the path to creating an integrated online contingent faculty competency system
TRANSCRIPT
The Path to Creating an Integrated
Online Contingent Faculty
Competency System
Pere
Speakers
Jeremy AndersonDeputy Chief of Academic & Administrative Technology
Jamie LitchfieldAcademic Program Director of Business Programs
Our Model
Pere
The American Women’s College
Access mission
1600 students
20 UG majors
6-week sessions
Centralized courses
PDs & SMEs
Adjuncts
Wrap-around support
Institution Model
High quality
Low price
Pere
Disaggregation
Pere
Disaggregation
Pere
Disaggregated KSAs
Teaching experience
Subject expertise
Community building
Responsiveness
Formative feedback
Summative feedback
Program assessment
Rubric use
Instruction Assessment
Pere
Could It Be?
Our Project
Goal
Our goal was to develop a comprehensive and consistent
process in which adjunct faculty are hired, onboarded,
trained and evaluated.
The vision is to create a self-sustaining community of
intrinsically motivated adjunct faculty.
Methods
We started by gathering data from multiple stakeholders through:
1. Review of Existing Institutional Requirements
2. Focus Groups
3. Review of Existing Faculty Development
4. Literature Review
Developing the Faculty Development
Model
Instructor
Competencies
Student Evaluation
Training Courses
Peer Evaluation
Job Description, Hiring &
Onboarding
Faculty Handbook
Best Practices
Identified a set of best practices in the areas of:1. Faculty-student engagement2. Timely feedback3. Community of Inquiry
Presence
CompetenceResponsiveness
Development
Developing Competencies
Faculty
Competencies
Developing Competencies
Presence
Presence
CompetenceResponsive
Development
Create a presence in the course through the following:
• Weekly video announcements• Engagement in discussions as
measured by participation at least four days per week and at least twenty percent of all posts (online only)
• Providing a meaningful presence through grading and feedback
• Engage in student outreach to increase student success and retention
Developing Competencies
Competence
Presence
CompetenceResponsive
Development
Demonstrate competence in the following:
• Relevant area of subject matter expertise
• Knowledge and application of university policies and procedures
• Knowledge and application of student support services
• Culturally responsive teaching• Technology relevant to
teaching
Be responsive to student needs through the following:
• Regular and timely communication with students in accordance with university policies
• Regular and timely grading in accordance with university policies
• Regular and timely feedback with students in accordance with university policies
Developing Competencies
Presence
CompetenceResponsive
Development
Responsiveness
Faculty participate in continued training and development in:
• The area of subject matter expertise
• Best practices in teaching and learning
• University policies and procedures
• Technology applicable to higher education
Presence
CompetenceResponsive
Development
Developing Competencies
Continued Development
Step 1: Selection
Opening the loop
Perekjkjkj
Hiring & Onboarding
Pere
Job descriptions
Selection
Contracts
Welcome letter
Faculty orientation
Faculty handbook
Hiring Onboarding
Step 2: Evaluation
Measuring progress
Perekjkjkj
Performance Dashboard
Jane GoodeProgram(s): Business, WELL
Tenure: 21 cred Last Active: 2017 FA D1
Perekjkjkj
Student Evaluations
Competency Presence in Student Evaluations
1. Create a
presence in the
course through
the following
Assessment Level Example 1 Example 2
1a. Video
Announcements
Indirect
Assessment
The technology used in
this course effectively
assisted me in learning of
the material.
The instructor
demonstrated expertise
in the subject area.
1b. Discussion
EngagementDirect Assessment
The instructor helped me
feel engaged.
The instructor guided
discussions effectively.
1c. Presence in
Grading and
Feedback
Direct Assessment
The instructor provided
timely and constructive
feedback that helped me
improve my learning and
understanding.
--
1d. Student
OutreachNone -- --
Perekjkjkj
Faculty Rubric
Create a Presence in the Course
Perekjkjkj
Faculty Rubric
Be Responsive to Student Needs through:
Perekjkjkj
Faculty Rubric
Self Report & Peer Mentor
Perekjkjkj
Faculty Rubric
Self Report & Peer Mentor
Perekjkjkj
Faculty Rubric
Continued Learning and Development
Perekjkjkj
Peer Review
● Peer Evaluation are conducted after the first course is taught and once yearly thereafter
● Evaluations, using the faculty competency rubric,are conducted by Lead Faculty members who act as a resource and mentor throughout the semester
Step 3: Ongoing Development
Closing the loop
Perekjkjkj
Continued Development
● Faculty self-report activities around continued training and development in the following areas:
○ Subject matter expertise○ Best practices in teaching and learning○ University policies and procedures○ Technology applicable to higher education
Perekjkjkj
Summative Assessment
● Academic Program Directors conclude the assessment process with a summative assessment after review of data collected through:
○ Faculty data dashboard○ Student evaluations○ Peer reviewed faculty rubric○ Faculty self-reporting
Perekjkjkj
Ongoing Learning and Development
Questions?
Perekjkjkj
Thank You!
Jeremy AndersonDeputy Chief of Academic Technology and Administrative Technology
Jamie LitchfieldDirector of Computer Applications and Business Programs
Perekjkjkj
References
Mccracken, H., & Dittmar, E. (2012). Promoting Continuous Quality Improvement in Online Education: The
Meta Model. Online Learning, 16(2). doi:10.24059/olj.v16i2.269
Mireles, T. (n.d.). TAWC Adjunct Faculty Competencies Final Report (Rep.).
Tobin, T. J., Mandernach, B. J., & Taylor, A. H. (2015). Evaluating online teaching:
implementing best practices. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.