Steering Committee Meeting Minutes February 17, 2010

10:00-11:00am (Schulz 2019)


  1. General update
    1. Review loose ends since November 2009 meeting (see November meeting notes) All School Department Chair meetings were visited with an ATI update by the end of the 2009 Fall semester; probably should revisit Communications planning and will try to plan for the semester.
    2. Update from ATI Central, Executive Sponsors conference conversation, 02-11-10 The last conference call focused on the current central projects and priorities; the handout outlining these priorities was distributed with the agenda; energetic discussion around Instructional Materials.
    3. Review draft of Revision to Coded Memo (distributed by email 02-09-10) Webinars are being offered on the revision: see for dates.

      Brett attended first Webinar and emphasized the change in approach from original Coded Memo but noted that many of the outcomes remained the same. He also discussed how the CO is looking to collect the Self Assessment information in order to develop baseline goals. Additionally, he noted that there was acknowledgement of budget constraints and goals would be tailored to individual campuses as necessary.

      Comment from Richard Senghas regarding workload for faculty as expectations increase, including an initiative such as accessibility. Susan Kashack wondered if any discussion had taken place regarding resources that might be made available to help move the initiative along.

      A concern was raised by Emiliano Ayala regarding the decentralization of the initiative effort and making individualized campuses more responsible for designing their plans. He wondered if this new flexibility would ultimately cause a lack of synergy with campuses losing the benefit of learning from the other campuses.

      Deborah Roberts suggested incorporating the goals of ATI in with the launch of Moodle which lead to a greater discussion about Moodle.

      Nate Johnson asked if a baseline time frame has been established and if particular goals had been given particular timelines. Butler responded that the CO is intending to develop a baseline plan and goals informed by the feedback received by the campuses.

      Do any of the dates that existed in the first Coded Memo remain as goals for the future? Barbara said she will check whether or which hard dates that were established with the first Coded Memo are still considered valid.

      Richard Senghas wondered if the Risk Management team at the CO was consulted when producing the new Coded Memo. Barbara confirmed that there had been a discussion between the legal department at the CO and members of the ATI Leadership Council.

      Barbara urged everyone to take a look at the revised Coded Memo if they hadn’t already. Resending draft with these minutes – please take a look before the next meeting on March 17, 2010

  2. SSU ATI plan for 09-10 and campus self-assessment reports
    1. Status of self-assessment reporting – due to insufficient resources and personnel absences, SSU opted not to do a voluntary self-assessment report (due February 5, 2010 for this cycle).  The self-assessment reports received by the CO for this cycle will be made available later in the Spring on the ATI web site which will help other campuses with benchmarking.  All campuses will be required to submit a self-assessment report in November 2010 that will cover progress for 09-10 as articulated in the campus plan.  Christie, Moore, Butler will review the current plan for possible revisions and will bring suggestions to next meeting on March 17, 2010.
  3. Current status and efforts (updates)
    1. Priority 1 (Administrative Web Accessibility)
      Barbara Moore - Web team meeting regularly and getting close to having some web guidelines completed.  They are also working on Web Standards which are a different level from Policy guidelines in that they will change frequently.  The Web Standards deal primarily with technological language which is evolving and changes rapidly.
      She also mentioned the software tool called Survey Monkey.  It is not only easy to use for developing surveys but it also generates accessible forms.
    2. Priority 2 (Instructional Materials Accessibility) 
      Brett reported on the CAMP workshop that was held in June 2009 to train faculty to create accessible documents.  12 faculty completed the entire workshop.  He is collecting information from the participants.  Brett also announced a workshop at SFSU April 30 entitled “Reach more without doing more” which will incorporate accessibility among other topics. Contact Brett if interested. 
      Barbara Moore mentioned the acquisition of Echo360 by IT.  This is a lecture capture product that produces video and audio of presentations and can be accessed after the event on the web.  It is possible to make an appointment with Stephanie Torres in IT to record your lectures and request that they be captioned.
      Accessible Syllabus—Barbara M. and Brett will work on some fine-tuning to the template including wording and clearer instruction to what the “template” is intended to do to offset confusion.
    3. Priority 3 (E & IT Procurement)
      No update.
  4. Workshops and training

    ATI Professional Development for Accessible Technology