1.        What does this Innovative Practice do and how does it work?

Through technology we have expanded student access to education in rural areas.   This could not have happened alone.   Partnership with TCI Cable and the Colorado Department of Education (CDOT) has given us access to fiber optic networks, allowing us to reach several small towns in our service area. Partnerships with K-12 schools have placed two way interactive TV classrooms in high schools in these towns, where we offer dual credit classes.   In a region where Internet access (and therefore online classes) is spotty, we have had to be creative in ways of reaching students who wouldn’t otherwise have access to college classes.  

2.        What motivated you to develop or adopt this Innovative Practice?

Our philosophy was the initial motivator.   We believe that every Colorado resident should have access to education.   

The demand in our service area was the second motivator.   We serve a sparsely populated 11,500 square mile segment in Northeastern Colorado (an average of seven individuals per mile).   The largest town has about 12,000 people, and many smaller communities dot the countryside with many miles between them.    The need to reach students in these smaller communities dictated a distance education outreach effort.   Establishing regional centers (of which we have five), was the beginning, but was not enough; there were still many communities we were not reaching.  

A third motivator was technology.    Internet service in smaller rural communities is spotty or non-existent, thus a purely online distance education format was unsatisfactory for our service area.   While it remains an option for some, other formats were needed to reach other students.

A fourth motivating factor was viable class size.   We can’t always find enough students in any one small community to justify offering a class there; however, if we can connect several communities together, the numbers justify offering courses.

Limited funding was another motivating factor.   We could not afford to do it alone.   Partnering to share funding and resources was a must.  

3.        How long did it take you to develop and implement this Innovative Practice?

Discussions of a two-way interactive classroom system began in 1991.   A DOLA grant was obtained in 1993 and construction began that same year.  This network was known as LTN (Learn Together Network).   The first classes were taught over the system in 1994.   This first system connected the MCC main campus with three high schools in Morgan County.  

4.        What did it cost you to develop and implement this Innovative Practice?

In 1993 dollars it cost $255,000 to build a two way interactive television classroom system in the northern part of the service area that included the main campus and three area high schools.   TCI Cable donated all of the fiber and installation into the buildings; the DOLA grant was used for the rest, which included installing a microwave tower to reach one of the communities that was not connected by fiber optic cable.    

5.        What resistance did you face in developing and implementing this Innovative Practice and how did you reduce or overcome it?

·          Quality issue – would two way interactive classes be as effective for students as on-site classes?   Teachers have had to develop strategies for teaching on camera and from multiple sites.  Instructors are encouraged to make site visits to maintain close relationship with all students.

·          Cost issue – could we afford to implement it?   Would area schools share in the cost?   Yes.   Cooperation and partnerships have made it affordable.

·          Logistics.   Excellent tech support has kept this manageable.     

·          Maintenance and upgrades to equipment.     Routinely handled by tech support personnel.

·          Coordination of schedules between MCC and area high schools.   Handled by ongoing communication between schools.

·          Training of faculty and technicians.    New teachers are mentored by experienced distance education instructors and given orientation sessions by the technical support personnel.   Turnover in technicians has been nil.  

6.        What does it cost to maintain and operate this Innovative Practice, and what does it save you?

Cost:   For the LTN system, $126,602 ($2,500 annual cost for equipment and repairs plus three hours a day technical support).

Savings:   It is difficult to calculate savings because without the system, these classes would not be offered at all.   It is possible, however, to calculate revenue generated over cost.   In 2007, 24FTE was  directly attributable to the LTN system.   The calculated average revenue for that FTE is $214,000, leaving $87,898 in revenue over cost.     

7.        How do you measure or check whether this Innovative Practice performs the way you intend it to?

·          FTE

·          Student Satisfaction surveys

·          Instructor and student complaints

8.        What print or web documents are available to provide more detail and explanation about this Innovative Practice?

None at this time.

9.        How does your organization currently use this Innovative Practice?

We use it to generate FTE and reach students who wouldn’t otherwise be able to take college classes.

We have also expanded two-way interactive education to a second network (VNETS), used in the southern part of our service area, connecting sixteen different school districts with three of the regional centers of the college.  

The percentage of FTE from distance education at MCC has grown from 4% in 1994 to 20% in 2007.   At its height in 2001, two-way interactive courses accounted for 80% of those distance education classes; the subsequent growth in online and hybrid course offerings reduced it to 43% by 2007, but it is still a vital part of our course offerings, and has the advantage of providing live interaction with an instructor.  

10.    Whom at your organization should people contact for more information or help about this Innovative Practice.

Betty McKie, VP of Instruction

1. First Year Experience (FYE) Enhances Satisfaction and Retention
2. The Outcomes Program advances a comprehensive approach to student learning assessment
3. Learning First! Initiative engages stakeholders in advancing learning-centered environment
4. Northwood University’s EXCEL Program (Student Development Transcript)
5. Student Opinion Survey Generates Data for Institutional Change
6. New program development engages employers to improve student outcomes
7. Statewide coordination of course development and course approval improves seamless credit transferability.
8. Academic Improvement Reports: A Faculty and Advising Center Collaboration
9. Using surveys to determine student and support services needs
10. Course content alignment to professional standards
11. Improving Teaching and Learning Spaces
12. Committee Process and Implementation Steps for Academic Planning
13. Instructional Technology Planning: Providing Comprehensive Instructional Technology
14. Integrated – Basic Education and Skills Training (I-BEST)
15. Mandatory Course Placement
16. Assessment of Departmental Academic Programs
17. Annual Outcomes Assessment reporting process supports student learning.
18. SCC Provides Area High Schools with Career Planning System
19. Online Instructional Course/Certificate Enhances Teaching Effectiveness
20. Academy for Teaching Excellence for Faculty Development
21. Electronic Documentation of the Assessment of Student Learning