QUALITY ENHANCEMENT PLAN

Self, Society, World, and Vocation:

A Thematic Approach to Experiential Student

Learning

HIGH POINT UNIVERSITY 833 Montlieu Avenue • High Point, North Carolina 27262 • (336) 841-9000

~2~

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A MESSAGE FROM PRESIDENT NIDO R. QUBEIN .............................................................................. 4 1. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................ 5

Institutional Profile ............................................................................................................... 5 A Brief History of High Point University .............................................................................. 6 The Mission of the University............................................................................................... 7 The Thematic Structure of the Curriculum ............................................................................ 9 Strategic Planning............................................................................................................... 10 The QEP in Institutional Context ........................................................................................ 10

2. DEVELOPMENT OF THE QEP ...................................................................................................... 11

The Leadership Team ......................................................................................................... 11 Identifying the Focus of the QEP ........................................................................................ 11 Sharpening the Focus of the QEP........................................................................................ 14 The QEP Advisory Committees .......................................................................................... 15

Civic Engagement........................................................................................................ 15 The Benefits of Civic Engagement ......................................................................... 15 Civic Engagement Needs Assessment..................................................................... 17 Toward Implementing the Civic Engagement Program .......................................... 19

Study Abroad............................................................................................................... 20 The Benefits of Study Abroad................................................................................. 20 Study Abroad Needs Assessment............................................................................ 21 Toward Implementing the Study Abroad Program ................................................. 24

Internships ................................................................................................................... 25 The Benefits of Internships .................................................................................... 25 Internships Needs Assessment................................................................................ 26 Toward Implementing the Internship Program ...................................................... 29

Collaborative Inquiry ................................................................................................... 29 The Benefits of Collaborative Inquiry .................................................................... 29 Collaborative Inquiry Needs Assessment ............................................................... 31 Toward Implementing the Collaborative Inquiry Program..................................... 32

Implementation and Assessment .................................................................................. 32 The Implementation Committee ............................................................................. 33 The Assessment Committee.................................................................................... 36

3. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE QEP.................................................................................................. 39

Institutional Integration of the QEP..................................................................................... 40

Curricular Alignment ................................................................................................... 40 Linking Experiential Learning to the Curricular Themes of Self, Society, World, and Vocation .................................. 40 "Delivering" Experiential Learning Opportunities to Students ............................... 41 Administrative Structure .............................................................................................. 46

~3~

Resource Requirements................................................................................................ 47 Institutional Readiness to Support the QEP ........................................................... 49

Assessment Mechanisms.............................................................................................. 49 Conceptualizing and Measuring Program Success................................................. 50 The Assessment Process ........................................................................................ 51 The QEP and Institutional Decision Making.......................................................... 54

Publicity and Communications..................................................................................... 54

Evaluation of Student Learning Outcomes .......................................................................... 55

Conceptualizing and Measuring Student Learning........................................................ 55

The Assessment Process .............................................................................................. 59

4. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE.................................................................................................... 62

QEP Implementation: A Four-Year Plan ............................................................................ 62

Preliminary Work (2005 - 2006) .................................................................................. 62

Phase I: The Freshman Civic Engagement Program (2006 - 2007)............................... 63 Phase II: The Sophomore Civic Engagement Program (2007 - 2008)........................... 66

Phase III: The Study Abroad Program (2008 - 2009) ................................................... 67

Phase IV: The Internship and Collaborative Inquiry Programs (2009 - 2010)............... 68

5. APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................. 70

Appendix A: The High Point University Mission Statement ............................................... 70

Appendix B: Members of The SACS Leadership Team, QEP Steering Committee, and QEP Advisory Committees................................................... 71

Appendix C: Guiding Questions for the QEP Advisory Committees................................... 73

Appendix D: Resource Needs for QEP Implementation...................................................... 75

Appendix E: Breakdown of QEP Assessment Responsibilities ........................................... 78

Appendix F: Internal and External Measures of Student Learning ...................................... 81

Appendix G: QEP Implementation Calendar ...................................................................... 82

~4~

A MESSAGE FROM PRESIDENT NIDO R. QUBEIN

HE LANDSCAPE OF HIGHER EDUCATION IS CHANGING. Academic institutions across the country are beginning to reexamine what it means to be an educated person in today�s world. Colleges and

universities are starting to cast critical eyes upon what students are learning, how they�re learning it, and why. The impetus for this scrutiny does not lie solely (or even primarily) in political mandates or economic concerns, but in the rising conviction that students should be fully prepared for their roles as global citizens. Of course, the acquisition of technical skills and specialized

knowledge�traditional academic staples throughout the 20th century�is an important part of this preparation, but so also is the cultivation of those attitudes, values, and ethical sentiments that are the bedrock of civil society. It is for this reason that amidst the dialog and debate about the fate of higher education in America, a singular message is rising above the din: today�s graduates should be defined not just by the sum total of their classroom experiences, but also by the quality of their characters and their readiness to lead happy, productive, and responsible lives. In keeping with this worthy trend in higher education, High Point University�s Quality Enhancement Plan is designed to prepare students for work and service in a world that grows more complex and more interdependent with each passing year. The Plan focuses on several different forms of experiential learning, each of which is tied to the learning objectives of the University�s core curriculum. During their years at High Point University, students will have many opportunities to participate in a wide variety of civic engagement, study abroad, internship, and collaborative learning experiences, experiences that will allow our students to apply what they�ve learned in the classroom to real-world settings. Along the way, students will be expected to reflect on their learning experiences and, it is hoped, grow in their appreciation of different viewpoints, beliefs, and ways of relating with others. Quite literally, then, this Quality Enhancement Plan seeks to bring education to life by binding the theoretical to the practical and by showing that knowledge, generously applied, is a valuable tool for both personal and civic development. When fully implemented, High Point University�s Quality Enhancement Plan will have many beneficiaries. Students will discover that learning, far from being a static process that occurs only in classrooms and laboratories, has a living quality and is therefore capable of producing real personal, social, and even global change. Faculty will have license to reshape or redesign their courses in ways that highlight the inherent usefulness of course material, an activity that could enliven the instructional process itself. And the City of High Point will see that its namesake institution is committed to the betterment of the community�that the institution truly is High Point�s University. In these and many other ways, this Quality Enhancement Plan will contribute to the culture of excellence that High Point University wishes to cultivate, and in so doing, it will bring us closer to our goal of becoming an institution that is truly extraordinary in every way.

T

~5~

INTRODUCTION

CCORDING TO THE HANDBOOK FOR REAFFIRMATION OF ACCREDITATION, THE EXPLICIT PURPOSE of the QEP is to ��enhance overall institutional quality and effectiveness by focusing on an issue or issues the institution considers important to improving student learning� (p. 21). Because it

emphasizes the high worth of continuous institutional development, the QEP is a valuable tool with which colleges and universities can, in very direct and tangible ways, craft their futures, either by developing new and innovative programs or by expanding, improving, or recasting existing programs. At the same time, it should be noted that the QEP is not intended to be a stand-alone device, a detailed plan that has no connection to the historical goals and purposes of the institution. In fact, quite the opposite is true: in order to be maximally effective, the QEP should be capable of integrating fully with the institution�s broader strategic aims, supporting rather than supplanting the goals and objectives that comprise the institution�s overall academic mission. Given that the ways in which academic institutions conceptualize and promote student learning are rooted in the institution�s identity, culture, and historical context, it is important to consider these defining features at the outset of this report.

Institutional Profile High Point University is a private, four-year liberal arts institution affiliated with the United Methodist Church. It offers Bachelor of Arts and Bachelor of Science degrees in 43 academic areas, and masters degrees in Business Administration, Public Administration in Non Profit Organizations, Sports Studies, and Education. In 2005, the student body comprised 2,760 individuals, of which 236 (8.6%) were graduate students. The 2,524 undergraduate headcount represented 68.3% Caucasian, 22.7% African American, 2.6% Asian, and 2.4% Hispanic individuals, with females outnumbering males by approximately 1.7 to 1. The instructional staff consisted of 122 full time and 105 part time members, of which 36% were female and 4.1% were members of a minority group. Three-quarters of the full time faculty have earned doctorates in their fields. The athletic program is a member of Division I of the NCAA and fields varsity teams in soccer, tennis, basketball, baseball, golf, track, cross-country, and volleyball. To complement its academic programs, High Point University supports a wide variety of student organizations, clubs, and extra-curricular activities. Representatives of the University�s 96 registered organizations include the Community Affairs Board, the Art League, American Humanics, College Democrats and College Republicans, the Campus Coalition to Put a Face on AIDS in Africa, Habitat for Humanity, the Society for Historical and Political Awareness, Students for Environmental Awareness, the International Club, and the Board of Stewards. The University also recognizes seventeen honor societies, seven campus-based religious organizations, and seven ethnic student organizations. Also available to students is a diverse array of campus life activities ranging from intramural athletics and cheerleading to Model United Nations, student government, the Writer�s Club, and the Tower Players theater group.

A

1

~6~

A Brief History of High Point University1 High Point College opened in the fall of 1924 as a cooperative venture of the Methodist Protestant Church and the city of High Point. The establishment of the College was an extraordinary and unlikely achievement, as the Church, unsuccessful in its previous attempts to locate an academic institution in North Carolina�s central piedmont, had by this time grown doubtful about the feasibility of such an ambitious educational pursuit. But through the relentless efforts of Joseph F. McCulloch, a Methodist minister from Greensboro, North Carolina, and others, the vision of a church-related college was revived. McCulloch labored for nearly twenty-five years to bring together the people and resources necessary to make this vision a reality, and in 1921, the Annual Conference of the Methodist Protestant Church finally voted to proceed with the project. Shortly afterward, the city of High Point contributed 60 acres of land and $100,000 so that construction could begin on the first buildings of the High Point College campus. Three years later, in September, 1924, the College began offering its first classes. A strong spirit of optimism attended the birth of the new college, as students, faculty, and administrators set their sights on the institution�s promising future. Unfortunately, this positive outlook was unable to prevent the institution from stumbling under the weight of its mounting financial burdens. Heavily in debt and with few reliable sources of revenue, the College found itself struggling for viability even as the first students were crossing the muddy grounds and filing into the still unfinished classrooms. For several years the College�s academic and physical plant programs were sustained by a few timely gifts, generous utility allowances by the City Council of High Point, and some imaginative fundraising efforts by administrators and students alike. But as the Great Depression fell upon the country and student enrollment began to decline, the subsequent loss of income became detrimental to the institution�s operating budget. In addition, the capital debt, which already exceeded a quarter of a million dollars in 1924, proved to be insuppressible, eventually ballooning to $370,000 in 1930. By 1934 the College was on the brink of financial ruin, and on June 15th of that year President Gideon Humphreys, recognizing that he could not slow the College�s steady descent into insolvency, filed for bankruptcy. The next few years were extremely difficult, as High Point College labored to reduce its debts while sustaining its academic and structural development programs. Eventually, however, conditions began to improve, and by the end of the decade the College could boast several additional faculty members, a handful of new buildings, and an expanded undergraduate curriculum. Moreover, with the liquidation of the College�s debt, in 1945, financial stability was restored and hope for the institution�s future was rekindled. This hope was given form when, in 1951, the College accepted unconditional membership into the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, an act that not only provided the institution with an important kind of public legitimacy, but which also enabled High Point College to begin crafting its identity as a center for advanced learning in North Carolina�s central piedmont. The postwar years brought rapid growth to High Point College. Under the influence of the G.I. Bill, enrollment more than tripled, with a corresponding increase in teaching and administrative staff. Then, in 1964, the College initiated a plan christened the �Golden Decade� in anticipation of the College�s fiftieth anniversary. This plan was a comprehensive program of strategic initiatives designed to strengthen and enhance the institution�s operations, physical structures, and academic programs. Through a combination of generous donations and prudent investments, the College�s financial position strengthened to the point that substantial building and remodeling ventures could be undertaken nearly every year. A good number of these projects involved student housing, but others�a chapel, an infirmary, a new campus center, a track, a new science building, and various landscaping improvements�were also taken up, enhancing both the utility and the appearance of the College. Serious efforts were also devoted to attracting and retaining more highly qualified faculty by raising salaries, providing benefits, and instituting sabbatical leaves and other reward systems for professional productivity. Furthermore, significant curricular

1 Most of this information was drawn from two excellent sources: Locke, W. R. (1975). No easy task: The first fifty years of High Point

College. High Point, NC: High Point College Press; McCaslin, R. B. (1995). Remembered be thy blessings: High Point University�the college years, 1924-1991. High Point, NC: High Point University Press.

~7~

reforms yielded new majors, cooperative arrangements with other institutions through the Greater Greensboro Consortium for Higher Education, and innovative degree offerings�such as the Evening Degree Program�that served an increasingly diverse student body. In the spring of 1985, the Board of Trustees of High Point University assembled the National Commission on the Future of High Point College�a body of academicians, administrators, alumni, and leaders representing a broad range of religious, educational, and business domains�whose purpose was to lay in place the flagstones that would enable the institution to reach the next stage of its development. The strategic blueprint this group devised, published as the National Commission Report on the Future of High Point College, combined an aggressive future orientation with a healthy respect for the past to form a developmental roadmap that would allow the College to move ahead without repeating past missteps. Moreover, the National Commission Report boldly endorsed the idea of institutional reinvention, weaving the concept of intentional self-transformation directly into the fabric of the institution by rewriting the mission statement, refashioning the academic program, and in 1991 changing the name of the school from High Point College to High Point University. By following the recommendations outlined in the National Commission Report, High Point University experienced the most dramatic growth in its history. Much of this growth was physical. From 1986 to 2001, 26 major construction or renovation projects�including the Evening Degree Program�s Madison Park campus (1987-1993), the Millis Athletic and Convocation Center (1992), and the Charles E. & Pauline Lewis Hayworth Fine Arts Center (2002)�were completed at a cost of 42.7 million dollars. This physical expansion was complemented by continued programmatic development. For example, the University established the Graduate School in the fall of 1992 and, one year later, began offering courses leading to Masters of Science in Management and International Management. New major courses of study were added to the curriculum, and the Internship and Study Abroad programs were enhanced and expanded in an effort to address the National Commission�s recommendation that the University improve students� experiential learning opportunities. Student enrollment increased from 1200 in 1985 to nearly 3000 only ten years later. The institution�s fiscal condition likewise improved dramatically, with the endowment rising from $8 million to $40 million. Importantly, throughout this period of strong internal development, High Point University was also becoming a vital part of the broader High Point community, connecting with various civic, business, and religious groups through student internships, cooperative partnerships, and a wide variety of outreach programs. Today, High Point University stands at the cusp of a new era in its evolution. With an ambitious new strategic plan in the final stages of development and an energetic and visionary president providing enthusiastic leadership, the University is taking significant steps toward establishing itself as one of the premier private institutions in the state of North Carolina. Not only is the University proceeding to enhance its physical infrastructure, financial standing, and academic reputation, it is also seeking to provide innovative educational experiences to students whose scholarly expectations and professional aspirations are evolving rapidly within an ever-changing global environment. Indeed, the present Quality Enhancement Plan stems from the University�s conviction that the richest kind of learning occurs when knowledge acquired in the classroom is liberally applied to the problems and possibilities of contemporary life. By acting on this conviction in the years ahead, the University will craft academic, service, and support programs of unparalleled quality and will continue to cultivate an environment that is maximally conducive to student learning.

The Mission of the University High Point University is dedicated to providing a comprehensive education to students, not just in the traditional domains of scholarship, but also in the actual spheres of experience where students� professional talents, ethical sensibilities, and social values take shape and crystallize. This broad

~8~

approach to higher education is specifically represented in the University�s mission statement2 by the following two institutional commitments:

! to blend imaginatively critical thinking, intellectual inquiry, and aesthetic appreciation with a practical need for innovation, skill, and knowledge within professional disciplines;

! to offer an education, grounded in the development of character, personal responsibility, and a sense of civic duty, that prepares students for leadership, citizenship, and service in a diverse global community.

In the past sixteen years, High Point University has taken several steps to ensure that graduates receive the comprehensive education articulated in the mission statement. In the fall of 1989, for example, the institution adopted and implemented a new general education curriculum rooted in the �imaginative blending of the liberal arts with professional preparedness.� To a significant degree, this innovative academic program reflected the institution�s belief that, although many students view the attainment of a college degree as a necessary step toward a rewarding career, it is nevertheless the special duty of the liberal arts college or university to ensure that each graduate is thoroughly exposed to the classical areas of learning. Fueling this belief was the idea that although focused training in a particular academic domain might make an individual competitive in a highly specialized professional market, even the most technically accomplished graduates would find it difficult to succeed in their chosen professions if they did not also possess the abilities to think logically, speak persuasively, write clearly, and access knowledge from a wide range of scholarly domains. Thus, at a time when many institutions of higher education were dividing their liberal arts and professional programs and becoming, in the process, more diversified and specialized, High Point University was purposefully evolving into an institution whose approach to undergraduate education was holistic, integrative, and interdisciplinary. The changes the University made to its core curriculum coincided with the drafting of a new set of desired attributes of High Point University graduates, including:

! the ability to speak and write clearly and effectively;

! possession of basic analytical and quantitative skills necessary for handling information in mathematical form;

! an understanding of the methods and developments in the natural sciences and the impact of science on society;

! an understanding and appreciation of the western historical, cultural, and religious heritage;

! an understanding of American society, human behavior, and how values shape people�s lives;

! knowledge of other cultures and an understanding of one�s own society in an international context;

! the acquisition of communication ability in a modern foreign language not previously studied;

! an understanding that good health and physical fitness are important to a well-lived life;

! the ability to integrate ideas and knowledge into a holistic understanding of current issues and practical problems;

! proper preparation to enter professional life or graduate education and clearer objectives with regard to life goals.

In general, the University shifted from a cafeteria model of general education to a more tightly structured liberal arts model, and in the process revealed its intention to offer every student, regardless of academic discipline or professional aspiration, the same fundamental grounding in English, mathematics, science, art, history, foreign language, and philosophy. Along with this shift came a renewed emphasis on the 2 The full mission statement is presented in Appendix A.

~9~

cultivation of students� expressive skills�as reflected in the development of the Writing across the Curriculum program and the establishment of the Writing Fellows Program. In addition to revising its academic program, High Point University has also attended to the issue of students� cultural, social, and physical development. The Cultural Enrichment Series, for example, was designed not only to provide a venue for students to display their own talents (through plays, concerts, and exhibits), but also to bring to campus a diverse group of actors, musicians, and both nationally and internationally known speakers. Furthermore, in the past decade the University has seen an increase in the number of social, service, and special interest groups that provide students with opportunities for leadership development, community outreach, and exposure to other cultures. Other efforts to promote a comprehensive educational experience may be seen in the expansion of High Point University�s Student Life Program, greater emphasis on student research, and in the continuing development of the Study Abroad and Internship programs. At the core of the University�s mission statement, therefore, lies the belief that well-educated students are not merely well informed�able, at a moment, to discuss interesting facts about art, history, science, or current events�but are fully prepared to negotiate their ways through the shifting complexities of contemporary life. They are problem solvers and creators, chroniclers and teachers, entrepreneurs and shapers of society; people who, having built up sure stocks of knowledge, bring their diverse aptitudes to bear on the many opportunities that come their way. They are also thoughtful about, and appreciative of, the infinite variety of experiences available in a global community, and are responsible and effective citizens in whichever cities, states, or countries they happen to live. Productive and ambitious and enterprising though they may be, they also understand what it means to be a part of an intricately arranged society whose members differ greatly in ability, aspiration, and need. Thus, from High Point University�s perspective, well-educated students are rich mixtures of knowledge, talent, and understanding; well trained and professionally prepared to be sure, but also ruminative, responsible, ethical, self-aware, and civically-minded.

The Thematic Structure of the Curriculum One of the unique features of the new general education curriculum introduced in 1989 was its thematic structure. Rather than simply supplying students with a menu of course choices, the members of the National Commission on the Future of High Point College sought to place the curriculum in a conceptually integrated framework designed to mirror students� development as citizens in a global community. This framework, articulated in the following excerpt from the Report of the National Commission on the Future of High Point College (pp. 14 � 15), consists of four stages, each of which is associated with particular sets of courses or structured learning experiences:

�[High Point University�s] general education program is interdisciplinary, leading in a logical progression from questions of the self and individual identity to issues involving the individual�s eventual choice of vocation. In the first year, general education courses deal with images of the self throughout history�a powerful theme that can be richly studied in an interdisciplinary context. In the sophomore year, the theme is self and society. Here the student deals with questions of the self�s relations with others, the individual�s obligations and responsibilities to society, and the central role of ethics and values in civilization. This theme is taught especially as it relates to the history and culture of the United States. In the third year, the world is added to self and society. Here the student studies other cultures, reinforcing the international and interdisciplinary dimensions of the curriculum and deepening the student�s understanding of the global integration of modern society. Finally, the senior year is concerned with Self, Society, World, and Vocation. Here, in a senior seminar, students relate what they have learned to questions of their own life goals.�

~10~

The practical value of this thematic structure lies in its ability to place academic coursework in contexts that are especially meaningful to students, a function that effectively transmutes what some students might otherwise perceive to be a jumble of unrelated courses into a coherently arranged mosaic of academic offerings. Less obvious, but equally important, is the fundamental assumption underlying the thematic structure itself, namely, that High Point University is committed not just to students� intellectual development, but to their personal, social, and professional development as well. Thus, the four themes of Self, Society, World, and Vocation are both tactically useful and reflective of the University�s educational philosophy, qualities that render them suitable as anchor points for the overarching goals of the QEP.

Strategic Planning The University�s most recent Strategic Plan specifies three courses of action that are relevant to the QEP:

! The University will assess all aspects of the non-curricular student experience with the goal of improving student life and student engagement;

! The University will conduct a thorough evaluation of the internship program to determine both departmental and student needs;

! The University will sponsor a wider range of study abroad opportunities and will develop a plan for recruiting greater numbers of international students;

As these strategic directions suggest, providing students with opportunities to serve, work, and learn in real-world settings will go far toward fulfilling the University�s academic mission. Furthermore, it is worth noting that the successful implementation of the QEP is likely to have positive long-term effects on student engagement and student retention, outcomes that are also relevant to the University�s developmental aspirations.

The QEP in Institutional Context In the final analysis, the broad focus of the QEP on improved experiential learning opportunities for students is consistent with High Point University�s historical purpose, academic mission, general education curriculum, and future goals and objectives. Furthermore�as will be shown in the following section�the QEP also has broad institutional support, a strong empirical foundation, and a solid basis in contemporary scholarship. Taken together, these facts indicate that the QEP fits well within the broader institutional context and is thus an appropriate mechanism by which to improve student learning at High Point University.

~11~

DEVELOPMENT OF THE QEP

IGH POINT UNIVERSITY�S MOST RECENT STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS COMMENCED IN September, 2002, with a series of fact-finding and brainstorming meetings among trustees, administrators, faculty, and staff, and concluded in December, 2004, with the publication of High

Point University Strategic Directions 2004 � 2014. In the intervening two years, the Strategic Directions Committee, headed by Dr. E. Vance Davis, Vice President for Academic Affairs, examined the University�s previous development plan (the National Commission Report on the Future of High Point College) and the various new recommendations put forth by the administration and faculty, and subsequently drafted a set of 22 broad goals designed to propel High Point University into the 21st century. As mentioned in the previous section, several of these goals sought to maximize student engagement by vivifying and diversifying the academic program, a process that would involve, among other things, providing students with more opportunities to become active participants in their own educations. It is appropriate to say, therefore, that the roots of this QEP can be traced to the careful deliberations that, from 2002 to 2004, led to the creation of the University�s new strategic plan. The QEP itself, however, was the result of a separate (albeit parallel) collaboration among University constituencies, one in which open discussion and the thoughtful analysis of existing needs yielded an ambitious yet realistic plan for the enhancement of student learning. The nature of this collaboration and its effects on the development of the QEP are the subjects of this section.

The Leadership Team In January, 2004, the SACS Reaffirmation of Accreditation Leadership Team�comprising then-President Jacob C. Martinson; Dr. E. Vance Davis, Vice President for Academic Affairs; Dr. E. Roy Epperson, SACS Liaison and Reaffirmation of Accreditation Chair; Dr. Alberta Herron, Dean of the Graduate School and Reaffirmation of Accreditation Co-chair; and Dr. Stephanie Crofton, Assistant Professor of Economics�convened to begin laying plans for the forthcoming SACS on-site visit. The Leadership Team�s principal responsibilities were to satisfy all requirements for compliance certification, oversee the development of the Quality Enhancement Plan, and communicate with the various institutional constituencies about the reaffirmation of accreditation process. To facilitate the development of the QEP, the Leadership Team named Dr. Mariann Tillery, Professor of Education, and Dr. Jeff Adams, Associate Professor of Psychology, co-chairs of the QEP Steering Committee.

Identifying the Focus of the QEP The process of identifying an appropriate focus for the QEP began on August 19, 2004, during pre-semester faculty seminars. Following an introductory session in which the purposes and functions of the QEP were described, faculty members were divided into small work teams and asked to generate answers to the question, �What can High Point University do to improve student learning?� Five months later, in January, 2005, High Point University undergraduate and graduate students were contacted via e-mail and asked the same question. A total of 234 suggestions, reflecting a diverse set of wide-ranging concerns,

H2

~12~

were proffered. After inspecting the set of suggestions, the QEP Steering Committee identified eleven broad thematic categories into which the individual suggestions could be sorted:

! Changes to Institutional Structure

! Changes in Program Offerings

! Faculty Development

! Faculty � Student Relationships

! Innovative Instructional Mechanisms

! Miscellany

! Out-of-Class Learning Experiences

! Raised Academic Standards

! Shifts in Institutional Philosophy, Policy, and Protocol

! Student Resources and Amenities

! Technology

To render the task of identifying an appropriate QEP theme more manageable, the QEP Steering Committee examined with particular care the four categories into which the majority of suggestions fell. These categories were Out-of-Class Learning Experiences (15% of all responses), Shifts in Institutional Philosophy, Policy, and Protocol (14.5%), Innovative Instructional Mechanisms (13.7%), and Changes in Program Offerings (10.3%). Taken together, the four categories accounted for 53.5% of all suggestions from faculty and students. Despite the different themes captured by these categories, a close examination of the recommendations in each category revealed a common thread that tied many of the recommendations to a single, overarching concern�the need for High Point University to provide educational experiences that are practical, hands-on, innovative, exciting, and broadly applicable to students� lives and future professions. This thread is readily discernable in the following suggestions sampled from the four selected categories:

�Teach skills that will benefit students in a variety of �real life� settings, including: all types of writing skills, speaking skills, etiquette, evaluative skills, ways to utilize technology, etc. Teach values that encourage giving to your community (time, talent and treasure) and balance between job, family, social, spiritual, emotional, physical, etc.�

�HPU could improve student learning experiences by having professionals in various areas�supplement professors� lectures by providing real world experiences and information they are currently facing.�

�[High Point University should] intentionally and actively encourage student-faculty collaboration in research and other professional learning activities (e.g., writing, painting, composing, et cetera).�

�I�think it is very important to go outside and apply the knowledge in the community. I think High Point needs to be more active in the High Point Community area.�

�I think that HPU should offer more study abroad programs to all students, not just those studying a foreign language.�

�[High Point University should] improve student learning through more engaging learning experiences that foster global awareness, e.g., service learning, study abroad, cross-cultural experiences, internships, field trips and collaborative projects.�

On the basis of these responses (or, more specifically, on the frequency with which they appeared in the list of student and faculty suggestions), the QEP Steering Committee tentatively decided that the focus of the QEP should be on some aspect of experiential learning. In order to justify this decision, however, the Committee sought to determine whether the qualitative judgments of faculty and students corresponded with more objective indicators of programmatic needs. As a first step, the Committee examined participation trends for the two principal experiential learning

~13~

2018161412108642

83.2% across sixdisciplinary areas

Per

cent

age

of T

otal

19.0%

14.3%

11.9%9.5%

Study Abroad Participation by Discipline (2002 – 2004)

19.0%

9.5%

Business Administration

Behavioral Sciences

Education

Modern Foreign Languages

History/Political Science

Religion/Philosophy

opportunities offered by the University�the Study Abroad Program and the Student Career Internship Program.1 Results for the most recent three-year period showed that on average, only 3.2% of the student body participated in internships and less than 1% participated in study abroad. Additional analyses further demonstrated that of those who did participate in internships or study abroad, the vast majority came from a small handful of academic disciplines. A second

step toward justifying the experiential learning focus of the QEP involved examining the results of recent surveys of student satisfaction and student engagement. Several relevant facts emerged from this examination, including:

! In the most recent three years, less than half of all High Point University students surveyed reported being satisfied with opportunities for community service and the relevance of their coursework to everyday life;

! In the most recent three years, more than 90% of all High Point University students surveyed indicated that since commencing their college careers, their understanding of the problems facing their community, their country, and the world had not improved much;

! In 2002, the institutional benchmark score for High Point University freshmen on the academic dimension of Active and Collaborative Learning was lower than the scores of nearly 90% of comparable institutions; the benchmark score for seniors was exceeded by nearly 70% of comparable institutions.2

These findings, coupled with the participation data for the Study Abroad and Internship programs and the favorable sentiments expressed by large numbers of faculty and students toward the enhancement and expansion of experiential learning opportunities on campus, created the empirical foundation necessary to justify the focus of the QEP and to ensure its support by students, faculty, staff, administrators, and trustees.

1 Many departments at High Point University provide students with �unofficial� experiential learning opportunities such as collaborative research,

community service, and social or religious outreach, but because these learning experiences often occur in informal contexts and are not tied to some aspect of the curriculum, precise records of student participation in these experiences typically are not available. The decision to limit the needs assessment to the Study Abroad and Internship programs, therefore, was based primarily on the availability of reliable participation data.

2 These data are from the National Survey of Student Engagement and represent comparisons between High Point University and 82 other

Baccalaureate-General institutions.

5045403530252015105

Behavioral Sciences

90.3% across fivedisciplinary areas

Per

cent

age

of T

otal 40.7%

23.9%

10.3%7.7% 7.7%

Internship Participation by Discipline (2002 – 2004)

Sport & Recreation Sciences

Business Administration

English

Exercise Science

~14~

Sharpening the Focus of the QEP The Reaffirmation of Accreditation Leadership Team approved the experiential learning focus of the QEP on February 2nd, 2005. The following week the QEP Steering Committee met to discuss plans for sharpening the focus of the QEP and for setting in place the mechanisms by which the various constituencies of High Point University could contribute to the QEP�s development. During this meeting it became clear that an appropriate starting point was with the University�s existing Study Abroad and Internship programs. These programs have for many years provided students with opportunities to learn by experiencing different cultures or by working in a diverse array of professional settings, but as the participation data showed, relatively few students had actually taken advantage of these opportunities. One natural point of emphasis in the QEP, then, involved strengthening and expanding the Study Abroad and Internship programs by increasing their visibility on campus and reinforcing their importance as elements of a comprehensive university education. It was equally clear, however, that simply shoring up these programs would not meet all the experiential learning needs of High Point University students, so other opportunities also were explored. Drawing both from the list of suggestions provided by students and faculty and a careful review of the various experiential learning opportunities offered at other institutions, the Steering Committee ultimately settled on civic engagement (discussed below) as a form of applied learning that was broad enough in scope to satisfy many different educational aspirations. At two successive faculty meetings�on February 17th and March 17th, 2005�the QEP Steering Committee gave presentations on the purpose, focus, and desired learning outcomes of the QEP. At each meeting, faculty members were invited to contribute to the development of the QEP by commenting on its focus, scope, and fit with the University�s mission. Responses to the proposed QEP were generally favorable, although a number of faculty members indicated that the three experiential learning opportunities specified in the plan�civic engagement, study abroad, and internships�didn�t capture other kinds of practical educational experiences that many students find useful, such as collaborative research, participation in professional conferences, symposia, or colloquia, and so forth. The Steering Committee agreed that these kinds of experiences�henceforth referred to as Collaborative Inquiry�did indeed fall within the thematic boundaries of the QEP and should, therefore, be included in the plan. An issue of particular consequence that arose during these early discussions involved whether the QEP should be designed with all students in mind. High Point University has two distinct undergraduate populations�a traditional day population consisting primarily of young adults aged 18 to 22 years, and an evening degree population consisting primarily of older, working professionals. Historically, every effort has been made to ensure that the University�s academic offerings, student services, and extracurricular (or co-curricular) opportunities are equally available to both populations; however, the clear and unchangeable differences between these two populations sometimes preclude their equal treatment in certain areas. Specifically, because students in the evening degree program are employed during the day, are in class until late at night, and usually have families to attend to after they�ve met the exigencies of both work and school, it would be a challenge of Herculean proportions for these students to take on the kinds of additional responsibilities that their counterparts in the traditional day program�who are less encumbered by multiple life-demands�can shoulder more readily. The fundamental question to be addressed, then, was whether it was realistic to require non-traditional students to participate in the types of experiential learning opportunities that would be specified in the QEP. After discussing the matter at some length, the members of the Reaffirmation of Accreditation Leadership Team and the QEP Steering Committee decided that the initial target of the QEP should be the traditional day students, not just because of the unique challenges faced by working professionals, but also because of the strong belief that the ambitious goals outlined in the QEP would be achieved more expeditiously with a smaller and more homogenous target population.3

3 Discussions on this issue are ongoing. It is expected that once the QEP has been implemented fully with High Point University�s day students,

efforts will be made to extend its reach into the Evening Degree Program.

~15~

The QEP Advisory Committees By the beginning of April, 2005, a clear sense of the shape and scope of the QEP had begun to emerge from institutional discussions on the subject. In the early weeks of April, the QEP Steering Committee sent a series of summary reports to faculty, staff, and students describing the current state of the QEP and outlining a general plan for its future development. A significant component of this plan involved the mobilization of several advisory committees whose function would be to translate the broad focus of the QEP into a more refined program of experiential learning. Six advisory committees, consisting of diverse combinations of administrative, faculty, staff, and student volunteers, met throughout the month of April and addressed a set of specific issues relevant to each aspect of the QEP. (See Appendices B and C for advisory committee rosters and the guiding questions the committees were asked to address). Four of the advisory committees focused on the four categories of experiential learning identified in previous discussions�Civic Engagement, Study Abroad, Internships, and Collaborative Inquiry�while two committees examined the processes by which the QEP would be implemented and assessed. It is upon the work of these committees that the following sections are based.

Civic Engagement

�Civic engagement means working to make a difference in the civic life of our communities and developing the combination of knowledge, skills, values and motivation to make that difference. It means promoting the quality of life in a community, through both political and non-political processes�. A morally and civically responsible individual recognizes himself or herself as a member of a larger social fabric and therefore considers social problems to be at least partly his or her own; such an individual is willing to see the moral and civic dimensions of issues, to make and justify informed moral and civic judgments, and to take action when appropriate.�4

The unique charge of the Civic Engagement Advisory Committee was to generate ideas for a new civic engagement program that would enable students to establish and cultivate meaningful, mutually beneficial relationships with businesses, government agencies, non-profit organizations, schools, and a host of other civic groups in and around the Central Piedmont Region of North Carolina. In part this charge required the Advisory Committee to identify existing service organizations on campus�Circle K, Habitat for Humanity, the service fraternities and sororities, and other, perhaps more informal, groups�and determine how to weave them into the larger fabric of the proposed civic engagement program. But it also involved (a) exploring other kinds of opportunities for civic engagement not currently available on campus, and (b) articulating the philosophical, organizational, and structural frameworks on which these programs would be constructed. The work of the Civic Engagement Advisory Committee was, therefore, creative, innovative, and, in a very literal way, central to the establishment of a culture of experiential learning at High Point University.

The Benefits of Civic Engagement For well over a decade, many colleges and universities across the country have been gathering under the banner of an age-old, but nearly-forgotten, mandate of higher education: to prepare students for citizenship in a diverse and increasingly complex world. This mobilization, whose first stirrings can be seen in the emergence of service learning programs on college campuses during the 1980s, was essentially a reaction to the stark manner in which the American academy, in the decades following World War II, broke from its historical alliances with religious and civic organizations and established itself as an edifice of intellectualism for which �The increase in knowledge (rather than virtue) became the raison d�etre of both the research university and the undergraduate college, with knowledge celebrated

4 From Civic Responsibility and Higher Education, Edited by Thomas Ehrlich, published by Oryx Press, 2000, p. vi.

~16~

both as valuable in itself and as a powerful engine of productivity and economic and social progress.�5 The chief complaint against the academy�a complaint that ultimately became the driving force behind such organizations as Campus Compact, the National Service-Learning Partnership, and the Corporation for National and Community Service�was that its near-exclusive emphasis on students� intellectual and professional development, while certainly beneficial to the nation�s political and commercial interests, was inimical to the advancement of civil society. To remedy this situation, a number of academic institutions began developing both stand-alone programs and individual courses of study designed to promote the virtues of community service, leadership development, and other forms of civic engagement, a trend that, in recent years, has nearly achieved the status of leitmotif in both scholarly writings and public discussions on the state of contemporary higher education. At the core of this renewed emphasis on civic engagement is the idea that, perhaps more than any other civil institution, colleges and universities have the capacity to convey to the greatest number of people�and in the most concentrated and systematic way�the importance of becoming actively involved in one�s local community as well as in the broader context of global affairs. As noted in the President�s Declaration on the Civic Responsibility of Higher Education:

�Higher education is uniquely positioned to help Americans understand the histories and contours of our present challenges as a diverse democracy. It is also uniquely positioned to help both students and our communities to explore new ways of fulfilling the promise of justice and dignity for all, both in our own democracy and as part of the global community. We know that pluralism is a source of strength and vitality that will enrich our students� education and help them learn both to respect difference and to work together for the common good.�

This is a noble charge to be sure, and there is accumulating evidence that when students and faculty members devote themselves to community service, social outreach, or causes that are more global in scope, the practical effects of these endeavors frequently are both noticeable and socially significant.6 Yet it is important to recognize that the benefits of civic engagement extend not just to those who are served, but also to those who serve, for civic engagement is as much about learning as it is about serving society. Indeed, according to the Association of American Colleges and Universities, civic engagement can have a profound effect on participating students:

�Liberal education has the strongest impact when students look beyond the classroom to the world�s major questions, asking students to apply their developing analytical skills and ethical judgment to significant problems in the world around them�this newly pragmatic and committed liberal education will both prepare students for a dynamic economy and build civic capacity at home and abroad.�7

In part, the value of civic engagement as an academic tool lies in the variety of ways that students can become engaged with their communities. For example, an examination of several civic engagement programs across the country shows that, among other things, civic engagement encompasses:

! Participating actively in the political process;

! Contributing to the artistic ambiance of one�s community;

! Enhancing appreciation for cultural or ethnic diversity in one�s community;

! Tutoring in local schools;

5 Schneider, C. G. (1998). Core Missions and Civic Responsibility: Toward the Engaged Academy (p. 4). Association of American Colleges

and Universities. 6 Putnam, R. D. (2001). Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. Published by Simon & Schuster. 7 AAUC (2002). Greater Expectations: A New Vision for Learning as a Nation Goes to College (p. xii).

~17~

! Contributing to urban planning, neighborhood development, and community beautification projects;

! Working to enhance the economic climate of one�s community;

! Supporting religiously sponsored outreach programs. These kinds of programs provide students with a rich array of real-world experiences from which they can glean valuable information about race and gender, politics and economics, religion and morality, and many other subjects of personal, local, and national relevance. Equally important, however, is the fact that civic involvements stimulate students to think critically, reflectively, and creatively, to express themselves both verbally and in print, and to cultivate their abilities as leaders, innovators, and responsible citizens.8 Moreover, research supports the view that civic engagement enhances both academic development and life skills development.9 Thus, the benefits of civic engagement are wide-ranging, long-lasting, and applicable in equal measure to communities and individual students alike, outcomes that fully justify the inclusion of a civic engagement component in High Point University�s experiential learning program.

Civic Engagement Needs Assessment As mentioned previously, High Point University supports a number of volunteer organizations whose activities benefit the wider High Point community. These organizations, however, are not bound together under a central institutional directive for civic engagement, and they tend to appeal only to those students whose commitments to civic duty are already well formed. Furthermore, participation in these organizations constitutes an extracurricular activity rather than a structured learning experience that is explicitly and demonstrably tied to the academic curriculum. Finally, because these organizations have, for the most part, operated at the periphery of the University�s academic program, they have not received the kinds of sustained development efforts afforded to other strategic initiatives. Taken together, these facts suggest several courses of action that should be taken in order to develop a vibrant and effective civic engagement program.

1. Institutionalization If it is to be successful, High Point University�s civic engagement program must be seen not as another supplemental activity in which interested and well-intentioned students may or may not choose to participate, but as an extension of the institution�s identity and developmental aspirations, a tool for learning that is available to, and used by, all day students. To achieve this end, every effort should be made to institutionalize the civic engagement program by tying it to existing University structures and functions, providing it with adequate resource support, and presenting it publicly as a mechanism by which High Point University intends both to improve student learning and forge stronger bonds with the community. These outcomes could be obtained by:

! Acknowledging the close connection between the civic engagement program and the University�s mission and long-term strategic plan;

! Intertwining the purpose of the civic engagement program with the institution�s goals for teaching, learning, and research;

! Assigning the civic engagement program a unique position in the University�s budget;

! Providing the civic engagement program with infrastructure, staffing, and other resource needs beyond minimally sustainable levels;

8 Astin, A. W., Vogelgesang, L. J., Ikeda, E. K., & Yee, J. A. (2000). How Service Learning Affects Students. Higher Education Research

Institute, University of California, Los Angeles. 9 Astin, A. W. & Sax, L. J. (1998). How Undergraduates are Affected by Service Participation. The Journal of College Student Development, 39

(3): 251-263.

~18~

! Articulating an administrative reporting structure that places the leadership of the civic engagement program within the broader context of institutional governance;

! Identifying civic engagement initiatives as legitimate indicators of the professional development of faculty;

! Publicizing faculty accomplishments in the area of civic engagement, providing stipends to faculty who develop courses with a civic engagement component, and establishing a faculty award recognizing achievements in the area of civic engagement;

! Creating a communications network�a University website, campus and community newsletters, established media outlets, and so forth�through which the activities of the civic engagement program can be publicized.

Recognizing at the outset that the civic engagement program is an integral part of the University�s academic program�both by acknowledging its capacity to enhance student learning and by linking its success to the vested interests of the University�s various constituencies�will solidify the program�s legitimacy and, consequently, ensure that the program itself is properly cultivated in the years ahead.

2. Curricular Alignment In keeping with the academic mission of the University, the civic engagement program must be clearly aligned with the core principles, values, and requirements of the institution�s curriculum. In one sense, this means that students� civic engagement experiences should reflect the curricular themes of Self and Society, themes which, as discussed previously, were designed to convey the idea that comprehensively educated students are those who leaven their personal strivings and professional aspirations with a mature sense of social responsibility. With this in mind, at least three different kinds of civic engagement programs could be designed to fit the progressive themes of the curriculum:

A Civic Engagement Immersion Program. This unique initiative could be integrated with the University�s existing freshman orientation program to create a comprehensive freshman year experience that would allow new students to forge bonds of friendship, camaraderie, and collegiality while they pursue civic engagement activities in and around the Piedmont Triad.

Discipline-Specific Civic Engagement Courses. New or existing courses from a variety of disciplines could be designated Civic Engagement Courses, with community service, leadership development, or other forms of civic involvement serving as the experiential core around which course content is arranged, examined, analyzed, and understood.

A Problem-Based Civic Engagement Program. This program would provide students with opportunities to work closely with members of the community in order to better understand a particular community problem or need. Students could then marshal their newly acquired knowledge and skills to propose and implement solutions to the problems they�ve chosen to address.

It is worth mentioning here that in and of itself, the plain act of serving the community in some capacity does not necessarily result in long-term student learning. Rather, learning occurs when students reflect upon their experiences in structured and deliberate ways and endeavor to connect their real-world encounters with the educational content of the curriculum. In other words, the mechanism for student learning lies not in community engagement per se, but in the purposive acts of thinking about and weighing the personal relevance of one�s civic involvements.10 It is for this reason that another form of curricular alignment�this one reflecting the University�s commitment to the liberal arts�also should be pursued during the development of the civic engagement program. In particular, students who become involved with their communities in the ways mentioned above should expect to read, write, and speak 10 Bringle, R. G., & Hatcher, J. A. (1995). A Service-learning Curriculum for Faculty. Michigan Journal of Community Service-Learning, 2,

112.

~19~

about their experiences on a regular basis. These activities will not only reinforce the lessons students learn from their various experiences, but will also provide students with additional opportunities to develop the critical thinking and expressive skills that are so fundamental to a liberal arts education.

3. Effective Management Perhaps the ultimate determinant of the civic engagement program�s success will be the effectiveness and efficiency with which it is designed, developed, and managed. Beyond the minimum expectation of adequate staffing and physical resources, effective management will also involve a host of structural and operational concerns, including:

Organizational Structure. As mentioned in point 1 above (Institutionalization), the civic engagement program should be regarded as an independent operational unit, but one that is tightly yoked to the broader academic mission of the University. As such, the civic engagement program should be adequately staffed (minimally with a director and an administrative assistant) and explicitly positioned within the University�s organizational framework. Like other functional units on campus, the civic engagement program should also have a clearly articulated mission and a set of key goals and objectives designed to ensure (among other things) that all civic engagement initiatives, including those that are embedded in courses, meet acceptable standards of performance and that the various needs of students, faculty, and community agencies are addressed in appropriate and conscientious ways.

Planning. It perhaps goes without saying that a thorough planning process is essential to the successful development of the civic engagement program. Furthermore, because of its complexity and extended reach into the University�s core curriculum, the program will require the efforts of a diverse group of individuals who are committed not just to the integrity of the program, but also to the soundness and stability of the University�s academic mission. For this reason, it would be worthwhile to establish a civic engagement advisory committee whose principal function would be to assist the program director by, for example, organizing visitation teams to observe successful civic engagement programs at other institutions, bringing academic and community consultants to campus to lead education and training seminars for faculty, and providing information about best practices, legal and/or ethical concerns, and any other subject that the committee deems relevant to the efficient functioning of the civic engagement program.

Evaluation. As the methodological complement of planning, the process of evaluating the effectiveness of the civic engagement program should be carried out conscientiously, regularly, and with the fundamental intention of ascertaining whether or not (1) the program has been managed satisfactorily, (2) students have gained from their civic involvements the expected increases in knowledge, leadership ability, and expressive skills, and (3) the community has benefited from the students� service. It is expected that the director of the civic engagement program will work with the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment to design and implement an effective system of program evaluation.

Toward Implementing the Civic Engagement Program Before the civic engagement program can be implemented, many needs must first be met. An operating budget must be provided, at least one well-qualified individual must be selected to manage the program, and the process by which the program will be integrated with the general education curriculum must be clearly articulated. Faculty who wish to design civic engagement components in their classes must be trained and supported, partnerships must be established with community groups, civic organizations, and other potential sites, and the day-to-day exigencies of program operation must be worked out. Because these issues demand concentrated attention, a more detailed implementation plan will be articulated in Sections 3 and 4 of this QEP.

~20~

Study Abroad High Point University began offering study abroad opportunities in 1987, when well-qualified students could spend their junior year studying at the University of Leeds in England. Shortly thereafter, the University created the semester abroad program at Westminster College (now Oxford/Brookes University), in Oxford, England, and established affiliations with other institutions so that eligible students could spend a semester studying French in Paris, German in Heidelberg, and Spanish in Seville. Also about this time, High Point University arranged transfer agreements with the Université Laval in Québec for the study of French and with Universidad Madero in Puebla, Mexico, for the study of Spanish. In the fall of 2003 the University established a cooperative association with St. Andrews University in Scotland, bringing to eight the total number of formal study abroad opportunities available to students. Initially designed to provide students with an immersion experience in foreign language, the Study Abroad program is now viewed as a means to buttress the curriculum of the liberal arts�particularly in the humanities�by providing students with opportunities to visit places of historical and artistic significance. As mentioned above, however, the vast majority of High Point University students have not capitalized on these opportunities during their undergraduate careers. While it is true that the relatively high cost of international travel prevented some of these students from pursuing study abroad experiences, others chose not to study abroad either because they were not attracted to the countries with which the University has cooperative arrangements or because they did not see the educational or professional advantages of studying abroad. Occasionally, students were simply unaware that a study abroad program exists at High Point University, a fact that caused them to bypass a unique educational experience they might otherwise have enjoyed and from which they likely would have benefited. For these and other reasons, the institution�s study abroad program has been underutilized for the past 18 years, a trend that the Study Abroad Advisory Committee set out to reverse as it deliberated throughout the month of April, 2005.

The Benefits of Study Abroad The idea that the world is shrinking�that satellite technology, integrated communication networks, and efficient air travel have reduced the time it takes for people to interact with, learn from, and do business with one another�is so commonplace that it scarcely needs explaining. The implications of this idea, however, continue to expand and grow more profound with each international crisis, as images of famine, poverty, and war humanize the faces of people who, not too long ago, could be relegated to the category of �distant others.� Indeed, globalization has created political and economic interdependencies that cannot be broken without catastrophic effects; it has brought to the foreground deep-seated cultural and religious conflicts among ancient rivals whose once-isolated clashes have now become sources of international anguish; it has heightened our awareness of the growing scarcity of vital natural resources and the rising threat of rapidly transmittable infectious diseases; and it has drawn attention to the worldwide effects of pollution, overcrowding, and the erosion of the environment. Globalization has, in short, made neighbors of us all, a fact that may suggest the importance of reflecting anew on what it means to be neighborly. The importance of these developments to the next generation of global citizens has not been lost on institutions of higher education. Today, many colleges and universities in the United States and around the world offer study abroad programs in an effort to help students learn about and appreciate cultures that are different from their own. As a growing body of research shows, these international experiences do indeed have significant effects on students� psychological, professional, and academic development. For example, compared to non-participants, students who have meaningful and academically integrated study abroad experiences report significant increases in international political concern, cross-cultural

~21~

interest, and cultural cosmopolitanism.11 Other studies have shown that international learning experiences are associated not only with the development of oral communication skills in a foreign language,12 but also with significant personal and social growth.13 Moreover, there is good evidence that studying in a different country may enhance career development,14 a finding that is often consistent with the qualitative appraisals of many study abroad participants. It should be noted that nearly all of these positive outcomes are obtained only in study abroad programs that have a solid experiential base (that is, programs in which students are expected not simply to attend classes in a host country, but to participate actively in out-of-class learning experiences that tie in with clearly defined curricular goals15). Hence, most successful study abroad programs:

��send students out of the classroom into a world that is complex and interconnected, challenging their prevailing worldview and their ability to take responsibility for their own learning. Learning is then evaluated based on reading, writing, presenting, or producing projects that measure achievement based on direct experience� (p. 2).16

Beyond enhancing student learning, though, adding an experiential component to study abroad is also ��necessary to support and legitimize [the] academic integration of an international experience with the rigor and credibility afforded to traditional discipline-based learning (p. 3),�17 an important point to bear in mind in the design or expansion of any study abroad program.

Study Abroad Needs Assessment Although the study abroad program at High Point University has existed for eighteen years, no systematic efforts have been made to evaluate the program either for its effectiveness as a learning tool or for its overall adequacy as an academic experience. For this reason, the Study Abroad Advisory Committee, before suggesting possible paths for future development, surveyed a sample of faculty members and students and obtained descriptive data bearing on people�s attitudes toward, and wishes for, the study abroad program.18 The most relevant results from these surveys can be summarized as follows:

! Consistent with previous investigations of student participation in study abroad at High Point University, a large majority of the student sample (74%) indicated that they would like to participate in the study abroad program, though only 2.3% had actually done so;

! When asked about the reasons for not participating in study abroad, 30.3% of the student sample indicated that they�d never thought about it and 26.9% said that the cost was too high;

11 Carlson, J. S., & Widaman, K. F. (1988). The effects of study abroad during college on attitudes toward other cultures. International Journal

of Intercultural Relations, 12, 1-17.

12 Freed, B. (1995a). Language learning and study abroad, In B. Freed (Ed.), Second language acquisition in a study abroad context, (pp. 3-34). Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

13 Institute for the International Education of Students. (2002). 14 Hannigan, T. P. (20 ). The effect of work abroad experiences on career development for U.S. undergraduates. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary

Journal of Study Abroad, 7, 1-23. 15 Lutterman-Aguilar, A., & Gingerich, O. (2002). Experiential pedagogy for study abroad: Educating for global citizenship. Frontiers: The

Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, 8, 41-82. 16 Montrose, L. (2002). International and experiential learning: The academic context. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study

Abroad, 8, 1 � 15. 17 Montrose, L. (2002). International and experiential learning: The academic context. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study

Abroad, 8, 1 � 15. 18 Thirty four full-time faculty members (27.4%) and 201 traditional day students (12.6%) completed surveys. While not fully representative of

the universe of High Point University faculty and students, these samples were diverse enough to provide a substantial amount of credible and valuable information.

~22~

! Most students expressed an interest in participating in study abroad experiences for one semester (57.4%) or one summer session (30.7%); only 11.9% said that they�d like to study abroad for a year;

! Although many students indicated a preference for courses in their major (71.1%) or in a foreign language (55.7%), it was almost uniformly thought that a broader array of courses should be offered in the future;

! The most popular destinations for study abroad were Australia (48.3%), England (43.8%), Italy (43.3%), France (31.3%), Ireland (29.9%), Spain (27.9%), Germany (22.9%), Scotland (22.4%), New Zealand (20.9%), and Switzerland (15.4%); nearly one in five students (18.4%) expressed an interest in studying in either China or Japan;

! Approximately half of all faculty respondents (48.5%) expressed an interest in leading a study abroad program, although many of these respondents indicated that they lacked the time or expertise to design an appropriate study abroad course on their own;

! Almost all faculty respondents (94.1%) thought that study abroad should involve some form of out-of-class experience, and several respondents proposed offering internships abroad.

Despite their diversity and thematic complexity, these findings suggest two principal ways in which the Study Abroad Program at High Point University can be enhanced over the next three to five years. First, the program itself should be expanded, publicized, and integrated more completely with the academic mission of the University. Second, a new administrative structure for the study abroad program should be devised and several important operational concerns should be addressed. Both of these areas are explored more fully in the following sections.

1. Program Development A popularly held belief about High Point University�s study abroad program is that it is somewhat limited in scope. Indeed, this concern has been formalized in the institution�s most recent ten-year strategic plan:

Of the institution�s existing [study abroad] programs, three are located in the British Isles, two are in Spanish-speaking countries, two are in areas where French is the principal language, and one is in Germany. While this degree of dispersion is certainly respectable�it nevertheless falls somewhat short of capturing the true spirit of internationalism. It would be worthwhile, therefore, for the University to consider offering a wider range of semester abroad programs, particularly in non-English speaking countries, including locations outside western Europe. By extending its reach thus, the University would not only succeed in providing students with more diverse study abroad options, it would also maximize its own global visibility and thereby increase its appeal to foreign students.19

In response to this call to action, the Study Abroad Advisory Committee generated several suggestions for increasing the availability, diversity, and global reach of study abroad opportunities offered to High Point University students, including:

Semester Abroad in England with a Significant Humanities Focus. Although students identified Australia as the most desirable study abroad destination, for pragmatic reasons the University should focus immediate attention on more traditional destinations. In particular, the University should identify another institution in England, preferably one with a strong reputation in the Humanities, and discuss with that institution the desirability and feasibility of establishing a cooperative study abroad arrangement similar to the one currently in place with Oxford-Brookes.

19 High Point University Strategic Directions 2004 � 2014, p. 84.

~23~

Short-Term Study Abroad Programs. In response to student and faculty requests for shorter-term study abroad opportunities, the University should establish several permanent catalog offerings of three to five weeks duration in May and June, and of six to eight weeks duration in the summer months, that could be used to satisfy general education requirements.

Development of New Linkages for Foreign Language Study Abroad. Because a high percentage of student respondents indicated an interest in studying foreign language abroad, the University should consider developing additional semester abroad linkages involving the study of French, German and Spanish. Such programs would be open to students at a lower level of foreign language study than is required for participation in the programs currently available to our students. Students participating in semester programs through these new linkages would take 4�6 credits in foreign language with the remainder of the coursework being taught in English.

Study Abroad Programs for EDP and Graduate Students. Given the constraints on the schedules of evening degree and graduate students, the University should consider establishing short-term (perhaps ten days to two weeks), faculty-led programs that meet the unique needs of these populations.

Study Abroad Programs in Locations Outside Europe and Mexico. For a variety of reasons�expressed student interest, acknowledged need by the International Business and International Studies programs, et cetera�the University should begin exploring ways to increase the number of countries outside Europe and Mexico in which students can study languages, take courses that satisfy either general education or major requirements, or participate in internships. These new study abroad opportunities could be offered during the fall and spring semesters as well as over the summer. Although many locations could justifiably be considered, preference should be given to China, Japan, Australia, and countries in South America.

Although all of these recommendations speak to the importance of expanding or extending current study abroad opportunities, it is worth noting that simply providing students with more (or different) study abroad options is but a first step toward vivifying High Point University�s study abroad program. In order to maximize student learning, it will also be necessary to review the kinds of learning experiences students have while they are abroad and to redesign those experiences, if necessary, so that specific and measurable learning objectives can be met. For example, in keeping with research demonstrating the importance of active student involvement in the study abroad experience, coursework should include a clear hands-on component in which students immerse themselves in the culture of their host country and then reflect on, evaluate, and determine the relevance of their experiences to their academic, vocational, or professional pursuits. Only if these elements are included will the addition of new study abroad locations lead to meaningful gains in student learning.

2. Administrative Development A significant impediment to the growth of the study abroad program has been the absence of a centralized administrative unit whose sole function is to coordinate study abroad experiences. Historically, the study abroad program has been administered on a part-time basis by faculty members who have a vested interest in the international dimensions of higher education. However ably these faculty members have been able to manage the exigencies of travel abroad in past years, it is unreasonable to expect significant development in the study abroad program unless it receives full-time attention. Other matters worthy of address include the expense of study abroad, safety and security issues, and the general lack of understanding of the purposes and possibilities of international learning experiences. In light of these concerns, the Advisory Committee offered several recommendations for the administration of the study abroad program.

Establish a Study Abroad Office. The day-to-day and month-to-month management of the study abroad program is a highly involved enterprise. For each study abroad experience, the

~24~

responsible administrative agents must keep attentive eyes on several operational concerns, including the application process, the selection of courses, pre-departure orientation, transfer of course credit from one institution to another, travel arrangements, housing and pre-registration for the semester of return to High Point University, handling family emergencies, publicizing the program and recruiting students, minding issues of liability and insurance, working with outside agencies, and many other issues. Given the scope of these duties�a scope that will certainly expand with the proposed enhancements to the study abroad program�it is essential that the University create a Study Abroad Office headed by an individual who is well versed in all aspects of the study abroad experience. This individual should not only take primary responsibility for meeting the operational requirements of the study abroad program, but should also be capable of developing the program in a manner consistent with the University�s long-range goals. Address the Expense of Study Abroad. If the University intends to maximize the attractiveness and educational importance of the study abroad program, it should also explore ways to make participation in the program more affordable. Historically, the institution has been very generous in its provision of financial aid to students with need, but moving forward, it would be worthwhile to determine the feasibility of increasing the amount of aid available to students. Another strategy designed to reduce the financial impact of study abroad might involve securing scholarship funding, perhaps from corporate donors with strong international connections. Still another strategy might involve creating a study abroad support fund from the revenue generated by adding a nominal fee to students� tuition charges. By making the costs of participation in study abroad less prohibitive, it is likely that more students would take advantage of the unique learning opportunities afforded by structured international experiences. Re-examine Policies Related to Insurance and Security. The safety of students who are studying abroad has always been the first order of importance for High Point University. When establishing study abroad programs or linkages with other organizations, the University must continue to verify that the host institution or sponsoring organization is equally committed to taking all possible measures to assure the safety and well being of the students. Furthermore, because of the risks that accompany international travel, the University�through the Office of the Chief Financial Officer�should re-evaluate and, if necessary, upgrade its insurance policies for study abroad. Minimally, these policies should have adequate medical coverage for participants, including major emergency coverage, and should provide liability coverage for the faculty leader and the institution. Increase the Visibility of the Study Abroad Program. Although information about the study abroad program can be found in a number of campus publications and on the High Point University website, it would be desirable to make the program even more visible by, for example, upgrading the study abroad web pages and linking them directly to the High Point University home page. Additionally, greater effort should be devoted to publicizing the study abroad program, by, for example, communicating more effectively with faculty and students, emphasizing study abroad in the academic advising process, and organizing biannual study abroad fairs.

Toward Implementing the Study Abroad Program Unlike the civic engagement program, the study abroad program already exists in a recognizable form on campus. Hence, the program will not be �implemented� so much as it will be expanded and enhanced. Still, the steps that need to be taken to improve the study abroad program must be choreographed precisely so that they do not interfere or compete with the other components of this Quality Enhancement Plan. The action plan for developing the study abroad program will be presented in its entirety in Sections 3 and 4 of this document. Internships

~25~

�Once regarded as supplemental educational experiences, internships and other practical applications of classroom instruction have become thoroughly integrated into the academic programs of most contemporary colleges and universities. The value of these experiences lies primarily in their ability to place students into environments and situations that cannot readily (or effectively) be replicated in the lecture hall or laboratory, thereby providing aspiring professionals with opportunities to practice their trades in real, but safe, settings.�20

One of the oldest and most established experiential learning programs at High Point University, the Student Career Internship Program (SCIP) has been enhancing students� academic experience since 1973. Like other internship programs across the country, SCIP seeks to place students in real-world settings where they can learn more about a particular career or vocation, hone their expressive, receptive, and critical thinking skills, and use the knowledge they�ve acquired in the classroom to navigate through the sometimes labyrinthine corridors of the workplace. In nearly every case, students who have participated in internships at High Point University have reported benefiting tremendously from the experience, their subjective appraisals corresponding neatly with the substantial body of scholarship (discussed subsequently) that has built up over the past two decades. However, as is the case with the study abroad program, apart from those students for whom internships are a degree requirement, only a small proportion of the student body voluntarily chooses to participate in an internship experience in any given year. Because the core of SCIP is generally understood to be sound, the principal goal of the Internships Advisory Committee was to examine the Student Career Internship Program, identify potential causes of low participation rates among students, and determine how to bolster its role as a facilitator of student learning.

The Benefits of Internships In an earlier age, it was easy to think of the College Years as a span of time that was somehow cut from and lifted above the temporal fabric of students� lives, a time when students could explore the vast terrain of human thought and endeavor while remaining relatively untouched by the storm and stress of workaday life. Today, however, the college experience is inextricably tied to the challenges and requirements of societal and global citizenship, as students are expected not only to acquire factual knowledge and skills related to effective thinking and communicating, but also to demonstrate more than a passing understanding of the abilities that will allow them to integrate successfully with the world of work. It is largely for this reason that practical, out-of-the-classroom experiences have become so popular among contemporary colleges and universities. Despite the fact that internships, fieldwork, and practicums historically have been regarded as peripheral to the academic enterprise,21 there is little doubt that participation in these learning experiences is positively related to several meaningful student outcomes. Among the strongest associations found in the literature are those between internship participation and subsequent success in one�s chosen vocation. In one representative study, for example, it was shown that compared to students who did not have internship experiences, student interns required less time to obtain their first positions, received higher starting salaries, and were more satisfied with their jobs.22 Moreover, there is evidence that internship participation may facilitate the crystallization of vocational self-concept and work values,23 promote the

20 High Point University Strategic Directions 2004 � 2014, p. 82. 21 Migliore, S. A. (1990). National study shows progress and needs in strengthening institutional support for experiential education. In J. C

Kendall (Ed.), Combining service and learning: A resource book for community and public service. Raleigh, NC: National Society for Internships and Experiential Education.

22 Gault, J., Redington, J., & Schlager, T. (2000). Undergraduate business internships and career success: Are they related? Journal of

Marketing Education, 22, 45-53. 23 Taylor, M. S. (1988). Effects of college internships on individual participants. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 393-401.

~26~

further development of critical thinking skills,24 and, in some cases, even contribute to the shaping of one�s ethical values.25 The link between internship participation and vocational success may be explained in several ways. For example, internships provide students with unique opportunities to practice self-discipline and personal initiative, qualities that are judged favorably by most employers.26 Internships also have the practical function of providing students with professional contacts and a better sense of the job market.27 Perhaps most directly, the internship experience itself removes the mystery in which a particular job or profession might be shrouded. By performing the duties associated with a certain job, students quickly become familiar with the milieu in which they are performing, a process that ��can soften the reality shock of transitioning from the world of academics to the working world.�28 Internships are thus not merely extra-curricular educational opportunities, but truly transformative experiences in which students can begin to reshape their professional or vocational identities.

Internship Needs Assessment It has long been acknowledged that enhancing the Student Career Internship Program at High Point University will require a commitment of both personnel and material resources. This conclusion, however, rests largely on the subjective appraisals of SCIP supervisors and participants rather than the results of a formal needs assessment. Therefore, in an effort to lend empirical credence to what many members of the High Point University community readily perceive to be a conspicuous instance of need, the Internship Advisory Committee solicited faculty and student responses to the following five questions:

! What defines a high quality internship for a student?

! Ideally, what would you like the internship program at High Point University to include? What services, opportunities, etc. should be provided to students?

! In what ways could faculty and staff support improve an internship experience?

! How could students� educational experience be improved if they completed an internship?

! Should internships be required for all HPU students? Despite the open-ended nature of these questions and the diversity of the individuals who participated in the assessment, the responses provided were remarkably consistent. High quality internships, for example, tended to be defined as experiences that were hands-on, relevant to real world concerns, and replete with opportunities to assume diverse roles and responsibilities, network with other professionals, and learn valuable job-relevant skills. Not surprisingly, these same features also figured prominently in responses to the question of what services and opportunities SCIP should provide to students in the future. In addition, however, respondents mentioned the importance of extending internship opportunities beyond the High Point area and strengthening the lines of communication among internees, faculty supervisors, and internship site supervisors. When asked how the SCIP program could be improved, respondents highlighted such areas as making internships a more visible component of the academic program, encouraging faculty members to sponsor internships, and streamlining the application process. Finally, most respondents indicated that, although internships are important to students� academic development and hence should be promoted vigorously, they should not be required for graduation.

24 McCormick, D. (1993). Critical thinking, experimental learning, and internships. Journal of Management Education, 17, 260-262. 25 Smith, D. C. (1996). Ethical reflection and service internships. Journal of Business Ethics, 15, 59-65. 26 Dennis, A. (1996). The benefits of using college interns in a firm. Journal of Accountancy, 181, 889-892. 27 Groves, D. L., Howland, B., Headly, F., & Jamison, D. (1977). Relevance in the classroom and curriculum. College Student Journal, 11, 259-

261. 28 Knouse S. B., Tanner, J. T., & Harris, E. W. (1999). The relation of college internships, college performance, and subsequent job opportunity.

Journal of Employment Counseling, 36, 36-45.

~27~

Using these survey responses as a starting point, the Internship Advisory Committee discussed the various concerns that would have to be overcome if the SCIP were to evolve into a more effective mechanism of student learning. The principal result of these discussions, reflected in the following recommendations, was that the internship program at High Point University, like the study abroad program, would benefit from both programmatic and administrative reforms. 1. Program Development As indicated above, there is already a fundamental soundness to the existing Student Career Internship Program; however, in order to facilitate the continued development of SCIP (and thereby increase its value as a component of the academic program) it will be necessary to step beyond current practices and begin moving toward the realization of the program�s full potential. After considering several different avenues to programmatic growth, the Internship Advisory Committee settled upon three courses of action designed to render SCIP more accessible, visible, and academically valuable. These courses of action are discussed below.

Broaden the Range of Internship Experiences Available to Students. Over the years, as different groups of students have passed through the Student Career Internship Program, what began as a relatively small set of internship sites has grown into a sizable collection. Indeed, since 2001, students have completed internships at 134 different sites, including, for example, Merrill Lynch, United Soccer Leagues, and ESPN Magazine. While these numbers suggest considerable variety in the kinds of internship experiences students have had in recent years, it nevertheless remains the case that most of these internships took place in or around the Piedmont Triad region and, contrary to appearances, actually represented a relatively narrow range of professions or occupations.29 In order to remedy this situation, it would be worthwhile for each academic major on campus to develop a list of internship sites that would meet the unique needs of their respective students. In addition, concentrated effort should be devoted to expanding internship opportunities beyond the borders of North Carolina and into neighboring states, different national regions, and perhaps even different countries.30

Increase the Campus Visibility of the Internship Program. Like study abroad, the Student Career Internship Program has tended to lie in the shadows of High Point University�s academic program, not invisible, but only dimly perceived. To bring SCIP into clearer focus, the University should begin publicizing the internship program and emphasizing its place in the educational and professional development of students. One way this could be done is by hosting an end-of-semester event designed to showcase the experiences of High Point University interns. Alternatively (or, perhaps, correspondingly), the University could publish a monthly newsletter that announces new internship opportunities, reviews the activities of current internship participants, and informs the High Point University community of scheduled events relevant to internships.

Maximize the Efficacy of Internships as Mechanisms of Student Learning. Since its inception, SCIP has been guided by the assumption that internships are important learning experiences whose purpose is to supplement the processes of knowledge and skill acquisition that occur in the classroom. This assumption has never been tested directly, however, and while routine evaluations of and by student interns capture some of the academic benefits of internships,31 the

29 Because internships, fieldwork, and/or practicums are required of all students in the Human Relations, Education, and Exercise Science

programs, internship experiences in business, education, and medicine significantly outnumber those in other areas. 30 The Study Abroad Advisory Committee also mentioned the potential utility of establishing an internship abroad program. These unique

experiential learning opportunities would allow students to gain focused professional experience in a wide variety of international contexts. 31 On the Internship Site Evaluation Form, for example, field supervisors are asked to rate interns on the quality of their oral and written

communication skills, their awareness and sensitivity to ethical issues, and their ability to learn, understand, and apply new information or procedures. In addition, field supervisors provide an overall rating of whether the intern has learned beyond expectations, up to expectations, or below expectations.

~28~

specific effects of internship participation on student learning remain largely unknown. For this reason, every effort should be made to identify and then strengthen the links between internship experiences and improvements in students� knowledge, skills, and abilities.

2. Administrative Development Historically, a member of the faculty has directed the Student Career Internship Program, and this on a part time basis. Thus, all of the constraints on program development mentioned in the study abroad section of this report apply here as well, as does the general observation that if the internship program at High Point University is to flourish, it must be regarded as an integral component of the institution�s academic mission. For this to occur, several significant changes need to be made to the way SCIP is managed, not only at the level of day-to-day operations but also with respect to the overall evolution of the program.

Establish a Centralized Internship Office. In recognition of the fact that a single person working in a part time capacity could not reasonably be expected to transform SCIP into a major academic program, the Internship Advisory Committee recommended that the University establish a centralized internship office headed by an experienced Director and supported by at least one executive assistant. Such an office would not only ensure that the internship program operates efficiently, it would also help elevate the program to a level of respectability and importance commensurate with the ambitious aims of this QEP. In addition to helping faculty manage the exigencies of individual student internship experiences, the internship office would also hold primary responsibility for establishing new partnerships with community agencies and organizations, promoting the program to the University�s various constituencies, and ensuring that all internships contribute in meaningful and measurable ways to student learning.

Clarify and Expand the Role of Faculty in Student Internships. One factor that will be essential to the future success of SCIP is the continued involvement of faculty throughout the internship process. As the internship program develops it will be increasingly important for faculty members not just to maintain their roles in approving internship goals, establishing objectives, and participating in the evaluation process, but also to forge stronger bonds with the Internship Office so that the connection between internships and academics is brought into sharper relief. Furthermore, it would be worthwhile for the University to begin addressing broader institutional variables that currently limit the engagement of faculty in the internship process (e.g., heavy teaching loads, minimal staff support, and lack of compensation for internship supervision, et cetera).

Streamline Application and Assessment Processes. A persistent problem in the administration of the internship program has been a fundamental inconsistency in the ways that ��various academic departments locate and secure internship sites, process internship applications, outline expectations for student performance�and assess each internship experience.�32 Because a fairly thorough and precise internship manual exists, the principal cause of this inconsistency appears to be differential attention to the contents of the manual. Here again is a circumstance for which the creation of an internships office would serve a restorative function, systematizing the internship application and assessment processes through the initiation of new policies and procedures.

Toward Implementing the Internship Program As an existing program that is adequately managed, steeped in the history of the University, and fully capable of providing valuable learning experiences to students, SCIP is in the enviable position of requiring little more than a few upgrades to achieve its developmental goals. These upgrades, however, are not inconsequential, as they will require significant institutional commitments to both personnel and

32 High Point University Strategic Directions 2004 � 2014, p. 82.

~29~

material resource support. The action plan High Point University will follow to enhance the Student Career Internship Program, along with specific implementation timelines and a detailed description of budgetary requirements, will be articulated more completely in Sections 3 and 4 of this document.

Collaborative Inquiry

�The art of teaching is the art of assisting discovery.�33 A common thematic element that runs through the previous three forms of experiential learning is the idea that students learn best when they leave the classroom and engage in (and reflect upon) a variety of real-world activities. These activities differ, however, in terms of the skills, attitudes, and knowledge structures that students derive from them. Through participation in civic engagement programs, for example, students become better acquainted with their communities and with the problems, policies, and procedures associated with government, business, religious organizations, and virtually any other institution of social or civic relevance. Students who study abroad, on the other hand, learn what it means to be a part of an international community whose diverse customs, beliefs, and values reflect the myriad ways in which humanity manifests itself. Finally, student interns, by virtue of their immersion in different vocational settings, become more knowledgeable about the world of work generally and about the daily requirements of specific jobs in particular, gaining in the process more confidence in their abilities, more connections with others in the field, and, ultimately, better future prospects. All three of these experiential learning activities provide students with numerous opportunities to think critically, master important communication skills, and establish meaningful working relationships with faculty members, supervisors, and site coordinators. Moreover, civic engagement, study abroad, and internship experiences can help launch students� careers by giving them privileged access to a wide variety of intellectual, interpersonal, and informational resources. Yet despite these undeniable benefits, there are some students whose academic interests or desired professions require something different�something equally applied and hands-on but with a more specific disciplinary focus. Collaborative inquiry, a form of experiential learning that allows students to work closely with an instructor or with other students on a well-defined project suitable for publication, presentation, or performance, is a particularly useful mechanism by which these unique professional needs can be met.

The Benefits of Collaborative Inquiry In many disciplines, students� future professional success depends on the extent to which they have conducted research, written a screenplay, given a talk at a professional meeting, given an artistic performance, or engaged in some other kind of activity that demonstrates both a readiness and an ability to compete at an advanced level. It is uncommon for students to initiate these kinds of activities on their own, however, because the initiation process itself typically requires specialized knowledge or skills that aren�t often taught in the classroom. For example, even if a student were a strong researcher and a gifted writer (skills that can be honed through a variety of courses in the general education curriculum), he or she would be unlikely to publish a piece of scholarship without also knowing something about the publication process, the subtleties of communicating with editors, reviewers, and competing colleagues, and how to cope with criticism and rejection. In such a circumstance, an enterprising student would do well to align him- or herself with a mentor whose knowledge of the publishing world would bridge the gap between the student�s scholarly aspirations and his or her lack of practical experience. This, in the most fundamental terms, is the essence of collaborative inquiry. Although the term �collaborative inquiry� is of relatively recent coinage, the practice itself is ancient, stretching at least as far back as the invention of apprenticeships during the Middle Ages. As befits a learning arrangement whose roots reach into antiquity, a great deal of scholarship has accumulated over the centuries, much of it springing into existence within the last 75 years. Perhaps not surprisingly, the

33 Mark van Doren

~30~

benefits of collaborative learning prove to be abundant. For example, research has shown that in addition to improving students� understanding of the principles of empirical scholarship,34 collaborative learning experiences also:

! facilitate the development of critical thinking skills by allowing students to explore and clarify ideas through debate and discussion;35

! improve students� level of academic achievement;36

! strengthen reading, writing, and speaking skills;37

! provide contexts in which students can develop leadership skills.38 Furthermore, one might expect that the nature of the collaborative learning relationship�whether it exists between a student and a professor or between small groups of students�would foster among the participants a strong sense of personal initiative, intellectual tolerance, and responsibility to task. The reason for this is that as partners in discovery, collaborators are mutually dependent on each other and subject to one another�s weaknesses, successful together only if they are effective individually. Collaborative inquiry, therefore, can be seen as a kind of interpersonal device�a learning strategy that helps individuals internalize the sense of collegiality that is so important for professional development. Another advantage of collaborative inquiry is that it provides students with opportunities to set and meet ambitious goals. While this is certainly true when small groups of students work together on a common project,39 it is also likely to be the case in the one-to-one collaborative relationships of students and professors. Bringing a research project to fruition, for example, requires the ability to take a series of measured steps over the course of weeks, months, and sometimes years, and to persevere in the face of obstacles or setbacks. Students who commit themselves to this lengthy and strenuous enterprise, therefore, can gain valuable experience in breaking large projects into smaller, more manageable pieces, and in so doing may even learn something about their personal tolerances and limitations. Finally, students who work collaboratively with an expert in a particular field can gain insight into the state of that field, and this insight, in turn, could influence the students� career preferences. On the one hand, seeing a particular academic or professional discipline from the �inside� could strengthen students� resolve to pursue that discipline by, for example, applying to graduate school; on the other hand, academic apprenticeships could cast what students thought was an attractive career choice in a more unsavory light, resulting, perhaps, in a reevaluation of students� future goals and aspirations. Either way, important information has been gleaned from the collaborative learning experience. The focus of scholarship on collaborative inquiry has tended to be on those disciplines in which formal research experience is considered to be the sine qua non of professional achievement. Biology, history, economics, the social sciences, all of these fields require that their students know how to create new knowledge and hence how to broaden and extend their disciplines. But the collaborative process is by no means restricted to the sciences. Indeed, it could be that the spirit of apprenticeship that underlies the very idea of collaborative inquiry is seen most clearly�in the American academy at least�in the courses

34 Garnett, P., & Holmes, R. (1995). Research, teaching and learning: A symbiotic relationship, in B. Smith & S. Brown (Eds), Research,

teaching and learning in higher education (pp. 49-57). London: Kogan Page. 35 Peterson, P., & Swing, S. (1985). Students� cognitions as mediators of the effectiveness of small-group learning, Journal of Educational

Psychology, 77, 299 � 312. 36 Slavin, R. E., (1983b). When does cooperative learning increase student achievement?, Psychological Bulletin, 94, 429 � 445. 37 McCarthey, S.J., & McMahon, S. (1992). From convention to invention: Three approaches to peer interactions during writing, in Hertz-

Lazarowitz & Miller (Eds.), Interaction In Cooperative Groups. NY: Cambridge University Press. 38 Johnson, R. T., & Johnson, D. W. (1990). Cooperative Learning: Warmups, Group Strategies and Group Activities. Edina, MN: Interaction

Book Co. 39 Costa, A. L., & O�Leary, P. W. (1992). Co-Cognition: The cooperative development of the intellect. In Davidson and Worsham (Eds.),

Enhancing Thinking Through Cooperative Learning. NY: Teachers College Press.

~31~

of study that comprise the traditional liberal arts. Learning a foreign language or mastering some artistic technique, for example, seems particularly well-suited to the methods of collaborative inquiry, and subjects as diverse as education, mathematics, and physical education have, at colleges and universities in America and abroad, benefited tremendously from the adoption of innovative collaborative inquiry paradigms. As an educational platform, therefore, collaborative inquiry is both flexible and widely applicable, capable of advancing the professional pursuits of scientists, entrepreneurs, and artists alike.

Collaborative Inquiry Needs Assessment For many years, High Point University has offered independent study courses in each major. These credit-bearing courses allow students to form a collaborative relationship with a professor and to complete special projects in the students� area of academic interest. Thus, there already exists on campus a system in which one form of collaborative inquiry is practiced somewhat routinely. Like the internship and study abroad programs, however, the independent study program has tended to be viewed as an extra learning opportunity for interested students instead of a significant pedagogical tool. Consequently, the historical rates for participation in the independent study program, while not altogether poor, are something less than optimal. It is also worth noting that the independent study program, as it is now designed, allows only for the formation of collaborative relationships between one student and one faculty member, an arrangement that, though clearly advantageous for both parties, precludes the formal recognition of cooperative learning experiences in which, for example, a professor works with a small group of students or more senior students work with their more junior counterparts. Although neither of the aforementioned issues suggests that the existing independent study program is flawed, they do reveal that High Point University faculty and students tend to underutilize the collaborative learning experiences they have at their disposal. This, then, was the special charge of the Collaborative Inquiry Advisory Committee�to identify ways to facilitate the formation of more student-faculty collaborations on campus and to offer suggestions for how the methods and goals of cooperative learning can best be aligned with the academic mission of the University. After examining current University practices and discussing the unique problems and possibilities associated with the collaborative learning enterprise, the Advisory Committee determined that three issues were particularly deserving of ongoing institutional attention:

What Kinds of Collaborative Learning Experiences Should the University Support? At the heart of this question lies the fact that collaborative inquiry has several different manifestations. Sometimes collaborative learning occurs in the classroom, with small teams of students working together to solve a problem or complete a project. At other times, collaborations occur outside the classroom, perhaps tied to the content of a course, but not part of the course per se. At still other times, the notion of collaboration is applied to learning communities, wherein blocks of students take a sequence of courses together and, in the process, forge cooperative and collegial bonds with one another. An important decision for the University, therefore, will involve determining the scope of the collaborative inquiry program.

What is an Appropriate Outcome of the Collaborative Relationship? The purpose of collaborative inquiry, of course, is to facilitate student learning. But what, precisely, is the student expected to learn, and how will one know that the student has indeed learned what he or she is supposed to? The answers to these questions depend in part on the nature of the relationships that exist between or among collaborators. If, for example, the collaborative relationship is between an instructor and a student, and the focus of the collaboration is on a piece of research, then one might expect some tangible product�a publishable paper, a conference presentation, a colloquium�to stand as evidence of learning. If, on the other hand, the collaborative relationship is among groups of students in a classroom setting, learning might be operationalized as improvements in problem-solving, critical thinking, writing, or public speaking. Whatever the specific outcome turns out to be in a given circumstance, the Advisory

~32~

Committee agreed that it should be significant and clearly linked to the broader goals and objectives of each student�s particular academic program.

What Resources will the Collaborative Inquiry Program Require? The independent study program currently operates on a contractual basis in which a student�usually the initiator of the process�submits a proposal to a faculty member who either consents or refuses to supervise the student. If the faculty member consents, he or she works with the student for the semester and, depending on the student�s performance, assigns him or her a passing or failing grade. Material resources typically are not provided to the faculty member or the student, so any expenses incurred during the collaboration (if any) must be paid by the collaborating parties. Moving forward, however, the University should consider making funds available for this kind of learning experience, not just to help defray the costs of ambitious independent study projects, but also to demonstrate that collaborative inquiry is a vital part of High Point University�s academic mission. Apart from financial resources, though, it is also likely that the future success of collaborative learning on campus will require the continued development of such essential support services as the library and the Information Technology Office, and would benefit significantly from the greater availability of equipment, supplies, and other materials necessary for effective scholarly activity. Finally, given that many (if not most) collaborative inquiry experiences involve research, it is imperative that the University establish an Internal Review Board so that research proposals can be evaluated for methodological and ethical soundness.

Toward Implementing the Collaborative Inquiry Program As was the case with the study abroad and internship programs, the development of the collaborative inquiry program will involve the expansion and enhancement of an existing institutional offering. Accordingly, the implementation of the program will involve providing greater resource support for collaborative inquiry and promoting it enthusiastically as a valuable part of the University�s nascent experiential learning program. A more detailed description of the implementation process will be presented in the final two sections of this report.

Implementation and Assessment By the first week of May, 2005, the work of the Civic Engagement, Study Abroad, Internship, and Collaborative Inquiry advisory committees had begun to congeal into a firm foundation capable of supporting the infrastructure of High Point University�s Quality Enhancement Plan. The recommendations that each group provided�supported as they were by the careful consideration of current institutional needs, the weight of empirical scholarship, and the desire to craft an experiential learning program of the very highest quality�were tensile, robust, and more than adequate to transform what had been a set of mostly peripheral academic offerings into indispensable mechanisms for student learning. Moreover, when viewed side by side, it became clear that each group�s recommendations shared a certain thematic kinship�a set of linkages based on demonstrable needs for material resources, publicity, and committed leadership. While this similarity of needs did not mean that the various experiential learning programs were undifferentiated and interchangeable, or that they would all follow the same evolutionary pathway, it did seem to suggest that many of the impediments to the growth of these programs could be removed by taking a relatively small number of key steps. To be sure, there were still many questions to be answered and many procedural details to be worked out, but at least the path to be followed did not now seem so steep.

The Implementation Committee The task of plotting the initial course of the QEP fell to a nine-person Implementation Committee comprising a diverse group of individuals representing several institutional constituencies. This committee was asked to take a broad view of the proposed experiential learning program and to address the major questions and concerns that conceivably could be raised by thoughtful critics. The committee�s

~33~

goal was not to produce a detailed implementation plan for the QEP�such a plan would later become the shared objective of the entire University community�but to survey the landscape, identify potential pitfalls and dead ends, and otherwise clear the way for the establishment of High Point University�s experiential learning program. After examining the individual reports provided by the four Experiential Learning Advisory Committees, the Implementation Committee identified four general areas worthy of discussion:

! Fit with the University�s Broader Strategic Plan;

! Staffing, Fiscal, Oversight, and Structural Considerations;

! Implications for Making Aspects of the QEP Requirements for Graduation;

! Potential Legal, Philosophical, or Programmatic Obstacles. Because of its centrality to the long-term ambitions of High Point University, the committee first addressed the question of whether the QEP fit within the broader framework of the institution�s ten-year strategic plan. As described in the introductory section of this document, every effort was made to ensure that the QEP was a natural extension of High Point University�s academic mission. Indeed, the QEP�s emphasis on experiential student learning grew directly from the institution�s commitment to provide students with an education that (a) blends, in an imaginative way, the central elements of traditional liberal arts instruction with rigorous professional training, and (b) prepares students for leadership, citizenship, and service in a diverse global community by encouraging the development of character, personal responsibility, and sense of civic duty. Furthermore, the experiential learning focus of the QEP was evident in several of the University�s strategic directions, two of which explicitly described the enhancement of the Study Abroad and Internship programs and three of which addressed the more general need to increase students� sense of academic and social engagement. It was therefore the unanimous conclusion of the Implementation Committee that the QEP was consistent with, and wholly appropriate to, the University�s broader developmental aspirations. The second issue the Implementation Committee addressed�staffing, fiscal, oversight, and structural needs�produced considerably more discussion. It was clearly evident in the summary reports of each Experiential Learning Advisory Committee that the success of High Point University�s Experiential Learning Program depended on the adequacy with which the Program was staffed, funded, and managed, a point that was endorsed emphatically by the Implementation Committee. Indeed, the committee suggested that a full-time director should head the entire Experiential Learning Program and that full-time coordinators should manage the day-to-day exigencies of the internship, study abroad, and civic engagement programs.40 These individuals should be experienced and qualified to plan, implement and administer the Experiential Learning Programs, and should possess the kind of far-sighted vision necessary to transform these programs into vital and essential academic offerings. The committee also recognized the need for dedicated office space and fiscal resources sufficient to ensure the proper operation of the various experiential learning programs. Finally, the committee recommended that the Experiential Learning Program be written into the official organizational structure of the University and that the goals and objectives of the Program be integrated with those of the general education curriculum. Without these two provisions, the committee thought, the Experiential Learning Program would not possess the institutional legitimacy necessary to achieve the University�s own lofty expectations.

40 Because the Collaborative Inquiry program is more discipline-specific than the other experiential learning opportunities, and because

collaborative inquiry, as a pedagogical tool, is not bound as tightly to a set of �best practice� standards as other kinds of experiential learning, the Implementation Committee questioned the need for a separate coordinator to manage this particular program. Although it will be important to ensure that collaborative inquiry is supported and encouraged among the various academic departments on campus, it may be most reasonable to assign these general responsibilities to the Director of Experiential Learning or, perhaps, to the Director of Institutional Research and Assessment.

~34~

The third issue�and in some ways the most controversial�involved the question of whether some or all of the Experiential Learning Program should be required for graduation. On the one hand, the Implementation Committee acknowledged that there was value in mandating at least some aspects of the QEP, as making participation voluntary could undermine the fundamental objective of the QEP�enhancing student learning�by �limiting�41 experiential learning opportunities to those students who are already predisposed to study abroad, participate in internships, and so forth. The committee also conceded that a completely voluntary QEP would be little different from the kinds of experiential learning opportunities currently available to students and on that account would not rise to an appropriate level of institutional significance. There was, therefore, a fairly clear sense that in order to be successful, the QEP would have to be broadly applicable and, to some degree at least, enforceable. On the other hand, the committee also recognized that requiring students to participate in all forms of experiential learning would not only be impractical from an administrative standpoint, but could also be disruptive to students� individual courses of study. In particular, the committee identified several issues that seemed to preclude the possibility of mandating all experiential learning opportunities. For example:

! because some majors have tightly regulated academic schedules, it would be difficult (if not impossible) for students in these majors to participate in even one experiential learning opportunity, much less all four;

! transfer students, particularly those entering High Point University in their junior year, could not be expected to participate in all experiential learning opportunities;

! new administrative policies (and perhaps new administrative positions) would have to be created to ensure that students satisfied their experiential learning requirements prior to graduation;

! making the Experiential Learning Program a graduation requirement would have implications for the University�s core curriculum.

The Implementation Committee concluded that the resolution of these issues was beyond the scope of its immediate charge, but suggested that it would be possible to develop an experiential learning program that had both required and voluntary elements.42 The final substantive areas the Implementation Committee considered were the legal, philosophical, and programmatic implications of the proposed QEP. Given that the central intention of the QEP is to bring students out of the classroom and into the wider�and sometimes more perilous�world of work, civic involvement, and international travel, the Committee thought it essential that the QEP contain provisions designed to ensure students� safety and well-being. For example, the Committee recommended that the QEP attend to the issue of liability, not only in circumstances where the possibility of physical injury exists, but also where students might be exposed to psychological stress or emotional strain. As the QEP moves toward implementation, there will be a great need for expert guidance on such matters as appropriate insurance coverage, clarification of the legal relationships among the University, its students, and the community sites where civic engagement and internship experiences will be carried out, and so forth. The Committee further suggested that the University consider the possible implications of serving students with disabilities, whose full participation in the Experiential Learning Program could be adversely affected by the extent to which civic engagement, internship, or study abroad sites are accessible to the disabled. Some Committee members indicated the potential value of preparing for the possibility that some experiential learning experiences (for example, those in the psychological, sociological, medical, or criminal justice fields) may involve issues of confidentiality that could have implications for student liability, whereas others suggested the prudence of reviewing any laws or 41 One argument the committee raised was that completely voluntary programs, even those that are endorsed and promoted heavily, often have

relatively low participation rates because they attract homogenous groups of like-minded individuals. Because the QEP should encompass more than a small subset of students, the committee thought it would be worthwhile to consider building into the implementation plan a mechanism by which all students engaged in some form of experiential learning prior to graduation.

42 The Committee noted that it would be possible to require students to participate in a civic engagement learning experience (by, for example,

embedding such experiences in existing core courses) but to allow participation in internships and study abroad to remain voluntary.

~35~

governmental regulations that pertain to such areas as workmen�s compensation, EEO laws, Health Department guidelines and restrictions (including HIPAA), sexual harassment policies, mandatory drug testing, and mandatory background checks. In addition to these legal considerations, the Committee also recommended that the University examine several other practical, philosophical, and programmatic issues that could affect the manner in which�and the ease with which�the QEP is implemented. For example:

! There must be University-wide agreement on the definition and scope of the various experiential learning opportunities specified in the QEP;

! There must be discussion about how best to include the large population of international students on campus, taking into account such matters as visa restrictions, transportation limitations, and possible language and cultural barriers;

! Given the possibility that some academic disciplines may be able to incorporate the elements of the Experiential Learning Program more easily than others, individual departmental concerns should be taken into account when the QEP implementation plan is finalized;

! The University should articulate clearly where the Experiential Learning Program will be housed and who will hold primary responsibility for its operation;

! A substantial number of experiential learning opportunities will require off-campus travel. Given this, the University should consider the practical constraints that may exist for students who don�t have ready transportation;

! Because the full implementation of the QEP will require (1) significant commitments of time and material resources, (2) the integration of the Experiential Learning Program with the academic and administrative structures of the institution, and (3) the creation of detailed policies and procedures necessary for the smooth operation of the Civic Engagement, Study Abroad, Internship, and Collaborative Inquiry programs, the University should not endeavor to set the program in motion all at once but should instead adopt a development model in which the key elements of the QEP are phased in over time.

Through their careful work, the Implementation Committee established the feasibility of the ambitious goals outlined in the QEP. While it is true that the Committee raised several concerns and potential obstacles to QEP implementation, the Committee also noted that these obstacles were not insuperable and could, in fact, be avoided entirely through the application of foresight and careful planning. The Implementation Committee�s principal contributions to the QEP development process, therefore, were to survey the veiled and uneven terrain of the University�s future and to propose a directional heading that would allow the institution to skirt the most obvious trouble spots. In carrying out its responsibilities in such a thorough and judicious manner, the Committee succeeded in bringing the QEP one step closer to fruition.

The Assessment Committee

�The institution�s evaluation of its QEP should be multifaceted, with attention both to key objectives and benchmarks to be achieved in the planning and implementation of the QEP as well as the overall goals of the plan�. In evaluating the overall goals of the QEP, primary emphasis will need to be given to the impact of the QEP on the quality of student learning. Multiple strategies using both quantitative and qualitative measures will need to be employed, and student learning outcomes will require careful analysis for consistency of results across different measures and for variation among the outcomes.�43

43 Handbook for Reaffirmation of Accreditation, p. 27.

~36~

If the primary functions of the Study Abroad, Internship, Civic Engagement, Collaborative Inquiry, and Implementation advisory committees were to sharpen the focus of the QEP, give it structure, and prepare it for integration with the University�s existing operational framework, the special charge of the Assessment Committee was to recommend a plan for evaluating the QEP�s effectiveness as a facilitator of student learning. Indeed, throughout the QEP development process�even as the various committees were discussing and debating such practical matters as what kind of liability insurance is most appropriate for students studying abroad or what material resources an experiential learning program needs to succeed�the overarching purpose of the QEP (to improve student learning) never drifted from view. For the members of the Assessment Committee, the questions of how to define student learning and how to measure it were of central importance. Because its initial work coincided with that of the other committees, it was not possible, in May of 2005, for the Assessment Committee to produce a comprehensive assessment program that articulated how and when specific learning goals and objectives would be measured; however, the Committee was able to outline what such an assessment program would look like and what functions it would serve. Moreover, it forwarded recommendations to the QEP Steering Committee regarding the evaluation of the QEP itself, noting that the ultimate success of the proposed Experiential Learning Program would depend a great deal on the conscientiousness and precision with which the Program was monitored and, if necessary, adjusted so that it better met students� needs. Finally, the Committee submitted a brief policy statement about the importance of accountability in the areas of student learning and overall institutional efficacy. This statement, which reflects both the fundamental philosophical stance of SACS and the central credo of a growing number of colleges and universities, underscores High Point University�s commitment to cultivating a culture of improvement in all areas of operation.

1. Assessing Student Learning The Southern Association of Colleges and Schools defines student learning as ��changes in students� knowledge, skills, behavior, and/or values that may be attributable to the collegiate experience.� This definition, purposefully broad, suggests that learning can be operationalized and measured in a variety of ways and on several different levels. With this in mind, the members of the Assessment Committee recommended developing an assessment matrix within which various kinds of learning outcomes could be organized. Such a matrix, an example of which is presented on the following page, might distinguish between learning outcomes that can be described quantitatively from those that can be described qualitatively, and between learning outcomes that fall into behavioral, attitudinal, and academic domains.44 The different assessment methods reflected in the resulting six cells would yield a wealth of information about students� overall learning experience. The three learning outcomes�behavioral, attitudinal, and academic�reflect High Point University�s intention not only to provide students with the tools necessary to facilitate their acquisition of discipline-specific knowledge and skills, but also to expose students to the kinds of real-world experiences that help shape or solidify particular kinds of attitudes and behaviors. Furthermore, the Assessment Committee specified that these different learning outcomes should be linked to the curricular themes of Self, Society, World, and Vocation. Thus, for example, because the Civic Engagement Program will provide students with opportunities to address some of the problems and challenges that exist in the High Point community (a focus that reflects the curricular themes of Self and Society), the learning objectives for students� civic engagement experiences should include not only knowledge gains in domain-specific content areas (psychology, sociology, and political science, for example), but also the development of more tolerant and cooperative attitudes toward members of different racial, religious, or political groups, improved

44 Qualitative outcomes might include narrative responses to written questions, interview transcriptions, writing samples, portfolios, or virtually

any other kind of information that is non-numerical in nature. Quantitative outcomes are reflected in numerical indicators such as grade point averages, summary scores on questionnaires, and other variables on which individuals can be compared mathematically. Although the relative merits of qualitative and quantitative data have been the subject of considerable debate over the years, it is becoming increasingly clear that despite their differences, these two types of data are interconnected and, if the methods used to collect the data are sound, mutually confirming.

~37~

Typ

e of

Dat

a

Qua

ntita

tive

Qua

litat

ive

Behavioral Attitudinal

Type of Outcome

Academic

Assessment Matrix for Student Learning Outcomes

leadership skills, and a heightened sense of civic responsibility. It might also be expected that students who participate in the Civic Engagement Program would, during their remaining years at High Point University, volunteer in the community with greater frequency than students who don�t participate, thereby contributing a piece of behavioral evidence to support the efficacy of the Civic Engagement Program. Following this example, individual assessment matrices could be created for each experiential learning program. 2. Assessing the QEP A critical assumption underlying the QEP is that it is not a static document to which the institution must pledge unwavering allegiance, hoping that the lofty goals, objectives, and action plans written on the document�s pages will remain relevant and attainable during the entire five-year implementation schedule. While it is understood that the overarching purposes and functions of the QEP will not change dramatically over the years, it is also expected that specific elements of the QEP�particular objectives, implementation strategies, learning criteria, and so forth�will undergo periodic revision. These revisions cannot legitimately be made, however, unless their necessity has been justified by a careful assessment of the policies, practices, and expected outcomes of the QEP itself. Thus, in addition to proposing the development of an assessment protocol designed to evaluate student learning, the Assessment Committee also urged the QEP Steering Committee to develop a plan by which the efficacy of the entire Experiential Learning Program could be determined. In particular, this plan should:

! identify which individuals or administrative offices will be responsible for assessing the overall effectiveness of the QEP;

! define the criteria by which the effectiveness of the QEP will be judged;

! establish an assessment schedule that corresponds with the different phases of QEP implementation;

! include a set of procedural guidelines for the collection, analysis, and reporting of assessment data, and for the process of revising any aspect of the QEP judged to be inadequate.

~38~

These recommendations underscore the fact that the process of QEP assessment will not be periodic or based solely on immediate needs, but instead will be a continuous and consistent activity designed to gauge the sometimes uneven pace of institutional development and allow the University leadership to make well-reasoned adjustments in heading. By regarding the QEP assessment cycle as a natural extension of its ordinary operating routines and strategic planning processes, High Point University will be well-positioned to integrate the QEP with the institution�s expanding academic program. 3. Accountability and the Commitment to Institutional Excellence Although its main charge was to provide practical suggestions for how to conceptualize and measure important aspects of the QEP (i.e., student learning outcomes, goals and objectives of the Experiential Learning Program, et cetera), the Assessment Committee also submitted a brief policy statement bearing on the importance of accountability at High Point University. More a reaffirmation of the institution�s commitment to excellence than a specific call to action, this statement emphasizes the importance of continuous and systematic assessment at all levels of institutional operation:

High Point University acknowledges and embraces the special bonds of accountability that tie each student, parent, alumnus, faculty member, administrator, trustee, and benefactor to the common cause of institutional excellence. The University pledges its commitment to the cultivation of a campus-wide culture of improvement in which hope, optimism, and high expectation are the chief determinants of what is possible, and the inseparable strategies of attentive planning and thorough assessment are the principal instruments of change. By holding firm to these principles and practices, High Point University will demonstrate in the clearest possible way what it means to be a truly extraordinary institution of higher education.

The praiseworthy efforts of the Civic Engagement, Internships, Study Abroad, Collaborative Inquiry, Implementation, and Assessment committees had the important effect of yielding the raw materials from which the QEP would eventually be constructed. The specific recommendations each group provided�the philosophical and practical scaffolds they erected to support the lofty aims of the QEP�did more than just provide a rough outline for the proposed Experiential Learning Program; they also offered hints as to the Program�s size, shape, and position within the institution�s operational structure. But perhaps even more significant than this, each group, working independently of one another (though coordinated to singular purpose by the QEP Steering Committee), did much to galvanize the diverse constituencies that comprise the High Point University community, not only by highlighting the exciting possibilities that lie ahead for the institution�s academic program, but also by demonstrating in a clear way what it means to cultivate a culture of improvement on a small college campus. In the end, the work of the advisory committees imposed a kind of order on what had been an unbounded collection of free-floating ideas, thereby providing High Point University with a coherent framework to which the diverse elements of the QEP could be attached.

~39~

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE QEP

HE PROCESS OF DEVELOPING THE QEP, AS DELINEATED IN THE PREVIOUS SECTION, CAN PERHAPS best be described as an exercise in synchronized collaborative brainstorming. Armed with the Handbook for Reaffirmation of Accreditation, a set of general deliberative guidelines provided by

the QEP Steering Committee, a draft of High Point University�s Strategic Directions, 2004 � 2014, and their own native sense of what experiential learning is, the various advisory committees assembled, in a remarkably short span of time, richly detailed compendiums of recommendations, strategies, considerations, and concerns designed to propel the QEP toward eventual implementation. But like Armenian miniatures, each committee�s summary report illuminated only a particular aspect of High Point University�s proposed Experiential Learning Program, describing the specific requirements and unique challenges that fully realized civic engagement, study abroad, internship, and collaborative inquiry programs would have to face. Even the Implementation and Assessment committees, with their broader foci, were not truly integrative in the sense that their primary charges were not to articulate when, how, and with what resources the QEP was to be implemented and evaluated, but to outline in broad brushstrokes the essential features of an adequate implementation or assessment plan. Hence, what was needed was a concentrated effort to place the individual images produced by the six advisory committees within a single frame and arrange them in such a way that the resulting mosaic revealed the true programmatic character of the QEP. The QEP Steering Committee�with able assists from the President of High Point University, the Vice President for Academic Affairs, the Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs, the Dean of the Graduate School, and the University�s SACS Liaison�undertook this task during the summer and fall of 2005.

For all its complexity, High Point University�s QEP can be understood to involve two broad concerns. The first of these is institutional integration, or the degree to which�and the manner in which�the QEP is interwoven with the institution�s existing academic, administrative, evaluative, and fiscal systems. As described in the Handbook for Reaffirmation of Accreditation, the QEP should not be regarded as a supplemental aspect of an institution�s operation, but rather should be incorporated seamlessly into the dynamic processes of institutional governance and development. Such a significant integrative enterprise requires that institutions take a systemic view of QEP implementation so that important programmatic functions are not misaligned, the flow of financial and physical resources is not disrupted or rerouted inequitably, and the academic integrity of the institution is not compromised. An essential component of High Point University�s Implementation Plan, therefore, will be a detailed description not just of the policies, procedures, and provisions necessary to sustain a high quality Experiential Learning Program, but also of the mechanisms by which the efficacy of the Program will be assessed and assured. The QEP�s second concern is, of course, student learning. A QEP that has been fully integrated with an institution�s existing structures and processes could be seen as a strategic or logistical success and still have minimal impact on student learning. For this reason, it is imperative that the QEP articulate a well-conceived and well-executed implementation plan that is geared specifically toward the conceptualization, measurement, and evaluation of student learning outcomes. Both of these broad concerns will be addressed in this section.

T 3

~40~

Institutional Integration of the QEP The plan for integrating the QEP with High Point University�s existing academic, administrative, and fiscal structure�derived from the recommendations advanced by the Civic Engagement, Internship, Study Abroad, Implementation, and Assessment Advisory Committees�has five primary components:

! Curricular Alignment�This component involves (a) linking the four experiential learning programs (Civic Engagement, Study Abroad, Internship, and Collaborative Inquiry) to the four curricular themes of Self, Society, World, and Vocation, and (b) identifying the specific ways in which each experiential learning opportunity will be �delivered� to students;

! Administrative Structure�This component addresses the exigencies of program management by (a) describing the responsibilities of the individuals and advisory groups who will oversee the daily operation of the Experiential Learning Program, and (b) detailing the policies, procedures, and reporting structures that will link these individuals and advisory groups together in an efficacious administrative network;

! Resource Requirements�This component outlines the physical, fiscal, and personnel resources that will be necessary to ensure the successful implementation of the QEP;

! Assessment Mechanisms� This component identifies (a) the individuals responsible for analyzing and reporting assessment data, (b) the types and sources of data that will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of the Experiential Learning Program, and (c) the process by which program evaluation data will be reviewed and used to make informed decisions about the operation of the Experiential Learning Program;

! Publicity and Communications� This component describes the ways in which (a) the Experiential Learning Program will be packaged and publicized to current and prospective students, visitors to the University, and members of the community, and (b) information about the program�general announcements, formal presentations, training, et cetera�will be communicated to the High Point University Community;

Each of these components has an attendant set of goals and objectives that will both provide structure to the individual components themselves and allow the appropriate offices to assess the entire implementation plan in a comprehensive and straightforward way. These goals and objectives will be presented separately in the pages that follow, and will be integrated into a Master Implementation Plan in Section 4 of this document.

Curricular Alignment 1. Linking Experiential Learning to the Curricular Themes of Self, Society, World, and Vocation A developmental emphasis lies at the heart of High Point University�s general education curriculum. This is true�as it is at other colleges and universities around the country�not just in the sense that basic courses in students� early years are followed by more advanced courses as students approach graduation, but also in the sense that the arrangement of courses across the curriculum corresponds to students� development as members of society, contributors to the world of work, and as inhabitants of a diverse global community. As discussed previously (see pp. 8 � 9), the touch points of this developmental emphasis are represented by the four curricular themes of Self, Society, World, and Vocation, which not only serve as organizing principles for the content of individual courses, but which also summarize rather effectively the fundamental goals of the four aspects of the University�s proposed Experiential Learning Program. For example, as shown in the following table, the curricular theme of Self emphasizes the development of individual identity and is reflected in courses of study that explore the myriad ways in which selfhood is experienced and expressed. Through the QEP, this theme will be further developed in a freshman-level Civic Engagement program (discussed in greater detail below), in which students will engage with their communities and reflect upon their experiences as a means of both civic improvement

~41~

and self-discovery. Hence, by the end of their freshman year, students will have participated in a wide variety of courses and practical learning experiences that cumulatively ought to facilitate the

ThemeSampleCourse

ExperientialLearning

Opportunity

The Unifying Themes of Self, Society, World, and V ocation

Emphasis

Internships

Collaborative Inquiry

Senior Seminar: A capstone course designed to integrate a wide range of academic, professional, and vocational skills, including report writing, critical thinking, independent research, and internship experiences.

L ife GoalsVocation

Study Abroad

Internships

Intercultural Perspectives in Business: A course designed to enhance cross-cultural communication skills through the study of the impact of culture on international business/professional interaction.

Global AwarenessWorld

Civic Engagement

Social E thics: A study of significant issues facing Americans in the context of world communities. Students will explore such collective concerns as biomedical developments, racism, world hunger, and technology.

Social ResponsibilitySociety

Civic Engagement

Human Images in Art: A study of the nature of art in Western culture from ancient to modern times, with a focus on how humankind perceives and understands the self through art.

Individual IdentitySelf

crystallization of students� evolving sense of self. As students proceed through their sophomore, junior, and senior years, the sequential themes of Society, World, and Vocation will be emphasized in courses and in more advanced civic engagement, study abroad, internship, and collaborative inquiry experiences. At the time of their graduation from High Point University, therefore, students should not only possess the knowledge and skills necessary to make them competitive in the professional marketplace, but should also have a fuller understanding of who they are as individuals, what their responsibilities are to the broader society, and what their roles and obligations are as citizens of the world. 2. �Delivering� Experiential Learning Opportunities to Students A second and more challenging aspect of curricular alignment will involve structurally integrating the Experiential Learning Program with the University�s existing academic curriculum. In its treatment of this issue, the Implementation Committee suggested that, although it would be possible to imbue at least some aspects of the Experiential Learning Program with the weight and significance of a curricular requirement, it would be both logistically and fiscally imprudent at this time to mandate all students to participate in all four experiential learning opportunities. The fundamental questions that need to be addressed at this point, therefore, are (a) If the Experiential Learning Program is to have required elements, which elements should those be? and (b) How should each element of the Experiential Learning Program�both the required and the voluntary�be �delivered� to students? In answering the first question, the QEP Steering Committee was heavily influenced by its conviction that, because SACS intended the QEP to be a significant feature of High Point University�s ongoing

~42~

planning and development process, the Experiential Learning Program must have a mandatory curricular tie-in. Moreover, after considering the fundamental purposes of the four experiential learning opportunities, their relative positions within the thematic structure of the curriculum, and their differential exactions on students� financial resources and academic schedules, the Steering Committee concluded that Civic Engagement was the most appropriate choice for a required experiential learning program.1 In answering the second question, the QEP Steering Committee sought out existing structures and processes into which the mandatory Civic Engagement component could be embedded. Additionally, the Committee outlined a new process by which students and faculty would be encouraged to participate in the voluntary experiential learning programs (i.e., Study Abroad, Internship, and Collaborative Inquiry) and then rewarded for their participation. These efforts, which are formalized in the following goals and objectives, will be discussed subsequently.

Objective 1.1.1: Obtain formal approval from the Board of Trustees, the President of the

University, and the appropriate evaluation committees to revise the core curriculum to include the Civic Engagement program.

Objective 1.1.2: Design and implement a freshman-year Civic Engagement program that

combines opportunities for public service with opportunities for personal discovery.

Objective 1.1.3: Design and implement a sophomore-year Civic Engagement program with a

strong emphasis on civic responsibility. Objective 1.1.4: Articulate a process by which faculty can design and develop specialized civic

engagement courses in their particular disciplines. Objective 1.1.5: Ensure that all curricular changes are reflected in every publication�paper or

electronic�pertaining to the academic program at High Point University. The key features of Goal 1.1 are reflected in Objectives 1.1.2 and 1.1.3, which concern the development of the mandatory freshman and sophomore year civic engagement programs. The central challenge in both of these objectives will be to provide students with learning experiences that are meaningful and pedagogically valuable without overstraining the system of academic requirements already in place. The plan for overcoming these challenges consists of identifying existing course offerings, whose subject matter or format are conducive to the experiential learning focus of the QEP, and building into them a significant civic engagement component. In the freshman year, the course that is best suited for this purpose is the President�s Seminar on Life Skills, and in the sophomore year the most appropriate courses are those that comprise the University�s ethics requirement. The President�s Seminar on Life Skills, a new curricular offering at High Point University led by President Nido Qubein, is designed to supplement students� traditional academic and professional training by providing freshmen with opportunities to explore such topics as leadership, time management, communication, fiscal responsibility, and other subjects of fundamental relevance to people�s lives. The central objective of this course is to help students cultivate those skills and abilities that will enable them

1 This decision was further bolstered by an initiative, put forth by President Nido Qubein, designed to strengthen High Point University�s

academic, cultural, and civic ties to the city of High Point. By emphasizing the importance of giving back to the community�of being High Point�s University�President Qubein tacitly (and later explicitly) endorsed the mandatory status of the Civic Engagement Program.

GOAL 1.1: Create a mandatory Civic Engagement program that is embedded within the University�s existing core curriculum.

~43~

to achieve both personal and professional success. The University�s ethics courses have been a part of the core curriculum for many years, supporting the institution�s mission to promote ethical thinking and behavior in its students. When these courses were first developed it was thought that, in addition to being exposed to certain ethical traditions, students should also learn what it means to be ethically minded. For this reason, several different ethics courses�each one focused on particular ethical domains (e.g., society, business, the environment, and so forth)�were offered, allowing students to appreciate the wide variety of contexts in which ethical thinking is relevant. As shown in the following table, the proposed freshman and sophomore year civic engagement programs, though different in structure, duration, and academic focus, will nevertheless similarly address the themes of Self and Society that underlie the first two years of the undergraduate curriculum. The differences between the two programs, however, are important, reflecting as they do the unique developmental

Freshman Year Program

Sophomore Year Program

Course: President�s Seminar on Life Skills Purpose: To teach students the basic life

skills that will assist them in their personal, academic, and professional development.

Focus: Personal development. Duration: One year Structure: Topical seminars followed by a

sequence of short-term, civic engagement experiences.

Credit: 2 hours graded Pass/Fail

Courses: All sophomore-level ethics courses. Purpose: To explore contemporary ethical

perspectives on a broad range of subjects, including family, society, business, and the environment.

Focus: Personal and social development. Duration: One semester Structure: Traditional lecture courses that

include a long-term (one semester) civic engagement experience.

Credit: 3 hours graded A � F

challenges and opportunities that freshmen and sophomores must face. The freshman year program, for example, will emphasize personal growth as a necessary precondition to social, professional, and cultural development. Hence, freshmen will participate in their civic engagement experiences at least in part so that they can learn something about their own attitudes, beliefs, and moral judgments on broader social problems and concerns. To this end, the President�s Seminar on Life Skills will be a particularly relevant delivery system because it will provide students with many of the tools necessary to begin their journeys into responsible citizenship. The decision to embed the sophomore year civic engagement requirement in the University�s ethics courses (and to both deepen and lengthen the civic engagement experiences required therein) was based on (a) the clear connection between ethical and civic development, and (b) the breadth of topical coverage represented in the various ethics offerings. When they enter their sophomore year, students will have had two full semesters in which to reflect upon what it means to be an individual in a complex society. As they proceed through their sophomore year, students will come to a fuller understanding of what it means to be a part of society�with all the obligations and responsibilities that mature citizenship requires�by putting into practice the ethical principles they learn in the classroom. The extended civic engagement experiences required at the sophomore level, then, are intended to expose students more consistently and more thoroughly to the problems and possibilities of community life.

~44~

Consistent with published lists of best practices in civic engagement and service learning, students at both the freshman and sophomore level will be required to engage in purposeful reflective exercises designed to augment the curricular themes of Self and Society. For example, in the freshman year program, students will reflect upon their civic engagement experiences and then write a series of papers2 in which they discuss those aspects of the experience they found most self-relevant. In the sophomore year program, the reflective exercises will encourage students to think about the nature of particular social problems and their various solutions. In both cases, the civic engagement experiences will allow students to attach personal meaning to the material they glean from their coursework. Eventually, it is expected that opportunities for civic engagement will extend beyond the borders of the ethics courses and move into other curricular offerings. Thus, Objective 1.1.4 specifies the development of a process that will allow any faculty member to build a civic engagement component into a course of his or her choosing. To the extent that a nontrivial number of faculty members elect to redesign their courses in this way, students will have many more (and more diverse) options for civic engagement, and the civic engagement program itself will become even more thoroughly integrated with the University�s academic program.

Objective 1.2.1: Write mission statements, consistent with the overall mission of High Point

University, for the internship, study abroad, and collaborative inquiry programs. Objective 1.2.2: Create a set of measurable goals and objectives for the internship, study abroad,

and collaborative inquiry programs. Objective 1.2.3: Conduct a comprehensive analysis of best practices in internships, study abroad,

and collaborative inquiry. Objective 1.2.4: Review and, if necessary, revise all policies and procedures pertaining to the

internship, study abroad, and collaborative inquiry programs. Because the internship, study abroad, and collaborative inquiry (i.e., Independent Study courses) have existed for many years at High Point University, they are, strictly speaking, already aligned with the curriculum. There is, however, much that can be done to formalize and publicize this alignment so that the academic status of the institution�s existing experiential learning opportunities is made more explicit. Objectives 1.2.1 and 1.2.2, for example, call for the drafting of mission statements for the three programs along with specific goals and objectives by which the pedagogical efficacy of the programs can be judged. More substantively, Objective 1.2.3 reflects the need for comprehensive analyses of best practices for all three experiential learning programs. This objective in particular underscores the importance of establishing and maintaining a culture of improvement in academic institutions. By rigorously exploring the most effective ways to deliver internship, study abroad, and collaborative inquiry experiences to students, the University will increase the likelihood that these experiences will be positively related to student learning. Finally, Objective 1.2.4 supports curricular alignment by ensuring that the policies and procedures that govern the operation of the various experiential programs are consistent with the overall policy structure of the University.3

2 These reflection papers will also function as a mechanism for the assessment of student learning. 3 The specific ways in which the Internship, Study Abroad, and Collaborative Inquiry programs will be developed are outlined in Section 4.

GOAL 1.2: Implement a comprehensive improvement program designed to maximize the academic, professional, and personal value of Study Abroad, Internships, and Collaborative Inquiry.

~45~

Objective 1.3.1: Create an Experiential Learning Track for students who participate in a fixed number of civic engagement, internship, study abroad, or collaborative inquiry experiences (or some combination thereof).

Objective 1.3.2: Establish scholarships and honorary distinctions for outstanding students

interested in experiential learning. Objective 1.3.3: Designate experiential learning as a separate category of professional

development for faculty. Objective 1.3.4: Provide funding to faculty members who become significantly involved in the

experiential education of their students.

The argument could be made that since a substantial proportion of students and faculty endorsed the idea of increasing the number and quality of experiential learning opportunities at High Point University, there should be little need to set as an explicit goal the creation of structures and processes designed to encourage the members of the University community to take advantage of these opportunities. Put differently, it might be expected that structured incentive programs would be unnecessary in an environment where support for experiential learning is already high. While it is certainly true that the specific objectives comprising Goal 1.3 could, with some justification, be seen as inducements to participate in internships, study abroad, and collaborative inquiry, their real purpose is to reinforce the idea that experiential learning is a legitimate part of the University�s academic program and hence is deserving of the same administrative �treatment� as more traditional academic programs. The impetus for Objectives 1.3.1 and 1.3.2, for example, is to institutionalize the voluntary experiential learning programs by creating an experiential learning �track� and by making funds available to students who wish to pursue this track. Such an arrangement would be consistent with the University�s existing Honors Program, in which students with exceptional academic promise are expected to satisfy more stringent curricular requirements in return for substantial scholarship awards and official recognition�at graduation and on the diploma�as an Honor�s Student. In a similar way, students who commit themselves to the pursuit of experiential learning opportunities (above and beyond the required civic engagement component) would be eligible for scholarship assistance and would, upon graduation, receive (a) recognition as �Experiential Scholars,� (b) a special citation on their diplomas, and (c) experiential learning transcripts that would be issued along with their academic transcripts. Also like the Honors Program, Experiential Scholars will be expected to participate in a senior-year symposium in which they give formal presentations about some aspect of their experiential learning opportunities. Linking experiential learning to faculty development�reflected in Objectives 1.3.3 and 1.3.4�also would facilitate the institutionalization of the Experiential Learning Program. One plausible explanation for why High Point University�s internship, study abroad, and collaborative inquiry programs have remained at the periphery of the institution�s academic program is that faculty participation in these experiences has tended to be inconsistent over the years.4 By establishing a recognition and reward system for faculty who devote their time and professional efforts to the cause of experiential learning, this state of sporadic faculty involvement will likely give way to one characterized by greater faculty enthusiasm for out-of-class learning experiences.

4 This is particularly true for internships and study abroad, for which student participation in general is relatively low (see pp. 12); however,

anecdotal evidence suggests that, although many faculty members collaborate with students on research, projects, or performances, it is difficult to estimate with any degree of precision the historical participation rate of faculty because few official records of these collaborations exist.

GOAL 1.3: Establish an operational system designed to encourage and celebrate broad participation in the Civic Engagement, Study Abroad, Internship, and Collaborative Inquiry programs.

~46~

Administrative Structure The success of the Experiential Learning Program will depend to a considerable degree upon the creation of administrative units comprising well-qualified and motivated individuals who are committed to the advancement of experiential learning at High Point University. Indeed, the advisory committees that convened in April and May of 2005 raised this point more consistently and more emphatically than any other, noting that much would be sacrificed�operational efficacy to be sure, but also programmatic visibility, prestige, and attractiveness to students�if the civic engagement, internship, study abroad, and collaborative inquiry programs received only part-time attention. Proper staffing, however, is only one element of administrative structure that needs to be addressed. As reflected in Goal 2.1, it will also be important to specify the reporting relationships that exist (a) among the administrators of the Experiential Learning Program, and (b) between the administrators of the Experiential Learning Program and the executive leadership of the University. Furthermore, the lines that connect the Experiential Learning Program to other administrative units on campus need to be drawn, and the reciprocal and shared responsibilities of these various units need to be articulated clearly. By attending properly to each of these needs, the University will lay a firm administrative foundation upon which the Experiential Learning Program can be built.

Objective 2.1.1: Write position descriptions for all individuals responsible for the development,

maintenance, and assessment of the Experiential Learning Program. Objective 2.1.2: Determine the reporting structure for the administrators of the Experiential

Learning Program. Objective 2.1.3: Articulate a process by which procedural or policy-related issues are raised,

shared among the relevant administrative officers, and then acted upon. Objective 2.1.4: Specify the ways in which the functions of other administrative units on campus

(e.g., the Business Office, the Office of Financial Planning, the Student Life Office, et cetera) contribute to the operation of the Experiential Learning Program.

Because of its focus on academic outcomes, it seems appropriate that the Experiential Learning Program should fall within the administrative purview of the Vice President for Academic Affairs, whose principal responsibility will be to ensure the academic integrity of the various experiential learning opportunities afforded to students. The day-to-day administration of the Experiential Learning Program itself, however, will fall to the program�s Director, who, in turn, will rely on individual coordinators to oversee the operation of the civic engagement, internship, and study abroad programs.5 As shown in the following diagram, the individual program coordinators will benefit from the expertise of faculty members, staff, students, and community representatives who have either experience or a strong vested interest in one of the four experiential learning programs. These advisory boards will assist the program coordinators by keeping abreast of best practices in the field, monitoring and reporting any concerns or recommendations provided by members of the High Point University community, and generally supporting the coordinators� efforts to maintain high-quality programs. Two additional bodies will help ensure that the Experiential Learning Program is successfully integrated into the broader administrative structure of the University and remains, as it develops, consistent with the

5 It will be recalled that because of its unique qualities, the collaborative inquiry program will not, in all likelihood, require a separate

coordinating officer (see p. 32, footnote 40).

GOAL 2.1: Identify an administrative structure for the Experiential Learning Program.

~47~

University�s academic mission. First the Experiential Learning Executive Committee will serve in both advisory and regulatory capacities, offering policy-relevant recommendations to the Director of Experiential Learning and evaluating proposals that the various advisory boards (or, perhaps, individual faculty members) might submit for new experiential learning opportunities. The Executive Committee will comprise five to seven senior faculty members�broadly representative of the entire University faculty�with experience in the evaluation of academic programs. Second the QEP Leadership Team will monitor the development of the Experiential Learning Program and make certain that as the program evolves, it remains true both to the principles of accreditation set forth by SACS and to the long-term objectives of High Point University. The Leadership Team will comprise those individuals who were most directly involved with the institution�s reaffirmation process.

Resource Requirements The administrative structure just described capitalizes to a considerable extent on existing personnel, with the Experiential Learning Executive Committee, the QEP Leadership Team, and the various advisory boards consisting of individuals who are already members of the High Point University community. However, the institution currently does not have a full-time Director of Experiential Learning or full-time coordinators of the civic engagement, internship, and study abroad programs. It is clear, therefore, that individuals will have to be hired for these positions, either from within or without the High Point University community, in order to bring the Experiential Learning Program to fruition. In addition, these individuals, if they are to manage the exigencies of their offices efficiently, will require at least some support from secretaries or administrative assistants. Given that the first phase of QEP implementation is expected to commence in August of 2006 (see the implementation schedule in Section 4 and Appendix G), it will be necessary to begin filling some of these positions immediately. As reflected in Objective 3.1.3, an important resource need of the Experiential Learning Program is physical space. This is so for at least two reasons. First (and most obviously), the Director and coordinators of the various experiential learning programs will need offices in which to conduct the business of the Experiential Learning Program. But perhaps more importantly, the allocation of dedicated

Director of Experiential Learning

Advisory Boardfor Civic Engagement

Coordinator ofCivic Engagement

Coordinator ofInternships

Coordinator ofStudy Abroad

Advisory Boardfor Collaborative Inquiry

Advisory Boardfor Internships

Advisory Boardfor Study Abroad

Vice President for Academic Affairs

QEP Leadership Team

Administrative Structure of the Experiential Learning Program

Experiential LearningExecutive Committee

~48~

space to the Program will enhance its visibility and respectability on campus, symbolizing its importance and further substantiating its legitimacy as a component of High Point University�s academic program.

Objective 3.1.1: Select four well-qualified individuals to fill the positions of Director of

Experiential Learning, Coordinator of Civic Engagement, Coordinator of Internships, and Coordinator of Study Abroad.

Objective 3.1.2: Hire two administrative assistants to provide clerical support to the Director of

Experiential Learning and the coordinators of the individual experiential learning programs.

Objective 3.1.3: Obtain office space for the Director of Experiential Learning, the coordinators of

the individual experiential learning programs, and the administrative assistants.

Objective 3.1.4: Provide adequate funds to meet the operating needs of the Experiential Learning Program.

Objective 3.1.5: Ensure that institutional support services, particularly Smith Library, the Career

Center, and the Academic Services Center, are properly staffed, equipped, and funded to meet the needs of students engaged in experiential learning pursuits.

Currently, as a result of unprecedented fundraising efforts, the institution is experiencing significant physical and programmatic growth, so it is expected that sufficient space will be made available to the Experiential Learning Program within the next 12 to 18 months. Because the four experiential learning programs will have different emphases, their operational needs also will differ. For example, an important part of the development of the study abroad program will involve increasing the number of study abroad sites around the world, a process that will require the Coordinator of Study Abroad to engage in a great deal of international travel. For the collaborative inquiry program, on the other hand, the need for travel may not be as great as the need for more material resources, such as specialized equipment, computer software, or discipline-specific research tools. Apart from these differences, however, the experiential learning programs are united in their common need for basic supplies, membership fees, publicity and communications, postage, and so forth.6 It is worth noting that resource support is not limited just to the immediate physical requirements of the Experiential Learning Program itself, but extends to other areas of institutional operation as well. For example, given that the fundamental purpose of the Program is to enhance student learning, it will be necessary to ensure that the Library�s holdings and electronic resources are sufficient to meet the needs of a new generation of students for whom the application of knowledge, not merely the acquisition of it, will be the preferred educational pursuit. Similarly, because new demands7 will likely be placed on the Career Center once the Experiential Learning Program is fully implemented, the resource needs of this important office should be examined as well. In short, the success of the Experiential Learning Program will

6 A summary of budget estimates for the five-year implementation plan may be found in Appendix D. 7 A key criterion by which the effectiveness of the Experiential Learning Program will be judged is the rate at which High Point University

graduates obtain desirable positions in the workforce. It is expected that the Career Center will play a significant role in helping students translate their civic engagement, internship, study abroad, and collaborative inquiry experiences into profitable employment.

GOAL 3.1: Provide the physical, fiscal, and personnel resources necessary to ensure the successful implementation and maintenance of the Experiential Learning Program.

~49~

depend at least as much on how well the University�s support services are funded and staffed as it will on the adequacy of its own internal resources. 1. Institutional Readiness to Support the QEP Although the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools has indicated that �the QEP need not require substantial investments of institutional resources,�8 High Point University, because it is committed to delivering academic programs of the very highest quality, has already begun laying a strong financial foundation for the Experiential Learning Program. In November of 2005, the High Point University Board of Trustees voted to appropriate $50,000 per year to support the objectives of the QEP. These unrestricted funds will be used to defray some of the material operating costs associated with the civic engagement, study abroad, internship, and collaborative inquiry programs. It is also the case that existing sources of support for the study abroad and internship programs will be rolled into the new Experiential Learning Program, an action that will further minimize the initial fiscal impact of implementing the QEP. A third factor that demonstrates the institution�s readiness to support the QEP is the unequivocal endorsement of the program by President Nido Qubein, whose pledge to provide any and all resources necessary to guarantee the success of the QEP is tantamount to cash on hand. Finally, the gradual implementation of the QEP�the last stage will be completed in the 2010-2011 academic year�will allow sufficient time for the University to hire well-qualified individuals to manage the Experiential Learning Program and to raise any additional funds that might become necessary during the implementation process. Taken together, these points suggest that High Point University is well-positioned to create and maintain the ambitious Experiential Learning Program described in this document.

Assessment Mechanisms The key to ensuring that the new Experiential Learning Program succeeds in carrying out its pedagogical mission is to monitor its development at every stage of implementation and to assess, as thoroughly and accurately as possible, the various operational indicators through which programmatic success can be plausibly inferred. This process is, of course, no different from any other form of institutional assessment, and indeed, the only fact that warrants its full discussion here is the newness of the program to which the process will be applied. Still, it is worth reinforcing the importance of accountability in

Objective 4.1.1: Select a set of indicators suitable for evaluating the effectiveness of the

Experiential Learning Program. Objective 4.1.2: Select or create reliable and valid measures of program effectiveness. Objective 4.1.3: Identify the individuals who will be responsible for analyzing and reporting

assessment data. Objective 4.1.4: Develop a system specifying how and when assessment data will be collected,

analyzed, and disseminated throughout the year. Objective 4.1.5: Specify the process by which program evaluation data will be used to make

informed decisions about the operation of the Experiential Learning Program.

8 Handbook for Reaffirmation of Accreditation, p. 25.

GOAL 4.1: Develop a comprehensive Quality Control Process by which the effectiveness of the Experiential Learning Program can be judged.

~50~

higher education and of the absolute necessity of cultivating a culture of improvement in every corner of the campus. The following section, therefore, describes in detail the steps that will be taken to weave a QEP Quality Control Process into the existing fabric of institutional assessment. 1. Conceptualizing and Measuring Program Success Objectives 4.1.1 and 4.1.2 address the most fundamental questions in any assessment program: (a) Which indicators of program effectiveness should the institution examine? and (b) By which means should these indicators be measured? Clearly, these questions are of critical importance to the entire assessment process, as poorly-chosen and badly-measured indicators will yield little data upon which meaningful conclusions can be drawn. In an attempt to avoid this unfortunate state of affairs, a broad range of indicators will be assessed using a variety of methods, resulting in what is expected to be a reliable pattern of mutually confirming results. It will be recalled8 that the Assessment Advisory Committee recommended using an assessment matrix in the evaluation of student learning outcomes. In this matrix three categories of indicators (behavioral, attitudinal, and academic) were crossed with two categories of data (quantitative and qualitative) to produce six ways of evaluating student learning. This same model can be used to assess the effectiveness of the Experiential Learning Program as well, as shown in the following diagram:

Typ

e of

Dat

a

Qua

ntita

tive

Qua

litat

ive

Behavioral Attitudinal

Type of Indicator

•The quality of student’s written evaluations of their civic engagement, study abroad, internship, or collaborative inquiry experiences.

•Ratings of institutional academic reputation as reported in publications such as US News & World Report.

•Anecdotal support of the Experiential Learning Program (newspaper and magazine articles, student or faculty highlights, other forms of publicity).

•Informal evaluations of program effectiveness derived from discussions in monthly meetings of the administrators of the Experiential Learning Program.

•When asked, students can describewhat experiential learning is and what the QEP’s goals and objectives are.

•Trends in expressed interest in the Experiential Learning Program.

•Historical trends in overall academic performance (e.g., GPA, scores on the Academic Profile, etc.) pre- and post-QEP.

•Correlations between degree of experiential learning participation and overall academic academic performance.

•Student preferences for particularkinds of experiential learningopportunities.

•Feedback surveys from communityagency representatives, students,and faculty.

•Feedback surveys from graduates(emphasis on perceived impact of experiential learning on professional success).

•Number of new experiential learning proposals submitted by faculty.

•Students’ rate of participation innon-required experiential learningprograms.

•Weekly attendance logs from the field.

•Job placement data.

•Student retention data.

Academic

Assessment Matrix for the Experiential Learning Program

Each cell in the assessment matrix reflects a particular indicator of program success along with a method (or methods) to measure that success. Thus, for example, in the Quantitative-Behavioral cell, a percentage increase in the rate at which faculty submit proposals to the Experiential Learning Executive Committee or students choose to participate in the voluntary experiential learning programs will be taken as evidence of program success. Likewise, the adequacy of the Experiential Learning Program (or the specific programs that comprise it) will be conceptualized in terms of attitudinal feedback from students, 8 See p. 36. The assessment matrix for student learning outcomes will be examined more thoroughly at the end of this section.

~51~

faculty, community representatives, and the leadership of the Experiential Learning Program itself. Success in this case will be reflected in the degree to which participants rated the Experiential Learning Program in positive�rather than neutral or negative�terms. In the end, by aggregating the results of behavioral, attitudinal, and academic indicators derived from both quantitative and qualitative measures, it will be possible to see at a glance where the Experiential Learning Program�s strengths and weaknesses lie, allowing the leadership of the Program to make any necessary adjustments to policy, procedures, or common practices. It is important to comment upon the question of measurement here, as the ways in which assessment data are collected will determine the inferences that can be drawn from them. For example, several of the indicators shown in the assessment matrix constitute what might be called �count data,� or data that reflect the simple frequency with which certain events occur. All of the behavioral indicators, for example, are based on count data. Count data are useful for making judgments about trends, but these judgments must ultimately be tempered by the fact that not all trends can be interpreted in exactly he same way. It might be assumed, for example, that the most compelling count data would be those showing a steady increase in the indicator under consideration: if student participation in the voluntary experiential learning programs�or faculty proposals for experiential learning-based courses, or the number of prospective students who express interest in the Experiential Learning Program�are higher this year than they were last year, then it seems reasonable to conclude that the Program was successful in achieving its objectives. Yet even under optimal conditions, not all positive trends can continue indefinitely, not because �all good things must come to an end,� but because the good things captured by the positive trends cannot get any better. As the percentage of students who choose to participate in the voluntary experiential learning programs increases, for instance, there must come a time when some optimal participation rate is achieved, at which point the trend in the data will level out. At such a time it should be recognized that the leveling of this trend is not necessarily an indicator that the Experiential Learning Program has become unsuccessful, but that it has become as successful, in this particular area, as it is likely to get. The feedback surveys completed by members of the University community may be the most immediately useful sources of assessment data because of their ability to elicit evaluative responses regarding every operational aspect of the Experiential Learning Program. For example, each student who participates in a civic engagement, internship, study abroad, or collaborative inquiry experience will be asked to rate the experience on a number of evaluative dimensions, including how academically, professionally, and personally beneficial the experience was, whether it was organized and well-managed, and what could be done to improve the experience in the future. Faculty and community supervisors will be asked similar questions as well as others designed to address issues of greater administrative relevance, such as program costs, resource availability, and procedural efficiency. Another important source of assessment data will be the appraisals that the Director of Experiential Learning and the individual program coordinators provide regarding the functioning of their respective offices. These appraisals will yield valuable information about the day-to-day operation of the Experiential Learning Program and will be particularly useful in the analysis of program needs. Finally, the development of new alumni surveys will allow data to be collected on the practical effects of the Experiential Learning Program. It will be possible, for example, to determine whether there is a relationship between participating in some form of experiential learning and securing a job or going to graduate school. 2. The Assessment Process When High Point University created the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment in the spring of 2005, it established a formal mechanism by which all assessment activities on campus would be managed. It is this office, therefore, that will be most directly responsible for assessing the effectiveness of the QEP; however, in an effort to maximize the efficiency with which relevant data are collected and communicated to the various constituencies on campus, individual assessment duties will be distributed among the leaders of the Experiential Learning Program as well as other administrative officers. These duties, furthermore, will be distributed throughout the academic year in a coordinated assessment

~52~

program designed to culminate in a comprehensive, year-end report�prepared by the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment�that summarizes the activities of the Experiential Learning Program and offers recommendations for its improvement. A breakdown of assessment responsibilities, along with a general timeline for data collection and reporting, is shown in Appendix E. As can be seen, individual assessment duties have been assigned in such a way that they generally correspond to the administrative structure of the Experiential Learning Program. Thus, for example, the responsibility for evaluating the extent to which students, faculty, and community partners benefited from their civic engagement, study abroad, or internship experiences will fall primarily to the individual experiential learning units, whose contact with the Program�s participants is expected to be the most frequent and the most direct. The Director of the Experiential Learning Program will be responsible for evaluating how well the Program functions in the broader context of High Point University�s academic program. In part this programmatic evaluation will depend upon the assessment work of the individual experiential learning units, but will also involve more direct assessments of the personnel, policies, and procedures that undergird the Experiential Learning Program. Finally, the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment will be responsible for assessing the overall impact of the Experiential Learning Program on student learning, alumni success, and institutional development, a task that will require input from both the individual experiential learning units and the Director of the Experiential Learning Program.9 The processes of collecting and reporting evaluative data relevant to the effectiveness of the QEP will be carried out systematically throughout the year and, insofar as possible, in concert with existing assessment, planning, and budgeting schedules. The reporting structure for QEP assessment, as shown in the diagram on the following page, suggests the general process by which assessment data pertaining to the operational effectiveness of the QEP will be aggregated, disseminated, and used in institutional decision making. This process will comprise two sets of routines, the first of which will involve the assessment of program needs and the second of which will involve the evaluation of program quality. The responsibility for assessing program needs will fall primarily to the coordinators of the individual experiential learning units and the Director of the Experiential Learning Program. As a matter of course, the Civic Engagement, Study Abroad, and Internship coordinators, with the assistance of their respective advisory boards, will, periodically throughout the year, ascertain their fiscal, material, and staffing resource needs and translate those needs into budget requests that will be submitted to the Director of Experiential Learning each December. The Director, in turn, will incorporate these individual requests into a general Experiential Learning budget that will be submitted to the Vice President for Academic Affairs along with an annual Needs Assessment Report. The Vice President for Academic Affairs will then consider the various needs of the Experiential Learning Program in the broader context of institutional operations and, in consultation with the President and Chief Financial Officer of the University and the Director of Experiential Learning, make funding decisions for the following year. The evaluation of the overall quality of the Experiential Learning Program will be a continuous process with two distinct reporting periods (December and May). In August of each year, the Director of Institutional Research and Assessment, the Director of the Experiential Learning Program, and the coordinators of the Civic Engagement, Study Abroad, and Internship programs will begin10 collecting data in their areas of responsibility. Then, in early December and again in early May, the coordinators of the individual experiential learning programs will prepare and forward to the Director of Experiential Learning summary reports describing the activity of their units during the previous term, including:

9 Though not listed in this table, it is also expected that participating faculty members�specifically those who teach civic-engagement-

component courses or supervise study abroad and internship experiences�will participate in the assessment process by functioning as the immediate collectors of student-relevant data.

10 This phase of data collection will include any experiential learning activities undertaken in the summer term.

~53~

Director ofExperiential Learning

Coordinator ofCivic Engagement

Coordinator ofInternships

Coordinator ofStudy Abroad

Vice President for Academic Affairs

Reporting Structure for QEP Assessment

Unit A ssessmentReports

N eeds AssessmentReport

E xperiential L earningMaster Data Set

Director ofInstitutional Research

and Assessment

A nnual QE PAssessment Report

Collaborative InquiryAdvisory Committee

Experiential Learning Executive Committee

! Results of satisfaction surveys completed by students, participating faculty, and, if appropriate,

site supervisors;

! Other diagnostic information such as the number of inquiries from students (both prospective and enrolled) and informal evaluations provided by faculty members or administrators;

! Formal recommendations for improvements or enhancements provided by the advisory committees for each experiential learning program.

In May, the Director of Experiential Learning will forward to the Director of Institutional Research and Assessment a Master Data Set that includes the Unit Summary Reports submitted by the individual experiential learning program coordinators as well as:

! Annual evaluations of all coordinators and staff members involved with the management or maintenance of the Experiential Learning Program;

! A summary of faculty feedback pertaining to the effect of the Experiential Learning Program on other areas of institutional operation;

! A summary of issues, concerns, and recommendations that arose during monthly staff meetings;

! A summary of the activity of the Experiential Learning Executive Committee;

! Trend data reflecting faculty involvement in experiential learning, student interest in the voluntary forms of experiential learning, and prospective student interest in the Experiential Learning Program at High Point University.

The Director of Institutional Research and Assessment will then add to this information the academic, institutional, and alumni outcomes data collected throughout the year and submit to the Vice President for

~54~

Academic Affairs a final report describing the year-end status of the QEP. This report, which will be written in consultation with the Director of Experiential Learning, will become a permanent addition to High Point University�s overall assessment plan and will, in conjunction with the Needs Assessment Report and the Report on Student Learning Outcomes (discussed subsequently), form the evidentiary basis on which decisions will be made about the Experiential Learning Program. As the preceding discussion makes clear, the annual evaluation of the QEP will be primarily an internal process, with those individuals who are most directly responsible for implementing the QEP being equally responsible for its assessment. While it is fully expected that this process will be systematic and thorough, it is also acknowledged that there is great value in having an outsider�s perspective on the evaluation of program development. For this reason, in the second and fourth year of QEP implementation the University will bring to campus a consultant with expertise in the area of experiential learning to conduct an independent evaluation of the Experiential Learning Program. Working with the Director of Experiential Learning and the Director of Institutional Research and Assessment, this consultant will be asked to generate an independent report that reflects his or her judgments about the extent to which all policies, practices, and administrative structures relevant to the Experiential Learning Program are consistent with the highest standards of operational effectiveness. By bringing in an outside expert to comment on the quality of the Experiential Learning Program, High Point University seeks to ensure that every possible obstacle to programmatic growth is removed. 3. The QEP and Institutional Decision Making It perhaps goes without saying that the ultimate reason for setting up the kind of comprehensive assessment and reporting plan described above is to provide the leadership of the institution with the data necessary to make well-informed decisions about the future course of the Experiential Learning Program. To be sure, given the central role of the QEP in High Point University�s evolving academic program, it is imperative that all processes involved in the measurement and reporting of institutional data are rigorous and methodologically sound. But even more importantly, the data generated by these processes must be consulted regularly and interpreted conscientiously throughout all phases of QEP implementation so that the fundamental health of the Experiential Learning Program can be assured. It is for this reason that the Annual QEP Assessment Report generated by the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment will be integrated into the formal decision-making processes of the University, thereby ensuring that the QEP receives the same official consideration as other areas of institutional operation.

Publicity and Communications High Point University�s modest size means that the QEP can be administered, evaluated, and otherwise managed by a relatively small number of individuals. The long-term success of the Experiential Learning Program, however, will require the broad involvement of several University and community constituencies, all of whom will have important roles to play in the Program�s institutionalization. In order to keep these diverse constituencies constantly apprised of developments relevant to the QEP and to provide as many opportunities as possible for students, faculty, and community partners to become involved in experiential learning, an effective communications system must be established and properly maintained. New academic programs�even ones as ambitious and transformative as the Experiential Learning Program proposed in this QEP�run the risk of sinking beneath the threshold of awareness if they are not actively promoted and thus kept before the public eye. Objectives 5.1.1 and 5.1.2 specify two mechanisms by which this important communicative function can be carried out. While it might seem that these two items could reasonably be collapsed into a single, overarching objective, their separation here is based on the fact that, whereas websites often are designed to convey general information to a wide range of individuals, printed materials can be tailored to specific audiences and may, therefore, be much more flexible and strategically useful delivery systems.

~55~

Objective 5.1.1: Create a QEP website.

Objective 5.1.2: Create printed material�brochures, newsletters, flyers, et cetera�designed to

promote the Experiential Learning Program both on and off campus.

Objective 5.1.3: Identify a process by which faculty, staff, students, and community partners can receive detailed information and formal training about all aspects of the Experiential Learning Program.

Objective 5.1.3 reflects the importance of communicating with faculty and students about the academic implications of the QEP, and with community partners about what the Experiential Learning Program means to them. Regarding the former point, as a new academic requirement, the civic engagement component of the QEP will have a direct effect on scheduling and advising and thus will become increasingly relevant to the academic planning process. Furthermore, it is expected that as more students and faculty align themselves to the cause of experiential learning, there will be a greater need for training in such areas as the development of courses with civic engagement components and the design of internship and study abroad experiences that are maximally conducive to student learning. With regard to community partners, because they may not fully understand the academic dimensions of civic engagement or internships, it will be important to provide these partners with opportunities to learn about the ways they contribute to students� academic, social, and professional development.

The integration of this QEP with existing institutional structures and processes will be a monumental undertaking, one that will require not only the commitment of resources, but also consistent leadership, attentive planning and assessment, and the persistent efforts of a dedicated group of administrators, program directors, and faculty. In some cases this integration will involve the creation of entirely new programs; in others, the refinement and extension of programs that have served High Point University well for many years. Perhaps most critically, this integration will challenge every member of the University community to embrace a culture of improvement in which the daily pursuit of excellence is a central goal. From whichever perspective one views it, this QEP represents a tremendous opportunity for High Point University to demonstrate its dedication to the cause of student development, an opportunity that the institution will seize in the months and years ahead.

Evaluation of Student Learning Outcomes Ultimately, the success of the High Point University�s QEP will be determined by the extent to which participation in civic engagement, study abroad, internship, and collaborative inquiry experiences lead to measurable improvements in student learning. As mentioned above (see p. 38), even if the Experiential Learning Program is designed, implemented, and managed with unparalleled skill, the experiences themselves may not produce positive changes in students� behavior, attitudes, academic abilities, or professional competencies. For this reason, it is crucial that an assessment program centered on student learning be established to operate separate from�but parallel to�to the assessment system described above for the QEP itself. 1. Conceptualizing and Measuring Student Learning Student learning, like the functional aspects of the Experiential Learning Program, can be conceptualized as positive changes in behavior, attitudes, and knowledge, and can be measured both quantitatively and

GOAL 5.1: Establish an effective communications system that facilitates the sharing of information about the Experiential Learning Program to students, faculty, staff, and members of the broader community.

~56~

qualitatively. By crossing these definitions and methods, one obtains a complex and information-rich array of learning outcomes that can be taken as reliable indicators of the effectiveness of the Experiential Learning Program. As shown in the following table, students who participate in the four kinds of experiential learning articulated in this QEP should show evidence of improved understanding in areas of social and global relevance, including, for example, social welfare, public health, global economic concerns, and the dynamics of the geo-political system. More than this, however, participation in civic engagement, study abroad, internship, and collaborative inquiry experiences should impel students to think differently�or at least more deeply�about themselves and the roles they play on both local and global stages, and to actually engage in behaviors�volunteering, voting, campaigning, et cetera�that are reflective of students� evolved attitudes and knowledge structures. Student learning, in other words, ought to be a comprehensive phenomenon, one that is reflected not just in the grade one receives in a

Typ

e of

Dat

a

Qua

ntita

tive

Qua

litat

ive

Behavioral Attitudinal

Type of Outcome

•Reflection journals demonstrating a link between experiential learning opportunities and the content of academic courses.

•Individual student interviews.

•Focus group interviews.

•Reflection essays emphasizing students’ attitudinal development in a particular service or scholarship domain.

•Faculty and field supervisor judgments of students’ leadership qualities.

•Faculty judgments of students’ professional promise.

•Performance on senior year Experiential Learning Presentation.

•Academic performance in germanecourses.

•Standardized test data (e.g., Academic Profile, Major FieldAchievement Tests, etc.)

•Scores on measures of civic engagement.

•Scores on measures of campus engagement.

•Scores on measures of global awareness.

•Scores on measures of professional or vocational interest.

•Volunteerism rates after graduation.

•Involvement in activities and/ororganizations on campus.

•Attendance rates for cultural events on campus.

•Number of conferences, publications, or other forms of scholarly output.

•Faculty and peer ratings of students’ senior-year experiential learning presentations.

Academic

Assessment Matrix for Student Learning Outcomes

course, but also (and, one could argue, more importantly) in students� cast of mind and in the subsequent impact they have on their communities, their places of work, and, perhaps, the world. It is, of course, one thing to define student learning in such a complex and comprehensive way and quite another thing to measure this kind of learning accurately. Needless to say, it will be particularly important to select appropriate measures for the various indicators of student learning shown in the assessment matrix. �Appropriate,� in this instance, refers not just to the reliability and validity of the measures selected, but also to the extent to which they capture the curricular themes upon which this QEP is based. To use an illustrative example, measures of the behavioral, attitudinal and academic learning outcomes for students who participate in civic engagement will include:

! Faculty and field supervisor judgments of students� leadership qualities or �civic mindedness;�

! Scores on objective measures of civic engagement;

~57~

! Academic performance in courses such as sociology, social ethics, and political science;

! Scores on particular subscales of standardized academic achievement tests;

! Reflection journals that demonstrate an understanding of the personal and social importance of civic engagement.

Similar sets of quantitative and qualitative measures will be assembled to match the unique requirements of each experiential learning program. Thus, students who participate in several forms of experiential learning will be assessed numerous times and in several different ways, resulting in a portfolio of assessment results that will stand as a general profile of student learning. To collect data on these diverse facets of student learning, both internal (i.e., created and implemented by the institution) and external (i.e., created and implemented by standardized testing agencies such as ETS and CIRP) measures will be used. These measures, listed in Appendix F, will yield the kinds of data necessary to assess the ways in which�and the extent to which�students learn from their various real-world experiences. The internal measures comprise both existing assessment devices and instruments that have been created specifically to evaluate the learning outcomes identified in this QEP. In a number of cases, existing assessment devices�the Annual Alumni Survey, HPU Presentation Evaluation Rubric, and Internships Exit Survey�were modified11 so that they could detect with greater accuracy the behavioral and attitudinal changes we expect to accompany students� participation in the Experiential Learning Program. But the most common practice was to develop new measures tailored to fit the contours of High Point University�s evolving academic program generally and the QEP in particular. The Campus Life Survey, Student Satisfaction Survey, and Writing Assessment Portfolio, for example, were created to meet the needs of the University�s overall assessment program, while the civic engagement, study abroad, and collaborative inquiry exit surveys emerged from the process of QEP development. The external measures that will be used to assess various aspects of student learning include the National Survey of Student Engagement, the Annual Freshman Survey developed by the Cooperative Institutional Research Program, the Measure of Academic Proficiency and Progress, and, where appropriate, discipline-specific Major Field Achievement Tests.12 As the QEP is implemented, and as students begin to participate in the civic engagement, study abroad, internship, and collaborative inquiry programs, what specific outcomes could legitimately be accepted as evidence that student learning has indeed improved? Ideally, improvements in student learning should be marked against some baseline�or pre-QEP historical average�relevant to the learning outcomes under consideration; however, because the number of outcomes for which baseline data exist at High Point University is relatively small and limited primarily to participation rates in different kinds of experiential learning,13 the ideal strategy of making pre- and post-QEP comparisons will, in many cases, have to be abandoned in favor of examining post-QEP learning trends only. This being the case, improvements in student learning will be conceptualized in terms of (a) the degree to which post-QEP learning outcomes show linear increases over time, and (b) the degree to which students who participate in several different experiential learning programs score higher on particular learning outcomes than students who do not participate in these programs. To illustrate the manner in which student learning will be assessed, consider the outcomes associated with the Civic Engagement Program. As discussed previously, these outcomes will be measured in a variety of ways (i.e., qualitatively and quantitatively) and across a variety of domains (i.e., behavioral, attitudinal, and academic). The resulting data set will thus be a rich and multifaceted collection of grades, ratings,

11 Typically, these modifications involved rewording items or adding new items that better captured the phenomenon being assessed. 12 Copies of all assessment materials are on file in the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment and are available upon request. 13 Exceptions to this rule include historical averages for course grades and, to a lesser extent, standardized test scores. Attitudinal measures and

most types of qualitative measures have not often been used to assess student learning.

~58~

and scale scores that can be examined individually for evidence of incremental improvement in specific areas, or aggregated into a composite score that can be interpreted as an overall indicator of student learning. Both of these strategies have unique advantages that render them particularly suitable for our assessment purposes. The chief advantage of composite scores is that they reflect, with a high degree of reliability, what might be called a student�s �realized potential.� In the experiential domain of civic engagement, for example, high composite scores would be indicative of students who have demonstrated�behaviorally, attitudinally, and academically�that they are engaged with their communities and have absorbed important lessons about civic responsibility and community service. Because this, in its simplest form, is the ultimate objective of the Civic Engagement Program, the civic engagement composite score may be the most appropriate criterion by which program effectiveness is judged. As shown in the following diagram, evidence that students have indeed benefited from their civic engagement experiences will be reflected in linear increases in their composite scores across the four-semester civic engagement period.14

1 2 3 4

Semesters in Civic Engagement Program

Mea

n Sc

ore

on

Civ

ic E

ngag

emen

t Com

posi

te 60

55504540353025201510

Expected Linear Trend for Civic Engagement Learning Outcomes

. . .

.

...

..

..

.

. ...

.

.

.. . .

.

...

..

..

.

. ... .. . .

.

...

..

..

.

. ... .

.. . .

.

...

..

..

.

... .. . .

.

...

..

..

.

. ... .

.. . .

.

...

..

..

.

... .

. . .

.

...

..

..

.

. ... .

.. . .

.

...

..

..

.

... .

. . .

.

...

..

..

.

. ... .

.. . .

.

...

..

..

.

... .

.. ....

On the other hand, the individual indicators of student learning�responses to the Civic Engagement Exit Survey, for example, or grades assigned to civic engagement reflection papers�will be useful in answering questions about the particular proficiencies students have acquired as a result of their civic engagement experiences. For example, it would be immensely useful to see if participation in the Civic Engagement Program was equally predictive of improvements in critical thinking and reflective writing as it was of increases in civic mindedness and social responsibility. Furthermore, given their ability to reveal the relative predictive strength of each indicator of student learning, these kinds of comparative analyses would yield important diagnostic information that could be used to make mid-course adjustments to the QEP assessment process. Because of its unique status as a core university requirement that stretches across two years, the Civic Engagement Program will lend itself well to longitudinal analyses. The same cannot be said, however, for the Study Abroad, Internship, and Collaborative Inquiry programs, which for most students will be voluntary experiences. Although it is expected that greater numbers of students will choose to pursue 14 More precisely, a linear increase in composite scores will exist to the extent that the slope of the best-fitting regression line is positive and

significantly different from zero.

~59~

these valuable learning opportunities as the QEP is implemented, it also must be acknowledged that not all students will choose to do so. Under these circumstances, the assessment of student learning will involve making comparisons between program participants and non-participants on the relevant outcome measures. Obviously, it is expected that composite scores of students who participate in study abroad, internships, or collaborative inquiry will be significantly higher than those of non-participating students. 2. The Assessment Process Unlike the assessment of the Experiential Learning Program, in which the processes of collecting, analyzing, and reporting on program evaluation data will be shared by several coordinators and program directors, the responsibility for assessing student learning outcomes will fall primarily to the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment. There are three main reasons for centralizing the assessment process in this way:

! The effective management of the Experiential Learning Program will depend on the practical expertise of individuals who are trained in and familiar with the particular exigencies of their areas. Accordingly, the advisory committees and coordinators of the Civic Engagement, Study Abroad, and Internship Programs will be uniquely positioned to determine what their areas need in order to be successful and how to judge whether or not their programs have indeed been successful. In contrast, student learning, despite the fact that it can be conceptualized and measured in various ways, is a more singular construct that can be evaluated by one office whose principal function is to assess academic outcomes.

! Given the considerable flow and flux of learning outcome data generated during the year, it will be much simpler (and probably more effective) to funnel these data to a single administrative office than it would be to channel them to several intermediate offices, each of which would have to be regulated and coordinated in order to ensure the integrity and accuracy of the data for which each office is responsible.

! Several sources of student learning data�standardized external measures such as the National Survey of Student Engagement, experiential learning exit surveys, student satisfaction surveys, et cetera�are already managed by the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment, while other sources�student grades and alumni records, for example�are directly accessible through the Datatel data management system.

The assessment process will begin each August with information sessions delivered during the annual faculty seminars by the Director of Institutional Research and Assessment. In these sessions the Director will summarize the previous year�s QEP and learning outcomes data and review the procedures by which assessment data will be collected in the forthcoming year. Also in August, the Director will inventory all internal and external surveys and set an assessment schedule for the year.15 This schedule will specify not only when particular assessments will be conducted, but also when and how learning outcome data will be reported. The process of collecting learning outcome data will occur in three distinct phases, each with its own timetable and unique set of procedural guidelines, and each aligned with a particular data source. As shown in the following diagram, the first process will involve collecting evaluative data from the participants, instructors, and supervisors in each of the four experiential learning programs. These data will capture the most immediate effects of the Civic Engagement, Study Abroad, Internship, and Collaborative Inquiry programs by quantifying students� post-experience attitudes and aptitudes, faculty members� judgments about students� academic performance, and site supervisors� appraisals of students� skills, abilities, and readiness to function as civic assets in their communities. The second phase will involve the administration of internal and external measures designed to assess more global aspects of

15 Although it is expected that the assessment schedule will not fluctuate dramatically from year to year, a number of factors�variations in study

abroad offerings, changes in the academic calendar, the implementation of new assessment strategies, et cetera�may necessitate the adjustment of the schedule in any given year.

~60~

student learning�such as critical thinking or knowledge gains in particular academic areas�as well as broader attitudes about personal integrity, civic engagement, political involvement, community service, global mindedness, and professionalism. In the final phase, several official indicators of student learning�course grades; participation rates in student government, volunteer opportunities, or institutionally sponsored cultural events; post-baccalaureate indicators of professional success, et cetera�will be culled from students� official University records.

Assessment Plan for Student Learning Outcomes

Experiential Learning Data Internal & External Measures Official Student Records

Sources of Data

! Exit Surveys ! Faculty/Supervisor Ratings ! Behavioral Indicators ! Reflection Essays

Sources of Data

! Exit Surveys ! MAPP ! NSSE ! CIRP ! MFAT

Sources of Data

! Registrar�s Office ! Student Life Office ! Alumni Office

Data Collection Timeline

! At the conclusion of each

experiential learning program (typically at the end of the academic term).

Data Collection Timeline

! Throughout the year (but

especially in the months of August, December, January, and April).

Data Collection Timeline

! December, May, and

August.

Data Collected By

! Faculty ! Site Supervisors

Data Collected By

! Director of Institutional

Research and Assessment

Data Collected By

! Director of Institutional

Research and Assessment With the data from these various sources at hand, the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment will draft and submit to the Vice President for Academic Affairs a Report on Student Learning Outcomes. This report will summarize all available indicators of student learning and provide an analysis of the effect the Experiential Learning Program has on students� behaviors, attitudes, and academic proficiency.

Office of Institutional Research and Assessment

Report on StudentLearning Outcomes

Vice President for Academic Affairs

~61~

Furthermore, this report, in conjunction with the Annual QEP Assessment Report, will form the foundation of all institutional discussions about the adequacy of the Experiential Learning Program as an important facilitator of student learning.

It has been the goal of this section to set all the elements of the QEP into a broad institutional framework and to describe, in as much detail as possible, how the QEP will enhance student learning at High Point University. Particular emphasis has been placed on incorporating the QEP into the University�s operational structure and on the assessment of its effectiveness as a pedagogical mechanism, and frequent mention has been made of the University�s commitment to the cause of experiential learning. This commitment is not merely rhetorical. It is instead the firmest possible proclamation of intention the University can make, a deliberate and specific orientation toward academic improvement that is reflected in the creation of new positions, the revision of the institution�s core curriculum, the realignment or restructuring of existing academic programs, a campus-wide transformation in the way people think about accountability in higher education, and many other changes. Indeed, the focus on experiential learning is itself a reflection of High Point University�s commitment to academic excellence, demonstrating as it does the institution�s persistent pursuit of pedagogical models that view education as a holistic, practical, and personally relevant enterprise. In the end, it is expected that by attending to the details of implementation articulated in this section, High Point University will produce students who are not just maximally prepared to fulfill their personal and professional ambitions, but are also exemplars of responsible citizenship in the 21st century world.

~62~

IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE

HIS QUALITY ENHANCEMENT PLAN ASKS MUCH OF THE STUDENTS, FACULTY, and administrators of High Point University. It asks students to step out of the classroom and onto larger stages, to experience firsthand those aspects of human experience that textbooks and lectures, however

artfully written or delivered, can never fully capture. It asks faculty to reconsider the terms of their pedagogical calling and to reevaluate what it means to be a teacher and mentor in today�s world. And it asks the University administration to ensure that whatever the Experiential Learning Program needs to succeed�financial and material resources, solid leadership, and well-oiled mechanisms of program evaluation�it gets. Above all, though, the QEP asks that all of these individuals work together in a synchronized way so that the long-term goals of the Experiential Learning Program can be met as thoroughly and expeditiously as possible. In order for this to occur, it is essential that a temporal structure be imposed on the implementation program described in the preceding section, for without a shared vision of the sequence in which key developmental events should unfold, there can be no progress. It is the purpose of this concluding section to articulate just such a temporal structure for the QEP.

QEP Implementation: A Four-Year Plan1 Even in the early days of institutional deliberation over the focus of the QEP, it was recognized that no significant academic program could be fully implemented in the short run. It was understood that at minimum such a program would require the accumulation of operational resources and a thorough working out of its logistical, curricular, administrative, and policy implications, activities that could easily occupy upwards of two years. As the QEP expanded, however, and the details of the Experiential Learning Program began to coalesce into a coherent plan, it became clear that, owing to the need to hire several support staff, weave the QEP into the fabric of the University�s core curriculum, and overcome the unique challenges associated with studying abroad, full implementation would not be possible for at least twice that time. The QEP Steering Committee, therefore, decided to phase in the QEP over four years, focusing on one experiential learning program per year and aiming at full implementation by 2009. The highlights of this plan are presented below, with a detailed implementation schedule attached as Appendix G. Preliminary Work (2005 � 2006) Given High Point University�s stated intention to commence its QEP in the 2006 � 2007 academic year, it was necessary to begin laying the groundwork for the Freshman Year Civic Engagement Program during the fall of 2005. Some of this early work occurred during the writing of this QEP and took the form of defining and then activating the administrative and advisory bodies whose job it would be to manage the

1 It must be mentioned at the outset that despite the symmetry and orderliness of the phrase �four year plan,� the actual unfolding of events during

the four implementation years will occur in an overlapping and sometimes recursive way. Although there will be a specific sequence of events leading to the full development of the Experiential Learning Program, each implementation phase described below should be taken as a convenient label for the twelve-month period that separates one academic year from the next, and not as the precise beginning and ending points of a span of time during which�and only during which�a particular experiential learning program will be designed and developed.

T 4

~63~

civic engagement component of the Experiential Learning Program.2 Importantly, the University appointed Dr. Kelly Norton to the position of Director of Experiential Learning. Dr. Norton�s education, training, and unique experiences as an advocate of authentic, out-of-class education will allow the Experiential Learning Program to develop with greater facility than it otherwise would. Another preliminary step involved designing a delivery system for the Freshman Year Civic Engagement Program, a process that required the QEP Steering Committee to submit to the Educational Policies Committee a formal proposal outlining the structure, content, and logistical concerns of the President�s Seminar. Third, because the central purpose of the Freshman Year Civic Engagement Program is to provide students with opportunities to connect with the broader community, it was necessary to identify a wide variety of agencies and organizations that would be interested in forming collaborative partnerships with High Point University. Between August and October of 2005, thirty such organizations were contacted and invited to an information session�held in November�in which the goals and objectives of the QEP were described. The participants� responses to this session were extremely positive, with each organization in attendance agreeing to work with High Point University students in the following year. Also receiving consistent attention between August, 2005 and February, 2006 was a publicity and education campaign designed to keep the High Point University community apprised of the development of the QEP and to prepare students, faculty, and staff for the curricular changes that would accompany QEP implementation. Through a series of formal presentations, meetings with departments and individual student groups, and several e-mail updates, the QEP Steering Committee sought to ensure that all campus constituencies were kept constantly aware of the many aspects of QEP evolution. Because thorough and consistent assessment lies at the heart of this QEP, a great deal of effort went into the process of developing (or redesigning) internal measures relevant to the operational efficacy of the QEP and to specific student learning outcomes. New student satisfaction and alumni surveys were created, as were new instruments designed to assist faculty and community supervisors in their assessments of students� performance in a variety of experiential learning contexts. The existing Internships Evaluation Survey, which is completed by students at the conclusion of their internship experience, was modified slightly to incorporate specific learning outcomes relevant to the QEP, and new exit surveys were created for the Civic Engagement, Study Abroad, and Collaborative Inquiry Programs. This program of instrument development and modification will continue through each phase of QEP implementation. Finally, the Director of Institutional Research and Assessment, along with the principal data managers in the Registrar�s office and the offices of Academic Affairs, Student Life, and Information Technology, collected all available sources of baseline data and assembled them into a single data set. Though not comprehensive, the data set does comprise several years� worth of internship and study abroad participation records, scores on the CIRP Freshman Survey, Academic Profile, and the Social and Political Engagement Survey, the number of students who presented or published scholarly work, student volunteer rates, writing assessment scores, and official University records relevant to any aspect of experiential learning (e.g., course grades, student retention rates, et cetera). Phase I: The Freshman Year Civic Engagement Program (2006 � 2007) As indicated above, significant steps have already been taken to form collaborative partnerships with professional members of the community; however, the processes of cultivating new partnerships and clarifying the nature of these partnerships must continue throughout the spring and summer of 2006.

2 It will be recalled that in the initial stages of QEP development, six advisory committees were assembled to help sharpen the focus of the QEP

(see p. 14). When they completed their assigned tasks, in April of 2005, these committees were dissolved as the QEP Steering Committee began work on the QEP document. In September of 2005, different groups of faculty, staff, and students�many of whom did not participate in the earlier stages of QEP development�were organized into permanent Civic Engagement, Study Abroad, Internship, and Collaborative Inquiry Advisory Committees. It is these committees that are shown in the Reporting Structure for QEP Assessment (see p. 52).

~64~

Indeed, this will be among the most pressing tasks facing the new Director of Experiential Learning,3 as the success of the Freshman Year Civic Engagement Program will depend on the existence of a sizeable cadre of community sites capable of accommodating 400 to 500 new students a year. Thus, prior to the commencement of the fall semester, 2006, a major goal will be to host several more information meetings and to establish additional collaborative partnerships with diverse groups of agencies and organizations. In order to ensure that the High Point University community is fully prepared to participate in the Freshman Year Civic Engagement Program (and that the community at large is aware of it), an extensive publicity campaign will be initiated throughout the summer and fall of 2006. There will be several aspects to this campaign, including:

! The development of an Experiential Learning Program website;

! The publication of feature articles in both the High Point University campus newspaper and city newspapers;

! A printed media campaign designed to keep the Experiential Learning Program in the public eye;

! Training sessions designed both to educate and encourage broad-based participation in the Freshman Year Civic Engagement Program.

This last bullet point is especially relevant because of the logistical need for faculty (and possibly senior student) mentors during students� civic engagement experiences. While it is true that the community site supervisors will play a significant educative role throughout the civic engagement experience, institutional supervision also will be necessary to ensure that the lessons learned at the site are carried back to campus and effectively translated into measurable outcomes. With the beginning of the fall semester, 2006, several events and processes will commence simultaneously. First, the President�s Seminar and the accompanying Freshman Year Civic Engagement Program will get underway, with the Director of the Experiential Learning Program assuming primary responsibility for the day-to-day management of the program. In particular, the Director will coordinate (a) all record-keeping activities (including attendance, graded assignments, and the like), (b) transportation to and from community sites, and (c) the activities of faculty, staff, and senior student mentors. Second, the Civic Engagement Advisory Committee will start convening on a regular basis to discuss the operation of the Freshman Year Civic Engagement Program, address any logistical problems or obstacles that might arise during the initial stages of implementation, and assist the Director of Experiential Learning in the development of the program (by, for example, identifying and applying for external sources of funding, conducting studies of best practices, and so forth). In addition, the Advisory Committee will begin planning for the Sophomore Year Civic Engagement Program. As described previously (see pp. 41-44), this program will be delivered to students via High Point University�s core requirement in ethics. The faculty of the Religion and Philosophy Department has taught the ethics courses since they were inserted into the core curriculum, so this group will take the lead in redesigning the courses during the 2006-2007 academic year. Their immediate charge will be to embed a set of extended civic engagement experiences within the existing structure of the ethics courses and to spell out the policies and procedures that will ensure the academic integrity of those experiences. Additionally, though, the Religion and Philosophy Department will be responsible for developing a model by which other departments can create their own civic engagement courses. This model will be the evaluative standard used by the Experiential Learning Executive Committee to judge the adequacy of new civic engagement course proposals. Consistent with the current administrative calendar at High Point University, it is expected that in November or December of 2006, the Civic Engagement Advisory Committee will submit to the Educational Policies Committee new course proposals for each modified ethics course. 3 The duties associated with the management of the Civic Engagement Program will be carried out by the Director of Experiential Learning.

These duties will be assumed by a full-time coordinator in the spring or summer of 2007.

~65~

Third, concentrated efforts will be directed toward identifying and securing extramural funds to supplement institutional support of the QEP. The experiential learning focus of this QEP is well-aligned with the missions of numerous granting agencies in both the public and private sectors, and the process of submitting applications to several of these agencies is currently underway. Over the course of the four-year implementation plan, it is expected that this process will continue under the direction of a full-time professional with expertise in grant writing. Finally, the ongoing process of assessing student learning outcomes and the overall efficacy of the Experiential Learning Program will officially begin. Existing assessment protocols (e.g., the assessment of student writing, the administration of the Student Satisfaction Survey and the Measure of Academic Progress and Proficiency, the tracking of comparative institutional data, et cetera) will, of course, remain in place, but new assessment strategies and reporting structures will be established as well. For example, the minutes of the Civic Engagement Advisory Committee�not to mention the results of the QEP Faculty Feedback Survey, course evaluations for the President�s Seminar, the Civic Engagement Exit Survey for students and community site supervisors�and any other data, information, or recommendations produced by the Committee will become part of the Unit Assessment Report that is submitted to the Director of Experiential Learning each December. The same is true for the Experiential Learning Executive Committee. Once this Committee begins evaluating new course proposals (most likely beginning in the fall of 2007) or engaging in any other kind of regulatory or advisory activities, a summary report of these activities will be forwarded to the Director of Experiential Learning. In January of each year, the Director of Experiential Learning will prepare two documents that summarize the various activities of the Experiential Learning Program. The first document, which will be submitted to the Vice President for Academic Affairs, is a formal needs assessment (with a budget) for the Experiential Learning Program. The second document, submitted to the Director of Institutional Research and Assessment, is a master data set for the fall semester. (A second master data set for the spring semester will be submitted in May). This data set will include all relevant information from the Unit Assessment Reports as well as Experiential Learning Program personnel assessments. The full assessment cycle will conclude in June of each year when the Director of Institutional Research and Assessment submits to the Vice President for Academic Affairs the Annual QEP Assessment Report and the Report on Student Learning Outcomes. These reports, which will combine all evaluation data for QEP efficacy and student learning outcomes from all available sources, will form the foundation of institutional discussions on the future development of the Experiential Learning Program. A major goal for the 2006-2007 academic year will be the selection of a full-time coordinator to lead the Civic Engagement Program beginning in the fall of 2007. In October of 2006, the Director of Experiential Learning and the members of the Experiential Learning Executive Committee will initiate the search process and subsequently will assume primary responsibility for processing applications, interviewing eligible candidates (as well as arranging interviews with the President of the University and the Vice President for Academic Affairs), selecting a high-quality candidate, and establishing him or her on campus. In addition to the Coordinator of Civic Engagement, the University will also seek to fill a half-time administrative assistant position. Qualified individuals for both positions should be identified and hired by April of 2007. The summer months that separate each academic year will have their own unique scheduling features which, for convenience, may be described as reflective routines and preparatory events.4 Each June, for example, a group consisting of the Vice President for Academic Affairs, the QEP Leadership Team, and the administrators and advisory committees of the Experiential Learning Program will meet to review the Annual QEP Assessment Report and the Report on Student Learning Outcomes. The purpose of this reflective routine will be to identify any problems that were encountered during the previous

4 One regular occurrence during the summer months that doesn�t fall into either of these categories is the administration of the alumni survey. By

concentrating assessment efforts in the summer months, the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment anticipates a greater response rate from recent graduates.

~66~

implementation year, discuss the opportunities and challenges that lie ahead, and make any necessary adjustments to the course of the program. Examples of preparatory events include the design of fall publicity campaigns, the finalization of faculty and student mentor rosters, updating the QEP website, and training sessions for faculty, staff, and students. These events, obviously enough, are designed to pave the way for the next phase of QEP implementation. Phase II: The Sophomore Year Civic Engagement Program (2007 � 2008) Despite the significant work that will go into the redesign of the ethics courses and the inevitable �breaking in� period that accompanies all new curricular offerings, it is expected that the Sophomore Year Civic Engagement Program will be simpler to implement than the Freshman Year Program. One reason for this is that the ethics courses have been a part of the undergraduate curriculum for many years and are thus common and familiar features of the academic program at High Point University. A second reason is that many of the logistical challenges associated with transporting students to their civic engagement sites, managing student assignments, and coordinating with site supervisors will likely have been worked out during the Freshman Year Program, obviating the need to revisit these areas. Still, it should be pointed out that with the commencement of the 2007-2008 academic year, the total number of students participating in mandatory civic engagement experiences will double, making it necessary for the Coordinator of the Civic Engagement Program and the Civic Engagement Advisory Committee to ensure that adequate resources and structural supports are in place well in advance of the arrival of the new freshman class. By the fall of 2007, the Civic Engagement Advisory Committee will have taken several steps to ensure the academic integrity of the Sophomore Year Civic Engagement Program, including:

! Meeting with a consultant to discuss strategies for developing civic engagement courses (June, 2006);

! Meeting monthly as a group to redesign all ethics courses so that they include a civic engagement component (August-December, 2006);

! Submitting new course proposals to the Vice President for Academic Affairs and the Educational Policies Committee (December, 2006-January, 2007);

! Pilot testing and evaluating a civic engagement ethics course during the summer session (June, 2007).

Furthermore, the Advisory Committee and the Director of Experiential Learning will have consulted regularly in the preceding months, and this should result in a fall implementation that is well-coordinated and streamlined. In addition to the annual assessment and reporting processes set in motion during Phase I, the 2007-2008 implementation year will move forward with several new programmatic initiatives. First, the Study Abroad Advisory Committee will begin meeting with greater regularity in preparation for the planned expansion of the Study Abroad Program in the 2008-2009 academic year. Among the Committee�s objectives will be drafting an agenda and a mission statement (September, 2007), searching for and hiring a full-time Study Abroad Coordinator (October, 2007-April, 2008), and exploring a variety of new study abroad opportunities (December, 2007; February, 2008; May, 2008). As described in the Study Abroad Needs Assessment section of this QEP (see pp. 22-23), these new opportunities include additional study abroad locations as well as more flexible study abroad schedules (e.g., four-week May sessions, six- to eight-week summer sessions, et cetera). Given the labor-intensive nature of these enterprises, it is expected that the Study Abroad Advisory Committee and the Coordinator of the Study Abroad Program will be fully occupied with them throughout the 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 implementation years. A second significant aspect of the 2007-2008 implementation year will be the design of the Experiential Learning Scholars track. As described previously (see p. 45), this track will both formalize and celebrate

~67~

participation in all forms of experiential learning by (a) recognizing extraordinary student achievement with a special designation on the diploma, (b) issuing an experiential learning transcript along with the academic transcript, and (c) providing graduating seniors with an opportunity to share what they�ve learned in a year-end symposium. The QEP Leadership Team will assume primary responsibility for this aspect of program development, working with the appropriate administrative offices to ensure that the Experiential Learning Scholars Track is integrated seamlessly with the existing university structure. Third, the 2007-2008 implementation year will see the initiation of workshops designed to educate faculty and students on the value of each experiential learning opportunity and to provide training in the policies, procedures, and common practices of the Experiential Learning Program. These workshops will be led by the coordinators of each program and will be as much recruiting tools as they are teaching venues. Finally, with most of the University�s scheduled construction projects at or near completion, the process of identifying dedicated office space for the Experiential Learning Program will begin. It is expected that a connected suite�comprising individual offices for the Director of Experiential Learning, the Coordinators of the Civic Engagement, Study Abroad, and Internship Programs, and administrative assistants�will be designated the Center for Experiential Learning during the summer of 2008. In June of 2008, the institution will bring to campus an outside expert in the area of experiential learning to provide an independent evaluation of High Point University�s QEP. This will be the first of two such visits (the other occurring in June of 2010) in which an individual not affiliated with the University will provide his or her unique perspective on the merits and shortcomings of our developing Experiential Learning Program. The feedback this individual provides will become a permanent part of the QEP assessment record and will be used in conjunction with the University�s regular assessment protocols to make decisions that will lead to improvements in the Experiential Learning Program. Phase III: The Study Abroad Program (2008 � 2009) As the QEP moves into the third stage of implementation, its focus will shift from the creation of new programs and processes to the expansion and enhancement of existing programs. The thematic focus of the QEP will likewise shift from an emphasis on Self and Society to World and Vocation. The fall semester of 2008 will commence with a special study abroad kick-off event, held during freshman orientation week, in which the aims and aspirations of the reinvented Study Abroad Program will shared and celebrated. Given that the Study Abroad Program will be aligned with the curricular theme of World, this kick-off event will also highlight the growing relevance of global awareness and understanding to every American citizen, and the particular importance of study abroad experiences to students who wish to pursue careers in which cultural and linguistic knowledge is paramount. By this time, the Study Abroad Coordinator and Study Abroad Advisory Committee will have done a great deal of legwork in creating new study abroad linkages and more flexible schedules for High Point University�s various student groups. But a major goal for the 2008-2009 academic year will be the establishment of new study abroad opportunities in China, Japan, Australia, Spain, and other regions of global significance. Indeed, beyond the more mundane task of attending to the various legal, logistical, fiscal, and organizational details common to all study abroad programs, the process of expanding High Point University�s study abroad options to more far-flung locations will likely be the Study Abroad Program�s primary preoccupation in 2008. Phase III will also mark the incipient activities of the Internship and Collaborative Inquiry Advisory Committees. As did the Study Abroad Advisory Committee the year before, the groups responsible for guiding internship and research experiences at High Point University will begin creating or revising their program development agendas and writing mission statements. In October of 2008, the Internships Advisory Committee will begin searching for a full-time coordinator with the expectation that a qualified candidate will be in place by the fall semester of 2009. This advisory committee will also undertake the tasks of (a) developing or revising procedural requirements for student interns and faculty supervisors

~68~

(November, 2008), (b) greatly expanding and managing a list of internship sites categorized according to academic discipline (March, 2009), and (c) designing the Internships fall publicity campaign (May, 2009). Meanwhile, the Collaborative Inquiry Advisory Committee will spend most of the 2008-2009 academic year translating the University�s existing Independent Study system into a program that is truly institutional in scope and relevance. At the very least this will require a studied consideration of (a) what constitutes a collaborative inquiry experience (an individual student-faculty collaboration? Collaborative teams of students and faculty?), (b) what counts as a legitimate outcome of the collaborative inquiry experience (a presentation at a professional conference? A publishable screenplay or novel? A salable piece of workmanship? An invention worthy of patent?), (c) how the scholarly, professional, or practical achievements of students and faculty will be publicized and celebrated, and (d) how faculty participation in collaborative inquiry experiences will be encouraged, rewarded, and accounted for in tenure and promotion decisions. Phase IV: The Internship and Collaborative Inquiry Programs (2009 � 2010) The final year of QEP implementation will see the Internship and Collaborative Inquiry programs brought on line as official components of the Experiential Learning Program. As was the case with the Study Abroad Program the year before, a special kick-off event will be held during freshman orientation to inaugurate the two new programs. Throughout the fall and spring semesters, the curricular theme of Vocation will be highlighted in workshops and via annual publicity campaigns. Faculty will be encouraged to promote internships and collaborative inquiry experiences to their students, and monthly Brown Bag Colloquia will be held so that students and faculty can come together in an atmosphere of collegiality to discuss ideas, share methodologies, report on current or planned projects, and share in the spirit of scholarship that characterizes all vibrant institutions of higher education. The 2009-2010 academic year will also be a milestone for the Experiential Learning Program, as the first group of students who entered the program in 2006 will now be seniors. It will, accordingly, be something of a celebratory year, one in which a new set of rituals will commemorate the special achievements of the first set of Experiential Scholars. In addition to formally recognizing them on Honors Day, these scholars will participate in a capstone symposium, held in April, in which they will give a professional-quality presentation on any aspect of their experiential learning they found to be particularly illuminating, edifying, or professionally beneficial. Although these presentations will in part provide a final opportunity for the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment to evaluate student learning outcomes, perhaps their greatest effect will be to encourage, challenge, and motivate the younger students in attendance to become thoroughly involved in the Experiential Learning Program in their remaining years at High Point University. In this way the Experiential Learning Symposium will function as a rite of passage in which newer students are introduced to the culture of experiential learning by more seasoned students who can speak with some authority about the various advantages of civic engagement, study abroad, internships, and collaborative inquiry experiences. In June of 2010, the University will once again invite an outside expert to evaluate the Experiential Learning Program. By this time High Point University will have successfully completed four Freshman Year Civic Engagement Programs, three Sophomore Year Civic Engagement Programs, two full study abroad cycles, and one internships and collaborative inquiry cycle. The Director of Experiential Learning will have been in place for four years and coordinators for the Civic Engagement, Study Abroad, and Internship Programs will have been hired. Four Annual QEP Assessment Reports and four Reports on Student Learning Outcomes will have been written, each one more complex, detailed, and data rich than the one that came before it. When the visiting expert submits his or her final report in June of 2010, High Point University�s Experiential Learning Program will have become a deeply rooted part of the institution�s academic program, affecting the hearts and minds of nearly 2000 students, invigorating the teaching and scholarship of over 120 faculty, and benefiting the City of High Point and points beyond.

~69~

It is not a simple undertaking to change the culture of an academic institution. Old habits sometimes need to be broken and replaced with new sets of routines that might wear roughly at first. Expectations oftentimes must be adjusted upward, away from comfortable and common pursuits and toward achievements that are truly extraordinary. Uncertainty and confusion may reign for a while, but if the process of re-acculturation is carried out systematically, sensitively, and gradually, these uncomfortable states of mind will dissolve, their places taken by optimism, anticipation, and hardiness of purpose. As an instrument of re-acculturation, this QEP seeks to take High Point University to a higher level of academic distinction, not just by providing students with improved experiential learning opportunities, but also by opening the door to a new way of thinking about institutional development. By following the plan outlined in this document, High Point University will indeed enhance student learning, but perhaps more importantly, it will also establish a culture of improvement on campus in which the enhancement of student learning is a permanent and passionately pursued objective.

~70~

APPENDIX A

THE HIGH POINT UNIVERSITY MISSION STATEMENT

High Point University is a private, liberal arts university affiliated with The United Methodist Church and dedicated to the Judeo-Christian principles of inclusiveness and diversity. The mission of High Point University is to provide vital and distinguished undergraduate and graduate programs that enhance both traditional and non-traditional students� powers of inquiry, breadth of knowledge, command of written and spoken language, and insight into ethical behavior. This mission is deeply rooted in the liberal arts and is reflected in seven overlapping commitments:

# To foster close communication, both inside and outside the classroom, between motivated students and faculty who are committed to teaching and scholarly activity;

# To blend imaginatively critical thinking, intellectual inquiry, and aesthetic appreciation with a

practical need for innovation, skill, and knowledge within professional disciplines; # To promote the balanced development of students� cognitive, social, and physical capacities; # To offer an education, grounded in the development of character, personal responsibility, and a

sense of civic duty, that prepares students for leadership, citizenship, and service in a diverse global community;

# To provide the opportunity for exploration of faith and humane values within a Judeo-Christian

context; # To contribute to the educational and cultural life of the broader community by offering cultural

activities of regional and national interest, and by devoting the resources of the University, the professional skills of the faculty, and the talents of students to local charities, businesses, and other civic groups;

# To maintain a physical environment, including classrooms, libraries, laboratories, and open spaces,

that supports the academic success of students and the professional development of faculty. In pursuing each of these commitments, High Point University is guided by the principles of intellectual freedom, academic excellence, and ethical rigor, and by the desire to create and enhance an environment conducive to the liberal arts education and professional development of students.

~71~

APPENDIX B

MEMBERS OF THE SACS LEADERSHIP TEAM, QEP STEERING COMMITTEE, AND

QEP ADVISORY COMMITTEES

SACS Leadership Team

Dr. Nido R. Qubein President, High Point University nqubein@highpoint.edu E. Vance Davis, Ph.D. Vice President for Academic Affairs vdavis@highpoint.edu E. Roy Epperson, Ph.D. SACS Liaison, Reaffirmation Chair epperson@highpoint.edu Alberta H. Herron, Ph.D. Dean of Graduate Studies aherron@highpoint.edu Stephanie O. Crofton, Ph.D. Asst. Prof. of Economics scrofton@highpoint.edu

QEP Steering Committee

Jeffrey M. Adams, Ph.D. Director of Institutional Research jeadams@highpoint.edu Mariann W. Tillery, Ph.D. Dean, College of Education mtillery@highpoint.edu

QEP Advisory Committees

Civic Engagement Advisory Committee

Carole Stoneking, Ph.D. Prof. of Religion cstoneki@highpoint.edu Clint Corcoran, Ph.D. Prof. of Religion and Philosophy ccorcora@highpoint.edu Pat Haun, M.A. Asst. Prof. of Human Relations phaun@highpoint.edu Susan Linker, Ph.D. Assoc. Prof. of Spanish slinker@highpoint.edu Pamela Palmer, M.S. Asst. Prof. of Human Relations pmurrill@highpoint.edu Jim Zarick, Ed.D. Assoc. Prof. of Sport Management jzarick@highpoint.edu Sarah Chisholm, B.A. Coordinator of Admissions, EDP schishol@highpoint.edu Kelly Norton, Ph.D. Director, Academic Services Center knorton@highpoint.edu Audrey Cecil Undergraduate, REL major cecila03@highpoint.edu Shannon Stevenson Undergraduate, HRE major steves04@highpoint.edu

Internships Advisory Committee

David J. Bergen, Ph.D. Assoc. Prof of Human Relations dbergen@highpoint.edu Chris Allred, Ph.D. Assoc. Prof. of Education callred@highpoint.edu Guy Arcuri, Ph.D. Assoc. Prof. of Spanish garcuri@highpoint.edu Elizabeth Dull, Ph.D. Assoc. Prof. of Interior Design edull@highpoint.edu Karen Reaves, M.B.A. Asst. Prof. of Information Systems kreaves@highpoint.edu Andrea Wheless, M.F.A. Assoc. Prof. of Art awheless@highpoint.edu Tracy Lovejoy, B.S. Coordinator of Registration, EDP tlovejoy@highpoint.edu

~72~

Study Abroad Advisory Committee

Carole Head, Ph.D. Prof. of Modern Foreign Languages chead@highpoint.edu Akintunde Akinade, Ph.D. Assoc. Prof. of Religion aakinade@highpoint.edu Peng Deng, Ph.D. Prof. of History pdeng@highpoint.edu Claudia Femenias, Ph.D. Assoc. Prof. of Spanish cfemenia@highpoint.edu Barbara Mascali, Ph.D. Assoc. Prof. of French and German bmascali@highpoint.edu Michael McCully, Ph.D. Assoc. Prof. of Economics mmccully@highpoint.edu Jane Stephens, Ph.D. Asst. Prof. of English jstephen@highpoint.edu Peter Broadley, M.Ed. Head Coach, Men�s Soccer pbroadle@highpoint.edu Jim Schlimmer, M.Ed. International Student Coordinator jschlimm@highpoint.edu Tracy Anderson Undergraduate, SMED major Andert04@highpoint.edu Travys Courtney Undergraduate, INS major court004@highpoint.edu Angie Gomez Undergraduate, ACC major gomez@highpoint.edu Paula Hartness Undergraduate, ART major phartnes@highpoint.edu Jennifer Mraz Undergraduate, BIO major mrazj03@highpoint.edu

Collaborative Inquiry Advisory Committee

Lisa Carnell, Ph.D. Assoc. Prof. of Mathematics lcarnell@highpoint.edu Terrell Hayes, Ph.D. Assoc. Prof. of Sociology thayes@highpoint.edu Kelli Sapp, Ph.D. Asst. Prof. of Biology ksapp@highpoint.edu Woody Gibson, Ed.D. Director of Athletics wgibson@highpoint.edu Mike Tuttle, B.A. Associate Director of Athletics mtuttle@highpoint.edu Lisa Woods, B.S. Assistant Dean, EDP lwoods@highpoint.edu Jason Straw Undergraduate, CSC major strawj@highpoint.edu Jamie Casterline Undergraduate, CSC major castej03@highpoint.edu

Assessment Advisory Committee

Mariann Tillery, Ph.D. Prof. of Education mtillery@highpoint.edu Anthony Gabrielli, Ph.D. Asst. Prof. of Political Science agabriel@highpoint.edu Wid Painter, Ph.D. Prof. of Chemistry wpainter@highpoint.edu Leah Schweitzer, Ph.D. Asst. Prof. of English lschweit@highpoint.edu Jessie McIlrath-Carter, B.A. Director of Admissions jmcilrat@highpoint.edu

Implementation Advisory Committee

Rob Harger, Ph.D. Assoc. Prof. of Mathematics rharger@highpoint.edu Barbara Leonard, Ph.D. Prof. of Education bleonard@highpoint.edu Larry Simpson, Ph.D. Prof. of History lsimpson@highpoint.edu Mike Waggoner, M.Ed. Asst. Prof. of Education mwaggon@highpoint.edu Sam Beck, M.A. Director of Career Development sbeck@highpoint.edu Diana Estey, M.Ed. University Registrar destey@highpoint.edu Allen Goedeke, Ph.D. Assoc. Dean for Academic Dev. agoedeke@highpoint.edu Marisa Ray, B.S. Director of Alumni Relations mray@highpoint.edu Gail Tuttle, B.A. Dean, EDP gtuttle@highpoint.edu Stephanie Webster Undergraduate, MTH and BUA major swebster@highpoint.edu

~73~

APPENDIX C

GUIDING QUESTIONS FOR THE QEP ADVISORY COMMITTEES

CIVIC ENGAGEMENT

1. What specific goals and objectives should a civic engagement program endeavor to achieve?

2. How could specific civic engagement experiences be linked to the academic themes of SELF and SOCIETY?

3. How might a campus-wide civic engagement plan be implemented? What staffing, fiscal,

structural, and oversight considerations must be taken into account?

4. Could civic engagement be incorporated into existing classes across campus? If so, how?

5. Are there any legal or ethical concerns that would have to be addressed with the establishment of a civic engagement program?

6. Are there any other practical, philosophical, or programmatic issues that ought to be addressed?

INTERNSHIPS

1. What specific goals and objectives should the Student Career Internship Program endeavor to achieve?

2. How could the Student Career Internship Program be expanded or improved? What staffing,

fiscal, structural, and oversight considerations must be taken into account?

3. How could specific internship experiences be linked to the academic themes of WORLD and VOCATION?

4. Are there any legal or ethical concerns that would have to be addressed with the expansion and

enhancement of the Student Career Internship Program?

5. Are there any other practical, philosophical, or programmatic issues that ought to be addressed?

STUDY ABROAD

1. What specific goals and objectives should the Study Abroad Program endeavor to achieve?

2. How could the Study Abroad Program be expanded or improved? What staffing, fiscal, structural, and oversight considerations must be taken into account?

3. How could study abroad experiences be linked to the academic themes of WORLD and

VOCATION?

4. Are there any legal or ethical concerns that would have to be addressed with the expansion and enhancement of the Study Abroad Program?

5. Are there any other practical, philosophical, or programmatic issues that ought to be addressed?

~74~

COLLABORATIVE INQUIRY

1. What specific goals and objectives should the Collaborative Inquiry Program endeavor to achieve?

2. How could the Collaborative Inquiry Program be expanded or improved? What staffing, fiscal,

structural, and oversight considerations must be taken into account?

3. How could collaborative inquiry experiences be linked to the academic themes of WORLD and VOCATION?

4. Are there any legal or ethical concerns that would have to be addressed with the expansion and

enhancement of the Collaborative Inquiry Program?

5. Are there any other practical, philosophical, or programmatic issues that ought to be addressed?

PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION

1. Are there any potential legal, philosophical, and programmatic obstacles that would have to be overcome before the proposed Quality Enhancement Plan could be implemented?

2. What staffing, fiscal, oversight, and structural considerations must be taken into account before

the proposed Quality Enhancement Plan could be implemented?

3. How does the proposed Quality Enhancement Plan fit within the broader context of High Point University�s strategic plan (particularly as articulated on pp. 77 � 88 and 93 � 97 of the Strategic Directions Document)?

4. What are the implications of making at least some aspects of the Quality Enhancement Plan

requirements for graduation?

ASSESSMENT

1. What empirical data or theoretical perspectives justify the implementation of the proposed Quality Enhancement Plan?

2. How will the effectiveness of the proposed Quality Enhancement Plan be assessed? That is, how

will we know if student participation in service learning, internship, and study abroad leads to improved learning?

3. How will learning be operationalized? What specific outcomes will demonstrate that student

learning has occurred? 4. What should an overall program of QEP assessment look like? That is, how frequently should

the QEP be evaluated and what procedures should be established to improve or revise the QEP?

~75~

APPENDIX D

RESOURCE NEEDS FOR QEP IMPLEMENTATION

Implementation Year 1 Resource Needs for QEP Implementation

Total Cost

Estimate Civic

Engagement Study

Abroad Internships Collaborative

Inquiry

Staffing $60,0001 --- --- --- $60,000 Travel $2,5002 --- --- --- $2,500 Office Supplies $1,000 --- --- --- $1,000 Postage $200 --- --- --- $200 Assessment $500 --- --- --- $500 Publicity/Communications $500 --- --- --- $500 Membership Dues $250 --- --- --- $250 Professional Services $7,5003 --- --- --- $7,500

2006 – 2007

(Freshman year Civic Engagement

Program)

Program Development $1,000 --- --- --- $1,000

$73,450 $73,450

Implementation Year 2 Resource Needs for QEP Implementation

Total Cost

Estimate Civic

Engagement Study

Abroad Internships Collaborative

Inquiry

Staffing $96,0004 --- --- --- $96,000 Travel $5,000 --- --- --- $5,000 Office Supplies $2,000 --- --- --- $2,000 Postage $400 --- --- --- $400 Assessment $1,000 --- --- --- $1,000 Publicity/Communications $1,000 --- --- --- $1,000 Membership Dues $250 --- --- --- $250 Professional Services $5,000 --- --- --- $5,000

2007 – 2008

(Freshman + Sophomore year Civic Engagement

Programs)

Program Development $2,000 --- --- --- $2,000

$114,650 $114,650

1 Base salary for the Director of Experiential Learning ($42,000) and half-time administrative assistant ($18,000). 2 Transportation costs to and from civic engagement sites. 3 Includes expenses related to professional consultations and stipends for faculty and student assistants. 4 Base salary for Director of Experiential Learning ($44,000), half-time administrative assistant ($20,000), and full-time Coordinator of Civic

Engagement ($32,000).

~76~

Implementation Year 3 Resource Needs for QEP Implementation

Total Cost

Estimate Civic

Engagement Study

Abroad Internships Collaborative

Inquiry

Staffing $102,0001 $34,0002 --- --- $136,000 Travel $5,000 $5,000 --- --- $10,000 Office Supplies $2,000 $750 --- --- $2,750 Postage $400 $200 --- --- $600 Assessment $1000 $500 --- --- $1500 Publicity/Communications $1000 $500 --- --- $1500 Membership Dues $250 $250 --- --- $500 Professional Services $5,000 $1,000 --- --- $6,000

2008 – 2009

(Study Abroad program

development)

Program Development $2,000 $1,000 --- --- $3,000

$118,650 $43,200 $161,850

Implementation Year 4 Resource Needs for QEP Implementation

Total Cost

Estimate Civic

Engagement Study

Abroad Internships Collaborative

Inquiry

Staffing $116,0003 $36,000 $36,0004 --- $188,000 Travel $5,000 $5,000 $1,000 --- $11,000 Office Supplies $2,000 $750 $750 --- $3,500 Postage $400 $200 $200 --- $800 Assessment $1000 $500 $500 --- $2,000 Publicity/Communications $1000 $500 $500 --- $2,000 Membership Dues $250 $250 $250 --- $750 Professional Services $5,000 $1,000 $1,000 --- $7,000

2009 – 2010

(Internship program

development)

Program Development $2,000 $1,000 $1,000 --- $4,000 $132,650 $45,200 $41,200 $219,050

1 Base salary for the Director of Experiential Learning ($46,000), half-time administrative assistant ($22,000), and full-time Coordinator of Civic

Engagement ($34,000). 2 Base salary for full-time Coordinator of Study Abroad. 3 Base salary for the Director of Experiential Learning ($48,000), full-time administrative assistant ($32,000), and full-time Coordinator of Civic

Engagement ($36,000). 4 Base salary for full-time Coordinator of Internships ($36,000).

~77~

Implementation Year 5 Resource Needs for QEP Implementation

Total Cost

Estimate Civic

Engagement Study

Abroad Internships Collaborative

Inquiry

Staffing $122,0001 $38,000 $38,000 $16,0002 $214,000 Travel $5,000 $5,000 $1,000 $3,000 $14,000 Office/Lab Supplies $2,000 $750 $750 $3,000 $6,500 Postage $400 $200 $200 $50 $850 Assessment $1000 $500 $500 $500 $2,500 Publicity/Communications $1000 $500 $500 $500 $2,500 Membership Dues $250 $250 $250 $1,500 $2,250 Professional Services $5,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $8,000

2010 – 2011

(Internship program

development)

Program Development $2,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $5,000 $138,650 $47,200 $43,200 $26,550 $255,600

1 Base salary for the Director of Experiential Learning ($50,000), full-time administrative assistant ($34,000), and full-time Coordinator of Civic

Engagement ($38,000). 2 Base salary for part-time administrative assistant.

~78~

APPENDIX E

BREAKDOWN OF QEP ASSESSMENT RESPONSIBILITIES

Assessment Agent

Responsibilities

Sources of Data

Action Timeline

Oversees and provides support for all assessment activities relevant to the QEP.

N/A

Throughout the year.

Examines the relationship between participation in experiential learning and students� overall academic performance.

• Official student records. • Participation records provided

by the Director of the Experiential Learning Program.

December, May, and August of each year. December, May, and August of each year.

Monitors the impact of experiential learning on institutional reputation.

• Publications such as US News

& World Report. • Press releases in newspapers,

magazines, and other publications.

June through September of each year. Throughout the year.

Assesses impact of the Experiential Learning Program on the professional success of graduates.

• Alumni survey developed by

the Office of Institutional Research & Assessment.

June through August of each year.

Director of Institutional Research & Assessment

Assesses student satisfaction with collaborative inquiry experiences.

• Satisfaction survey developed

by the Office of Institutional Research & Assessment.

January of each year.

Director of the Experiential Learning Program

Assesses all operational aspects of the Experiential Learning Program.

• Annual assessment of Resource

Needs. • Evaluations of program

coordinators and support staff. • Informal feedback from staff

meetings. • Annual assessment of faculty

sentiments.

December of each year. December, May, and August of each year.

Monthly. April of each year.

~79~

Assessment Agent

Responsibilities

Sources of Data

Action Timeline

Director of the Experiential Learning Program (Cont.)

Monitors the institutional development of the Experiential Learning Program.

• The number of new

experiential learning proposals submitted by faculty.

• Students� rate of participation

in non-required experiential learning programs.

• Trends in expressed interest in

experiential learning by prospective students.

Throughout the year. December, May, and August of each year.

Throughout the year.

Assesses student satisfaction with civic engagement experiences.

• Satisfaction survey developed

by the Office of Institutional Research & Assessment.

December, May and August of each year.

Assesses community partner satisfaction with civic engagement experiences.

• Satisfaction survey developed

by the Office of Institutional Research & Assessment.

December, May, and August of each year.

Civic Engagement Coordinator

Assesses all operational aspects of the Civic Engagement Program.

• Annual assessment of resource

needs. • Number of inquiries into the

civic engagement program.

December of each year. December, May, and August of each year.

Assesses student satisfaction with study abroad experiences.

• Satisfaction survey developed

by the Office of Institutional Research & Assessment.

Throughout the year (dependent on when study abroad opportunities are offered).

Assesses faculty supervisors� judgments of the quality of study abroad experiences.

• Evaluation form developed by

the Office of Institutional Research & Assessment.

Throughout the year (dependent on when study abroad opportunities are offered).

Study Abroad Coordinator

Assesses all operational aspects of the Study Abroad Program.

• Annual assessment of resource

needs. • Number of inquiries into the

study abroad program. • Annual assessment of study

abroad sites.

December of each year. December, May, and August of each year. December of each year.

~80~

Assessment Agent

Responsibilities

Sources of Data

Action Timeline

Assesses student satisfaction with internship experiences.

• Satisfaction survey developed

by the Office of Institutional Research & Assessment.

December, May, and August of each year.

Collects internship site supervisors� evaluations of intern�s performance.

• Internship Evaluation Form.

December, May, and August of each year.

Internship Coordinator

Assesses all operational aspects of the Internship Program.

• Annual assessment of resource

needs. • Number of inquiries into the

internship program.

December of each year. December, May, and August of each year.

~81~

APPENDIX F

INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL MEASURES OF STUDENT LEARNING

Indicator of Learning

Internal Measures

External Measures

Behavioral Outcomes

Increased volunteerism rates after graduation. Annual Alumni Survey1 NSSE2 CIRP3

Increased involvement in activities and organizations on campus. Campus Life Survey1 NSSE

CIRP

Higher attendance rates for cultural events on campus. Campus Life Survey Official Registration Records

NSSE CIRP

Increased number of conferences, publications, or other forms of scholarly output.

Annual Collaborative Inquiry Survey1 Faculty Professional Development Reports -----

Ratings of students� leadership qualities. Civic Engagement Exit Survey (Faculty Form) 1 Internships Exit Survey (Faculty Form) 1 -----

Ratings of students� professional promise. Annual Collaborative Inquiry Survey (Faculty Form) 1 -----

Attitudinal Outcomes

Attitudes reflecting the importance of civic responsibility.

Civic Engagement Exit Survey (Student Form) HPU Student Satisfaction Survey1

Writing Assessment Portfolio

NSSE CIRP

Attitudes reflecting an awareness of and appreciation for matters of global relevance.

Study Abroad Exit Survey (Student Form) 1 HPU Student Satisfaction Survey Writing Assessment Portfolio

NSSE CIRP

Attitudes reflecting campus engagement. HPU Student Satisfaction Survey NSSE CIRP

Greater sense of professional or vocational interests. Annual Collaborative Inquiry Survey (Student Form) 1 SVIB4

Academic Outcomes

High academic performance in relevant coursework. Course grade MAPP MFAT

Enhanced reading, writing, and critical thinking skills. Writing Assessment Portfolio MAPP

Enhanced presentation skills. HPU Presentation Evaluation Rubric -----

1 Measure developed by the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment. 2 National Survey of Student Engagement. 3 Cooperative Institutional Research Program Annual Freshman Survey. 4 Strong Vocational Interest Blank.

~82~

APPENDIX G

QEP IMPLEMENTATION CALENDAR

ACADEMIC YEAR 2005 - 2006 August September October

! QEP update at faculty seminars.

! Explore civic engagement course options.

! Meet with Registrar to discuss scheduling implications of the QEP.

! Send e-mail updates on QEP development to students and staff.

! Submit new course proposal to Educational Policies Committee for President�s Seminar/Freshman Year Civic Engagement Program.

! Assemble initial roster of community contacts for Freshman Year Civic Engagement Program.

! Create advisory committees for the Civic Engagement, Study Abroad, Internship, and Collaborative Inquiry Programs.

! Update meetings with advisory committees.

! Host QEP reception for community partners.

! Develop initial menu of civic engagement experiences for Freshman Year Civic Engagement Program.

! Send e-mail updates on QEP development to faculty, students, and staff.

! Administer the Social and Political Engagement Survey.

! Administer the CIRP.

! Revise writing assessment prompts so that they better reflect QEP themes.

! Administer Academic Profile.

! Assess student writing using new prompts.

! Develop Alumni Survey.

! Conduct needs assessment with new community contacts.

November December January

! Follow up letters to community partners.

! Initial meeting with the Department of Religion and Philosophy to discuss Sophomore Year Civic Engagement Program.

! Apply for grants.

! Follow-up meeting with the Department of Religion and Philosophy.

! Submit review draft of QEP to Reaffirmation Leadership Team.

! Send e-mail updates on QEP development to faculty, students, and staff.

! Update meetings with advisory committees.

! Finalize syllabus for President�s Seminar/Freshman Year Civic Engagement Program (EXP 100-101)

! Submit complete draft of QEP for faculty review.

! Name Director of Experiential Learning Program.

! Set up cooperative contracts with community partners.

! Develop Student Satisfaction Surveys.

! Design assessment plans for QEP and student learning outcomes.

! Administer Student Satisfaction Surveys.

! Administer Academic Profile.

~83~

ACADEMIC YEAR 2005 � 2006 (Cont.)

February March April

! QEP Leadership Team meets with Chair of the On-Site Reaffirmation Committee.

! Submit QEP to On-Site Reaffirmation Committee.

! Send e-mail updates on QEP development to faculty, students, and staff.

! Write mission statement for Civic Engagement Program.

! SACS On-Site Committee visit.

! Update meetings with advisory committees.

! Assemble second roster of community contacts for Freshman Year Civic Engagement Program.

! Set up cooperative contracts with community partners.

! Add EXP 100-101 to University Catalog and all academic forms and publications.

! Host QEP reception for new community partners.

! Set up cooperative contracts with new community partners.

! The Civic Engagement Advisory Committee and the Department Religion and Philosophy discuss implementation of the Sophomore Year Civic Engagement program.

! Finalize assessment plans for QEP and student learning outcomes.

! Assess student writing.

! Develop course evaluation form for President�s Seminar.

! Conduct needs assessment with new community partners.

May June July

! Finalize Freshman Year Civic Engagement Schedule.

! Design fall publicity campaign for Freshman Year Civic Engagement Program.

! Create QEP Website.

! Outside expert leads training workshop on integrating civic engagement with existing ethics courses.

! Set up cooperative contracts with new community partners.

! Finalize roster of faculty and student mentors for civic engagement.

! QEP Leadership Team annual meeting.

! Host QEP reception for new community partners.

! Set up cooperative contracts with new community partners.

! Training sessions for faculty and student mentors.

! Apply for grants.

! Compile database of available baseline data for 2005-2006 academic year.

! Administer Alumni Survey.

! Conduct needs assessment with new community partners.

! Administer Alumni Survey.

~84~

ACADEMIC YEAR 2006 - 2007 August September October

! QEP update at faculty seminars.

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Freshman Year Civic Engagement Program Kick-off Event.

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Faculty and student workshops.

! Civic Engagement Advisory Committee and Department of Religion and Philosophy design ethics courses with civic engagement component.

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Begin search for Coordinator of Civic Engagement Program.

! Host QEP reception for new community partners.

! Set up cooperative contracts with new community partners.

! Administer the Social and Political Engagement Survey.

! Administer the CIRP.

! Administer Alumni Survey.

! Administer Measure of Academic Proficiency and Progress.

! Assemble comparative institutional data.

! Assess student writing.

! Conduct needs assessment with new community partners.

November December January

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Send QEP newsletter to faculty, students, and staff.

! Apply for grants.

! Experiential Learning Program budget meeting.

! Civic Engagement Advisory Committee submits to the Vice President for Academic Affairs new ethics course proposals for Sophomore Year Civic Engagement Program.

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Civic Engagement Advisory Committee submits new ethics course proposals to Educational Policies Committee for Sophomore Year Civic Engagement Program.

! Administer QEP Faculty Feedback Survey.

! Evaluations of Experiential Learning Program personnel due.

! Student evaluations for President�s Seminar.

! Assess learning outcomes relevant to study abroad, internship, and collaborative inquiry (baseline data).

! Director of Experiential Learning Program submits 1st semester Experiential Learning Master Data Set to Director of Institutional Research.

! Administer Student Satisfaction Surveys.

! Administer Measure of Academic Proficiency and Progress.

! Director of Experiential Learning Program submits Experiential Learning Program Needs Assessment Report (with budget) to the Vice President for Academic Affairs.

~85~

ACADEMIC YEAR 2006 � 2007 (Cont.)

February March April

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Civic Engagement Advisory Committee develops model for civic engagement courses.

! Faculty and student workshops.

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Send QEP newsletter to faculty, students, and staff.

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Hire Coordinator of Civic Engagement Program.

! Host QEP reception for new community partners.

! Set up cooperative contracts with new community partners.

! Review syllabus for President�s Seminar.

! Develop civic engagement course evaluation form.

! Assess student writing.

! Administer National Survey of Student Engagement.

! Student evaluations for President�s Seminar.

! Administer QEP Faculty Feedback Survey.

! Conduct needs assessment with new community partners.

May June July

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Design fall publicity campaign for Sophomore Year Civic Engagement Program.

! Host QEP reception for new community contacts.

! Set up cooperative contracts with new community partners.

! Finalize roster of faculty and student mentors for civic engagement.

! QEP Leadership Team annual meeting.

! Pilot civic engagement ethics course.

! Update QEP website.

! Apply for grants.

! Training sessions for faculty and student mentors.

! Director of Experiential Learning Program submits 2nd semester Experiential Learning Master Data Set to Director of Institutional Research and Assessment.

! Assess learning outcomes relevant to study abroad, internship, and collaborative inquiry (baseline data).

! Director of Institutional Research and Assessment submits Annual QEP Assessment Report and Report on Student Learning Outcomes to the Vice President for Academic Affairs.

! Administer Alumni Survey.

! Conduct needs assessment with new community partners.

! Administer Alumni Survey.

! Evaluate piloted civic engagement ethics course.

~86~

ACADEMIC YEAR 2007 - 2008 August September October

! QEP update at faculty seminars.

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Sophomore Year Civic Engagement Program Kick-off Event.

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Faculty and student workshops.

! Study Abroad Advisory Committee creates or revises program development agenda, writes mission statement.

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! QEP Leadership Team meeting to discuss the Experiential Learning Scholars Program.

! Begin search for Coordinator of Study Abroad Program.

! Administer the Social and Political Engagement Survey.

! Administer the CIRP.

! Administer Alumni Survey.

! Assemble summer session data.

! Administer Measure of Academic Proficiency and Progress.

! Assemble comparative institutional data.

! Assess student writing.

November December January

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! QEP Leadership Team drafts initial proposal for the Experiential Learning Scholars Program.

! Send QEP newsletter to faculty, students, and staff.

! Apply for grants.

! Experiential Learning Program budget meeting.

! Deadline for faculty submission of civic engagement course proposals to Experiential Learning Executive Committee.

! Study Abroad Advisory Committee explores options for May and summer session study abroad opportunities.

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! QEP Leadership Team submits the Experiential Learning Scholars Program proposal to the Educational Policies Committee.

! Deadline for Experiential Learning Executive Committee to submit civic engagement course proposals to Educational Policies Committee.

! Administer QEP Faculty Feedback Survey.

! Evaluations of Experiential Learning Program personnel due.

! Student evaluations for President�s Seminar and ethics courses.

! Program Coordinators submit Unit Assessment Reports to Director of Experiential Learning.

! Director of Experiential Learning Program submits 1st semester Experiential Learning Master Data Set to Director of Institutional Research.

! Administer Student Satisfaction Surveys.

! Administer Measure of Academic Proficiency and Progress.

! Director of Experiential Learning Program submits Experiential Learning Program Needs Assessment Report (with budget) to the Vice President for Academic Affairs.

! Assess learning outcomes relevant to internship and collaborative inquiry (baseline data).

~87~

ACADEMIC YEAR 2007 � 2008 (Cont.)

February March April

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Study Abroad Advisory Committee finalizes plans for May and summer session study abroad opportunities.

! Faculty and student workshops.

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Add Experiential Learning Scholars Track to University Catalog and all academic forms and publications.

! Send QEP newsletter to faculty, students, and staff.

! Hire Coordinator of the Study Abroad Program and an administrative assistant for the Experiential Learning Program.

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Review syllabus for President�s Seminar and all ethics courses.

! Assess student writing.

! Student evaluations for President�s Seminar and ethics courses.

! Administer QEP Faculty Feedback Survey.

May June July

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Study Abroad Advisory Committee identifies new linkages for foreign language study abroad.

! Design fall publicity campaign for Study Abroad Program.

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Finalize roster of faculty and student mentors for civic engagement.

! QEP Leadership Team annual meeting.

! Secure dedicated office space for the Center for Experiential Learning.

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Update QEP website.

! Apply for grants.

! Training sessions for faculty and student mentors.

! Director of Experiential Learning Program submits 2nd semester Experiential Learning Master Data Set to Director of Institutional Research and Assessment.

! Assess learning outcomes relevant to internship and collaborative inquiry (baseline data).

! Director of Institutional Research and Assessment submits Annual QEP Assessment Report and Report on Student Learning Outcomes to the Vice President for Academic Affairs.

! Administer Alumni Survey.

! Outside reviewer evaluates progress of QEP.

! Administer Alumni Survey.

! Review and update list of community contacts.

~88~

ACADEMIC YEAR 2008 - 2009 August September October

! QEP update at faculty seminars.

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Study Abroad Kick-off Event.

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Internship and Collaborative Inquiry Advisory Committees create or revise program development agenda, write mission statements.

! Faculty and student workshops.

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Begin search for Coordinator of Internship Program.

! Study Abroad Advisory Committee explores options for new study abroad locations in China, Japan, and Australia.

! Administer the Social and Political Engagement Survey.

! Administer the CIRP.

! Administer Alumni Survey.

! Assemble summer session data.

! Administer Measure of Academic Proficiency and Progress.

! Assemble comparative institutional data.

! Assess student writing.

November December January

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Send QEP newsletter to faculty, students, and staff.

! Internships Advisory Committee refines application, evaluation, and communication processes for student internships.

! Apply for grants.

! Experiential Learning Program budget meeting.

! Deadline for faculty submission of civic engagement course proposals to Experiential Learning Executive Committee.

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Deadline for Experiential Learning Executive Committee to submit civic engagement course proposals to Educational Policies Committee.

! Administer QEP Faculty Feedback Survey.

! Evaluations of Experiential Learning Program personnel due.

! Program Coordinators submit Unit Assessment Reports to Director of Experiential Learning.

! Student evaluations for President�s Seminar and all other civic engagement courses.

! Director of Experiential Learning Program submits 1st semester Experiential Learning Master Data Set to Director of Institutional Research.

! Administer Student Satisfaction Surveys.

! Administer Measure of Academic Proficiency and Progress.

! Director of Experiential Learning Program submits Experiential Learning Program Needs Assessment Report (with budget) to the Vice President for Academic Affairs.

! Assess learning outcomes relevant to internship and collaborative inquiry (baseline data).

~89~

ACADEMIC YEAR 2008 � 2009 (Cont.)

February March April

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Faculty and student workshops.

! Study abroad open house.

! Collaborative Inquiry Advisory Committee outlines program funding plan.

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Send QEP newsletter to faculty, students, and staff.

! Internships Advisory Committee finalizes master list of internship sites.

! Hire Coordinator of Internship Program.

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Review syllabus for President�s Seminar and all civic engagement courses.

! Establish new study abroad sites in China, Japan, or Australia.

! Assess student writing.

! Administer National Survey of Student Engagement.

! Student evaluations for President�s Seminar and all other civic engagement courses.

! Administer QEP Faculty Feedback Survey.

May June July

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Design fall publicity campaign for Internship and Collaborative Inquiry Programs.

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Finalize roster of faculty and student mentors for civic engagement.

! QEP Leadership Team annual meeting.

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Update QEP website.

! Apply for grants.

! Training sessions for faculty and student mentors.

! Director of Experiential Learning Program submits 2nd semester Experiential Learning Master Data Set to Director of Institutional Research and Assessment.

! Assess learning outcomes relevant to internship and collaborative inquiry (baseline data).

! Director of Institutional Research and Assessment submits Annual QEP Assessment Report and Report on Student Learning Outcomes to the Vice President for Academic Affairs.

! Administer Alumni Survey.

! Administer Alumni Survey.

! Review and update list of community contacts.

~90~

ACADEMIC YEAR 2009 - 2010 August September October

! QEP update at faculty seminars.

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Internship and Collaborative Inquiry Kick-off Event.

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Faculty and student workshops.

! Collaborative Inquiry Brown Bag Colloquium.

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Study abroad and internship open houses.

! Collaborative Inquiry Brown Bag Colloquium.

! Administer the Social and Political Engagement Survey.

! Administer the CIRP.

! Administer Alumni Survey.

! Assemble summer session data.

! Administer Measure of Academic Proficiency and Progress.

! Assemble comparative institutional data.

! Assess student writing.

November December January

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Send QEP newsletter to faculty, students, and staff.

! Apply for grants.

! Collaborative Inquiry Brown Bag Colloquium.

! Experiential Learning Program budget meeting.

! Deadline for faculty submission of civic engagement course proposals to Experiential Learning Executive Committee.

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Deadline for Experiential Learning Executive Committee to submit civic engagement course proposals to Educational Policies Committee.

! Collaborative Inquiry Brown Bag Colloquium.

! Administer QEP Faculty Feedback Survey.

! Evaluations of Experiential Learning Program personnel due.

! Student evaluations for President�s Seminar and all other civic engagement courses.

! Program Coordinators submit Unit Assessment Reports to Director of Experiential Learning.

! Director of Experiential Learning Program submits 1st semester Experiential Learning Master Data Set to Director of Institutional Research and Assessment.

! Administer Student Satisfaction Surveys.

! Administer Measure of Academic Proficiency and Progress.

! Director of Experiential Learning Program submits Experiential Learning Program Needs Assessment Report (with budget) to the Vice President for Academic Affairs.

~91~

ACADEMIC YEAR 2009 � 2010 (Cont.)

February March April

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Faculty and student workshops.

! Study abroad and internship open houses.

! Collaborative Inquiry Brown Bag Colloquium.

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Send QEP newsletter to faculty, students, and staff.

! Collaborative Inquiry Brown Bag Colloquium.

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Review syllabus for President�s Seminar and all ethics courses.

! First Experiential Learning Symposium.

! Honors day recognition of Experiential Learning Scholars.

! Assess student writing.

! Student evaluations for President�s Seminar and all other civic engagement courses.

! Administer QEP Faculty Feedback Survey.

May June July

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Finalize roster of faculty and student mentors for civic engagement.

! QEP Leadership Team annual meeting.

! Experiential Learning Program staff/Advisory Committee meetings.

! Update QEP website.

! Apply for grants.

! Training sessions for faculty and student mentors.

! Director of Experiential Learning Program submits 2nd semester Experiential Learning Master Data Set to Director of Institutional Research and Assessment.

! Director of Institutional Research and Assessment submits Annual QEP Assessment Report and Report on Student Learning Outcomes to the Vice President for Academic Affairs.

! Administer Alumni Survey.

! Outside reviewer evaluates progress of QEP.

! Administer Alumni Survey.

! Review and update list of community contacts.