DISTANCE EDUCATION & INSTRUCTIONAL
TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE
September 18, 1996
Present: Ann Adams, Marti Ayers, Vicki Beck, John Berg, Evon Bergstrom, Beth Camp,
Russ Gregory, Mike Holland, Ed Knudson, Elizabeth Lundy, Barbara Rice, Ron
Sharman, Ann Smart, Paul Snyder, John Sweet, Diane Watson, Ed Watson, Peggy
Weems, Chuck Wert
Beth began the meeting by explaining that the purpose of the committee's retreat was the
planning for distance education and instructional technology at LBCC. To answer the question,
"What did the committee achieve in 1995-96?", Beth presented a detailed outline of what each
subcommittee accomplished:
Training Subcommittee
Chair: Marti Ayers, Members: Evon Bergstrom, Peggy Weems, Jim Crotts
Current mission: Meet the training needs of faculty teaching via distance education and those
interested in exploring it as distance education technologies and teaching methods have
developed faster than instructors have been trained in their use.
Achievements during 95-96:
Held staff forums to identify types of training needed
Organized Spring in-service around identified short- and long-term training needs related to technology
Scheduled workshops and presentations supporting staff interests in technology
Identified specific training needs so that all staff:
can communicate with others electronically
can use the telephone and voice mail comfortably
can use FAX technology comfortably
Set goals to provide different kinds of training to serve our diverse needs, such as word
processing, Banner, spread sheets and data bases, teaching via distance education
(ITFS, modem, WEB pages, and EdNet), and multi-media
Some unresolved issues:
Discuss need to establish fund for release time so that staff can have time for training
(perhaps modeled after Professional Development with a per-faculty allotment)
Curriculum Subcommittee
Chair: Ed Watson, Members: Jim Bell, Rosemary Bennett, Barbara Rice, Ann Smart,
Paul Snyder and Chuck Wert
Current mission: Within four years, have an AAOT degree available by distance education.
Achievements during 95-96:
Drafted grid of existing and future classes for general education and distribution
requirements for the AAOT, including:
telecourses,
modem-based courses,
ITFS courses,
WEB-based classes, and
EdNet classes
Identified key issues in evaluation, assessment, and funding that will affect our ability to
offer an AAOT degree by distance education
Some unresolved issues:
Need to coordinate professional development grants to match curricular changes
Need to coordinate our district offerings with statewide and regional course offerings
through articulation
Need to establish implementation time lines
Need to support new distance ed courses especially when courses fit LBCC's curricula
Marketing Subcommittee
Chairs: Kay Chapman, Ed Knudson, Members: Jan Huskey, Barbara Rice, Ed Knudson,
Diana Howell
Current mission: Develop a clear understanding of what the market potential is for distance
learning is and who is not using our services so that we can promote programs in distance
learning.
Achievements during 95-96:
Contacted Chemeketa and Lane community colleges to review their market surveys
Investigated methods and costs of conducting a survey
Developed cost-effective pilot marketing survey, reviewed by DEIT, and conducted
Summer 1996
Established need for baseline survey data coming from other than current LBCC students
Some unresolved issues:
Need to discuss results of pilot survey to decide what further survey efforts will be most
useful and how our current marketing of distance learning could serve students
better
Policy Subcommittee
Chair: Beth Camp, Members: Ann Adams, David Bezayiff, Jim Crotts, Russ Gregory, Jorry Rolfe, Joe Sherlock, Ann Smart, Paul Snyder, Peggy Weems
Current mission: Propose college policies, processes, and/or guidelines as needed to support
staff and student awareness of ethical issues related to distance education and technology use.
Achievements during 95-96:
Drafted "Guidelines for Using Computers and Related Resources" that clarified
student/staff rights and responsibilities as well as copyright issues and tied in with
established due process.
"Guidelines" were reviewed by all staff and adopted as an LBCC administrative rule
Identified criteria and process for approving College WEB pages created by staff,
departments, division and the college for consistency and quality
Some unresolved issues:
Need to review criteria for computer literacy competency
Need for WEB page "template"
Student Services Subcommittee
Chair: Christina Salter, Members: Jackie Olsen, Jenna Brooks, Carolyn Gardner, Diane
Watson, Paula Grigsby
Current mission: To understand the links between changing technologies and services provided
to our students.
Achievements during 95-96:
Provided a voice for student services throughout the year time lines to show projected use
of various distance education technologies
Identified training needs for this subcommittee
Developed team approach to planning for future use of technology in student services by
linking with Student Services Leadership Team
Some unresolved issues:
Need for student participation in subcommittees and DEIT
Some policies and processes in student services do not currently support distance
education
Technology/Delivery Subcommittee
Chairs: Paul Snyder and Ron Sharman, Members: Ann Adams, Rick Barker, Jim Crotts,
Mike Holland, John Sweet, Chuck Wert
Current mission: Provide the technological infrastructure and telecommunication technology to
meet the LBCC Distance Education Mission and Goals
Achievements during 95-96:
Created grid of current technology infrastructure with time lines to show projected use of
various distance education technologies
Analyzed needs for budget requests for equipment, staff and training
Provided technical assistance to all other committees
Created special interest group to investigate First Class and Internet for instruction
Supported these changes in our technology resources:
expanded number of staff computer workstations
set up distance education classroom (Takena 117)
began planning networked classrooms
Some unresolved issues:
Review need to standardize software use and support
Decide on focus next year (proposed focus: online classes)
Beth asked several people to give some perspectives on various issues relating to the committee.
Mike Holland (Perspectives from an Institutional Point of View):
Mike gave out a handout which is attached. The 1994-95 Report and Recommendations of the
Distance Education Committee catalogs some initiatives the college should undertake in regard
to distance education and technology. These initiatives were thoughtfully constructed and should
not be disturbed. At the same time, the Report and Recommendations describe work that, when
done, leaves the college with a robust electronic edge and a conventional core. Have we
underestimated the effect that technology will have on deconstructing our curriculum, relocating
training investments from campus to in-plant programs, realigning the relationship between
instructors and learners, and redefining the role of faculty? A braoder conversation is what kind
of institution are we going to be and what does it mean to all of us if the technology we're
talking about is fully utilized.
For most of the years that community colleges have operated in Oregon, the worry has been how
will we provide access to educational services for remote learners? The question is rapidly
changing now and we will soon need to worry if the remote learners (and not so remote learners)
will choose us when they select from a rich menu of educational offerings. Do we have a
sufficient sense of urgency about our technological needs and our need to rethink delivery
systems? What do we need to do to position ourselves in the electronic educational bazaar that is
on the horizon? Can we be high quality, responsive and light on our feet, customized, customer
focused, and all the other things that will influence "buyers" in a choice driven marketplace?
Chuck Wert asked about transfer mission. Mike said changes are happening there, also. WR
121 can now be taken at home. What's the value of taking that course through LBCC than, say,
Chemeketa? We need to position ourselves so they choose us. There will always be a place for
institutions like Willamette University. Community colleges in the past have been the
institutions of convenience but they will only continue to be that as they are willing to change.
Medicine has changed, with insurance companies, not doctors, now in charge.
A discussion then followed with the following points:
Community colleges do a better job of teaching.
We know our market and can respond.
Students receive a more personalized education at lower costs.
Through cooperation between community colleges, we can strive to maintain excellence.
Focus on what we do well.
Ann Smart (Perspectives on our Infrastructure):
Ann gave a presentation on distance education for the new faculty orientation and realized how
much technically she had learned. As she watched Cynthia Yee get her five-year pin, she
reflected back to what was accomplished in the years of the Title III grant: computers on every
manager's desk, computers in all major Banner offices, a computer for each instructional floor to
do advising, the library automated, CD Roms, Ed-Net system, and satellite downlinks. In the last
year Ethernet backbones, servers to all offices, at least a 386 computer for all staff, voice mail, 7
multi-media projectors, a dedicated distance ed classroom, LB Web Page, T1 lines, new HP
computer classrooms, Info Station in Library with CD Rom and Internet, Library restaffed with
half-time instructional assistant to help students, Intranet Web Pages in formative stages, with all
board policies and administrative policies ultimately on the Intranet, faculty applied for
curriculum development funding. Still to come - full implementation of the ITFS. LBCC has
put in for a grant for rural infrastructure to service Alsea and Sweet Home. Two more people
will be hired in Media and two have already been hired in Computer & Communication Services.
The Capital Project Team Ann chairs is looking at what to do with the old Metallurgy area and
the second floor of the new building. The team would like state of the art classrooms with
capacity to send and receive and a lab to support technical programs. For the long range
computers for all staff need to be upgraded past 386. Keeping computers current is just a cost of
doing business like utilities. In a report to the board Dennis Bechtel, Electronic Imaging and
Prepress Technology instructor, told how Linn-Benton Community College students swept the
top five awards in a recent international graphic arts competition. This happened because of a
specialized instructional lab designed by the faculty. Ann also described what she saw at
Crescent Valley High School. She felt that we need to have our curriculum drive our technology
for specialized labs, and faculty need the skills to develop these labs.
Ed Watson (Perspectives on the Curricula):
The original target was to have an AAOT degree in four years through distance learning. He said
he believed it was a realistic goal. It is important to ask all faculty how will technology change
delivery and content. Many faculty resist change because they believe the way they are doing it
now provides higher quality. There is the access issue - how we can deliver high quality
instruction inside and outside the classroom. For every course outline we need to see how we
can provide them outside the classroom by distance ed and other ways. Curriculum does drive
technology just as our consumers influence us. Our focus is changing. Resources are
everywhere, e.g., the Internet. The instructor is no longer looked upon as the sole source of
information. Some faculty may not want to teach under the new paradigms. Barbara Rice
commented that we need to continue to provide quality education but we need to make it
attractive and accessible so people will try it. They can go elsewhere now.
Marti Ayers (Perspectives on Training):
Her office budgeted 15 distance education grants. They do not have to be completed until
October so she doesn't have a report to present yet. The Web Page training did not happen this
summer as few of the people who wanted the training were on campus. She stressed that the
college needs an institutional plan which sets up where we want to be in training by a specific
date given the limited amount of funds. Faculty have told her they need backfill. Many faculty
now feel that they have so much work now, are not sure they will get rewarded, and are not sure
if their idea is going to work.
Elizabeth said Math is offering a Web Page Calculus course. There will be an instructor
available six hrs per day and an instructional assistant available eight hrs per day. They will use
department dollars for the curriculum and faculty for this class. There were some people who
questioned why we should go to distance education when we don't have enough money for
regular classes. People can now avail themselves of telecourses, video courses, and self-study.
The technology is now available to reach a community of learners that have never been reached
before. They can have instructors on-line to help students. This is a different way of building a
community of learners.
Diane Watson (Perspectives on Student Services):
According to Glenda Tepper voice response will be up in another year. Registration, financial
aid information and student grades will be on-line. Several questions will need to be answered:
Can test results be given over the phone? Do you charge out-of-state tuition to people outside
the state taking a distance education course? Can you give out Social Security numbers over the
Internet? Can you do interest testing by the Internet?
The committee members were divided into four groups to brainstorm "What is your vision of
what we should be doing via DEIT?" and "How can we improve communications?" The results
are attached.
Beth said there are two more questions to work on in the future: What do we need to reach our
vision? and What themes should guide our work?
She went over the DEIT challenge: governance.
Who serves on DEIT?
Should there be a new chair? When asked, Beth said she was willing to serve another
year which the committee unanimously accepted.
Should we change subcommittees? A subcommittee (Mike, Chuck, Paul, Ed, Diane and
John) was appointed to review and make recommendations regarding possible alternative
structures.
What kind of meeting schedule should we set up for 96-97? It was suggested that an
Intranet discussion structure be adopted so people can keep up-to-date. This would
reduce the problem of a large group having to meet so often.
DISTANCE EDUCATION/INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
ISSUES TO PONDER
1. "Part of the mythology dominating information technology management is that it is all
about technical issues. It can be argued instead that it's actually about managing
change...technical, social, pedagogical, political and financial. From this perspective, the
notion of building technology infrastructure is inconsistent with the notion of constant
and rapid change and should be approached with caution.
...(T)he infrastructure most needed to support the information era is financial, social, and
political, not technical. Financial infrastructure is the institutional commitment to
understand the economics, develop appropriate financial strategies, and fund technology
adequately. Social infrastructure is the critical mass of faculty, staff, and students who
are willing to accept and work for change. Political infrastructure is the collective
resolution of senior administrators, trustees, and legislators to support information
technology as a strategic imperative for the campus."
J. L. Oberlin, CAUSE/EFFECT, Vol 19, No. 2. , pg. 12, Summer 1996
If the above is true, have we done an adequate job of building our "non technical"
infrastructure? In particular, are we willing to make the financial commitments needed to
support an appropriate level of technology? Are we sufficiently committed to make the
pedagogical, curricular, and administrative changes that will flow from fully embracing
technology? Are technological investments critical to our future or are they incidental to
that future?
2. The 1994-95 Report and Recommendations of the Distance Education Committee
(Virtual Learning) outlines a number of specific initiatives the college should undertake
in regard to distance education and technology. These initiatives were thoughtfully
constructed and should not be disturbed. At the same time, the Report and
Recommendations describe work that, when done, leaves the college with a robust
electronic edge and a conventional core. Have we underestimated the effect that
technology will have on deconstructing our curriculum, relocating training investments
from campus to in-plant programs, realigning the relationship between instructors and
learners, and redefining the role of faculty? I think these " conversations of the soul" are
an important complement to the agenda set out in the 1994-95 Report.
3. For most of the 30+ years that community colleges have operated in Oregon, the worry
has been how will we provide access to educational services for remote learners? The
question is rapidly changing now and we will soon need to worry if the remote learners
(and not so remote learners) will choose us when they select from a rich menu of
educational offerings. Do we have a sufficient sense of urgency about our technological
needs and our need to rethink delivery systems? What do we need to do to position
ourselves in the electronic educational bazaar that is on the horizon? Can we be high
quality, responsive and light on our feet, customized, customer focused....and all the
other things that will influence "buyers" in a choice driven marketplace?
DISTANCE EDUCATION & INSTRUCTIONAL
TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE
BRAINSTORMING RESULTS
September 18, 1996
The members were divided into four groups to brainstorm on "What is YOUR VISION of what
we should be doing via DEIT?" The group then prioritized using colored dots. Each person was
given 2 yellow dots (hot, must do), 4 green dots (green light, move ahead on this), and 2 blue
(forget me not!).
First Group
Communicate a vision to all staff (3 yellow dots)
Determine how and to implement it
Promote/educate a paradigm change (3 green dots)
Take a leadership role (3 yellow dots)
Change in teacher/learning paradigm
Student oriented service change within constraints of time and place
(2 yellow, 5 green dots)
Weekend, evenings, short course
Open entry/exit - where students are
Identify hurdles/barriers to implementation (4 green dots)
Financial, political, social, teaching
Start doing something (5 yellow dots, 1 green dot)
Take risks
Allocate resources
Training, workshops to facilitate change (1 green dot)
Create intranet for this committee (1 green dot)
Need for financial vision from this committee (4 green dots)
Create new/revise committee structure for DEIT
i.e., on-line committee with charge time lines, tasks, etc. (8 green dots)
Manage change better and communicate that vision formally and informally to the
college (2 green dots, 1 blue dot)
What is the vision?
What are the details that come out of that?
Second Group
Vision needs process for execution (2 yellow dots, 1 green dot, 1 blue dot)
Increase numbers to move us forward
Conversation on change
Communication
Getting so much e-mail can't assimilate
New Groups
Process evaluating our results (1 green, 1 blue dot)
Suggest ways to use technology to communicate internally (2 blue dots)
Film presentation on what does all this mean to LB - Discuss in small groups
(2 yellow dots, 2 green dots, 3 blue dots)
Increase critical mass thinking (1 green dot)
Bill Gates' discussion to Intel
Bill Daget
Know generation coming up (1 yellow dot, 1 green dot)
Mismatch service available and ability to use - skill set - how to enforce?
Skill set in planned way to get to a new place (1 green dot)
Small cross-discipline discussion (2 blue dots)
Forum of new methods of teaching (1 green dot, 3 blue dots)
Are we silos? (1 blue dot)
Third Group
DEIT Outreach: Communication (1 green dot)
Intranet: DEIT minutes (1 green, 1 blue dot)
"Brown Bags" (3 green dots)
Communicator
More training: (1 blue dot)
e-mail
computer skills
Foster more interest, expectations skills levels
Institute stronger leadership (4 yellow, 4 green dots)
Institute incentives for professional development (4 green dots)
Need to define centralized (college-wide) computer competencies
(1 yellow, 1 green, 2 blue dots)
Need to recognize the value of both traditional and non-traditional
education modalities (7 blue dots)
Need to develop systems to promote learning communities among:
Evening students (e.g., open Commons) (1 yellow dot, 3 green dots)
Distance ed students (call students)
Continue to provide current technology to education providers (2 yellow, 3 green dots)
Need to discuss matriculation of distance ed courses
Need to discuss compensation issues now! (1 green dot)
Need to "blow our horn"! (1 yellow, 1 green dot)
Bring back "entrepreneurial spirit"! (3 yellow dots, 2 green dots, 1 blue dot)
Fourth Group
DEIT vision should be college-wide (1 yellow dot)
Committee members serve as:
Resource of information/contacts/support
(3 yellow dots, 1 green dot, 2 blue dots)
Communicate vision
Give or direct faculty to examples (brokers of information)
Support by administration to support vision (3 blue dots)
By budget allocation (4 green dots)