Browse

Classification of Instructional Programs (CIP) codes were designed to report outcomes in higher education by specific disciplines and professions, however, universities, states, and accreditation bodies also use these codes in other ways. This paper describes CIP-2010 usage in higher education and how these codes are used in funding public universities in Texas, and summarizes the American Kinesiology Association/National Academy of Kinesiology recommendations to the National Center for Education Statistics on updating kinesiology-related CIP codes. Kinesiology leaders should be knowledgeable about how CIP codes are often used behind the scenes in a variety of ways that affect our faculty, programs, and the field. Greater use of the term kinesiology in many future CIP codes would benefit the field and individual departments seeking alignment with institutional priorities.

The rapidly increasing enrollment in kinesiology programs recognizes the important role of our academic discipline in promoting future professionals within the physical activity, fitness, wellness, education, sport, and allied health domains. Unprecedented growth in student interest in kinesiology offers faculty and administrators in higher education both exciting opportunities and difficult challenges. One significant concern facing kinesiology faculty is maintaining high-quality instruction within growing class sizes. Incorporating service-learning components within kinesiology curricula provides numerous benefits to students, faculty, institutions of higher education, and members of our local and global communities. In addition, service-learning has the potential to initiate innovative and entrepreneurial learning experiences and funding opportunities for students and faculty.

In 2009, California State University-Chico implemented a unique system of course redesign with the aim of improving student learning, increasing instructional efficiency, and reducing university costs. Inspired by and modeled after the National Center for Academic Transformation, the “Academy e-Learning” program involves a 3-week training covering models of course design, learning theories, assessment methods, and a host of instructional technologies. This paper summarizes data from 40 courses, across five separate cohort groups from 2009–2013, with respect to the efficacy of Academy e-Learning (re)design training. Data show improvements in student learning outcomes in over half of the course redesigns. Benefits of course redesign included increased instructional efficiency, enhanced student learning, and a reduction in university costs by offering some instruction online and increasing enrollment caps. Barriers to a successful course redesign included lack of time, technology malfunction, and workload concerns. This paper outlines the redesign process at California State University-Chico, discusses similar redesign initiatives at other institutions, and offers solutions for measuring effectiveness of a redesigned course.

Higher education is in a period of flux. For many public institutions, state support has decreased over the past decade, resulting in the notion of doing more with less. Using an inverted triangle approach, this article examines how both institutions and departments are coping with their present reality using innovative and entrepreneurial ideas. First, the story of how public institutions in the state of Illinois are responding to decreased state appropriations and declining K–12 enrollments is discussed. Second, a rich example of how one institution completed the strategic planning process—from conceptualization to implementation—is shared. Finally, one department’s multifaceted plan to handle declining state support is shared.

There is a tremendous need for wellness programming at all university levels as well as the United States as a whole. Healthy lifestyles benefit the workplace through lower healthcare costs, lower rates of injury and absenteeism, higher productivity, and improved morale and retention. This paper describes two innovative programs in higher education, the Healthy Diploma^TM and Healthy Titans, which are designed to improve the health and well-being of both students and employees. Two universities addressed the health and wellness of students (Healthy Diploma^TM) and employees (Healthy Titans) by utilizing the strengths of their respective kinesiology department students and faculty members. The Healthy Diploma^TM program was designed to lead university students to a healthy lifestyle while enhancing their postgraduation contributions as healthy entry-level employees. The Healthy Titans program was designed to provide University of Wisconsin Oshkosh employees and their families an affordable fitness program with an onsite clinical setting for kinesiology students to gain practical experience with fitness programming. Students were provided the opportunity to gain personal health and wellness skills and competencies, and practice their future profession in an applied, yet highly-supervised setting. Practitioners were provided current research and best profession practices. These two programs at two different universities further illustrate both the practicality and advantages of faculty and student collaborations for campus-wide wellness. Programs addressing wellness at the university level have demonstrated appropriateness as well as benefits for students, employees, and community members, and suggest expansion of similar programs to other university settings.

Over the past decade, institutions of higher education have been forced to become more innovative and entrepreneurial, seeking creative solutions to budget challenges. This has been particularly important within kinesiology programs, which represent one of the largest growing sectors of higher education over the past 10–15 years. In preparation for the 2016 American Kinesiology Association (AKA) Leadership Workshop, a survey was administered by the AKA to capture key institutional classifications (i.e., Carnegie classification, institutional size, public vs. private designation) and department chair or designated administrator perceptions on entrepreneurial issues relevant to their unit. Sixty-eight of 881 units surveyed responded, yielding a response rate of 7.7%. The majority of respondents (67%) indicated a unit funding model that was based on the previous year’s level (i.e., historical budget model). While the majority of respondents reported that their unit is provided with “adequate to plentiful” resources (59%), this varied widely based on institutional classification. Specifically, baccalaureate institutions (Chi-square 18.054, p < .001) and institutions with < 5,000 students (Chi-square 10.433, p & .015) had the least favorable perceptions of unit resource allocation. For the majority of entrepreneurial activities and partnerships (5 of 8 targeted questions), ≥ 50% of the respondents reported “no involvement.” There was a significant mismatch between actual vs. expected time spent by the department chair on fundraising activities (Chi-square 4.627, p = .031), with higher expectations than actual time spent on fundraising. In summary, the AKA survey suggests that there is tremendous heterogeneity in perceptions of and participation in entrepreneurial activities within kinesiology, and that there remains strategic areas of opportunity within the field.

This is an era in which academic units in higher education are expected to do more with less. State- and institutionally-appropriated funding streams are generally decreasing or stagnant. Federal grant funding is at its lowest level in years, and unlikely to rebound anytime soon. Institutions are restricting tuition increases to allow greater accessibility to students of limited means as well as to heed public demand for more accountability in the “educational product”. Enrollment growth adds pressure to academic units but rarely results in immediate resources directed to the affected units. To compound this problem, kinesiology is one of the fastest growing majors nationwide. With such mounting pressures on academic units and their leaders, creative entrepreneurial resourcefulness is not only rewarded, but required. This paper presents a series of successful and practical resource-generating strategies from the unique perspectives of units at several different institutions.

External funding increases as the number of quality proposals submitted increases; increasing the number of faculty submitting proposals is a logical step to increase external funding. Reflecting on a physical educator’s > $1.5 million grant portfolio, two main themes emerge: the role of the PI and the unit administrator. Realizing increases in external funding is in part a result of administrators empowering faculty for success, and five administrator strategies have been identified. These strategies include: (1) value all sources of external funding (e.g., teaching, research, outreach, federal, foundation), (2) reward the process and the outcomes (a good proposal is equal to a data-based paper), (3) facilitate connections for collaboration (e.g., spread the word about your faculty), (4) provide infrastructure (from labs to personnel evaluation), (5) identify and develop potential. Important strategies for PIs include: (1) write proposals, (2) take risks, (3) answer the phone, (4) details matter, and (5) seek collaborators.

Market pressures and external demands to sustain access, improve cost management and accountability, and increase productivity continue to persist in departments and schools of kinesiology. Confidence in the sustainability of an institution’s business model is eroding. To address these challenges, one possible approach for enhancing institutional performance, accountability, and stability is to revise an institution’s management process or budgeting model. Indicators suggest that many institutions are changing budget models to an incentive-based budgeting (IBB) system (i.e., responsibility-centered management [RCM]). The management strategies reviewed in this article are important for higher education budget administrators that implement, or are considering implementing, an IBB system as a means for assessing outcomes or institutional decision-making.