Integrated First-Year Experience
An integrated first-year experience is one of the three final QEP topic proposals. Click here to download the proposal. For all three proposals go to the Final Proposals page of this website. Please review each of the three proposals and send us your comments and recommendations.
We ask that you give primary consideration to the specific topic area being proposed and what you believe are the value and importance of the areas of student learning that this proposal will promote and enhance. Do not get too far into the details right now–all three proposals have areas that are incomplete—areas where more data analysis may be needed, where program issues need to be resolved, where resources need to be identified and budgets and comprehensive assessment plans must be developed. Regardless of the topic chosen, all of those things and many more details will need to be addressed in our final QEP submission to SACS.
We recommend that you consider each proposal by asking yourself these questions:
1. Which topic area do you think will best meet the educational needs of our students?
2. Which topic area will best support our core educational mission and will advance the university in its stated goals of achieving excellence as a liberal arts institution?
3. What do you think are the positives and negatives of each topic idea and overall proposed plans?
4. For the one you believe should be our final QEP topic, what areas/issues do you think need to be addressed as that idea/proposal goes forward—what recommendations do have for improving or developing that idea if it is chosen?
In addition to these questions, the QEP Planning and Review Committee will be considering the following:
- Rationale for the topic grows out of and is supported by data from UMW institutional effectiveness efforts or other institutional sources.
- Project will clearly advance the university mission and the UMW Strategic Plan.
- Proposal describes a direct connection to student learning outcomes, learning outcomes that have depth and importance and can be measured and assessed.
- Project affects a well-defined and generally large or significant cohort of students.
- Project builds on an existing UMW strength or targets a significant area that needs strengthening.
- If selected as the UMW QEP topic, proposal can be developed to include a substantial, on-going, and viable assessment plan.
- Proposal receives broad-based input/feedback and support from UMW faculty, students, and staff.
You may provide your feedback on this proposal in three ways: post your comments below –they will be public; follow this link to send your comments directly to the committee anonymously; or email your comments directly to the chair or any member of the planning committee.
All comments must be received by 5:00 pm on Monday, April 11. The QEP Planning and Review Committee will meet to review all of the comments we have received and will then make our recommendations to the president and the provost.
The committee welcomes all feedback.
4 Comments so far
Charlie Sharpless on 04 Apr 2011 at 10:21 pm #
I like this proposal. It fits the definition of “taking what we’re already doing and making it better.” The resource requirements look modest. It looks like it will clean up problems we currently have with staffing and function of our first year seminars. Though I am not by any means an expert in it or even well-informed about the process, I wholeheartedly support any actions we can take to integrate the residential and academic experiences of our students. I can sense some of that happening now, and this QEP would seem to formalize the process and strengthen our efforts in that area. We need to find ways to make students engage in their learning outside of the classroom, in social settings that reinforce good intellectual habits and (dare I say it) the life of the mind. Our students are increasingly unprepared for college and really don’t seem to have any notion of intellectual life. This plan looks like a good mean to address this in a holistic way that simultaneously cleans up some sloppiness in our current FY curriculum and general education requirements.
Rosemary Arneson on 07 Apr 2011 at 5:15 pm #
I agree with Charlie’s comments above. This proposal appears to build on our current strengths. If this is chosen as the QEP topic, I’d like to talk with the team about how to integrate the library into the proposed courses. The first year courses especially would be a good chance for us to help students get off to a good start in conducting research.
Craig Vasey on 08 Apr 2011 at 2:25 pm #
Our First Year seminar program needs to be coordinated and integrated into what we’re doing better than it is at present, so this strikes me as the most pressing and compelling of the three projects.
Some kind of FY writing program seems like an essential element that we’re currently missing; this proposal calls for taking writing seriously, instead of taking it for granted.
I like the proposal for seniors to learn through teaching internships or as mentors/tutors, and the common reading/ study experience –though I am not sure I’m sold on there being a single common experience (there could be multiple options for common experiences), or that the common experiences all even have to speak to the same overarching theme.
Andrew Dolby on 11 Apr 2011 at 12:07 pm #
I think that ehancement of our first year program would 1) have the best chance of improving the educational experiences of our students, 2) reach the most students, and 3) be the most feasible of the three plans given current constraints imposed by limited resources. I agree with the previous posts that a first year experience QEP plan could focus on improving what we are already delivering and involving upper-level students. I would support a re-designed first year seminar with greater and more consistent focus on 1) introducing students to university resources, 2) providing additional academic advising that would complement the first year advising program, 3) developing students’ communication skills, 4) developing students’ study and university-level academic coping skills, and 5) targeting at-risk students for study skills workshops and remedial writing and speaking courses (and continue to develop critical thinking skills, etc. as they are currently doing.) Additionally, I would support incorporation of an upper-level student mentoring program (great idea to give them experiential learning credit!)and extracurricular cultural and service activities (I agree that these could be led by upper-level peer mentors).
However, I do think we need to carefully evaluate the costs and benefits of adding too many new courses to the program. Given that some departments are able to participate in our current first year seminars on only a limited basis, I am not convinced that substantial expansion of course requirements would receive much support. Resources are limited and some departments are struggling to meet student demand for general education courses as well as courses needed by majors. We would need more faculty, redesign our general education program, or both to accomodate all the elements of this proposal. In summary, though, I support as our QEP an augmentation plan for our first year experience.