September 13, 2001

Alsea-Calapooya Room

Present: Ann Adams, Lynn Bain, Rich Bergeman, Beth Camp, Mike Holland, Phil Krolick, Elizabeth Lundy, Marlene Propst, Lori Rowton, Paul Snyder, Diane Watson, Ed Watson, Carol Schaafsma, Diane Bauer

Read and discuss Steve Gilbert’s “Why Bother” handout. DEIT members reviewed Steve Gilbert’s “Why Bother?” handout to say they appreciated the mix of practical and visionary ideas as well as the breadth of his discussion of how educators and students benefit from an investment in technology, although we noted that some of his benefits for using technology are also true to other modes of delivery. The key reason we use distance methodologies is because “more people will be able to learn and teach better.” We affirmed that LBCC is not interested in being a diploma mill; we value academic integrity, regardless of delivery. Our strategic concern: Given limited resources, how do we choose our priorities for investment? Should these decisions be entirely student-driven?

Meeting with Steve Gilbert - Beth Camp shared feedback from the group with Steve Gilbert by phone. Steve was unable to fly to Oregon from Washington D.C. as all planes were cancelled because of the terrorist attacks there. Steve has tentatively been rescheduled for Jan. 3^rd to meet with the committee and LBCC staff. Steve Gilbert expressed his regrets at not being with us at the DEIT retreat and looked forward to working with us face-to-face. He sees increasing numbers of faculty making a new commitment to use technology in their teaching and learning. This is not a small undertaking, he noted. But, at the colleges he’s worked with, he reports that small groups taking small steps together can create transformative changes.

RECAP: Summer Retreat Recommendations – Mike Holland. The DEIT Summer Retreat of June 28-29, 2001, resulted in several targeted activities (with time lines and assigned to committees). Additionally, Mike Holland prepared a thorough report of the strategic goals developed at the Retreat, with specific outcomes and challenges identified for each strategic goal. Two handouts developed from Retreat materials were discussed today to help DEIT connect the work of the retreat to LBCC’s college-wide goals and to the subcommittees that will be active over the next two years. These two handouts are: “Questions to be Addressed” and “Next Steps.”

Under the “Questions to be Addressed,” DEIT looked at Question #2: Do we currently have an AAOT degree offered online. This led us to ask: “Do we have that many students working for an AAOT degree which would justify the needed outlay for us to offer an online AAOT?” Could we benefit from already existing programs?

Review LBCC’s 2001-2002 Goals – Mike Holland. Mike led a review of LBCC’s college-wide goals. Goal #2 (enhance student learning), Goal #5 (maintain learning environment), and Goal #6 (become strategic in LBCC’s technological investments and use of technology) all generated considerable discussion.

Paul Snyder noted that earlier, LBCC had to prove that distributed learning could work. Now, we’re at a key point. Our priorities will continue to change, but our goals have shifted. We are moving toward a more flexible distributed learning model, supporting both face-to-face instruction and distributed learning (through distance delivery and the new ITFS channels).

Several DEIT committee members noted that it would be easier to put technology into the already identified college goals rather than to have a separate technology goal. In this way, technology becomes more of a means, a process. As our goals are broadening, the question becomes how do we broaden to meet them? Perhaps the department level is the best way to identify those specific next steps, while the goal for DEIT is to clarify what our college distributed learning strategies need to be.

DEIT is interested in continuing its coordinating/communicating role in discussing college operations and applications of technology as well as participating in policy issues. We want some continuity by continuing key past subcommittees, yet will add a few new subcommittees this year to focus our efforts on strategic planning. We are agreed that the heart of DEIT is student access to technology, wider use of technology by staff, and quality learning. We also agree that any technology use should be appropriate for students and for the curriculum involved. We can measure our progress by asking the same questions asked of any college effort: What are our goals and outcomes? What progress have we made? How should our efforts be measured?

The following mix of operations issues and planning issues were discussed as critical to thoughtful use of our resources supporting technology over the next two years.

PLANNING ISSUES:

– Do we need more coordinated planning and accountability in how we develop distributed education?

– What are the strategic priorities that will guide LBCC committee decisions on budgeting for instructional technology or supporting professional development?

– What should the college-wide goal for Distributive Education be? Should distributed education be part of the college-wide mission statement?

– Should some shared vision of technology be reflected in the college mission?

– How will DEIT approach and prioritize projects?

OPERATING ISSUES:

– What specific technology enhancements do we need once our technology priorities have been clarified?

– Should we develop an online “Boot Camp” for students and staff?

– Should we work toward offering an AAOT program online?

– What priority does technology infrastructure have (in terms of staffing positions, technology-related equipment, training, hardware, and software adoptions, such as Blackboard or Flashlight, or other classroom management support tools)

DEIT was asked to choose between focusing its efforts entirely on strategy or on continuing its operations-oriented subcommittees. The consensus was that DEIT should appoint a DEIT strategic planning subcommittee with other key DEIT subcommittees applying the overall college goals to its individual missions. We will work to:

– Use technology to improve teaching and learning.

– Improve access to technology.

– Improve efficient use of technology or our productivity in using technology.

We will review this approach at the October 10 meeting.

NEXT MEETING: The next full committee meeting will meet on OCTOBER 10 at 3:00 pm in the Willamette Room (CC210)