserve a home in
the ULC with the opportunity to provide expanded programming in critical areas.
♦
Communication Skills: These are also of second stage importance and may also require a
physical presence. This is a new service and should encompass written, electronic, and
oral communications. It is likely that, programs in this area would be run predominantly
on a workshop basis.
To support many of these activities, the ULC will initiate a new program of peermentoring/peer-tutoring in academic subjects. This will be a service learning initiative by
students for students. Learners in this program will receive tutorial help in specific courses
and skills. Mentors/tutors in this program will benefit by gaining experience, obtaining
training, and eventually qualifying for a tutor certification credential. The ULC will work with
academic units and student groups to establish this new program, anticipated to be piloted
beginning in January 2007 and fully operational for the 2007/08 academic year.
This peer-mentoring/peer-tutoring program will be complemented and directed by a larger
experiential and community service learning initiative aimed at supporting the community
service learning strategy described in the Outreach and Engagement Foundational Document
(OEFD) recently approved by University Council and Senate. Community service learning
initiatives provide an opportunity for students and communities to work together through
mutually beneficial partnerships to achieve shared goals. By coordinating
experiential/community service learning opportunities both within the University and beyond
its immediate borders, the ULCSS will participate in a fundamental way in achieving the goal
of creating a “curriculum of consequence” enunciated in the OEFD and confirm the University
of Saskatchewan’s commitment to its ‘sense of place’ as described in the Strategic Directions.
Establishing new partnerships, augmenting existing relationships, and supporting the
development of innovative opportunities for experiential learning in the community requires a
creative and focused effort, closely connected to student learning goals and leadership
potential, while drawing on effective and long-standing relationships which many faculty
already have within the larger community. Several successful service learning programs
currently exist, such as the Commerce program for income tax preparation for seniors, the
SWITCH initiative developed by students in health science disciplines, the Honours English
internship program where students are placed with publishers, etc. One of the first functions
envisioned for the ULCSS will be to build on the work associated with the Teaching and
Learning Foundational Document to elaborate existing experiential learning opportunities and
ensure that they are broadly advertised to students. An additional function would be the
identification of further experiential and service learning opportunities in the community
(within and beyond Saskatoon), and a liaison role with academic units to create and support
new experiential and service learning opportunities for students. Strong linkages and
interactions with other units on campus will be an important operating principle for the
ULCSS, especially in its initial stages to ensure clarity of purpose and collaboration on
activities.
In addition, a direct and close inter-relationship between and among the activities and goals
of the ULCSS is anticipated. For example, peer mentors undoubtedly will be involved in the
writing centre and math help centre. Pilot projects will be encouraged, such as a pilot in
electronic portfolio development for students and a new program in tutor training and
certification with organized peer-mentor study groups.
To achieve its goals, the ULCSS will need to find ways to work in cooperation with the many
existing support services including those reporting to the Associate Vice-President Student
and Enrolment Services such as disability services, the international students office, the
Aboriginal student centre, student employment centre, etc as well as other offices such as
ESL services, library services, which will continue to operate outside the ULC’s direct sphere
of activity. The best way to coordinate activities between the ULCSS and these other areas in
the short term is to ensure there is a coordination role at the Director level, as well as to gain
awareness of their services and to provide a referral service (a portal) to the various campus
services for students. In addition, a collaborative relationship and referral service needs to be
developed with the various transition programs into the University, such as: U-Life 101,
University Readiness, and the Aboriginal transition program as well as a connection to
transitional programs for graduating students such as Disorientation.
Much of the activity of the ULCSS is already ongoing in other forms. The main incremental
cost of this centre would be in terms of administration/management, some front-line staff to
handle student requests, funding for student peer tutor/mentors, and expansion of some
services (such as math and writing help).
2. Supporting Teaching-Career Development for Faculty, Graduate Students, &
Instructional Staff
The GMTLC was initiated to support faculty in these areas. Additional resources, expanding
the mandate of the GMTLC, and pursuing broader goals enables those engaged in teaching
at the University to have better access to resources and to develop a community of practice
to ensure their continued professional development as teacher-scholars. Media consulting,
technology training, collegial support, course development workshops and academic
programming and design will support these developments. The ULC then will house the
GMTLC with such an expanded mandate. The Centre for Distributed Learning will be an
obvious candidate centre for research collaboration with the ULC. Possibly TEL program
administration and TEL innovation coordination may also find their way into the ULC.
The recent discussions informing the Teaching and Learning Foundational Document reveal
some interest on the part of the campus community in renewal of a peer
consultation/mentoring program for faculty teaching improvement. The re-establishment of
such a program should be a priority for the ULC in Phase One, even if only in pilot form.
Additionally, some discussion has centered on the need for a program designed for faculty to
improve classroom teaching, along the lines of the existing and successful GSR 989 that is
currently available for graduate students. Such a program would be well worth exploring in
Phase One provided it maintains existing support as the discussions on the Foundational
Document unfold.
While it is clear that general e-learning activity needs to be controlled by the academic units
that deliver instruction, there is an important coordination and promotion role for the ULC.
Following the direction provided in the Teaching and Learning Foundational Document, the
ULC should champion many types of innovation including e-learning efforts and encourage
the creation and adoption of programs and initiatives that support the University’s future elearning strategy. As this happens, course development activities funded under the Province
of Saskatchewan’s Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL) initiative may not logically fit within
the ULC. It may be beyond the scope of the ULC to launch an e-learning development group
and take responsibility for all of the E-learning development resulting from TEL funding.
These activities may more logically fit inside either the Centre for Continued and Distance
Education (CCDE) or a separate Centre that brings together the expertise of the DMT, ITS,
and subject matter experts with TEL instructional designers under the leadership of a new
administrative structure which would ensure close connections between ULC, the E-learning
development group, and other service providers. Further discussion and negotiation with the
TEL steering committee are needed.
3. Supporting Curricular and Program Development and Innovation
A natural progression beyond instructional development is curricular development and
program design and innovation. As colleges and departments reflect on new approaches to
teaching, the ULC will serve as a centre for exchanging ideas on emerging teaching and
learning strategies and encouraging and supporting problem based learning, active learning,
setting learning outcomes and assisting with program and curricular revision. Continuing
research in techniques, opportunities provided by new technologies, and changing student
needs promise increasing latitude in curricular and programmatic approaches. Distributed
options, group learning, and complementing core student achievements further push and pull
the need for curricular reform. New directions such as problem-based learning, blended
learning environments, outcomes-based program assessment, incorporating research into
undergraduate curricula, and instruction based on communities of practice are just a few
examples of innovations that need to be considered in our local context.
The College of Education and the Instructional Design Group in the Extension Division
currently house much of our collective expertise in these areas. However, there are other
pockets of expertise and experience across the institution that can be brought together to
foster innovation, guide program development, and support diverse approaches to program
delivery. At the moment there are no campus-wide services that fall directly under this
category (although there are some college-specific facilities, notably in the College of
Medicine). It is vital that the University work to modernize its curriculum and to embrace new
innovations in curricular and program development.
For these reasons, the mandate of the GMTLC will be expanded to provide a new consultancy
initiative in innovative instructional design and curriculum/program development. This
consultation service will be a key place for departments, colleges, and individual faculty
members contemplating curricular or program re-design to discuss ideas, learn about new
trends elsewhere, and generally obtain guidance and advice. This service would be
undertaken by seconding selected faculty members into the ULC, some on a full time, and
some on a part-time basis. Three faculty members, including the Director, will work full time
in the GMTLC. They will need to have an academic home in some college for tenure and
promotion purposes, but would be fully funded by and permanently seconded to the ULC. For
the part-time secondments, colleges would be encouraged (paid) to provide some relief from
normal duties to selected faculty members so that they can spend part of their time in the
ULC to offer these consultancy services to other faculty and to departments or colleges. This
consultancy would also take the form of providing advice, guidance, and greater academic
credibility for activities undertaken by the GMTLC. It is envisaged that one or two faculty
members per term with one or two course teaching reductions (or equivalent) would be
seconded to assist with this activity in the GMTLC. Careful selection of the individuals to
participate in this activity will be critical. The budget requirements for such a program would
not be very large, but appropriate recognition for departmental and college collaboration will
be required.
4. Facilitating Research and Scholarly Work
In order to lead us toward innovation in teaching and learning, it is important for the
University to engage in more research related to teaching and learning in higher education.
In this regard, the development of capacity for research in university teaching and learning
will be encouraged by the ULC. Again, there are pockets of activity across the institution
where research in discipline-specific instruction occurs, and where more general research in
higher education is conducted. The Centre for Distributed Learning is one example. Offering
an umbrella for more general research activity on the subject of university teaching and
learning is an important role of the ULC. In the first phase of the ULC, an invitation to explore
the feasibility of adding capacity within the GMTLC for research on University Teaching and
Learning will be extended to the University community on the premise that the impetus for
research must come from those interested in pursuing research. Should this come to pass,
the ULC could offer some space, access to research subjects and data, and a testbed for
experimental innovative programs in response to researchers’ needs. The ULC might, in
future phases, have a budget for supporting novel research projects related to teaching and
learning and perhaps offer “seed funding” for preliminary projects (that could later seek
outside funding). Additionally, the ULC should have available some resources for special
projects and to provide support for faculty to attend conferences related to the scholarship of
teaching and learning.
5. Supporting Access to Learning Resources
The ubiquitous computer and ever-expanding internet have blurred the lines between
content development, media production, and computer support and have made access to
knowledge “24/7”. Making the most effective use of information technology resources and
assessing new investment is a crucial issue for the U of S. Despite the substantial social,
cultural, and economic changes of the past decade, the prevalent model of teaching and
learning remains essentially the same as that of earlier decades of our institutional history, -not unlike other universities. The effect this model of teaching and learning may have on
student recruitment and retention as well as our ability to attract faculty has yet to be
determined, but is unlikely to have ‘no impact’ as students and faculty adopt new
technologies and embrace a wide variety of learning opportunities outside the traditional
classroom environment. The value of the Learning Commons currently existing within the
Library is obvious by its popularity; as the Library continues to evolve, learning how to access
materials will become a key role of the ULC and the ULCSS.
On-line resources in support of teaching and learning are not scarce; in fact there is a
problem of resource overload facing learners and teachers. Locating quality resources
appropriate to individual needs is a critical problem that needs to be solved. Help desks, both
physical and virtual, provide a good means to combat the resource overload problem. We
need to further consider best practices in learning management systems and how to make
best use of existing opportunities such as PAWS course tools and WebCT. The notion of a
“one-stop referral service” for locating useful resources is an appropriate model.
Efforts by the Library (and others) to develop a campus repository of learning objects, efforts
by DMT to develop a repository of media artifacts, and efforts by the USSU to develop a
repository of student-specific and course-specific resources are important steps in this area.
The ULC will act as an advocate for such projects and as a knowledge-broker for linking
expertise across the campus in areas related to building repositories of knowledge resources.
Space Implications and Space Availability
The principles that will govern space planning will be those that have already been enunciated:
collaboration, cooperation, and coordination. The ULC cannot, nor should it, ‘house’ all of the
infrastructure to support teaching and learning at the University of Saskatchewan. Nevertheless,
it will need a substantial physical presence to accomplish its goals.
Plans have been developing over the past several months to provide for space to house the
activities of the new ULC within the Main Library. Space will be freed up to accommodate the
ULC in three phases over the next three years. At the highest level, faculty support and teaching
support programs offered through the GMTLC will be housed in the space recently vacated by the
College of Graduate Studies and Research (CGSR) (at least through Phases One and Two). Staff
from the GMTLC will relocate there, as will some faculty members currently in the Instructional
Design Group of the Extension Division. The GMTLC secretary will be responsible for reception
duties for the people in this space. In addition, the director of the ULC and the part-time faculty
consultants likely should be in this space. There should be a good-sized meeting/seminar room
and some space for researchers.
The Library Circulation Desk and help desks currently on the first floor of the library will stay in
their current locations in Phase One but will likely move to the ground floor by Phase Two.
Several meeting room style spaces will be needed to accommodate the writing centre, math help
centre, and the study groups program. Some of this space will be available on the first floor in
Phase 1 and more space will be available on the ground floor in Phase 2. Office space for the
mentor/tutor training program staff will be needed as well as a preparation room for the
mentors/tutors. For Phase 1 this requirement will be satisfied by temporarily occupying the
ground floor space vacated by the GMTLC. Information on specific renovations and other
requirements will need to be examined and developed in detail, but an overview of current plans
is provided in Attachment One to this document.
The phased in strategy meets the needs of the ULC, as identified at this time, and supports the
goals of the Main Library Transformation project. An assessment of the future utilization by the
Library of the Second Floor South and the Sixth Floor South will take place in concurrent
investigations. The need to provide additional space to accommodate ULC activities and program
needs will consider the development of expansion space on the perimeter of the Library Ground
Floor – South or other options such as building additions in Phase 3.
Resources
The establishment of a vital centre requires responsive and dynamic staff, working closely
together to coordinate programs that enable students and instructors to meet program and
personal goals. Initial resources to support the activities of the ULC will be provided through reassignment of positions from the Extension Division, the GMTLC, and possibly elsewhere,
augmented by additional support provided by operating budget resources, including the
Academic Priorities Fund, primarily for student-oriented programs offered by the centre.
It is anticipated that by July 2007 a full-time faculty member will be appointed to direct the
overall activities of the ULC, including the work of the GMTLC. The Director will be supported by
administrative and secretarial support, by a manager for the ULCSS, a coordinator for the Service
Learning Initiative, faculty colleagues, as well as professional staff in the ULCSS, and the GMTLC.
Existing resources available to the ULC include the budgets for the GMTLC, faculty salaries and
transfers from the Extension Division, the Student Enhancement Fund that currently supports the
writing and math centres, and will be augmented by direct support from the Academic Priorities
Fund and from endowment funds. Approximately 13 FTE, faculty and staff, are anticipated by
Phase 2 (late 2007), primarily from transfers of faculty and an initial investment to provide direct
support for students and program initiatives directly related to students.
As the ULC grows, fulfills its mandate, creates an array of distinctive programs and services, and
with demonstrated effectiveness and results, additional resources will undoubtedly be required.
The resources sketched out above are minimal requirements for a fully functioning and effective
ULC, giving it the greatest chance for success. Because the ULC will be phased in based on
space and programming availability and development, resources will be required in a similar
manner, but, at least initially, priority will be placed on existing programs in the GMTLC, the
support programs identified above for the ULCSS (writing and math help), along with at least a
pilot project for service learning by January, 2007 so that a visible presence can be demonstrated
to students and faculty during the 2006/07 academic year.
Phase 2 Budgetary Requirements for the new University Learning Centre*
Annual Costs (2007-08 and beyond)
Full-time Faculty (including director)
3 FTE
Part-time Faculty secondments
$40,000
Professional Staff (ULCSS and Service Learning) 5 FTE
Professional Staff (GMTLC)
3 FTE
Administrative/Clerical Staff
2 FTE
Students
$120,000
Programs, Initiatives and Operations
$200,000
Total Annual Cost
roughly $1.2M
*Does not include TEL Coordinator or term instructional designers from Extension Division
Budget requirements for 2006-07 will include a seconded acting director for the ULC and GMTLC,
continued funding of the GMTLC at its current staff complement, support for the writing and
math help centres, a manager for the ULCSS (to begin work in the fall of 2006), and two or three
professional staff to support programming in the ULCSS (also to begin work in the fall of 2006).
Governance and Management
The ULC will be headed-up by a Director, who will report to the Provost. The Director will have
the dual responsibility of directing the overall ULC as well as the GMTLC. The Director should be
a member of faculty with strong interest and demonstrated excellence in teaching and learning
practice, innovation, and research. The Director should take an active role in guiding the GMTLC
programs and staff in addition to providing leadership and high-level direction to the ULCSS. An
advisory committee with make-up similar to that of the current ULC Steering Committee will
assist in providing direction for the operation of the ULC and will ensure broad-based support for
initiatives as well as information sharing for program planning and delivery purposes. The Dean
of the Libraries, the Dean of Education, the Dean of Arts and Science, and the Associate VicePresident Student and Enrolment Services will be important partners in ensuring the success of
the ULC and governance arrangements will need to ensure that strong and close partnerships
with these offices exist.
Beyond the units which are directly included in the ULC, it will be essential to create opportunities
and vehicles for communication and program planning/delivery. Essential to this will be strong
participation and support from SESD, the Library, ITS, DMT, the colleges, student organizations,
and other partners.
A senior staff member with suitable experience in learner support should be hired into the role of
Manager of the ULCSS. An experienced staff member in the area of Service Learning should be
hired into the Service Learning Coordinator position. The ULC will be a program driven operation
with hands-on management and as flat a reporting structure as possible. Subject Area
Coordinators within the ULCSS will be responsible for learner support initiatives involving student
tutors in selected subject areas (particularly Mathematics and Writing) or skill areas such as study
skills, communication or technology literacy.
Faculty in the GMTLC should be assigned duties by the Director, but would require a “home”
College for collegial decisions. Since these individuals will be largely involved in scholarly work in
higher education, the College of Education would be best to serve this role. Under the guidance
of the Director and GMTLC faculty members, the program coordinators in the GMTLC will plan
and organize programs for faculty and other instructors. Where appropriate they will be involved
in delivering these programs, much as they do at the present time.
A proposed organizational chart is provided to summarize positions and reporting relationships.
ULC Organizational Chart
ULC Director (.5)
GMTLC Director (.5)
Manager
Student Success
Subject Area
Coordinators (2)
Service Learning
Coordinator
Online Support
Coordinator
ULCSS
Assistant
Program
Coordinators (3)
Faculty (2)
Assistant
GMTLC
Consultation
The creation of a new University Learning Centre figured prominently in the University integrated
plan. Over the past two years numerous consultation efforts were undertaken to seek input and
to shape the centre.
- Steering Committee formed (late 2004) with regular meetings since January 2005
- Town Hall meeting featuring M. Ridley, Chief Librarian, University of Guelph
- Workshop held April 2005 for potential stakeholders in the learning centre
- Second workshop held February 2006 to discuss preliminary “Shape Document”
- Town Hall meeting held March 2006 to present the proposed Centre to the wider University
community
- First presentation to Planning Committee, March 2006
- Presentation to IDCC, April 2006
- First presentation to Council, May 2006
- Approval by Committee on Centres, August 2006
The ULC Project has a significant building component and this is inextricably connected with the
main Library transformation project. Many joint meetings with the Library and FMD have taken
place over the past year and the renovation projects for the ULC and Library have been formally
integrated to become the ULC/Library Transformation project.
Consultation with various deans, department heads and administrative unit leaders, student
leaders, individuals in charge of the writing centre and math help centre, etc. has been frequent
and ongoing.
Reporting and Evaluation
The ULC will prepare an annual activity report, which will be presented to the advisory committee
and the Provost for approval. An annual report will also be made to the Instructional
Development Committee of Council. As an academic support unit with an academic mandate, the
ULC should be periodically subjected to external review to ensure that it is providing effective
support to learners and instructors. Ongoing evaluation research into programs and activities will
be conducted by ULC researchers to obtain evidence for use in these periodic reviews.
E-Learning, the ULC, and TEL
E-Learning activity at the University of Saskatchewan has been accelerated in recent years
because of targeted provincial government funding through the Technology Enhanced Learning
(TEL) initiative. Thus far TEL, a provincial government program, has been administered on
campus by an ad hoc coordinating committee. Over the past few years TEL has been the source
of considerable funding for the Extension Division, DMT, and ITS. The funds have been largely
project-based, allocated around individual course development projects. Concern has been raised
about many aspects of TEL and TEL-funded projects by the campus community, including the
Planning Committee of Council.
There are, however, many activities related to e-learning which reside outside the TEL program.
Many academic units are actively involved in e-learning activities and such initiatives should be
encouraged within a University-wide e-learning strategy. The Teaching and Learning
Foundational Document is expected to underscore the urgency of policy development and to
recommend that an office be responsible for oversight of the e-learning policy and Universitywide initiatives arising from it. Moving towards a more broadly-based University strategy for elearning might provide an opportunity for the ULC to be linked to new centrally-based e-learning
organizational structures which might be developed, – a common practice at other universities –
and to provide consultative services for colleges and departments wishing to expand online or
blended instruction. Perhaps one solution is to create an e-learning development unit consisting
of instructional designers, media developers, and ICT specialists who would work on specific
content and resource development projects. This will need to be worked out as the Foundational
Document is developed over the coming months.
Conclusion
This paper provides an overview of the shape and scope of the new ULC. It reflects options that
have risen to prominence from discussions which have been engaged with faculty and students,
student organizations, existing units that might deliver services or participate in the ULC
programs, as well as with key members of the University community and Council committees
since January 2005. This proposal represents strong consensus that teaching and learning
initiatives must inform and build on each other. It reflects University-wide interest in the
development of a Centre that coordinates, collaborates, and conducts programs and initiatives
that support and enhance the University’s teaching and learning environments. It is intended to
provide a roadmap for future development and evolution of the new ULC as faculty, students,
and staff participate in its activities and shape its future.
<JG/PMM.31.August.2006>
Attachment One – Space Needs and Availability (as of July, 2006)
Allocation of $1 million from the Academic Priorities Fund will provide initial funding to
support the ULC/Library Transformation Project. The following outlines the phasing
strategy for the ULC resulting in anticipated capital costs for Phases 1 and 2 of roughly
$3 million with:
1. more space being made available for the ULC at the end of Phase 2,
2. greater flexibility in addressing the developing needs of the ULC,
3. an improved and consistent strategy for incorporation with the needs of the
University Library,
4. expected reduced capital costs for Phase 3.
Phase 1 – Expected completion by January 2007
• Gwenna Moss Teaching and Learning Centre (GMTLC) will relocate to the
vacated College of Graduate Studies and Research Space
• Break out rooms will be developed on the First Floor – South for the Writing and
Mathematics Help facilities.
• The Centre for Student Success portion of the ULC will be developed within the
vacated GMTLC on Ground Floor – South
• Library Access Services staff and Research Services staff will remain on First
Floor – South
• A mobile coffee cart will be explored.
Phase 2 – Expected completion for January 2008
• Library Technical Services and the Aboriginal Portal Unit will relocate from
Ground Floor – South to 6th Floor – South
• Circulation Desk and Reserve will relocate from First Floor – South to Ground
Floor – South
• Relocated and enlarged washrooms (including accessible washroom) will be
developed on Ground Floor – South
• A café/lounge will be developed on Ground Floor – South
• Additional space will be developed for the ULC on Ground floor – South (Break
Out Rooms, Student Skills Resource Space)
Phase 3 – Will be completed when planning is finalized and funds are available
• Currently under development
• The basic strategy will not change, however, it is anticipated that there may be
reduced capital costs as a lesser degree of internal Library shifts are being
considered
NOTES:
• Increased capital costs are anticipated for Phase 2 as Library staff will now be
relocated to the 6th Floor – South of the Murray Building
• Additional space will now be available for the ULC as part of Phase 2
• Internal relocation of Library staff may be minimized in Phase 3 thereby reducing
capital costs
• Library storage space will be provided in both the SERF Building and the General
Purpose Building
• The ULC space strategy is indicating a stronger interaction between facilities and
resources located on Ground Floor South and First Floor South.
• Common resources and spaces such as break out rooms, service/resource
operations, computer facilities, and classroom/multimedia space, will be located
on both floors and will be available to all users of the Learning Centre.
Attachment Two – Preliminary Budget (pending PCIP approval)
ULC Overall
Director
Secretary/receptionist
Innovative projects-award winning teachers
Operating costs
ULC for Student Success
Senior Coordinator / Manager
Faculty Advisors 2*3cu release
Writing Help
Coordinator
paid core tutors
service learning tutors
Math Help
Coordinator
paid core tutors
service learning tutors
Other Subject help
Coordinator
service learning tutors
Online Helpdesk
Coordinator
service learning tutors
Service Learning Initiative
Coordinator
Assistant
Operating budget - professional development,
special projects,
GMTLC
Director
Faculty (2)
Curriculum Consultants
(faculty teaching release)
Program Coordinators (3)
part time assistants
Newsletter
Operating Budget(programming etc.)
Capital Equipment Renewal
Total
0.5 FTE
1 FTE
$15,000
$35,000
Faculty
CUPE
1 FTE
$8,000
ASPA
3/4 FTE
$36,000
$12,000
ASPA
3/4 FTE
$36,000
$12,000
ASPA
1/2 FTE
$12,000
ASPA
1 FTE
$12,000
ASPA
1 FTE
1 FTE
ASPA
CUPE
$50,000
0.5 FTE
2 FTE
$25,000
3 FTE
$30,000
$10,000
$75,000
$8,000
~ $1.2 M
Faculty
Faculty
ASPA
Attachment Three: Peer Mentoring – An Example of New Programming in the
ULC for Student Success
This initiative involves a formalized program of peer study groups for specific selected courses.
The ULC and the ULCSS would provide, where possible, a student mentor to act as a study group
leader / consultant / tutor. This mentor would be knowledgeable enough to serve as a tutor for
the group. Study group meetings would be scheduled subject to time constraints and space
availability.
Mentors in this program would themselves be participants in a tutor-training program. Such a
program would involve training seminars/class sessions, coaching by experts, and access to
resources on best practices in their subject area. A significant “practical internship” would involve
time spent assisting/coaching/tutoring study groups. Upon completion of the tutor-training
program, a credential (a license perhaps) would be issued to the mentor. This license would
serve as a quality control measure for individuals who wish to engage in private tutoring. In
addition, course credit for mentors engaged in this tutor-training program may be considered. It
may be reasonable in some disciplines to offer a 3-cu subject-specific course in teaching that
subject.
Students engaged as mentors/tutors would thus gain experience and a credential. Their work
with study groups would be considered to be a type of service learning (i.e. an unpaid internship
or possibly paid some honorarium).
The creation and management of such a program would be a fairly major undertaking that would
require faculty guidance, an experienced senior staff person, and likely an administrative support
person and graduate teaching fellows. The budget needs to be explored in more detail.