Walters State's Vision

Walters State Community College shall be a regional college of choice with twenty-first century campuses, dedicated to excellence in teaching and service, guided by shared values and principles, and inspired to exceed student and community expectations (Walters State Community College 2006-2007 College Catalog and Student Handbook, p. 6).

Walters State's Mission

Walters State Community College, a public two-year higher education institution, is a component of the State University and Community College System of Tennessee governed by the Tennessee Board of Regents (TBR). The mission of Walters State is consistent with the college's shared vision for guiding the college into the twenty-first century and with the values expressed within the Campus Compact. Walters State is a learning-centered, comprehensive community college established to provide affordable and quality higher education opportunities for the residents of upper East Tennessee. The college offers programs of study that lead to the Associate of Science, Associate of Arts, and Associate of Applied Science degrees. The college has degree programs built on a General Education foundation that emphasize learning outcomes and provide information technology instruction across the curriculum. Students may receive a certificate of credit for programs of study of one year or less; students may also receive a certificate of recognition for non-credit programs and services.

To facilitate student learning and transfer, the college maintains articulation, collaboration, and partnerships with public schools, technology centers, colleges, and universities. Service to business and industry is facilitated through the utilization of partnerships, networks, and customized programs and courses supporting the development of competitive products, services, and operations. The college provides faculty and staff of the highest quality dedicated to excellence in teaching, student learning, and service (Walters State Community College 2006-2007 College Catalog and Student Handbook, p. 7, par. 2 and 4 omitted).

Methodology for Selection of QEP Topic

In Fall 2004, Walters State built its SACS Leadership Team which traveled to the SACS Annual Conference in Atlanta, Georgia. In Spring 2005, Faculty Representative and Associate Professor of English Carla Todaro, accompanied by Walters State Internal Auditor Cindy Kington, began a series of one-hour focus groups to ascertain critical issues regarding student learning that the institution felt needed to be addressed. These focus groups began with faculty: 22 focus groups were conducted at the Morristown, Greeneville, and Sevierville campuses to give each faculty member the opportunity to answer two questions:

Question 1: If you could identify one issue that seems to hinder student learning at Walters State, what would it be?

Question 2: What can Walters State Community College do to improve student learning?

Answers to these questions widely varied, yet one thing remained constant: the enthusiasm generated in those focus groups by faculty who were given the time to speak about their greatest concerns regarding student learning, including the perception that they "spoke one language" while their students "understood another," and their recommendations for how student learning could be stimulated and strengthened[WSCC1] , including stronger study skills and students' knowledge of how they learn best.

In Summer 2005, Todaro and Kington conducted focus groups with all professional and support staff of the college from each campus, asking them the same two questions that they had asked faculty. Many focus group meetings extended longer than the one-hour time period simply because staff felt that they had much to share from their observations of students and learning that differed from the faculty's perspective[WSCC2] . Because they saw the students outside of the classroom and listened to their concerns, worries, and life responsibilities, all of which served to distract the students from their studies and from forming social ties to the college and their peers, these staff members felt that faculty who could make the time in the classroom more meaningful and targeted more directly at the students instead of just at the material would be more successful in improving student learning. In short, these staff members called for student-centered learning environments.

In Fall 2005, Todaro and Kington conducted eight separate focus groups for students at the Morristown, Greeneville, and Sevierville campuses. In an attempt to gain input from a representative cross-section of students, focus groups were scheduled during the day, during the evening, and online. Participation was sought from first-semester students as well as from those near graduation. Focus group questions were tailored to students in the following ways:

Question 1: If you could identify one issue that would improve your learning, what would it be? Or, what seems to hinder your learning?

Question 2: What can Walters State Community College do to improve student learning?

Just as faculty and staff quickly grew interested in the questions, so did the students. They had strong opinions about both questions once they were able to move beyond their skepticism regarding why they were being asked these questions in the first place. Students took responsibility for their learning ("I hinder my own learning because I have no discipline"; "I never learned how to learn") and also laid responsibility at the door of the instructors and the institution ("My instructors move through the material too quickly for me to absorb it, and they never consider that I might have been left behind two chapters ago"; "Walters State could improve my learning by making our schedules more flexible and by offering student services at night and online"). They were eager to share their concerns, and they expressed a desire to "learn how to learn."

After completion of the focus groups, Kington compiled the individual responses and grouped them into seven categories:

1. Teaching/Learning Styles: Student learning can be improved by assessing and matching instructor teaching styles to student learning styles.
2. Motivation: Student learning can be improved by motivating students to learn.
3. Personal Responsibility/Accountability: Student learning can be improved by encouraging students to take responsibility for active learning and by holding them accountable for results.
4. Advising and Counseling: Student learning can be improved by streamlining and enriching the advising process.
5. Life Responsibilities: Student learning can be improved by the college facilitating coping strategies to assist students in balancing school work and classes with personal obligations.
6. Lack of Preparation for College: Student learning can be improved by preparing them for college-level work before they enroll in college-level courses and by increasing their awareness of "what it means to be a college student."
7. Valuing Broad Education: Student learning can be improved by increasing their awareness of the relevance of all courses, not just those in their major or study.
8. Raising Standards and Quality: Student learning can be improved by raising performance standards and expectations in all courses and by maintaining consistency in quality across the disciplines.

During this time period of the focus groups, Todaro and Kington conducted staff and faculty forums to keep everyone apprised of the progress of the QEP topic selection progress and to solicit further suggestions. The SACS Leadership Team met monthly, and Carla Todaro provided periodic updates to Walters State's Executive Council and Faculty Council.

Critical Issues to be Addressed

As the faculty, SACS Leadership Team, and Executive Council began to discuss the focus group response categories, they found that a number of concerns overlapped. The faculty's and staff's deepest academic concerns included:

• They knew that they wanted their students to succeed for the students' sake and to boost the institution's retention and graduation rates.
• They knew that their students seemed uninterested, lacking motivation to stretch their thinking in their classes.
• They recognized that many students came to college underprepared to meet the content and study challenges imposed upon them by college-level work. Indeed, many students did not enter at college level: while the average ACT score in Tennessee is 19, 70% of entering Walters State students must complete at least some remedial or developmental math, reading, or writing upon entrance due to below average ACT scores (Walters State Cohort Report, 2005, p.3).
• They realized that students brought "life" with them: work and family challenges that were very real and looming factors in their attempts at academic success.

After deliberation, Walters State faculty and staff concluded that choosing one of these statements to name "most important" would be impossible. Therefore, they decided to combine them into topics that would encompass the issues that they felt to be important and would, at the same time, lend themselves to direct measurement of student learning. These two broad topics were 1) instructor teaching styles and student learning styles and 2) life responsibilities that seem to negatively impact student achievement. Following this combination, they worked in conjunction with the Walters State Library staff to conduct a brief literature review related to topics. The literature review focused on topics such as motivation (Dembo, 2004), collaborative learning (Drew, 1990), adult learners (Fairchild, 2003; Hayes, 1996), inquiry learning (Harada & Yoshina, 2004), responsibility for learning (Howell, 2001), addressing student preconceptions (Lucas & Myers, 2004), advising (Marques, 2005), assessing learning styles (Rochford, 2003), student success strategies (Sayles & Shelton, 2005), teacher expectations of students (Schilling & Schilling, 1999), diversity of learning styles (Tomlinson, 1999; Vaiie, Cabanach, Gonzalez-Pienda, & Pineiro, 2003), and differentiated instruction (VanSciver, 2005). Ms. Todaro shared this literature review with faculty in preparation for the topic vote.

In November 2005, faculty members were given the opportunity to vote for one of the two QEP topics that had been formalized into statements of action:

1. Assess instructor teaching styles and student learning styles for one course or a common group of courses. Educate instructors and students about and direct them toward learning strategies suited toward their preferences, resulting in deeper, more relevant educational experiences and appropriate academic advising for the students. Match teaching styles to learning styles and measure learning success. Expectations and additional positive effects of this action could include increased student motivation, active learning, and personal responsibility for learning.
2. Determine the life responsibilities that seem to negatively impact student achievement in one course or a common group of courses. Instructors and students would co-design course plans that address lack of preparation for college and meet the course objectives and high standards of the class while working with, rather than in opposition to, the other obligations and responsibilities of the students. Expectations and additional positive effects of this action could include increased motivation, active learning, in-depth advising practices, and personal responsibility for learning.

Faculty members were reminded to keep the tenets of the QEP in mind regarding SACS expectations:

• The plan of action must target an area of student learning that we can document as a need on our campus.
• The plan of action must focus on students: we must do something to students, for students or with students that positively affects their learning.
• The plan of action must be measurable: we must be able to show that learning was improved due to the action(s) we performed.

Although there was strong support for the ideas of the second topic, many faculty members and the QEP chair expressed concern that it would be difficult to narrow it to a focus that could be measurable and directly linked to student learning. In the end, the faculty voted to adopt the first topic that focused on the application of teaching/learning styles knowledge to engagement and course competency.

Early Development

In February 2006, Walters State's SACS Leadership Team hosted a campus-wide "SACS Rollout" in the R. Jack Fishman Library; faculty and staff enjoyed refreshments to the tune of Kool and the Gang's, "Celebrate!" President McCamey delivered an overview of the compliance and QEP processes and reminded each person of his or her role in the reaffirmation of accreditation through assignment to SACS committees. He also explained the duties and importance of each committee. Administrators, faculty and staff spent the rest of the afternoon in committee meetings with committee chairs and writers.

At this time, the QEP Development Committee was formed from eighteen faculty members, two professional staff, and two faculty members as QEP Chair and QEP Writer/Reviewer. Carla Todaro, QEP Chair, distributed a packet consisting of a QEP Developmental Committee membership roster, dates and deadlines, QEP Development Committee tasks, excerpts from The Principles of Accreditation: Foundations for Quality Enhancement covering aspects of the SACS review that pertain to the QEP, two sample tables of contents from the QEP documents of other institutions, and websites for Learning Style Assessment tools. In briefly reviewing material from the packet, the chair noted the importance of the QEP to the reaffirmation of accreditation process and explained the great deal of flexibility they had in developing the QEP to fit and benefit Walters State students.

The first charge of the QEP Development Committee was to narrow the QEP topic to an inspiring, transformative vision and a workable goal. Over several weeks, the committee discussed the possibilities and implications of the various components of the topic; they sent their ideas to the general faculty population for feedback. As a result of the discussion and feedback, they set a Walters State Quality Enhancement Plan Vision and Goal:

QEP Vision: Walters State will be a learning-centered institution that enhances student learning and reaches high achievement through increased engagement and a working awareness of various teaching and learning styles.

QEP Goal: To improve student engagement and increase competency of learning outcomes, Walters State will identify a diversity of learning styles and implement a variety of teaching styles in the classroom. We will come to understand better our students and ourselves in order to help students forge stronger connections with learning and to help them reach greater academic success.

Next, the committee struggled with how to define "engagement": some members equated student engagement with individual motivation; others equated it with class participation. After a thorough review of the current literature on student engagement, they found the following definition that seemed to be broad enough to encompass the differences between courses yet narrow enough to be measured: "[t]he concept of active involvement on the part of students with faculty and staff, classmates, and the subject matter" (Manzo, 2006, p. 4).

In Fall 2006, the QEP Development Committee named QEP Representatives for each academic division, each campus, and the Walters State professional staff. These representatives disseminate information from the committee to the Walters State constituencies. The committee then divided into teams to facilitate the decision-making for specific components of the plan. Teams met with their leader every week and the QEP chair and writer every two weeks. The new teams were

• Faculty Development
• Marketing
• Outcomes Assessment
• Engagement Assessment
• Institutional Capability
• Literature Review

Rationale

The QEP Development Committee gathered and analyzed existing Community College Survey of Student Engagement (CCSSE), ACT and Walters State Cohort data to determine where the greatest area of need lay, considering such factors as engagement, success and persistence rates, and overall course grades. A review of three years of ACT high school profile data for Walters State's ten-county service area indicated that 60-70% of graduating high school seniors are not prepared for college-level work (Appendix 1). ACT reports for the state of Tennessee mirror this percentage. Data from the 2005 Walters State Cohort Report show that 68.7% of students Walters State students must take developmental math (Appendix 8); this number exceeded Developmental Reading by 32.5% and Developmental Writing by 23.1%. This cohort data also indicated that more students placed into Developmental Mathematics 0800 (Elementary Algebra—DSPM 0800) than into Developmental Mathematics 0700 (Arithmetic) or Developmental Mathematics 0850 (Intermediate Algebra) (Appendix 8). Therefore, the institution decided that DSPM 0800 should be the first area of focus for QEP. Student comments in focus groups supported the soundness of this decision; students claimed that they "need better math skills—our learning is crippled because we do not have a good foundation" (Appendix 2).

For these reasons, Elementary Algebra (DSPM 0800 was selected for the QEP pilot that will begin in August 2007. In Summer 2006, two Walters State developmental math instructors, Dr. Mary Owens and Mr. Chris Knight, volunteered to teach the QEP pilot classes (DSPM 0800) in Fall 2007. The dean of mathematics, Dr. John LaPrise, joined the QEP Development Team at this time, attending meetings as needed.

QEP's Role in Institutional Effectiveness

The goals of Walters State's Quality Enhancement Plan include improving the short term and long term learning environments, both implicitly and explicitly, for faculty and for students. In the short term, students will gain valuable self-knowledge about how they learn best and easiest, and they will gain tools for maximizing the benefits of those preferences. In the long-term, faculty and students will also become familiar with how others learn (and how others teach), enhancing their success with lifelong learning by aiding them in growing more adaptable and successful in various types of learning situations.

Implicitly, the goal of this plan is to improve the learning environment by placing emphasis on "learning to learn," underscoring for the student and for the instructor the vital connection between thinking, engagement, and deep learning. Explicitly, the methodology of this plan will improve the learning environment by sparking interest and motivation in the classroom, resulting in stronger student confidence due to higher levels of student competency. As by-products, the school expects to see persistence and retention rates climb as students and instructors scaffold new learning experiences upon the foundations of knowing themselves and using that knowledge to move forward and to surmount obstacles. Through the sharing of students' individual learning styles, this learning environment will reach from the classroom out toward tutoring services, counseling services, advising services, retention services, and other key student services which play vital roles in helping students succeed. The QEP focus and student learning are inextricably linked through the causal relationship between an active knowledge of learning styles and increased engagement with the content, leading to a rise in content knowledge and a greater enthusiasm for teaching and learning.

Student focus groups revealed a strong desire for a faculty focus on various learning styles. Students asserted that they "have different learning styles [and] need different methods of teaching." They also claimed that "presenting material in different ways makes it more interesting" because "teachers who only read information are not enjoyed. They do not discuss other perceptions." They wanted teachers to "engage students more by asking questions in class, rather than just lecturing." As a way to vary teaching styles and to address a diversity of learning styles, these students suggested "active learning - let students take a chapter to teach" and "group projects that help us to see other's ways of working on tasks" (Appendix 2). Current literature in the fields of teaching and learning styles reveals that these are common student perceptions and that their suggestions are highly effective in the college classroom (Chapter 3: Review of Literature), and CCSSE concludes that students learn more when they are actively involved in their education and have opportunities to think about and apply what they are learning in different settings. Through collaborating with others to solve problems or master challenging content, students develop valuable skills that prepare them to deal with the kinds of situations and problems they will encounter in the workplace, the community, and their personal lives (2006 CCSSE Report).

Walters State takes pride in the fact that current CCSSE reports indicate that its students report a high satisfaction rate with instructors and instructors' dedication to teaching and to student success (Appendix 3); nevertheless, students shared in focus groups that they do not feel empowered to understand the course material, nor do they feel that they participate in any "real" way with the skills they are expected to master. The idea of lack of or low engagement on the part of both faculty and students was repeated: faculty reported that "students think instructors are entertainers; they don't want to put forth any effort"; they "come unprepared and want WSCC to pour in the information" (Appendix 2). In focus groups, students conceded that "student motivation is an issue" (Walters State Community College Student Focus Group Comments). However, students felt that student engagement was a responsibility of the instructor as well, claiming that "we need enthusiastic teaching…and better teacher engagement. You can tell which teachers love to teach and those who are just going through the motions" (Appendix 2). The QEP addresses this perception of low engagement by seeking new ways to reach out to students "where they are," attempting to determine their learning styles, and then using an attention to those learning styles to help student involvement and participation become a strong factor in the learning and skills-mastery equation.

Student Achievement in General Education data for 2001-2006 showed that Walters State students score above the national mean on the Academic Profile (AP) the Measure of Academic Proficiency and Progress (MAPP) (Appendix 5). Nevertheless, competency in course outcomes is not consistent across courses and disciplines at Walters State; pass/fail data and persistence data reveal that students are not as competent in course outcomes as would be desired by faculty, staff, future employers, or the students themselves. For example, the 2005-2006 Tennessee Higher Education Commission Performance Funding Report indicated that Walters State falls 4.1% behind its benchmark peers in "completion of D/R course and subsequent completion of math college-level courses" (Appendix 6). The 2006 MAPP test also showed that students are almost equally distributed in the 25th (109/130), 50th (112/130), and 75th (116/130) percentiles in mathematics skills proficiency; reading and writing distributions are similar (Appendix 7). In addition, according to the 2005 National Community College Benchmark Report (NCCBP), Walters State's 2004-2005 general fall-to-fall persistence rate was 49% (Appendix 6). Walters State's QEP will operate under the assumption that a focus on student learning styles and increasing engagement will stimulate more frequent and successful study and application of course concepts, leading to a more positive demonstration of competency in course outcomes.

QEP Relationship to WSCC's Vision

The QEP fits into the stated vision of Walters State by showing a strong "dedication to excellent teaching and service, guided by shared values and principles." Through faculty development, faculty will grow in their awareness of learning styles and in skills to address these styles. From its inception, the QEP was faculty/staff/student driven; the topic is one that was voiced many times during focus groups and further discussions with these college constituencies. Therefore, they are united in their conviction that this focus is a meaningful and timely way to improve student learning and to transform the institution.

QEP Relationship to WSCC's Mission

The QEP helps to fulfill the stated mission of the institution: it is a viable way to "guide the college into the twenty-first century" because it is designed to keep instructors current in the field of learning styles, and it is designed, through its focus on the student and his or her particular learning tendencies, to offer students more individualized plans of instruction and remediation than have existed in the past. The mission states that Walters State is "learning centered," and the QEP takes the institution further down that path. The QEP ties directly to student learning outcomes for each course; therefore, it supports the portion of the mission focused on "emphasizing learning outcomes." It supports "developmental education programs for academic enrichment" by giving students, instructors, advisors, counselors, tutors, and retention officers tools and information that they can use to increase student success and persistence through developmental courses. In addition, the QEP supports personal development and leadership skills through its focus on increasing engagement in the classroom. In these ways, the QEP will impact overall institutional effectiveness as it spreads from developmental classes through the General Education program and beyond.

QEP Relationship to WSCC's Strategic Plan

The four components of Walters State's 2005-2010 Strategic Plan align with the four components of TBR's 2005-2010 Strategic Plan. These are leadership, access, quality, and resourcefulness. The QEP grows directly from and firmly supports each of these components.

1. Leadership: The strategic plan states that, "as a comprehensive community college, Walters State will provide leadership to its geographically large and diverse primary service area promoting, documenting, and communicating the value of higher education to the economic development and quality of life for all stakeholders."
   
   The QEP, with its focus on strengthening both engagement with the course materials and achievement of course outcomes, leads faculty, academic support staff, and students toward a more meaningful educational (learning and/or teaching) experience, enriching the quality of life for all and leading to degrees that graduates can use to earn competitive salaries in the marketplace.
2. Access: The strategic plan states that, "Walters State shall remain committed to the education of a non-racially identifiable student body and will promote access using traditional and non-traditional delivery systems to increase the participation rate and diversity of target populations in higher education."
   
   The QEP begins with students in developmental mathematics classes, traditionally a student population that carries with it academic, economic, and social obstacles to success. The use of an understanding of learning styles to reach students on a more individualized basis by capitalizing on their learning style tendencies provides students greater access to a diversity of content delivery. In addition, it increases the participation (engagement) of these students with the material, leading to greater chances for success and further access to higher level college courses. The integration of Student Services into this plan reinforces the access opportunities.
3. Quality: The strategic plan states that, "Walters State shall remain committed to excellence in teaching, learning outcomes, and service and will address institutional effectiveness and accountability through an effective strategic planning and continuous improvement system."
   
   The QEP reflects Walters State's strong commitments to teaching and learning outcomes. Its goal is to increase competency of those outcomes using the flexibility of teaching based on an awareness of student learning styles as its vehicle. The eighteen-month planning stage allowed the time and opportunity for the members of the QEP Development Committee to work with the Strategic Planning Committee and to ensure that the QEP fits seamlessly into other continuous improvement initiatives.
4. Resourcefulness: The strategic plan states that "Walters State will assess and respond to changing community needs and provide opportunities for enhancing the quality of life for all constituents through sound fiscal management, resource allocation, growth of outside support, pursuit of collaborative and entrepreneurial initiatives, and removal of obstacles to competitiveness."
   
   The QEP encourages collaboration through the bridges it builds between students, faculty, courses (on-ground, hybrid, videostream, and online) academic departments and divisions, campuses, library services, counseling and testing services, and advising services. Sharing fiscal, physical, and personnel resources among and between these entities allows sound, economical use of money, space, time, and faculty/staff.

QEP Relationship to WSCC's Campus Compact

In Walters State's Campus Compact, the institution vows to create and maintain an "educationally purposeful community…a place where we share academic goals and work together to strengthen teaching and learning…." Sharing academic goals and working together to strengthen academics is inherent in the QEP. Faculty, staff, and students alike identified as issues low engagement and low performance in course competencies; therefore, the QEP addresses an issue relevant and important to the Walters State community. The QEP then shines a strong and intense light on what takes place in the classroom between instructor and student, seeking to impact both teaching and learning in a positive way.

Walters State also is committed to sustaining a "just community, a place where the sacredness of the person is honored and where diversity is aggressively pursued," as stated in the Campus Compact. Underlying all actions of the QEP is the firm conviction that recognition of diversity and use of that diversity to aid students is integral to the learning process; in seeking to better understand particular learning strengths in the individual, the institution honors and supports that individual in a way that can directly impact engagement and achievement.

Development of the QEP

Walters State ensured broad-based involvement of its college community in the selection of the QEP topic. This involvement included focus groups conducted with every faculty and staff member at every Walters State campus to ascertain ways to improve student learning at the institution; this involvement also included eight focus groups of students, conducted during the day, during the evening, and online, targeted at the same information. The QEP Development Committee kept lines of communication open by sharing information with the SACS Leadership Team, Executive Council, the Strategic Planning Committee, and Faculty Council. It also maintained communication in person through division representatives responsible for relaying information to faculty and staff verbally, in print through resources such as the Walters State Bulletin, and through electronic media such as InfoSys.

Marketing the Message

The QEP Development Committee's Marketing Team was formed in February 2006. The team includes members from three Walters State campuses and representatives from various academic divisions, affording the body a diverse base of representation. The team's leader is Mr. Joe Fall, Ed.S., Associate Professor of Business and Department Head of Hospitality Business. Mr. Fall teaches at the Sevier County campus.

The Marketing Team's first task was to develop a motto for the QEP that would articulate the focus in an easily understood and memorable way. In March 2006, the team assembled to develop this motto and to brainstorm ideas that would stimulate interest and excitement and educate all key constituents including faculty, staff, students, and the Walters State community at large. The committee developed a slogan for the QEP: "SLATED for Success." SLATED is an acronym for Student Learning and Teaching Effectiveness Development and embodies the QEP components that the institution wishes to emphasize.

During Spring 2006, the Marketing Team developed an agenda of activities for 2006-2007. The means by which they decided to communicate the QEP message included the use of print and electronic media; promotional items and apparel; verbal updates at each campus, within academic divisions, and to the internal community at general assemblies, special student gatherings and through the involvement of student clubs. The team planned a logo contest that would be opened to all students/clubs at the college with the intent to engage students in developing a logo using the SLATED acronym. The developer of the winning logo would receive $500.00 and would be recognized at Walters State Pride Night in the Fall 2006 semester. The winning logo would become the emblem of the QEP to be used in many of the aforementioned marketing ideas.

In Fall 2006, QEP plans were unveiled to the faculty and the staff at the annual President's Inaugural Breakfast, at the general faculty meeting in August, and in beginning semester division meetings by the QEP division representatives. The QEP Development Committee distributed ink pens and notepads displaying the QEP slogan at the breakfast, and faculty members distributed QEP bookmarks to students the first day of classes. During this semester, several students and student clubs entered the logo contest, and the committee selected a winner in November. The logo adopted is n addition, during this fall semester Walters State's Production Horticulture classes planted flowers spelling out "Q-E-P" in the quadrangle of the Morristown campus. This display attracted much "passers-by" attention and interest. The Production Horticulture department intends to refresh the display each semester with seasonal plants.

In January 2007, the Marketing Team leader met with the other QEP team leaders to review the QEP marketing plan for the next five years. A preliminary marketing budget was established for presentation to the SACS Leadership Team for their approval. This budget was later modified after the spring budget hearings. The team developed and refined a media action plan and a list of promotional items to be distributed among all faculty, staff, and students with the "QEP: SLATED For Success" logo or slogan. The media campaign also included hanging 4' x 6' banners displaying the "QEP: SLATED For Success" logo inside the main entrance at each of the four Walters State campuses and centers, displaying 11" x 17" QEP posters in public areas and in classrooms, and utilizing 4" x 6" table tents on tables and counters in locations such as libraries and cafeterias. In addition, a one-page "QEP Frequently Asked Questions" flier was developed which pointedly addresses the fundamentals of the QEP. These fliers were distributed to academic administrators by the Vice President of Academic Affairs for distribution to all full-time and adjunct faculty members with the intention of delivering an encapsulated look at the purpose of the QEP. Finally, a QEP page was included in the Fall 2007 timetable of classes, and the "QEP SLATED For Success" logo will appear on the college home webpage as a student and community link for QEP updates and information beginning Fall 2007.

Looking to the future, information regarding the QEP will be displayed on a series of slides on the internal INFOSYS which is broadcast to all campuses. The slides will also be displayed on the Morristown local public information television station, Channel 7. The Statesman and the Bulletin (both college print media) will display QEP information and updates in each of the current and upcoming editions. These print materials will be available at all campuses.

In Fall 2007, the QEP Marketing Team will work in conjunction with the Vice President for Student Affairs to upgrade the annual fall "Welcome Back Students" cookouts which are held each September at the Morristown, Sevierville, and Greeneville campuses. Special activities will take place at each cookout. For example, t-shirts, ball caps, and other QEP logo apparel and promotional items will be distributed to students, faculty and staff. Members of Walters State's Executive Council will be present and will participate in activities in order to underscore the importance and relevance of the QEP to all Walters State stakeholders. During this QEP Fall Rollout, "Roving Representatives" comprised of college Executive Council members, including the president, will visit each campus and choose random students to ask what the QEP is about. Students who answer correctly will receive an immediate cash prize. This campaign will be promoted in the Walters State media and in the classroom by faculty.

The Marketing Team should stay intact throughout the entire timeline of the QEP for the purpose of QEP promotional continuity. The budget carries forth monies for each year to adequately support and promote the plan, as indicated in Chapter Seven.

Introduction

In May 2006, the Literature Review team began to locate and summarize current literature and review best practices collected by the QEP Development Committee on teaching and learning styles, engagement, outcomes, and assessment, compiling the material in November 2006. Initial emphasis was placed on literature in developmental education, specifically math, with a focus on remedial student learning styles since this is the QEP pilot area of focus; however, the team also looked for information concerning the application of learning styles awareness to general education classrooms as well, since the QEP will head in that direction during the next five years. The ongoing process involved collaboration with the Faculty Development, Outcomes, and Engagement teams along with representatives from remedial math. The committee worked closely with on-campus faculty who are familiar with the concept of teaching and learning styles, and QEP team members periodically reviewed the literature[WSCC3] .

Teaching/Learning Styles

A number of researchers asserted that understanding student learning styles serves a dual purpose of helping instructors to address student diversity in learning styles and assisting students to improve learning by increasing self-awareness, engagement, and positive educational outcomes. Acharya (2002), in looking at ways in which learning style could impact student learning, used Keefe's description of learning style as, "the composition of cognitive, affective, and physiological learning preferences" (cited in Acharya, 2002, ¶2). She indicated that Keefe believed that learning is a composition, and learning styles, like great constructions of architecture, use different elements to create an entire learning environment. In addition, much of the research emphasized that learning styles are a dynamic construction of learning preferences (Silver, Strong & Perini, 1997).

In considering best practices behind learning strategies, Boylan (2002) found that developmental students have more problems understanding and monitoring their own comprehension than do other students. He suggested that, "it is important to teach learning strategies in a variety of contexts to encourage [these] students to apply these strategies to different situations" (p. 99). Miglietti and Strange (1998) contended that teaching strategies should consider instruction goals, student characteristics, and course progression, indicating that a combination of multiple paradigms assists in providing a positive learning environment for students. These researchers' study involved a population of both traditional and non-traditional students and confirmed that when learner-centered styles were deliberately addressed, higher course grades were the result (Miglietti & Strange, 1998). The preponderance of Miglietti and Strange's work not only contributed to the conception that individuals' learning styles indicate their preference in terms of ways in which they gather, process, and store information, but also concluded that students attained a greater sense of self-actualization through this method of learning.

Bill (1998) supported the findings of Miglietti and Strange and the concept of diverse learning styles when he concluded that when an instructor varied the presentation modality, a larger portion of students could be positively affected. Here, again, familiarity with students' learning styles further supported the belief that learning preference contributes to the composition of cognitive, affective, and physiological learning.

Haar, Hall, Schoepp, and Smith (2002) likewise discovered that it was important for teachers to identify, by using a learning style assessment, the instructor's principal learning style in order to avoid teaching only to their own dominant and preferred style of learning. Cross and Tilson (1997) additionally concluded that when teaching style was congruent with the learning styles, the students acclimatized to their learning environment exceptionally well. Ebeling (2000) believed that faculty understanding of their own learning style, as well as that of students, is an essential element of an effective educational community, creating a learning environment that aligns the teaching plan with the variant learning styles present (Ebeling 2000). Morrison, Rha, and Helfman's (2003) study examining the effectiveness of a teaching-learning model indicated that by using different teaching modalities in the classroom, students connected to meaningful learning experiences. Ballone and Czerniak (2001) analyzed a survey sample of 109 Ohio teachers and found that using a variety of teaching strategies resulted in greater student success. Teaching style plays a mutually dependent function in the educational arena: when faculty discover and obtain an understanding of their teaching styles, that understanding facilitates accommodation of diverse student learning styles.

Studies in the field showed that providing compatible instructional strategies, especially among less academically successful students, was an effective way to address success in remedial classes (Dunn et al. 1993; Rochford 2003). Rochford further claimed that students need to be tested for individual learning styles so that both students and instructors can use this information for optimum learning (p. 675). Application of learning styles inventories showed promise for increasing success in remedial writing classes (Houston, 1997) and remedial math classes (Nadkarni, 2004).

Successful application of learning style inventories in all classes occurs best when faculty are able to provide a broader array of teaching style options once they understand how their students learn. The American Mathematical Association of Two Year Colleges (2006) argued that an effective mathematics curriculum is one that provides students of every learning style an opportunity to engage in a topic, connect with the material, and then stretch their learning capacity in other learning modes (Chapter 4). Dunn and Stevenson (1997) and Honigsfeld and Dunn (2006) argued that identifying learning styles and providing information on how to study, along with examining the relationship between grades and teaching and learning styles, can improve success for non-traditional and poorly-achieving students.

Engagement

Combining teaching and learning styles, instructors can design activities that engage students in active learning. A doctoral candidate at Texas Tech University discovered that she had a large portion of students who were kinesthetic learners (Dodds, 2004) which led her to change the manner in which she presented material in class. She added several more demonstrations and increased her interactive lectures to increase student engagement. Other researchers also suggested that student engagement has a significantly positive effect on student success. Bonwell, Eison & Cook noted that "[i]dentifying a student's learning style can support professors' efforts to utilize active learning strategies" (cited in Fritz, 2002, ¶1). The evidence supports the belief that students who are involved in active learning have the potential to produce healthier learning attitudes. Therefore, incorporating learning styles in an active teaching process, as indicated by these researchers, would produce graduates who would have the potential for higher achievement, positive involvement, and enhanced retention. Klem and Connell (2004) further supported linking instructors' methods of delivery to student engagement. They concluded that a healthy and interactive student/faculty relationship results in a comfortable learning environment, and such engagement produces a significant increase in students remaining in school and graduating.

In an effort to improve student engagement, schools have been implementing efforts to incorporate "active and collaborative learning activities and promoting internship and senior capstone experiences" (What we're learning, 2003, ¶53). This form of engagement seems to occur when teachers include activities that appeal to the way students like to learn. When instructors create strategies that arouse curiosity, stimulate interest, and motivate students to seek new information, the students become inquisitive (Caram & Davis, 2005). Students who are drawn to that level of inquisitiveness become actively charged to understand "why" and are not afraid to raise questions. Burns, Johnson, and Gable's (1998) research emphasized that instructors should seek to create an atmosphere where students feel safe to risk failure for the sake of learning. If students are engaged to the extent that they are able to identify with and value schooling outcomes and participate in academic and non-academic school activities, then learning, teaching, and engagement unify into a learning community in which students are comfortable in classroom participation (Willms, 2000).

Forrest (2004) stated that "learning and teaching are active processes occurring simultaneously on a continual basis" (¶1). She contended that with a dual focus on learning and teaching styles, students would become engaged because they would become more motivated and attentive. She also concluded that the "process of exploring the effectiveness of one's teaching styles enhances the ability to facilitate the learning process" (¶2).

Beck (2001) further supported the idea that teaching and learning are closely linked when teachers have an extensive repertory of teaching strategies. Nevertheless, he cautioned that instructors must take care not to stereotype students into categories, and students should be taught that tasks can be accomplished by using different styles. Beck (2001) also believed that "the student who feels locked into one style [is] likely to experience frustration when confronted with a task that [is] more successfully accomplished by integrating styles" (¶29).

Bowen (2005) provided great insight when he stated, "perhaps the most important contribution of engagement [is] the focus it brings to the learner's personal relationship to learning" (¶12). Like others, Bowen (2005) recognized that engagement is dependent upon both teaching and learning. If learning styles were understood and teaching styles were manipulated to reach as many students as possible, engagement would complement the entire learning environment. Research showed that engagement in active and collaborative learning is essential for student success. The more actively engaged students are with faculty, available services, and other students, the more likely they will learn effectively and continue in college (CCSSE, 2005; 2006; Pascerella and Terenzini, 2005). Chen and McGrath (2003), supporting Bowen's theory of creating learning environments of student involvement, studied a sample of 42 high school students to discover that learning combined with information that the students gathered collaboratively "often related to greater levels of student motivation, effort, satisfaction, and higher standards of student projects" (Chen & McGrath, 2003, 52).

Current research suggested that developmental, and/or minority and part-time students often experience less engagement and social integration into college campus systems than traditional full-time students in nondevelopmental classes (Boylan, 2002; CSSEE, 2005; 2006; Lederman, 2006; Triesman, 1992; Swail, 2006). In addition, recent studies drawing on the National Survey of Student Engagement showed that good practices of engagement may be particularly important for the success of underprepared students, a population that is representative of a large portion of Walters State's student body. These studies found that underprepared students' exposure to educationally effective practices is associated with higher grades and contributes to their persistence to the second year of college (Cruce et al., 2006; Lederman, 2006; Kuh et al., 2007). Among other activities, developmental and part-time students can increase engagement by working with other students, participating in tutoring, and functioning in an institutional environment that emphasizes studying and academic work (Boylan, 2002).

Recent studies made the case that assessment of student engagement is important for institutional improvement (Banta, 1992; 2002). Assessment is crucial to developing evidence to build strategies for improving student success and campus relationships and culture (CSSEE, 2006; Kuh et al., 2005a; Pascarella and Terenzini, 2005) and works best when it engages faculty and students in the process (Rouseff-Baker and Holm, 2004).

Implementation of QEP Pilot Courses

In the spring of 2007, the QEP Development committee collected baseline data in four DSPM 0800 classes through the use of pre- and post-tests containing test items linked to course objectives. They analyzed this data to determine a baseline for course outcome improvement in the pilot classes beginning Fall 2007. They studied recent CCSSE data to determine a baseline for student engagement improvement in the pilot classes. In the spring of 2007, the QEP pilot instructors attended faculty development conferences and workshops focused on the use of learning styles in mathematics classes and on assessment; one particularly useful conference was the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics conference. They will continue to participate in training of this kind during the summer and fall.

In Fall 2007, the QEP pilot instructors will introduce QEP concepts to two treatment classes each; they will also conduct two control classes each so that they may compare the effects of the treatment to the fall data as well as to the spring 2007 data. These instructors will administer the Soloman-Felder Learning Styles Inventory (Appendix 7), discussed at length in chapter five, during the first week of classes and will use that data to help guide their teaching and their tutoring of students. They will direct their teaching—including introduction of concepts, skills practice, group activities, and homework-- to the eight types of learning styles identified by Solomon-Felder: active, reflective, sensing, intuitive, visual, verbal, sequential, and global. These instructors will not isolate and teach to only one learning style; in fact, they may incorporate several into one lesson or simultaneously; for example, it is quite easy to present material both visually and verbally (and quite common to do so in mathematics), and it makes sense to pair sequential and global learning since they work somewhat like two sides of the same coin. The goal of each mathematics unit is to present material and design activities that allow students of each learning style to respond. A lesson on an algebraic formula, for example, might include presenting an overview of what the formula is supposed to do and what it looks like, verbally explaining each step of the formula while visually manipulating the factors in the formula, allowing the students to manually manipulate the factors in the formula, and then giving students some quiet reflection time to think through what has been presented before they begin to practice the formula themselves.

These instructors will also administer a pre-test the first day of classes to be paired with a post-test on the final day of classes. Mastery of course competencies of individual students as well as of the classes will be compared to measure overall semester progress. These mathematics instructors also will administer periodically throughout the semester a qualitative assessment of engagement, tailored to the specifics of this particular mathematics course in this particular mathematics division. They will use feedback from these short engagement assessments to redirect their teaching and their students' learning as the semester progresses. Near the end of the semester, a short version of the CCSSE will be administered to these classes, and results will be analyzed and used to redirect the next semester's QEP classes.

The mathematics classes included in this QEP pilot will make extensive use of the Math Learning Lab, located in the same building. Tutors from this lab will be trained in the Solomon-Felder LSI and will be instructed to work with the students who need remediation according to their particular learning style. Instructors will teach to the diversity of learning styles in the classroom, while tutors will use individual learning styles to provide one-on-one supplementary teaching and practice.

QEP Implementation Beyond the Pilot

From Spring 2007 until 2012, the college plans to include the Solomon-Felder LSI in the online registration process for all new students. Each student will be required to complete this LSI before they can exit the registration window, and the Solomon-Felder site will provide them with instantaneous information concerning how to study and learn according to their particular learning styles. Walters State will maintain a database of the learning style results for access by faculty, tutors, counselors, advisors, and retention officers in order to help tailor student support to many areas of the students' academic careers. This information will enable each person working with the student communicate more effectively with that student and to help that student make academic decisions suitable to how that student learns and understands. LSI information will be included on each faculty member's student roster the first day of classes; these faculty members will be free to use the information as they please until their discipline is enveloped into the QEP expansion, at which time there will be specific teaching/learning styles guidelines incorporated into those classes. The hope is that this information will also be available for analysis so that we can determine which learning styles Walters State students seem to prefer during any given academic year.

The QEP application will be expanded according to the following progression:

• developmental mathematics
• developmental reading and writing
• General Education
• other classes to which the QEP may be applicable.

Before each expansion level, the QEP Implementation Committee will analyze engagement and course outcomes data in previous QEP classes and make general recommendations for revisions to future classes. In preparation for each level of expansion, the upcoming discipline will gather baseline course outcomes and engagement data to guide them in setting goals for engagement and competencies increases when their disciplines participate. Faculty, tutors, and related Student Services personnel will attend learning styles and course assessment training at the Walters State QEP Summer Institute which will begin in Summer 2008; they will also attend discipline-specific conferences and workshops in learning styles and assessment. This expansion will take place in courses offered on all campuses as well as in online courses offered in the specific disciplines. In addition, adjunct faculty as well as full-time faculty will have opportunities to participate in QEP training and courses, and the training will be offered in a variety of formats, including videostreaming and/or ITV.

As each discipline enters the QEP, it will tailor the QEP to fit its course content and departmental/division goals. No two disciplines will administer the QEP the same way, nor should they. The purpose of the QEP is for each instructor in each class to be able to engage his or her students at a higher level of understanding and performance than was done previously. Each instructor will be fully acquainted with Felder-Solomon's eight learning styles and how to direct his or her teaching to those styles, but the instructors in each discipline will retain great flexibility in determining how to go about this. Assessments will remain the same as in the pilot courses.

Learning Styles Instrument

The QEP Development Committee examined several learning styles indicators in an attempt to choose one that would serve the purposes of the quality enhancement plan, would be helpful rather than cumbersome or intrusive to the instructor, and would be applicable to many disciplines. In 2006, Janice Donahue, leader of the QEP Faculty Development Team, and Charlie Williams, leader of the QEP Engagement Team, conducted a workshop for the QEP Development committee to further acquaint them with learning styles and their usefulness to the classroom. Subsequently, the committee examined the VARK (Visual-Aural-Read/Write-Kinesthetic) Inventory, but after committee members had taken the inventory and studied the literature, they determined that VARK might not be applicable to some disciplines and that its questions did not isolate the academic information needed. Next, they examined the Felder-Soloman inventory and found it to be better suited to the needs of the institution.

The Felder-Soloman Learning Styles Inventory (LSI) incorporates components of well-established personality and learning styles assessments, including the Keirsey Temperament Sorter, Myers-Briggs, VARK, and Left and Right Brain Analysis. Therefore, the QEP Development committee, composed of many full-time faculty members, was confident that this inventory would lend students and faculty the flexibility to apply the knowledge gained from the inventory to many academic disciplines. In addition, this inventory provides students with many resources and support materials for individual and group studying according to particular learning style. Finally, the online version of the inventory was offered "at no cost for non-commercial purposes by individuals who wish to determine their own learning style profile and by educators who wish to use it for teaching, advising, or research," (Felder), making it a particular cost advantage.

Outcomes Measurement

The Outcomes Team was formed in September 2006 as a subcommittee of the college-wide QEP Development committee. The team charge was to plan activities, assessments, and data collection/analysis for the Fall 2007 QEP pilot and five-year implementation, contributing to the overall QEP goal of improving student engagement and increasing competency of learning outcomes. A learning outcome is defined as "a level of knowledge, skills, [and] abilities that the student has attained" (Council for Higher Education Accreditation, 2002, p. 2).

The American Association of State Colleges and Universities (2006) reported that an effective value-added model of outcome assessment should draw on recognized and tested national instruments and employ a multi-faceted approach to address institutional improvement and inform public policy making. For instance, the General Education measure such as the Measure of Academic Proficiency (MAPP) provides a direct measure of student college learning. More specifically, Miglietti and Strange's (1998) research on using teaching and learning strategies in remedial classes showed that teaching strategies are positively associated with learning outcomes but should be considered in light of student characteristics, learning styles, and course goals. They pointed out that addressing learning and teaching styles should vary due to variations between disciplines. Ideally, measuring course outcomes should draw on standardized institutional measures but also should reflect the diversity of indicators that are specific to a particular course within audits and other embedded assessment tools. Chapter 3 validates the strategy of the WSCC QEP plan and its focus on engagement and course outcomes; namely, that an increased focus on teaching and learning styles and engagement is central to improving student learning and success.

Pilot Class

The QEP Development Committee selected Elementary Algebra (DSPM 0800) as the target course for the QEP pilot project because 2005 Walters State Cohort Data showed this as the area of greatest need within its developmental educational program (Appendix 8). DSPM 0800 extends the topics of DSPM 0700 and includes problem solving with algebraic expressions, including simple trinomial factoring, linear equations, inequalities, and functions. Satisfactory completion of DSPM 0800 allows the student to enroll in DSPM 0850, Intermediate Algebra. Mary Owens and Chris Knight agreed to serve as instructors of the target course sections.

During September 2006, Outcomes Team members met to continue work on the project. At this point, Owens and Knight were invited to join the Outcomes Team as members because their input was critical to defining the evaluation process. Their addition to the team and the reassignment of several other original team members resulted in the team being comprised of five faculty members (a team chair and four members).

Before the study design could be outlined, it was necessary to understand the current procedures for testing. Team members determined that the final student grade would verify student mastery of the learning outcomes, if the outcomes were directly tied to each of the final exam questions. Team members also discussed the educational interventions necessary to affect change in the treatment groups. The actual instructional interventions would be designed to address the learning styles of the students and would necessitate the determination of each student's learning style and each teacher's teaching style. This discussion led Outcomes Team members to the realization that the Outcomes Team and the Engagement Team missions were significantly intertwined.

By the end of September, discussions by Outcomes Team members and correspondence between Owens and Todaro resulted in the refinement of the experimental design. The study design was proposed as follows:

• ·Determine student and teacher learning styles at the beginning of the semester. A variety of learning activities will be used in the classroom to target the different learning styles present among the students.
• Assess student competency at the beginning of the semester. The level of student competency at the beginning of the semester is identified by the student's placement in DSPM 0800. Students are placed in this class by ACT, Course Compass, GED scores, or the successful completion of DSPM 0700. Course placement is further screened by a departmental diagnostic test on the first day of class. Students may opt to test out of the course by passing a departmental Challenge Test given the first week of class.
• Utilize a pre/post-test design to determine course competency in DSPM 0800. The pre-test will consist of 25 questions tied to course outcomes identified as critical by the instructors. The post-test will consist of the same 25 questions embedded in a longer, more comprehensive 50-question final examination. Comparison of student performance on the 25 pre- and post-test questions will facilitate end-of-course evaluation of student competence. Students will take the pretest during the first week of class at the beginning of the semester, unaware that the same questions would be included in the final examination.
• Perform the following assessments:
  • Administer the Feldman-Soloman learning styles assessment tool during the first week of classes.
  • Determine student achievement by comparing pre-test and post-test exam grades.
  • Determine course success rate: the percent passing compared to other DSPM 0800 classes during the same and/or past semesters.
  • Ascertain course retention: the number and percentage of students who completed the course during the same and/or past semesters.

During the month of October, Owens and Knight constructed a scoring rubric for the pre-test. They reviewed the course outcomes and identified 25 questions from a past DSPM 0800 final examination that would measure competence of 8 of the 9 course outcomes.

Course Outcomes

The student will develop and demonstrate the ability to:

1. Verbally, numerically, graphically, and symbolically represent functions.
2. Graph, analyze, and solve linear equations using multiple approaches.
3. Graph and solve linear inequalities.
4. Solve absolute value equations.
5. Perform basic operations of addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division of polynomials.
6. Solve a system of linear equations in two variables graphically.
7. Factor polynomials.
8. Solve real world problems integrated throughout the course.
9. Use calculators and computers in learning and doing mathematics.

Owens and Knight decided not to specifically address Outcome 9 since it could be effectively evaluated in other course outcomes. They discussed at length a working definition of "competency." A student will be designated as competent in a course outcome if he or she correctly answers a minimum of 75% of the problems tied to that outcome. Because some of the outcomes were measured by less than four questions, a student might have to answer all of the problems correctly to be designated as competent. A rubric describing the assignment of test items to course outcome follows. Also included is the number of items a student needs to correctly answer to be deemed competent in the particular objective.

To be deemed competent in the course, the student must be found competent in Course Outcomes 1, 2, 3, 5, and 8. These objectives were identified as critical to the understanding of the course material. Twenty questions addressed the critical objectives and comprised 80% of the 25 questions.

In November 2006, discussion turned to the refinement of the pilot study. Outcomes assessment and data analysis would be practiced in targeted courses in Spring 2007. This data would provide baseline data for the pilot study to be implemented in Fall 2007.

The experimental procedure was outlined. During Fall semester 2007, four classes will be selected for the pilot study. They will be taught by Owens and Knight, and each will have a treatment and control group. All four classes will receive the 25-item pre-test and the 50-item post-test. The treatment groups will receive instruction appropriate to the learning styles present in each class; the instructors will use a diversity of teaching styles to try to reach as many learning styles as possible without compromising the content or slowing the pace of the course. The control groups will be taught in the historically typical lecture/group work format. The larger QEP Development Committee determined that the Learning Styles Inventory created by Richard M. Felder and Barbara A. Soloman from North Carolina State University would be used to identify the individual learning styles of the students.

In mid-January 2007, a meeting was held to review the activities of the Outcomes Team over the past few months in preparation for writing the QEP report. Data from past semesters of DSPM 0800 was requested from the Division Dean, and retention data was requested from Walters State's Retention officer. This historical data will be compared with data obtained during the pilot study.

Owens and Knight reviewed the DSPM 0800 student final examinations from the Fall 2006 classes. To gain information about the reliability and validity of the pre-test, Owens and Knight administered the 25-item test to 5 sections of DSPM 0800 during the second week of class, Spring 2007[WSCC4] .

During the next few weeks, the evaluation criteria for the pilot study were reviewed and refined. The criteria include the following:

Student Competency

Student competency of the outcomes will be verified by a comparison of the pre- and post-test scores. Based on the findings of the QEP project at Coastal Bend College, South Texas, Walters State's QEP mathematics benchmarks have been set with an expectation that we will find an increase of 10% from pre- to post-test scores in the treatment groups. We expect to see at least 60% of the students in the treatment groups achieve competence on the critical items on the final exam. We also expect to see significantly different performance between treatment and control group performance on the course final exam, with the treatment groups scoring at least 10% higher.

Course Success Rate

We expect to see at least 60% of the students in the treatment groups pass the course. The course pass rate will be compared with the course pass rate for the past two years (when the textbook was changed to the current edition). The pass rate in Fall 2005 was 53%. The pass rate in Fall 2006 was 57%.

Course Retention

We expect to see an increase in the percentage of students in treatment groups who complete the course. In Fall 2005, 553 students began the course, 183 students failed, and 75 students withdrew during the semester. The course retention rate was 53%. In Fall 2006, 436 students began the course, 155 students failed, and 65 students withdrew. The course retention rate was 49%.

Currently, there is no mechanism in place to track students from DSPM 0800 to DSPM 0850. This can be accomplished by requesting that the information be collected by the Institutional and Educational Technology department. The current student tracking system, however, will be replaced throughout the Tennessee Board of Regents colleges by the Banner System prior to the start of the Fall 2007 semester, which may present challenges in terms of seamlessly implementing the technology of the QEP data.

The Walters State course retention rate of students from the developmental mathematics courses to the college level courses is tracked. Currently, 71.9% of students move from developmental to college level math courses (Appendix 4). The benchmark set by the Tennessee Higher Education Commission on its Performance Funding Report, however, is 76[WSCC5] % (Appendix 4). The college Retention Task Force is looking forward to working with QEP committee members in a coordinated effort to boost student retention from developmental to regular level college courses.

Use of the Learning Lab

All students will be encouraged to utilize the Math Learning Lab on their own, and the students also will go to the Math Learning Lab as a regularly scheduled class activity. Tutors will keep a copy of the treatment group students' learning styles so that they may tailor their tutoring to the individual student. Control group students will be tutored without consideration of their learning style. Learning Lab tutors will keep a record of all student interactions.

Engagement Measurement

The Engagement team, led by Mr. Charlie Williams, has determined a course of action for the measurement of engagement in each QEP classroom. Inherent to the plan is the belief that students' increased awareness of learning styles will be motivation in and of itself—knowing oneself is valuable insight. It is also the expectation of the team that when faculty direct their attention and their presentation of materials and activities to students' specific learning styles, those students will both feel more engaged with the material, classroom, and teacher and will demonstrate explicit signs of engagement, including increased participation in activities, question-asking, and general interest.

Before each new discipline enters the QEP implementation, it will administer measures of student engagement in order to gather baseline data. The CCSSE will be administered to all classes each spring, and the shortened version the CCSSE will be administered to fall QEP classes and those classes which will enter the QEP implementation the following semester. Results from these CCSSEE assessments will be used to gauge current engagement and to set baseline goals for increased engagement in each class.

In addition to the formal CCSSE, instructors in each class will measure engagement periodically based upon what they as instructors have agreed upon with their academic departments defines "engagement" in their particular discipline. They will discuss and decide how engagement is displayed to the teacher and perceived by the student in that discipline, and that academic department will design a qualitative measure of engagement to be used throughout the course as a way for the instructor to know a general engagement level of his or her students and be able to adjust teaching methods accordingly. Assessment questions may range from participation in group activities to individual initiation of contact to attendance practices; however, part of this assessment must include questions concerning whether or not the students feel that their level of engagement is influencing their mastery of course outcomes. As current research shows, students' perceptions of their own engagement with course material and instructors can have a direct impact on students' performance on measures of course competencies.

Assessment in QEP Expansion Classes

By the fall semester 2008, the instructors of 70% of all DSPM sections (DSPM 0700, 0800, 0850, and 0870) should be participating in the QEP project by incorporating an awareness of student learning styles into their courses. DSPM 0700 is Basic Mathematics, a pre-algebra course which includes problem solving with fractions, percents, proportions, integers, geometry, variables, simple linear equations, tables and graphs. DSMP 0850 is Intermediate Algebra which includes problem solving with polynomial, quadratic, rational, and radical functions. DSPM 0870 is a combination of DSPM 0800 and DSMP 0850. The same pre-test/post-test study design utilized in the pilot study will be used to collect data. Data collection will include determination of the student's learning style, student use of the Math Learning Lab, student competency of course outcomes, course success rate, and course retention rate.

By the fall semester 2009, 70% of all developmental classes should be participating in the QEP learning styles project, working to increase and assess engagement and improve writing and mathematics competencies. The specific design of this participation is dependent upon substantive changes to curriculum and assessment due to the Tennessee Board of Regents Remedial and Developmental Redesign mandate. Once the redesign has taken place, then the QEP team will evaluate which components of the current QEP design are applicable and will work with the developmental coordinators and instructors to implement the QEP in the classes. In these meetings, discipline-specific plans will be outlined, and then these plans will be further developed by instructors during the Summer 2009 QEP Institute.

At this time, the developmental classes include the developmental mathematics classes described above plus DSPS 0800 Learning Strategies, as well as the developmental reading and writing classes, including DSPR 0700 Basic Reading, DSPR 0800 Developmental Reading, DSPW 0700 Basic Writing, and DSPW 0800 Developmental Writing.

Data collection will include determination of the student's learning style, student use of the Math Learning Lab and Writing Tutor, student competency of course outcomes, course success rate, course retention rate, and periodic informal (instructor/department designed) as well as formal (CCSSE) engagement assessments.

By the fall semester 2010, 70% of all General Education courses will be incorporating QEP study design, interventions, and methods of evaluation. In order to determine which components of the QEP study design will apply, the QEP team will analyze results of the pilot classes and the developmental classes. This analysis will show common elements that can span the curriculum, teaching, and assessment methods of all General Education and which elements were specific to previous classes but will not be applicable to General Education. The QEP Development Committee will meet with the Vice President of Academic Affairs, the Chief General Education Officer, the deans, and the instructors involved with General Education to plan for the application of the QEP to specific General Education disciplines. In these meetings, discipline-specific plans will be outlined, and then these plans will be further developed by instructors during the Summer 2010 QEP Institute. Each discipline entering the QEP implementation will detail outcomes measurements and use of results of measurements in a similar manner to the way that has been done for the developmental mathematics pilot courses. See the Walters State Catalog (2006-2007), p. 51, for a listing of Walters State General Education core requirements.

By the fall semester 2011, 70% of all courses listed in the Walters State catalog, including technical certificate courses, will be incorporating QEP study design, interventions, and methods of evaluation. Data collection will include determination of the students' learning styles, students' use of the Math Learning Lab and the Writing Tutor, student competency of course outcomes, course success rates, course retention rates, and informal as well as formal measures of engagement.

Narrative

1. Walters State has prepared and implemented a timeline that begins with the QEP pilot classes in 2007 and ends with campus-wide QEP participation across most disciplines by 2012. This timeline may be viewed on page 47 of this document.
2. Walters State has assigned qualified individuals to administer and oversee the QEP implementation. The SACS Leadership team—including the president and most of the vice-presidents-- will provide general oversight. The head administrator until January 2008 will be QEP Development Leader and SACS Faculty Representative, Carla Todaro, Ed.S. Mrs. Todaro is an associate professor of English and is the assistant dean of the Humanities division. She has led many campus-wide committees including the Promotion and Tenure Committee and the Evaluation Task Force. She is a 2005 graduate of Walters State's leadership succession program, Leadership Walters State. Beginning January 2008, Amy Ross will be QEP Director. Amy is the head of the Business Management department, an associate professor of Business Management, and is completing her Ph.D. in Education with a concentration in educational technology. She has also served on many campus-wide committees and is a 2006 graduate of Leadership Walters State.
   
   Other qualified individuals include the QEP Implementation Committee leaders:
   
   Faculty Development: Mr. Darrel McGhee, Assistant Professor of History. Mr. McGhee has strong interpersonal and organization skills as well as a deep-seated interest in faculty development. Marketing: Mr. Joe Fall, Ed.S., Associate Professor of Business and Department Head, Hospitality Business. Mr. Fall has an extensive background in management and promotion with several hotels and restaurants in the Northeast and Southeast. Outcomes/Engagement Assessment: Dr. Elizabeth Dobbins, Associate Professor of Nursing, and Mr. Charlie Williams, Associate Professor, EMT. Dr. Dobbins' interest is assessment, and she contains particular understanding of outcomes assessment. Mr. Williams recently completed his Master's degree; his thesis focused student engagement and the use of learning styles in the classroom. He also has conducted several learning styles workshops for Walters State faculty.
3. Walters State has sufficient financial and physical resources to implement and sustain the outcomes of the QEP. The QEP Development Committee leaders met on several occasions to plan a budget that would allow all components of the QEP to function until 2012. Discussion of the budget items necessitated discussion of the human and physical resources that the budget would support. Mr. Roger Beverly, Assistant Vice President of Business Affairs and the QEP Development Committee's Institutional Capability for Initiation and Continuation officer, reviewed and approved the proposed budget as sound. The proposed QEP Implementation Budget was presented at the Walters State Budget Hearing on March 27, 2007. At this time and on many occasion before and since, Dr. Wade McCamey, President of Walters State Community College, has pledged stable institutional support for the QEP. Dr. McCamey instructed Walters State's Business Office to create a specific account for QEP which will be used to record approved budgeted amounts in the college's 2007-2008 annual budget. This budget was submitted to the Tennessee Board of Regents for approval in May 2007 and was approved at the quarterly meeting of TBR in June 2007. The QEP Implementation Committee was granted a one-year commitment of $38, 500 for the upcoming year with the right to renew each year. There is a reasonable expectancy that the projected budget for 2007-2012 will be fully funded. The QEP account is classified in the Academic Support function area and is funded by income generated from student tuition and state appropriations.
   
   The additional budget for QEP will not be a burden on the college. In Fiscal Year 2006, the college received student tuition revenues net of scholarship allowances in the amount of $7,557,172 and state appropriations in the amount of $16,999,100. At 2006 fiscal year end, the college's current assets were $8,421,067, and current liabilities were $4,831,854. The college increased its net assets in this period by $4,424,980.
   
   As the QEP develops, adjustments can be made in the October 2007 revised budget and in future budgets to ensure the program's objectives are met. The Walters State Business Office, as part of its duties for the college, will provide reports of expenditures and monitor available budget amounts through out the fiscal year.
   
   The QEP Development Committee anticipates various physical and human resources needs to implement and sustain the QEP. The Math Learning Lab has been relocated from Walters State's R. Jack Fishman library to the Math/Behavioral Social Science building to provide more convenient access for students. This lab will be direct support for the QEP developmental mathematics pilot courses beginning Fall 2007. Peer tutors must be hired to assist in the math and English learning labs each semester as these labs are needed to accompany direct instruction in the QEP classrooms. Campus facilities and faculty will be used to run the QEP Summer Institute; small funds from the QEP budgetary item "Summer Institute" will be used to provide travel funds to the departments of the faculty members leading and attending the institute.
   
   As the QEP is implemented across disciplines and across Walters State's four campuses, there will be need for technology resources, including use of computer labs, SmartClassrooms, and videostreaming technology. These resources already are installed and maintained by Walters State's IET department.
4. Walters State has allocated sufficient academic resources and systems to implement and sustain the outcomes of the QEP. The academic departments as well as the office of Academic Affairs are aware of their roles in the QEP process and already have pledged time and money resources towards its sustainability as well as reorganizing tutoring services to better serve the QEP. In addition, the R. Jack Fishman library has ordered several new books and e-books pertaining to engagement and learning styles; these books are shelved in the QEP section of the Faculty/Staff Reading Room.
5. Walters State has established appropriate administrative processes for maintaining the progress of its quality improvements. These administrative processes include oversight by the Vice President for Planning, Research, and Assessment, who has been including and will continue to include the QEP as part of the Walters State Strategic Plan and as part of the Performance Funding package submitted to the Tennessee Higher Education Commission each year and support from the office of the Vice President for Student Affairs. The Office of Information and Educational Technologies will maintain all technological needs that the QEP implementation may have, including supporting the QEP link from the WSCC homepage as well as the student learning inventory link on the Star_Net web page that new students will access in order to determine their individual learning styles.

Note: The 2007-2008 budget has been approved, and the monies have been allotted to the QEP account. The budget for the remaining years must be submitted and approved each fiscal year; therefore, they are projections only.

Conclusion

The QEP literature review indicated that many studies have shown a correlation between recognition of teaching and learning styles, implementation of diverse modes of delivery, and improved outcomes in terms of student learning and engagement. For its Quality Enhancement Plan, Walters State chose a focus on teaching and learning styles to increase engagement and improve course competencies. Because institutional data identified developmental students, particularly those in Mathematics 0800, as showing the greatest need for improvement in these areas, the QEP Development Committee decided to begin with four pilot sections in that course.

QEP committee members were divided into the areas of focus encompassing specific tasks related to the implementation of the plan. Marketing communicates and promotes QEP concepts throughout the academic community. Faculty Development provides opportunities for training in the areas of teaching/learning styles and assessment. Outcomes Assessment identifies expected academic outcomes and assessment methods. Engagement Assessment seeks ways to define, improve, and measure student engagement. Institutional Capability developed a five-year budget and examined how the college could sustain the QEP's fiscal and physical resource needs. Literature Review located respected and timely scholarship in the QEP areas of focus. Each of these teams projected markers and goals for the next five years, and each team contributed to articulating the plan, detailing short-term and long-term goals in each area.

Baseline assessments in the developmental math classes were implemented in Spring 2007, and the pilot courses are scheduled for Fall 2007, with incremental increases each year until the plan is incorporated into 70% of all courses at Walters State Community College by 2011.