building post-secondary collaboration via technology ruth mitchell pitts and gali beeri center for...
Post on 21-Dec-2015
217 views
TRANSCRIPT
Building Post-Secondary Collaboration via Technology
Ruth Mitchell Pitts and Gali Beeri
Center for European Studies
UNC-Chapel Hill
Project Overview
Pools faculty expertise in the European Union across 3 schools
Enrolls students on 3 campuses Triples course listings in specialized
EU topics Enhances student and faculty
collaboration at area colleges
Project rationale
Need for deep learning about region Limited course offerings existed Complementary expertise Natural function for National Resource
Center
Partners in UNC system schools
Center for European Studies (CH) Political Science departments:
Charlotte, NCSU, and Chapel Hill Technology services at 3 sites Professors
Walsh & Piazza (Charlotte)Stephen & Wagner (NCSU)Vachudova and Marks (Chapel Hill)
Technology and Support
16 NC system schools ‘information highway’ (NC-REN)
Normal use only bi-lateral Continuous presence (all on all) Behind camera support. VOIP used
for on-site tech staff communications
Consortium sets schedule Professors appointed adjunct at all
sites Course offered on all campuses (no
transfer credit) TA from Chapel Hill (only PhD
program) One central website hosting 3 syllabi
(site-specific language)
2004-6 schedule
Business and Politics in the EU (NCSU) Fall 2004
Transatlantic Relations and Security (Charlotte) Spring 2005
European Monetary Unification (Charlotte) Fall 2005
Undivided Europe (Chapel Hill) Spring 2006
Enrollment 72-75 per semester
Schedule 2006-2010
Europe as Identity: Histories, Spaces, and RelationsPeter Wagner, NC State, Fall 2006
Theories and Practices of European IntegrationGary Marks, UNC Chapel Hill, Spring 2007
Islam and the West: the EU PerspectiveJames Piazza, UNC Charlotte, Fall 2007
Assessing EU EnlargementMilada Vachudova, UNC Chapel Hill 2008
European Capitalism and Global InfluencesRoland Stephen, NC State 2009
Two or more courses earn certificate in EU Studies
Assessment
Departments asking for increases seat allocations
Faculty find student performance on a par with regular classes
Student evaluations of faculty meet or exceed departmental means
Department Mean
Section Mean
Question: The instructor usually…
3.95 4.64 2. Clarity and logic of communication
3.10 4.82 4. Encourages questions
4.10 4.82 5. Emphasizes critical thinking
3.76 4.18 6. Promotes active involvement
3.97 4.82 11. Availability
4.41 4.73 12. Well prepared
3.87 4.73 13. Overall excellent
3.97 4.73 14. Goals and objectives clearly specified
4.14 4.55 15. Requirements clearly specified
4.05 4.73 16. Assignments related to objectives
3.86 4.36 17. Methods facilitate learning
4.18 4.09 18. Well organized
3.96 4.09 19. Materials stimulated critical thinking
Semester 1: EU and Business
Department Mean
Section Mean
Question: The instructor usually…
4.09 4.45 2. Clarity and logic of communication
3.34 4.36 4. Encourages questions
4.23 3.95 5. Emphasizes critical thinking
3.96 3.82 6. Promotes active involvement
4.11 4.09 11. Availability
4.40 4.50 12. Well prepared
3.97 4.09 13. Overall excellent
4.18 4.05 14. Goals and objectives clearly specified
4.27 4.32 15. Requirements clearly specified
4.23 4.32 16. Assignments related to objectives
3.83 4.09 17. Methods facilitate learning
4.17 4.32 18. Well organized
3.99 3.91 19. Materials stimulated critical thinking
Semester 3: European Monetary Integration
Lessons Learned
Expectation of technical problems Reality was human problems Needed more classroom tools
outlines, video-lectures, TA visits, calling on students at all sites
Conclusion
Any series of classes can use this model
Useful for pooling expertise and deepening course offerings
Two-edged sword Added value for center’s instruction
program and post-secondary outreach program