Options for EMU’s Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP)
Common Grounds
January 15, 2008

SACS Core requirement: “The institution has developed an acceptable Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP) that (1) includes a broad-based institutional process identifying key issues emerging from institutional assessment, (2) focuses on learning outcomes and /or the environment supporting student learning and accomplishing the mission of the institution, (3) demonstrates institutional capability for the initiation, implementation, and completion of the QEP, (4) includes broad-based involvement of institutional constituencies in the development and proposed implementation of the QEP, and (5) identifies goals and a plan to assess their achievement.”

Option 1: Faith development

According to our mission statement, an EMU education invites students to:
experience Christ and follow His call to
witness faithfully,
serve compassionately, and
walk boldly in the way of nonviolence and peace.

While this statement is core to our mission and “nurture faith” is one of eight goals listed on EMU’s strategic plan, there appears to be some uncertainty about how faith is and should be developed across the EMU experience. Survey data and a summary analysis of 2006-2007 AIER reports as reviewed by the Strategic Planning Council suggest that while faculty believe an important goal for faculty is to enhance spiritual development , there are concerns about how well we are doing in encouraging faith development. Our future viability may depend on how we address this facet of an EMU education, given our current difficulty in maintaining Mennonite student percentages. Increasingly a critical question emerges: How can we reach students who share passion for our mission within the broader Christian community? EMU could benefit from addressing the following question: What does our faith story look like and how do we pass it on with integrity and vision?

Option 2: Environmental sustainability

The March 2007 event called “Living Micah’s Vision: Creative Dreaming toward EMU’s Future” created enthusiasm for an Environmental Sustainability effort, which is being carried forward by a Creation Care Council with at least five subgroups that are already at work to change the way we live at EMU. Environmental sustainability addresses how the university manages its resources and wastes, as well as how the university educates our community to walk humbly and justly in the world. Part of our tradition is to live simply, which should be demonstrated by minimizing use of resources such as energy, water and other consumables. Environmental sustainability also speaks to the types of resources we choose to use. This should in turn influence our procurement processes; our building construction, renovations, and maintenance; as well as choices about what sort of energy to use. To educate students to live in a global context is to teach them to understand the relatedness inherent in interlocking circles of communities. When we take this approach to education, we will encourage students to act in environmentally sustainable ways that consider the common good.

An environmental sustainability focus would have at least three outcomes that speak to student learning and the environment supporting learning and would enhance two of EMU’s strategic goals, i.e. nurture faith and enhance academic programs.

Students will learn about environmental principles in both traditional classes and research projects and in both science and non-science (JPCS, business/economics, ethics, etc.) courses.
Students will incorporate environmental sustainability into their theological worldview and articulate how it is consistent with the Anabaptist traditions of discipleship, community, service, and peacebuilding.
Buildings and resource management will use ‘green’ technologies and choices that 1) are visible (visible technologies are more amenable for use in learning), 2) provide opportunities for quantifying benefits (which emphasizes active, student-centered learning), and 3) focus on water, pollution and energy issues (the most important sustainability issues).

Option 3: A Teaching and Learning Center or where do we locate support for a “single organizing academic vision” for the university and support for high quality teaching and learning?

The Academic Structure Task Force (ASTF) used an action research methodology to identify needed changes in the academic structure of EMU. One resulting proposal that generated a lot of energy was creating a Center for Teaching and Learning. It is most helpful to see the proposal for such a center as an expression of longing for:

The clear identification of a single organizing academic vision that cuts across the undergraduate, graduate, seminary and ADCP programs, and
Support for developing and maintaining a university that engages in high quality teaching and learning.

The ASTF was not mandated to make recommendations about programming, vision, or job descriptions for current positions such as the deans or the provost. Consequently, this expressed longing ended up in the ASTF recommendations as a new center under the direction of a yet-to-be-defined role of Assistant or Associate Provost. Rather than debating the merits of adding a new administrative role or creating a new center, we would benefit greatly from engaging in a study that would help clarify our single organizing academic vision and the best ways to promote a vibrant teaching and learning community that is tied directly to EMU’s mission as an Anabaptist university. Further evidence that this topic would respond to current concerns of the faculty can be found in the report on the faculty “table talk” groups held during the September 24, 2007 Faculty Assembly. During that meeting, faculty spent a lot of time talking about how to teach today’s students with their increasing academic needs, how to recruit students who resonate with our mission, and how to overcome the divisions between graduate, undergraduate, seminary and ADCP programs. Focusing our QEP on the proposed teaching and learning center can harness this energy and unlock creativity as long as we focus on the underlying question: Where do we locate support for a “single organizing academic vision” for the university and support for high quality teaching and learning?

Option 4: Residential Living and Learning Communities

Residential living and learning communities* are designed to bridge the disconnect that frequently occurs on campuses between academics and student life. Assessment data from the Admitted Student Questionnaire indicate that EMU is perceived by prospective students as having a friendly and welcoming social environment, but it is not perceived as having a particularly strong academic environment. Making changes in the curriculum to tie academics and residential living together would communicate that learning is an integral part of all aspects of EMU college life. The National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) as reported in the November 9, 2007 Chronicle of Higher Education indicates that learning communities that require out-of-class activities, as well as discussion groups that integrate material from different courses, improve critical thinking skills among other positive results. Mike Eyster (ACAP Conference, October, 2007) has documented multiple types of residential living and learning communities. Several examples that fit with EMU's mission and values might include a Global Village community for students returning from or getting ready to go on their cross-culturals, a Creation Care community that focuses on environmental and sustainability issues, or a Residential First Year Experience community that focuses on academic, social, physical, spiritual, and emotional transitions to college. EMU could benefit from an effort to strengthen the connection between academics and student life and enhance student engagement in learning through learning communities.

* Defined as programs that involve undergraduate students who live together in a discrete portion of a residence hall (or the entire hall) and participate in academic and/or extra-curricular programming designed especially for them (National Study of Living Learning Programs).

Option 5: Global Village Curriculum

As the core of undergraduate education at EMU, the Global Village Curriculum presents many opportunities for developing a QEP topic focused on improving student learning. Attention to the GVC is especially relevant given impending curricular changes designed to ensure a vibrant, quality general education program. Some areas that may lend themselves to successful QEP topics include:

learning communities linking discipline-based introductory courses with College Writing and First-Year Engagement,
a writing program cultivating student and faculty development through the lens of “writing to learn,”
student and faculty development programs to promote engaged learning at EMU,
information literacy integrated throughout the curriculum, and
capstone courses within departments or clusters, including internships, that enrich the educational experience and provide opportunities to “synthesize, integrate, and apply knowledge” (National Survey of Student Engagement)