WHAT’S YOUR QEP?…toolbox for broad-based participation

Queens University of CharlotteProfile Located in Charlotte, North Carolina Private, co-ed, masters-level university founded in 1857 Commitment to liberal arts and professional studies Serves approximately 2,300 undergraduates Five North Carolina professors of the year 16 NCAA Division II men’s and women’s athletic teams Award winning international study and internship programs

QEP Reaffirmation in 2011 QEP process began in 2009

QEP Timeline

February 2009

March 2009 April 2009 May 2009 Summer 2009

Determine topic selection strategies with team #1

Gather topic ideas from the entire community

Collect feedback; hold community discussions to narrow topic choices

Announce three topic choices; assemble faculty team #2 to write white papers

Faculty team writes white papers

September 2009

October 2009

November 2009

December 2009

2010

Present white papers; arrange community discussions

Advance papers through necessary committees and councils

Collect and organize campus-wide input

Announce topic; generate enthusiasm

Guide team #3: Implementation

Guiding Questions

How can we encourage the entire community to participate?

How can we generate enthusiasm for topic selection?

How can we accomplish these goals using our resources wisely?

COMMUNITCOMMUNITYY

Timeline for Campus-wide input

Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5

Brainstorming & Outreach

Brainstorming & Outreach

Narrowing Narrowing Narrowing

Set ballot boxes Ice Cream Stations

Conduct focus groups

Gather and condense ideas

Use rubric to narrow to 3 topics

Recruit student orgs Encourage online discussions

Lunchroom Blitz

Survey to rank ideas

Announce topics in Week 6

Set up Intranet site

Student Involvement

Ask the right questions. Meet students where they live, work,

and play. Make use of high traffic areas where

students normally congregate. Recruit student organizations to help. Encourage peer-to-peer communication. Feed them.

Idea Ballot boxes were spread around campus, so students could submit ideas wherever they gather: Center for Academic Success, dining

room, residence halls, etc.

Lunchroom Blitz

Colorful bags, QEP descriptions, conversation prompts, and ballots to offer ideas were pre-arranged on each table. For 3 days students discussed and submitted their ideas while dining.

Lunchroom Blitz

Student and staff volunteers approached students in the dining room to stimulate conversation and to encourage idea submissions.

Eating lunch. Offering ideas.

North Carolina Teaching Fellows discussing the QEP.

Ice Cream For Your Thoughts

One day during the lunch and dinner hours, we set up a student-run ice cream station in a high traffic area.

Students received a free ice cream cone for offering a QEP topic idea.

Student Organizations

Recruiting the help of student organizations promotes peer-to-peer communication, generates ownership and energy, and is FREE!

The Latin American Club hosts “A cookie for your thoughts” in the student center.

Faculty & Staff Involvement

Divide work among three committees to prevent burnout and ensure maximum participation.

Invite a cross-section of faculty and staff to serve on committees.

Use technology: intranet & survey tools. Keep it low-tech too; develop opportunities

for face-to-face discussions. Communicate widely. Work with Faculty Council and the Center

for Excellence in Teaching & Learning. Feed them.

Generating Topic Ideas: Committee #1

Director of Career & Internship Services Vice President of Enrollment Management University Librarian Associate Professor, Nursing Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs Assistant Professor, Environmental Studies Director of Athletics Dean of Students Associate Professor, Psychology Associate Professor, Education Director of Academic Advising Associate Professor, Communication Associate Professor, Business 5 student representatives

Use Technology

Reserving a space through the university’s intranet system allows a space for vibrant discussion, a one-stop shop for relevant information, and a timeline.

Setting up a QEP “class” in Blackboard or Moodle could be a good alternative for schools without an intranet.

Use Technology

Electronic survey tools are available through intranet systems, course management platforms, or via the web (e.g. www.surveymonkey.com). Electronic surveys are useful for instantaneous data, point of contact response, and easy to use interfaces.

Faculty, staff, and students were invited to thoughtfully discuss possible QEP topics.

Discussion Groups

Next, faculty and staff were invited to a reception to discuss the completed white papers and to offer feedback about which topic generated the most enthusiasm.

Discussion Groups

Administration & Board of Trustees President’s Council Executive Council Dean’s Council Academics Committee of the Board of

Trustees

What’s Our QEP?

White Paper Topics

Student-faculty InteractionWe would create an intentional structure for different types of academic collaboration between faculty and students, perhaps emphasizing research opportunities but also potentially including advising and mentoring.

Sustainability in a Global ContextWe would think critically about the stewardship role of the U.S. and other countries in the world and our duty to create a sustainable global environment, encouraging the campus community to “act locally but think globally.”

Diversity and Civic EngagementWe would frame diversity so that it is not thought of as a problem to be solved but as an opportunity to explore the creative tension that diverse backgrounds and cultures can bring, emphasizing the power of action and communication to build community and make positive change happen.

Smart Moves

Avoided competition; vote language. Made it fun and relaxed. Very affordable; virtually no money. No burnout – the work was spread over three

committees, which had the benefit of getting more people involved.

Faculty led discussion during administrative meetings.

Kept it focused on student learning. Invited students to participate in decision-

making.

Less Smart Moves

Should have been more clear about final decision making process

Could have allowed more time for white papers; for the authors it seemed to feel like a “hurry up and wait” situation.

First student “ballot” was more complicated than it needed to be.

Should have had a focus group for staff only.