Distance and Distributed Learning Committee Meeting
March 18, 2005
Via Distance Learning Technology: Macromedia Breeze
In attendance:
Dr. John Downey (Chairperson; BRCC), Susan Beasley(CVCC), Kristen Kelly (JTCC), Sara Brown (LFCC), SusanKennedy (MECC), Linda Claussen (NRCC), Monica Sasser sitting in forSteve Sachs (NVCC), Carolyn Byrd (PHCC), Mary Clare DiGiacomo (PVCC), Leslie Smith (RCC), Bill Hightower (SSVCC), Stacy Harris (SWCC), Scott Langhorst (TCC), Charles Boiling (VHCC), Inez Farrell (VWCC), and Jaime Shetrone (WCC). From the System Office: Dr. Neil Matkin, Dr. Carole Schultz, Tim Tirrell, Bob Vawter, Ralph Lucia, and Sue Ann Curran. Guest: Blair Potts (SSVCC).
I. Welcome and Introductions
Dr. Downey,Committee Chairperson, welcomed the group to the meeting. He thanked Blair Potts for arranging to host the meeting via Macromedia Breeze.
II. Update from Dr. Neil Matkin, Vice Chancellor for Information Technology Services
Dr. Matkin updatedthe committee on the status of the enterprise system upgrades. He reported that the Peoplesoft 8.0 SIS upgrade was generally progressing as expected andthat the go-live process arrived with relatively minor issues. A few issuesemerged with the simultaneous upgrade of Directory Services 2.0, and the ITstaff at the VCCS was busily working on addressing those. Finally, the upgradeof the Blackboard 6.0 LMS was delayed one semester due to a delay in the delivery of equipment. The LMS upgrade is now scheduled for Summer, 2005.
III. Position Paper
The bulk ofthe meeting time was used to discuss and revise an initial draft (appended tothis document) of a DDLC position paper authored by John Downey. The purposeof the position paper is to identify the state-wide obstacles to thecoordinated implementation of distance and distributed learning objectives listed in the Chancellor’s current goals, Dateline 2009 and the 2001 Strategic Plan for Distance Learning.
The draft was discussed in stages as outlined below.
SECTION ONE: BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW:
DDLC Member comments;
Several members made the suggestion that specific goalsfrom the three documents listed (Chancellor’s goals, Dateline 2009 and the Strategic Plan) that are related to distance and distributed education beincorporated directly into the document itself at the end of line 36 in theattached document).
One member suggested making sure the document capturesboth the positives as well as the obstacles to implementing distance learningprograms and courses in the VCCS.
SECTION TWO: Distance Learning VCCS Values:
A suggestion was made to re-order the values listed,with the statement on mission listed first and the statement on quality listedsecond. (See lines 54-59).
Several individuals believed the focus on quality issueswas critically important. Some indicated that issues of student success wereintegrated with the degree of student support provided system-wide.
Some members discussed the quality issue in relation toperceptions of quality assurance in traditional classroom courses, suggesting aneed to focus on quality across all methods of delivery, not just in relationto distance learning delivery.
SECTION THREE: Primary Benefits of Distance Learning:
Members suggested a re-wording of this section toprovide greater clarity. From the perspective of colleges, there are twobenefits to providing access to distance learning in a service area: First, sothat constituents in that service area can access programs and servicesotherwise unavailable at the local college and second, to increase access orprovide greater convenience for constituents to access programs and servicesthat are already provided locally.
Some members suggested also listing benefits tostudents. In particular, distance learning provides access to a variety oflearning styles that may or may not be available in traditional classrooms.
SECTION FOUR: Current Distance LearningMethodologies:
Members suggested re-ordering the methodologies from themost frequently used method (web-delivery) to the least frequently used method(compressed video). See lines 78-85.
Some members advocated adding usage data to this sectionto reflect the preferences of students and faculty for each methodologylisted. Other members advocated adding some reference to hybrid methodology(where distance learning is mixed with some on-campus classroom-based methods)OR other forms of mixed technology delivery methods.
Some discussion centered on whether the increasedreliance of distance learning methodology was attracting new students notpreviously served by the VCCS or whether existing students already served byVCCS colleges were opting for the convenience of distance methodologies. Questions concerning class size and productivity relative to distance learningversus classroom methodologies were also discussed.
SECTION FIVE: Challenges:
The slight modification to the title of this section:“Challenges t the Proliferation of Distance Learning in the VCCS”, was suggested. Specifically a member suggested changing the word proliferation to“Coordination.” See line number 87
Given the purpose of the position paper, most membersconcurred with the four preliminary issues listed. Again, members advocatingre-ordering the list: First, the issues that are perceived to impact thegreatest number of students should be listed, followed by the to the issuesthat are perceived to impact the least number of students.
Several additional issues were suggested to be added tothe list. These include:
A discussion of obstacles related to registration issues for students desiring to take coursesfrom multiple colleges.
Clarification ofwhich issues the VCCS should be viewed as having the authority to implementstate-wide standards versus issues that VCCS provides guidance for but local colleges have ultimate authority.
A statement advocating the joint appointment of faculty members across two or more colleges.
A statement regarding the advocacy of a common calendar across colleges for distance learning delivery OR at least a statement addressing the issues that arise for students due to the lack of a common academic calendar.
A general statement regarding funding challenges to implementation of an increase in the number of distance learning courses in a system where college-based FTEs regulate funding.
A statement advocating minimal staffing for distance learning support, with clearguidelines/job descriptions for those positions.
Others?
Process for DRAFT TWO of the PositionPaper
At the conclusion of the meeting, Dr. Downey agreed toconvene a subcommittee of the membership to work on a second draft of the position paper for presentation to the entire DDLC at the in-person meeting on June 3, 2005. That group will be convened inmid to late May.
IV. Next meeting:
The next meeting of the DDLC was scheduled for Friday June 3, 2005.
The June 3 2005 meeting will be an in-person meeting to be held at Blue Ridge Community College, Robert Plecker Workforce Center, in Weyers Cave.
Details will be sent out in early May.
There being no other business, the meeting adjourned a little after 11:00AM.
APPENDIX
INITIAL DRAFT OF A DDLC POSITIONPAPER ON THE CHALLENGES PREVENTING FULLER SYSTEM-WIDE IMPLEMENTATION OFSTRATEGIC DISTANCE LEARNING GOALS
