Skip navigation
​​Education and Human Services Building

OAPC 2.0 Launched February, 2016

We are pleased to announce that all members of the OAPC committee will be taking part in the implementation efforts of the OAPC 2.0.  The implementation committee will continue efforts in the following subgroups:

The OAPC 2.0 Final Report and Committee Recommendations

OAPC 2.0 August Updates: 

  1. Education and Preparation (OAPC Ed Prep Group) Purpose and Charges (Membership List)
    1. The purpose of this group is to work in concert with CMU experts to develop an innovative, ongoing and sustainable education and preparation plan that prepares faculty to employ best practices for e-learning.
    2. The group will develop and seek to launch initiatives that will take affect during the 2016-17 academic year.
    3. By the beginning of the fall semester a comprehensive plan will be submitted to the OAPC 2.0 committee.
    4. The group will develop a budget of needed resources for this plan.

      Progress Towards Charge: The Education and Preparation subgroup has identified key needs for the university. We need to do a better job of reaching out to the specific needs of departments and colleges in terms of communicating and facilitating best practices in eLearning, connecting resources to those in need, and improving the experience of eLearning course development.

      Some of the activities that led us to the solutions being proposed included:

      • Sending faculty and staff from the team out to determine existing resources, needs from faculty, and gaps in existing services
      • Looking into current research
      • Interviewing the Assistant Director of MSU’s Innovation Hub
      • Interviews with eLearning personnel at various other institutions, including Purchase College, SUNY, Virginia Tech, and University of Arizona

               To this end, we have  will be proposing the creation of symposiums that are tailored to the unique needs of the college. Each symposium will not be a one-time professional development opportunity. It will be a series of learning opportunities designed to springboard the college into on-going, targeted professional development.
               We will also be proposing the creation of a single web-based eLearning portal, which, by way of social-networking and response tools, facilitate collaboration and communication online, while providing a single umbrella linking to many existing resources and up-to-date online professional development.
               Thirdly, a re-imagined eLearning course development process, a team-based approach, will be proposed. In this model, small groups of (3-6) faculty will pursue eLearning content creation as a cohort, with universal and uniform access to support resources.  The effort will empower faculty and create opportunities for peer-review and support.  

  2. Student Needs (OAPC Student Group) Purpose and Charges (membership list)
    1. The purpose of this group is to examine the different needs of traditional, non-traditional, professional and off campus student populations and the support services the various populations require.
    2. The group will expand on the work already conducted by the CARRS staff to target the needs of current and future students.
    3.  The committee will include student members and seek input from various student constituencies.

      Progress Towards Charge: Timeline and Next Steps: By August 11th the committee will vote on the approval of their proposed plans for addressing each of the three identified needs. They will then send it to the OAPC main committee for approval and feedback. 
             The Student Needs subgroup has met regularly since its inception and has completed the following tasks as this group as worked towards its goals and charge:
      1. Reviewed OAPC 1.0 Report;
      2. Reviewed the CARRS report, and has consulted and met with Mary Senter;
      3. Consulted with Institutional Research Robert Roe, and added an IR member to the subgroup;
      4. Reviewed additional research and national student trends and needs, with additional materials posted to OAPC website;
      5. Added Student Government representative to the subgroup, there are four students serving on the subgroup;
      6. Developed a student survey to gather input from our current CMU students from all disciplines and locations;
      7. Consulted with the office of Research Compliance and Bob Beinkowski regarding survey going through IRB review;
      8. Consulted with Provost Mike Gealt regarding timelines for launching to avoid conflicts with other surveys on campus;
      9. Piloted the student survey with a small convenience sample.

  3. Market (OAPC Market Group) Purpose and Charges (membership list)
    1. The purpose of this group is to look at market trends related to online education, identify potential program enhancements at CMU and communicate these opportunities to the university community.  
    2. This group will work with OIR and conduct a capacity analysis, program and student needs assessment of current market conditions. Groups 2 and 3 will work together to ensure efforts aren't duplicated with regard to student needs.

      Progress Towards Charge: The Market Analysis Sub-committee has identified an Online Program Analysis Process and developed an Online Program Analysis Model to gather and analyze specific data points related to online program development and delivery. The aim of the Process and the Model is to inform key decision-makers on the potential success of an online program. The Online Program Analysis Process includes the gathering and synthesis of external to CMU and internal to CMU data points to assess current market conditions, available resources, and enrollment potential for specific academic programs. The process is utilized to gather information and data in support of the new academic programs and/or for support of moving existing programs into an online delivery format. The Online Program Analysis Model outlines the specific data points to be used to inform the immediate stakeholders, and members of the wider university community, as to the potential long-term sustainability and success of an academic program to be delivered in an online format. The Model is not intended to determine whether a program should be delivered in an online format; rather, it is to be used to inform the overall decision-making process. The internal data points are to be used in tandem with the external data points to establish a holistic understanding of potential program sustainability and success.

  4. Structural Issues (OAPC Structure Group) Purpose and Charges (membership list)
    1. The purpose of this group is to examine the administrative processes related to online course/program development and delivery, and identify areas where improvements can be made e.g. curriculum approval, course development, staffing, etc.
    2. The group will make specific recommendations for short and long term changes to improve administrative online development and delivery that will ensure CMU continues to provide high quality courses and programs in every format.
    3. The group will seek input from a wide-range of CMU stakeholders to ensure that recommendations meet the needs and expectations of the greater university.

      Progress Towards Charge:
      • Online courses and the Curriculum Authority Document (CAD). Recommendation to remove delivery mode from Master Course Syllabi (MCS) and the course approval process. Submitted and approved by OAPC.
      • Notifying students of delivery mode for particular courses. Recommendation that primary communication of delivery mode should be through the online scheduling and registration system. Approved by OAPC – Sub-group 4, to be submitted to OAPC for consideration at next regular meeting.
      • Definition of "hybrid" courses. Committee has reviewed an extensive survey of "hybrid" definitions and is preparing a recommendation.
      • Notification to students concerning delivery mode that currently exists in the undergraduate, graduate and Global Campus bulletins. Revised language submitted and being reviewed by committee.
      • Notifying students of required meeting times for "hybrid" and "synchronous online" courses. In addition to course syllabi, required meeting days and times for all courses must be communicated via the online scheduling and registration system. Recommendation prepared.
      • Improved communication between Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning (CETL), faculty and departments regarding options available for online/hybrid course development. Recommendation will likely support work being completed by Sub-group.

2.0 Committee Members:

  • Dale-Elizabeth Pehrsson, Committee Chair, Dean, College of Education and Human Services 
  • Jeffery Betts, Chairperson, School of Health Sciences 
  • Kathryn Dirkin, Faculty, Teacher Education and Professional Development
  • Ian Elliott, President, Student Government Association
  • Shellie Haut, Director, Licensure, Regulatory Svcs. and Human Capital, Global Campus 
  • Bill Kanine, Chair, CMU Board of Trustees 
  • Melinda Kreth, Faculty, English Language and Literature, and Chair, Academic Senate 
  • Latoya Lain, Faculty, School of Music 
  • Paul Natke, Chairperson, Economics 
  • David Patton, Chairperson, Geography 
  • Peter Ross, Vice Provost, Academic Development
  • Lawrence Sych, Chairperson, Political Science and Public Administration


Meeting Agendas:
July 7, 2015 Agenda
July 28, 2015 Agenda
August 18, 2015 Agenda
September 16, 2015 Agenda
October 28, 2015 Agenda
February 18, 2016 Agenda
March 3, 2016 Agenda
March 24, 2016 Agenda
April 14, 2016 Agenda
May 5, 2016 Agenda
May 26, 2016 Agenda
June 16, 2016 Agenda
July 14, 2016 Agenda
July 28, 2016 Agenda
August 18, 2016 Agenda
September 8, 2016 Agenda
September 29, 2016 Agenda
October 20, 2016 Agenda
November 10, 2016 Agenda

Meeting Notes:
July 7, 2015 Meeting Notes
July 28, 2015 Meeting Notes
August 18, 2015 Meeting Notes
September 16, 2015 Meeting Notes 
October 28, 2015 Meeting Notes
February 18, 2016 Meeting Notes
March 3, 2016 Meeting Notes
March 24, 2016 Meeting Notes
April 14, 2016 Meeting Notes
May 5, 2016 Meeting Notes
May 26, 2016 Meeting Notes
June 16, 2016 Meeting Notes
July 14, 2016 Meeting Notes
July 28, 2016 Meeting Notes
August 18, 2016 Meeting Notes
September 8, 2016 Meeting Notes
September 29, 2016 Meeting Notes
October 20, 2016 Meeting Notes

Committee Updates:
Committee Report 8/24/15

Additional Resources:
Webinar and conferences
Current National Trends
CMU Data and Trends

Original Committee Charge: 

  1. In comparison with other similarly-situated higher education institutions with recognized leadership in online academic program and course delivery, how does CMU compare with such institutions in terms of the quantity of academic programs and courses available online? What reasons exist for this differentiation?
  2. In comparison with other similarly-situated higher education institutions with recognized leadership in online academic program and course delivery, what challenges exist for CMU which may be adversely impacting or delaying the development and delivery of new or additional online academic programs and and/or courses? What opportunities exist for timely and effectively addressing such challenges?

Board of Trustees' Meeting 


Co-Chairperson
Dr. Dale​-Elizabeth Pehrsson, Dean
College of Education and Human Services

Co-Chairperson
Dr. David Patton, Chair, Geography Department, College of Science and Engineering

Need additional information? 
Contact Sheila Roupe at
College of Education and Human Services | Central Michigan University | ehs@cmich.edu | 195 Ojibway Ct | EHS 426 | Mt. Pleasant, MI 48859 | (989) 774-3079