Training Process
 
 
Tier 1: Basic Online Course Development Process (continue what we are currently doing in our semester-long process)

• Target audience is first time course developers . Our new process will include a brief interview w/ each prospective developer. Project approval (or denial) decisions are made internally (XLS IDD team)
• Roles/Expectations: 
  
  • Remain the same
• Incentives:
  
  • Remain the same ($500 per credit hour)
• Opportunities:
  
  • Professional Development Grant (same as current practice/policy)

 
Tier 2: Advanced Course Development

• Target audience is returning course developers or "veterans" (facutly who began teaching online before 2007 and had no support) who want to revise a major learning task or instructional event. Our new process will include a brief meeting with the department chair or dean (if the chair is the one proposing the advanced project). Project approval (or denial) decisions are made internally (XLS IDD team) after consultation with the academic chair or dean.
• Roles/Expectations:
  
  • Tier 2 projects are bonafide design projects
  • Supporting evidence that justifies the proposed project must be included in the proposal (examples could include grades on existing task - indicating overall poor performance, student evaluations of the course, student comments on CATs or other feedback tools, etc).
  • Facutly member works 1:1 with an instructional designer to revamp the learning task (a project management tool/project tracking tool will be used to create a timeframe and monitor the project's completion)
  • should there be a Tier 2  online course of limited duration (three weeks) to broaden general expertise instructional design?
  • Faculty member participates in Basic Course Design Kick-off Meeting, Peer Review session & presents at XLi
• Incentives:
  
  • $500 per credit hour stipend
• Opportunities:
  
  • Do we want to make the professional development grant available for this group?

 
Tier 3:  Online Peer Mentor

• Target audience is course developers/online instructors who have had successful experiences in Tier 1 and 2.
• The long-term goal is to have at least one mentor in each academic unit (or perhaps within each discipline for CAS) on campus.
• Mentor selection decisions are made at the academic unit level.  (If needed, the IDD team can provide  information on whether or not the applicant had a successful experience in Tiers 1 &2 and his/her demonstrated engagement in team work - being a member of a cohort).  Deans/chairs will be reminded that faculty selected as mentors must demonstrate the following dispositions/skills:
  
  • Good interpersonal skills
  • Desire to mentor/develop colleagues
  • Embrace the concept of a student- or learning-centered approach (rather than a teaching-centered approach) 
  • Interest in learning new educational technologies/applications
• Roles/Expectations:
  
  • Must complete the Quality Matters online training program (a 3-week online course) and review our Course Design Rubric
  • Responsible for mentoring up to 3 colleagues ("mentees") throughout the semester-long Tier 1 process
  • Must attend monthly (4 total) meetings with Instructional Designers and other mentors (topics include: the mentoring process/working with adult learners, basic instructional design skills, technology skill development, use of our Course Design Rubric) and keep a log of their mentoring experience.
  • Must attend montly (4 total) meetings with the mentees (this will replace our Bb "open lab" sessions and create structured times for working within the LMS)
  • With the team of mentors, must complete final ID review of "x" number of mentees' course development projects (other than those assignmed to him/her)
  • Must meet with assigned mentees 3 times during the semester in which the course is being taught for the first time.  (How do we want the mentors to report back to us? What kind of feedback do we want re: the initial delivery of the course? (perhaps we could consider having the mentees submit an action plan for the improvement of their course in a subsequent semester after the three meetings. the mentors could complete a spreadsheet on attendance at the meetings. The submission of the action plan by the mentees would be proof of involvement.)
• Incentives:
  
  • 1/4 release time for the semester in which the mentee's course is being developed or a stipend consistent with that given a department chair; do we need an additional stipend for the 3 required meetings with assigned mentees during the semester in which they first teach the online course? 

2.      Certificate of Recognition (that ties into the Promotion and Tenure processes?) It would be worth trying to just give symbolic recognition in the first instance of this program. If this doesn't seem to be sufficient,  then we can look into the promotion and tenure aspect. My impression is that negotiating the program's inclusion in the promotion and tenure process for  each department may take considerable time.