E-education at Towson University  

A Report to the University Senate from the University Curriculum Committee Based on a report submitted by the University Curriculum Committee’s E-education Subcommittee  (February 2002)

Preface 

Web-based instruction is giving us new opportunities to analyze our values about learning and teaching.  It is causing us to examine our curriculum development and delivery systems.  While the Web is the latest in a long line of technological innovations in higher education, it is creating opportunities for faculty to consider and measure student learning and faculty performance.  These new course design possibilities are raising significant issues about not only Web-based but also traditional classroom-based courses.  Furthermore, Web-based instruction is generating serious issues about intellectual property and faculty promotion and tenure that, when resolved, may affect all members of the academy. 

To deal with these new challenges and opportunities, Towson University’s Senate approved in Fall 2000 a request from the University Curriculum Committee to establish a special subcommittee to look into these matters. 

The University Curriculum Committee then reviewed and revised an initial report from the Subcommittee on E-education to determine if particular criteria or standards were needed for web-based courses.  The issue of “distance education” was set aside until the university administration takes a position on the fit of this effort for Towson University. 

It quickly became evident that both the University Curriculum Committee and its subcommittee on E-education believed that because the Web is but another teaching tool—along with chalk, overheads, and textbooks,—the review process and criteria for course approval using this method of delivery should be the same as for all other courses. 

However, in the spirit of truth in advertising, students and faculty colleagues need to know the structure and form of a course so that they can select the best learning and teaching environment for themselves.  This may include a code or codes, for example, which could be used to designate web-based courses during the scheduling process.  To help students understand the amount of content and activities within a course that is online and to help students choose courses that best fit their learning styles, the University Curriculum Committee proposes the following classification for web-based courses.  It also proposes that at the time of course scheduling that individual instructors and department chairs be asked to self-designate their course.  This classification will appear in the schedule booklet to assist students in selecting classes. 

Classification 

The proposed classification is based on the belief that the real differentiation among web-based courses is whether students are asked to passively or actively use the web and if any class time will be reduced because of time spent online.  It should be noted that the subcommittee found that web-based courses often require a greater investment of faculty time and effort. 

A.  Minimal Web Presence and no reduction of class time:  This course may have a passive web presence—such as syllabus, assignments, handouts, and other class resources on the web. 

B.   Moderate Web Presence and no reduction of class time:  This course makes an active use of web technology such as group projects, on-line discussions, assignments submitted on line. 

C.      Significant Web Presence with a reduction in class time of less than 50% balanced by additional web assignments.  This course makes active use of web technology such as group projects, on-line discussions, assignments submitted on line, quizzes on line. 

D.  Extensive Web Presence with a reduction in class time of more than 50% balanced by additional web assignments.  This course makes extensive, active use of web technology such as group projects, on-line discussions, use of public or licensed databases, digital image banks, assignments submitted on line, and quizzes/tests on line. 

E.   Fully Online:  This course can be accessed anywhere anytime via the web.  It may not require any face-to-face class time.  Prospective students are encouraged to contact the department or the instructor regarding class meeting.  

Evaluation of Courses 

There was a general consensus that review of existing courses was a departmental matter and that departments should be encouraged to engage in review of courses as a routine activity from the point of view of student learning regardless of the method of delivery. 

There was some consensus that individual departments with multiple sections of the same course should be encouraged to develop a master syllabus.  This would be especially important for multiple sections of general education courses.  It was also noted that the University Curriculum Committee should put several sample syllabi on its web page.  These sample syllabi should include web-based courses.  The discussion of good syllabi could also be a topic of a joint meeting between the University Curriculum Committee and college curriculum committees. 

Evaluation of Faculty 

There is a connection between the process of monitoring the quality of web-supported courses with the process of promotion and tenure (for example, see towson.edu/~probinso/Online_Observation.html for RSET Department committee report).  Most P&T evaluations of faculty members teaching performance are by peers and students that occur in a classroom setting and focus on traditional classroom related activities.  A major effort must be made soon to modify these evaluation techniques so that they embrace online teaching and learning activities in a consistent manner with non-web-based courses in departments.  The University Curriculum Committee believes this is an issue for the University Promotion and Tenure Committee to consider.

 Intellectual Property 

The University Curriculum Committee is aware that there is a University System of Maryland Policy on Intellectual Property, which was approved by the Board of Regents (2/8/2002) and a TU policy which is consistent with USM requirements that is now being circulated.  Therefore it recommends no further action on this issue.

 University Curriculum Committee Members:

       Chair, Toni Marzotto of Political Science

      Ken Broda-Bahm of Mass Communication and Communication Studies

      Sharon Buchbinder of Health Science

      Marion Cockey of Sociology, Anthropology and Criminal Justice

      Nicole Dombrowski of History

      Karla Kubitz of Kinesiology

      Leping Liu of Reading, Special Education and Instructional Technology

      Reza Sarhangi of Mathematics

      Andrew Schiff of Accounting  

      Ex Officio:      

      Eleanore Hofstetter of Library

      William Reuling of Academic Affairs

      Lawrence Shirley of Graduate School

      Louise Shulack of Admissions (Undergraduate)

      Kevin Webb of Enrollment Services, Non-Traditional

      Jenna Yeager of Occupational Therapy and Occupational Science

E-education Subcommittee Members: 

      Co-chair, Joyce Currie Little of Computer and Information Sciences

      Co-chair, Mark McElreath of Mass Communication and Communication Studies

      Cindy Cates of Political Science

      Karla Kubitz of Kinesiology

      Leping Liu of Reading, Special Education and Instructional Technology

      David McDonald of the College of Extended Programs

      Joan McMahon of Psychology

      Paulette Robinson of Reading, Special Education and Instructional Technology

      Kevin Webb of Enrollment Services

      Jenna Yeager of Occupational Therapy and Occupational Science  

Also contributing to this committee is Gloria Holland of the Center for Instructional Advancement and Technology.  

February 2002