TABLE OF CONTENTS
Module I: Getting Into Character Page 1
Module II: Introducing the Day Page 1
Module III: Competition Descends on St. Petersburg Page 3
Module IV: Navigating to 2005 Page 9
Module V: Next Steps Page 19
USING YOUR REAL TIME RECORD
This document is a record of the event. This record includes text and images that were captured throughout the course of the session. The text is not a transcription of the event. Rather, it represents the documentor’s synthesis of the large-group reports and dialogues.
Module I: Getting into Character
We want you to take some time to get into a character. The year is 2005. Create the "story" of your character. Describe this character’s experience and interaction with SPJC? Write an outline or notes of your story on the provided hypertile and be prepared to tell your story in 15 minutes.
Team 1 Patty Curtin Jones Mary Smith Willie Felton Esther Oliver James Olliver Dianna Williams Team 2 Carl Kuttler Bev Grundset Lars Hafner Martha Campbell Edward Leach Carol Copenhaver Team 3 Nick Billiris Iris Yetter Charles Roberts Jerry Cade Guy Hancock Janice Buchanan David Henniger Noreen Hodges Jean Wortock Tina O’Daniels Chris Finney Team 5 Conferlete Carney Patsy Yeates Baynard Kurt Forster Steven Johnson George Greenlee David Hartman Team 6 Lucien Tomski Kay Adkins John Cromer Susan Reiter Karly Barr Douglas Duncan
Team
4
Module II: Introducing the Day
We have adopted a $250,000 budget that is going to change the face of SPJC. We are taking out color ads in Florida Trend and other magazines. I will tell you, though, our college is at a crossroads. There are not enough dollars to do the things we need to do at SPJC. By the time we finish the planned renovations of SPJC we will need to start over again &emdash; the dollars are coming that slowly. We do not need to become a 4-year institution in six months. What do we need to be doing? That is what we are here to illuminate. I want to thank each of you for making the commitment to be here today, we have a lot of work ahead of us.
Welcome to the CNL Management Center, a 13-year-old facility designed by one of Frank Lloyd Wright’s students. I would like to introduce four concepts for the day. We are here to work on strategic direction. Many companies are talking about moving in strategic directions. This focus has replaced a long-term strategic plan. Companies used to set a plan and
operate
their business off it for decades. That simply does not work today.
The unknown is pushing closer and closer, and that calls for a shift
in the way we think about the world. Strategic direction is a story,
or a direction, or a set of goals that describe where we think we
want to be. To illuminate that, companies develop a set of
"experiments" to test the viability of a strategic direction. A
change in strategic direction does not happen all at once, though.
Business as usual will continue, but the experiments are used to move
you in that direction. One of the concepts that we are going to
utilize today is back casting. Back casting involves putting
yourselves at some point in the future and looking backwards at how
you arrived there. Another concept is s’pose. In s’pose a
mental lab is developed that says "what if…" and assumes that
you can do a thing. You ignore what you believe impossible while you
build a robust model and then you debate the merits and feasibility
of the model. The third concept is strategy and operations. When you
leave here and return to work your duties (email, etc.) will still be
there (the operational path), but your focus today should be on new
an innovative ideas (strategic path). At some point you will still be
managing the operational path (keeping the existing or parent
organization going), but the strategic path (what you develop
today/change) will require some of your attention. Finally, drivers
such as competition, student diversity, lifelong students and new
technology were identified. We decided to focus on five things
today:
A couple of administrative things to note, you will be working in teams for most of the day. We do not take formal breaks; manage your own breaks. Please be here &emdash; we have watched what happens to teams when a person leaves to conduct other business. Do not worry about the process &emdash; that’s our job. We will provide lunch, but there is no formal break. Manage your own energy in the teams.
Module III: Competition Descends on St. Petersburg
New Administration Edward Leach Martha Campbell Conferlete Carney Guy Hancock Douglas Duncan Susan Reiter Jean Wortock John Cromer Steven Johnson Distance Learning Business Noreen Hodges Bev Grundset David Hartman Iris Yetter Mary Smith Dianna Williams Karly Barr Lars Hafner Patsy Yeates Baynard Workforce Development Business Willie Felton Nick Billiris Kay Adkins Tina O’Daniels Kurt Forster Chris Finney Carl Kuttler Jerry Cade Lucien Tomski Learning Paradigm Business Patty Curtin Jones Charles Roberts Janice Buchanan Esther Oliver Carol Copenhaver George Greenlee James Olliver David Henniger
Three of the teams represent companies whose mission has led them to enter the St. Petersburg and take over the market share of the Junior College. The fourth team is a new group of administrators who comes in to revamp the junior college from the ground up. All teams are asked to stretch their thinking bud also avoid "perfect world" solutions as they talk about what they have accomplished between 1999 and 2005.
Team Reports
We want to give each team an opportunity to report to the group.
Team 1 &emdash; Learning Paradigm Business
We decided we would serve all of Pinellas County. We were going to offer open entry and exit, a multifunctional classroom design to accommodate all types of students. We planned to bring in experts (e.g., Bill Gates, etc.) and broadcast lectures to all sites. We developed vidweb courses that have strong Internet and web items, which provided a very robust interaction between faculty and students. We developed valid, reliable methods to access student learning types. We also streamlined the student services. We were the amazon.com of the college world. Our staff development program focuses on retention. We access up-front the learning styles and the needs of our students and faculty. We serve quickly and easily with lots of options. We also provided a variety of learning options and specialized hours to accommodate a variety of student situations. Our faculty and staff are the best available and we continually retrain and support their learning. We implemented state-of-the-art technology, including a palm-type learning aide for the students, which allows the students to download books and
other related items. Our staffing method includes the master teacher concept and is augmented by international experts. We also looked at support for discipline-based ongoing development. We spent a good deal of money researching what worked and did not with learning paradigms to pick the best one to use. In addition, we continued to refine that paradigm with ongoing research. We also had readily available curriculum design support for faculty. We decentralized decision-making to allow each site to make decision-making on site and delight the customer.
Team 2
&emdash; Distance Learning
We put SPJC out of business by implementing "Education with
Direction." We specialize in distance learning, but we are able to
provide and capture the entire market. We offered anywhere, anytime,
anyplace learning opportunities. We have "on the spot"
decision-making. Students pay for courses after completion. We teach
24 hours a day, seven days a week. We are customer-focused. We will
do whatever it takes to please the consumer. We have to have an image
and credibility internationally. All this allowed us to come in and
take over the 
market.
We stress thinking outside the box. We can access anyplace in the
world, which aids credibility and flexibility and we bring in
partners from every segment of the marketplace. We bring chief
technology experts in to feed the process. We are continually
building relationships with businesses. We have identified a
full-range of needs for our students. We meet everyone’s needs,
not just the two-year students, we include four-year, adult and
graduate students. We continually grow and enhance our offerings
including cross-curriculum options. We use a continuous evaluation
model that provides constant feedback. We are recognized as an
international leader and we provide continuous learning for our
students. Our market is everyone. Our support services include
affordable payments, accessibility, earning while you are learning
and we continuous faculty retraining. We were concerned about
losing the
"human touch," so we developed ways for students to interact with
each other and our faculty. We also have continuos mentoring for
faculty and students. We arrange our faculty into teams. Each faculty
member must serve on two teams, which promotes cross-pollination of
learning. We pay premium wages so we can ensure that we have the best
faculty for our students.
Team 3 &emdash; New Administration
Higher
education is a competitive market. We decided to spin off the
Seminole county facility. We split the focus and priority of our
degree program into two branches skills-based and curriculum-based.
We applied the ABR model for curriculum development.
We
eliminated geographical boundaries. We looked at the needs of five
counties around our current location and ultimately the entire state.
We became an education broker, brokering quality across the state. We
place more emphasis on quality, including additional sources of
education. We placed additional emphasis on quantitative data
measurement to allow us to measure our effectiveness. We created a
cross-functional structure and cut down the number of learning silos
(to promote cross-learning).
We reward risk-taking in our faculty and we shifted from a management-driven to a customer-driven evaluation system. We formed business alliances with all levels of business (largest to the smallest). We gave faculty more autonomy. We provided the leading edge technology and site-specific technology support to all our facilities.
Team 4
&emdash; Workforce Development
We integrated the best parts of the other plans into our organization through acquisition. We knew we could provide responsiveness, a good price/value tradeoff, learning on the go. We plan to guarantee businesses the types of training they desire. We are going to provide an extended warrantee. Students leave with a bundle of skills not just credits. Students can return to the university to upgrade or add to their skill set. No application fees or book fees. We plan to teach current marketable skills. We plan to bring it where student/employers want it. We have knowledge engineers making up our staff. We provide an ease of access, open entry and exit, and provide students with the skills they want. We provide career advising online, current technology, a sound curriculum base. We provide business-industry exchange, continual training for faculty. We use adult learning principles as the basis for our firm.
Module IV: Navigating to 2005
Synthesis Team Patsy Yeates Baynard Lars Hafner Jean Wortock David Hartman Janice Buchanan Douglas Duncan Distance Learning Team James Olliver Susan Reiter David Henniger Carl Kuttler Guy Hancock Iris Yetter George Greenlee John Cromer Workforce Development Team Kay Adkins Conferlete Carney Noreen Hodges Esther Oliver Carol Copenhaver Patty Curtin Jones Jerry Cade Charles Roberts Student Services Team Willie Felton Mary Smith Dianna Williams Nick Billiris Edward Leach Chris Finney Kurt Forster Wendy Berry The Changing Learning Paradigm Team Lucien Tomski Tina O’Daniels Kathy Federico Martha Campbell Steven Johnson Bev Grundset Karly Barr
Synthesis Team
Let us look at what we have already done. We are making strides in delivering our educational programs, but it still needs work and is an ongoing process. We should add the educational outcomes to the mission statement. We have not used educational outcome data to improve learning. We need to have better strategies to implement the educational data. We made significant strides in improving delivery, but this is ongoing. Most of the curriculum design has been done by the faculty not the curriculum designers, but we are designing viable curriculum. Student services are one of the major areas we still need to work on. We want to change every instance of the word students to learners. We want to broaden the focus to include the entire spectrum. We really do not know why people leave us. We do not have mechanisms in place to track why a student is attending SPJC. Do we want managed enrollment or ballooning enrollment? Managed does not mean limited, it just means that we are informed about program levels so we can apply adequate resources. I think we have made a lot of headway, but it is hard to track. We need to rethink the entire student services program, including what we offer and do not. We need to retrain the faculty to be advisors, which creates a stake in the student on the part of the faculty. That would make it easier to track why students are there. We are just beginning to implement technology to improve communication access for students. We are not refining our planning, evaluation and assessment systems for SACS; we are doing it to better programs for our students. We are working on a college-wide, technology-support plan, but it is ongoing. How do we mean diversity? Do we really want to celebrate diversity? How were diversity and support placed together? It is a shame that we do not just accept our diversity and get on to what is important. Why do we want a diverse staff? It is important because we have a diverse student population. We are not as diverse as we should be, especially in the student arena. We are providing additional training opportunities for faculty, but we are still lagging behind for the staff. We are lacking in morale, loyalty and customer service issues. Strengthening the college’s identity in the community is an ongoing issue. We have made positive strides in this area in the last year. Major headway is being achieved in all areas of facility and equipment improvements, but this is an ongoing issue. Securing additional resources in the form of gifts and scholarships is ongoing and requires specific, measurable goals each year to keep it on track. We need to have cross reporting of progress on our various incentive programs so that everyone knows how it is going.
1999-2002 GOALS, LEARNING OUTCOMES and OBJECTIVES
A.
Create a new workforce development team that is separate
Create a seamless interface between credit and non-credit workforce programs
Delete obsolete programs and create ten new programs per year
Develop varied learning assessment methods
Develop customized learning modules using robust interactions
Explore new models for program development for distance learning so it becomes an every day process
B.
Create an integrated workforce registration system
Implement student support to meet student needs
Move financial aid under student services
Student support should address distance learning needs
Provide open entry/open access courses
Create college accountability and awareness of accountability by students
Work with Pinellas County to improve the level of student college preparation
C.
D.
(both academic and experiential)
Provide faculty training and retraining in creating and designing distance learning and multi-media courses
Reevaluate compensation for distance learning
E.
Merge the workforce program with the community
F.
Create technical delivery systems
Establish separate space for workforce programs
Student and faculty access to technology expanded to meet changing needs
Technical support systems and structures need to be mission central
G.
Develop cooperative program and curriculum development grants
Module
V: Putting It Together
Team Reports
Workforce
Development Team
We used a
non-linear mode of thinking (i.e., we looked backward from the
future). Where are we now? In workforce, development is being managed
as part of a larger set of issues. We believe we need to bring it
out. The output is not as effective as it should be. The workforce
program requires us to work with both credit and non-credit programs,
which creates a dichotomy. In 1999 we has insufficient staff, time
and focus, our management was too diffused because of other issues
and fires being put out; time-consuming decision-making issues. Today
we work together seamlessly. We have many good interactions between
credit and non-credit programs. We manage the credit program but are
able to refer people over to the non-credit side if that is what they
need. We have integrated registration, adequate space and equipment,
seamless cooperative work and technology delivery systems. We will
create an average of ten new programs each year, but we do not carry
dead wood. We are constantly doing research to make sure we are
keeping up with the marketplace. One of our experiments looked at
three programs that would never be put into the academic curriculum,
but would have a person dedicated to overseeing the day-to-day
functions of the program. To do this we would need to hire a manager
and more faculty, rent space. Experiment two looked at taking entire
programs out into the community. This is based on a Vallencia College
program. This requires additional staffing, a marketing plan and
funding. The third experiment looks at online workforce program
development. We propose using the dental hygiene AS program. We would
like to enter the vocational business. We propose looking at the
criminal justice and real estate programs for online development. We
need funding, marketing, staff/curriculum advisors. Experiment four
looks at creating two non-credit programs. We propose project
management and professional training. Resources we would need are
support staff, funding and a marketing plan.
Learning Paradigm Team
We looked at the assumptions of the current paradigm, what our target paradigm is and how we get there. The current paradigm has certain assumptions: students are taking an active role in learning, assessment methods are valid, the traditional classroom is the hub of learning, classroom tracks with real-world experience, our sequence and scope is right, we have a bias toward AA transfer, there is a faculty/student experimental dissonance, credit learning is more valuable than non-credit learning. Our new paradigm stretches us. Students have different measurable learning styles. Further, different learning modes should be matched up with different teaching styles. We should emphasize more team learning. In the old paradigm, working together is equated with cheating. Vary the evaluations of learning. Independent learning would become the focus moving away from the classroom hub. Teachers need to become facilitators who match teaching and learning styles. Experiment one looked at matching teaching modes with learning modes. We believe this is an evolutionary process, it will not happen over night. Phase one has us sensitizing our students and faculty to style assessment. Phase two has students to select instructors who match their learning mode. We need identify willing instructors and an assessment tool. We would need an advisor to manage the program. Experiment two looks at collaborative team based approached. We would look for entire sections that are entirely team-based experiences. We would need a project manager for this project. A miracle will get us there. Show me I will watch. Tell me I will hear. Involve me and I will learn.
Student Service Team
We struggled to develop a focus and lay out our role in student success. We decided that student services are an umbrella with a safety net to catch students that fell through the cracks. We wanted to reshape our services to provide accountability. We looked at ways to shift services and provide the best to our students. We also want to provide customer service to our students. The present paradigm for student services is not working and we know it. We want to shift our services into an outreach. We want to implement a counseling/advising program for at-risk students. We hope that more services will keep them persist. We plan to take 150 at-risk students and have encouraged them to use the current services and evaluate them. Our goal is to retain the students. Experiment two looked at online registration. Many of our students are capable of advising themselves. We have many adult learning students who see the registration services as a roadblock to what they need. We plan to extend online registration through the entire application process. This allows students to self-council themselves. They could be connected to the college from their business or home facilitating ease of registration. We feel we have all the resources we need with the implementation of the People Soft system. We will need some additional laptops and a committee or person to take ownership of this program. We need some statistical tracking methods to evaluate the effectiveness of these programs.
Distance Learning Team
In 2005, learners my elect to have their learning needs met at a distance via customized learning units, using a variety of methods. Distance learning is currently departmentalized and it is not organized to support distance learning. Faculty compensation is not keeping pace. Technical support structure needs to be mission central. Student and faculty access to technology needs to be upgraded. Institutionalize faculty training evaluating distance learning. Explore new models for program development. Experiment one is an online application, registration and payment process that works flawlessly. Prerequisites are a major roadblock in online registration. Many of our students cannot register online without a lot of help. We need to pre-advise the students before they engage the system, which will aid them in selecting the appropriate courses. Experiment two looked curriculum differences between distance learning and traditional courses. Experiment three is a pilot of open entry - open exit courses. Experiment four creates a one-semester, in-house group sabbatical for students to explore distance learning options. Experiment five explored new models for program development in distance learning so it becomes an everyday business type access.
Synthesis Team
We labeled all your wonderful ideas and integrated them into our goals. Why do we work at SPJC? What is our mission? Because of the people, we work with. The students we teach. The job we do. It keeps us open to new ideas. We believe what we do makes a difference. We give home. We are enriched by our exchange with students and each other. We make a difference to our students. The business community depends on us. We create opportunities.
Module VI: Next Steps
You still have a process to go though to decide what experiments you go forward with. We have to finish the strategic goals for the cabinet meeting on Monday. We opened three new centers this year. I consider this a success.
