10:00-11:00am (Schulz 2019)
- General Update
Barbara introduced new Steering Committee member, Sandy Ayala, who gave a brief description of her background in Special Education which includes experience in assistive technologies. She is excited to be part of the ATI Steering Committee. Jack Nguyen introduced himself to Sandy and described his role in DSS. Introductions were made by the rest of the group.
Emiliano Ayala distributed a handout describing a new resource that will launch this fall. UDL Universe, a UDL faculty development site that will aid faculty and staff to provide, create, and improve course design for all students including those with learning disabilities. He described it as a “one-stop shop” for everything UDL. Much of this resource contains information about the available assistive technologies. Barbara Butler asked Emiliano if the site would be ready by the next ATI steering committee meeting and if he would be willing to do a walk through at the next meeting. Emiliano thought it may be ready and would be happy to do a tour around the site.
- SSU ATI goals for 2011-2012
The ATI goals for this year will be driven by the report results from last year that were submitted by SSU and the other campuses. The goals can be reviewed on the ATI website at http://www.sonoma.edu/accessibility/atigoals11-12.html.
Barbara surveyed the group present to ascertain whether the frequency of meetings is satisfactory to all the group members. She mentioned that smaller work groups will likely meet more frequently to work on the priority areas. Brent Boyer felt that the meeting frequency was fine and there was no other comment from the rest of the committee.
- Report cycle for 10 – 11
The next annual campus ATI progress report is due November 15, 2011 and will have the same format as the last report although drawbacks to the report format have been acknowledged. A comprehensive plan is expected from each campus by June of 2012. The report process, although not perfect, has been effective in assessing the progress of the campuses.
The reporting out of ATI information should frame our goals. It will be important to pay attention to those areas that have the highest impact of student success. Barbara has provided a one page summary of the current ATI status that she has shared with the various groups she meets with regularly. The overall progress of SSU is considered good. One of the notable achievements was the list developed by Paula Hammett, with others, “Hints for Making Instructional Materials Accessible.”
Emiliano suggested it would be a good idea to invite the Provost to the meeting as well as linking the Professional Development Subcommittee to ATI. Emiliano has been a part of the Diversity Subcommittee and has been able to advocate some of the goals of ATI there.
Deborah Roberts asked if there were going to be specific deadlines similar to what was expected when ATI was first rolled out several years ago. She feels that if deadlines are more realistic, then working on one goal (eg., timely textbook adoption) at a time would yield real progress. Barbara added that both early text book adoption and the accessible syllabi are still goals for 2011- 2012. Richard Senghas was unable to attend the meeting but Paula mentioned she knew he had been working on timely textbook adoption with the FSAC committee. She observed that he would still be very interested in trying to move this goal forward.
- Current status and efforts
- Priority 1 (Administrative Web Accessibility)
Barbara Moore was not able to make the meeting. Christine Hayes reported in her absence that the Web group is still working on the SSU website redesign and Hi-Soft compliance but progress is being made.
- Priority 2 (Instructional Materials Accessibility)
This priority’s lead position is still vacant but Barbara suggested that a group approach may work comprised of faculty who sit on the Steering Committee. The focus of the group would likely center around, Timely textbook adoption, Instructional Materials for Late Hires, Learning Management System (Moodle), and Accessible Syllibi.
Emiliano asked if our goals are aligned with those for which the Chancellor’s Office would like to see progress and with other CSU campus priorities. Barbara responded that our goals are essentially set by us and that once we have determined these goals, the expectation would be for demonstrable progress around the self-determined goals.
Barbara would like to get the communication campaign going again and would like to discuss the best ways to go about it. How can the group best raise the awareness with the Faculty? Brent suggested that selection or design of instructional materials should start out with accessibility in mind rather than trying to make them accessible after the fact. He also feels that if other faculty, peer to peer, are communicating the need to produce accessible instructional materials, the message would be more meaningful and effective.
- Priority 3 (E & IT Procurement)
Jenifer reported they are still working toward getting campus vendors to provide accessible materials and continuing to see improvement. Paula mentioned that many vendors she is dealing with are now using accessible features as selling points for their materials.
- Priority 1 (Administrative Web Accessibility)
- Discussion of SSU and system reports for 2009 - 2010
Barbara passed around the ATI Annual Report 09/10 System-wide Executive Summary provided by the Chancellor’s Office. This report provides the medians for each of the goals in each of the priority areas as indicated in the consolidated campus reports. Jason Wenrick observed that the Chancellor’s Office has instituted more realistic and achievable objectives for the ATI goals.
- Workshops and Training
The ATI Professional Development for Accessible Technology website is in ongoing development. http://teachingcommons.cdl.edu/access
- Fall 2011 meeting dates, 10:00 – 11:00 a.m., Schulz 2019
Wednesday, November 16, 2011
Wednesday, December 14, 2011 (tentative)