Leveraging Resources Within the Institution and Region

Sponsored by:

National Council for Continuing Education & Training

Presented by:

Stephen B. Kinslow, President, Austin Community College

Sandra Gaskin, NCCET Executive Director

Kirk White, Austin Community College District

Agenda

• Partnerships in a Region• Scope of the I-35 Corridor

Partnership• Partnerships within a College• Examples of successes • Lessons learned• Q&A

I-35 Corridor CollaborativeWhy:

– Hosted Regional Green Economy Forum (business/industry, workforce groups, academia)• To create coordination & sharing of green

programs• To formalize regional collaborative/enhance

competitiveness• I-35 Corridor Collaborative then created

– ACC formed Federal Stimulus Response Office• To track funding opportunities• Linked to Workforce Education, Governmental

Relations, Grants, and President’s Office

I–35 Collaborative Goals• Goals:

– Form collaborative group of education and training partners focused on green/sustainable programs

– Leverage resources by sharing curriculum and faculty development

– Pursue grants and training opportunities – Contribute to the development of a

sustained regional Green Economy

I-35 Collaborative

• Enhance communication and collaboration

• Enhance higher ed/workforce investment boards collaboration

• Enhance competitiveness for federal stimulus dollars

Partners Agree to:

• Design curriculum materials on a regional basis, and to share existing materials

• Design and share faculty professional development activities and materials

• Develop regional proposals for funding Green Economy initiatives

• Develop processes to facilitate a high level of cooperation and coordination

Members

• Alamo Colleges – San Antonio• Austin Community College District - Austin• Dallas County Community College District – Dallas• Temple College - Temple• Texas State Technical College System - Waco• Central Texas College - Killeen• McClennan Community College - Waco• 8 Workforce Investment Boards associated with the

colleges• Texas Foundation for Innovative Communities

(non-profit group facilitating industry interfaces)

Impact of Collaborative

• Grant development and funding• Much larger impact • Sharing of resources• Avoid duplication of effort• Potential for collaborations beyond

the I-35 Corridor

Impact of Collaborative• Current Projects:

– Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy Curriculum Development Project [$1,133,186.00]

– I-35 Life Sciences Cluster Regional Cooperation Grant [$380,094.00]

– Health Information Technology (HITECH) Community College Consortium Project [Year 1 - $683,705.00; Year 2 - $533,133.00 (requested); plus access to HITECH curriculum developed under another $10 million dollar project]

Leveraging Resources Within an Institution

• Utilizing Continuing Education as a way of expanding or initiating new workforce training in an institution

• Creating strong internal partnerships to benefit students

CE as an Incubator

• Strengths of Continuing Education– Quality driven with competitive pricing– Typically follows a business model– Responds quickly to community needs– Generates revenue to pay for development– Flexibility & entrepreneurial approach to

program development– Not limited by many “credit” related

barriers

CE Strengths for Success

• Responsiveness – often the “front line” of the college

• Leveraging of Resources – maximize what is available

• Sustainability – build it so it can stand on it’s own

Responsiveness

• Community often comes to CE & customized training first with requests for new programs

• Used to creating new programs within weeks/months rather than years

• Frequently engaged with community groups – Chambers, Workforce Boards, Community Based Organizations

Leveraging of Resources

• Working with college credit departments• Sharing of faculty & expertise• Utilizing specialized classroom, lab

space, and internship sites• Joint use of expensive equipment• Sharing revenue with credit

departments• Coordinating grant funded projects

Sustainability

• Building program on identified need• Building the CE program with the

goal of becoming a credit program• Integrated courses (or program)• Flexibility for various student groups• Demonstrate success before

committing significant college resources

Models that Work

• Video Game Development• Renewable Energy

Video Game Development

• Began in CE based on industry request• Advisory council with game companies• Three college departments, 2 Deans• 3 identified tracks / degrees• Joint work with credit faculty to move to

“Game Development Institute” (GDI)• GDI Director position

www.viscom.austincc.edu/gamesgroup

Renewable Energy

• Started in CE at request of industry• Emphasis on solar technologies (both

certifications and degree/certificate)• Several grants that leveraged

funding for resources & development• Shared equipment, space and faculty• I-35 Corridor Consortium & TREEC

www.austincc.edu/ce/renewable

www.austincc.edu/green

www.austincc.edu/ce/greentraining

Lessons Learned

• Importance of departments / partners working together to develop programs

• Developing with the end in mind– Credit course hour requirements– Credit faculty credentials– Ease of transition / articulation for

students– Who “owns” the program after it grows

into a credit program?

Lessons Learned (cont)

• Transcript issues need to be resolved with CE offering a letter grade

• Students need to be recognized by the college as a “student” regardless of how they are registered (CE or Credit)

• All college resources need to be available to all students (advising, library, etc)

“Leveraging resources” means capitalizing on

what each partner does best.

Questions?

Contact Information• Stephen B. Kinslow, President, ACC

president@austincc.edu

• Kirk White, Associate Dean of CEACC, kwhite@austincc.edu

• Sandra Gaskin, Executive DirectorNCCET, nccet@sbcglobal.net