CONTEXT ANALYSIS

 

ACADEMIC DIRECTORS’

FACULTY MANAGEMENT TRAINING COURSE:

"COUNSELING AND MENTORING FACULTY

IN THE WAKE OF

NEGATIVE STUDENT FEEDBACK"

 

 

PREFACE

 

Since April 2004, this writer has served as full-time collegiate faculty member and Academic Director for Legal Studies in the School of Undergraduate Studies at University of Maryland University College (“UMUC”).  Therefore, she is part of the Organization that is the subject of this Context Analysis for the Prototype Assignment.

 

Unless citations are otherwise noted, the information herein was obtained through observations and occurrences in the writer’s workplace and by conferring with Assistant Deans and fellow Academic Directors.  Information has been gathered over the course of the writer’s tenure with UMUC and not necessarily in anticipation of this Prototype Assignment.

 

 

Directors of Academic Programs (“Academic Directors”)

 

II. ORGANIZATION

 

University of Maryland University College (“UMUC”) - School of Undergraduate Studies (“SUS”)

 

A. Mission Statements

 

Overall

“The University of Maryland University College (UMUC) is the Open University of the state of Maryland and of the United States.  The University in its entirety has but one focus – the educational needs of the non-traditional student.”  http://www.umuc.edu/gen/mission.shtml

 

Human Resources Mission

“Human Resources is dedicated to serving as a strategic partner with UMUC's units to maximize the potential of our greatest asset - our employees. We embrace change and the opportunity it brings. We are focused on delivering quality, proactive services in the recruitment, retention, development and rewarding of our global workforce.”[1] http://intranet.umuc.edu/

 

Center for Teaching and Learning (“CTL”) Mission and Objectives

“The mission of the Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL) is to promote teaching excellence and enhance teaching effectiveness in order to maximize the quality of teaching and learning at University of Maryland University College (UMUC).

CTL's Primary Objectives Are To:

Create a positive environment for collegial and collaborative interaction on teaching-related issues for all UMUC faculty and administrators;

• Provide opportunities for faculty recognition and rewards;
• Promote student-centered pedagogy that results in consistently positive student learning outcomes;
• Foster the development of a multiskilled group of faculty members capable of teaching effectively in both real and virtual learning environments.”[2]  http://www.umuc.edu/distance/odell/ctla/about_ctla.html

B.  Current Staff

 

Academic disciplines in SUS are grouped into five (5) academic departments. Each academic department is headed by an Assistant Dean.  Each academic discipline is assigned an “Academic Director.”  The Academic Director is charged with, among other things, managing and mentoring faculty assigned to teach in the discipline.[3] 

 

 

III.  THE PROBLEM AND A PROPOSED SOLUTION

 

A.  Problem

 

New Academic Directors in the Organization have no formal training, specifically to prepare them to counsel and mentor faculty about negative feedback from students, such as comments in course evaluations and students’ informal complaints.[4]  The lack of training is exacerbated by the absence of formal UMUC policies/procedures for counseling faculty in these situations.   Furthermore, with the absence of formal training, experienced Academic Directors have no resources to draw upon when facing these same issues.

Current Context of Learning

Any training of Academic Directors is ad hoc and generally is delivered by Academic Directors who were trained by other Academic Directors.  The “trainers” have not necessarily had a “train the trainer” course and there is no work experience benchmark to qualify an Academic Director as a “trainer.”  Therefore, training can be somewhat diluted and inconsistent and may be delivered by inept trainers.  Furthermore, in the midst of ad hoc training, there is nothing in place to evaluate the content or quality of the training delivered to Academic Directors.[5]

 

B.  PROPOSED SOLUTION

 

The proposed solution is to offer to Academic Directors a Faculty Management Training (“FMT”) course, Counseling and Mentoring Faculty in the Wake of Negative Student Feedback.  Content should be housed in an online, asynchronous course on UMUC’s training server (see V.  Training Resources – B.  Infrastructure).   Different sections of the FMT course, with identical content, can be provided for different trainers and training sessions, as appropriate.  Placing course content online serves two purposes – it is a convenient forum for busy trainers and trainees and the course will provide on online repository for training materials. 

 

Obviously, counseling faculty is an “art” and not a “science” and situations can widely vary.  However, there are somewhat proven techniques and skills that should be offered as guidance for Academic Directors.  These techniques and skills are valuable food for thought that can facilitate Academic Directors’ development of their own “art” or “style” when addressing negative student feedback with faculty.  

 

Course Overview

The course would essentially be a three- or four-week hybrid[6], with the trainer and trainee working through the content online and working side-by-side on a daily basis discussing and working through issues.  Some issues will be those contained in the FMT course; others will be those that arise in the workplace.  FMT course content will serve as a guide for issues from both sources.  This writer envisions the evolution of what Karagiorgi & Symeou (2005) label as a “cognitive apprenticeship” that “aims primarily at teaching the processes that experts use to handle complex tasks.”  (p. 20) 

 

Instructional Context

It is difficult to predict the precise instructional context since the trainee will interact with the FMT course content and trainer via an asynchronous, online tool.   The trainee may access the course in his/her home; therefore, conditions regarding light, noise, and other physical attributes of the learning environment can widely vary.  The trainee may also access the FMT course in his/her UMUC office and will have in-person interactions with the trainer in the office.  Office conditions at UMUC can vary as to light, noise, etc.  However, every Academic Director’s office is equipped with a desktop computer with Internet access via high speed DSL, software necessary for access to and operation of UMUC’s online training server, and word processing software for composing FMT coursework offline.    

 

 

IV.  ANALYSIS OF TARGET AUDIENCE

 

A.  Education

 

All Academic Directors hold doctorate level degrees.  Therefore, all should have the ability to comprehend abstract information to develop the “art” of counseling faculty.

 

B.  Professional Experience

 

Professional experience can vary.  University-level teaching experience is required of Academic Directors and UMUC prefers that the experience be in an adult education context.  However, not all Academic Directors are required to have academic program or faculty management experience.  Therefore, new Academic Directors may not be equipped to deal with counseling faculty about negative student feedback.

 

C.  Technology Fluency

 

In order to participate in the FMT course, Academic Directors first should complete the training course for use of WebTycho, UMUC’s proprietary online academic course delivery system which is pretty much identical to the training server (see V. Training Resources – D. Infrastructure).  Familiarity with the course delivery system should improve trainees’ FMT course experience since there should be little to no technology learning curve.  Typically, Academic Directors receive WebTycho training before or as soon as they come on board with UMUC.  Therefore, they should be prepared for the FMT course.

 

 

V.  TRAINING RESOURCES

 

A.  People 

 

Currently, SUS has no staff member(s) formally assigned to training and/or professional development of Academic Directors. 

 

Role of the Assistant Deans

The Assistant Deans generally do not train the Academic Directors, as the Assistant Deans have no time in their busy schedules.  Most often, the Assistant Deans enlist more “experienced” directors in their academic unit to train a new Academic Director. 

 

Nonetheless, the Assistant Deans should play a key role with the FMT course.  UMUC should seek feedback from the Assistant Deans on the development and administration of the FMT course.  In addition, the Assistant Deans should have the final decision on recommending and appointing FMT course trainers in their respective academic units.

 

Suggested Trainers for the FMT Course 

UMUC should utilize experienced UMUC Academic Directors in SUS who are willing and adept trainers.  Trainees can greatly benefit from the trainers’ insight gained from their experience at UMUC.  Most important, only those Academic Directors truly interested in assuming the role of trainer should be enlisted.

 

UMUC should first seek out as potential trainers any Academic Directors who have experience delivering formalized training, either in or outside of UMUC.[7]  Also, UMUC should consider Academic Directors who have already taken a “train the trainer” course since they should have better orientation to the training function (as opposed to the teaching function).  For example, Quality Matters offers a “train the trainer” course.  http://qualitymatters.org  In addition, Assistant Deans should recommend as trainers any experienced Academic Directors[8] who have emerged as informal trainers or mentors, even if they do not have prior formal training experience or a “train the trainer” course under their belts. 

 

All potential FMT course trainers should be required to complete the train the trainer (“TTT”) course described below.  That will give the TTT facilitator the opportunity to evaluate all potential trainers.   

 

“Train the Trainer” (“TTT”) Course for Prospective FMT Course Trainers[9]

A formal UMUC “train the trainer” (“TTT”) course should be a prerequisite for all prospective FMT course trainers.  The TTT course should be delivered on UMUC’s online training server (see V. Training Resources – D. Infrastructure). 

 

The TTT course should accomplish the following for the prospective FMT course trainers:  (a) orient them to the training process and function in general; (b) familiarize them with the content and administration of the FMT course and evaluation strategies and instruments; (c) prepare them for the stage when knowledge and skills are transferred into the workplace  and mentoring evolves (see VI. Transfer Context); and (d) train them to utilize evaluation strategies for the “Transfer Context” stage.  All evaluation strategies and instruments should be developed by the TTT course facilitator.

 

Since SUS has the advantage of having UMUC’s Master of Distance Education (“MDE”) program “next door,” we should approach the MDE program to recommend developers and facilitators for the TTT course.  Logical recruits for the role of TTT facilitators should include faculty who teach OMDE 607 Instructional Design and Course Development in Distance Education and OMDE 621 Training at a Distance. 

 

Facilitators of the TTT course should evaluate the potential of prospective trainers’ for the FMT course.[10]  The TTT facilitators’ evaluations should be heavily weighted by the Assistant Deans when selecting trainers.

 

Staffing Trainers for the FMT Course

Each Assistant Dean should appoint at least one FMT course trainer for the academic unit.  At the discretion of the Assistant Dean, FMT course trainers can be relieved of regular, “on-load” discipline teaching duties in exchange for facilitating the FMT course(s).  Assistant Deans should determine a fair “exchange rate” for how much FMT work is equal to the teaching load.  When calculating the “exchange rate” pertaining to the FMT course effort, Assistant Deans may also consider Academic Directors’ participation in the TTT course.

 

B.  Infrastructure

 

UMUC has its proprietary online academic program course delivery system, WebTycho. https://tychousa3.umuc.edu/wtdocs/wthelp/html/aboutwt.html  In conjunction with WebTycho, UMUC has its proprietary online training server known as Nighthawk.  It is similar in appearance and function to WebTycho; therefore, WebTycho training prepares users for navigating Nighthawk.[11]  http://nighthawk.umuc.edu/wtdocs/wthelp/html/technology.html   Since the FMT course is a training course, UMUC will more than likely deliver it via Nighthawk.

 

C.  Funding

 

Total funding and expenditures needed for the FMT course should be relatively minimal.  There are costs associated with the FMT course development and revision(s), FMT course trainers, and the TTT course.

 

FMT Course Development and Revision(s)

There would be fixed and perhaps variable costs for the development of the FMT course.  Since the developer is a full-time UMUC employee, the fixed cost for the development would likely be according to the above mentioned “exchange” rate.  There may be variable costs related to the developer – again likely at the “exchange rate” – for revisions to the FMT course.

 

There may be costs for media or other enhancements and other general technological assistance.  Fixed costs would be incurred at the development stage; variable costs may be incurred in the event of course revision(s).  These media and technology resources should be procured from internal UMUC sources.  Such procurement may result in a minimal internal expenditure.  If there is no expenditure, the cost will be attributed to the dedication of internal resources to the project.  There would be no expenditure for use of Nighthawk since it is proprietary to UMUC; the only cost is use of the server space, or dedication of that resource to the project. 

 

FMT Course Trainers

If FMT course trainers are relieved of regular discipline teaching duties, then there would be the “exchange rate” cost for assigning another faculty member to cover the FMT course trainer’s teaching load.  If a trainer facilitates the FMT course as an “overload” beyond regular duties, there will be an expense that will likely be roughly equal to the above mentioned “exchange rate.”  These costs are variable since we cannot now determine how often a trainer will facilitate the FMT course.

 

TTT Course

We should also consider the costs related to the TTT course since it is necessary for the FMT course.  There will be a fixed cost for the development of the TTT course.  There may be other fixed costs for media or other enhancements and other technical assistance with the TTT course development.  However, as with the FMT course, costs can be minimized by utilizing internal UMUC resources.  Variable costs include payment to the TTT course facilitator(s) and to the developer(s) for any necessary revisions to the TTT course, evaluation instruments, etc.  There would be no expenditure for use of Nighthawk since it is proprietary to UMUC; the only cost is dedication of the server space. 

 

D.  Feedback

 

Feedback on the FMT course is an additional valuable training resource that should not be overlooked.  The feedback should be considered when developing and considering course revision(s).

 

Feedback should be actively gathered and noted at every opportunity.  At a minimum, UMUC should seek feedback on the FMT course from the following sources at the following times[12]:

 

Assistant Deans:

▪ at the FMT course development and revision stages;

▪ when evaluating FMT trainees’ work performance with regard to the knowledge and skills presented in the FMT course; and

▪ when situations arise in the workplace that may reveal a deficiency in or a necessary revision to the FMT course.

 

Prospective FMT Course Trainers:

▪ during the TTT course.

 

TTT Course Facilitators:

▪ during the TTT course.

 

FMT Course Trainers:

▪ when conducting the FMT course;

▪ during the “Transfer Context” stage (V. Transfer Context);

▪ when carrying out their regular Academic Director duties, they note a deficiency in or a necessary change to the FMT course; and

▪ at the FMT course revision stage.

 

▪ after the FMT course, preferably in the Transfer Context stage and periodically thereafter.

 

Academic Directors:

 ▪ at any time when situations arise that may require training or guidance beyond that offered in the FMT course.

 

 

VI.  TRANSFER CONTEXT:  ON-THE-JOB SUPPORT AND CONTINUED MENTORING

 

As discussed above, the TTT course will prepare FMT course trainers to assist trainees with transferring to the workplace the knowledge and skills gained in the FMT course.  The FMT course trainer and Assistant Dean should use the various evaluation strategies and instruments to ensure that the FMT course knowledge and skills have successfully transferred.  The Assistant Dean can use this information when evaluating the FMT trainees’ job performance, specifically with regard to the knowledge and skills that should be transferred to the workplace.

 

Sample “Transfer” Strategy

An example of a strategy to assist the trainee with the transfer follows.  The FMT course trainer can ask the trainee to report when a “real” student negative feedback issue arises.  The trainee should then articulate for the trainer a strategy, in stages, for evaluating the issue and addressing it with the faculty member, using the methods practiced in the FMT course.  The trainer can then provide feedback, ask the trainee to report back after each stage, and ask the trainee to consult with the trainer before moving on to the next stage.  As the trainer and the Assistant Dean become more confident with the trainee’s abilities to independently evaluate and handle the negative feedback issues, the trainer can begin to “let go.” 

 

The Mentoring Stage

Eventually, the trainer, after consulting with the Assistant Dean, should be able to “let go.”  However, it is important that the FMT course trainer remain available as a mentor for the trainee. 

 

Evaluating the Transfer of Knowledge and Skills from the FMT Course

All evaluations of the trainee should employ strategies and/or instruments developed by the TTT course facilitator. Specifically, these strategies and/or instruments should examine whether the trainee’s ability to transfer the knowledge appears to be a direct product of the FMT course.  Evaluation strategies and/or instruments will need to measure whether the trainee’s transfer progress is adequate.  Finally, the strategies and/or instruments should inform us whether the FMT course needs to be revised to better facilitate the transfer of knowledge and skills into the workplace.

 

References

 

Karagiorgi, Y. & L. Symeou (2005). Translating Constructivism into Instructional Design: Potential and Limitations. Educational Technology and Society. 8, 1. (pp. 17 - 27).

 

Quality Matters.  http://qualitymatters.org  Visited June 18, 2006.

 

University of Maryland University College – Center for Teaching and Learning.  http://www.umuc.edu/distance/odell/ctla/about_ctla.html  Visited June 18, 2006.

 

University of Maryland University College – Human Resources Intranet page.  http://intranet.umuc.edu/  Visited June 18, 2006.

 

University of Maryland University College – Mission Statement.  http://www.umuc.edu/gen/mission.shtml  Visited June 18, 2006.

 

University of Maryland University College – WebTycho, Help and Support, "Hardware and Software Infrastructure" page.  http://nighthawk.umuc.edu/wtdocs/wthelp/html/technology.html  Visited June 18, 2006.

 

University of Maryland University College – WebTycho.  WebTycho, Help and Support, "Introduction" page. https://tychousa3.umuc.edu/wtdocs/wthelp/html/aboutwt.html  Visited June 18, 2006.