Action Projects - Academic Quality Improvement Program

Understanding and Addressing the Mental Health Needs of our Students - November 2016 - November 2017. NMU identified student mental health as a priority for our community. The purpose of this Action Project was to improve our understanding of students’ mental health needs, determine how we can improve our ability to respond to our students’ needs in a targeted and focused manner, and identify long-term mental health solutions for our students. This Action Project was led by the Director of NMU Counseling and Consultation Services (CCS) with additional faculty from CCS and members of the President’s Task Force on Mental Health and Well-Being also participating.

Enhancing Employee Retention and Engagement - December 2016 - December 2017. This project addressed key programs and processes intended to support greater employee retention and engagement. The project focused on development and implementation of a new employee orientation and on-boarding process, an enhanced employee recognition and reward program, and revised performance evaluation processes for staff employees, all aligned with NMU’s strategic plan, mission, vision, and core values.

Evaluating the Success of Our Graduates from our Students' Perspectives - May 2017 - July 2018. NMU measures graduates’ success by monitoring indicators such as employment rates, admission rates to advanced degree programs, and participation rates in other programs after graduation. A review of these practices indicated a need to investigate more efficient and consistent processes to measure graduate success. NMU expanding upon current indicators to include students’ perspectives on specific competencies gained within their academic program(s). Data from alumni provide information for improvements to program learning outcomes and department and program mission statements. 

Integrating and Advancing Campus-wide Assessment of Student Learning - Completed May 2017. This Action Project addressed NMU’s need to further integrate and advance assessment of student learning practices and procedures in the general education program, program assessment of learning, co-curricular and student support areas of campus. While previous Action Projects resulted in clear assessment practices for specific areas of campus, there existed a need to align these practices with NMU’s new mission, vision, and Core Values. In addition, the Action Project committee reviewed and made recommendations regarding communication pathways between academic, co-curricular, and student support areas of campus aimed at increasing awareness of the value of assessing student learning.

Transparency Project: Communication, Collaboration, Process and Procedure in University-wide Decision-making - Completed December 2016. This Action Project addressed NMU’s senior level decision-making strategies with the intent to create an environment where stakeholders have easy access to information they need and the opportunity to be involved in efficient, collaborative university-wide decision-making (non-departmental, non-emergency). Key stakeholders included senior leadership, collective bargaining leadership and other campus leaders, the communications office, information technology, business intelligence, internal auditor, and university archives.

Developing a Student Inquiry and Complaint Tracking Process - Completed June 2016. NMU currently collects information regarding student complaints and inquiries. However, the process varies across campus. The purpose of this Action Project was to develop a campus‐wide process for accepting, logging and evaluating student complaint and inquiry data. The development of this process took place primarily within Business Intelligence and Information Services. Major gateways of student complaint and inquiry data such as Dean of Students, Financial Aid, Housing and Residence Life, and others participated in the development. NMU gathered data that will lead to a more accurate view of our students’ experiences.

Professional Development Strategies to Enhance the Student Learning Environment - Completed September 2015. Faculty join Northern Michigan University with expertise in their academic disciplines. NMU's current one-day orientation program provides only a cursory introduction to teaching and NMU organizational processes without strategically planned supplemental activities. An effective orientation program will more thoroughly address pedagogy, managing relationships with students, diversity awareness, and other important aspects of a university career. This project will identify specific career development needs of early-career faculty, develop strategies to address those needs, and plan and begin to deliver programs and resources. The project's goal is to ensure that faculty are well prepared to provide students with a high-quality learning environment. 

Developing Core Values and a Strategic Plan - Completed July 2015. Phase I of this Action Project will identify new, campus-wide "core values" for NMU. Phase II of the Action project will begin strategic planning processes built upon the established core value framework. The goal of the project is to successfully organize campus-wide involvement and overall support of a new NMU strategic plan and have the plan in place by July 2015.

Developing Leadership Training and Succession Planning - Completed April 2015. This Action Project intends to promote a climate that will help attract and retain employees with diverse leadership skills, while focusing on training and mentoring a pool of leaders who could be promoted from within. Through training of faculty, staff, and administrators, NMU can develop leadership skills used at all levels and better assist itself in facilitating effective succession planning.

Improving Student Success and Retention - Completed January 2015. The intent of this project is to review and evaluate institutional services and practices related to student retention currently in place across the institution in the context of 'best practices'. Following that review, develop recommendations and implement systemic that will improve student retention, success, and degree completion. 

Completed January 2014. To more readily provide information to parents by increasing the ease of allowing students to grant access to parents and/or others to their protected information (grades, class schedules, etc.), Northern Michigan University will implement software options in the student information system. Potential concerns will be identified, researched and resolved. Effectiveness measures will be considered and selected for a one year follow-up on satisfaction, usage and impact of that usage.

September 1, 2012 - January 31, 2014

Project Description

Project origination: Service Unit Outcomes Assessment Plans - Registrars Office

Project description: To more readily provide information to parents by increasing the ease of allowing students to grant access to parents and/or others to their protected information (grades, class schedules, etc.), Northern Michigan University will implement software options in the student information system. Potential concerns will be identified, researched and resolved. Effectiveness measures will be considered and selected for a one year follow-up on satisfaction, usage and impact of that usage.

Project rationale: Communicating information, as well as providing students with on-line tools and services, is important to us.  Over the past five to ten years, both students and parents have increasingly expressed the desire to have a way for parents to access some of their student’s information beyond just their bill.  Currently, there is no way for the University to share this important information with parents, as we are prevented from doing so directly by FERPA.  This project would provide a solution to parents who are requesting protected information from the University, as well as to students who are looking for an easy way to share information with their parents, by putting the control of that access in the hands of the student.

Project Scope:

The primary units affected by this Parent Portal project are the Registrar’s Office, Student Services Center and the Dean of Student’s Office due to parental inquiries.  In addition, Information Technology may need to be involved in the implementation of the software.  Other impacted units would be any staff interacting with students regarding their academic record, to include Orientation staff, Academic and Career Advisement Center, Financial Aid, and academic departments.

Documents

• Annual Update Report - Submitted June 2013
• Active webpage with descriptions and links to login

Completed January 2014. Northern Michigan University (NMU) intends to implement plans for improvement in its distance delivery support infrastructure, quality oversight, assessment, and faculty and student preparation. The project also addresses the need to more strategically plan support services for sustainable growth in distance-delivered programs.

Project Timeframe: December 2013 - January 2014

Northern Michigan University (NMU) intends to implement plans for improvement in its distance delivery support infrastructure, quality oversight, assessment and faculty and student preparation. This project also addresses the need to more strategically plan support services for sustainable growth in distance-delivered program.  

• Action Project Declaration

Task Force Members

Completed June 2014. The intent of this project is to review and reframe the general education learning outcomes, adopt or develop assessment methods and create a new process and procedure for conducting the assessment of those learning outcomes and using the results. This Action Project does not include review or revision of existing general education divisions.

Project timeframe:  December 1, 2012 - May 1, 2014

The intent of this project is to review and reframe the general education learning outcomes, adopt or develop assessment methods and create a new process and procedure for conducting the assessment of those learning outcomes and using the results. This Action Project does not include review or revision of existing general education divisions.

Project Documents

• Action Project Summary
• Action Project Charter
• Solicitation for Gen Ed Council - member nominations
• Request for ranking of Gen Ed learning outcomes - belief of importance
• Selected Gen Ed learning outcomes
• Request for current state of divisional coverage and assessment
• AQIP Review of Annual Update Report
• Action Project Final Report

Task Force Members

Completed 2012. This Action Project will develop processes for effective leadership-guided communication and recognized feedback mechanisms. It will review the communication role for all levels of leadership, develop clear expectations of leaders’ communication, and provide for its evaluation. Current methods of disseminating information on decisions and collecting feedback will be studied in order to build effective two-way communication channels into the university infrastructure.

September 1, 2011 - December 15, 2012

Project origination: AQIP feedback, campus discussions, AQIP Strategy Forum

Project description: This Action Project will develop processes for effective leadership-guided communication and recognized feedback mechanisms. It will review the communication role for all levels of leadership, develop clear expectations of leaders’ communication, and provide for its evaluation. Current methods of disseminating information on decisions and collecting feedback will be studied in order to build effective two-way communication channels into the university infrastructure.

Project rationale: The Systems Appraisal identified, and campus discussions affirmed, opportunities to develop and enhance campus communication. A need exists for better dissemination of information and feedback mechanisms to address two issues: perceived lack of decision transparency and realization that feedback does not always make its way up or down the leadership chain. Expectations for communication skills for leadership positions and communication must be clarified through campus-wide processes.

Project outcomes:

• Development of ongoing assessment of information dissemination through recognized campus communication channels and leadership communication roles.
• Creation of defined process for a feedback mechanism to funnel ideas and opinions up and down the leadership chain.
• Implemented leadership communication strategies that include, but are not limited to:
  • Inventory developed of needed communication traits of successful leaders
  • Communication expectations defined for each leadership position with updated job descriptions on file
  • Revised leader evaluation form(s) and procedures as it relates to communication that are pilot tested
  • Leadership communication skills training plan built and resources identified based upon a needs analysis
• Creation of a plan for Action Project assessment as a long-term measure of effectiveness that can be incorporated into the Systems Portfolio.  For example as a post-test, the initial procedure used to identify leaders’ current understanding of their communications role and perceived current state of feedback mechanisms could be replicated, comparing the results to the pre-project data. 
• Possible ancillary benefits are increased employee trust and morale, time-savings due to increasingly efficient communications, and enhancement of the selection of future leaders. 

AQIP project declaration statement

NMU Communications Audit Final Report - December 2011

AQIP Action Project Update Report - Reviewed - October 2012

AQIP Action Project Final Report - December 2012

Task Force Members (2010-11)

Completed 2012. Northern Michigan University will study current processes for academic program review conducted by its academic departments and colleges; review past university-wide procedures; identify and analyze best practices used internally and externally; and develop a cyclic academic program review process that can be applied campus-wide. The baseline process must be systematic and standardized. While accommodating program accreditation requirements and  reflecting best practices and standards for academic program review, it must strive to efficiently align curricula and program offerings with student’ and  employers’ needs.

Completed 2012. This project will undertake a thorough review of all forms of internship and work experience programs at NMU, enable campus-wide discussion of a draft set of common guidelines and procedures that monitor structured experiences and internships, consider legal issues, and collect and track data on these entities. A goal of this project would be to establish a strong on-going relationship between the Career Services office and department internship coordinators.

Description

October 2010 - April 2012

Project Description: As interest has grown amongst students and employers alike, awareness has grown that the processes associated with internships at NMU are sometimes inconsistent, weakly documented and administration is variable in attention to detail.  This project will undertake a thorough review of all forms of internship and work experience programs at NMU, enable campus-wide discussion of a draft set of common guidelines and procedures that monitor structured placements and internships, consider legal issues, and collect and track data on these entities. A goal of this project would be to establish a strong on-going relationship between the Career Services office and the department internship coordinators.

Documents

• Action Project Proposal   
• Action Project Charter
• AQIP Review of 2011 Annual Update
• AQIP Review of 2012 Annual Update
• Action Project Final Report

Presentations

• January 2012 - Deans, Department Heads and Directors
• March 2012 - Academic Cabinet
• April 2012 - Work Experience Directors
• April 2012 - Academic Department Heads

Completed 2011. Concludes a 2009 Action Project through the systems development, pilot testing, training and implementation phases of a new information system. The 2009 action project, "A Process for Managing NMU's Strategic, Operational and Resource Performance," developed a knowledge management information system infrastructure to support the NMU strategic plan, Road Map to 2015. For successful implementation, the development of a project of this magnitude and complexity must include thorough testing using live data to evaluate and modify the system.

• AQIP Action Project Proposal
• Annual Update Report
• AQIP Review of Annual Update Report
• AQIP Action Project Final Report - submitted Nov. 1, 2011
• Project formally closed, Nov. 1, 2011

Sample image of key performance indicators in the dashboard created by the project.

Completed 2010. This Action Project will articulate a process to evaluate if the Laptop program has increased the capacity and quality of the NMU student body, and it will use this process to assess if this recruitment goal has been reached at this time.

One of the “Framing Themes” of NMU’s Strategic Plan, the Road Map to 2015, is Information Technologies.  This theme suggests that our mobile device culture has placed NMU “…far ahead of and distinct from our competitors….increas(ing) both the capacity and the quality of NMU”.   This Action Project will articulate a process to evaluate if the mobile device program has increased the capacity and quality of the NMU student body, and it will use this process to assess if this recruitment goal has been reached at this time. 

Mobile Device Recruitment Action Project

Institution: Northern Michigan University
Category: 3-Understanding Students' and Other Stakeholders' Needs
Planned project kickoff date: 10-15-2009
Target project completion date: 05-31-2010

1.  Describe this Action Project's goal in 100 words or fewer.

Ten years ago, NMU initiated the Teaching, Learning and Communication (TLC) Initiative.  To achieve the goals of this initiative, the university implemented a mobile device program that provided NMU students and faculty with a mobile device. One of the “Framing Themes” of NMU’s Strategic Plan, the Road Map to 2015, is Information Technologies.  This theme suggests that our mobile culture has placed NMU “…far ahead of and distinct from our competitors….increas(ing) both the capacity and the quality of NMU”.  This Action Project will articulate a process to evaluate if the TLC program has increased the capacity and quality of the NMU student body, and it will use this process to assess if this goal has been reached at this time.


2.  Describe briefly your institution's reasons for taking on this Action Project now -- why the project and its goals are high among your current priorities.

The NMU TLC initiative has been in place for 10 years, and it has become a point of pride for NMU and a part of our culture.  When our AQIP Quality Checkup Visitors came to campus in March of 2009, they were very impressed with the program, but repeatedly asked if we had conducted an outcomes assessment of the initiative.  While we have conducted some student satisfaction measures of the success of the program, we have not developed an ongoing evaluation process to gauge its success, nor have we conducted a comprehensive program review of the impact of the program on student recruitment.  This project will both define that evaluation process and then use it to assess the impact of the TLC initiative on student recruitment at this time.


3.  List the organizational areas -- institutional departments, programs, divisions, or units -- most affected by or involved in this Action Project. 

The charge of this Action Project is to provide a means to assess if one goal of this initiative – to enhance student recruitment – has been met.  The primary organizational areas that will be involved in the project will include Institutional Research, Communications and Marketing, Admissions, the NMU Enrollment Management Network, the Office of the Associate Provost for Student Services and Enrollment, and our current student body.


4.  Name and describe briefly the key organizational process(es) that you expect this Action Project to change or improve.

This project will be instrumental in providing a process that will evaluate a major university initiative – the 10-year old Teaching, Learning and Communication program.  A “value added” benefit of the project will be the development of an evaluatory process that can be applied to other university initiatives.  Finally, the process will be implemented to assess the TLC program goal of student recruitment at its 10th anniversary.


5.  Explain the rationale for the length of time planned for this Action Project (from kickoff to target completion).

6.  Describe how you plan to monitor how successfully your efforts on this Action Project are progressing. 

As noted in our other 2009-10 AQIP Action projects, we will follow a practice that we have developed with Action Projects completed in previous years to monitor our success with the current project.  The committee will be charged with its task, and the weekly meetings of this group will be attended by the NMU AQIP Liaison.  Progress on the project will be presented on a bi-weekly basis to the President’s Council, and at every NMU Board of Trustees meeting.  Given the proposed brevity of this Action Project (6 months), no mid-year report will be filed for the project; instead, the final report will be presented to the NMU Provost for Academic Affairs and it will be posted at the NMU AQIP website by mid-April of 2010.


7.  Describe the overall "outcome" measures or indicators that will tell you whether this Action Project has been a success or failure in achieving its goals.

Process measures:

1. Process developed to evaluate the Teaching, Learning and Communication initiative on an on-going basis

Outcomes Measures:

1. Survey data to determine if student recruitment goal of TLC initiative has been realized
2. Action Project results presented to President’s Council at end of the 2009-10 academic year
3. Final project report posted at NMU AQIP Website

Committee Members

• AQIP 2010 Action Project Annual Update
• Review of AQIP 2010 Action Project Annual Update

Completed 2010. One goal of the TLC initiative was to create a learning environment that: a) embraced technology to enhance student access, b) promoted the development of independent learners, and c) encouraged greater student-faculty communication and collaboration.  This Action Project will articulate a process to evaluate this goal on an ongoing basis, and will use this process to assess progress towards the goal at this time.

Ten years ago, NMU initiated the Teaching, Learning and Communication (TLC) Initiative.  To achieve the goals of this initiative, the university implemented a mobile device program that provided NMU students and faculty with a standard set of hardware and software tools.  One goal of the TLC initiative was to create a learning environment that: a) embraced technology to enhance student access, b) promoted the development of independent learners, and c) encouraged greater student-faculty communication and collaboration.  This Action Project will articulate a process to evaluate this goal on an ongoing basis, and will use this process to assess progress towards the goal at this time. 

Institution: Northern Michigan University
Category: 1-Helping Students Learn
Planned project kickoff date: 10-15-2009
Target project completion date: 10-14-2010

1. Describe this Action Project's goal in 100 words or fewer.

Ten years ago, NMU initiated the Teaching, Learning and Communication (TLC) Initiative.  To achieve the goals of this initiative, the university implemented a mobile device program that provided NMU students and faculty with a standard set of hardware and software tools.  One goal of the TLC initiative was to create a learning environment that: a) embraced technology to enhance student access, b) promoted the development of independent learners, and c) encouraged greater student-faculty communication and collaboration.  This Action Project will articulate a process to evaluate this goal on an ongoing basis, and will use this process to assess progress towards the goal at this time.


2.  Describe briefly your institution's reasons for taking on this Action Project now -- why the project and its goals are high among your current priorities.

The NMU TLC initiative has been in place for 10 years, and it has become a point of pride for NMU and a part of our culture.  When our AQIP Quality Checkup Visitors came to campus in March of 2009, they were very impressed with the program, but repeatedly asked if we had conducted an outcomes assessment of the initiative.  While we have conducted some student satisfaction measures regarding the success of the program, we have not developed an ongoing evaluation process to gauge its success, nor have we conducted a comprehensive program review of the impact of the program on student learning.  This project will both define an evaluation process that can be used for the TLC initiative in the future and can be adapted for use in other university-wide initiatives, and it will also provide the university with data to determine if the outcomes of the program support this initial goal.


3.  List the organizational areas -- institutional departments, programs, divisions, or units -- most affected by or involved in this Action Project.

The charge of this Action Project is to develop a process that can be used to evaluate if the original goal of the initiative – to enhance student access, promote independent learners, and encourage faculty-student interactions – has been met.  We will then implement that process to evaluate goal achievement at this time.  Given this focus, the primary organizational areas that will be involved in this project are academic.  In particular, the project will involve members of the NMU Teaching and Learning Advisory Committee, Academic Department Heads and Faculty Members, and all NMU students.  In addition, staff members from two support units – Administrative Information Technology, and Academic Information Services – will be involved in this project.


4.  Name and describe briefly the key organizational process(es) that you expect this Action Project to change or improve.

This project will be instrumental in providing a process that will evaluate a major university initiative – the 10-year old Teaching, Learning and Communication program.  A “value added” benefit of the project will be the development of an evaluatory process that can be applied to other university initiatives.  Finally, the process will be implemented to assess the TLC program goal of helping students learn at its 10th anniversary.


5. Explain the rationale for the length of time planned for this Action Project (from kickoff to target completion).

6.  Describe how you plan to monitor how successfully your efforts on this Action Project are progressing.

As noted in our other 2009-10 AQIP Action projects, we will follow a practice that we have developed with Action Projects completed in previous years to monitor our success with the current project.  The committee will be charged with its task, and the meetings of this group will be attended by the NMU AQIP Liaison.  Progress on the project will be presented on a bi-weekly basis to the President’s Council, and at every NMU Board of Trustees meeting.  A mid-term report, and a final report, will be presented to the NMU Provost for Academic Affairs; these reports also will be posted at the NMU AQIP website.

Finally, the Action Project Review that we receive from AQIP after submitting our Annual Report also will be posted at the NMU AQIP website.


7.  Describe the overall "outcome" measures or indicators that will tell you whether this Action Project has been a success or failure in achieving its goals.

Process measures:

1. Process developed to evaluate the Teaching, Learning and Communication initiative on an on-going basis

Outcomes Measures:

1. Survey data to determine if original student learning goals of TLC initiative have been realized
2. Action Project results presented at Annual President’s Council Retreat
3. Mid-year and final project reports posted at NMU AQIP Website
4. Review of Annual Report from AQIP posted at NMU AQIP website

Committee Members

Laptop Learn Mid-Term Report

Action Project Committee Mid-Term Report
March 3, 2010

The membership roster of the Action Project Committee for Evaluating the Effectiveness of the Mobile Device Goal: Enhancing Student Learning (AP Committee) was confirmed in early December, 2009.   An organizational meeting was held December 15, 2009 to introduce members to each other, review the Action Project and Committee charge, discuss the action project timeline, and solicit members’ schedules for the Winter 2010 semester.

Much progress has been made thus far with respect to the objectives of the Action Project which are to “articulate a process to evaluate this goal on an ongoing basis” and “use this process to assess progress towards the goal at this time” (AQIP Action Project statement).  Process elements, which could be used by other committees to plan an assessment project, include:

• Analyze components of the goal to be assessed
• Clarify definitions within the goal to be assessed (original documents associated with the initiative, input from key personnel involved, and other resources were used to accomplish this task with respect to this particular action project)
• Identify and review possible data sources already in existence at NMU (e.g. National Study of Student Engagement (NSSE); institutional surveys)
• Identify and review possible data sources used elsewhere (e.g. NSSE, surveys published in journal articles, case studies, etc.)
• Select peer institutions for comparison (e.g. mobile device and non-mobile device)
• Develop or identify an appropriate survey instrument to gather additional data
• Secure permission to conduct the survey at NMU and peer institutions

Definitions became important in keeping the team focused on the original NMU Teaching, Learning, and Communication (TLC) Initiative goal specified in the Action Project.  Definitions were also critical in helping AP Committee members determine the most appropriate data resources and survey questions to use in assessing success of the goal.  Definitions for the three components of the TLC Initiative goal within this project are:

1. Student access – putting technology (hardware, software, network) in the hands of students
2. Independent learners – Gaining knowledge by your own efforts from a number of sources.
3. Student-faculty communication and collaboration – Exchange of information and knowledge between student and faculty in order to work towards a common goal of student learning.

For this particular Action Project, the peer institutions are Winona State University (MN), chosen as the mobile device peer, and Saginaw Valley State University (MI), selected as the non-mobile device peer.  Both peer universities have been contacted and are willing to assist with our assessment project.  A random sample of students at all three universities (NMU, Winona, and Saginaw Valley) will be asked to complete a questionnaire which AP Committee members designed to gather perceptions about computer use.  These questions seek to gather information primarily about independent learning and student-faculty communication.   Survey dates have been identified, based on the university calendars for all three institutions, which Committee members believe will most likely garner responses.  The survey instrument will be distributed using Qualtrics software with assistance from NMU’s Office of Institutional Research.

Assessment of student access to computing resources will be assessed using a combination of data from the student survey being conducted by the AP Committee, reports from NSSE surveys conducted previously and slated to be done again this year, and from data maintained by staff at NMU.  Local data that will provide evidence of student access to computing resources includes:

• hardware issued to students
• student participation in computer and network set-up and registration during computer distribution
• software applications available to students
• network development on campus and off campus (wired, wireless, Wi-Fi, Wi-Max)
• network traffic
• use of campus-wide systems such as the course management system

The next several weeks will be spent gathering data, after  which AP Committee members will review the evidence gathered to see if the outcomes of the TLC program support the initial goal to “create a learning environment that: a) embraced technology to enhance student access; b) promoted the development of independent learners; and c) encouraged greater student-faculty communication and collaboration.”

Respectfully submitted,

Darlene Walch
Chair – Action Project Committee
Evaluating the Effectiveness of the Mobile Device Goal: Enhancing Student Learning

• Committee Final Report
• AQIP 2010 Action Project Annual Update
• Review of AQIP 2010 Action Project Annual Update

Completed 2010. The project will include documenting the process for using the NMU Knowledge Management System (KMS) to monitor, analyze, and communicate university performance related to its strategic, operational and resource management efforts.

This project will develop and implement an information technology based Knowledge Management System (KMS) for Northern Michigan University to enable the administration, staff, and faculty to have ready access to NMU’s documented base of facts, sources of information, and analysis.  This system will permit users to do ad hoc analyses and reporting.  The system will be constructed by primarily using existing software tools and information systems that are currently supported by the university.  The project will include documenting the process for using KMS to monitor, analyze, and communicate university performance related to its strategic, operational and resource management efforts.

• Committee Members
  • Felicia Flack, Director Support/Consulting Services, AdIT; Action Project Leader
  • Cheryl Andrews, Senior Programmer, AdIT
  • Tony Bertucci, Senior Programmer, AdIT
  • Paul Duby, Institutional Research
  • Gavin Leach, Finance and Administration
  • Michael Roy, Special Projects Consultant
  • Terry Seethoff, College of Arts and Sciences
  • Cynthia Prosen, AQIP Liaison
• Committee Final Report
• AQIP 2010 Action Project Annual Update
• Review of AQIP 2010 Action Project Annual Update

Institution: Northern Michigan University
Category: 7-Measuring Effectiveness
Planned project kickoff date: 10-15-2009
Target project completion date: 10-14-2010

1.  Describe this Action Project's goal in 100 words or fewer.

This project will develop and implement an information technology based Knowledge Management System (KMS) for Northern Michigan University to enable the administration, staff, and faculty to have ready access to NMU’s documented base of facts, sources of information, and analysis.  This system will permit users to do ad hoc analyses and reporting.  The system will be constructed by primarily using existing software tools and information systems that are currently supported by the university.  The project will include documenting the process for using KMS to monitor, analyze, and communicate university performance related to its strategic, operational and resource management efforts.

2.  Describe briefly your institution's reasons for taking on this Action Project now -- why the project and its goals are high among your current priorities.

Northern Michigan University has vast amounts of information, but to be useful to those needing data to make decisions, this information should be organized more effectively and efficiently.  There are a variety of audiences who need access to this information, including a) the executive management team, b) deans and department heads, c) the NMU Board of Trustees, and d) members of the Educational Policy Committee.  NMU recently agreed to participate in the Voluntary System of Accountability (VSA) to provide readily accessible institutional data to our stakeholders.  The primary goal of this project is to leverage existing information to enhance planning and decision making.

3.  List the organizational areas -- institutional departments, programs, divisions, or units -- most affected by or involved in this Action Project.

The following areas will be involved in creating the Knowledge Management System:

• Support/Consulting Services, Administrative Information Technology
• Finance and Administration
• Institutional Research
• Academic Affairs

The following areas will be users of the Knowledge Management System:

• Executive Management Team (President, Vice President for Finance and Administration, Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs)
• NMU Board of Trustees
• College Deans
• Academic Department Heads
• Educational Policy Committee members
• Bargaining Councils

4.  Name and describe briefly the key organizational process(es) that you expect this Action Project to change or improve.

1. Strategic Planning.  The information that this project will organize and automatize will assist university leadership to set the direction of the university, foster alignment between our departments, and help us communicate our priorities to our stakeholders.  The project will help NMU reach the goals set in an 2008-09 AQIP Action Project, in which we determined specific benchmarks for the NMU Strategic Plan, the Road Map to 2015. 
2. Financial Management.  This project will assist NMU to effectively manage its student, financial, and personnel resources. 
3. Operational Directions.  Using the data that this project will create and structure, this project will help NMU execute its goals and objectives. 

5.  Explain the rationale for the length of time planned for this Action Project (from kickoff to target completion).

The following time line has been established for this project:

• October - December:  Inventory existing performance information from internal and external sources, and review how it is maintained (measures, reports, data bases)
• Early January:  Agree upon a conceptual framework
• Late January:  Design the appearance of the KMS, including
  - Portfolio formats
  - Portfolio organization - Function
  - Portfolio organization - Perspectives/Conceptual Framework
  - Access
• Late January:  Identify software tools to be used to support KMS, including
  - Banner
  - Oracle
  - Cognos
  - iDashboards
  - Corda
• Late January:  Map measures to identify relationship and where they should be included in portfolios
• Mid February:  Define process for monitoring, analyzing and communicating performance
• March: Finalize KMS design and performance management process
• Late May:  Develop and implement measures, portfolios, and website for KMS
• June-August: Let users "debug" system, suggest improvements/changes
• September:  Write AQIP Final Report

6.  Describe how you plan to monitor how successfully your efforts on this Action Project are progressing.

As noted in the response to Question 5, we have derived a timetable for completion of this project.  In addition to evalauting if appropriate success has been made with respect to this time table, a mid-term report and a final report will be presented to the Vice President for Academic Affairs, the Vice President for Finance and Administration, and the NMU President; these reports will be posted at the NMU AQIP website.  Finally, the Action Project Review that we receive from AQIP after submitting our Annual Report also will be posted at the NMU AQIP website.

7.  Describe the overall "outcome" measures or indicators that will tell you whether this Action Project has been a success or failure in achieving its goals.

One outcome measure for this project will be the documentation of the process that the KMS will use to monitor, analyze, and communicate university performance with respect to strategic, operational, and resource management efforts.

A second outcome measure will be the extent to which performance management in enhanced within each of the three domains targeted by the project:

• Strategic planning: are data managed by the project used to set direction, foster alignment, and communicate priorities?
• Operations: are we reaching our goals and objectives by creating stakeholder value within our core processes?
• Financial/resource management: does the KMS provide insight into what resources we have and how to best use them by monitoring and reporting on the budget?

A final outcome measure will be provided by stakeholder feedback regarding their ability to effectively use the KMS to accomplish their strategic goals.

Completed 2009. The goal of this project is to review and revise the means by which departments use the data they collect and devise a mechanism by which these reports and plans are reviewed so that we can “close the loop” of the quality improvement cycle of “plan, do, check and act”.

The goal of this project is to review and revise the means by which departments use the data they collect and devise a mechanism by which these reports and plans are reviewed, so that we can “close the loop” of the quality improvement cycle of “plan, do, check and act”.

Assessment and accountability are increasingly important topics in higher education.  Universities are asking to demonstrate their accountability to a variety of internal and external stakeholders.  An external consultant will help us make progress towards this goal.  This Action Project will permit NMU to continue to perfect its current assessment processes in both academic and service departments across campus.

Institution: Northern Michigan University

Planned project kickoff date: October 15, 2008

Target project completion date: October 14, 2009

Actual project completion date:

A. Give this Action Project a short title in 10 words or fewer.
Documenting and Benchmarking the NMU Outcomes Assessment Process

B. Describe this Action Project’s goal in 100 words or fewer.
One of NMU’s first Action Projects involved outcomes assessment.  An important result of that project was that all departments submit annual outcomes assessment reports.  The goal of the current project is to review and revise the means by which departments use the data they collect and include a mechanism for administrative review of internal and external benchmarks and progress towards meeting goals. An external consultant will visit our campus to help design an optimally effective assessment process, and return to campus after the project is underway to evaluate progress.  A scoring rubric developed last year will be assessed for its effectiveness, refined, and then applied to the current year’s reports.

C. Identify the single AQIP Category that this Action Project will most affect or impact.
Helping Students Learn.

D. Describe briefly your institution’s reasons for taking on this Action Project now — why the project and its goals are high among your current priorities.  Our Outcomes Assessment process has evolved since NMU became an AQIP institution.  All units across campus currently submit annual Outcomes Assessment reports from the previous year, and plans for the current year.  Last year, for the first time, all reports were evaluated using a Systems Appraisal-type scoring rubric (“SS”, “S”, “O”, or “OO”).  This process needs to be continually improved, to ensure that the activity of all units reflects the Sherwhart quality improvement cycle (plan, do, check, and act).  Our Systems Appraisal Feedback Report indicated that “Evidence presented regarding Criterion 3, Core Component A (“The organization’s goals for student learning outcomes are clearly stated for each educational program and make effective assessment possible”) is weak.  By identifying our level of assessment abilities with the assistance of an external expert, and then targeting those levels with coaching from the external expert, this Action Project will address that weakness, and strengthen our ability to assess student learning.  An internal review of our current outcomes assessment process suggests that service departments are more advanced in their process, followed by the academic departments.  Hence we will devote most of the energies of this Action Project to our academic departments, while using the scoring system developed last year to evaluate the Reports and Plans from the Service Departments.

E. List the organizational areas — institutional departments, programs, divisions, or units — most affected by or involved in this Action Project.
Academic departments and the membership of the Faculty Senate Liberal Studies committee will be particularly involved in this project, as they learn about best practices in the assessment of student learning.  We will extend all discussions to the Faculty Senate Liberal Studies Committee as well, since one of the elements of our Strategic Plan (Roadmap to 2015) is to revise our Liberal Studies program.  While we will begin by concentrating most of our activities on academic departments, the project will also involve Service Departments, as noted above, in which service departments will use the scoring system developed last year in an evaluation of the current year’s Feedback Reports and Plans, to determine if the assessment process is continually improving in those units. 

F. Name and describe briefly the key organizational process(es) that you expect this Action Project to change or improve.
This Action Project will impact one of our most important functions – the assessment of student learning.  Further, it will help us develop data that can be used in a dashboard-type scorecard, indicating our success in the assessment of student learning at levels ranging from the department to the college to the university. 

G. Explain the rationale for the length of time planned for this Action Project (from kickoff to target completion).
Oct: Outcomes Assessment Report and Plan document due from academic departments; these represent the first full-cycle Outcomes Assessment Reports and Plans since the scoring system was implemented last year.
Oct-Nov: Action Project Committee evaluates the scoring rubric to be applied to Service Department assessment plans and reports.
Nov-Dec: Service Department Heads use rubric to evaluate 2007-08 Outcomes Assessment Reports and Plans from Service Areas; evaluations distributed to Service Areas, and to centrally-located Outcomes Assessment Repository.
Oct-Dec: Student Learning Outcomes Assessment expert identified, invited to campus to help design an effective process to assess student learning.  That process will involve determining which data to collect, which outcomes measures to target, and what rubric to use to evaluate the reports.  Best practices in establishing learning outcomes at both the general, and the programmatic level, are discussed. 
Oct-Oct: NMU Liaison reports on project progress in monthly meetings with President’s Council, and at all NMU Board of Trustees meetings
Nov-Jan: Action Project Committee reviews the scoring rubric to be applied to Academic Department assessment plans and reports
Feb-Apr: Academic College Deans and Department Heads use scoring rubric to evaluate 2007-08 Outcomes Assessment Reports and Plans from Academic areas; evaluations distributed to Academic Departments, and to centrally-located Outcomes Assessment Repository.
Feb – Apr: External consultant returns to campus to review progress, determine which processes should be adjusted, and ensure that appropriate data are collected.
Apr: Academic Departments invited to re-consider 2007-08 Report and Plan with respect to the evaluation data provided.
Apr-May: Action Project Committee compares 2007-08 Outcomes Assessment Reports against 2006-07 Outcomes Assessment Reports and respective scored feedback to assess effectiveness and validity of the scoring rubric.
Feb-Apr: Centrally-located infrastructure developed to document processing of Report and Plan documents and display of progress
May-June: Outcomes Assessment Data displayed on website
May-June: Using advice from the Guest expert, available resources from Outcomes Assessment and related organizations, and in-house best practices, an repository of outcomes assessment measures and data collection methods and tools is built as a resource for academic disciplines
July: Service units complete new Report and Plan document
Aug – Sept: Feedback provided to Service units
Aug-Sept: External consultant validates data analysis and overall effectiveness of process developed to assess student learning.
Oct: Outcome Assessment Report and Plan document due from academic departments

H. Describe how you plan to monitor how successfully your efforts on this Action Project are progressing.
Progress towards this project will be monitored at multiple levels.  All unit leaders will be responsible for completing their Report and Plan documents in a timely fashion.  The Action Project Committee will regularly report its progress to the NMU AQIP Liaison, who will describe this progress to the President’s Council and the NMU Board of Trustees.  A final summary of the progress of the committees will be reported to the President’s Council.  The overall assessment progress will be displayed on a university website.

I. Describe the overall “outcome” measures or indicators that will tell you whether thisAction Project has been a success or failure in achieving its goals.Process Measure:

1. Action Project Committee assesses the scoring rubric to be applied to Service Department assessment plans and reports.
2.  Scoring rubric is used by Service Department Heads to score reports.
3.  Action Project Committee assesses the type of data to collect, the outcome measures to target, and the scoring rubric to be applied to Academic Department assessment plans and reports.
4.  Scoring rubric is used by Academic Department College Deans and Department Heads to score reports.
5.  Academic Departments reconsider 2007-08 Reports and Plans with respect to the evaluation data provided.
6.  Centrally-located infrastructure developed to document processing of Report and Plan documents and display of progress.
7.  Available resources from Outcomes Assessment, Guest Expert, and in-house best practices are used to build a repository of outcomes assessment measures and data collection methods and tools.

Outcomes Measures:

 1. Visit from Outcomes Assessment Expert, who describes current best practices in measuring student learning to university community.
2. Action Project Committee compares 2006-07 and 2007-08 scored feedback from both Service and Academic units.
3. Website displays progress towards evaluation of Outcomes Assessment.
4.  Repository of outcomes assessment measures and data collection methods and tools published on website.

J. Other information (e.g., publicity, sponsor or champion, external partners, etc.)
An external consultant will be identified and invited to campus to discuss best practices in the assessment of student learning.  CAMPUS (our on-campus electronic newsletter) and other campus publications will describe the activities of this Action Project.  Alumni will be informed of these changes via Horizons, the alumni magazine.  The NMU Board of Trustees, whose meetings are public and are attended by members of the local press, will be informed of project activities.  The Northwind, the student newspaper, will be contacted upon project completion.  Our NMU AQIP website (see:  http://www.nmu.edu/aqip/) will be regularly updated to reflect project progress.  Finally, the newly-developed website display our assessment progress, comparing current data to those from previous years.

K. Project Leader (suggested):
Sheila Burns, Ph.D.
Professor of Psychology and Department Head
sburns@nmu.edu
906.227.2935

• Documenting and Benchmarking the NMU Outcomes Assessment Process Action Project - Final Report
• Documenting and Benchmarking the NMU Outcomes Assessment Process Action Project - AQIP Review

Completed 2009. This Action Project presents an opportunity for all units to reflect upon the revised mission of NMU, and determine how their activities can best help the university achieve its mission.

The goal of this project is to align all unit mission statements with the revised university mission statement.

In September of 2008, the NMU Board of Trustees approved a revised mission statement for the university. Our revised mission statement emphasizes life-long learning, diversity, and local and global leadership.  This Action Project presents an opportunity for all units to reflect upon the revised mission of NMU, and determine how their activities can best help the university achieve its mission.

Aligning Unit Mission Statement Action Project

Institution: (Northern Michigan University)

Planned project kickoff date: October 15, 2008

Target project completion date: April 15, 2009

Actual project completion date:

A. Give this Action Project a short title in 10 words or fewer.
Aligning unit mission statements with a revised university mission statement.

B. Describe this Action Project’s goal in 100 words or fewer.
In September of 2008, the NMU Board of Trustees approved a revised mission statement for the university: “Northern Michigan University challenges its students and employees to think independently and critically, develop life long learning habits, acquire career skills, embrace diversity and become citizens and leaders in the regional and global community”.   The purpose of this Action Project is to align all unit mission statements with the revised university mission statement.  The alignment process will begin with higher levels, and progress to lower levels, to insure that lower levels reflect the mission of all higher units.

C. Identify the single AQIP Category that this Action Project will most affect or impact.
Leading and Communicating.

D. Describe briefly your institution’s reasons for taking on this Action Project now — why the project and its goals are high among your current priorities.  NMU underwent a rigorous process prior to the adoption of the revised university mission statement by our Board of Trustees.  In the summer of 2006, President Wong charged the members of the President’s Council with talking to their direct reports to solicit ideas for a revised mission statement.  During the President’s Council Annual Retreat that summer, the Council Members discussed the ideas and drafted a revised mission statement.  That draft was circulated to all levels of the university, and comments were solicited from all university employees.  Based on that input, a second revised mission statement was drafted and circulated to the university community; during his 2008 Convocation Address, Dr. Wong again asked for comments from the university community.  After consideration of all comments, a final revised mission statement was recommended by the President’s Council to Dr. Wong, and that statement was approved by our Board of Trustees.  This Action Project presents an opportunity for all units to reflect upon the revised mission of NMU, and how their activities can best help the university achieve its mission.  Our university has changed over time, beginning as a “Normal” teaching institution, later adopting a comprehensive university mission, a community college function, and most recently becoming a leader in using technology to assist student learning.  Our revised mission statement emphasizes life-long learning, diversity and local and global leadership. All units across campus need to carefully determine how their unit will contribute to each of these newly-defined functions.  Our Systems Appraisal Feedback Report indicated that “Evidence relating to Criterion 2, Core Component D (“All levels of planning align with the organization’s mission, thereby enhancing its capacity to fulfill that mission”) needs expansion.  NMU’s Portfolio did not depict or provide evidence of how all levels of the college planning align with or enhance the institution’s current mission statement or the proposed new mission statement”.  NMU last revised its mission statement in 2003; in the annual outcomes assessment process, 73% of academic departments did not achieve departmental and university mission statement congruence.  This Action Project will address these issues, by helping all units revise their missions and ensure that all units are moving towards common goals.

E. List the organizational areas — institutional departments, programs, divisions, or units — most affected by or involved in this Action Project.
This Action Project will affect all organizational units across campus.  All units in both academic departments and service areas have a mission statement, and all will need revision.  While coordination of these activities will rest within the Office of the Provost, direction will be provided by academic college and service department leaders.  It is expected that the revised university mission statement will be discussed by all university employees, and that all employees will contribute to revising their unit statements.  We will consult with students, alumni and other stakeholders when appropriate.

F. Name and describe briefly the key organizational process(es) that you expect this Action Project to change or improve.
This Action Project will impact university planning, by defining a process by which all units contribute to a recently articulated change.  It will also enhance communication throughout the university.  

G. Explain the rationale for the length of time planned for this Action Project (from kickoff to target completion).
Oct: College Deans and Division Directors charged with revising mission statements
Oct – Jan:   College and Division mission statements revised
Oct-Oct: NMU Liaison reports on project progress in monthly meetings with President’s Council, and at all NMU Board of Trustees meetings
Jan: College and Division mission statements presented to President’s Council
Feb: Department heads and unit directors charged with revising mission statements
Feb - June:  Dept and unit mission statements revised
July: Dept and unit mission statements presented to President’s CouncilAug -
Oct:  Revised mission statements collected centrally, posted to newly developed website

H. Describe how you plan to monitor how successfully your efforts on this Action Project are progressing.
Progress towards this project will be monitored at three levels:  Departmental, College and Division, and President’s Council.  Leaders of each of these units will be charged with ensuring that the process proceeds in a timely fashion.  Reporting dates will be announced in advance, and unit leaders will monitor the progress of those who report to them.  All progress will be regularly described on a monthly basis to the President’s Council, and at all Board of Trustee meetings.

I. Describe the overall “outcome” measures or indicators that will tell you whether thisAction Project has been a success or failure in achieving its goals.

Process Measure:
Facilitated discussions held for all units across campus, resulting in debate about how to revise unit mission statement in congruence with university mission statement.

Outcomes Measures: 
1. Presentation of revised College and Division mission statements
2.  Presentation of revised Department and Unit mission statements
3.  Developed website displays all mission statements
4.  Documentation of process used to align mission statements, permitting the process to be used for future similar projects.

J. Other information (e.g., publicity, sponsor or champion, external partners, etc.)
The newly-developed website will display the revised mission statements.  CAMPUS (our on-campus electronic newsletter) and other campus publications will describe the activities of this Action Project.  Alumni will be informed of these changes via Horizons, the alumni magazine.  The NMU Board of Trustees, whose meetings are public and are attended by members of the local press, will be informed of project activities.  The Northwind, the student newspaper, will be contacted upon project completion.  Our NMU AQIP website (see:  http://www.nmu.edu/aqip/) will be regularly updated to reflect project progress.  We do not anticipate seeking an external partner on this project. 

K. Project Leader (suggested):
Cynthia Prosen, Ph.D.
Interim Associate Provost
610 Cohodas Building
Northern Michigan University
Marquette, MI  49855
Phone:  906.227.2300
Email:  cprosen@nmu.edu

• Aligning Unit Mission Statement Action Project: AQIP Review
   
• Aligning Unit Mission Statement Action Plan - Final Report

Completed 2009. The goal of this project is to assign benchmark measurements to the goals and priorities described in the Road Map.

The goal of this project is to assign benchmark measurements to the goals and priorities described in the Road Map.

The Road Map to 2015 is our academic master plan.  It identifies four thematic areas – Innovation, Meaningful Lives, Leveraging Campus Attributes, and Community Engagement - that will guide our commitment to an active and dynamic curriculum, our work on and off campus, and our resolve to continue to improve the NMU experiences.  This Action Project will help us identify where we are now on our travels towards these objectives, and what roads we need to take to reach these goals.

Benchmarking the NMU Road Map to 2015 Action Project

Institution: Northern Michigan University

Planned project kickoff date: October 15, 2008

Target project completion date: October 14, 2009

Actual project completion date:

A. Give this Action Project a short title in 10 words or fewer.
Benchmarking the NMU Road Map to 2015

B. Describe this Action Project’s goal in 100 words or fewer.The Road Map to 2015, our academic and university strategic plan, was introduced in March 2008.  This Action Project will assign benchmark measurements to the goals and priorities described in the Road Map.  These internally and externally defined benchmarks will be used to evaluate progress towards achieving these new initiatives, ensuring that measurement is conducted, analyzed and used.  The project will involve input from all units across campus into our institution-wide strategic plan, and will help NMU refine its process for implementing university initiatives.

C. Identify the single AQIP Category that this Action Project will most affect or impact.
Planning Continuous Improvement.

D. Describe briefly your institution’s reasons for taking on this Action Project now — why the project and its goals are high among your current priorities.  The Road Map to 2015 is our academic master plan.  It identifies four thematic areas that will guide our commitment to an active and dynamic curriculum, our work on and off campus, and our resolve to continue to improve the NMU experience.  These themes are Innovation, Meaningful Lives, Leveraging Campus Attributes, and Community Engagement.  Within each thematic area, 3-4 specific goals are stated, and for each goal, multiple priorities are specified.  Implementation of the university-wide planning that NMU undertook to produce the Road Map will continue, by benchmarking that document.  Our Systems Appraisal Feedback Report suggested that our Systems Portfolio “…provided little or no evidence of external or internal benchmarks”, that our process for implementation of our new, large initiatives could be strengthened by “…building effectiveness measures into all new initiatives to ensure that measurement is conducted, analyzed and used for continuous improvement”.  This Action Project will address these comments, and will provide NMU with a system that will document our progress towards our goals and priorities.

E. List the organizational areas — institutional departments, programs, divisions, or units — most affected by or involved in this Action Project.
The Road Map was announced by the President’s Office, which will continue to be involved in developing the Road Map via this Action Project.  Sub-committees will be formed to address the 4 themes and the goals described in the Road Map.  All units on campus have already been asked to determine how they can contribute to the Road Map, and hence we expect this project to involve work from all NMU employees and many students.  However, areas that will be particularly involved will include Academic Departments, the Senate Liberal Studies Committee, the Office of Grants and Research, the Office of International Programs, the Center for Student Engagement, the NMU Foundation, the Honors Program, Academic Information Services, University Centers that focus on the Upper Peninsula, the Office of Finance and Administration, and the Facilities Department.

F. Name and describe briefly the key organizational process(es) that you expect this Action Project to change or improve.
Benchmarking the Road Map will define a process to implement university-wide initiatives.  It will help NMU ensure that adequate human resources, a financial commitment, and facilities necessary for implementation are identified.  Our strategic planning process will be improved as a function of this Action Project.

G. Explain the rationale for the length of time planned for this Action Project (from kickoff to target completion).
Oct-Nov: Sub-committees identified, charged with benchmarking goals and priorities stated in Road MapOct-Oct: NMU Liaison reports on project progress in monthly meetings with President’s Council, and at all NMU Board of Trustees meetingsNov-June: Committees consult with appropriate units; goals and priorities in Road Map sections are benchmarked.  Committees report on a monthly basis to AQIP Liaison on progressNov-April: NMU websites move to improved display of university initiative goals and priorities, benchmarks, and current data reflecting progressJuly: Benchmarking descriptions presented at President’s Council Annual RetreatJuly-Aug: Benchmarks refined based on input from President’s CouncilAug: President presents Benchmarks to campus during Convocation AddressAug-Oct: Initiation of data collection and display on website

H. Describe how you plan to monitor how successfully your efforts on this Action Project are progressing.
The NMU President will introduce the topic of Benchmarking at a university-wide forum.  The 4 sub-committees will be charged with their task, and will report on a monthly basis to the NMU Liaison.  Progress will be presented on a bi-weekly basis to the President’s Council, and at every NMU Board of Trustees meeting.  Summary data will be discussed during the President’s Council Annual Retreat, and the President will describe this summary to the entire campus community during the fall, 2009 Convocation Address.

I. Describe the overall “outcome” measures or indicators that will tell you whether thisAction Project has been a success or failure in achieving its goals.Process Measures:

1. Each committee discusses benchmarking, and determines how to apply benchmarking principles to appropriate Road Map theme
2.  Committees determine units with which to consult for each goal and priority, and begin discussion with those units of appropriate benchmarks
3.  Monthly progress reports reviewed by President’s Council
4.  Final reports from all sub-committees delivered at President’s Council Annual Retreat
5.  Summary of Action Project activity presented by President during convocation address

Outcomes Measures: 

1. Leading indicator benchmarks, and progress, displayed on NMU website
2. A process to implement university-wide initiatives will be documented and in place

J. Other information (e.g., publicity, sponsor or champion, external partners, etc.)
An external consultant will be identified and invited to campus to discuss best practices in benchmarking of multi-faceted projects, such as our Road Map.  CAMPUS (our on-campus electronic newsletter) and other campus publications will describe the activities of this Action Project.  Alumni will be informed of these changes via Horizons, the alumni magazine.  The NMU Board of Trustees, whose meetings are public and are attended by members of the local press, will be informed of project activities.  The Northwind, the student newspaper, will be contacted upon project completion.  Our NMU AQIP website (see:  http://www.nmu.edu/aqip/) will be regularly updated to reflect project progress.  Finally, a newly-developed “Road Map Progress” will display our successes, comparing current results to desired results

.K. Project Leader and contact person (First Name, Middle Initial, Last name, Title, Email, Telephone)
Terrance L. Seethoff, Ph.D.
Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences
2609 West Science Building
Northern Michigan University Marquette, MI  49855
Email:  tseethof@nmu.edu
Phone:  906.227.2700

• Benchmarking the NMU Road Map to 2015 Action Project - Final Report
   
• Benchmarking the NMU Road Map to 2015 Action Project: AQIP Review

Institution: Northern Michigan University
Planned project kickoff date: October 15, 2009
Target project completion date: October 14, 2010
Actual project completion date:

A. Give this Action Project a short title in 10 words or fewer. Developing a Process to Manage the Road Map: Innovation Theme

B. Describe this Action Project’s goal in 100 words or fewer. The 2008-09 Road Map Action Project committee was tasked with establishing benchmarks for the Road Map to 2015, the NMU strategic plan.  The Innovation Theme subcommittee derived 33 external and internal benchmarks relevant to that theme.  The goal of the current action project is to develop a process by which Road Map benchmarks are developed into objectives that define specific, measurable outcomes, with a timetable for achieving those outcomes.  The process that is developed will then be implemented with the Innovation Theme to determine its efficacy.

C. Identify the single AQIP Category that this Action Project will most affect or impact. Planning Continuous Improvement.

D. Describe briefly your institution’s reasons for taking on this Action Project now — why the project and its goals are high among your current priorities.  The Road Map to 2015 is our academic strategic plan.  It identifies four thematic areas that will guide our commitment to an active and dynamic curriculum, our work on and off campus, and our resolve to continue to improve the NMU experience.  Last year, one of our Action Projects involved determining benchmarks for each of the four Road Map themes.  Next, we must develop a process that will permit us to manage our strategic plan to reach the Road Map goals and priorities.  This project is of high priority for NMU because the Road Map defines current and future academic directions to which the university has committed itself

E. List the organizational areas — institutional departments, programs, divisions, or units — most affected by or involved in this Action Project. The Road Map to 2015 was announced by the President’s Office, which will continue to be involved in developing this strategic plan via this Action Project.   All units on campus have already been asked to determine how they can contribute to the Road Map, and hence we expect this project to involve work from many NMU employees.  Areas that are particularly involved with the Innovation Theme include the Office of International Programs, the Education Policy Committee, Institutional Research, Nursing and Clinical Sciences, Graduate Studies, Information Technology, the Scholarship Committee, Grants and Research, the CORE, Continuing Education/Workforce Development, and the NMU Foundation.

F. Name and describe briefly the key organizational process(es) that you expect this Action Project to change or improve.  This project will define an important process that can be used to implement subsequent university-wide initiatives.  It will help NMU ensure that adequate human resources, a financial commitment, and facilities necessary for implementation of new initiatives are identified.  Our strategic planning process will be improved as a function of this Action Project.

G. Explain the rationale for the length of time planned for this Action Project (from kickoff to target completion).  The emphasis of this project is on the development of a process to manage our strategic plan, and hence the majority of the Action Project will be concentrated on that development.  The timetable we will use for this project is reproduced below.

H. Describe how you plan to monitor how successfully your efforts on this Action Project are progressing.  As noted in our other 2009-10 AQIP Action projects, we will follow a practice that we have developed with Action Projects completed in previous years to monitor our success with this project.  The committee will be charged with its task, and the meetings of this group will be attended by the NMU AQIP Liaison.  Progress on all projects will be presented on a bi-weekly basis to the President’s Council, and at every NMU Board of Trustees meeting.  A mid-term report, and a final report, will be presented to the NMU Provost for Academic Affairs; these reports also will be posted at the NMU AQIP website.  Finally, the Action Project Review that we receive from AQIP after submitting our Annual Report also will be posted at the NMU AQIP website.

I. Describe the overall “outcome” measures or indicators that will tell you whether this Action Project has been a success or failure in achieving its goals.

Process measures:

1.  Process developed to identify stakeholders for relevant section of the strategic plan
2.  Process developed to evaluate current and new priorities for relevance to the strategic plan
3.  Process developed to identify which priorities to pursue per year
4.  Process developed to automate/collect data, and display collected data for public view

Outcomes Measures:

1.  Process implemented to turn Innovation Theme priorities into measurable outcomes  
     with appropriate timetables
2.  Action Project results presented at Annual President’s Council Retreat
3.  Mid-year and final project reports posted at NMU AQIP website
4.  Review of Annual Report from AQIP posted at NMU AQIP website

J. Other information (e.g., publicity, sponsor or champion, external partners, etc.)
CAMPUS (our on-campus electronic newsletter) and other university publications will describe the activities of this Action Project.  Alumni will be informed of these changes via Horizons, the alumni magazine.  The NMU Board of Trustees, whose meetings are public and are attended by members of the local press, will be informed of project activities.  The Northwind, the student newspaper, will be contacted upon project completion.  Finally, our NMU AQIP website (see:  http://www.nmu.edu/aqip/) will be regularly updated to reflect project progress. 

In spring 2008, Andrea Dupras, a junior mechanical engineering technology major from Marquette, was the Big Green Idea contest winner and took home an iPod. Her idea that NMU began using compostable, biodegradable trash bags was implemented in 2008-09.

Did you know?

• Since 1973 NMU has more than doubled in space but has been able to reduce its heating requirements by 25 percent.
• Since 1992, NMU has recycled more than 5,000 tons of paper, 1,000 tons of metal, 32 tons of fluorescent lamps. 
• NMU has reduced its water consumption by a third since 1973.
• In 2008 NMU began a battery recycling program.
• In 2008 NMU switched over entirely to green cleaning products.
  [view more about sustainability efforts at NMU]

Now we need your ideas on how to make Northern Michigan University greener. Prepare a one page summary that explains how your idea will make Northern greener. You may wish to illustrate your idea with an image (drawing, photo or video; saved for web viewing, 5MB limit). E-mail the one-page summary and any supporting material by Monday Feb. 1, 2010 for consideration by the Big Green Idea selection committee.

Competition Guidelines

The competition is restricted to students enrolled at Northern Michigan University, submissions from groups or individuals are welcomed. 

The winning submissions will be selected on the basis of:
1.) originality
2.) feasibility
3.) potential impact

Any supporting image (drawing, photo or video; saved for Web viewing, 5MB limit) submitted must be original and not infringe on any third-party rights.

E-mail summary and supporting image (5MB limit) to: BigGreenIdea/AQIP

Submission deadline: Monday Feb. 1, 2010.

Decisions of the selection committee are final. Winning submissions will become the property of NMU.

If you require any further information about the competition, please contact NMU Communications and Marketing at commark@nmu.edu.

Submissions will be judged on a 1(low)-10(high) scale based on:
1.) originality 1-10
2.) feasibility 1-10
3.) potential impact 1-10

Grading process:
1.) Grade all using above criteria
2.) Select your top 3
3.) Provide rationale (under 200 words) for top 3.
4.) Email selection to aqip@nmu.edu

Names below are linked to "Big Green Idea" documents.

Timothy Adams
Casey Andrews
1.Jessie Avery
2.Jessie Avery
Stephan Baumler
Elizabeth Bloomfield
Eli Collins
Luis Raul Colon
Thomas Cory
Shannon Daniels
Andrea L Dupras
Thomas Gallagher
Andrew Hillier
Courtney Kelly
Erica Lensink
Patrick J Murphy
Heather Oliver
Garrett Paquette
Kaitlin A Paupore
David Smith
Kaina Tavonatti
Andrew Volpe
Edward Theut/Andrew Volpe
1.Mindelei Wuori
2.Mindelei Wuori
3.Mindelei Wuori

Completed in 2008.  Northern’s AQIP Sustainability Committee laid the groundwork for establishing an ongoing and conscious effort at making Northern more sustainable.

The goal of this project is to help students, staff and faculty learn about sustainability and how to develop and promote sustainable and healthy living environments on campus and beyond.

Nationwide data suggest that while we have become more energy conscious, we paradoxically use more energy.  NMU, situated on the southern shores of Lake Superior and whose byline is “Northern Naturally”, is in the ideal location to explore what it means to be a “sustainable” university, and increase student, faculty and staff understanding of how they can contribute to a more sustainable environment.

Northern Naturally: A More Sustainable NMU

Planned project kickoff date:  October 15, 2007
Target completion date: September 14, 2008
Actual completion date: October 15, 2008

A. Give this Action Project a short title in 10 words or fewer:

Northern Naturally:  A More Sustainable NMU

B. Describe this Action Project's goal in 100 words or fewer:

The goal of this project is to help students, staff and faculty learn about sustainability and how to develop and promote sustainable and healthy living environments on campus and beyond.

C. Identify the single AQIP Category which the Action Project will most affect or impact:

1. Helping Students Learn

D. Describe briefly your institution's reasons for taking on this Action Project now -- why the project and its goals are high among your current priorities:

Recently, there has been increased media attention on sustainability.  While our university is firmly committed to this concept, we have little data that catalog our current efforts towards sustainability.  Our data are particularly lacking with respect to student awareness of and behaviors towards creating a sustainable environment.  Nationwide data suggest that while we have become more energy conscious, we paradoxically use more energy.  NMU, situated on the southern shores of Lake Superior and whose byline is “Northern Naturally”, is in the ideal location to explore what it means to be a “sustainable” university, and increase student, faculty and staff understanding of how they can contribute to a more sustainable environment.  Finally, our process of vetting potential AQIP Action Projects has revealed extensive support for project.   The proposed sub-projects will address these complex issues with a series of small projects designed to educate students and other NMU stakeholders about their environmental impact and how it can be reduced, thereby creating a more sustainable community.

E. List the organizational areas - -institutional departments, programs, divisions, or units -- most affected by or involved in this Action Project:

Academic Departments, Facilities, Food Services, Student Organizations, Housing, University Center, Purchasing, and Recreational Sports.

F. Name and describe briefly the key organizational process(es) that you expect this Action Project to change or improve:

1.  Create an AQIP working committee to survey the level of sustainable activities currently active on our campus.

2.  Charge the AQIP committee with articulating the infrastructure needed to enhance the number of sustainable activities at NMU.

3.  Determine how to evaluate, with respect to the goals stated by the working committee, the extent to which the goals a) help students learn, b) decrease energy consumption, and c) increase sustainability.  The resultant rubric will be used to select the projects to be pursued by the university in the next year.

4.  Improve communication across campus constituents involved in the project and facilitate long-term collaborative efforts to sustain greener campus planning.

Key Organizational Processes that will change:  Academic Departments, Academic Service Learning, Communications and Marketing, Dining Services, Facilities/Plant Operations, and Purchasing.

G. Explain the rationale for the length of time planned for this Action Project (from kickoff to target completion):

This project will take one year to complete:

Fall semester:

1.  Survey current sustainable activities across campus.

2.  Evaluate current “green product” usage across campus.

3.  Measure current recycling efforts.

4.  Assess current levels of food waste of food provided as a part of student meal plans.

5.  Begin preparing the grounds for a community garden.

Winter semester:

1.  Analyze survey data.

2.  Use survey data and information collected in the fall semester to define specific goals and benchmarks for project completion. 

3.  Implement programmatic changes to attain defined goals and benchmarks.

4.  Convert to using “green products”, where possible.

5.  Increase recycling in the campus community of paper, glass, plastic, metal, and potentially batteries.

6.  Begin an educational campaign to help students learn how to restrict their food portions, in part by providing them with the results of the fall survey of food waste.

7.  Select seeds and plant in the spring, with the harvest occurring during the late summer.

H. Describe how you plan to monitor how successfully your efforts on this Action Project are progressing:

A series of benchmarks will be established by committees responsible for implementing each activity, e.g. by the end of October, develop the survey instrument, distribute it by end of November, and analyze the data by March.  Information will be available on the progress of this Action Project via a newly created NMU “sustainable” website; via a report to the President’s Council, and the leadership of the Vice Presidents for Finance and for Academic Affairs in the fall and winter semesters; and via student groups.

I. Describe the overall "outcome" measures or indicators that will tell you whether this Action Project has been a success or failure in achieving its goals:

Successful outcome measures from these projects include:

a.  established working committee for this AQIP project

b.  completed survey of current  activities

c.  identification of infrastructure needed to increase sustainability activities

d.  development of rubric for selecting AQIP sub-projects

e.  forum for communication between students, staff and faculty established and ongoing

Successful product measures from these projects include:

a. increased use of “green products”, as defined by the NMU Department of Plant Operations

b.  provide in-service experience for faculty to learn how to bring sustainability concerns into the classroom

c.  increased campus recycling

d.  decreased food waste in the resident halls

e.  establishment of a campus garden

Note: All reports generated by this project will be shared with the campus community including administration, students and faculty.

J. Other information (e.g., publicity, sponsor or champion, etc.):

The following student organizations are potential sponsors: the Environmental Science Organization, the Green Group, Northern Veg(an)etarians, the Sustainable Agriculture Club, and Earthkeepers.  Other sponsors are university stakeholders including alumni and the Board of Trustees.  Alumni will be informed of these efforts via the alumni magazine.  The Board of Trustees will hear presentations on this project at their fall and winter meetings scheduled to coincide with convocation events.  Academic departments will be encouraged to promote student projects related to sustainability objectives.  These could include Service Learning opportunities, or curricular changes that emphasize sustainability.

K. Project Leader and contact person

Michael J. Broadway, Head and Professor of Geography
Email:  mbroadwa@nmu.edu
Phone:  906.227.2636

Sustainability AQIP Interim Report

June 3, 2008

Committee Chair:
Michael Broadway

Committee Members:
Annette Brown; April Lindala; Bob Holtzmann; Brandon Sager; Carl Pace; Chris Storves; Cindy Prosen; Deanna Pozega; Doug Russell; Jim Cantrill; Kathleen Thompson; Kevin Conlin; Mary Stunkard; Michael Broadway; Michael Cinelli; Nathan Mileski; Rachel Harris

Table of Contents

• Executive Summary
• Background: Sustainability & Higher Education
• Committee Deliberations 2007-8
• The Way Forward
• Appendix 1 Current Sustainability Initiatives at NMU

Executive Summary

“We do not inherit this land from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children.” Haida saying.

Sustainable development has been described as “meeting the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” The concept arose in the 1980s out of recognition that population growth, increased energy consumption, and urbanization were placing unprecedented demands on the earth’s resources and threatened society’s ability to maintain or improve environmental quality. Within US higher education the concept is increasingly used as a means of devising sustainable practices and in some Universities it has formed the basis for a new curriculum. Beginning in the 1970s NMU’s facilities and operations division adopted a variety of strategies that have reduced energy and water consumption and a recycling program was introduced in 1993. Most recently, the University attained LEED certification on a dormitory renovation in 2007 and received two more certificates in 2008. 

The AQIP Sustainability Committee was established in fall 2007 and met a total of 11 times during the 2007/8 academic year. The committee began its deliberations by reviewing how other Universities were incorporating sustainability into their practices, then surveyed NMU faculty and staff about sustainability strategies and organized a student competition on how to make Northern Michigan University “greener.” On the basis of these activities the committee recommends:

1. Sustainability should be incorporated into the University’s mission statement.
2. A permanent committee of faculty, staff, administrators, and students should be formed to promote sustainability initiatives on campus.
3. A sustainability “czar” should be appointed who reports directly to the president to coordinate the University’s sustainability initiatives.
4. The University should establish an annual competition on how to make Northern a greener campus.
5. The University should provide more opportunities for faculty and staff to support sustainability beyond the existing commitment to recycling activities; incentives should be provided to faculty to develop and implement new green/sustainable courses that encourage cross disciplinary academic programs.

Background: Sustainability and Higher Education

In 1986 the United Nations issued a report Our Common Future, in which it defined sustainable development as “meeting the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”  Despite the concept’s ambiguity it has been embraced as a guiding principle for cities, businesses and increasingly U.S. College campuses.  In October 1990 the President of Tufts University convened twenty-two University presidents and chancellors in Talloires, France to discuss ways in which higher education could contribute to a more sustainable future for the planet. The result was the Talloires declaration a 10 point action plan that has now been signed by over 350 University and College Presidents and Chancellors. The document commits it signatories to use every opportunity to educate a university’s various constituencies about sustainable development and create an institutional culture of sustainability.

In recognition of this growing movement towards incorporating sustainability into North American Universities and Colleges the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education was formed in 2005.  Its mission is “to promote sustainability in all sectors of higher education from governance and operations to curriculum and outreach through education, communication, research and professional development.”  In December 2007, 361 four and two-year colleges and universities were counted as members. 

Committee Deliberations

The Committee met a total of 11 times during the 2007/8 academic year. The first meeting involved a discussion of what exactly was meant by the term sustainability.  It was the consensus of the Committee that faculty and students needed to learn more about sustainability and the University’s existing efforts to promote a more sustainable NMU (Appendix 1).  The second meeting involved brainstorming about possible Action Projects that could contribute to the University’s sustainability efforts. This led to the committee’s first recommendation that sustainability be incorporated into the University’s mission statement. The committee also recommended that Northern join the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education, a recommendation that was quickly accepted by the administration.

The third and fourth meetings were devoted to a review of how sustainability principles had been adopted by other Universities and Colleges located in the Upper Midwest. In those institutions where sustainability had been widely adopted a campus-wide committee consisting of administrators, faculty and students was usually established, along with the appointment of a “sustainability person” whose responsibility was to oversee the University’s sustainability initiatives.   Based upon this review the committee made the following two recommendations: 1. A permanent sustainability committee should be established at NMU consisting of faculty, staff, administrators, and students.  2. A sustainability “czar” should be appointed who reports directly to the president to coordinate the University’s sustainability initiatives.

In January 2008 the Committee agreed that it would engage students in learning about sustainability by organizing a student competition on how to make Northern Michigan University a greener campus. A student from the Art and Design department produced a logo to launch the competition.

Organizing the competition involved overcoming a number of logistical and practical problems including whether we could provide a cash award (we could not without affecting a student’s financial aid eligibility), announcing the competition in an environmentally friendly way (the committee did not want to produce unnecessary waste), deciding whether we would accept individual or group entries (it was decided to encourage individual entries) and determining the criteria that would be used to evaluate the entries.  These issues were resolved by providing the winning student with an Apple iPod touch; announcing the competition via an advertisement in the student newspaper and an email sent to all students that included a link to a web site with the competition guidelines and instructions; and judging the entries on the basis of originality, feasibility and potential impact.

Despite the short time frame and limited publicity over 25 individual submissions were received for the competition. As would be expected a range of practical and very “creative” proposals were submitted, from only allowing cold water washing machines to establishing a community garden. For each idea committee members assigned a value between 0 and 10 to the three criteria, feasibility, originality and potential impact. The highest score was attained by Andrea Dupras, a junior majoring in mechanical engineering technology, who proposed the University shift to compostable, biodegradable trash bags. This option is now under evaluation by the University’s Facilities department.

The comparative success of this project given the limited lead time leads the committee to recommend, an annual competition be established to solicit ideas on how to make Northern Michigan University a greener campus.  The competition could be widened to include faculty and staff as well as team entries.

Discussion was given to establishing a website that outlined NMU’s sustainability efforts and provided practical information on how faculty, staff and students could adopt sustainable strategies. But it was decided not to establish such a site until the administration assigned responsibility for maintaining it. 

In March 2008 faculty and staff were surveyed as to what they were doing as individuals and in their workplace to contribute to a more sustainable NMU and whether faculty had incorporated sustainability into their courses. In keeping with sustainability principles, (and avoid the generation of waste paper) respondents were sent an email with three questions and directed to a web site where they could respond. A total of 124 responses were received, with approximately 75 percent of them from staff and the remainder from faculty.  When asked what was being done in their workplace to promote sustainability 93 percent of respondents stated “recycling.” The next highest response (20 percent) focused on reducing paper by submitting paperwork electronically. In fact what is most striking about the responses is the fairly limited view of sustainability. For example, less than 12 percent of respondents mentioned turning off electronic devices, while just 2 percent said they biked to work. This constrained view of sustainability (recycling equals sustainability) leads to the fifth recommendation, the University should provide more opportunities for faculty and staff to support sustainability beyond the existing commitment to recycling activities; incentives should be provided to faculty to develop and implement new green/sustainable courses that encourage cross disciplinary academic programs.

Among faculty members the majority (86%) stated they had integrated some aspect of sustainability into their courses. The level of integration varied, with one faculty member noting:

The Woodworking and Furniture Design areas of concentration in the School of Art and Design primarily use wood as our main media. Wood is obviously a renewable resource. The bulk of the wood used in our classes is locally grown species such as oak, maple, ash, and birch. I either harvest logs myself or buy from local mills to reduce transportation costs. I also emphasize the low environmental impact of using shellac and wax finishes.

And others noted,

As a photography instructor, I show and discuss images that deal with the devastating landscape of human waste particularly the images of Edward Burtynsky, Robert Adams, Richard Misrach, Mark Klett etc….  I have incorporated sustainability issues into most of my courses, which is a no-brainer since they are key issues facing our political society, and our political institutions.

In other instances faculty emphasized they only allowed electronic paper submissions or they uploaded course material into webct and no longer provided paper syllabuses and others noted that sustainability did not apply to their area of study. These results must be treated with some caution given that only 10 percent of the faculty responded to the survey; however they are probably indicative of the variation in the extent to which sustainability has been integrated into classes.  Clearly, if the University is interested in promoting sustainability it needs to promote the active engagement of faculty in this area.

The Way Forward

The degree to which sustainability principles have permeated Northern Michigan University varies. The University’s Facilities department began implementing a variety of conservation measures dating back to the first energy crisis in the early 1970s. It continues to incorporate sustainable strategies as part of its business plan using compact fluorescent light bulbs and waterless urinals in new and remodeled buildings and seeking LEED certification. But the biggest potential in making Northern Michigan University sustainable lies in educating faculty, staff and students about the small measures they can incorporate into their work place and daily lives. It is essential that if the University is serious about its commitment to sustainability, it adopt this report’s five major recommendations so that Northern can be “Northern Naturally Green.”

Appendix 1
Current NMU Sustainability Initiatives

1. Energy Conservation

NMU’s energy conservation efforts began in 1973 as a result of the oil embargo. Since then the University has adopted a number of conservation strategies including: the expansion of an energy management system across campus, the installation of thermal efficient windows and individualized heating controls in dormitories, new lighting projects in Hedgcock, PEIF and Harden Hall.  These and other strategies resulted in $25 million in cost avoidance between 1973 and 2006. Even more impressive is the fact that during the same period square footage increased 77.7 percent but electrical use is down 1 percent and thermal usage is down 25 percent.

2. Reducing Water Consumption

Adopting waterless urinals, installing water efficient fixtures and irrigation wells reduced water consumption 34 percent between 1973 and 2006.

3. Recycling

NMU established an Environmental Committee in 1992 charged with recommending recycling procedures and source reduction. Since then and 2006 the University recycled 5,230 tons of paper, 1,013 tons of metal, 32 tons of fluorescent lamps and 12,400 gallons of waste oil. In 2008 the University began a battery recycling program and introduced a single sort recycling program that allows paper, glass and plastic to be placed in a single receptacle.

4. Participation in LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certification program.

The program has been developed by the US Green Building Council to encourage the adoption of sustainable green building and development practices.  In 2007 Meyland Hall’s renovation received LEED certification, a first for any building in the Upper Peninsula. In 2008 Van Antwerp received LEED silver certification and Hunt Hall is LEED registered with a goal of silver certification.

5. Adoption of Biofuels

In 2007 NMU staff met with representatives of Van Aire Inc. from Gladstone, MI to discuss the use of biofuels in University vehicles. Once Van Aire has their product up to specifications the University will test it on several vehicles.

6. Adoption of Green Products

Following the successful testing of green cleaning products in Van Antwerp and Meyland residence halls the University switched over to their use across the campus in spring 2008.

This information was compiled from information supplied by NMU’s Facilities Operations.

Sustainability AQIP Final Report

Completed in 2008. The 2006-2007 Online Infrastructure Committee envisioned the AQIP project to change or improve admissions, scheduling, marketing, curriculum development and review, provision of academic resources, technical training for faculty and students, and established processes for course evaluation, including how these changes or improvements might influence promotion and tenure.

The goal of this project is to improve and expand the online learning experience at NMU.

This Action Project intends to document the current state of online learning at Northern Michigan University to create a baseline from which to measure growth, improve the quality and consistency of the online learning experience for students and faculty, identify stakeholders in need of support and/or training which may be inhibiting them from participating, and identify new opportunities and increase the number of online offerings.

Improve and Expand Online Learning

Institution: Northern Michigan University
Planned project kickoff date: October 15, 2007
Target completion date: September 14, 2008
Actual project completion date: October 15, 2008

A. Give this Action Project a short title in 10 words or fewer:

Improve and Expand Online Learning

B. Describe this Action Project's goal in 100 words or fewer:

Document the current state of online learning at Northern Michigan University to create a baseline from which to measure growth, improve the quality and consistency of the online learning experience for students and faculty, identify stakeholders in need of support and/or training which may be inhibiting them from participating, and identify new opportunities and increase the number of online offerings.

C. Identify the single AQIP Category which the Action Project will most affect or impact:

Helping Students Learn

D. Describe briefly your institution's reasons for taking on this Action Project now -- why the project and its goals are high among your current priorities:

This project follows the (OIC) final report of the Online Infrastructure Committee, a 2006-2007 Task Force charged with developing and implementing the infrastructure necessary to support 1,000 true distance education students.   This suggests that background work has been done.  The topic of online learning repeatedly surfaced as a desirable AQIP project topic in campus-wide discussions.  A hiring search for a new position of Director of Instructional Design, Technology, Media has begun, which will provide additional support for this project. There is an increase in the number of curriculum proposals for online entities, suggesting that faculty are envisioning ways to integrate online learning. Enrollments are stable or increasing in the limited number of current online courses, and thus student demand is increasing. A desire to have 1000 distance learners by 2008 has been voiced, indicating that the administration is supportive. From many vantage points, the environment for an AQIP online learning project is receptive.

E. List the organizational areas - -institutional departments, programs, divisions, or units -- most affected by or involved in this Action Project:

Academic Colleges and Departments; College of Graduate Studies, Admissions, Continuing Education, Administrative Computing, Dean of Students, Registrar, Academic Information Services (includes library services, instructional media and technology support, academic computing), Teaching & Learning Advisory Council and Educational Technology Resources and Policy Committee (standing oversight committees of the Academic Senate), AAUP and NMUFA (faculty unions), Faculty Review Committee (oversees promotions and tenure), and ASNMU (student governance)

F. Name and describe briefly the key organizational process(es) that you expect this Action Project to change or improve:

Admission, scheduling, marketing, curriculum development and review, provision of academic resources, technical training for faculty and students. Additionally, established processes for course evaluation must be applicable to online courses, including  how these may influence promotion and tenure.

G. Explain the rationale for the length of time planned for this Action Project (from kickoff to target completion):

The scope of the project should fit within a one calendar year timeframe.

*Fall 2007*

Collect and analyze data on the current state of online learning (numbers of faculty, courses, disciplines, enrollments, passage and retention rates, technology usage, and methods of instruction). Quantify faculty interest in the immediate future (one year) for curriculum/course development to establish realistic growth. Determine what technical skills and competencies are necessary for a student to succeed in an online course. Organize and structure faculty training to aid quality and consistency. Enable faculty to identify and discuss other possible program offerings and methods to ensure quality.

*Winter 2008*

Curriculum development currently underway will enter the approval process, or if already approved will move to implementation. Complete analysis of data collection.  Create a pilot process for student training and support based upon data collection results. Recommend methods to ensure quality. Disseminate information and solicit feedback.

*Summer 2008*

Write a project final report to measure the project’s success comparing the baseline to the scheduled Fall 2008 courses and number of involved faculty. Disseminate all information, proposals, and action plan(s).

H. Describe how you plan to monitor how successfully your efforts on this Action Project are progressing:

Information on AQIP projects are regularly covered by various University publications: student newspaper, employee newsletters, and website articles. In addition to the online AQIP portfolio, there are bi-annual reports to administration and the Board of Trustees. At least one presentation will be made to the standing oversight bodies of Deans and Department Heads, Academic Cabinet, President’s Council, and the Academic Senate.

I. Describe the overall "outcome" measures or indicators that will tell you whether this Action Project has been a success or failure in achieving its goals:

Using the baseline data collected and analyzed in Fall 2007, as referenced in Section G, all general goals stated in Section B will be implemented. Specific outcomes from the following goals identified by the Online Infrastructure Committee should be implemented, revised with new dates, or removed.

These goals were:

• An AQIP Committee will be created in fall 2007 which has oversight provided by the Office of Academic Affairs.

• Training and Support

    - By the end of the fall 2007 semester, develop an online course specifically designed for        
      faculty using NMU’s course management system where content about online    
      instruction is conveyed in an online environment. Faculty teaching, or who anticipate    
      teaching, online will be encouraged to take this course.

    - Provide at least two opportunities each academic year for faculty to learn about online
      education.  

    - By winter 2008, hire an additional professional staff person to help with design and    
      delivery of online courses. Review current staffing assignments and identify    
      cross-training and inter-office cooperative efforts when feasible.   

    - Make online orientation and course management system information available for    
      students via NMU’s web pages. 

• Curricula

    - Develop procedures to identify new online courses and programs that are consistent    
      with the NMU mission

    - Utilize identified procedures to increase the number of online programmatic course
      offerings, to meet the recommendations of the 2006-07 Online Infrastructure
      Task Force

• Policies, procedures, and guidelines

    - Establish a formal mechanism for reviewing new technologies for class use by
      Winter 2008.

    - Establish guidelines with respect to issues regarding the quality of online courses,
      including but not limited to:  types of courses to put online, definition of hybrid courses,
      faculty qualifications to teach online, registration restrictions (e.g., can local students    
      take online courses for convenience when a face-to-face section is offered?), offerings
      outside of the traditional academic calendar, types of office hours, testing/assessment,
      minimum components of an online course, course evaluations, peer evaluations, impact
      on tenure/promotion.

Note: All reports generated by this project will be shared with the campus community including administration, students and faculty.

J. Other information (e.g., publicity, sponsor or champion, external partners, etc.).

External Influences

• In April 2006, MI Governor Granholm signed a law requiring all Michigan high school students successfully complete an online course or learning experience. Michigan is the first state to impose such a requirement. The new law is effective for all students entering high school in 2006. Established in 2000, Michigan Virtual High School <www.mivu.org> is one of the largest accredited virtual schools in the nation.  (Michigan Virtual University Press Release April 21, 2006).  As one of Michigan’s regional state universities, Northern Michigan University should prepare for the incoming class of 2010.

• We are experiencing changing demographics of a work force that needs to update their skills and knowledge base, to remain competitive in a dynamic work environment. These individuals may be bound by constraints such as place, winter travel conditions, workday, and family obligations. Providing educational opportunities for these students is consistent with Northern Michigan University’s mission.

Publicity

An existing AQIP e-Portfolio provides documentation on all AQIP projects, goals, progress, and reports. University forums, newsletters for faculty/staff, parents, and alumni, and student school newspapers will keep interested parties informed and solicit input. Northern Michigan University Board of Trustees meetings also will include an update on our AQIP projects.

K. Project Leader and contact person

Judith Puncochar, Associate Professor
Email:  jpuncoch@nmu.edu
Phone:  906.227.1366

AQIP Online Committee
Improve and Expand Online Learning Final Report

Completed in 2008. During the 2007-08 academic year, Northern Michigan University undertook the AQIP Action Project entitled “Enhancing the campus climate for scholarship.” A working committee was established to study the status of scholarly work and to determine how faculty perceived the climate for scholarship on campus. In particular, the committee was asked to identify real and perceived barriers to scholarship and to make recommendations to alleviate these barriers.

The goal of this action project is to enhance the climate for scholarship and other creative activities on campus. 

The project is designed to improve communication among interested faculty and administrators, identify and address barriers to successful scholarship on campus, and improve dissemination of approaches to research and creative work from successful on-campus and off-campus scholars.  A particular focus will be to increase undergraduate participation in scholarly activities mentored by faculty.

Enhancing the Campus Climate for Scholarship Action Project

Planned project kickoff date: October 15, 2007
Target completion date: September 14, 2008
Actual completion date: October 15, 2008

A. Give this Action Project a short title in 10 words or fewer:

Enhancing the Campus Climate for Scholarship

B. Describe this Action Project's goal in 100 words or fewer:

The goal of this action project is to enhance the climate for scholarship and other creative activities on campus.  The project is designed to improve communication among interested faculty and administrators, identify and address barriers to successful scholarship on campus, and improve dissemination of approaches to research and creative work from successful on-campus and off-campus scholars.  A particular focus will be to increase undergraduate participation in scholarly activities mentored by faculty.

C. Identify the single AQIP Category which the Action Project will most affect or impact:

1. Helping Students Learn

D. Describe briefly your institution's reasons for taking on this Action Project now -- why the project and its goals are high among your current priorities:

Scholarship and creative works are at the heart of a University’s mission.  Improving the campus environment and infrastructure for all types of scholarship has clear benefits in improving the University’s ability to attract and retain faculty, recruit students and obtain outside funding.  Faculty wish to continue their creative work once they arrive on campus, and their level of satisfaction with their work environment is directly linked to their professional involvement.  Furthermore, an improved climate for scholarship on campus directly impacts our core teaching mission.  Faculty scholars bring innovation to the classroom to enhance teaching. Scholarship helps foster links between different disciplines on campus and with outside entities which enrich the university environment. Active faculty also tend to include students in their work outside the formal classroom. In several recent studies, a variety of benefits to students have been identified as resulting from participation in undergraduate research and other scholarly activities. 

Currently, there is the perception that scholarly and creative activities are not adequately supported.

• Faculty are dissatisfied with the atmosphere for conducting scholarship, the number of scholarly forums on campus that provide an environment conducive to the creative endeavor, and the level of administrative support.

• Infrastructure and administrative support are frequently mentioned by faculty and staff as hindering grant-supported work. 

• Faculty report they are overworked and have little time for scholarly activities.

• There are also issues related to the value placed on these activities by our current promotion and tenure guidelines. 

• There has been suggestion that students cannot find mentors to conduct independent projects or opportunities to be involved in research. 

• There is little appreciation by students of the opportunities made available to them for scholarly activities outside the classroom. 

All these elements have led to a general level of dissatisfaction for the conduct of scholarly activities, despite the fact that there is a significant record of quality scholarly work emanating from the university.  This state of affairs is not desirable on a university campus, and we seek to address these issues with this Action Project.

E. List the organizational areas - -institutional departments, programs, divisions, or units -- most affected by or involved in this Action Project:

Office of Research and Development,  Academic Affairs, Academic Departments, Communications and Marketing, Student Organizations

F. Name and describe briefly the key organizational process(es) that you expect this Action Project to change or improve:

i. Assess the number of faculty and students engaged in scholarly activities and evaluate real and perceived barriers to them. Evaluate potential mismatch between students and faculty that may result in students being unable to engage in scholarship because of a lack of mentors.  Make it easier to start scholarship projects on campus through educational seminars and improved infrastructure.

ii. Assess the university infrastructure that is in place to support scholarly projects once they are begun.  Describe barriers to effective project management. Make it easier to administer a scholarship project.

iii. Evaluate the roles of students in scholarship and the number of student participants in such projects.  Evaluate the success of the current Freshmen Fellows Program, and recommend changes to that program to enhance its success beyond the freshmen year.  Develop programs to encourage undergraduate scholarship (freshmen to seniors) outside the formal classroom.  Where graduate students are involved, incorporate them into the program.

iv. Develop an advisory committee that will use cross-campus dialogue to address issues relating to the enhancement of scholarship. 

v. Create a forum to expand publicity for successful work and opportunities for scholars to interact.  This should increase the valuation of activities outside the traditional classroom and lead to a greater appreciation of and an increased participation in scholarship by both faculty and students.

Key Processes that will change or improve:  Academic Affairs, Academic Departments, Research and Sponsored Programs, Controllers’ Department

G. Explain the rationale for the length of time planned for this Action Project (from kickoff to target completion):

• Fall 2007

o Survey current level of faculty scholarship at NMU

o Assess current university infrastructure that supports ongoing scholarly projects

o Evaluate current student involvement in scholarship

• Winter 2008

o Develop Council that will address scholarship when this Action Project has been completed

o Create forum to publicize NMU scholarship, including the NMU Research and Sponsored Programs website

o Use data from the Survey of Scholarship, the Assessment of Infrastructure, and the Evaluation of Student Involvement, to develop processes that will enhance the climate for scholarship at NMU

H. Describe how you plan to monitor how successfully your efforts on this Action Project are progressing:

In addition to achievement of the outcomes measures shown in I, the working committee will meet biweekly and document progress towards the identified goals.   Each of the major sections of this project will have a subcommittee tasked with its accomplishment, and these subcommittees will report back to the council on a monthly basis.  Their reports will also include overviews of accomplishments and data collected.  Ultimately, we will re-evaluate scholarship participation on campus and compare this to the baseline data collected through this project.

I. Describe the overall "outcome" measures or indicators that will tell you whether this Action Project has been a success or failure in achieving its goals:

• Establishment of clear policy guidelines for the promotion and support of scholarship, including a defined mission statement.

• Report baseline information regarding the current extent of student and faculty involvement in scholarly activity.  This will be available for comparison following initiation of other associated projects.  Report elements that have been identified by the campus community as barriers to scholarship.  Recommendations for dealing with barriers will be proposed.

• Report outlining the current status of the university administrative infrastructure supporting scholarship on campus.  Report will include recommendations for improvements to streamline the process as well as increase its utility to users.

• Action plan for the establishment of the enhanced scholarship program for undergraduates. 

• Develop plan for sustainability of projects beyond the scope of this one-year Action Project, including outreach activities to build awareness of on-campus scholarship. Elements included will build scholarship activity as well as an overall atmosphere conducive to scholarship activities.

• Initiation of a project to compile student and faculty scholarship products, likely in electronic format. 

• Benchmarks and goals clearly articulated that will describe attainment of enhanced climate for scholarship; e.g., number of papers published, performances given, works displayed, student accomplishments, grants awarded, etc.

Note: All reports generated by this project will be shared with the campus community including administration, students and faculty.

J. Other information (e.g., publicity, sponsor or champion, etc.):

Working and RSAC webpage will outline progress and goals. CAMPUS (on-campus newsletter) and other on-campus publications will describe the activities of this organization.

K. Project Leader and contact person (First Name, Middle Initial, Last name, Title, Email, Telephone).

Jill B. Leonard, Associate Professor
Email: jileonar@nmu.edu
Phone:  906.227.1619

Enhancing Scholarship Faculty Time Survey Report
Enhancing Scholarship Focus Group Report
Enhancing Scholarship Steering Committee
Enhancing Scholarship Interim Report

Enhancing Scholarship Open Forum

The forum was held on Thursday, January 31, 2008.  Approximately sixty faculty, administrators, staff, and students attended; it was a lively discussion, and participants made well over fifty separate comments.

Dean Cindy Prosen welcomed everyone to the forum and introduced President Wong, Provost and Vice President Koch, and AQIP Scholarship Committee Chair Jill Leonard.

President Wong said we are in the business of ideas and idea creation.  He went on to describe the work of the Lake Superior Partnership Committee, which has as one of its main concerns job creation in Marquette County.  The influence of NMU on the local economy is dramatic . . . all told $900,000,000.  The work we do at NMU as teachers and scholars has real practical meaning and value well beyond our campus.

Provost Koch spoke of how scholarship has enhanced her teaching and the teaching of many others.  The roles of teacher and scholar are complementary.  She also reviewed the work of Ernest Boyer in two reports for the Carnegie Foundation, Scholarship Reconsidered (1990) and Scholarship Assessed (1997).  Boyer defined scholarship more broadly in his notion of the four domains of scholarship: discovery, integration, application, and teaching.  Dr. Koch said we need to think deeply about these issues.  Being a professor is hard work, but the best job one can have.

Jill Leonard then gave a PowerPoint presentation describing the work of the committee. 

• --Definition: Boyer’s broadly inclusive definition of scholarship.
• --The role of scholarship in the academy
• --Current conditions for scholarship at NMU
• --Tasks at hand:
• --Improve communication
• --Identify and address barriers
• --Disseminate successful approaches
• --Increase participation of undergraduates and graduate students
• --The committee has developed the following subcommittees:
• --Participation (to assess the current level of scholarly activity at NMU)
• --Outreach (to involve as many faculty, students, and administrators in the process)
• --Systems (including the formation of a permanent scholarship committee)
• --Students (to assess undergraduate and graduate student participation in scholarship)
• --Time (especially for faculty to enable them to engage in research and creative activities)

[View power point presentation.]

Jill then opened the floor to discussion.  What follows is a summary of points that were made according to theme.

Student Research

Several people who spoke mentioned the excellent collaborative work between faculty and students (undergraduate and graduate) already being done at NMU, but it is not easy to quantify all these activities.  Faculty in the sciences said working with students on research was very rewarding for them and for their students (in terms of grad school and future careers), but also enormously time consuming and that NMU needs to be more flexible about how it thinks of teaching loads.  NMU’s student-focused mission should encourage more student-faculty collaboration: we could really excel at promoting student research in the future.

Ideas Generated: 

1) Extend the Freshman Fellows program to four years

2) Increase the number of internships and service learning projects for students

3) Improve how opportunities for student research are communicated to students

4) Continue to celebrate student research and creativity and to share it with the entire NMU community

Faculty Scholarship at NMU

There was general agreement that ideally scholarship and teaching are mutually enriching activities.  However, some expressed concern that NMU not lose its traditional emphasis on teaching.  There were also concerns expressed that expectations in regard to scholarly productivity not be increased at NMU suddenly without first creating conditions conducive to increased research and creative activity.  One such condition would be to allow occasional course releases to faculty with worthwhile projects.

Members of the committee and Dean Prosen observed that it has been difficult to assess how much scholarship is currently being done by faculty, and it was suggested that the Provost request an updated c.v. from each member of the faculty.  There were concerns that doing this would raise faculty discontent and union issues.  One source of the underreporting is that some faculty feel like they are bragging; further, some people feel that they don’t need to talk about the work they do, but it is important that they do. We as a community of scholars need to show what scholars do.  We are professionals and this is what professionals do. We are not just teachers.

More than one faculty member said doing research at NMU was often a lonely experience and there should be more of an effort to bring active scholars into dialogue with one another.  There also needs to be better infrastructure to support those who receive outside grants and better publicity of scholarly successes in the local media.

Some noted how much it has helped to have a full-time grant writer, Andrew Smentkowski, working with faculty on various proposals.  We need much more support of this kind.

Celebrating and rewarding scholarship at NMU is a relatively new development.  The Excellence in Professional Development award was created just a few years ago; faculty often receive course releases for service and administrative work, but not for research.  The university is moving to right the past imbalance, but much more can and should be done.

Ideas Generated: 

1) Find effective ways to measure current scholarly activity

2) Make significant funds available to departments to allow occasional course releases to faculty engaged in significant projects (to be determined by each department)

3)  Increase funds for sabbaticals so that more faculty who apply receive them

4) Create a permanent Scholarship Committee

5) Create a theme-based campus-wide lecture series each year with both distinguished outside speakers and NMU faculty; such a series would enliven the intellectual atmosphere on campus, encourage the sharing of research, and stimulate interdisciplinary dialogue

6) Create a place where faculty and administrators can informally gather to discuss their research and teaching

7) Create a strong mentoring system for new faculty

Issues of the Contract and Departmental By-laws

The Contract and by-laws in many departments suggest that at NMU research is second or even third to teaching.  Faculty are given the option of service OR research when they come up for promotion and tenure.  Should this emphasis be reconsidered?  Carrots and sticks:  The Contract is the stick.  No stick for scholarship at NMU, but no carrots for scholarship either. 

Any changes in the Contract, obviously, would have to be negotiated.

Final thought: the purpose of our AQIP Committee is not to force faculty or students to engage in research and creative activity.  It is our charge to encourage and enable those who are engaged or wish to be in the future.

Scholarship Meeting Minutes

The campus community is invited to follow our progress by reading the meeting minutes.

April 18, 2008
April 3, 2008
March 13, 2008
February 28, 2008
February 7, 2008
January 17, 2008
December 5, 2007
November 13, 2007
October 31, 2007
October 23, 2007

Enhancing Scholarship Committee Final Report
Higher Learning Commission Conference Presentation

Completed in 2005. Northern Michigan University no longer uses Social Security numbers as university identification numbers, except where required by law.

Institution: Northern Michigan University
Submitted: 2003-05-26

A. Give this Action Project a short title in 10 words or fewer:

Create a student identification system and interactive services Web site

B. Describe this Action Project's goal in 100 words or fewer:

This action project will replace the current student identification system—using Social Security numbers—with a more anonymous, individual ID number.  In addition, we plan to establish a web site that provides extensive information on programs and procedures, with an interactive areas where students can carry out routine transactions, the sort that currently require an office visit or some type of paper exchange.

C. Identify the single AQIP Category which the Action Project will most affect or impact:

Primary Category: Supporting Institutional Operations

D. Describe briefly your institution's reasons for taking on this Action Project now -- why the project and its goals are high among your current priorities:

This action project, first submitted as a “Provocative Proposition” by multiple groups at Campus Conversation Day, has received considerable support in follow-up conversations, especially from student groups.  An additional stimulus for this project is the federal law (FERPA) prohibiting the use of  even the last four digits of a SS# for identification. This change will enable us to avoid the problems of identification theft which have been experienced by other universities.

E. List the organizational areas - -institutional departments, programs, divisions, or units -- most affected by or involved in this Action Project:

All areas involved with student identification will be affected when the system is changed.  Also, the project will ultimately reduce the number of student office visits for services.  Employees providing student services will benefit because more business can be conducted privately and routinely online.

F. Name and describe briefly the key organizational process(es) that you expect this Action Project to change or improve:

Critical processes include advising, registration, scheduling, financial aid, admissions, student services, and any areas involving student identification.  Since the student identification number will replace SS numbers, all student records will reflect the new numbering system.  Because NMU is already a mobile university, the student web site will not significantly affect many critical processes; it is the students who will benefit from it.

G. Explain the rationale for the length of time planned for this Action Project (from kickoff to target completion):

Strong support for this project from student groups will help keep it on the front burner.  Because NMU is a mobile device institution, creating a student services web site means that students can take even greater advantage of the mobile devices they are leasing to conduct university business.  This project can be completed relatively quickly with a new numbering system in place for incoming students in summer 2004; a year of monitoring and collecting responses will let the numbering process and the Web site be improved during the second year.

H. Describe how you plan to monitor how successfully your efforts on this Action Project are progressing:

Surveys will be made after the system is in place to secure feedback for improvements. It will probably take about a year once the system is in place to secure feedback and tweak the process to make it as effective as possible. We will track whether most of the students are satisfied with this method of ID security and privacy and whether most of the students are satisfied with the services and information provided at the Web site.  “Satisfaction” bench marks will be established by the action project steering committee.

I. Describe the overall "outcome" measures or indicators that will tell you whether this Action Project has been a success or failure in achieving its goals:

Assigning an anonymous individual ID number means greater student privacy, protection against identity theft and a simplification of the many routine processes students currently face.  The project will also eliminate the need to have as many staff available for routine business transactions. We will also track whether most students are satisfied with the privacy and security of the numbering system and with the information and services at the web site.

J. Other information (e.g., publicity, sponsor or champion, etc.): 

Form Student ID System Committee, identify charge, determine details of the problem, determine outcomes, research potential solutions others have found, and review Northern's climate for this change. Decide on a draft plan and completion date, identify draft steps and timelines, evaluate resources necessary, and publicize the plan/solicit input.  Modify draft plans, steps, and dates from input, distribute and publicize the plan, and implement the plan. Collect data on satisfaction with the system and Web site, review plan's success according to criteria, make appropriate changes, and communicate the plan's completion to AQIP.

Superior Edge – Implemented in 2006. The Superior Edge Action Project has resulted in one of NMU's most successful programs. The Superior Edge Program encompasses a wide range of in- and out-of-classroom experiences that provides NMU students with a distinct advantage by better preparing them for careers, graduate school and life as engaged citizens.  We note with pride that this Action Project was listed in the Higher Learning Commission's AQIP Directory as one of its Innovative Programs.

Institution: Northern Michigan University
Submitted: 03-01-2006
Planned project kickoff date: 02-28-2006
Target completion date: 07-01-2007
Superior Edge Web site

A. Give this Action Project a short title in 10 words or fewer:

Superior Edge (Academic Service Learning and Community Involvement)

B. Describe this Action Project's goal in 100 words or fewer:

The purpose of this Action Project is to research, discuss and make recommendations for a value-added initiative (Superior Edge Program) comprised of several current experiences including, but not limited to, leadership, volunteering, membership in student organizations, academic service-learning, and civic engagement.

C. Identify the single AQIP Category which the Action Project will most affect or impact:

Primary Category: Helping Students Learn

D. Describe briefly your institution's reasons for taking on this Action Project now -- why the project and its goals are high among your current priorities:

This action project reflects some of the early Provocative Propositions generated at campus conversation day. There is a desire for more external student projects, including internships, collaborations with local business, community involvement and service learning. The proposed program was presented at a University-wide forum and to numerous committees (President's Council, Academic Cabinet, Academic Senate, Deans and Department Heads, Student Services, International Task Force, and First-Year Experience). Based on all of the information received, the Task Force makes the following recommendations: Implement the Superior Edge program to include four elements: · Citizenship Edge · Diversity Edge · Leadership Edge · "Real World" Edge

E. List the organizational areas - institutional departments, programs, divisions, or units -- most affected by or involved in this Action Project:

The academic side of NMU will be most impacted by this initiative because it directly involves student learning. We propose establishing a Center for Student Development and Civic Engagement. The purpose of the Center would be to organize all the student development activities under one area for better coordination. Areas to be included would be some of the following: · Academic Service-Learning · Superior Edge · Student Leadership · Volunteer Center · Community Outreach · Student Activities

F. Name and describe briefly the key organizational process(es) that you expect this Action Project to change or improve:

We will begin limited implementation in early 2006 with selected students, faculty, and Student Activities and Leadership Programs personnel participating. The purpose of the initial phase will be to evaluate the best approach for implementing the program and to determine the time commitment involved. The advisors would help develop the evaluation mechanism for the program. This would include additional operationalization of the outcomes and criteria provided in the proposal. We appointed a Superior Edge Advisory Committee in Fall 2005 consisting of faculty, staff, and students. The Committee's responsibilities would be to oversee some of the following: · review and recommend types of experiences which would be allowed under each of the "Edge" programs; · monitor the quality of the Program, student experiences and reflections based on program outcomes; · assist in the development of promotional materials for the Superior Edge with Communications and Marketing; · help market the program in cooperation with existing student services including Admissions, the First Year Experience Program, Campus Visits, and Orientation.

G. Explain the rationale for the length of time planned for this Action Project (from kickoff to target completion):

Performance Targets: Year One--The Task Force began meeting in late 2005, and the members have been diligent in completing the charges. The Task Force researched what other universities are currently doing and obtained feedback from faculty, staff, administration and the business community. The proposed program was presented at a University-wide forum and to numerous committees (President's Council, Academic Cabinet, Academic Senate, Deans and Department Heads, Student Services, International Task Force, and First-Year Experience). Performance Targets: Year Two--Appoint a Superior Edge Advisory Committee in Fall 2005 consisting of faculty, staff, and students. The Committee's responsibilities would be to conduce some of the following: · review and recommend types of experiences which would be allowed under each of the "Edge" programs; · monitor the quality of the Program, student experiences and reflections based on program outcomes; · assist in the development of promotional materials for the Superior Edge with Communications and Marketing; · help market the program in cooperation with existing student services including Admissions, the First Year Experience Program, Campus Visits, and Orientation. Implement an e-portfolio system as the record-keeping system for the Superior Edge Program. The e-portfolio system could also be used by faculty and students for other educational activities. One of the charges was to develop a timeline. The implementation of the program is dependent upon the level of commitment of resources. With the recommended budget, it is feasible to begin the Superior Edge program in Fall 2006, with full implementation by summer 2007.

H. Describe how you plan to monitor how successfully your efforts on this Action Project are progressing:

We envision implementation of an e-portfolio system as the record-keeping system for the Superior Edge Program. The e-portfolio system could also be used by faculty and students for other educational activities. Strong support for this project from student groups will help keep it on the front burner. This project complements other initiatives on campus and offers students yet another opportunity to become involved in a creative, career-building endeavor. Because this is a mobile device institution, the web and e-mail will provide avenues for students and faculty advisors to communicate during the experience, and will allow the advisory group to monitor progress.

I. Describe the overall "outcome" measures or indicators that will tell you whether this Action Project has been a success or failure in achieving its goals:

Outcome Measures: Students will become engaged, involved citizens ( Citizenship Edge). Students will develop a world view and better understand and appreciate diversity (Diversity Edge ). Students will grow as competent, ethical and effective leaders ( Leadership Edge ). Students will develop the ability to relate theory to practice (" Real World" Edge ). To satisfactorily achieve the Superior Edge, students will complete the following: All of the requirements for each of the four "Edge" programs An e-portfolio record A reflective paper, which would encompass the experiences in the Citizenship, Diversity, Leadership, and "Real World" Edges.

J. Other information (e.g., publicity, sponsor or champion, etc.): 

The Superior Edge originally began as a Presidential Initiative, but momentum and interest in this innovative program, plus the number of initial Provocative Propositions that expressed interest in service learning and internships, led us to declare this as a new Action Project. In addition, we solicited feedback from another AQIP institution, and the response was very favorable. Here is a response to one of the questions that we asked of colleagues: Does the project appear to be worthwhile? Yes. The Superior Edge project is designed to complement the classroom instructional offerings and experiences. The benefit to implementing the Superior Edge program is that students will be able to apply the information learned in class and to actively participate in activities that accentuate a well rounded educational experience. In essence, the Superior Edge project is designed to systematically and continuously provide students with a “service learning” experience that compliments the classroom experience.

Review of NMU’s Advising Process – Completed winter 2007.  The AQIP advising subcommittee turned in its final recommendations, which have not fully been implemented due to several procedural, staffing and budget reasons.  This project is bring revisited as a priority of NMU’s new academic strategic plan, The Road Map to 2015.

Development of Departmental/Unit Outcomes Assessment Plan – Completed 2005.  This project resulted in all academic and service units on campus submitting an annual report and plan describing their objectives and how those objectives will be met.  A second phase of this project is one of the proposed action projects for 2008-09.

Comment 1

Colleagues -

Allow me to provide review comments regarding the proposed NMU Student Career and
Placement Action Project (#1).  The inclusion of a proposed Action Project implies the need for improvement in the area of career "placement".  While the University may be able to do more to assist our graduates in their career endeavors, the stated goal of "an increase in the number, variety, size, and reputation of employers who actively recruit new and impending graduates..." indicates that there is a problem with the number, size, reputation, etc. of the employers who currently hire are graduates.  We should of course welcome any number of "clients" to express interest in recruiting our students for post-graduation opportunities, and yes, our geographic location makes it difficult for some employers to justify the cost of recruiting at NMU when other universities are closer.  One could argue, however, that the more than 150 employers who visited campus during the 2006/2007 year to recruit at job fairs and interview days indicates a successful "recruitment of the recruiters". 

One of the stated goals of the project is that "...the University would be creating successful and well-placed alumni around the world."  This statement indicated, indirectly, that we (the University) do not already do this.  "Successful" and "well-placed" are subjective qualifiers that may be difficult to explain let alone measure.  Does successful mean wealthy?  A corporate ladder-climber?  Someone who supervises a large number of people?  Does "well-placed" mean they work for a Fortune 500 company?  A Fortune 250 company?  The federal government?  80% of NMU graduates indicate that they are satisfied with their job.  One can make the case that job satisfaction is a more accurate indication of "success".

Further examination of the reason for this Action Project is difficult since the author indicates that survey results are driving the "need" for a larger number and variety of employers who actively recruit at NMU ("Surveys of students and alumni consistently point to the desirability of having a larger number and variety of employers actively recruiting on campus".)  To the best of my knowledge, this data has never been shared with Career Services.  I would welcome the opportunity to review these surveys.

Listing the four processes that are noted in the Action Project indicates that there is room for improvement in how the University recruits employers to visit and how information is shared with the university community regarding employer visits.  I am not aware of anyone indicating that there is a problem in this area and would welcome the opportunity to discuss concerns and more importantly, constructive ideas related to this topic.

I realize that the outcome measures proposed are simply suggestions, but there are problems associated with each measure as stated.  The first two outcome measures listed seem to indicate that "bigger is better". Is it?  Are we going to say that because the University of Michigan (the largest non-government related employer in Michigan) hired an NMU graduate, NMU has improved its career placement activities?  Is the presence of a Fortune 500 company on campus as a recruiter more of an indication of success than the presence of an smaller employer from the region who has hired one of our graduates?  Are we as a university community going to say we do better because 25 Fortune 500 companies visit campus?  I would imagine a graduate who is selected by the Peace Corps for two years of service may argue that he or she is an indicator of success, but we would not be allowed to "count them" if we follow the measures proposed.  Having 80 percent of employers return each year is not an indicator of the strength of our graduates - it's an indicator of the job market.  Employers visit universities to recruit if and when they have job openings.  Finally, the fourth measure stated would be very difficult to measure.  In short - not every employer recruits every year for each major.  The teacher job market is an example.  There are years when we do not have school districts visit campus to hire certain secondary education majors.  When that happens, does it mean we've failed?  Again, this measure is market driven and is not an accurate measure of the programs and services offered by NMU.

It is important to note that the "placement" of graduates is an important function of any University.  The staff in Career Services would embrace a discussion about what we do and how we do it.  The questions are, however - is improvement needed?  If the answer is "yes", then are the stated improvement areas (section F) and outcome measures (section H) accurate.

These two questions require further discussion.

Thank you.

John B. Frick

Director - NMU Career Services
Phone:  906-227-2800
Fax:  906-227-2807
Web:  http://www.nmu.edu/CareerServices

Comment 2

This would make a great action project.  Career Services needs to do more to assist graduates in finding jobs and enticing more employers to recruit at the job fairs.  I would rank this as one of the top three action projects.  More assistance is also needed in helping students to find internship opportunities.

Anonymous

Comment 3

If this objective is chosen, it should be well publicized, as it will be a tremendous student recruitment tool.

Submitted by Mary Lynn Anderson, Professor of Nursing

Comment 4

I agree that focusing on career opportunities/placement is an important focus area and that Career Services plays an important role in it. As a faculty member, however, I am trying to do more in this area via… advising, introduction classes, the focus areas students select for their major projects in our major, introducing real problem based learning, introducing students to related career opportunities, promoting social capital in students through our HealthCat Wiki, student internships/volunteer work, interfacing with Career Services, etc. In my opinion, this endeavor needs to be a soup-to-nuts endeavor

Submitted by Patricia I. Hogan, Professor of Health and Fitness Education

Comment 5

The student career action and placement project should be expanded to include placement in graduate programs.  All departments should be working to educate students about their possibilities for job placement and/or graduate training, and all departments should work to place students in either graduate programs or initial employment. As a specialist in career counseling, I believe all students engage in a process of self evaluation and decision making about their capabilities and their initial goals upon graduation.  Unfortunately many students underestimate their potential.  And many students don't know how to weigh the possibility of graduate training with the appeal of a starting income. We aren't able to answer all of these questions for the students, but all faculty have insights that are shared with the assertive students. However, many students are more reticent, and less willing to ask for appropriate direction.  They fend for themselves, sometimes quite well, and sometimes not as well as they could with some insightful direction.

Submitted by Mary Pelton-Cooper, Associate Professor of Psychology

Comment 1

"Fast Track Faculty Replacement/Recruitment" is crucial.  In our department delays in gaining authorization for positions has prevented us from hiring good candidates or settling for one-year temporary faculty members, when we really need full-time, tenure track people.  Along with this, informal and initial interviewing needs to be allowed at national conferences.

Submitted by Mark Smith, Professor of English

Comment 2

My God the process as it exists is expensive and time consuming! I have vowed not to participate in these processes in the future because I believe often the decision is made in private meetings in spite of the fact that all are expected to go to the dinners and the insufferably long meetings and discussions. 

This may not be a helpful comment, but really, the university should take a look at how decisions are made in the rest of the world of business.  Since rarely is everyone happy with the final selection, should we really pretend everyone has a voice and that everyone should carefully consider the candidate?

 Submitted by Mary Pelton-Cooper, Associate Professor of Psychology

Comment 1

Thank you for your work entertaining and preparing AQIP projects for our comment.

I generally like the prioritization of the president’s council. Let me add a reason that I think that Improving Web Education should be number one, in addition to those other people have probably thought of already. My reason is that being able to enhance the number and quality of web based courses helps the university to be disaster resistant.  Students might not miss a beat as to their curriculum progression and achieving course objectives if we are facile with our course delivery options during any event that could close the university. Professors could perhaps continue what was supposed to be regular face to face instruction with web enhancement in order to keep up with course objectives.  We are probably the best university in our state to be able to maintain courses during a disaster or shut down situation, whether it be one day, or 8 weeks due to some illness scenarios.  We need to think about this more and more as we see universities go out of business after disasters (e.g. Katrina). I realize that the way the project is described, that the focus is on students who are only taking courses on line and who might not get a degree otherwise. I am wondering if it can be extended even a little to encourage more on line courses or be a stepping stone to this type of preparedness for switching from face to face to online if need be in the future.  This would mean amped up infrastructure for web based courses too. Maybe it doesn’t fit, but just something to think about – if a preparedness tweak or layer could be added.

The action project entitled “web site for student research” seems like a very narrow activity. I am wondering if it could be part of a broader vision to grow student researchers and scholars. Not sure, and not criticizing those who came up with the idea. Just seems pretty limited.

What I am not entirely excited about is 4 years and out. Everyone, including legislators, seems to think that getting people out of college with a degree will improve the business dynamic in our state. Parents also likely tire of paying tuition. While we certainly do not intend to keep students here indefinitely, I am a little concerned that having an AQIP project with this in mind could ultimately lead to pressure for dummification of curricula or courses or policies, and put pressure on faculty to push students to git-r-dun. It is amazing that any 18 year old can figure out what they want to study and get in the right curriculum the first time! We have so many that just do not know and who change in midstream, or after some experience. I do like the idea of a study to ascertain the factors for 5 yrs in college. I understand that 4 & out can look politically correct given our state situation and perhaps we could get mileage with legislators with this agenda, but we have to balance what this will mean as to quality when the findings lead to suggested or required operations for faculty & associates at NMU.   

Thank you, Cheryl Turton

Comment 2

Just a quick comment on Webeducation (ease of use and student satisfaction).

Although purely anecdotal, when talking with students and discussing their online experiences almost all of them prefer to have the same predictability and standardization in an online course as they experience in a traditional course. Students usually know what to expect in traditional online courses; lectures, three or four examinations, a few papers and maybe a presentation, etc. However, many students who have taken several online courses have commented that the format of their online courses vary tremendously. This variation takes on many forms. Some courses contain PowerPoint lectures, some video lectures, and still others website lectures. Additionally, some courses contain written homework assignments attached to the assignment dropbox, others have posted assignments on the announcement page. Students have told me this confuses them, and prompted some to avoid online classes altogether, in favor of the predictability of in-class courses (and this might be a contributing factor in online failure rates).

Without treading on academic freedom (and I know this is close), I believe departments can inch toward some standardization of online course format. Content is faculty's purview however, the 'look' and 'feel' of an online course is certainly an area that could be somewhat standardized, and I believe could greatly increase student satisfaction and ease of use.

Dale P. Kapla, Ph.D.,
Acting Department Head
Department of Criminal Justice
(906) 227-1616
dkapla@nmu.edu

Comment 3

I highly recommend this action project.  In addition to the outcome of improving student satisfaction, the number of web courses needs to be greatly increased.

Anonymous

Comment 4

I have reviewed the many fine projects included in the AQIP list. The one project that I personally would like to see ranked higher on the list is #4, Enhanced Support for Web Education. I feel that NMU has few resources allocated to the support and expansion of our online programs and that online education is our most important area of expansion and added revenue.

I am in agreement with the ranking of other initiatives.

Submitted by Mary Stunkard, Assistant Professor of Clinical Sciences

Comment 5

"Improving Web Education" should, I believe, be among the top three projects.  There's too great a diversity in the quality of the courses offered via the Web.  More needs to be done to insure that on campus students don't enroll in these courses, but instead those who live long distances from campus take them.

Submitted by Mark Smith, Professor of English

Comment 6

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed AQIP Projects.

 I agree with the comments made by Mark Smith related to the diversity in quality of Web based courses and the issue of space being available in the courses for at distance students.  I think Web based classes can provide an option for the student who is unable to be on campus when classes are scheduled. However, I have heard of on campus students taking only on line courses and at distance students being unable to enroll in an online course because space is not available.  I think this "scheduling" issue needs to be addressed. 

The project proposal discussed improving Web Education for students taking only online courses.  Since students are taking both on line and face to face classes, I am uncertain how the focus will be just on students taking only on line courses.  However, whatever can be done to maintain quality in the on line courses will be helpful. Expectations in an online course should be similar to the expectations in an on campus course.

Submitted by Eileen M. Smit, Professor of Nursing

Comment 7

Comment regarding "webucation".  I think that improving our on-line education system is a worthy goal.  However, I hope this action plan can be fleshed out a little more specifically before it is actually set in motion.  I think it would be hard for people to embrace an action plan that consists of:  form a committee, conduct a survey, make improvements based on the survey results. 

Submitted by Lesley Putman, Associate Professor of Chemistry

Comment 1

Learning expectations and benchmarks, once defined at various levels
throughout the curriculum, can be measured through course projects as well
as through external means.  It is important to try to keep this simple and
not create more perceived "hoops to jump" which can be barriers in student
recruitment and retention.

Submitted by Mary Lynn Anderson, Professor of Nursing

Comment 2

I would rank "Integrating Goals University-wide" as one of my top 3.  I believe much more can and should be done to provide NMU students with an integrated educational experience.  Some progress has been made in the past few years with the review of the Liberal Studies Program, but much still needs to be done in this area.  We need fewer interdepartmental committees about the operation of the university and more of them dealing with the education NMU students are receiving and how to improve this.

Submitted by Mark Smith, Professor of English

Comment 3

Dear Colleagues,

Although this proposed project has an honorable ideal as its goal I fear for its success.   I see two problems with this project that I believe need to be addressed before this project is put into full action.

(1)  Faculty within departments much less university wide have widely varying opinions on  academic standards and what it takes to achieve them yet we are the only ones qualified to make that decision.

I dare say that most faculty can agree to the general interpretation of  'ABCDF' grades but the *level of achievement *that must be obtained to be assigned an 'A' can vary widely.  Speaking from personal experience, the Physics faculty take significant flak for their expectations in Physics course but I really don't think students are the best judge of the achievement level in a course.  Most students want the easiest path to the best or most interesting job (that's what defined the first 4 years of my higher education .... then I went to graduate school).  As for faculty outside the Physics Department, I am willing and encourage discussion among those that understand the material in a general sense and can add to the education experience with their opinions.  Yet, to be completely honest I would never change my expectations based on a discussion even with a biologist or a chemist no matter how much I respect their advise.  I would always consult with my Departmental colleagues and even perhaps Physics faculty elsewhere before making a change to my level of expectation.

(2)  This type of project, if taken to its extreme, could lead to more 'formula' education rather than the promotion of academic freedom and student success.  I am generally concerned that this type of reasoning could lead to educational standards which are forced (i.e. legislated either by a powerful faculty voting body or in the worse case the state/federal level) upon the faculty and the students.  This smacks of the "Academic Bill of Rights" which is a cleverly disguised way of controlling the academic standards at the university/college level and forcing the system to graduate students no matter what the level of actual achievement has been.  I admit this is the worse case scenario and I really don't believe this is the goal of this proposed project.  Yet, I am concerned that it might open the proverbial can of worms.  Once that can is opened it is difficult if not impossible to close.

I can appreciate the desire of parents, students, and others to have universities defined their levels of achievement.  That is why we have GPA standards, reading and writing expectations, and other requirements for graduation.  We also use faculty reviews at the department and college level to insure faculty are not stepping outside of the boundaries of reasonable academic expectations.  In my personal experience both as a student and as faculty, the issue is not with the university not having defined standards but rather the lack of understanding by students on what it means to get a university education.  I have had students go as far as to say that I *have *give them a passing grade and/or a particular level of passing grade.  They often use reasons such as "I attended all lectures" (which they know I can't prove since I don't take attendance) or they use the excuse that they "have to graduate this year" (which is sometimes an outright lie).  At what point do we as a university stop worrying about the opinions of those not qualified to judge our standards and stand up and educate the public about what it means to get a university education?

In conclusion, I don't necessarily object to this proposed AQIP project being implemented.  Rather this is a critic and opinion on the project based from my personal experiences as a student in the recent past and as a faculty member.  If this project sticks to the goals of clearing up goals and defining achievement levels at the department and university level and then properly educating incoming students on these expectations then I believe it will have great success.  If the project diverges into an argument about what is achievement and who defines achievement and even takes on the characteristics of modifying our expectations so that students can graduate in 4 to 4.5 years no matter what level of education has been achieved then I fully expect it to fail.  That is another discussion for another time.

Anonymous

Comment 4

To me, integration of goals is one of the most fundamental aspects of an agency. That is how we get synergy, but we need to make sure the goals are the right/appropriate goals. Basic goals are usually outlined in the mission/vision statements of an agency. The mission is supposed to identify the ‘reason for being’ of an agency.  Most educational missions in a democratic society identify their goals as developing knowledgeable, independent/self-directed critical thinkers who are capable of economic self-sufficiency, who are good citizens (including world citizens), and who have an appreciation for the “educated” concept of the ‘good life”.

The common goals/mission/vision is a leadership issue (vs. a management issue) which indicates where we should be putting our time/energy/resources, and indicates the ultimate outcomes we should be focusing on for our students. That is, we don’t just want to do “things right”, we want to do the “right things right”.

As I understand it, most disciplines have outcomes that are directed at some aspects of the aforementioned goals (e.g., to prepare people for a profession/economic self-sufficiency), and the liberal studies do as well (e.g, how do I best self-govern my life in line with principle to pursue human excellence?) Some indicate that the discipline/liberal education represents a false dichotomy.  Greater Expectations: The Commitment to Quality as a Nation goes to School (Association of American Colleges and Universities, 2002) calls for radical reform in education in the direction of developing and promoting a practical liberal education, one that ends the false dichotomy between liberal and practical education: “The key to successful reform is a clear focus on the kinds of learning that students need for a complex world. The [Greater Expectations] panel urges an invigorated and practical liberal education as the most empowering form of learning for the twenty-first century…Students will continue to pursue different specializations in college. But across all fields, the panel calls for higher education to help college students become intentional learners who can adapt to new environments, integrate knowledge from different sources, and continue learning throughout their lives.  To thrive in a complex world, these intentional learners should also become: empowered through the mastery of intellectual and practical skills; informed by knowledge about the natural and social worlds and about forms of inquiry basic to these studies; responsible for their personal actions and for civic values” (Greater Expectations, 2002).

Whitehead (1967, p. 6) views Liberal Education as the “acquisition of the art of the utilization of knowledge”, and claims that only the mastery of a special area of knowledge (i.e., discipline area) can take the general ideas and human abilities previously mentioned and formulate them for “their service in the comprehension of life”.  Thus, areas of study (the hard sciences, the behavioral sciences, etc.) become the means through which the universal skills and abilities (liberal education outcomes) are applied to do particular tasks (McKeon, 1970) or to form, execute, and assess specific purposes (Knott, 1975) in ethical ways.  In this sense the distinction between liberal and professional education becomes a false dichotomy.  Indeed, when liberal education is viewed as the process of developing specific human abilities (or developing students able to understand and utilize their area of special expertise in the interest of achieving pervasive, humane, and ethical ends, as Knott says) the distinction between liberal and professional education should cease to exist.

Perhaps in that way we can think about integrating goals.

Submitted by Patricia I. Hogan, Professor of Health and Fitness Education

Comment 5

This is a very vague goal.  It could be very cumbersome and not very practical, or it could be a vision kind of goal that might inspire some generation of ideas.  Personally, I am not drawn to this goal since it does not lend itself to practical solutions to real student problems.

Submitted by Mary Pelton-Cooper, Associate Professor of Psychology

Comment 1

I don't understand why "4 Years and Out" is even on this list.  Those students for whom this is a high priority can, and I believe do, achieve this goal. Those who are willing to take 5 or more years to earn their degree-well, I think their university educational experience is a richer, more varied and deeper one.  True, some parents are really concerned about this, but all our students are adults and I don't hear complaining that they didn't finish in 4 years.

Submitted by Mark Smith, Professor of English

Comment 2

I find this an unreasonable project given the number of students we have who are first-generation college students and the number of students we have who work 20 or more hours per week.  We are not a one-size-fits-all community and our students need flexibility while exploring their educational options.

Submitted by Sheila Burns, Department Head and Professor of Psychology

Comment 1

Since this action project has a date of "on-going" this seems to be something that can easily be put aside with the notion that this is a "good feeling" type project.

What I would suggest is something more precise to address diversity on NMU's campus.  A project that the Center for Native American Studies would like to see is something such as a "Visiting Native Elders Series" which would be a specific project to promote the "big picture" of diversity.

Perhaps this can be an action project for the Center -- I understand that. My point is this - diversity on NMU's campus should be something valued and sewn into the entire university infrastructure without being on a rating list.

Submitted by April Lindala, Director, Center for Native American Studies

No comments.

Comment 1

I think this is a good idea. It would help me learn students’ names earlier in the course, and I think that helps with our “Northern Family” concept.  I could see the “Big Brother” slippery slope aspect of it though.

Submitted by Patricia I. Hogan, Professor of Health and Fitness Education

Comment 2

This one seems like a very practical goal.  I'm not sure it needs to be a university wide kind of goal, but some department could improve our recall of student faces and fast track our ability to learn student names by implementing this one.

Submitted by Mary Pelton-Cooper, Associate Professor of Psychology

No comments.