DISTRIBUTED EDUCATION & INSTRUCTIONAL
TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE
Present: Lynn Bain,
Beth Camp, Elizabeth Lundy, Marlene Propst, Lori Rowton, Carol Schaafsma, Paul
Snyder, Diane Watson, and Ed Watson.
Beth opened the meeting by stating today’s purpose was to discuss the goals for 2000-2001 of DEIT’s subcommittees. She referred to the list of DEIT subcommittees in her e-mail of October 8, 2001 (attached) and to materials we would be using for today’s meeting from the DEIT Summer Retreat (“Next Steps” and “Questions to be Addressed”).
Announcement of statewide Deans’ Meeting to discuss solutions and problems related to Distance Learning -- Ed Watson. Ed discussed briefly the topics to be discussed to look for strategies and guidelines for Oregon Community Colleges related to distance learning. Topics mentioned were property rights, building capacity, faculty training, changing faculty goals, host/provider courses and looking at how we are using teleconferencing and videoconferencing.
How to encourage and increase faculty involvement on the DEIT. Several DEIT members were concerned about the need for more faculty involvement with DEIT. Paul noted that it may be time to look at ways of becoming more visible campus wide. As several active DEIT members who are faculty were unable to attend this term, Beth asked Lori to contact each faculty member of DEIT for their schedules so that each meeting can be set at a time that will facilitate maximum faculty participation.
FLASHLIGHT PROGRAM. Beth provided a summary handout on the Flashlight project, its benefits and features. This resource would give LBCC access to nationally validated survey items to improve our assessment of distributed programs and of student and staff needs. If we participate in this program, we would have access to a Flashlight Evaluation Handbook that includes a collection of evaluation tools and criteria for evaluating student needs, staff needs, technology costs, and distance education site staff issues. We estimate the annual cost would be about $3,000 (based on our FTE). Steve Gilbert of the TLT Group (Teaching and Learning with Technology) is also active with the Flashlight project. Paul added that it will help us so that we don’t need to spend time reinventing the wheel in determining strategic planning for enhancing distributed learning access and outcomes. Some of our staff already have experience in working with this resource and recommend it highly.
Review of DEIT subcommittees:
q Student Support (Diane Watson). No changes were made to this Subcommittee. We felt the Student Boot Camp could go here.
q ITFS (Rich Horton, Paul Snyder). It was suggested that this Subcommittee name be changed to better identify its goals. The new name will be Instructional Technology Infrastructure and will continue its focus on strengthening LBCC’s technical systems that support its distributed learning efforts.
q Barriers (John Griffith). The group decided a better name for this Subcommittee would be Resource/Solutions. We felt the Staff Boot Camp could go here, as well as In-service, training, and mentor program.
q Quality/Assessment/Offerings (Carol Schaafsma). This Subcommittee name too was changed to Curriculum. There was some interest in having the Flashlight resource put here – if adopted by the college.
q Web Presence (Marlene Propst). No changes were made to this Subcommittee.
q Proposed new Subcommittee: Strategic Planning (Proposed members: Ann Adams, Beth Camp, Mike Holland, Paul Snyder, Ed Watson, Jerry Wille and Lynn Bain).
Determine which subcommittees address priorities on “Questions to be Addressed” summary from DEIT’s Summer Retreat. We then reviewed reports from the Summer Retreat (the “xxx” handout) to determine in a preliminary way which issues might best be handled by which subcommittee. We strongly encourage subcommittees to review the newly approved college goals and the outcomes of the DEIT Summer Retreat as they affirm their subcommittee mission and goals during this Fall term.
q Priority #1 – Are we going to use the Flashlight Project inventory or other tools to obtain and measure baseline and ongoing learning experiences and outcomes? Using the Flashlight Project will be investigated by the Curriculum
Subcommittee, working with the Strategic Planning Committee.
q Priority #2 - Do we want to have an AAOT degree delivered entirely online? Curriculum Subcommittee will address this issue.
q Priority
#3 – Should we develop, implement and support a DEIT “boot camp” to prepare students
(and staff) for success in DEIT-delivered classes? Also related: Do we want to establish minimum knowledge/skills/abilities for
the use of technology (literacy and use) for students and staff. The “Student Boot Camp” was referred to the
Student Support Subcommittee; the “Staff Boot Camp” was referred to
Resource/Solutions Subcommittee.
q Priority
#4 – How will faculty be recognized, rewarded (compensation, workload, release
time, etc.)? This issue will be referred to the Strategic Planning Subcommittee. A faculty/management work team may be a good
solution for this contractual issue.
q Priority
#5 – Are we committed as an institution to provide the requisite funding,
staff, equipment, training, resources, etc., to support an enrichment/expansion
of technology-based instruction and support? This issue is referred to the Strategic Planning
Subcommittee. We want to encourage
other subcommittees to look at issues related to staff training (for example,
how do we engage faculty in this dialogue and help faculty/staff keep up with
student/employer/public/higher education expectations).
q Priority
#6 – Is distributed education going to be a college wide goal? DEIT members felt that this issue had
already been synthesized into college-wide goals. Key now is the question:
How does DEIT itself achieve this college-wide goal? This was referred to the Strategic Planning
Subcommittee.
q Priority
#8 – How will we prioritize college and DEIT activities to determine those with
highest value/impact on student success? We see this as a shared task
between the Strategic Planning Subcommittee and Curriculum Subcommittees.
Carol suggested to the committee that we hold off on the remaining list of “Other Questions to be Considered” so that the focus will remain on the first eight priorities. Members that were present agreed.
Where Should We Go and How Will We Get There? Next Steps - Looking at Step 1 of the “Next Steps” handout, the committee members agreed that Step 1 was complete. Here are some additional action steps:
q The Resource Solutions Subcommittee should start planning now for the next year and possibly even this year’s April In-service.
q The task of development and distribution of a glossary of DEIT-related terms was referred to the Strategic Planning Subcommittee. (Step 5 is pretty much the implementation of #4 and will be referred to (help on this one, please)
Raising Campus Awareness of DEIT – Beth led a discussion on the need to increase the visibility of DEIT on campus and how we are perceived by faculty. A possibility would be to have the committee look at defining goals to increase visibility (with some help from Marlene in Marketing), and identifying ways to generate enthusiasm and interest in the use and implementation of “distributive technology.” Can we as a committee decide what Distributive means and then figure out how to market it? Carol added that in order for LBCC to make an institutional shift in distributive technology, committees college-wide such as Instructional Council, Academic Affairs, etc. need to model this technology.
NEXT MEETING: Subcommittees are asked to meet to review these minutes and to develop their specific goals and tasks for the coming year. Subcommittees will report their progress at the last Fall term meeting of DEIT (the date (sometime in November), time and place will be announced.
Attachments: (1) Flashlight summary handout (2) “Questions to be Addressed” and (3)