ERIC Number: ED171211
Record Type: RIE
Publication Date: 1978-Jan
Reference Count: 0
Strategies for Implementing Instructional Improvement Programs.
Biles, Bert R.
Strategies for implementing instructional improvement programs must consider institutional characteristics, needs assessment, program and organizational objectives, and the characteristics of the instructional improvement program. Checklists, tables, and matrices are presented to illustrate the cyclical nature of the process of program development and implementation and to help organize an implementation approach. The first factor to be considered in the instructional improvement program development cycle is a set of 13 institutional characteristics that are relevant to needs assessment, goals, program and organizational objectives, and instructional improvement program characteristics. A needs assessment matrix includes the needs of faculty, students, administrators, the governing board, and other interests, and the matrix suggests four different types of needs that should be investigated. Three distinct stages of implementing program improvements are program adoption, program implementation, and program involvement. A program evaluation should be considered an integral component of the effort. The following three additional planning models are presented to aid in selecting an appropriate planning technique: interactive planning, financial productivity, and dual needs assessment. (SW)
Descriptors: College Faculty, College Instruction, Conference Reports, Higher Education, Improvement Programs, Institutional Characteristics, Instructional Improvement, Matrices, Models, Needs Assessment, Objectives, Program Development, Resource Materials
Center for Faculty Evaluation and Development in Higher Education, 1627 Anderson Ave., Box 3000, Manhattan, Kansas 66502
Publication Type: Speeches/Meeting Papers; Reports - Descriptive
Education Level: N/A
Authoring Institution: Kansas State Univ., Manhattan. Center for Faculty Evaluation and Development in Higher Education.
Note: Presented at the annual conference on Faculty Development and Evaluation in Higher Education (2nd, University of Florida, Orlando, Florida, Feburary 1-3, 1978)