Virtual College
July 3, 2012
9:00 – 10:30 am
Present:
David Cunningham (Facilitator)
Joe Duggan
Bob Francis
Ann Garnsey-Harter (teleconf)
Norma Goldstein
Jim Hills
Susan Hoyne
Gillian Lewis
Stuart Trippel
The purpose of this meeting is:
“What might/must we do in anticipation of a large influx of
Online students in the Fall to make the Virtual College
Viable both educationally and financially?”
Bob said there is anticipation of a significant influx of online students coming this fall if all goes
well. That leaves us with questions as to how we as Deans accommodate and make this a
successful venture.
A Dean brought up the conflict about International Students (IS) wanting F2F classes and the
expansion of the Virtual College. Stuart asked how that is conflicting. It is competing for scarce
resources. We might not be able to offer multiple sections. Diana Sampson was vocal about not
being able to accommodate IS needs this summer. Jim explained that it is the intention to grow
the resource. Getting that momentum started can be difficult. To say we are capped in the ability
to spend to create classes is not necessarily the case. We have an appropriate matrix for both F2F
and online, when and how we can grow. We need to set aside idea of capped resources. The
mandate in both initiatives is to grow.
Norma talked about the need to target new markets for either initiative to be successful. It is clear
to Norma that if we are going to grow both, we are not talking about students we have coming to
us. She assumes VC will solicit outside the normal group of students we have. Jim said
absolutely. We already have a strong VC based on how we offer our classes. Faculty are already
doing it.
Jim said it is not the conversion of existing F2F students to the online environment. Bob said
where it becomes imperative that VC does indeed pull in other students is when (for instance) we
offer a NW History class both F2F and online. We end up risking both of them of cancelling.
Jim said it is a delicate balance when we open another section still in play. Don’t go back to
“capped in resources.” Bob said where we have to be careful is how we financially analyze the
classes.
Stuart said this is a short run on a long-run issue. Jim is talking about increased revenue from
growth. That does not help us this fall. That is why we are growing this from a modest start of
five programs. The whole point of this is we will see enhanced revenue down the road. But we
have to manage from where we are right now. This is tricky for any business in growth. We
need to be aware we have to look to the future; we know where we are; and it is really how we
are going to get there. That is a tactical question.
1
David said the question on the table is relative to the work and what priorities we have for fall.
There will be influx of online students in the fall. A Dean said her concern is we are just starting
an advertising push for VC, so we have no track record. She has no idea what to suggest.
It is fair assumption to say we will likely have an influx of online students in the fall. If that is
the case, then we need to get our minds around it in terms of what does that mean for us as Deans.
Stuart said we need to be prepared for getting new students in the fall. It is significantly possible.
What is it we need to be thinking about? The idea here is to get a clear focus on what to think
about and prepare for.
Bob said we have to meet two imperatives to have VC successful. (1) It has to be educationally
viable. Students have to feel like they are learning or they will abandon the experience. (2) We
have to make sure we do not grow ourselves into poverty. We need to be able to be financially
viable.
Norma said we grew online to a point and wanted to advertise people can get an online AA-DTA
degree. She wants to ask the VC folks what are some of the long-term goals and strategies they
intend to use to grow. Are we going to continue advertising the ability to get an AA-DTA and
maybe other degrees online? Joe and Norma can tell you the level of success rate we don’t have
in those programs. Some of them don’t do well. So we have to be careful about advertising those
programs and pay attention to student completion rates.
David said we need to get focused. What are some other questions in our minds now as we move
ahead? There may be some other questions we should capture.
Susan said she spoke to Lee yesterday and talked about the two initiatives and its conflict. She is
finding as her faculty discover online classes that they don’t have to come to campus anymore.
The more we develop online the fewer faculty we will have on campus for International Students
and fewer F2F classes. We have to come to some kind of balance and talk about problems that
exist. Online teachers are not coming to campus. How can you have two initiatives co-exist and
still have student success? Gillian said Business does not teach any F2F in the summer, and
many part-time faculty we utilize won’t teach for us unless they can teach online. She started the
conversation last week and was shocked by the resistance. Bob said that is a problem for
Internationalization but a strength for the VC piece. Norma said there are contractual issues,
rules and regulations re faculty attendance, etc. Susan said the domestic student needs faculty on
campus as well. Many online faculty don’t take part in committees or attend meetings.
Bob said we can generate and should be able to make VC sustainable on tuition revenue. We will
get FTES out of it. If we are aiming just for tuition revenue, the biggest resource limit we face is
finding and recruiting online faculty that meet our standards.
Susan said if finding online faculty we will have two sets of faculty. Those under our contract
and online faculty with another contract, or no contract. Stuart said we are not there yet. Susan
sees full-time faculty moving over to online because they don’t have to fulfill anything in the
contract and they have fewer students.
Ann said the BluePrint for a Virtual College report written in March for the President (copies
were distributed) states we will pilot 5 programs for fall. That is Phase 1. Phase 2 will be more
programs like Accounting. She said Jim can help us understand how we are going to market to
new markets so we get more students (not going after the students coming to us anyway). David
2
said it is a mistake for us to take our time talking about long-term marketing plans. Our objective
this morning is fall. How do we address the increase in online students this fall.
Joe suggested we need a large pool of part-time faculty we can call on if the immediate concern is
fall. What are our initial efforts to make this viable? We need to do serious recruiting. This is an
obstacle as well as an opportunity. We have to get the word out and build pools. Susan agrees.
For fall she has full classes already and they are actually attracting online students or getting
online students because the F2F classes are full. She is not going to offer any more online classes
in her division because the labs will never go online. The majority of students would much prefer
having a mathematics teacher in the classroom. Stuart said we are not marketing for those.
Gillian noted we have only 12 weeks to find faculty. Ann asked if there is an alternative
suggestion. Gillian pointed out the frustration that would occur for classified staff to construct
this. Norma has an opposite problem. She believes they can deal with the influx of students.
Her Music Department won’t let a student out of their grip. They overload classes, create classes,
etc. They accommodate students morning, noon and night. Bob pointed out that is F2F, not
online. The question is, what do we do when you hit those upper limits? We go to Joe’s
solution…find part-time faculty.
The solution might be come up to a limit, and then you add the class opposed to adding a class
then pulling it back. Susan said to offer online class first. You can’t offer F2F then put it online.
You have to register for online class. If they come up to say 25 as a limit, 75% of that…if come
up to that then we can open it and get faculty. Again, you have part-time faculty waiting to find
out if you have that class or not.
Bob said the question is how do I access this pool. The problem is that pool is dominated by fulltime faculty waiting for a moonlight. Once he hits their moonlight capacity he is out of luck. He
thinks our first chore is to begin to build pools. The real good online faculty will get snatched up.
His concern is we end up scraping the bottom of the barrel. Joe asked where should faculty be
from. They could be in China. David said we have to figure out how to build a pool.
If we want an online class to be self supporting we have to come up with some kind of percentage
to make it go. How do we decide if a class is self supporting or not? Bob insisted that it will not
time consuming to create a spreadsheet to determine this.
Is there any college that is successfully doing a VC and F2F? Yes. They are named in the
Blueprint for a VC. Jim said the issues Deans are bringing up are absolute cruxes those colleges
had in the beginning. They worked through contractual stuff and teaching resources. We heard
stories from colleges how they got started. Lee has discussed matters with the AG’s office and
we have rightfully outlined our barriers.
David led the team through his workshop exercise.
SHORT TERM STRATEGIES (to be completed by Fall)
A. Define the Viable Finance Model (Bob Francis)
Develop generic formula for classes
Develop econ model for financial viability of classes
B. Define Criteria for VC Assignments (Gillian Lewis)
Devise a way to decide who teaches online
Only have part-time faculty teach online
Distinguish VC from F2F
3
C. Recruit and Hire Online, Qualified Instructors (Susan Hoyne)
Start advertising for VC specific instructors
Advertise on VC website and Craig’s List
Develop methods to assess potential online instructors
LONGER TERM STRATEGIES
Develop Required Training for VC Faculty
Design an “on ramp” with specific expectations of teaching processes
Offer incentives for part-time faculty to get training
Define the Assessment Tools for Online Instruction
Develop significant ways for student evaluations
Devise a means to evaluate/assess quality of online teaching
Mandate Quality Matters
Incorporate specific online criteria into FEP
Research Existing Successes and Resources
Look to vendors for solutions
Research online simulation labs
Bring expert from union state to advise us
Hire the VC Support Staff
Hire a VC Manager
Hire more hourly classified OA3s to support this expansion
Centralize course construction for VC
THE VC THIS FALL…..SOME CONSIDERATIONS
1. The VC is up and running
2. The online modality is perhaps contrary to International program/student needs
3. We have short- and long-term considerations
4. 2 Imperatives: (a) VC must be educationally viable (b) VC needs to be financially viable
SOME QUESTIONS
1. What are the long-term strategies to grow the VC?
2. How do we marry the two initiatives of Internationalization and VC?
3. What contractual issues are raised by VC program?
4. How do we allocate our resources to support normal operations, VC and the Int’l Program?
5. What are the implications for Deans/College when full-time faculty move to online?
6. Is our main challenge to build a pool of part-time faculty to teach online?
7. What do we need to bracket in order to enable VC expansion this fall?
NEXT STEPS
Through discussion they determined three short-term strategies and the Dean who will bring
together the appropriate people. Deans should not work in a vacuum in these matters. Deans will
reach out to other college resources to accomplish their task. For instance, Bob will take the
Finance Model to Holly and Stuart to have them help build a model to deploy. It will be a more
organic process than external to this room. Deans will reconvene on Friday, July 13 from 9 –
11:00 a.m. with the VC Team.
Meeting Adjourned 10:40 am
Minutes Recorded by Kerry Fondren
Virtual College Mtg Minutes July 3 2012
4