Monday
September 25, 2017
Quality Matters Webinar
A Rose By Any Other Name Smells As Sweet:
Introducing QM to Reluctant Faculty
	
	CART Disclaimer:  This rough edit transcript, which may contain missing, misspelled or paraphrased words, is only provided for your immediate review and is not certified as verbatim and is not to be cited in any way. 
	
	[Captioner standing by] 
	
	>> All right, we're going to go ahead and get started.  Is the webcast ready for us to get started?  All right. Thank you for coming to our session.  The first session of the conference, everybody still has a fresh brain, nobody is too tired yet. We stand between you and lunch, that can sometimes be a problem for folks. I wanted to start by saying that the presentation that we have here is slightly different than the presentation on the app.  The presentation on the app has more slides and a couple of them got rearranged between now and then, but everything that we're going to say today is still covered on those slides, we just kind of condensed things down a little bit. So the folks on the webcast may be seeing a slightly different version that what we have on the screen for you guys.  
	So my name is Wren Mills. I'm the Assistant Director for the Center for Innovative Teaching and Learning at Western Kentucky University. We are going to talk today about faculty who don't necessarily or buy into the ideas that support the Quality Matters program, which I'm going to guess a lot of you might have the same kind of problems on your campus that you have faculty that wrinkle their nose or dismiss the program. And before we get started, I'll let Alicia introduce herself.  
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: Thank you. And since we are webcasting, thank you to those joining us online, thank you for taking your time out of your busy day to join us for this session, whether you are doing it online or for here.  This is a little different from me because of standing in front of a microphone, Wren and I were talking about it earlier, because of the folks on the webcast, we are going to be conscious of standing in front of the microphone, which is hard for us.  
	I'm Alicia Pennington, I'm the Instructional Designer. Has anybody not re‑organized in the last two years in their University?  So we're still trying to figure it out. I still answer my phone, distance learning.  I'm like, no, I'm not with them anymore.  But I work with faculty, I also work with folks that do continuing and professional development related to Quality Matters, I am the QM Coordinator and Course Review Manager for Western Kentucky University, that's a new role for me, but I am definitely enjoying it. 
	So in this session today, when you leave, we have objectives, we relined, so we took out some slides.  When you leave, we hope you can describe the faculty learning community model, which is what we used.  Also discuss method for engaging reluctant faculty with the Quality Matters programs.  And also identify strategies for and programs where you might be able to hide Quality Matters.  It's kind of like if you have kids and you really want them to eat their vegetables, you try every place you can to stick the vegetables in the middle of the grilled cheese sandwich or something like that. That's what we did and we're excited to share that with you guys today.  
	>> WREN MILLS: Yeah, Alicia remembered to talk about her role in Quality Matters. We sure the QM stuff in case one of us is away or something.  I'm also Master Reviewer and facilitator face‑to‑face for programming, so that's part of why APPQMR is up here on the slide.  Our QM PD strategy, like Alicia said, we decided how to spread the love about Quality Matters was to start hiding it in places.  That doesn't mean we have overt this is a Quality Matters initiative, come to this type of workshop webinars and events, it just means we started being sneakier about how we got it to faculty.  I did a QM Success Story on it earlier, you can go and watch that recording if you are interested in learning about that. We have an intro to QM, which is the QM Quickie, I think it's Arizona State that shared that a couple of conferences ago.  We have that, it's about a 15‑20 minutes webinar, we do that before we offer the APPQMR to get faculty introduced to the idea if they do not know what it is.  It's overt, not hidden at all. 
	We also created standard‑by‑standard workshops where we go through the Quality Matters Rubric workbook. Faculty bring their laptop and open up their workbook and we go through each and every review standard, talk about what that might look like, give them a few minutes to look at in their course and make notes of, yeah, I have this, don't have to worry about it, or yeah, I really need to fix it. But we don't fix it right them. They are not quick fixes, we want them to be deliberate about it. We do one where we talk about QM is and we spend a lot of time talking about the importance of how we start our courses.  And then we do two, three, four and five, and six, seven and eight. And we try to offer that at least one a year.  These are people who hopefully go through a QM review.  How many of you on your campuses have faculty that will do all of this and never submit for a formal review?  Because that's us.  We have a lot of people on campus that know about QM, that integrate it into their practices, but they never actually go through the review.  We have maybe 3, 4, 5 reviews a year, but we have literally dozens of faculty who do buy into QM in their work.  
	And we apply the Quality Matters Rubric.  We have sometimes 6 people sign up, sometimes the maximum of 20. It kind of ebbs and flows.  And that's why we came up with the idea with what we are going to share with you guys today.  But the big thing is we do sneak it into things. We integrate into every presentation, workshop, webinar, work, camp, there is always a slide in every single one of them that says Quality Matters programs standards addressed.  Not met, of course, because it is a workshop or webinar, so we list out each of the specific review standards that the content touches on and we said, if you are would like to know more about this, please get in touch with us.  So no matter what we do, we integrate QM into. And it may not be pushing QM and overtly educating them about QM, but we are planting the seed in their head that it's a good thing and probably something you want to get in on.  
	We used to have a lot of workshops and webinars and even our summer camp is starting to go away, we haven't had it the last two years, even though we had 20 summer in a row, it always had 10‑20 faculty, but their needs are changing. What time they do have left has changed a lot, too, over the last few years.  We did a survey of our faculty and asked, what topics are you interested in learning?  What is your delivery method you prefer for that?  Some of them still wanted to webinars, camps, conferences, a lot of them when we gave them the chance to a PLC instead of a workshop, there were interested in that. Like 61% of faculty expressed interest. Now out of our 700 faculty, only about 100 participated in the survey. Now our IV team uses the Quality Matters in the work they are doing daily and they talk to faculty member about it too when they have the chance as well. 
	So the PLC Model, Milton Cox who is at Miami of Ohio, you have a link there, if you click the link in the app, if you don't want to write it out, it's working very well for us.  Right now we are offering either 5 or 6 PLCs.  These are times when faculty that are cross disciplinary from across campus, we do extended sessions of 90‑120 minutes focusing on some topic and it's a mini course for them.  We cap it at 15 people so we have a good sized group, if a few people don't show up, we can still have good conversations and get good feedback, but also, if we don't have five people we won't run it.  We feel if two people don't show up, suddenly that changes the conversation in the room.  It is also definitely a conversation. We are not lecturing at faculty members, we are saying, okay, this is a topic we are interested in learning about or improving in our course or teaching, we have some on research, some on leadership within the faculty career path, so we get together and talk about these things.  We also give homework for sessions in some of them. We had homework in our session.  One of the other sessions that we offer which is strengthening classroom teaching, they have a homework assignment every single time that is reflecting on some aspect of their classroom teaching and also one of the assignments is going in and observing one of the other participants and coming back and having a conversation with that person, what you thought about it, you had a chance to watch the video, how that all works.  The homework assignment does not take more than one to two hours between meeting.  Sometimes the meetings are a week apart, sometimes every other week, sometimes a month apart. The 5, 6, 7, PLCs, those are usually a month apart because we are really wanting them to dig in and do something with it. This PLC was not that big and long of a workshop and we'll talk about that in a minute.  The big thing about the professional learning communities, or faculty learning communities as Cox calls them, they have very collaborative.  What happens in PLC, stays in PLC.  We are not reporting back to your Department Head. If you report a problem, we are not reporting anything except at the end of it, we give you a letter saying, this is the topic we discussed, your faculty member attended this many meetings for this many hours so they can include that in their portfolio if they wish to do so. 
	So with this in mind, grumpy cat seems to be a theme this morning. Two summers ago I was offering our APPQMR and there were 20 people in the room and one of the people was not kind about Quality Matters all day.  He was not just a little disgruntled about it, he was so negative that the other faculty members, even after I talked to him about needing to tone down his comments during a break, they started telling him, he needed to tone down his comments. And this is beyond reluctant, he was saying how he was never going to let his faculty participate in Quality Matters workshops, which I don't really know how he can control that, but okay.  I just agreed with him, you know, okay.  He talked about how his biggest problem with it he had a faculty member in his department who had learned that if you aren't aware there are loopholes in the Quality Matters Rubric so you can still design a not so great course and get QM certified. And it is true. But generally the people interested in doing Quality Matters they are interested in improving the course, they are interested in best practices and good experiences for students and they milk that thing for all it's worth and do everything they can to make a good course.  This faculty member had found a way to get around that. And we didn't like it when he submitted courses for review and we always encouraged him to do better things and he was like, nope, I'm at the standards. So that's where this Department Head was coming from.  And he basically had come to the workshop in order to tell everybody this is a waste of your time, it doesn't matter if it's based on research, walk away.  
	So I left that day and I was pretty frustrated and I wasn't really sure I handled him as well as I could, and I thought, how is it that I can come up with something that for people like him I can bring them into the loop, this wonderful professional development program, especially in the days of online classes and they do not have the same retention as face‑to‑face classes, we need this program in his area.  How can I get people like him to get Quality Matters and see this is a valuable program?  He was our grumpy cat that encouraged us to do all this. 
	We came up with strengthening your PLCs. Alicia and I co‑facilitated this with the idea that every time we ran the PLC a different Instructional Designer would step in. Alicia was the figure guinea pig. I was happy she decided to do this with me.  We did not in any of the advertising, materials, discussions, mention the words Quality Matters at all.  Remember we are sneaking the broccoli into the grilled cheese.  There were four meetings, two hours each, on a Friday afternoon. We had coffee, iced tea, water, it was in the spring, a little warmer, late April, starting to warm up in Kentucky and then we had cookies or brownies. They seemed to prefer the cookies over the brownies.  That's an important thing.  Depending who it was, cookies always disappeared, brownies had a plate left over.  That's something important to consider.  
	But we were kind of surprised, I didn't know how many people were going to sign up for it.  I think we had 8 people sign up and pretty consistently all 8 came every time so we were pretty happy with that. I'll let Alicia talk about the design of it. 
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: So it was a lot of fun to get together. We, like Wren said, we didn't want to mention QM, but we wanted to use all of the standards and all of the information because it's great evidence‑based information. So we used the STAR system. QM uses points, we used the STAR system. And we'll show you in a minute, I have a sample of the workshop you can kind of see what it looks like.  We also changed the wording and the tone of the annotations and also of the standards, mostly it was more along the lines of taking out the word "institution" and using "Western" or "WKU." We took out the word "competency‑based."  Instead of "participant," we used "student." Instead of "Instructor," we used "you."  We made it more friendly and designed to the folks of Western Kentucky University.
We realigned some of the standards, again Wren mentioned we met just a few times.  So we poured over the standards to see how we can retitle and regroup the standards and include all of the level three ones or essential ones.  We really made some best practices for all the faculty that were going to participate in this. And that's what we call it, instead of standards, we called them best practices and gave them stars. And then with standard number 8, which is related to accessibility, QM has some great standards related to accessibility, there's only one though that is worth three points, the rest are worth two. And at Western, especially in our department, we have high standards for accessibility. So we really raised everything up to three stars instead of two and we have our own transcription service. 
	Here are the standards to look for.  How important is it?  The three stars.  And what it might look like in the course. We took that from the annotation.  Again, we just reworded it to some things they might do. If we knew faculty did something a little different, we kind of put that in there so they wouldn't feel left out or to ask questions.  So it was a lot of fun.  We also made a section for notes. We did allow them to work on it there, but sometimes you have to go home and think about it, mull it over, let it stew, whatever you want to call it that you do. Have to let it percolate. Maybe over the summer, we really encouraged them to think about it and what are you going to do next time?  
	>> WREN MILLS: Go back to the slide just for a second, you will notice this is exceedingly similar to the workbook.  I mean, really, we did not reinvent the wheel here, we just tweaked for any specific circumstances we had on our campus, any language.  And also we wanted to implant that three means good, so when we did introduce them to the workbook, they had in mind three needs I need to do it. If it's a two star practice, that's good to do. One star is still important to do. But three stars, you have to do it. That's cream of the crop best practice.  
	So with that said, even though we focused on the three stars, the first week we did complete the standards. We talked about why some were more important than others.  They could see how the twos and ones enhanced usability for students and just being able to feel comfortable in a course during the first week or two of the course when they got into it, but they also saw where you didn't have to have those things to be a successful course.  That was an important conversation to that that would set then up when they got a copy of the Rubric Workbook, they got that and we didn't spend time at our last meeting. 
	Since this is the strengthening online course, I've taught it for a while, some things aren't working right and I want to do it better, we talked about, what is the thing you want to focus on in this course over the next four weeks?  We got everybody to narrow it down to one course, just like a QM review, you can't do ten at once, you do one at a time. We had them talking about, how do you do all of these things?  Everybody shared what they were doing now.  And what we really liked is most of the faculty found they were doing almost everybody single thing in standard one.  So they were already feeling successful.  They were already feeling like, hey, I'm doing good stuff here. Not so much the case the next week, but I think we all find that. They had homework this week.  And I think it's the only week they had homework.  Part of my job is I do the graduate student training on campus for GAs that will become teacher record in the classroom which is an accreditation requirement, but also a good idea.  You don't want to slap students in front of students without any idea of how to teach. So I have a 20 minute video that talks about instructional alignment, how to write a good learning objective that is measurable and specific, appropriate for the level of the class according to Bloom's taxonomy.  And we asked them how many of them had heard of Instructional Designing?  And I was like, great, you have homework.  I made that a very short 20 minute video on purpose.  How many of you are familiar with the 20 minute mentor program through Magna?  We subscribe to that on our campus.  They really like it. Faculty like it a lot. So when I made that video, I made a timer on it, I timed myself multiple times before I ever recorded it.  It was going to be 20 minutes or less.  It was going to be Wren's 20 minutes instructional. It wasn't a huge commitment for them.  It's doable.  They don't think, I can't do the homework so I can't come back. 
	So when they came back the second time, what we had done is remember how Alicia said we kind of rearranged things and didn't cover things in order because we didn't have time to do that in four, two‑hour meetings.  We had them check their learning objectives.  We had them pick a unit to focus on for that day in the discussion and maybe try to draft one or two for that lesson.  And then we went through all of the alignment standards.  We went through those for two through six. It was a good discussion. There were lots of questions, lots of note taking.  This was the day they had more note taking than any other day than any of their other courses.  This the days they realized the little things that aren't aligned are students complain about and never do well on.  There were a lot of ah‑ha moments during this day.  We considered it a successful meeting. 
	Even though this was only two hours that we covered the alignment in because they had watched the video on alignment before they got there, and it was a quick and dirty one, it was all any need he had to get the juices flowing, the conversation flowing, so when we say okay open your course and check for this stuff. So if they had to go in and align the course on their own, they may have gotten frustrated and maybe not come back.  We did have one person that didn't come back and she didn't tell us why.  I don't know if she got overwhelmed at the thought of alignment or she just thought it wasn't for her. I think the important thing is if you do homework in a faculty learning community, don't make it the whole two hours’ worth of homework.  You are still grabbing them in here and getting them interested in the information.  
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: So then week three, we were half way down and week three we covered additional course policies.  If you are reading through the standards in the QM workbook, there are a lot of places in the previous week that mention course policies, but there was a couple left, a couple three pointers left, so we put them here.  It talks about the assessment measurement, that's about the grading, making sure you state that in your syllabus, and also making sure that in your syllabus or somewhere in your course with 3.3 that your assignments and your grading with those actually go back to your grading policy. And then the learner support so that learners know where to access help like technical support and also know how to access the Accessibility Office that might be on your campus or whatever that you might call it. 
	So we did the course policy section. And then we covered accessibility. We did not teach them in this session how to be accessible. We did not go through a PowerPoint and say, this is how you add your alt text, this is how you add this, this is how you do this, we simply told them, this is what you need to do. These are all of the standards meeting accessibility, here's what it might look like.  Here as an example of a good alt text. And we really debated that as to whether we wanted to teach them accessibility or not, but we finally came down to the conclusion that wasn't the purpose of this particular PLC, if we want to teach accessibility we have other resources or we can make another workshop or PLC and do accessible. That was week three.  
	And then week four, that was the last one.
It was really fun.  We got them together and we asked them, what is your biggest take away from the last three weeks?  And it really varied per person, but it really demonstrated that they had gotten a lot out of the three weeks. A lot of faculty really got the alignment was the big thing with them and they were still really struggling with that, but struggling in a good way.  Struggling knowing they could do it, knowing they might need to go back to their Department Head or their Department Committee because some of their objectives were department‑based and work on that. And we also suggested to them, you know, if you don't feel like you can get the department to move, then maybe just do it for your course. All of your objectives can go back to the department ones, but it's okay.  So they were really working on alignment and working on instructions. 
	As Wren mentioned earlier, she did the 15 minute quickie that she adopted from Arizona State who shared that back when you guys were in Baltimore, so that worked really well.  We discussed the Self‑Review Tool. We even gave them a copy of the workbook and pointed out, see, it was a three star in our little page, but it's a three point here.  And they were all really impressed that they were doing good.  You know, people that, some faculty that sometimes want to participate in the faculty development workshops don't think they are doing a good job, but really they are. So it was ‑‑ we really got the sense that they felt like, okay, I'm doing good, I can do better.  And here are some things I can do better with.  But they were doing a good job. So that was a lot of fun. And of course, we encouraged them to submit the course for review itself. It was a positive experience for us, but more importantly it was a positive experience for the faculty.  They got exposed to Quality Matters, to the standards, to what should be done based on research in an online class for success, but we kind of, we did, we snuck it in there and none of them we're offended.  None walked out and said we're never doing this.  It was a lot of fun. 
	So, you know, how could you do this?  How many of you are in the area of faculty development?  And I know that everybody ‑‑ oh, wow, most everybody. And I know from my own experience that the title, your title will differ [laughter], you know, where you are. I'm an Instructional Designer, I do faculty development. So has anybody ever run into reluctant faculty with Quality Matters?  So do you think maybe there's ‑‑ is there a program that you have in mind or maybe a workshop that you have in mind that you can kind of sneak it in?  And then at the end say, oh, look, it's Quality Matters and it didn't hurt you. 
	>> [Laughter] 
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: You didn't die because it's Quality Matters. What questions do you guys have for us?  
	>> WREN MILLS: Something to think about, too, we created a new program because I felt like if I took something that had an established name on campus and just took the Quality Matters, they would know that. Even if they don't read my e‑mails they would know that. 
	Yes?  
	>> [Off microphone]. 
	>> WREN MILLS: So how did we sneak this in with people who already know what the standards are, what QM looks like?  Not a single one of the people that was in that workshop had any familiarity with QM whatsoever.  None of them.  One of them, I guess it was like the third meeting, I think. 
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: Yeah, it was.  
	>> WREN MILLS: One of them said, I heard something about Quality Matters. Is this something like Quality Matters?  And we said, you know, what we're going to talk about that next time.  [Laughter]. So we were kind of shocked that, you know, if that was something they knew about, she didn't mention it unless half way through the third meeting.  We thought, oh, man, our cover is blown.  But we got through the meeting, it wasn't blown up again and none of the other people in the room related to what Quality Matters was, so if they did know about it... 
	It was like, let's talk about how to make your online courses better. 
	>> [Off microphone]. 
	>> [Laughter]. 
	>> [Off microphone]. 
	>> WREN MILLS: So the question is whether or not the standard‑by‑standard workshops are successful because at the APPQMR, like she said, it's beyond a deer in headlights look, it's a, how am I going to do this?  I don't think I can do this?  Especially they may have seen examples before and after and may not be at that level yet. 
	I would say they are successful because faculty take lots of notes, ask questions, they often go and work with the Instructional Designers afterwards, but I think I have done this four times in the past three and a half years and not a single review has resulted out of it. Some people would consider that not successful.  I consider it successful because they are asking questions, taking notes, working with the Instructional Designers, still using QM, just if anybody finds the formula to get over the faculty fear and I know money is a great formula, but we have no money and I'm sure a lot of you have no money to do that unless we build it into the course development because we do pay faculty to develop courses and they have fulfill the entire contract. I think that would put a bad taste in their mouth. They put me in their course and they are like, look at this, this is what I did with standard 4.2, do you think it's appropriate?  We are still having the conversation, so I know it's successful. It's a good use of my time so that's why I keep doing it. 
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: Question in the back. 
	>> [Off microphone]. 
	>> WREN MILLS: We have not run it again.  We're going to run it in the spring.  I will say that APPQMR this year only had six people in it, but we have kind of an odd morale issue on campus right now. I will know from the spring though when I see what enrollment is and if on the first day somebody says, is this kind of like QM?  That's when I'll know the word has gotten out about it. The people that were in the programs they were in were not who would normally come to a workshop about QM.  We had somebody from math, from business, psychology. Professional studies and business is where the grumpy cat was from. I don't think we had anybody from humanities.  We had people from social sciences, business, health sciences, but it was interesting they were not departments we normally would have seen at the APPQMR or QM webinars. 
	>> [Off microphone]. 
	>> WREN MILLS: We haven't. That has not even come up. 
	>> [Off microphone]. 
	>> WREN MILLS: Okay, I'm sorry. So we had them do this 8 hours ‑‑ I'm sorry people watching at home, it's so easy to forget that you are there. I apologize for that. [Laughter]. After they have done the 8 hours together with us over a month, we are asking if they are interested in being a Peer Reviewer that they will have to do either that all day and this is the way we do APPQMR, we do the all day, face‑to‑face experience, 8 hours in a room being submerged in QM and then you don't have to do the two week experience as well. Have we come across people feeling like it's too much?  It's 8 hours plus another 8 hours, plus a two week commitment to be the Peer Reviewer.  That has not come up yet.  I know one of the people in that workshop is very interested in becoming a Peer Reviewer.  She did not have time because of a study abroad this year and a study abroad this year to do it. She is not going to do a study abroad next year, so she has penciled it in that far in advance on her calendar. And she calls me two or three times a month as she is revising her courses to have QM standards.  That's a tiny sample.  We had 8 people and one person inquired about it, so I don't know that it hurt. 
	>> [Off microphone]. 
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: That's a good question. 
	>> WREN MILLS: Yeah, I'm thinking about how to repeat that question. [Laughter]. It's a great question.  When faculty members come into APPQMR or to workshops like this and they learn about alignment, they think it's great, they want to do it, they are all on board and they start to do it and realize it's a big job and some may not have the skills to do it well.  Do we have any programming that does that?  This semester we have a PLC that is actually focusing on a specific group of faculty that are involved with the quality enhancement plan on our campus and the assessment of that quality enhancement plan and we getting those faculty member to scaffold their assignments. The first time we met we talked about alignment and send them home with a homework assignment. We are giving them a month to align just one unit. But I don't know that we have any other programs, do we have?  
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: We don't have any other programs that do that, but you brought up a very interesting concept that some of the faculty that go back to their online course and then they look at their course and it's always ‑‑ they feel like they can't do it. And do we show them any courses that have met QM?  And we don't, but what a great idea because we do that for some other faculty development that we here.  Kind of here's a bad course, here's a good course, here are different ways to design a course, but that's a really neat idea.  That being said, they can work with the Instructional Designers and we can pretty much can do that. Do you have a follow‑up?  Because I have another question back here. 
	>> [Off microphone]. 
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: Okay. 
	>> [Off microphone]. 
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: Okay. 
	>> [Off microphone]. 
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: Okay. 
	>> [Off microphone]. 
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: Okay. So with those folks that are online, I'm going to try to repeat what he said because, man, that was an absolutely great idea and I think that when you get that built, we all want a copy of it. 
	>> [Laughter]. 
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: So what he's going to do is he is looking to develop a soft [indiscernible] interaction that covers one standard at a time and they give a little blurb at the top of what the standard is. And then there's an interactive piece that shows them what it looks like, how to fix it, and then even providing some HTML code so they can put that in Blackboard and kind of really work on that and do that. What a great idea! And, again, I'm going to, you know, on all of us, we're going to give you our cards at the end and when you get it done, you can e‑mail us.  That's fabulous.  
	>> [Off microphone]. 
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: Yes, in the back. 
	>> [Off microphone]. 
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: Okay. 
	>> [Off microphone]. 
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: Thank you. 
	>> [Off microphone].  
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: Okay, all right, we had a member of our audience share that is exactly what they do in their professional development when they are teaching QM, she have some folks that have already met that standards and the course meets the standards to come and show the others that are learning, you know, learn, teach, and do and share. This is how this faculty met, this is what it looks like in faculty X's and Dr. Y's courses.  That's wonderful. 
	Any more questions?  
	>> [Off microphone]. 
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: Sure. Y'all can pick which one can ask first, you are both wearing black and white, so either. 
	>> [Off microphone]. 
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: Show case courses, okay. 
	>> [Off microphone]. 
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: Okay, all right. 
	>> [Off microphone]. 
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: Okay, there's another institution that is does show case courses.  So after somebody sits through APPQMR and they are the deer in the headlights, you guys give them a link and say, okay, here are some show case courses that are at our institution that is have gone through the Quality Matters review, so you can look at them and you can see that you can do this, too. And it seemed like you were saying that the faculty that do that really come away with, I can do this. I'm overwhelmed right now, but I can do this, I'm capable. So that works really well for you guys.  That's wonderful. Thank you. 
	>> [Off microphone]. 
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: Oh, okay, so then the faculty show case courses kind of become mentors to the newbies a little bit. If you have any questions, just give me a call. Oh, that's fabulous. We have five minutes left. What's your question?  
	>> [Off microphone]. 
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: Similar to her?  I love this. Yes, ma'am?  
	>> [Off microphone]. 
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: Okay, so coming in a couple of weeks is the Quality Matters IDEA work is publishing cases and it's courses that have met different standards so we will all be able to go on and see that and some of the faculty will as well. 
	Okay, last question. 
	>> [Off microphone]. 
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: Okay. 
	>> [Off microphone]. 
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: Sure. 
	>> [Off microphone]. 
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: Okay, another institutions has implemented Improving Your Online Course and it is wildly popular with her faculty. 
	>> [Off microphone]. 
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: Yes. 
	>> [Off microphone]. 
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: Yes. 
	>> [Off microphone]. 
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: Yes. 
	>> [Off microphone]. 
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: Okay, so we have someone else that sneaks QM in. She calls it, Improving Your Online Course, and once they get there, they realize it's Quality Matters, but they tend to stay, they don't get mad and throw food, right?  
	>> [Off microphone]. 
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: Yeah, it's a QM thing. That's wonderful.  Anybody ‑‑ it seems like we are all doing great things at our Universities to help faculty with Quality Matters and get them to improve their courses.  
	Yes?  
	>> [Off microphone]. 
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: Three years and you are still implementing.  We get it, we get it. Everybody else is going, yeah, I get that. 
	>> [Off microphone]. 
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: Right. 
	>> [Off microphone]. 
	>> ALICIA PENNINGTON: Yeah. So we have a gentleman who is still working on implementing Quality Matters on his campus for three years and he is finally getting to work with the Instructors and they are coming to him with, this is great, but what does it look like in my course?  He is wanting some examples and it sounds if you wait a couple of weeks, you are going to get some great stuff from QM's IDA that they will be show casing.  That's wonderful. 
	I think it's lunch time.  Thank you guys so much for coming. Enjoy! 
	>> [Applause].  
	
	CART Disclaimer:  This rough edit transcript, which may contain missing, misspelled or paraphrased words, is only provided for your immediate review and is not certified as verbatim and is not to be cited in any way.