MinutesDDLC Meeting — March 31, 2006

DDLC Meeting — March 31, 2006 PVCC 10:00 a.m.

DRAFT

1. Welcome and Introductions.

The meeting started at 10:11 a.m., John Downey presiding.

Attendees:

John Downey, Laurie Hillstock, Kristen Kelly, Charles Boling, Bob Vawter, susan Kennedy, Kristy Walker, Mike Turner, Linda Capone Claussen, Steve Sachs, Scott Langhorst, Sue Ann Curran, Ralph Lucia, Rebecca Blankenship, Bill Hightower, Sheila Hobbs, Jamie Shetrone, Susan Beasley, Rio McBride, Inez Farrell, Mary Clare DiGiacomo, Ruth Smith, and Rebecca Kittleberger.

2. Update on ASAC actions concerning DDLC Reorganization.
Scott Langhorst read both of the ASAC resolutions to DDLC members which outlined the renaming of the ASAC DDLC to ASAC Educational Technology Committee and which clarified the role of the VCCS DDLC relative to the ASAC Educational Technology Committee.
Some DDLC members expressed concern about the proposed membership of the DDLC as worded. The wording left the appointment of DDLC members up to each College president, which is the current appointment structure a well. However, John and Scott pointed out that the CFAC representative to ASAC requested that faculty members also be appointed to the DDLC and noted that Vice Presidents were supportive of that request. Some members were concerned that some presidents might appoint a faculty member to the committee instead of an instructional technology person, who might have a broader knowledge of influencing academic technology issues. DDLC members discussed various options, including expanding the committee to include faculty representatives rather than replacing slots currently occupied by instructional technology personnel. John Downey indicated that he and Steve Sachs (the governance commission chair) would discuss DDLC committee membership with Dr. Sullivan.
Scott Langhorst read and explained the ASAC discussion item on reviewing the “VDEN Academic Standards” as it relates to proctored activities. Scott and Steve Sachs provided a history of the document and indicated that it was approved through the ASAC and ACOP back when distance learning consisted primarily of asynchronous compressed video courses. Scott mentioned that ASAC viewed the issues regarding proctoring to be broader than distance learning alone and requested a joint committee meeting at the next ASAC between the educational concerns and Educational Technology Committees. In the meantime, Scott emphasized that vice presidents were asked to survey faculty to determine the extent that proctored activities are currently happening at each college. He recommended that DDLC members should work with their VPs to ensure faculty are surveyed.
Steve Sachs talked about House Bill HR609 that just passed as part of the federal higher education reauthorization act. The bill requires colleges to verify the identity of each individual registered to take distance learning courses.

3. Update on Enterprise Initiatives.
Sue Ann Curran described current VCCS IT enterprise initiatives. Ralph Lucia then handed out a document updating the committee on ITS’ current and planned tasks that relate to Blackboard. He requested input from the committee on how to prioritize the list of tasks. Ralph Lucia also stated that ITS was still working on the Blackboard 6.3 test environment. Once that testing environment is ready, the Blackboard 6.3 upgrade can be tested to identify any issues that the upgrade may cause in production. In the meantime, Ralph wanted DDLC to provide feedback regarding the priorities of bringing the various building blocks identified at the last DDLC into production.
Ralph explained the two types of Building Blocks: Freeware & Open Source. Freeware comes “as is” at no cost. Since the source code is typically not provided with freeware, those building blocks cannot be altered if they cause any issues in production. Open Source software typically comes with the source code and thus can often be programmed differently if issues arise. Ralph also mentioned that although all of the building blocks requested at the last DDLC meeting come without a cost, ITS staff time devoted to testing and implementing such software should not be overlooked.
John Downey recommended, and the committee agreed, to start with the MERLOT Building Block as a test, since that was the only Open Source software provided by Blackboard that includes support. Once that building block is implemented and tested in the test database, then it could be launched in the production environment. Once that action is taken and the impact on end users is assessed, other building blocks could be tested using the same methodology. John suggested that the DDLC organize itself at the next meeting to develop a procedure for prioritizing additional Building Blocks for ITS. The document provided by Ralph is appended to these minutes.

Break for lunch.

Note: John Downey had to return to BRCC for faculty interviews. He asked Mary Clare DiGiacomo to fill in as chair for the afternoon.

4. Update/discussion on Course Coding for Distance Learning.
Rebecca Kittleberger handed out the “Course Coding in PeopleSoft” 3/30/06 draft and reported that the A&R Peoplesoft workgroup recommended that the document be approved by DDLC and subsequently by ASAC. Some DDLC members suggested that no one in the A&R workgroup has sufficient expertise in distance learning to understand the coding issues involved. DDLC made several suggestions for Rebecca to take back to the A&R workgroup. The major suggestions made by the DDLC included:
-Replace the term “Blended Courses” with “Hybrid/Blended Courses” so that the colleges that have used the term “Hybrid Courses” in publications can still use it.
-The committee suggested developing a category for real-time (synchronous) distance courses, such as those taught using Centra. The term “Virtual-RT” (real time) was suggested.
-DDLC Members discussed whether the term “Compressed Video” be changed to “Interactive Television”?
-If the LMS Panel is going to be used in the future for identifying courses, then should we be telling colleges that they do not have to use it now?

DDLC members discussed the possibility of a joint meeting between DDLC representatives and the A&R Peoplesoft workgroup in order to finalize the document for presentation at ASAC.

5. Blackboard Template Courses: Copy policy recommendation.
Steve Sachs recommended that the VCCS establish a policy in regards to coping courses designed as templates that do not follow the normal naming convention because they are templates and not courses offered in a given semester. Ralph Lucia explained that if a college gives VCCS ITS a course template, and indicates to them the number of courses that the college wants created based on the template, ITS can accommodate that request.




6. Update on the status of the VCCS DL Survey Committee.
Robert Vawter handed out and discussed the March 10, 2006, minutes of the DL Survey meeting.

7. “Refine toolsets in the shared course-management system.”
Robert Vawter asked the committee members to provide responses to Goal #18C, “Refine toolsets in the shared course-management system,” from the 2005-06 Chancellor’s Goals.
He indicated that members would be surveyed on this question after the New Horizons Conference. DDLC members asked for clarification regarding the meaning of “refine toolsets.” The committee was told that upgrading to Blackboard version 6.3 is one example and adding the MERLOT Building Block would be another. Bob also provided members with a list of tools that the VCCS MERLOT Team had identified in the MERLOT collection. The list is available at http://merlot.vccs.edu by clicking on “DL Tools,” which is located under the heading of “Dateline 2009 & MERLOT.”

8. Software titles purchased by the colleges to be run on their computers.
Robert Vawter told the committee that there are many software titles being purchased by multiple colleges without the benefit of pooling their purchases. The committee was told that AS&R is looking into the possibility of putting together a “software menu” of titles owned or being considered by several of our colleges. This menu would contain negotiated software prices that any college could purchase at substantial saving. This does not mean that the software would be enterprise versions but rather that contracts could be negotiated by the system for colleges to opt in or out of. The committee was asked if their colleges would be interested in this possibility, and many stated that they thought it was a good idea.

9. From the floor.
A committee member asked if there was a formal peer review form for distance learning courses. The committee was shown the “Quality Assurance for Asynchronous Distance Learning in the VCCS” plan that was drafted in 2000. This plan is located on the ITDE web site (http://itde.vccs.edu) under the “For College” menu. Some members of the committee also asked if faculty should be required to receive training on how to teach a distance learning course. Some colleges have an On-line Academy for Distance Learning instructors and PVCC has an online certification program for its DL faculty.

10. Next meeting.
The next DDLC meeting is scheduled for Friday, June 2, 2006. The meeting location will be announced as the date approaches. Mary Clare reminded the group that elections for chairperson would occur at that meeting.