Office of the Provost
2014-2015
Academic Innovation Fund
Program Description
Introduction
Economic challenges facing Seattle Pacific University:
“Colleges fear that their high prices and the concern over rising student debt are turning
people away, and on Wednesday, President Obama again challenged them to rein in
tuition increases. Colleges have resorted to deeper discounts and accelerated degree
programs. In all, the four-year residential college experience as a presumed rite of
passage for middle-class students is coming under scrutiny.”
“The long enrollment boom that swelled American colleges — and helped drive up their
prices — is over, with grim implications for many schools.”
“Hardest hit are likely to be colleges that do not rank among the wealthiest or most
prestigious, and are heavily dependent on tuition revenue, raising questions about their
financial health — even their survival.” New York Times, College Enrollment Falls as
Economy Recovers, July 25, 2013
There is little doubt that higher education generally is facing serious economic challenges.
Decades long practices of increasing nominal tuition at two or more times the rate of inflation
seems almost certain to change. The strategy of increasing nominal tuition but making up for it
with steeper and steeper discount rates also appears to be reaching the limits of its viability as a
strategy for attracting students.
Inside Higher Ed's 2013 “Survey of College and University Business Officers” reveals
doubt about their own colleges' futures and the higher education landscape more
generally.




Only 27% of business officers express strong confidence in the viability of their
financial models over 5 years -- and that drops to 13% over 10 years.
6 in 10 CFOs disagree with the statement that "reports that a significant number
of higher education institutions are facing existential financial crisis are
overblown.”
57% agree that new spending at their institutions will come from reallocated
dollars rather than new revenue….
CFOs favor better use of data to evaluate programs and identify solutions - but
most admit their colleges do not have the data or culture to make informed
decisions.”
Office of the Provost 4/14
Seattle Pacific University would seem to be very much in the center of this storm. Although SPU
offers a strong curriculum, it lacks the prestige and resources of a number of better endowed
and far more selective universities. Given the relatively small size of its endowment it is also
very tuition dependent. In 2012-13, 93.4% of SPU’s revenue came from tuition. Even small drops
in enrollment will continue to have significant impacts on the University’s budget.
It is difficult to say exactly from where the most immediate threats to SPU’s continued success
will come. It may be that we will reach a point where families simply can’t afford what we are
offering and they will opt out entirely. Or as we have seen in recent years, they will focus on
other economic solutions such as increased number of transfer credits, Running Start programs
and junior transfers to receive the SPU degree without the complete SPU education. Even when
scholarship packages make student tuition affordable, our “extra” distinctive –Christian,
transformative and holistic education with a focus on vocational exploration and preparation
may be perceived by parents to be insufficiently related to early career attainment to justify our
premium over other higher education alternatives who tout similar economic outcomes for their
graduates. Other institutions could offer the same value as we are offering but figure out how
to do so for a lower price. Or, alternatively, others might offer a higher quality education added value - for the same price.
In the midst of the churn occurring in traditional educational models we are also surrounded by
other possible disrupting factors. These include open source courses, MOOC’s and certificates,
increased acceptance of competency-based (information only) models (e.g. WGU), adaptive
technology such as Carnegie Mellon’s Open Learning Initiative that incorporates evidence based
pedagogy and continuous feedback to tailor individual student learning experiences to their
pace. Additionally, MOOC’s are using “big data” to develop “robo-grading” based off of sentence
structure and key words to grade tests and papers without faculty input.
Pedagogical challenges facing Seattle Pacific University
Moreover, even in the absence of economic threats, the changing nature of students who are coming to
our University suggests a need to take another look at how students learn and how we teach. Data
about undergraduates generally suggest that we are observing a number of differences between the
students who are arriving now and those from even the most recent generations. Current students are:






Less linear in their thinking – don’t always start at the beginning – “hypertext” minds
More adept at exploring and discovering – better at inductive and parallel thinking
Weak on critical thinking
More likely to incorporate graphics in addition to text as part of their learning
Able to process visual information more quickly – they both notice more and process faster
Better at spatial skills
Office of the Provost 4/14











Multi-taskers (albeit not necessarily adept) who have shorter attention spans and a more
limited ability to reason out problems or think deeply about a subject
Less skilled at and less naturally inclined to reflection - less built-in time for spaciousness of
thinking
Reading fewer books and less fiction growing up – fewer “constructed journeys” - internet
reading requires the reader to “construct her own journey” – no clear starting and ending
point
Inundated with too much information and need skills in sorting and evaluating rather than
finding – and because there is so much information they tend to find and settle on
information that confirms prior biases
Superior “scanners” but easily distracted and manipulated by visual cues
Eager for and expecting active and engaged learning opportunities
Desire to create their own knowledge rather than merely learning about other’s.
Better able to work in teams
Less willing to accept delayed gratification in learning
Used to being surrounded by multiple stimuli so are often bored in more traditional learning
settings
Placing a high importance on seeing connections between learning and positive social
change
However, the landscape of higher education is not completely bleak. Over the past 15 years there is a
growing body of scholarship on teaching and student learning, technological advances that have
increased learning resources and flexibility in course delivery, generational changes that have created a
more diverse and purpose-driven student body, and an increase in interdisciplinary problem-focused
coursework, to name a few.
Innovation Fund Strategy
Both for economic and pedagogical reasons, then, it is imperative that Seattle Pacific University continue
to innovate. Traditional teaching methods employed in the past are simply less likely to be efficacious
today. Moreover, the business model of higher education appears to be heading for a financial cliff.
Change is essential.
Having said this, however, there is no single solution or silver bullet that can be deployed across our
campus. Educational research on what does and does not work with the current generation of students
continues to evolve while the marketplace for higher education is changing rapidly and in ways that are
somewhat unpredictable.
In the face of certainty that some change is needed and uncertainty as to what change is needed, Seattle
Pacific University should adopt an intentional commitment to encourage and fund evidence-based
innovations in teaching and learning. The overall purpose of these educational innovations should be
threefold. First, they should be designed to lead to an enhanced pedagogical experience for our
students with a focus on clear learning outcomes. Second, they should seek to do so in a manner that is
Office of the Provost 4/14
increasingly efficient. (Since the major cost of higher education is tied up in faculty and staff salaries,
efficiency in this context translates into being able to educate more students with less faculty and staff
time.) And third, they should do so in a manner that preserves the central core Seattle Pacific’s identity.
These innovations should yield a number of benefits. First and foremost, successful innovations,
particularly if well-designed and documented, will not only benefit a specific course or major but in
sharing the outcomes, should benefit the entire community, giving us a jump start on changes that may
be needed to respond to a changing competitive environment. Even if outcomes associated with these
innovations are less than expected, negative outcomes can still provide information on how not to
invest future resources. Over time, intentionally planned innovations should provide a roadmap forward
for a unique Seattle Pacific experience that is both effective and efficient.
Funding innovations will also create some ancillary benefits. Already the Center for Scholarship and
Faculty Development and its Educational Technologies and Media Group has supported Faculty
Communities of Learners to create quasi-experiments around concepts such as blended learning, active
learning, on-line course development, team-based learning and “flipped classrooms” which has allowed
faculty members to produce well-received research about these alternate pedagogical strategies.
Additional academic conference presentations, journal articles, and books may be enabled by the
innovation fund. Research set in the context of faculty learning groups will also facilitate the
development of interdisciplinary communities on our campus. As we have grown in size and dispersion
in the Puget Sound area, the shared sense of faculty community is harder and harder to sustain.
Providing funding for research in teaching and student learning that brings faculty from different
disciplines together contributes to nurturing a more dynamic and unified faculty.
The Innovation Fund
In its spring, 2013 meeting, the Board of Trustees of Seattle Pacific University called for the
establishment of a $250,000 innovation fund. Beginning with the 2014-2015 Academic year, this fund
has been proposed to be established over five years at a spend rate of $50,000 per year. Once
contributed, these funds would be used exclusively to fund innovations which would be carefully
designed implementations that would have clearly defined objectives and measureable outcomes. The
$50,000 per year would be in addition to - rather than in replacement of funding already provided to the
Center for Scholarship and Faculty Development and school based Academic Renewal Grants. These
funds would be generated through fund raising efforts led by the Board of Trustees and supported by
University Advancement.
Responsibility for developing the request for proposals, selection, the administration of the funds and
monitoring the related innovations and coordinating showcases of the outcomes, is housed in the
Center for Scholarship and Faculty Development. The director of the Center administers these funds
under the leadership of the Provost. The Office of the Provost will provide an annual report to the Board
of Trustees detailing the use of the funds and the results.
Office of the Provost 4/14
The funding can be used for two purposes and may be directed toward both undergraduate as well as
graduate programs. The first type of funding can be requested to aid in the development of innovative
pedagogical approaches to existing courses. Some of the innovations could be developed in the first
instance by individual faculty members interested in exploring a particular approach for a specific class.
Other innovations could arise through a Faculty Community of Learners hosted by the Center. These
types of innovations might include using Learning Assistants, flipped classroom modules, team-based
problem or issue directed projects, intensive Camp Casey based modules with mentoring –tutorial style
interactions for the rest of the quarter (e.g. Marketing on the island) or intensive writing courses.
The second type of funding would be focused on curricular innovations (which would likely also
encompass innovative pedagogical alignments). 1 Departments could consider programmatic
innovation(s) across their curriculum or in conjunction with other departments. Funding can also be
requested to develop and seed complete programs through a multi-year proposal. For example, there
are a growing number of schools that have created three year cohort-based models with specific majors
(typically in the social science or business). Other models which have already been developed at public
and private schools could include an interdisciplinary program housed across multiple departments,
interdisciplinary programs with problem based focus bridging social and natural sciences (such as
University of Arizona’s Water, Society and Policy Degrees Program), low residency- intensive mentoring
programs, five - six year joint BA/MA or BS/MS programs, one-year Masters programs leading to
professional certificates (such as the CFA) and programs drawing on resources from multiple institutions
(such as the Houghton / Indiana Wesleyan partnership).
In the case of either type of proposal, funding for innovations could also be used to provide access to
enhanced hardware and software, course releases for faculty, stipends, opportunities to attend
academic conferences and webinars and other out of pocket expenses as determined by the director.
Examples of potential innovations
There are many innovations that could be supported through the fund. Without intending to be
restrictive, the following are examples of the types of innovations that you could consider pursuing:
Pedagogical Innovations for existing courses

Refine existing “flipped classroom” innovations
Increasingly, our faculty are utilizing a “flipped classroom” approach where the primary
transmission of content takes place outside of the classroom, but where in-class activities allow
students to interact closely with faculty and learning assistants in working with and applying the
information learned. In spite of our emphasis over the past couple of years on this particular
approach, however, there are many additional aspects of teaching in a “flipped classroom”
1
Which would be subject to the faculty governance process as appropriate.
Office of the Provost 4/14
format that need further exploration and experimentation. Faculty could propose an individual
course or propose a Community of Learners approach including several faculty who would work
on course revisions together.

Build an SPU course around free online robust course material
Consider creating a “flipped classroom” with open source material from Kahn Academy or a
MOOC offered by a leading faculty member in the field. The on-campus classroom time could be
spent in smaller groups exploring some of these concepts with an SPU faculty member in an
applied setting and in greater detail.

Utilize sophisticated interactive software programs to teach and assess learning in particular
modules of existing courses
Carnegie Mellon invites faculty from other institutions to use their open source interactive
software which creates a personalized learning module and assessment for students. Create a
class where students use the Carnegie Mellon software to compliment current course objectives
and use course time for problem or project based learning and application.

Offer the same course in multiple formats and at different levels of tuition
A single faculty member or a group of faculty teaching a common course could try offering a
course in alternate formats. For example, a course could be offered as a non-moderated, on-line
course where course credit would be assigned based on competency exams. Another section of
the same course might be based on the on-line material with small face to face tutorial sessions.
Other innovations could include adding learning assistant mentors to an existing course, or
combining a traditional faculty-led classroom with an Oxford-like tutorial setting which meets
weekly or for an intensive period at Camp Casey. In each case, we could measure learning
outcomes and the corresponding expense of delivery. We might experiment with charging
differential tuition for different models in an effort to assess market demand and appropriate
pricing for each.
Curricular innovations

Create Interdisciplinary or problem-focused, major, minor or set of courses
Faculty within and /or across programs may seek to merge the content of two or more related
courses to create an interdisciplinary or problem based curriculum that could last beyond a
single quarter. See Duke University’s Bass Connections, or UC Riverside’s focus on water supply,
utilization, and management as examples of problem-focused, interdisciplinary curriculum.

Collaborate with other CCCU or Lilly schools
Are there courses in your major that you would like to offer but do not have the capacity (e.g.
Public History and Museum Studies, Mandarin, Kinesiology, Biblical Archeology, and School
Office of the Provost 4/14
Librarianship)? Are the courses offered by other CCCU or Lilly Institutions? Do we offer courses
that you believe other institutions might want to send their students here to take (e.g. Science
Education, Music Therapy, Global Development)? Create a joint program with another CCCU or
Lilly school to exchange students or create some sort of hybrid courses where students might
spend a concentrated amount of time at either campus.

Create a new academic model which significantly decreases the cost of a college education to
both student and SPU.
Many colleges and universities are offering three year undergraduate programs. These
programs are often designed for motived and organized students who can work independently
through a curriculum. These programs are also likely to give credit based on demonstrated
proficiencies such as advanced placement scores, early college high school credit (such as
Washington State’s Running Start, prior learning assessment, military training and coursework,
college level examination program, and other placement examinations). Programs can
complement existing degrees or be designed as a stand-alone program with interdisciplinary
major.
Next steps: See the CSFD website under the Scholarship and Research Tab for the Requests
for Proposals, instructions and application.
Office of the Provost 4/14