heather bouillon, sally heath, lisa kuron wilfrid laurier ...€¦ · heather bouillon, sally...
TRANSCRIPT
Optimizing Program Development
Heather Bouillon, Sally Heath, Lisa Kuron Wilfrid Laurier University
Session Agenda
• Introductions • Context Setting • Laurier’s New Program Development Model • Discussion
2
Laurier Context
3
18,596 2+3 117
4
Process Change Influencers
5
Institutional Quality
Assurance Procedures
(2011)
Integrated Planning and
Resource Management
Exercise (2012-2014)
Negotiations of Strategic
Mandate Agreements
(2014)
Changes to MAESD Program Approval Process (2014)
Strategic Academic
Plan (2015-2020)
RCM Budget Model
(2017-2018)
External Drivers
6
Reconciling Competing Priorities
Proposal Authors: Academic Quality, Departmental
Reputation
University: Financial Viability, Revenue Generation, Strategic Fit
7
8
Stage 1: Statement of Intent
New Program idea
Consult with Quality Assurance Office
Define parameters for and conduct market
analysis
Use known parameters to create
draft budget
Use market analysis and budget to develop
Statement of Intent
9
Step 1: New Program Ideas
• Ideas for new programs driven by academic units to:
– Increase range of degree level offerings (i.e. addition of graduate programs)
– Respond to new trends in the discipline or market (i.e. Data Science)
– Capture new segment of student market (i.e. BSW) – Align with faculty research interests – Improve departmental reputation
10
New Program idea
Consult with Quality
Assurance Office
Define parameters for and conduct
market analysis
Use known parameters to create draft
budget
Use market analysis and budget to
develop SOI
Step 2: Consult with QAO
• Plan time lines and develop work plan, working backwards from desired start date
• Connect proposal author(s) with relevant support units
11
New Program idea
Consult with Quality
Assurance Office
Define parameters for and conduct
market analysis
Use known parameters to create draft
budget
Use market analysis and budget to
develop SOI
Step 3: Define Parameters for & Conduct Market Analysis
New Program idea
Consult with Quality
Assurance Office
Define parameters for and conduct
market analysis
Use known parameters to create draft
budget
Use market analysis and budget to
develop SOI
12
• Parameters vary depending on project needs • E.g., Tuition, curriculum, labour market needs
• Offers data to support decisions; acts as a gatekeeper
• Paid for by faculty
Step 4: Create Draft Budget New Program
idea
Consult with Quality
Assurance Office
Define parameters for and conduct
market analysis
Use known parameters to create draft
budget
Use market analysis and budget to
develop SOI
13
Step 5: Use Market Analysis and Budget to Inform SOI
• Institutional fit • Strategic Mandate Agreement Alignment • Relationship to IPRM • Tuition and Program Costs • Justifiable Duplication • Evidence of Societal and Labour Market Need • Evidence of Student Demand • Enrolment Planning • Experiential Learning
14
New Program idea
Consult with Quality
Assurance Office
Define parameters for and conduct
market analysis
Use known parameters to create draft
budget
Use market analysis and budget to
develop SOI
The Details…
15
Step 3: Potential Data Sources
16
• Government data (e.g., workingincanada.gc.ca) • Job advertisements • White papers, industry reports, newspapers • Meetings/focus groups with employers, alumni,
current students • Institutional data (e.g., enrolment, graduation rates)
– Common University Data Ontario
Societal/Labour Market Demand
17
Student Demand
18
Market Differentiation
19
Market Differentiation
20
Market Differentiation
21
Step 4: More Information Available
22
Financial Modelling Process
23
Resource Summary Form
Draft Budget
Check to SOI
Full Budget Development
SOI 5 Year Budget Inputs
24
Students
Intake each year
Retention Rate
Tuition Rate
Grant Information
Program Information
# of Courses
Required vs. elective breakdown
Existing elective capacity
Teaching Mix
Average courses taught
Specific Direct Costs
Staff
Basic Operating Expenses
Other Information
Equipment Needs
Space Needs
Delivery Needs
Qualitative – further Investigation required
Inputs Standard Mix
Full 5 Year Program Budget Inputs
25
Students
Intake each year
Intake mix
Retention Rate
Tuition Rate
Grant Information
Program Information
# of NEW Courses
# of labs/tutorials
Required vs. elective breakdown
Existing elective capacity
Teaching Mix
Average courses taught
Specific Direct Costs
Staff
Full-time Faculty Resources
Part-time Faculty Resources
Basic Operating Expenses
Other Information
Equipment Needs
Space Needs
Delivery Needs
Quantitative – further Investigation complete
Inputs Standard Mix
Calculation of Faculty Resources
26
Course No. of Students Max. Class Size Total Sections Course No. of Students Max. Class Size Total Sections
HB101 38 80 1 HB101 51 80 1
HB102 38 80 1 HB102 51 80 1
0 38 0 0 51 0 0
0 38 0 0 51 0 0
0 38 0 0 51 0 0
0 38 0 0 51 0 0
HB200 34 60 1
HB201 34 60 1
HB202 34 60 1
HB203 34 60 1
0 34 60 1
0 34 60 1
New Courses (Major):
Year 1 2016/2017 Year 2 2017/2018
• From total sections required each year, can confirm full-time faculty resources with planning group with reference to institutional metrics
• Balance of sections are taught by sessional faculty
Internal Resources
27
• Templates are developed within the VPA’s office and reviewed each year
• VPA’s office also develops and reviews a list of standard costs and inputs each year, in consultation with relevant internal experts
• Faculty Financial Analysts develop the program budgets and log process on a shared drive
• VPA’s office reviews before any presentation (e.g. to Dean’s council, Senate Finance etc.)
Stage 2: Proposal Approval
Proposal drafted
Proposal approved by internal committees
Proposal reviewed by external experts
Proposal finishes internal approval
stages
Proposal sent out for external approval
(quality and funding)
28
29
Internal Approvals Required
30
Unit-level curriculum procedures
Faculty / Divisional Council
Program Review Sub-Committee
External Review
Senate Academic Planning
Senate Finance Committee
Senate
External Approvals Required
31
Senate
Ontario Universities Council on Quality
Assurance
Ministry of Advanced Education and Skills
Development
Curricular Quality
Funding Eligibility
MAESD Program Approval Requests
2012 • Brief Description • Certification of societal need
by executive head • Evidence of justifiable
duplication
2016 • Alignment with university’s
Strategic Mandate Agreement • Internal / external tuition
comparators • Justifiable duplication • Evidence of Societal / labour
market need • Evidence of student demand • Enrolment planning • Experiential learning • Program prioritization
initiatives
32
The times, they are a changin’…
Excerpt from 2012 funding approval request: “The MA in CM is a “niche” program that duplicates no other program in Canada.”
Excerpt from a 2016 funding approval request: There are a few examples of comparable programs at other Ontario universities, but none that are direct competitors due to Laurier’s design focus (digital and physical), hands-on learning, and the inclusion of liberal arts into the program curriculum. Ryerson University’s Faculty of Communications and Design offers related courses in their Graphic Communications Management, Journalism, Image Arts, Professional Communications, and the RTA School of Media programs; however, they do not offer an entire comparable program. Ryerson’s current programs tend to focus on design without the additional emphasis on the theoretical and critical thinking gained through the liberal arts component of our proposed program. The University of Waterloo offers a Master of Digital Experience Innovation, which is focused more on the digital than user experience or experience design. This graduate degree focuses on the management of digital technologies, rather than design aspects. Additionally, this degree does not provide students with the critical skills honed through the liberal arts, and is offered at the graduate, rather than undergraduate level. Brock University offers two programs that bear some resemblance to what is proposed here, but there are important differences. Their BSc in Computer Science and Visual Arts is tailored to those interested in programming, software development, and digital media. There is neither the emphasis nor breadth of focus on the liberal arts as in the UXD program. Their Interactive Arts and Science program is closer to the UXD program insofar as it has a stronger grounding in the liberal arts, but it does not bring together user design aspects with the strong practical skills development that students in the UXD program will develop through the partnership with Conestoga College. The combination of design and liberal arts education, coupled with the technical skills developed through the Graduate Certificate in Interactive Media Management – User Experience Design, makes the Bachelor of Design in User Experience Design a unique offering within the province.
33
Benefits of Laurier Model
• Widespread consultation on both academic and administrative sides of the university – Transparency and collaborative partnerships
• Strong support structure for viable new program ideas
• Extremely high rate of external approval
34
Challenges to Model • Strategic Mandate Agreements require long-
term new program planning with limited flexibility
• New program developments are resource-intensive to the university
• Processes (both internal and external) are time-consuming (e.g. 2+ years from idea to enrolment)
35
Ideal Compromise
36
Program Quality
Financial Sustainability
Strategic Institutional Priorities
Optimal Environment
Impact
37
“The new forecasting process developed has been crucial to our planning processes, providing increased transparency and
more data-informed decisions.”
-Bruce Arai, Assistant Provost: Strategy
Thank you!
Heather Bouillon: [email protected] Sally Heath: [email protected]
Lisa Kuron: [email protected]