Present: Ann Adams, Marti Ayers, Al Barrios, John Berg, Jim Chancellor, Evon Bergstrom, Beth Camp, Richard Gibbs, Mike Holland, Jerry Phillips, Christina Salter, Ron Sharman, Ann Smart, Paul Snyder, Steve Soltesz, Ed Watson, Peggy Weems, Chuck Wert, Cynthia Yee

Guest: Gail Dameworth (subbing for Sue Trautwein)

Computer Competency

Beth gave an update on Computer Competency after talking to Jorry Rolfe. The Computer Competency Task Force has taken its recommendations to the Curricular Issues Committee which asked that the recommendations be reviewed at the department chair level. Some staff have the sense that the standards have been approved but that is not the case. Curricular Issues will survey faculty next week by e-mail and by hard copy. The survey will be due the first part of December.

Technical Delivery - Ann Adams

Ann reported that the Technical Delivery subcommittee had a lively and productive meeting. The subcommittee felt it was important to embrace all learning techniques, not just distance education. A written report will be submitted to the committee by the end of the term. When asked about whether there were any issues that surfaced or any sticking points, Ann replied that the subcommittee did find overlaps and there were issues they really couldn't deal with or had relationship with other subcommittees. Chuck commented that there is a need for a lot of technical support to keep progress moving--the need is ballooning as the number of courses increases. Ann Adams referred to the LBCC Inventory of Distance Learning survey under Section V, Technical Delivery Systems, which says "Equipment operation is continuously monitored by the technical staff" (i.e., 24 hrs/day 7 days/wk) which is not reasonable. She said the subcommittee will define what is reasonable.

Student Support - Diane Watson

Christina Salter reported for Diane. She said the Student Support Subcommittee is scheduled to meet on Monday, November 17.

Training and Assessment - Marti Ayers and Ed Watson

Ed handed out the meeting notes (attached) from the November 10 subcommittee meeting. He referred to the documents listed in the memo and said the subcommittee members agreed that these were areas that they could work on for the coming year. Marti will survey faculty regarding training needs and compile an inventory of instructional practices relating to distance learning. The survey will see what instructional techniques are being used and what gaps there are. Examples of questions to consider would be to determine how to make distance education classes more interactive or whether it makes good sense to offer certain classes through distance education. She said this committee is not just distance education but also campus usage of instructional technology and one should not be emphasized more than the other. Chuck Wert said instructional technology can also be used for data acquisition and manipulation of real-time data. Another example would be the use of interactive CDs to support autotutorial instruction.

Ed said in assessing which classes to offer there also are fiscal questions to answer, not just whether the class is appropriate, but cost effective as well (both to receive and send). Decision making questions are very important. Paul is making decisions on the basis of the faculty's ability to deliver a quality product. Does it make curricular sense and fiscal sense? Just hosting a class has a cost, too. Paul said this involves delicate issues which are at the heart of how you get people to do innovative things and take risks. We need to encourage experimentation and assess results while doing it. We don't want to introduce penalties or be negative which may be counter productive. The best way is to use a brainstorming approach, to talk, and not have hidden agendas. We have only done two terms of Web classes at this time so not all information or data is available.

Beth said this institution is committed to collaborative decision making. As we do surveys of staff and work with Academic Affairs, it is important that we do not separate distance education from the way other courses are delivered and use the same standards. Academic Affairs and Department Chairs were asked to recommend specific courses which they needed to offer our students. The fact is Department Chairs are not interested in hosting distance education courses at this time.

Marketing & Needs Assessment - Cynthia Yee and Joe Sherlock

Cynthia reported that Dagmar Johnson has joined the subcommittee. A meeting will be held in the next week or so. At the meeting they will state the intent of the subcommittee, develop an end result, and review what has been done by our school and other schools. Diane Watson also sits on the campus marketing committee. The questions to answer will be: When and what classes should be offered? How many students can we handle? Who our audience is (who would most likely take the class), and who our competitors are. At the meeting the members will try to get numbers to answer the questions, prioritize, and assign responsibilities. Peggy asked if there was a survey that could be done while the class is going on. She said her classes are not being surveyed. Paul said he does a survey every term on all classes. Cynthia has done editing and proofreading of the surveys and analysis of the results. Is it a good marketing survey or should more questions be added? Paul said he would send the questionnaire electronically to the DEIT Committee and it could be modified to meet needs. Paul will e-mail the committee with the address the survey has on the Web. Committee members can review it and send Paul suggestions as to what is missing and what needs to be added. Chuck questioned the purpose of the surveys. Paul said these are not faculty evaluations. That's a contractual process. These are for demographics and an evaluation of the course design. Cynthia asked the committee to send her any ideas by e-mail.

Fostering Innovation - Mike Holland

Mike handed out a memo on proposed activities of the subcommittee (attached). Carol Schaafsma has joined the subcommittee. Their first activity will be to encourage formation of a group of self-identified innovators and help them with a small sum of money.

A discussion was held about a suggestion for a summer institute for faculty. Chuck suggested using the grant structure to fund, and have it be a template for designing a workshop or skill. Beth suggested doing a call for proposal due January 1. Some felt that would be too soon. Ed said Portland State University has held a summer institute the last several years. It is important that the institute result in a product that could be used in the classroom. Beth said Chemeketa was overextended on their first one so next year it will only be for Chemeketa staff. There were questions about compensation for attending. Marti said the college has allowed faculty to use noncontract days to go to training. Paul said he didn't know if the people who attended training at OSU had put it on their faculty calendar but they could have. Marti said the grant proposal process works very well. The Foundation gave her office $4,000 to fund innovative instructional grants.

General Discussion

Paul asked for feedback on how the subcommittee process is working. He warned against making it look like decisions have already been made by committee. He suggested putting Draft on everything until it is finally decided. Mike asked when the subcommittees would know if proposals can be acted upon. So Paul suggested the DEIT Committee should hear the remaining subcommittee reports and then set aside time during the next DEIT meeting to decide what actions should be taken. Then it would go back to subcommittee for discussion, fine tuning and deciding what to keep. Peggy said other campus committees also need to evaluate parts that apply to their committees. Beth said the committee needs to meet before the end of the term to make decisions on action plans. Ann Smart suggested chairs send out their reports via e-mail and the committee could give comments. There is a public e-mail group for DEIT.

The next meeting will be Friday, December 12, 1:00 - 3:00 p.m. in the Willamette Room.

MEMO

TO: DEIT

FROM: DEIT Subcommittee, Fostering Innovation

SUBJECT: Proposed Activities

The DEIT Subcommittee that is working on ideas to foster innovation proposes the following activities for the 1997-98 academic year:

• The College should encourage the formation of a self-identified group of innovators. This group should have available to it a sum of money to fund small initiatives, speakers, demonstrations, etc. The subcommittee envisions a group that will: a) set its own agenda; b) provide mutual support and reinforcement for innovation; c) "beta test" new technologies, software, teaching techniques; and d) host "public" events that have the potential of infecting the college with a sense of excitement around innovative practices (this infection metaphor leads us to suggest that this group should be called "The Microbes"). The work of the Microbes would not replace innovation initiatives funded by challenge grants from the Center for Teaching Excellence. Any needed administrative support for the Microbes will be provided by the Vice President for Academic Affairs.

• The College should make available a free, intensive, "hands on" institute for faculty during the summer. This institute is to be focused on providing faculty with the skills and understanding needed to effectively teach in technological environments. The subcommittee believes faculty participation in the institute will be significant and not require pay inducements. The subcommittee would like to provide The Microbes with the first opportunity to design and sponsor the institute.

• The Vice President of Academic Affairs and the President of the Faculty Association will meet and confer to design an inclusive process to review the College's hiring expectations for new faculty. Newly hired faculty will be expected to be available for non-standard teaching times, and will also be expected to develop the skills necessary to teach through technological means (these skills could be developed after hiring). Current faculty will also be encouraged to develop their skills in using technology and/or teaching at non-standard teaching times.

• The Vice President of Administrative and Student Affairs will continue to work with Fostering Innovation subcommittee to devise an experimental plan that will allow departments to retain some of the revenues generated by innovative instructional offerings. A plan will be available for DEIT review not later than spring quarter.

Memorandum

To: DEIT Training and Assessment Subcommittee
From: Ed Watson
Subject: Meeting Notes--November 10, 1997
Date: November 10, 1997
CC: Beth Camp

Present: Ed Watson (co-chair), Marti Ayers (co-chair), John Berg, Evon Bergstrom, Paul Snyder, Steve Soltesz, Evon Bergstrom

Absent: Russ Gregory, Joseph Baily

Subcommittee Task and Goal Setting. The committee was tasked to develop effectiveness models including the assessment of the quality of distance learning instruction. Additionally, it was to design a faculty training development plan. To help the committee focus their efforts, the following documents were provided as references: "Summary of LBCC Inventory of Distance Education Practices," the 1994-95 Distance Education Subcommittee Plan (training), the Commission on Colleges accreditation requirements for distance education delivery, and instructional considerations cited in the "Strategic Plan of Oregon Community Colleges Distance Learning."

Assessment Goals and Activities. The committee will work on developing a plan which includes goals and activities which assess the following:

• characteristics of student capability to succeed in the distance delivery environment

• student retention

• student satisfaction

• faculty satisfaction

• demonstrated student learning outcomes will be comparable to outcomes of student learning in more traditional formats

All distance learning courses and programs are to be incorporated into the institution's program of documenting student academic achievement (College-wide Success Indicators)

Professional Development and Training Goals. Marti will survey faculty to determine training needs and collect an inventory of college-wide instructional practices relating to distance learning. A training plan will be developed that provides faculty skills in distance delivery which foster some the following instructional considerations:

• courses should be competency-based and include clear, measurable learning outcomes

• expanded syllabi are used for each course and the capabilities and limitation of the technical delivery system are described for the student

• courses should provide for significant interaction between students and faculty and among students, whether real-time or delayed

• courses and programs must maintain integrity through providing security measures, determining the appropriateness of the technology used in delivering the course, evaluating course learning outcomes and student and faculty satisfaction

• other considerations

Next Meeting. A report will be made to the DEIT Committee on November 12-- the next meeting scheduled thereafter.