ATI Priority 2, Group 2 Meeting Notes
February 27, 2007

 

Present: Paula Hammett, Aidong Hu, Barbara Moore, Lea Schell, Bonnie Sugiyama, Carol Tremmel

Absent: Brent Boyer, Brett Christie, Emiliano Ayala

Agenda

  1. Need to select a subgroup chair.
  2. Someone to take notes (same or different person)
  3. Policies and support to be identified. 
  4. See CSU LMS Strategic Planning website
  5. How routued through EPC, Senate, etc.

Selection of Chair

Tabled until Brett's return.

Someone to Take Notes

Barbara volunteered to take notes this session. Group agreed members would rotate this responsibility each meeting. Note taker should send notes to Brett or Barbara to post online.

Policies and Support

In order to begin thinking about a plan for SSU, the group worked through items 4-7 of the Instructional Materials Self-Study distributed by the systemwide ATI group. Following are some of the issues and ideas that came up.

Learning Management Systems

"4. A strategy to increase faculty use of the campus learning management system (LMS) for delivering technology-enabled courses, and for posting syllabi and instruction materials onlie for tradtional face-toface and hybrid or blended courses."

A. Does the campus train all Faculty on how to post course materials to the LMS?

Training is available, but optional. Only a handful of faculty come to training sessions. Some might be using online resources to train themselves. Others get hands-on support from Web Office.

B. Is a campus LMS site established automatically for each course in order to streamline Faculty use of the site?

Yes, since Spring 2004. WebCT use has increased quite a lot since then.

C. Does the campus specifically encourage Faculty to post their print-based materials in an electronic form as well?

Not formally.

Ideas for increasing Faculty use of LMS:

Purchasing Digital & Multimedia Materials

5. A process to incorporate accessibility requirements in the purchase of digital or multimedia instructional materials (captions on videos, for example).

A. Has the campus created any advisory material (e.g. accessibility checklists) for Faculty and Staff to use when evaluating multimedia instructional materials?

No.

B. Has the campus widely and proactively disseminated these materials to Faculty and Staff who procure multimedia instructional materials?

No.

C. Has the campus procurement office established business processes to review and to provide guidance to those who procure multimedia instructional materials?

Procurement and Library have established processes for procurement of library collections. Procurement hasn't included accessibility requirements in this process. The SSU ATI Priority 3 group is focusing first on purchases over $25,000. Library is trying to figure out how to implement accessibility requirements when reviewing possible purchases.

Ideas for including accessibility in purchasing processes

6. A process to incorporate accessibility as a required component in the curriculum review and approval process.

(no questions)

Ideas for incorporating accessiblity requirements in curriculum review

Creating Accessible Course Content

7. A plan to support faculty in the creation of accessible course content.

A. Does the campus provide training to Faculty in ways to author accessible documents (e.g. syllabi, handouts) in commonly-used formats such as Microsoft Office and PDF?

No. The Web Office and Library offer Dreamweaver training that includes accessibilty requirements. But there is no formal training for MS Word, PowerPoint or PDF creation.

B. Does the campus have the capacity to modify existing multimedia instractional materials to provide for accessibility (e.g. generate transcripts for audio, add captions to video)?

Probably not. This is not part of a service any department on campus currently offeres. DSS sometimes hires an interpreter as accomodation.

Ideas for supporting faculty in creation of accessible course content

Further Discussion (keeping items 8-11 in mind)

8. A communication process and training plan to educate student, staff and faculty about the campus Instructional Materials Plan.

9. An evaluation process to measure the effectiveness of the plan.

10. The identification of roles and responsibilities associated with the above processes.

11. Milestones and timelines that conform to the dates listed below (in coded memo AA-2007-04).

Ideas

Next Meeting

Next meeting Tuesday, March 6, 1-2:30 pm in Stev 2046.