commissioning an academic reformation
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
“Commissioning” an Academic Reformation

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 41

“Commissioning” an Academic Reformation - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 600 Views
  • Uploaded on

“Commissioning” an Academic Reformation Shift Happens!!! William H. Graves Senior Vice President, Academic Strategy Professor Emeritus, UNC-Chapel Hill Navigating Your Interests Each “hot” menu item at the left links to a slide of that title.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about '“Commissioning” an Academic Reformation' - JasminFlorian


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
commissioning an academic reformation

“Commissioning” an Academic Reformation

Shift Happens!!!

William H. Graves

Senior Vice President, Academic Strategy

Professor Emeritus, UNC-Chapel Hill

slide2
Navigating Your Interests
  • Each “hot” menu item at the left links to a slide of that title.
  • Some slides have embedded hot links to slides not on the menu, but the menu is always present to link back to any titled “menu” slide. So create your agenda.
  • For example, a sample agenda might be:
    • Pressure to Reform
    • Perceived Challenge
    • Revenue / Cost Pressures
    • Performance Obligations
    • Requires IT – and More
    • Culture of Performance
    • Performance Improvement
    • Performance Barriers
    • $64,000 Question
pressure to reform
Pressure to ReformPressure to Reform
  • Jan. 2005: Performance taxonomy and pressures articulated in Graves’ SunGard Higher Education white paper and its abridged publication in the Nov./Dec. EDUCAUSE Review
  • Mar. 2005: Final Report of the National Commission on Accountability in Higher Education (SHEEO)*
    • “Improved accountability for better results is imperative, but how to improve accountability in higher education is not so obvious.”
    • Say what?
  • Sep. 2005: Secretary of Education creates (national) Commission on the Future of Higher Education**
    • What access to what programs with what outcomes at what price to students, their families, and the public coffers?
    • Sep. 2006: Final report cites the role of IT without elaboration.
    • “To meet the challenges of the 21st century, higher education must change from a system primarily based on reputation to one based on performance.”
    • How many make it into any top-10 prestige ranking?
    • The Commission is looking for 3-4 star quality ratings earned by measurably improving and accounting for performance.
sourcing as reform
Sourcing as ReformSourcing as Reform

2000s

In The World Is Flat,** Thomas Friedman described eight IT-enabled forces that are driving individual entrepreneurship and more intimate (inter-dependent) business relationships to “flatten” the world to the advantage of customers and employees (students and faculty members).

1990s

In Unleashing the Killer App,* Larry Downes and Chunka Mui argued compellingly that the Internet reduces the friction in externally sourcing products and services to create more nimble and competitive customer-first (student-centric) business models.

1930s

Economics Nobel Laureate Ronald Coase noted that organizations were getting large and bureaucratic due not just to economies of scale, but also to the friction in externally sourcing products and services. Bureaucracy was becoming a barrier to customer intimacy (student centricity) and nimbleness.

sourcing today
Sourcing Today*Sourcing Today
  • Eight “Globalization 3.0” (post-web) IT-powered forces are driving innovative sourcing collaborations among organizations to improve performance and competitiveness – productivity.

1. Outsourcing 2. Insourcing

3. Open sourcing 4. Offshoring

5. Supply chaining 6. In-forming

7. Work flowing 8. Steroiding – IT “doping”

  • New external sourcing models can contribute to the redesign of academic and service processes for the purpose of measurably improving and accounting for learning and service outcomes, service flexibility, per-student cost structures, net tuition, and institutional nimbleness.
  • Nonprofit higher ed must proactively “flatten” its academic and administrative service models or risk being flattened by policy makers and competitors.

* Thomas L. Friedman, The World Is Flat (New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, 2005, 2006)

perceived challenge
Perceived ChallengePerceived Challenge
  • Catch-22 Leadership Vise of Opposing Pressures
  • High
  • Performance
  • Headaches
    • Most institutions know that a high-performing IT organization is necessary to competitiveness – necessary in order to meet the expectations and needs of all constituencies and to support improvements in financial and student service processes.
    • Most institutions fail to recognize that a high-performing IT organization is notsufficient for achieving long-term systemic, measurable performance improvement (including improved learning at stabilized or reduced per-enrollment expense).

Revenue / Cost Pressures

Performance Obligations

revenue cost pressures
Revenue / Cost PressuresRevenue / Cost Pressures
  • Revenue sources are changing.
    • Shrinking percentage of public funding spent on higher ed
    • Shrinking percentage of higher ed revenues from public funds
    • Tuition inelasticity
    • Increasing reliance on endowments, grants, contracts, & market-driven program revenues
  • Costs & competition are increasing.
    • More & larger need-based grants – greater costs
    • Merit-based tuition discounting – greater costs
  • Catch 22!! Responding to these pressures can degrade institutional performance.
    • By capping enrollments!!
    • By increasing tuition!!
slide8
“Although most state budgets for 2006 have improved, the long-term prognosis for state finances is poor, according to an analysis by the National Center for Higher Education Management Systems (NCHEMS). The analysis projects state spending and revenues for eight years, from 2005 to 2013, and concludes that all states face potential budget deficits that will serve to limit the funding of higher education.”

… National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education

slide9
“In 2005, state and local support per student was at its 25-year low, down from the 25-year high that occurred just four years earlier. Support per student decreased dramatically from 2001 to 2004, when enrollment and inflation grew by 11.9 percent and 10.5 percent, but state and local support was essentially flat. In 2005 state and local support resumed growth, but the national increase of 3.6 percent was exceeded by the combination of enrollment and inflation increases.”
performance obligations
Performance Obligations

Stabilize /Reduce Per-Student Costs

Increase Academic Productivity

Stabilize / Reduce Net Tuition Rates

Performance Obligations

Learning Accountability

Program Accountability

Expense Accountability

Affordability of Access

Capacity for Access

Convenience of Access

slide11
Performance Obligation

Measure and openly report learning outcomes in ways that permit comparisons among peer institutions.

Performance Pressures

Many campuses need to improve retention and graduation rates.

Most do not measure student learning and benchmark the results with peer campuses, even in the high-enrollment courses taught in common at most campuses.

Policy makers want learning assessed via independent instruments, such as the Collegiate Learning Assessment.

Performance Indicators

Peer average rate vs. actual rate for key indicators such as retention, persistence, and graduation

Peer comparisons in the National Survey of Student Engagement, or the Community College Survey of Student Engagement

Peer benchmarking via the Collegiate Learning Assessment, MAPP, or other independent assessments of college-prep courses, college-level basic fluency and critical thinking skills, and some of the highest-enrollment introductory-level disciplinary & professional courses

Learning Accountability

slide12
Performance Obligation

Respond rapidly to economic development and workforce needs with appropriate degree and certificate programs.

Performance Pressures

Nonprofit higher education is not offering degree programs at the capacity required to meet local, state, and national needs for school teachers, health-care professionals, engineers, scientists, mathematicians, IT professionals, and other immediate and future workforce personnel.

Even public nonprofit higher education is failing the free-market test in which supply and demand tend toward equilibrium.

Performance Indicators

Percentage of annual student FTE increase directly attributable to programs created or redesigned to meet identified economic development or workforce needs – for teachers, nurses, biotech workers, etc.

Percentage of annual increase in non-credit enrollments directly attributable to programs created or redesigned to meet identified economic development or workforce needs

Percentage of all degrees awarded that are directly attributable to programs created or redesigned to meet identified economic development or workforce needs

Program Accountability

slide13
Performance Obligation

Reduce or stabilize per-student operating costs (to increase institutional productivity).

Performance Pressures

Per-student operating expenses have been increasing for years at an unsustainable average annual rate in the 4%-5% range.

While productivity has risen for years in almost all sectors of the economy, higher education’s productivity has decreased.

Performance Indicators

Per-enrollment direct instructional expenses

Average ratio of enrollments to instructional personnel FTEs for college-prep and college-level basic fluency courses and some of the highest-enrollment introductory courses

Percentage of change in the annual ratio of student FTEs to instructional personnel FTEs

Percentage of change in the annual ratio of student FTEs to administrative FTEs

Per-student-FTE central IT expense and IT personnel (full-time & part-time) expense

Similar unit expenses metrics in other lines of service

Expense Accountability

slide14
Performance Obligation

Reduce or stabilize inflationary increases in net tuition to keep college affordable to all qualified students.

Performance Issues

The average annual increase in net tuition has exceeded the Consumer Price Index for years, making it difficult for students in lower and middle income brackets to afford college.

Higher education tends to focus on revenues, not costs and, so, focuses on replacing public revenue shortfalls rather than increasing productivity in order to hold down per-student costs and, thus, net tuition increases.

Performance Indicators

Ratio of the annual rate of change in undergraduate tuition/fees to the annual Consumer Price Index

Ratio of per-student-FTE revenues from net tuition/fees to per-student-FTE direct operational expenses

Affordability of Access

slide15
Performance Obligation

Offer students more convenient, flexible options for completing a degree or certificate.

Performance Pressures

A growing number of “flex” students can’t or won’t participate in program and service offerings unless they maximize asynchronous online self-service instruction and services, while also providing real-time access to faculty and staff as needed..

Convenience is the primary reason that students, even residential students, expect “flex” programs and services.

Program accountability obligations often dictate flex programs and services.

Performance Indicators

Percentage of all degree programs which can be delivered asynchronously except for required clinical or lab work

Percentage of all non-credit programs which can be delivered asynchronously except for required clinical or lab work

Annual inventory of services accessible asynchronously via a web portal

Convenience of Access

slide16
Performance Obligation

Manage enrollment capacity in response to demand.

Performance Issues

Bottleneck courses

Bottleneck programs

Faculty capacity

Classroom capacity

There are more students in the national pipeline today than ever before.

With more “flex” students than ever entering the pipeline, enrollment pressures will continue, especially at public institutions in the larger metropolitan statistical areas.

Performance Indicators

Percentage of qualified applicants refused admission or admitted with delay

Annual percentage change in total credit hours and in total non-credit enrollments

Total first-term enrollments (credit & non-credit)

Ratio of total first-term credit hours to total first-term instructional personnel FTEs and of total first-term non-credit enrollments to total first-term instructional personnel FTEs

Ratio of total annual enrollments to total seating capacity of the classroom plant

Capacity for Access

defensive response
Defensive Response

Resist

accountability

Increase

tuition

Cap

enrollments

Defensive Response

Risk political capital & good will

Worst-Case Bind

Politically Incorrect

Compromise theaffordability of access

Compromise the capacity for access

proactive response
Proactive Response

QUALITY

Assess & improvelearning & services

COSTS

Increasestudent tofaculty ratio

FLEXIBILITY

Integrateself-service &as-needed help

Proactive Response

Strategy of Simultaneity

Improve accountability & performance

Strategy ofSimultaneity

Performance

Sweet Spot

Decrease credit-hour expense & increase capacity

Increase flexibility, capacity, & responsiveness

requires it and more
Requires IT – and MoreRequires IT – and More
  • IT has been necessary to increase productivity in the national economy – especially in the recent economic downturn.
  • “Introducing technology alone is never enough. The big spurts in productivity come when a new technology is combined with new ways of doing business.” … Friedman in The World Is Flat
  • So, IT is not sufficient to increase academic productivity.

To redesign or not to redesign services; that is the question.

Bolted

on

Technology

Bolted

on

Expenses

IT-RedesignedServiceProcesses

ImprovedInstitutionalPerformance

redesign strategies
Flex Program Strategy

Redesign selected programs & services to:

Reduce requirement for real-time interactions between students & the faculty/staff.

More asynchronous (time-shifted) instruction & online self-service

Less synchronous (real-time) instruction & services

Less contact-hour instruction & scheduled services

More as-needed expert help & services

Increase options for getting expert help, scheduling courses, & completing a degree.

Increase classroom & office capacity of the existing plant.

Reduce dependency on the semester model.

Common Course Strategy

Redesign common courses to:

Focus on the course, not its course sections.

Emphasize active learning & mastery feed-back testing.

Use common tests, as appropriate.

Document learning differences via assessment.

Realign faculty tasks without increasing faculty labor to:

Offload some functions to software & assistants.

Optimize faculty expertise & interventions with students.

Increase student/instructor ratio

Reduce per-student direct instructional expense.

Redesign Strategies

Redesign Strategies
a performance initiative
A Performance InitiativeA Performance Initiative
  • A public institution lacks the classroom and faculty capacity to keep pace with enrollment demand in its high-growth region. It is turning away students and capping enrollments in the highest-demand courses and programs. Analysis reveals a strong correlation between a worsening retention rate and failure in a small subset of its highest-demand courses.
  • It applies the common course redesign strategy and the flex program and service redesign strategy to:
    • Redesign the problematic, highest-demand courses for flex delivery while simultaneously improving their learning outcomes and reducing their per enrollment costs (by increasing the student / instructor ratio) – thereby improving the retention rate, the affordability of access, and convenience of access.
    • Redesign the highest-demand degree programs for flex delivery, thereby increasing overall “classroom” capacity without capital investment. Redesign other services for flex delivery to meet the convenience needs of flex students – indeed, of all students.
  • The net result is improved performance in all six performance areas – learning accountability, program accountability, expense accountability, affordability of access, convenience of access, and capacity for access
faculty role quality
Faculty Role: QualityFaculty Role: Quality

Learning as an Expedition

Instructor-Led Active Leaning

Organize

Course

Resources

textbooks

libraries

web site

lectures

syllabus

course pack

Design & Guide

Active & Collaborative

Learning

as-needed help

team projects

internships

field trips

learningware

discussionware

Guide

Self

Study

homework

readings

tests

labs

papers

theses

Faculty teams are responsible for course & program redesign

common courses
Common CoursesCommon Courses
  • Taught at almost all institutions & account for at least 40%-50% of all enrollments – the higher percentage at 2-year colleges, the lower at 4-year institutions.
  • 25-35 required or high-demand elective common courses in strategic programs such as:
    • College prep program – developmental, remedial
    • General education program (AA) – about 20-25 courses
    • Nursing, teacher education, business or other high-demand workforce or professional programs
  • Typically taught in multiple sections
  • Common exams are possible, even nationally normed common exams.
  • Account for at least 20%-25% of total institutional expenses, assuming direct instructional expenses to be about 50% of total expenses.
course redesign history
Course Redesign HistoryCourse Redesign History
  • Course redesign principles & models are based on the National Center for Academic Transformation’s Program in Course Redesign funded by the Pew Trusts.
    • 30 institutions, 10 per year over three years
    • Each institution redesigned one common course to improve learning outcomes while reducing per-enrollment instructional costs.
    • Direct instructional cost savings averaged 40%.
  • Systematic redesign of common courses averaging 40% savings in direct instructional expenses can result in total institutional expense reductions of 8%-10%.
  • The Center now has over 60 institutions, systems, and companies participating in its Redesign Alliance to share resources and effective practices for improving learning outcomes while simultaneously reducing per-student costs in common courses.
culture of performance
Culture of Performance

Performance improvement redesign projects

Assignsresponsibility & resources ↑ ↓ Accounts for performance results

Performance planning & management processes

Provides real-time analysis & insight ↑ ↓ Assigns scorecard metrics to goals

Performance scorecards & analytics

Enables trend analysis ↑ ↓ Adjusts the data models

Performance warehousing & data modeling

Performance-Focused Institutional Leadership

Enables systemic productivity increases ↑ ↓ Aligns measurable goals w/ IT priorities

High-Performing IT Organization & IT Services

Individualized self-service portal

Single login authentication

Systems integration

Unified public website

IT governance, planning, management & accountability

24 x 365 toll-free help desk & other support services

Networks, servers, security, recovery, ERP, CMS, other systems

Institutional Digital Utility Foundation

Culture of Performance

Bridging the Gap Requires Institutional Leadership & IT Leadership

slide28
Culture of Performance

Performance improvement redesign projects

Assignsresponsibility & resources ↑ ↓ Accounts for performance results

Performance planning & management processes

Provides real-time analysis & insight ↑ ↓ Assigns scorecard metrics to goals

Performance scorecards & analytics

Enables trend analysis ↑ ↓ Adjusts the data models

Performance warehousing & data modeling

Performance-Focused Institutional Leadership

  • Develop data models around key institutional metrics.
  • Simplify operational reporting to eliminate a flood of data reports that are difficult to develop and ultimately not of much use at the cabinet level
  • Extract select longitudinal data into an institutional data warehouse to provide a foundation for institutional analytics and scorecard reporting.
slide29
Culture of Performance

Performance improvement redesign projects

Assignsresponsibility & resources ↑ ↓ Accounts for performance results

Performance planning & management processes

Provides real-time analysis & insight ↑ ↓ Assigns scorecard metrics to goals

Performance scorecards & analytics

Enables trend analysis ↑ ↓ Adjusts the data models

Performance warehousing & data modeling

Performance-Focused Institutional Leadership

  • Provide flexible, ad-hoc (anytime) performance reporting and analysis, both at the operational and longitudinal (trend) levels.
  • Provide configurable, flexible scorecards for monitoring key performance indicators at the institutional and departmental levels.
  • Provide ad hoc analytics capabilities within the scorecard model to query the institutional data warehouse to identify trends and gain insights into the future.
slide30
Culture of Performance

Performance improvement redesign projects

Assignsresponsibility & resources ↑ ↓ Accounts for performance results

Performance planning & management processes

Provides real-time analysis & insight ↑ ↓ Assigns scorecard metrics to goals

Performance scorecards & analytics

Enables trend analysis ↑ ↓ Adjusts the data models

Performance warehousing & data modeling

Performance-Focused Institutional Leadership

  • Senior consultants with a command of academic culture, shared governance, and institutional research to help the institution:
    • Align mission goals with measurable objectives.
    • Translate measurable objectives to the technical team responsible for implementing and evolving scorecards and analytics.
    • Guide a “performance council” in creating open and evidence-driven institutional performance planning and management processes.
    • Align academic, financial, and student service redesign strategies with key performance indicators requiring improvement.
    • Plan and source IT-enabled redesign projects for improving priority performance indicators.
slide31
Culture of Performance

Performance improvement redesign projects

Assignsresponsibility & resources ↑ ↓ Accounts for performance results

Performance planning & management processes

Provides real-time analysis & insight ↑ ↓ Assigns scorecard metrics to goals

Performance scorecards & analytics

Enables trend analysis ↑ ↓ Adjusts the data models

Performance warehousing & data modeling

Performance-Focused Institutional Leadership

  • Redesign academic, financial, & student service processes for efficient website- and portal-integrated self-service; for example:
    • Redesign degree programs for “flex” delivery to targeted audiences (the convenience factor).
    • Redesign the cluster of high-enrollment “common” courses to improve learning and the per-credit direct cost of instruction.
  • Redesign enrollment management processes.
  • Outsource business and student service processes selectively to avoid new capital and payroll costs, while improving services at reasonable per-student expense
performance improvement
Performance ImprovementPerformance Improvement

Performance Improvement Redesign Projects

Monitor

Discover

FinalizeLife Cycle

InitializeLife Cycle

Portalize

Prioritize

Planning & Management Processes

Align Plan - goals & metrics - redesigns

- departments - sourcing

Adjust Assign

- metrics - responsibilities

- scorecards - resources

Performance Council

Scorecards

Analytics

Data WarehouseData Models

Scale

Redesign

Adjust

Pilot

Assess

performance barriers
Performance Barriers?Performance Barriers?
  • No performance infrastructure and reporting to identify and account for strategic performance initiatives/metrics.
  • Faculty leadership & executive leadership not collaboratively aligned to meet performance challenges
  • Limited experience with the service redesign strategies that can improve academic & business performance
  • Strategic plan fails to include performance metrics
  • Inability to focus the expense & use of IT on strategic initiatives
  • Too small to afford robust IT – need to share services
  • No economies of scale from being part of a system, district, consortium, or commercial external sourcing relationship
  • Inadequate or dysfunctional IT unit
    • Weak leadership or management
    • Weak service mentality
    • Staff recruiting & retention difficulties
    • Inadequate IT infrastructure and/or service coverage – 24 x 365
    • Escalating or unpredictable IT costs
  • Inadequate resources for IT projects
    • Selection, planning, & conversion for ERP, CMS, analytics, etc.
    • Services / systems integration – web & portal projects
64 000 question
$64,000 Question$64,000 Question

Is Yours a Culture of Performance?

A High Performance Institution?

Systemic Progress?

Random Acts of Progress?

Progress requires

  • order where there is change &
  • change where there is order.

… Alfred North Whitehead

slide35
Our partnership will allow us to scale support for e-learning while not losing focus on other aspects of our IT plan. … Dick Leurig, CIO
  • Goals
    • Put the “student at the center of the College’s universe.”
    • Focus on the quality and flexibility of instruction & other services.
    • Increase capacity to maintain double-digit growth for a decade.
  • Challenges
    • Prior academic technology efforts lacked scalable support
    • Increase support for academic technology and its applications without losing focus on other IT initiatives
  • Services fro SunGard Higher Education
    • Onsite (5 FTEs) & remote academic professionals for faculty support & academic redesign projects
    • 24x7 hosting, infrastructure, & tech support services for WebCT-based courses & programs
  • Outcomes
    • Comprehensive institution-wide faculty development services for instructional applications – on-ground & on-line
    • Redesign of the Fast Track Math program to increase remediation capacity & decrease the need for math remediation upon matriculation
slide36
The company helped us respond to market needs while generating new discretionary revenues. …. Russ Adkins, Associate VP
  • Goals
    • Seize immediate contract/grant opportunities to redesign selected for-credit & non-credit programs to meet workforce needs
    • Lay the service & financial foundation for institution-wide academic technology faculty development support.
  • Challenges
    • Academic technology efforts lacked reliable, scalable support.
    • Capitalizing institution-wide faculty development & rapid-response program redesign/development was impossible.
  • Services from SunGard Higher Education
    • Extensive academic technology planning services
    • Onsite academic support for market-driven program redesign projects
    • Onsite & remote academic support for institution-wide faculty development & academic IT applications
    • 24x7 hosting, infrastructure, & tech support services for WebCT
  • Outcomes
    • Online certification programs for local hospitals & IT corporation.
    • Modular online nursing program – three different degree tracks.
    • Market-driven enrollment “profits” to support institution-wide:
      • Faculty development services for using technology in instruction – on the ground & online
      • 24x7 hosting, infrastructure, and tech support services for WebCT
slide37
Our partnership significantly enhances our efforts to plan for & meet the high expectations of our faculty, staff, & students. …. Vincent Gorman, Special Asst. to the President
  • Goals
    • Stabilize IT costs & service reliability.
    • Improve stakeholder satisfaction with IT technology services.
    • Position the college to plan, implement, & support academic IT services & initiatives.
  • Challenges
    • Unstable IT expenses and support services
    • Minimal support for faculty use of technology in the curriculum.
    • No academic technology plan
  • Services from SunGard Higher Education
    • Bottom-line, institution-wide responsibility for onsite & on-call management/support of all technologies & their administrative & academic applications.
    • Onsite & remote academic support for institution-wide faculty development & academic IT applications
    • Turn-key IT certification program – curriculum, marketing, recruiting, delivery, & 24x7 support.
  • Outcomes
    • Cost-effective, stakeholder endorsed IT management & support..
    • Institution-wide academic support for faculty & their IT applications.
    • Market-driven “profits” from IT certification training program.
slide38
In 1997 we selected the company to be our managed services partner and we’ve never looked back as its professionals help us innovate & compete at the leading edge. …. Dr. Jon Larson, President
  • Goals
    • Stabilize IT expenses & improve IT services
    • Support faculty efforts to use technology in instruction.
    • Support strategic academic technology projects.
  • Challenges
    • Unstable IT costs & crisis-level dissatisfaction with IT services
    • Difficult to meet strategic academic needs
    • Neither capital funds nor time to increase enrollment capacity
  • Services from SunGard Higher Education
    • Extensive IT & academic technology planning services
    • Comprehensive IT management & support services, including course management system & academic application support
    • Onsite & remote academic support for academic redesign projects
  • Outcomes
    • IT cost savings & improved IT & academic technology services
    • Stakeholder satisfaction with all aspects of IT support
    • Comprehensive faculty development services for using technology in instruction – on-ground & on-line
    • Redesign of the nursing program to increase capacity while meeting community needs & avoiding new classroom costs
    • Redesign of two high-enrollment general education courses to lay the foundation for systemic improvements in learning outcomes & reductions in instructional costs across the gen ed curriculum
slide39
Our relationship with SunGard Higher Education is much more a partnership than a client/vendor relationship.

… Sandy Shugart, President

  • Goals
    • Improve access to and the quality of IT services.
    • Scale IT services to meet growth & stakeholder expectations.
    • Expand the reach of the IT certification program.
  • Challenges
    • Rapid growth in excess of 15%
    • Diversity of the student body
    • Limited financial resources & IT expertise
  • Services from SunGard Higher Education
    • Comprehensive IT management & support services, including WebCT support
    • Migrate from mainframe to Web-enabled infrastructure
    • Institution-wide faculty support
    • Turn-key adult learning center IT certification solution
    • Develop & support robust student learning support systems (Atlas)
  • Outcomes
    • Saved millions in IT expenses over a multi-year period
    • Fulfilling the promise of being a “learning college”
    • Recognized by National Alliance of Business – CC of 1999
    • Earning new “profits” from adult learning center IT certification
    • Improved student/faculty satisfaction
    • At least 54,000 learners now supported via Atlas learning support
slide40
Value is the relationship between what we pay and what we get. National Louis gets a ton of value through this relationship.

… Tony Chaitin, VP of Finance & Administration

  • Goals
    • Bring IT services to the web and contain their costs.
    • Use web services to serve NLU’s student base of adult learners more effectively and conveniently.
  • Challenges
    • Outdated IT infrastructure and weak IT staffing.
    • Lack of data for academic and business decisions.
    • Student and faculty expectations for better IT services.
  • Services from SunGard Higher Education (starting in 2001)
    • Network upgrade and conversion to Banner.
    • CIO & full-service IT staff
    • 24x7 support for WebCT – hosting, infrastructure, and support services – and an Online Learning Center for faculty training and instructional design support
  • Outcomes
    • IT cost savings in excess of $1.5M over the past 4 years
    • Increased stakeholder satisfaction
slide41
The relationship with SunGard Higher Education is a true partnership.… Robert Tyndall, Vice Chancellor for ITS
  • Goals
    • Reorganize & integrate disparate IT initiatives/resources.
    • Meet mandated enrollment increase via online learning.
  • Challenges
    • Little lead time to accommodate 4,000 more students
    • Less space per student than sister institutions
    • No significant capital funding increase on the horizon
  • Services from SunGard Higher Education
    • Comprehensive IT & academic assessment and planning
    • 24x7 WebCT hosting, infrastructure, & support services
    • Project management & training support for faculty-led training
  • Outcomes
    • New IT governance and change-management model
    • About 60 fully online core courses as options for residential students & many Web-enhanced courses
    • “Technology College” – online fluency certification
    • Blended model of online & on-ground courses and services has relieved space constraints
ad