Enhancing the Campus Climate for Scholarship: A Successful Action Project

Cynthia A. Prosen, Ph.D.and Jill B.K. Leonard, Ph.D.

Northern Michigan University

Characteristics of Northern Mich Univ•Public comprehensive master’s institution in

Upper Peninsula of MI•Offer diplomas, certificates, associate,

baccalaureate, masters and two terminal degrees

•~9,500 students•Five unions represent NMU employees

Enhancing the Campus Climate

for Scholarship•Intent?▫Improve communication b/n faculty and

administration▫Identify barriers to scholarship▫Improve dissemination of scholarly findings▫Increase undergraduate participation in

faculty-sponsored scholarship•Both the Project and the Process were

important for our success

Where were we as an AQIP Institution?

•From:▫Action Projects = AQIP▫Poor understanding of CQI▫This is YOUR problem

•To: ▫Action Projects are OUR ideas▫Action Projects are a part of CQI▫This is OUR problem▫AQIP ≠4-letter word; AQIP = opportunity

Action Project Selection Process•Systems Appraisal has suggestions •Some Projects come from the “bottom up”•From May to September….

▫Asked entire campus for Action Project ideas▫Posted 22 ideas on website; encouraged

comments▫President’s Council ranked ideas▫New idea emerged▫Campus again asked for comment▫Three projects selected, widely publicized

The timing was right for this project

•Consistent with University Mission•Consistent with Road Map to 2015•Teaching = Scholarship• Increasing pressure to recruit students• Increasing credentials (and expectations)

of new faculty hires•Long drumbeat history:

▫Scholarship is my hobby▫Scholarship is not supported by

administration

Committee Selection Process•How many?

▫Too many: Nothing accomplished▫Too few: Not enough hands on deck

•Representation▫All academic colleges

Biol, Poly Sci, Chem, Health, Art & Design, Psych, English, Physics

▫Secretarial POV▫Library▫Grants and Research

•Selected vs. Volunteered

Getting A Positive Start

•Administrative buy in•Developing an activity plan•Use the expertise available

ACTION Participation Outreach & Campus Climate

Undergrad student involvement

Grad Student Involvement

Infrastructure & Systems

Time Allocation

Immediate Actions by OUR committee

Set up for Actions to commence in FallRecommendations for the future

The Big (Theoretical) Issues▫Action Projects may need to define

concepts▫Defining scholarship

Different ideas!Four forms of scholarship (Boyer)

Excellent… but, they carry baggage

Disciplinary application issuesUnifying definition that still allows flexibility

Very important given Union issues

• “The process of scholarship is one of problem solving through conceptual means that leads to an outcome that can be evaluated and presented to others.”

• “We do not expect that scholarship will be the same across campus, nor even for all forms of scholarship to be equally valued by different areas, rather it is the ability to come to consensus within a disciplinary group and to clearly express this consensus to those outside the group that is critical.”

• “We do not find scholarship and professional development to be synonymous.”

Dividing and conquering•Two types of work

▫By the entire WorkingCommittee Theoretical issues Integrating themes Developing

recommendations▫By subgroups

Data collection/generation Hot topics (e.g. Faculty

Time Allocation) Integration of information

Data

Time

Stude

nt

s

Infra

stru

ctu

re

Outre

a

ch

The Search for Data•Data is Critical

▫Validation and removal of “agenda”▫Inclusivity of diverse sources▫Linked to Outcomes Assessment

Became clear that we needed data that was unavailable

▫Importance of analysis Unbiased interpretation

▫Presentation styles Needs to be effectively portrayed to people with

diverse backgrounds Charts, graphs, stats and other crazy bits

•Outreach▫General

Forums Broad surveys

(electronic media)▫Specific individuals/groups

Focus groups Bargaining units Researchers, admin, etc.

▫Outreach needs to be seen as having an impact on the process

Reporting Back…

•Reporting▫Along the way and final

Interim update (to all parties) Final Report

▫To AQIP▫To the Admin▫To the campus community

•Presentation matters!▫Having a grant writer on your team

is not a bad idea…

Recommendations – 22!•Themes – organize and lump…

A. Support. This is a broad area encompassing issues of time, pay, infrastructure, and environment. The thrust of this area is to ensure that University expectations regarding scholarship are backed up with an appropriate level of support for scholarship. There are 11 recommendations under this category.

B. Encourage. As the distinctions between researcher and teacher continue to blur, it’s important that the University encourages faculty to pursue their own scholarship and to integrate research and scholarly activities into the curriculum. There are five recommendations under this category.

C. Value. While the issues of value and support overlap with regards to funding, valuing scholarship also encompasses non-financial issues like acknowledgement and appreciation of scholarship activities by the University administration and unions. There are two recommendations under this category.

D. Assess. It is critical that the University administration and the faculty unions negotiate a way to systematically document faculty scholarship. In addition, this information should be combined with assessment of student scholarship and published in annual report. There are four recommendations under this category.

Recommendations•Recs were specific and varied

▫Money vs nonmoney Need a new position vs need to collect data

▫Negotiated vs non-negotiated Negotiate strategy to assign load for

mentoring of student projects Curricular reform to allow students to use

projects in majors▫Links to student scholarship

Recommendation – Include Process•Timelines, processes, assessment

A.11 Recommendation: We propose the revision of a current AIS staff position to include liaison duties to faculty for scholarship-related needs, including coordination among computer-related units, basic support, assistance with nonstandard software and hardware needs, etc.

Process: AIS will develop a strategy during Fall 2008 with implementation by July 1, 2009. Position personnel will develop outreach strategies to the faculty and implement these strategies by December 2009. Personnel will collect data on theeffectiveness of this program.

Assessment: Successful revision and filling of position. Development of a Plan submitted to AIS. Collection of baseline information on implementationaccompanied

And the rest of the story….•Final Report truly remarkable•Shared with President’s Council, Deans and

Departments, Website, Vice Presidents….pretty much everyone on campus

•Which recommendations could be pursued?▫President, two Vice Presidents, and

President’s Council• Implementation fell to

▫Provost, Deans, Grants and Research, Controller, Unions, Committee Head

What have we done•Grants and Research Office

▫Formed!▫Hired second grant writer▫Post-award training programs for

faculty/staff▫Website development (ARRA information)

•University Scholars Program▫25 new undergraduate scholars selected

•Grant Writing “Boot Camp”•Administration agreed: Offer incentives•Research and Scholarship Advisory

Council (RSAC ) formed

What else have we done?•Celebration of Student Research and

Creative Works ▫Academic Service Learning now included▫Dance, recitals, art, class projects (Econ)▫More presentations, many more attendees

•Negotiations with Unions•Compliance Progress - Graduate Student•Student research•Wildcat Incentive Fund: up to

$25,000/award•Public display of work: Grants and Research

▫BOT meetings

What do we have to do next?•Student credit for scholarship

▫Needs to become consistent part of curriculum•Faculty credit for mentoring: “load” issue•Compliance officer: Full time•Summer scholarship support•Appoint head of student scholarship programs•Hire AIS (library) liaison•Create campus wide convocation series•Collect info on faculty AND student

scholarship•Assess internal grant recipients

What did we learn from this project?

•Campus wide buy-in essential for success•Collective bargaining unit involvement

essential – but sometimes difficult•Importance of outcomes assessment data

▫How will we know when we are done?•Concrete recommendations

▫Make it easy to say yes, hard to say no

Tips for success•Include multiple disciplines and personnel

groups•Be open, seek input from outside the team

▫Include ALL viewpoints; talk to the opposition•Base some Action Projects on campus-

identified need•Secure administrative support•Select committed (busy?) people•Use the proclivities and abilities of

committee members•Make specific recommendations; include

Process and Assessment

Why did this work?

•Cross-campus importance at onset

•Cross-campus input received

•Impact of Final Report▫Presentation style

important (just say yes)•And….it Enhanced the

Campus Climate for AQIP

QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?

NMU President Les Wong making opening remarks at the Open Forum

…Administrative support!

http:// webb.nmu.edu/aqipcprosen@nmu.edu OR jileonar@nmu.edu