2012 RECOMMENDATIONS
ACADEMIC INNOVATION TASK FORCE
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
I. INFRASTRUCTURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
II. ONLINE COURSES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
III. BLENDED LEARNING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
IV. REMOTE SITE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
V. ACADEMIC LITERACY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
3
A task force was organized to explore ways BYU could improve the quality of teaching and
learning. This group also considered how BYU could meet an increased demand for instruction
with limited resources. The task force met weekly for two semesters (Fall 2011, Winter 2012) to
view examples of teaching innovations (both pedagogical and technological), discuss
philosophy, and formulate recommendations.
Assumptions
Instructional innovation is key to realizing improvements in learning effectiveness,
flexibility, and efficiency at the university. The underlying purpose is to improve learning
experiences for students and to increase their level of engagement with BYU faculty
members and with the learning process. Faculty and academic units are in the best position to
introduce educational innovations that are likely to improve student learning and to be
sustainable long term. However, University vision, policy, and support play an important role
in encouraging and facilitating this innovation.
Principles
● Primacy of Quality Learning Outcomes—The first consideration for instructional
innovations should be their ability to maintain or improve the learning experience and
quality outcomes for students. Secondarily, innovations should seek to increase flexible
learning options and capitalize on gains in efficiency.
● Instructional Innovations—Instructional innovations involve new approaches to
teaching and learning that create improvements in learning effectiveness, flexibility, and
efficiency. While innovations may involve new ways of using technology, this does not
have to be a significant component of an effective innovation.
● Building a Culture that Invites Faculty Participation—Faculty will be more invested
in instructional innovations if they are able to make choices about what and how to
innovate rather than being required to make changes. A culture of innovation can be
nurtured as master teachers are encouraged to be early innovators and create models for
others to follow. Careful consideration as to how faculty will be recognized and rewarded
for their innovative efforts is paramount.
Expected Outcomes
The group agreed that in order to engage large numbers of students more effectively,
innovation would play a critical role. The group decided to focus on three outcomes
anticipated from its recommendations.
1. Improved quality of instruction and learning assessment
2. Greater flexibility for diverse teaching and learning methods and venues
3. Greater efficiency with the resources currently available for both faculty and students
Recommendations
In the spirit of these outcomes, the committee decided on five major recommendations to put
forward for consideration as outlined in the sections that follow. The first is addressed
specifically in one of the sections and is also embedded in the other four.
1. Provide an infrastructure of greater flexibility (tuition structure, calendar, daily class
scheduling, etc.) to support innovation.
2. Increase students’ access to high quality online courses.
3. Increase the number of blended learning courses offered on campus.
4. Utilize remote locations such as the BYU-Salt Lake Center.
5. Improve academic literacy.
4
I. INFRASTRUCTURE
DESCRIPTION
Increase use of existing facilities and resources, introduce new technologies and training to
enhance the ability of faculty to reach more students in a quality and efficient manner.
RATIONALE
Flexibility, Quality, Efficiency
 Allow for more students to come to BYU and have a better use of university resources.
 Critical thinking skills are as important as knowledge.
 Improve pedagogy/outcomes--changing from transmissive to an interactive environment.
 Reach more students and increase flexibility of where students are located and learn.
 Quality versus just a cheaper cost.
 Give immediate assessment of where you are doing well compared to where you may be
struggling.
 Go forth and learn to serve, don’t just check a box.
FEASIBILITY
All of the below recommendations can be implemented; time, resources and resistance to change
would be the key challenges. Prioritization of the recommendations is the next step.
Maximize use of existing facilities during low-use periods


Provide incentives for students to take spring and summer courses through tuition
benefits or university requirements.
▫ Rationale: More students taking more classes in off-peak semester will increase
throughput without sacrificing course quality or student flexibility.
▫ Feasibility: Incentives or mandates will be required to help students and faculty
take spring/summer courses during traditional work, internship or vacation times.
Teach more classes during off-peak times including early mornings, evenings and Fridays
▫ Rationale: More students taking more classes in off-peak hours will increase
throughput without sacrificing course quality or student flexibility.
▫ Feasibility: Incentives or mandates will be required to help students and faculty
respectively take and teach classes during off-peak times.
Increase innovation options for teaching more efficiently

Provide incentives for faculty and departments to revamp, develop, and implement ways,
e.g., an online and classroom course, publishing an ebook) to reach more students in a
quality way through increasing merit pay based on student credit hours produced and
providing an initial bonus for revamping a course
▫ Rationale: Faculty will be guided, encouraged, trained (see below for training
options), measured, and rewarded to use new technology to expand their reach to
more students. CTL and their “IA” group can be used to provide this ongoing
training.
5
▫



Feasibility: Incentives will be required to facilitate change from the traditional
ways of teaching.
Host an ongoing faculty innovation community (including other campuses) of
collaboration and learning regarding the use of technology and innovative ideas in the
classroom.
▫ Rationale: Faculty will have a support system to help in the change transition and
to support a culture of innovation.
▫ Feasibility: Setting up a faculty community will take a few strong faculty leaders
to help sustain and grow the idea.
Provide incentives for faculty for leading and applying innovation in the classroom.
▫ Rationale: Rewards and recognition of change make failure more acceptable/safe.
▫ Feasibility: Self-nominations will be gathered from faculty and a committee will
review and select winners each semester/annually.
Provide incentives for faculty based on achievements of Learning Outcomes, helping
more students achieve learning outcomes versus rewarding faculty for good student
ratings.
▫ Rationale: Measuring learning outcomes versus the experience of students.
▫ Feasibility: Revamp of faculty compensation.
Optimize flexibility for students to take courses, opening up more opportunities for
students to attend and graduate from BYU




Offer flipped classrooms where students learn content out of class and use class time to
discuss and process the information with the professor.
▫ Rationale: Enhances the in-class learning experience and provides increased
flexibility for students.
▫ Feasibility: Faculty and students will be trained on tools and flipped classroom
concepts. Classrooms may need updated hardware and software.
Integrate Independent Study courses in our normal tuition structure (current pilot
program).
▫ Rationale: Allows flexibility for students to enroll in classes of different lengths,
times, locations, etc. and could encourage student throughput.
▫ Feasibility: Policy and funding changes are needed.
Advanced standing tuition.
▫ Rationale: Increasing tuition after a set number of years at BYU can help
encourage students to graduate earlier.
▫ Feasibility: Policy and funding changes are needed.
Evening students don't count against the cap.
▫ Rationale: Allow the university to serve additional students with the same
physical facility base.
▫ Feasibility: Policy and funding changes are needed.
Enhance faculty and student knowledge of innovative and new technology ideas

Deliver a smorgasbord of training around different technologies and concepts.
▫ Rationale: Give faculty a smorgasbord (*details below) around what is possible
and what result they need; then let them determine how to do it. Have them try
one new thing.
6
▫

Feasibility: Create a committee that is in charge of innovative and new technology
training courses.
Reconfigure intellectual property at BYU through adopting an appropriate Creative
Commons licensing agreement.
▫ Rationale: Creative Commons licenses forge a balance inside the traditional “all
rights reserved” setting that copyright law creates.
*Smorgasbord for faculty (and student as appropriate) training on the following topics:





Software training:
▫ Use SharePoint, Camtasia, Vidyo, Qualtrics, GoToMeeting
▫ Teaching with graphics and video integration (Preparing for a class, integrating
with class time, best practices, what students should know)
▫ Linking note taking with ebooks or online materials
What are humans good at as opposed to tools?
▫ Focus faculty on the things that only faculty can do. Have tech do the rest.
▫ Decide online teaching versus in-class experience or both
▫ “Coaching” students
▫ Integrate Peer to peer learning
▫ Have class time discussions: Helping students become scholars
Introduction to basic technology experience: online, social networking, etc
▫ Use Google +
▫ Use eBooks (annotate, markings, notes)
▫ Use mobile devices and iclickers
▫ Blog (researching and writing – keeping it formal?)
▫ Master the benefits of technology’s use without wasting time
▫ Publish ebooks
Blended learning best practices and design:
▫ Use Asynchronous video feedback
▫ Teach students face-to-face (F2F) as well as with off-campus students
▫ Invert classroom from Lecture/learn during class and homework after to
lecture/learn before class to apply during class
▫ Explore use of tool possibilities
▫ Reconfigure intellectual property rules in order to find ways to work with online
media
▫ Select some courses taught online that could “bridge” the vital courses
▫ Measure online outcome
Toolbox of ideas to use in the classroom:
▫ Connect across the globe while staying connected locally
▫ Index lecture materials by headings
▫ Promote student learning
▫ Use Khan Academy model for online educational videos
▫ Keep quality while expanding possibilities (measure effectiveness)
▫ Make connections and inferences while reading
7
II. ONLINE COURSES
What is the recommendation?
One dimension of course type indicates the extent to which a physical classroom is used.
The extremes are often labeled “brick and mortar” (all learning activities in a classroom) and
“online” (all learning activities via the internet).
Another dimension is transactional distance, the “psychological and communications gap,
a space of potential misunderstanding between the inputs of instructor and those of the learner,”
(Moore, 1991). This contributes to students’ feeling isolated and disconnected from the learning
experience. Examples where the risk of significant transactional distance is high include classes
with many students with poor planning, poor delivery, or less-responsive feedback, e.g., paperbased correspondence.
Moore suggests three key interactive components that affect transactional distance
positively: dialog (interaction between learners and teachers), structure (capacity for
individualization), and autonomy (learner control of goals, execution, and evaluation). Research
continues into additional components and specific effects, but the basic principle is to reduce or
eliminate "the distance in understanding between teacher and learner" (Giossos, Koutsouba, et al,
2009) without requiring participants to always meet physically.
Both the “Online” and “Blended” AITF recommendations pursue shortened transactional
distance. However, the AITF “Blended” recommendation encourages less dependence on faceto-face interactions, while the AITF “Online” recommendation encourages none:
1. Offer a broad selection of online semester-based courses as regular tuition-supported
offerings that do not require classrooms on the BYU campus.
2. Use technology to shorten transactional distance, thus providing a high-quality, efficient,
and flexible student learning experience without ever using a physical classroom.
3. Require that students take a certain number of hours of online classes during their BYU
experience, e.g., 3 credit hours each semester or 15 credit hours of total undergraduate
online classes.
[Excellence with items #1 and #2 would rapidly eliminate the need for item #3.]
What is the fundamental reason for this recommendation?
The logical basis for teaching a course via online technologies rather than via the
traditional classroom becomes clearer when specific classroom activities are identified and their
online alternatives experienced. The greatest barrier to online courses is the lack of faculty
familiarity with the advanced technologies that provide an equivalent or better educational
experience in quality, efficiency, and flexibility for both students and professors. At the
elementary level, most participants would admit that making announcements, distributing
documents, turning in assignments, returning grades, or giving quizzes can be much more
efficiently performed online. More advanced classroom activities, such as presentations,
discussions, and collaborations are less frequently considered for online delivery, not because an
equivalent technological alternative is not available, but because it is unfamiliar or unknown.
Below are a few online technologies available for learning activities that, if actually
experienced by professors and students, would be seen as viable alternatives to requiring a
physical classroom.
8
METHODS (What are some enabling technologies for online courses?)

Lecture Capture
We currently have quality instruction delivered by our professors, but the same material
is repeated in class after class. Using lecture capture software, we are able to record the
best instances of those lectures and save that instruction for future use. We are also able
to edit the lecture, augment its content, and present it in a variety of mediums. Capturing
lectures allows us to devote more time to interacting with students while making content
accessible to new student markets.
Requirements:
▫ Video and Audio – the University already has the necessary hardware to record
lectures either through filming a lecture or using a screen capture tool. Resources
will need to be allocated to provide for assistance with film equipment and
additional time required by professors to record. Audio versions might be
available in a similar manner to the “Great Courses” series.
▫ Video editing – Resources will need to be allocated to edit and/or augment the
recorded sessions again either by staff, e.g. The Center for Teaching and
Learning, Independent Study or by professors. The filming needs to lead to a
quality product or students will resent having to watch them.
▫ Repository- the University will need to provide server space to house the recorded
material. Other options include free online options such as Vimeo or YouTube.

Discussion Boards
To compensate for the different social aspects of online learning, discussion boards fill a
void of isolation by allowing students to interact with one another. They will be able to
share thoughts and ideas, present information, and connect with instructors. This online
technology also supports archiving a record of the discussion, seldom available from the
in-class equivalent.
Requirements:
▫ Threaded Discussions – Threaded discussions allow participants to share ideas
and respond to others’ contributions without time or space restrictions. It has been
demonstrated that student conversations are more thoughtful and content-rich
with the time allowed between asynchronous communications versus spontaneous
in-class conversations. These tools are readily available on the internet, and the
BYU Learning Suite already contains the services required to utilize high fidelity
video posts through Digital Dialog and lower fidelity text.
▫ Group Chat – Spontaneous, synchronous discussion tools allow multiple people to
participate in online conversations.

Live Q&A Video Conference Sessions
Asynchronous communication has been a weakness of online learning in the past. Recent
technological advances allow for synchronous F2F communication with learners
anywhere in the world, that, properly configured, create 1:1 or 1:many conversational
environments that mimic same-room conversations. This reduces the perceived
transactional distance between student and teacher. Utilizing video conferencing is key to
9
a successful online session. Again, this technology also supports archiving a record of the
session.
Requirements:
▫ Access to software
 Free options do exist including Skype for one on one communication,
Google + Hangouts which supports up to 10 participants, OpenTok, which
is a free embedded video chat tool, and Facebook or Google chat with
video chat windows.
 For pay options include Vidyo which is currently being used in the Law
School and also the Salt Lake City Center.
▫ Infrastructure
 The expansion of video conferencing will need to be tested against the
current infrastructure of the University’s Internet bandwidth.

Audio Conference Calls
Audio has its own advantages. The infrastructure for audio communication is well
established. Also, people are generally very familiar with audio forms of communication.
Audio conference calls offer students more flexibility since they will not be required to
be near a computer during the call. Also, audio is more accessible in remote areas of the
world than video.
Requirements:
▫ Conferencing System
 A university-wide conferencing system should be established. The process
to use the system should be identical for all participants. Several options
are available to implement the system.

Distance Study Group Technology, e.g., Google+
Study groups differ from discussion boards since they are generally more informal. They
allow students who are not in the same class to come together and discuss what they are
learning. A study group has been shown to be a strong determinant of students’ success
(Light, 2002).
Requirements:
▫ Study group area
 The University should support a wide number of study group technologies
to allow for easy access by everyone. Free options include Facebook
Groups, Google + Circles, OpenStudy.com, etc.
▫ BYU Online Study
 The University could also support the creation of an online study group
that would allow students to collaborate on their work from around the
world. This will give students who are wary of social media and other
online tools a safe place to meet online.
 Server Space and development would be required for this endeavor.
 Funds for Support and maintenance would need to be allocated.
10

Course Advance Planning (versus shoot-from-the-hip instruction)
Online learning would require advanced planning for most details of a course. The
current movement towards learning outcomes greatly assists in this endeavor. Professors
will be able to utilize learning outcomes in their course planning to create high quality
instruction.
Requirements:
▫ Time
o The upfront load of planning and developing courses for online learning
will be higher than traditional coursework and should be allotted for.
However, maintenance of online learning is minimal in contrast to
traditional courses.

Open Courseware, e.g, MIT
Open Educational Resources (OER) are continuing to be developed by higher education
institutions such as Stanford, MIT, and Harvard. Content is no longer owned by an
individual institution. As content continues to be made more available, an institution’s
role will change from content provider to mentor. BYU has excellent content that could
substantially benefit the OER community. BYU can also benefit by the open courseware
that is currently available to give their online students a variety of options when learning
a particular concept. BYU can then become an institution that helps students learn how to
properly assess information and gain understanding from it.
Requirements:
▫ Resources
o Current resources are already in place; however, devoting more website
space and server time to BYU open courseware is required.
▫ Policy Support
o A new University vision of open content could be created to offer the
vision of open courseware that allows others to expand their knowledge
free of cost.
ANTICIPATED IMPACTS/BENEFITS

Quality
▫
▫
Quality in online learning has been questioned in the past. Unprecedented
improvement in both technologies supporting online instruction and the
instruction itself has occurred in recent years. We will be able to maintain or
improve the high quality of a BYU education by using a mix of synchronous and
asynchronous communication, augmented content and individualized teaching
moments, and a variety of mediums. Also, it is possible to reach new students
who desire a religious-based education but do not have the means of being on
campus.
Participation in the OER community will give BYU a testing ground to refine our
online techniques to improve quality. We would potentially have tens of
thousands of individuals viewing and using our materials. Their feedback would
be invaluable to determining what is working and what improvements are needed.
11
▫

Efficiency
▫
▫
▫

Online learning allows us to utilize new technologies to augment instruction in a
variety of ways. For example, multimedia and 3D animations give life to two
dimensional texts that visually support the concepts being learned. Because online
learning is not limited by time, a student is able to pause, rewind, and review
information they did not understand. They can use engating strategies (see Section
V: Academic Literacy), or continue to go back over the same content until they
comprehend the material.
Online learning requires fewer physical campus resources. Because students are not
physically present on campus the following resources will be used more efficiently:
 Classroom space
 Related common space (hallways, stairs, restrooms, etc.)
 Auxiliary services (dining, computer labs, study space, etc.)
 Utilities
 Parking
Utilizing fewer resources allows the campus to admit more students per semester
which will increase tuition payments while physical facility expenses remain
relatively unchanged.
Increased expenses may include more hiring of faculty or adjunct faculty and
teaching assistants to moderate the online courses, as well as the costs in setting up
the courses.
Flexibility
▫
▫
▫
▫
When students take an online course they are not limited by scheduling conflicts,
commuting time, or other time factors. This allows students to take the courses
they need to fulfill graduation requirements when it fits their schedule. This will
shorten graduation time because many students have difficulty scheduling
required courses, especially during the last few semesters. This would free up
more resources for the University.
Online classes would offer more flexibility for faculty who face the same
scheduling and time limitations.
Also, students who generally excel at certain subjects will be able to go through
content at their own pace instead of being limited to seat time. This may allow
certain students to take a larger load during the semester without regard to
scheduling limitations. These students may be able to graduate sooner and
concentrate on the subject areas that need more of their attention. This may result
in a higher quality of learning.
Students will not be required to remain in Provo for the semester if they are taking
all online courses. This will allow students to participate more in national or
international internships, fellowships, and assistantships. They will also not be
hampered in their course work if they need to leave the area for extenuating
circumstances, they will be able to complete the course regardless of location.
12
IMPLEMENTATION FEASIBILITY

Culture
▫
▫
▫
▫

Resources
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫

To encourage participation in online initiatives, online teaching must be valued by
the university. The development of courses should count towards a professor’s
research or a comparable measure for continuing status.
The teaching of online courses should be included as part of an instructor’s
teaching load.
Possible incentives for early implementation should be considered.
The overall effort towards online initiatives should contribute to departmental
evaluations.
Facilities for planning and creating online course components (audio and video
lectures, graphic arts, instructional designers, etc.) should be available and
configured for “turnkey” use by faculty, e.g., like a photo booth: drop in a quarter
and four flashes later the finished strip of pictures appears.
Training in online technology and pedagogy should be available and encouraged
for faculty. This could include:
 Introduction to basic technology experience (eBooks, mobile devices,
blogging, social media)
 Software training (SharePoint, Camtasia, Vidyo, Qualtrics, etc.)
 Best practices in online courses
 Design fundamentals and instructional design support
 Tool box of ideas to use in courses
 Measures online outcome
 Reconfigures intellectual property
Courses should be so well defined (by high-value full-time BYU faculty) that
less-costly resources (adjuncts, TAs) can effectively perform most of the timeconsuming instructional duties.
The benefits of online courses should be quantified and promoted, particularly the
saving of faculty time (lectures recorded once rather physically repeated class
after class).
Ongoing committees charged with advancing online initiatives
Allowances for effort expended during first year of develop an online course
Allowances for risk of failure in innovation, including the reduced impact of
student ratings on a professor’s performance record for a certain period of time
Timeline
▫
▫
The administration could set overall goals for colleges/departments to achieve
movement of a certain percentage of online models. Acknowledging the upfront
investment, goals could increase over a period of years.
Measure departments on the proportion of student credit hours delivered via
online versus in the classroom. The departments have flexibility in determining
which courses to move toward online and the timeline while meeting
administration’s goals.
13
III. BLENDED LEARNING
CORE RECOMMENDATIONS
Creating university policies and infrastructure that encourage innovation in blended and online
learning can provide a sustainable path to long-term improvements in learning effectiveness,
flexibility, and cost efficiencies that would allow BYU to reach more students without
compromising quality outcomes. This document outlines four high-level recommendations
related to the adoption and implementation of blended learning. Supporting details can be found
in subsequent pages of the document.
1. VISION - Create a vision to communicate how blended and online learning approaches
can help BYU achieve its mission.
2. INCENTIVES - Create incentives to academic units to begin strategically implementing
blended and online learning and establish a university-wide metric for monitoring
progress towards implementation goals set by academic units.
3. STRUCTURE - Create designations in the BYU registration system that identify that a
course is being taught in a fully online or in a blended modality and set the expectation
that learning outcomes be the same across all modalities.
4. SUPPORT - Invest in tools for online interaction and content creation and create a
professional development program that helps faculty learn how to use those tools to teach
effectively online.
DEFINITIONS
There are many instructional approaches between fully online and the traditional F2F lecture
environment. Figure 1 shows the three most common categories. “At its simplest, blended
learning is the thoughtful integration of classroom face-to-face learning experiences with online
learning experiences” (Garrison & Kanuka, 2004, p. 96). Blended learning is valued because it
allows for using what is good in both the F2F and the online learning environments. Blended
learning is also an approach that allows for a more practical and measured building of faculty
online teaching capacity than a direct move to fully online instruction.
Figure 1 - Instructional approaches that combine elements of traditional face-to-face (F2F) lecture-based and
online instruction.
I.
VISION
Faculty deserve to know how their efforts redesigning courses and learning to teach in online
modalities are helping students and contributing to the university mission. Some key points that
may be emphasized in a vision statement include:
14




II.
Lifelong Learning - BYU students should experience learning in online and blended
modalities because they are increasingly being used for post-secondary instruction and
professional development.
Learning Effectiveness – Meta-analyses show that when designed well, online and
blended learning can have have improved student learning outcomes (Zhao et al., 2005;
Sitzman et al., 2006; Means et al., 2009) while also increasing flexibility and cost
efficiencies (Graham, 2012 in press).
Flexibility - Flexible learning options (like taking an online course during the summer or
having fewer class/work scheduling conflicts) allow students to graduate more quickly.
Efficiency - Blended options can allow BYU to use its physical facilities more
efficiently, which ultimately allows the university to meet the needs of greater numbers
of students without increasing the number of buildings or classrooms.
INCENTIVES
Incentives to Colleges - The University needs to create a way to give colleges, departments, and
faculty reasons to want to do the extra work to increase their non-traditional offerings. Blended
learning will best be applied and evaluated at the local level. Accordingly, the University should
give incentives to COLLEGES to find blended learning opportunities. Those incentives could
include the following:
 Scholarship Money – The University could develop creative ways to provide incentives
for colleges through scholarship funding. One possible example might be to contribute
$10 to the student scholarship fund of a college for every semester-long reduction in
WEEKLY-STUDENT-HOUR seat time through implementation of a blended learning
approach. So, for example, in a business course of 400 students, seat time is reduced for
each student by 1.5 hours per week. Accordingly, the Marriott School would receive
$6000 (400 × $10 × 1.5) in student scholarship funds each semester.
 First, Do No Harm - In spite of their shortcomings, student evaluations of teaching
provide a metric over a long period of time that can be used to evaluate the impact of
blended learning implementation in a course. The monetary incentive mentioned above
could be cut in half for every semester (after the first attempt, if low) in which the course
evaluation number is lower than the 3-year historical average computed at the time of
initiation of the blended learning.
 Faculty slots – At least in the short term (say, 5 years), the University should promise
colleges that no faculty slots will be removed from a college because of surplus teaching
capacity created by implementation of blended learning. – If blended learning will
immediately lead to fewer faculty slots in a college, there is a big disincentive to adopt
blended learning. Give colleges a few years to experiment with how to use any surplus
teaching capacity created through blended learning. For example, colleges might learn
that faculty time freed up through blended learning can be spent in more small groups
and mentoring experiences with students.
Incentives to Individual Faculty Members - The incentives above are for COLLEGES, but it is
individual faculty members who will do the work. The primary “currencies” that colleges can
offer to individual faculty are teaching load, teaching flexibility, and overload compensation.
 Reduced Teaching Load - Faculty developing a new blended learning course could be
given a teaching load reduction for a semester while they engage in professional
development and course redesign.
15


Flexibility - Creative solutions using faculty flexibility as an incentive could be
developed by colleges. For example, as a possible option, colleges could give blended
learning faculty increased teaching scheduling flexibility such as allowing them to fit all
of their teaching into a Fall or Winter semester.
Overload Compensation - If load reduction and flexibility are not options for a
particular faculty or academic unit, then monetary overload compensation could be
considered as an incentive for extra time and efforts involved in professional
development and course redesign.
Some consideration of the above incentives makes it clear that during the 2-to-5-year
developmental phase, there will not be much, if any, cost savings to the university in terms of
reduced faculty. However, once blended learning has been implemented, tested, and refined, it
will make great savings possible for faculty cost-per-student. Saved faculty time could be
diverted to providing opportunities to larger numbers of students or providing more high quality
mentored experiences to the same number of students.
III.
STRUCTURE
Quality learning at the university should be measured by the knowledge, skills, and attributes
(i.e., learning outcomes) students attain rather than the path (i.e., course modality) they take.
Before deciding how many course versions with what degrees of blending should be offered to
students, two more critical structural issues take precedence:


Learning Outcomes: Learning outcomes should be specific, measurable, and
challenging, yet achievable. Departments should have put significant work into defining
program and course outcomes and into ensuring that these outcomes are consistent across
all course sections taught on campus. When the university supports multiple modalities
(i.e., in-class, blended, online) for a course, the learning outcomes must be consistent
along that dimension as well. The design of these course versions can then proceed,
taking advantage of the strengths that their respective modalities provide, yet guided by
the overall educational objectives intended for the students.
Learning Assessments: Learning assessments provide evidence that students have
actually attained the knowledge, skills, and attributes intended from the course. Given
that these learning outcomes are consistent across modalities, the assessments should also
be correlated to allow comparisons of actual student learning between the course designs.
The three foundational elements of course design are learning outcomes, learning assessments,
and learning activities. With the first two elements held constant across modalities, blended and
online courses only vary in the learning activities engaged (i.e., the path students follow). With
this in mind, we have several additional structural recommendations:


In the BYU class scheduling system, clearly designate the modality for each course
section, e.g., Classroom, Blended, Online.
Facilitate leveraging course components (outcomes, assessments, and activities) across
modalities by consolidating the design efforts between faculty and specialists for all of
these modalities (i.e., improving an in-class campus course, adding blended elements, and
designing for complete online delivery should all be supported through a common
resource and organizational structure).
16

IV.
Establish a university-wide metric for blended learning and monitor progress toward
goals set by each department, e.g., #BL courses / total courses in the class schedule.
SUPPORT
Providing appropriate support to academic units and faculty in the development of blended
learning courses is essential to the widespread adoption of blended learning, the development of
quality student learning experiences, and maintaining high levels of faculty satisfaction.






Establish Tool-Selection Committee - A university-level committee, comprised of
representatives from the faculty, the Center for Teaching and Learning, the Harold B. Lee
Library, and the Office of Information Technology, should be created to keep a pulse on
what tools faculty need and what tools are available in the marketplace with the purpose
of providing recommendations for ongoing tool acquisitions.
Invest In Tools for Content Development - The university should invest in site licenses
for tools that faculty can use to develop and manage the online content for their courses.
Potential tool genres include lecture capture, screencasting, CMS - content management
systems, etc.
Acquire or Develop Tools for Human Interaction - The university should pay
particular attention to the acquisition or development of tools that facilitate quality
learner-learner and learner-instructor interaction. A few examples of these tools would
include: DigitalDialog, which allows asynchronous video, audio, and text
communication; Vidyo, which allows synchronous video communication; and assessment
tools that allow for easy communication and ways to provide feedback to students on
assigned work.
Provide Technical Support - The university should provide access to technical support
for the most promising tools that are adopted.
Promote Professional Development - Because strategies for effective teaching online
are different than F2F, the university should develop a rigorous professional development
course that helps faculty develop the skills to be effective teachers in technologymediated environments. Participation in professional development should be by invitation
for strategic courses and by faculty interest.
Create a Database of Case Examples - Create a database of excellent cases of blended
learning that both improve learning effectiveness and cost efficiencies. These examples
can be used to encourage the adoption of blended strategies by colleges, departments, and
individual faculty members.
17
IV. REMOTE SITE
MORE STUDENTS IN REMOTE CLASSROOMS
Consider the use of remote physical sites, e.g., BYU Salt Lake Center, to accommodate more
students from the regional environs, e.g., Salt Lake, Davis, and Tooele Counties, in F2F
instruction utilizing adjunct faculty members.
MORE STUDENTS IN EXTENDED/OVERFLOW CLASSROOMS USING VIDEO CONFERENCING
TECHNOLOGY
Consider the use of remote physical sites, e.g., BYU Salt Lake Center, to accommodate more
students in F2F instruction utilizing video conferencing technologies with instruction originating
in Provo and transmitted to the remote site. This model may require teaching assistants and
additional IT support at the remote site.
FLEXIBLE STUDENT-CENTERED MODELS AT REMOTE SITES
Introduce flexible student-centered models at remote sites which may include any of the
following:
 Classes that meet less frequently but for longer durations, e.g., once a week during later
afternoon and early evening hours
 Classes are smaller and offer more community and individual student support
 Encouraging faculty members to originate instruction from both/multiple sites (i.e.,
sometimes the class is conducted at BYU Provo, and sometimes at BYU Salt Lake City)
so all students at all locations enjoy some direct contact with the instructor
 Offer some class periods (not the entire class) totally online and reduce even further the
number of times students are required to travel to the remote site
 Utilize lecture-capture technologies to build an instructional archive from courses
delivered using video conferencing for derivative purposes, e.g., support online courses,
enable student review, accommodate makeup need for student athletes and performers, or
students out of class with illness, etc.
EXECUTIVE PROGRAMS AND NONTRADITIONAL STUDENTS
Consider more executive programs derived from traditional programs on campus using a
weekend model, e.g., EMBA, EMPA, EDLF, etc., or programs that service nontraditional, older
students, and situate these remote programs near airports at larger cities, e.g., Salt Lake Center
near the SLC International Airport.
18
V. ACADEMIC LITERACY
CORE RECOMMENDATIONS
We are impressed with all the university is doing to nurture good academic writing by BYU
students and now recommend that such support be given for academic reading. Given that
research and our experience show that many college students have difficulty reading academic
texts to see the ideas from a critical perspective, to generate their own thinking as inspired by the
text, and, even at a more basic level, to obtain the key ideas and supportive arguments from a
text, this document outlines five recommendations to help our students become accomplished
learners from using challenging texts. Supporting details follow in the rest of the document.
FACILITATE QUALITY LEARNING/THINKING/READING:





ASSESS the reading/thinking/learning/writing skills of incoming students before they
register to suggest courses for registration. These assessments could also be administered
to current students as directed by professors.
EXPOSE the campus community to successful reading strategies.
INTEGRATE these strategies into the mentored teaching/learning environment,
including training faculty, teaching assistants, and mentors.
OFFER general education courses in academic reading, an introductory course for one
credit and an advanced course for two credits.
EXPECT students to demonstrate competency in academic reading strategies.
The actions we propose will help students approach their learning materials with engagement,
rigor, and strategies to handle their most challenging texts.
The ability to read and comprehend an academic text1 cannot be underestimated. Basic
understanding and critical and creative reading are important for success in all academic
disciplines. Students’ abilities to read not only impact all aspects of education, but also influence
personal lives including spiritual learning, socialization, interpersonal relationships, and selfesteem. Unfortunately, many stellar BYU students struggle to comprehend academic texts.
Limited knowledge of how to process texts contributes to students’ inadequate preparation to
succeed in intense university courses. This results in academic failure for some, increased length
of academic stay for others, and, for many, the failure to realize their full potential as learners.
Students often incorrectly attribute their academic struggles to lack of ability, to the text itself,
and to the professor. In reality, the problem is they do not know how to read difficult academic
texts. Data and experience indicate that virtually all students accepted into BYU can learn how to
succeed in intense university courses.
We recommend five courses of action: (1) assess the reading/thinking skills of incoming
students (and current students as directed by professors), (2) expose the campus community to
successful reading strategies, (3) integrate these strategies into the mentored teaching/learning
environment, (4) offer general education courses in academic reading as we now do for writing,
1
A text is any human communication, e.g., print, video, lectures, Internet sites, presentations, visual art, music,
equations. An academic text is any type of human communication a student is to process for learning well for a
course and by implication to join a discourse community and eventually to become an educated person, an expert in
a field, and a contributor to one’s career and to society.
19
and (5) if required by the major program, expect students to demonstrate competency in
academic reading strategies during their second academic year, or before acceptance into their
major program.
To assess the reading/thinking skills of BYU students, we propose that incoming students
complete four online reading assessments (taking approximately 30 minutes total) before being
allowed to register. Results of these assessments will be used in conjunction with the reading
portion of the ACT or SAT to provide customized registration recommendations for each student
based on an algorithm.
To facilitate improvement of learning/thinking/reading skills, we propose the exposure of
successful reading strategies through such venues as specialized workshops, a forum address,
and suggestions in course syllabi. Further, we propose the integration of these strategies into the
mentored teaching/learning environment. Examples of how this might be done include: create a
“University Reading” program patterned after University Writing; expand the existing Advanced
Reading Strategies (ARS) course (St Dev 305); pair a freshman general education course, e.g.
American Heritage, Freshman Writing, with a reading strategies seminar; and provide mentoring
through professors, teaching assistants, freshmen mentors, academic advisors, and a reading
strategies walk-in lab. We also propose creating a basic and an advanced reading course that
would provide GE credit.
Finally, believing that every BYU student is of great worth, we propose that the
university expect students to demonstrate proficiency in using the foundational reading strategies
to read difficult academic texts sometime during their second academic year. Implementing a
robust reading strategies program will empower students to be strategic, thought-filled, curious,
and capable learners and thereby excel in their academic experiences, future careers, and
personal lives.
HELPING BYU STUDENTS BECOME ASTUTE THINKERS/LEARNERS/READERS/PRODUCERS OF
ACADEMIC TEXTS
Disclaimer: What follows are ideas and possibilities ONLY. We have not contacted, proposed
to, or presumed that the entities we mention would go along with these ideas at all. Even if they
are willing later, surely they would need additional resources to be able to do so.
What are the academic learning needs of BYU students? Assess students' current abilities
to learn from difficult academic texts.
 Assess Reading
o Self-assessment—survey, e.g., Qualtrics using adapted ARS Reading Interview*
o College Entrance Reading Exam, e.g., reading portions of ACT, SAT (need to
look at these through a rapid technology)
o Quick assessment of basic comprehension and rate. e.g., SART* 4 min. test
(administer online before they register. Strongly recommend (or require)
o
 Assess Learning/Thinking Attitudes
o Continuum Self Assessment*
o College Student Attitudes toward Reading
*These have been developed and are being improved psychometrically for a St Dev 305
Advanced Reading Strategies course.
20
How can we facilitate more quality learning/thinking/reading?
 EXPOSE the campus community to successful academic reading strategies
o Strategy Workshops
 HBLL
 Career and Academic Success Center (CASC), JKB Writing Lab
 for Honors Students
 for students headed to graduate school (through pre-professional office,
etc.)
o A forum address
 Website for students --CTL, CASC, HBLL
 New Student Orientation
 Suggestions in course syllabi. Provide options of suggested reading
strategies that faculty could download, alter and then include in their
syllabi—strategies they think would be most helpful for the reading
demands of that class
 Links from Learning Suite to Reading Strategy Tips
 Create a display in one of the HBLL’s display rooms
 Make use of technology
 Online tutorials, e.g., training videos in LRC, YouTube
 Podcasts
 ReadMate App for electronic tablets—online tutorial, YouTube
 Video demonstrations on
o YouTube
o Media Center in HBLL
 Smartphone apps
 Facebook
 BYU TV programs
 eBook or open book of Handbook of Advanced Reading
Strategies. Build useful technologies into the electronic handbook
such as
o Video demonstrations
o Lectures on video or audio
o Examples explained
o Adaptations college students have made for a variety of
texts
o Advertise the above resources:
 Link from BYU Homepage
 Electronic display board advertisements in:
 HBLL
 Bookstore
 WSC
 Any other buildings having electronic display boards: MCKB,
BRMH, etc.
 Daily Universe ads, feature articles
 Tweets, Facebook
 Handouts
21

 CASC
 Department offices
 Academic Advisement offices across campus
 Booth in WSC
 Table tents in Cougar Eat
INTEGRATE within the discipline:
o Train professors to help their students within their courses (they teach their
students how to learn from the assigned readings)
 CTL
 CTL consultants who work with faculty and departments
 Have the CTL offer a series of practical workshops for faculty
 Refer faculty to the TeachingTips website produced by CTL
 Prepare a video for a professor to show or recommend at the
beginning of his/her course with tips for reading the text well OR
prepare a handout to distribute OR have the professor refer
students to the website produced by CTL. The Walk-in-Center can
create the video.
 Ask deans and department chairs for time to present in faculty
meetings
 Faculty Center
 Present a workshop or breakout session at the Faculty Conference
in late August and at the Spring Seminar in May.
 Incorporate workshops on scholarly reading as part of new faculty
induction (Faculty want to read better themselves, to read their
challenging academic texts well and in a timely way. Name
workshop: “Scholarly Reading: Strategies for Busy Academics”
 Train GE professors to teach a short, simple strategy. They would choose
a strategy that would help students learn their best. “Over time and across
many courses, we would learn all the strategies” (quote from a student).
 Start University Reading --“Reading Matters.” Pattern after “Writing
Matters”
 Newsletter
 Monthly luncheons with speakers
 Spring/summer reading groups
 Monthly workshops
 10-week seminars to help faculty integrate reading strategies into
their courses
 Pay bonuses to professors who take a the series of workshops for
improving their students’ reading of their texts—with a portfolio of
what they did to support readers or promote excellent reading
practices
 Make professors aware of options for sending students for more help with
academic reading (course offerings, a Reading Strategies Lab, websites,
etc.)
 Have a university-wide expectation that faculty will help students learn to
read the texts they assign. Perhaps integrate into course evaluations
22


Submit articles to professional journals that BYU professors read for their
disciplines
o Provide mentoring for classes with heavy reading loads
 Train people to know the strategies well enough to explain/demonstrate
them to students
 Professors—ten-hour training
 Teaching Assistants
o As part of qualifications to TA for American Heritage, take
StDev 305
o As part of qualifications for any other TA position where
much reading is part of the course, have five to ten hours of
training
 Freshmen Mentors—take StDev 305
 Academic Advisors across campus—ten-hour training
 Academic Support Advisors from the CCC—ten-hour training
 Reading Strategies Lab in CASC (like math, statistics, writing walk-in
labs manned by student mentors)
 Student workers are trained as Academic Reading Consultants—
take StDev 305
 Director is an expert on the Advanced Reading Strategies (He has
taught StDev 305!)
OFFER general education courses in advanced reading strategies
o Have the following courses earn general education credit.
o Expand offerings of the current StDev 305 "Advanced Reading Strategies for
College Success” (is currently an elective course)
 Increase number of sections
 Increase number of students per section (with TA/Mentors to coach)
 Blended Learning Course
 Independent Study Course
 Distance Learning
 OR divide the current course into TWO COURSES:
o Offer a one-credit course: StDev 105 “Introduction to College Reading—
Surviving the Demands of College Reading”
 Offer online (video conferencing, Skype)
 Offer summer on campus (blended course)
 Use eBook
 Offer during fall and winter semesters, twice a week as a block class
 Tailor-make sections for:
 Student Athletes by their academic support office for athletes
 Special needs students from Accessibility Center
 Referrals from Academic Support Office -- low academic
performance
o Offer a two-credit StDev 306 “Advanced Reading Strategies for College Success”
to focus on reading for deep, scholarly learning:
 For students who have declared their major, upperclassmen, students
desiring to attend graduate/professional schools, and graduate students.
23


Tailor-make sections for:
 Graduate students, law students, and MBA students
 Honors students
 Assume they have the StDev 105 skills: recommend they take it first or
provide online refresher (or initial teaching) of the key survival strategies
taught in StDev 105.
o Pair a core course, such as American Heritage or the Freshman Composition
course, with a reading strategies seminar—30 min. a week
o Offer a 2-week intensive course, like Harvard offers: non-credit first of semester
or during summer
o Offer a discipline-sponsored course for advanced reading (the ideal would be a
course integrated within a content course)
 Have it be a prerequisite course or a highly recommended course for
acceptance into
 Major (such as Nursing program, Accounting program)
 Graduate school (such as MBA refresher similar to the accounting
refresher course offered now)
 Any program with heavy, intense reading loads (sciences,
philosophy, English, engineering, history, etc.)
 Offer courses similar to Freshmen Writing Courses and Advanced Writing
Courses
 Survival Reading Strategies for freshmen, new students. (This
would be a general education course, not a discipline-specific
course.) (See StDev 105 suggestion above.)
 Advanced Reading Strategies for upperclassmen—could be
discipline-specific taught by professors of the discipline or teamtaught with StDev 305 professor. (Call it StDev 306)
EXPECT students to demonstrate competency in academic reading strategies
o Require this during their second academic year, if required by the major program.
(Many of the recommendations above will facilitate this proficiency.)
o Expect BYU students to come more prepared for the rigors of academic learning
 Recommend that the School of Education continue to prepare teachers
who know and teach these strategies in the public schools:
 Part of undergraduate teacher training –elementary and secondary
 Part of CITES classes for in-service teachers seeking USOE
Reading Endorsement
 State expectations and offer links as part of the application process to
BYU
 Refer prospective students to the online resources we have
developed
 See "Make Use of Technology" above, plus do these
o Have a one-hour workshop during BYU High School Days
o Have outreach to present to college prep classes, PTA
parent nights, etc. in high schools and middle schools.
o Offer StDev 105 as Open Courseware online for anyone,
anywhere, for free
24
o Educate parents
 Articles in BYU Magazine
 BYU Television programs
 Mini-courses at BYU Education Week
 Present at Women’s Conference
 Write articles for New Era and Ensign
 Letter to parents apprising them of the resources
available
What Reading/Learning/Thinking Strategies Make a Difference?
 To survive the reading loads of college classes (to be prepared for class discussions and
learning activities, to process the material with good basic understanding, to remember
what was read, and to prepare for quizzes and tests)
o Strategies taught in the first half of StDev 305, especially the following five
strategies
 BEFORE: Prepare the Mind
 THIEVVES with Snatches/Preview
 Launch and Met Purpose/Set Purpose
 DURING: Be a Demanding Reader
 Download and Telegram/Synthesize Along the Way
 Professor's Questions/Ask Questions
 AFTER: Be a Transformed Reader
 Be the Teacher/Explain
o 10 Principles to Speed up Academic Reading
 To process text in scholarly ways (to analyze, reason, creatively explore concepts,
determine importance, interpret, ask important questions, read mindfully, do rhetorical
reading for author’s intentions, probe reader’s own biases, expand perspective, generate
new thinking as inspired by the text, and otherwise read critically and creatively for deep
understanding)
o Last half of StDev 305
 In-depth learning
 Critical reading
 Creative reading
o 10 Principles to Speed up Academic Reading
Special emphasis needs to be given to important strategies for reading VISUAL, AUDITORY,
TECHNICAL texts from which students will be learning as part of their online learning worlds.
25
REFERENCES
Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential
in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95-105.
doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001
Giossos, Y., Koutsouba, M., Lionarakis, A., & Skavantzos, K. (2009). Reconsidering Moore’s
transactional distance theory. European Journal of Open Distance and ELearning, 2009(2),
1–6.
Graham, C. R. (2012 in press). Emerging practice and research in blended learning. In M. G.
Moore (Ed.), Handbook of distance education (3rd ed.). Routledge.
Light, R. J. (2002). Making the most of college, students speak their minds. Harvard University
Press
Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2009). Evaluation of evidencebased practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies (p.
94). Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-basedpractices/finalreport.pdf
Moore, M. G. 1991. Distance education theory. The American Journal of Distance Education 5
(3).
Sitzmann, T., Kraiger, K., Stewart, D., & Wisher, R. (2006). the Comparative Effectiveness of
Web-Based and Classroom Instruction: a Meta-Analysis. Personnel Psychology, 59(3), 623664. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2006.00049.x
Zhao, Y., Lei, J., Yan, B., Lai, C., & Tan, H. S. (2005). What Makes the Difference? A Practical
Analysis of Research on the Effectiveness of Distance Education. Teachers College Record,
107(8), 1836-1884. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9620.2005.00544.x