Child pages
  • 10.12.2011 Consortium Meeting Minutes

Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.
Comment: pulled action items to the top of page

October 12, 2011 Consortium Meeting Minutes and Action Items

Item

 

Notes

Date

Wednesday, October 12th

 

Time

1-3:30pm

 

Location

University of Massachusetts Collaborative Services Facility
333 South Street, Shrewsbury, MA 01545-4169

Directions

Conference Room

Amphitheater

 

...

Time

Item

1:00-1:15

Meeting Opens (Remarks from Ken Udas, Kevin Corcoran)

1:15-1:30

Consortium Participant Introductions

1:30-3:15

Discussion Items:

 

Northeast BlackBoard User Group

 

Technology Hosting

 

Online Tutorial Services

 

Research and Development

3:15-3:30

Meeting Recap

Meeting Action Items

Action Item

Assigned to

Status

Notes

Service Catalog:

  • What do we all have to offer?
  • Where are the redundancies?
  • Partnership and collaboration opportunities?
  • Find out if there is interest. What are others doing?
  • Catalog, skill sets…etc.
  • Plus list of what each school needs.
  • Buy in from higher ups to buy or provide services to other schools (i.e., sharing resources, services, cost sharing); gaining support and credibility.

All Consortium Members

 

 

Consortium Member Outreach (to include more schools)

All Consortium Members

 

 

MCO Conference Planning Discussion:

  • Provide Jennifer Brady contact details regarding MCO conference collaboration.

All interested in 'resurrecting MCO conference' potentially through this collaboration

 

 

Charter/Mission Statement of Consortium

  • Aimed to do
  • Scope
  • Differences to other associations (i.e., Nercomp)

Ken Udas, UMassOnline
Kevin Corcoran, CTDLC

 

 

Next Meeting Scheduled:
November 15th at UMassOnline following Speaker Series event featuring Chris Tilghman, Inside Track

All Consortium Members

 

 

Meeting Minutes

Meeting Minutes (raw notes, aka not perfect!)

...

  • Kevin, CTDLC: Individual campus test sites for integration testing sites. Might be helpful to share sandbox locations throughout the consortium. Bb 9.1 in CT has been open statewide for testing within the state. Willing to extend beyond that. Whatever, may be efficiencies allowing us to have a common sandbox, federated sandbox.
  • SUNY: Allows for a lot of knowledge sharing.
  • SUNY: right now we are almost a federation ourselves. SLN (supports 28 of 64 campuses for Angel). Satellite support for Bb. 5 regional meetings to describe SLN, SUNY to partner with Bb. Migration pattern and what we think we should do . Not trying to be marketer of bb…if enough people using different platform, will support other platforms. Been doing this a while now. See as way to make more efficient. Open to regional, going beyond New York. Something ery interested in providing that. Helpdesk perspectives, hosting isn’t there yet still need to make decisions there.
  • Ken: move from org and biz models that are inherently limited to promoting the benefits of larger community.  How can we take advantage of shared costs and savings from more users. Cost spread to lower cost per student. Savings dividend versus retaining earnings. Principally do hosting around Bb. Larger community interested in other types of other LMSs. Extent of which we are not doing all of the same thing but sharing services among one another. Working together to build connectors, might be helpful to us and to larger sector.
  • Kevin; When ou have a mass of regional folks together. Regional pricing: buying power alone rep’ing XX institutions, XX states. Might be wider interest, that can rep 5+ states plus UMass interest. Leverage brings some costs avings and reduction of duplication of effort. Demo’s.
  • Jennifer: Working on RFP with Texas, worked great because of better buying power. Especially where there was one demo for 9+ institutions. Demo more rich, better because they had ever one in the same room.
  • SUNY: If some org could come up with a way to serve help-desk better that presidium or perceptis. Pay same price if it worked. Might be some traction if there is support and interfacing between CT and MA.
  • Kevin: Great segue. Org rep’ing many. Revenue sharing. Where UMOL has historical done tech and marketing, subscriptions . may be specialties at UMass or CTDLC that can really be leveraged better. Rev stream overlap but need to figure out boundaries but unique pieces that become the specialty of one school vs the other. Would lover to be able to extend to the region where it makes sense. Overlap in service…need to define line to avoid competition among the consortium.
  • Pat: On Suny. 64 campuses, lots of replication.  Questioned identifying common services. Helpful to put together a service catalog by campus to define the services. Range from librarian to career counseling. Catalog put together in one plae. Opportunity to find peers doing similar things using similar tools…easier to pull together , join forces and connection led to shared resources.  (i.e., shared staff) Maybe a place to start…define the service catalog. Gone to cio group about helix media server. If we could get campuses to come together on this for hosting 29 institutions…would drive cost down to $500 per campus. Not sure what the barriers are. Saving $19,500 this way.  Began to identify the services but also the skills to support it.  Technology and skill sets to support technology are aligned.
  • Kevin: Services and creation of peer groups.
  • Pat: Don’t have to use Cf but could list campus consortium members and services offered/provided. Note those who don’t want to participate. We can set up from the starting page. Build incrementally. We can build off existing space for the consortium.
  • Ken: Mike talked a little about help desk. Interested in hearing a little about distributed tutoring.
  • Kevin: 10 yrs ago started community based online tutoring. Serve whaever students show up for hours open, skill sets there in that location. 7 schools in CT I 2001. Up to 100 schools nat’l.
  • Regional: northeast collaboration (40 colleges). Started other consortia in the northwest, ohio. CCs who want to have own consortium, can happen. State Us consortium. Technology. Used to host own campus specific tuition programs.  Aside from tech, still learning how to do this well even 10 yrs later. Sharing of wisdom, bringing together the experts…in terms of pedagogy and technology. Anyone willing to participate, can. Now consortia collaborating together. In terms of region here, there is potential Tutoring is a bit behind online. Struggling to get full adoption (online ed). More now who buy in. Tutoring community is a little behind in the times. At your campuses and region, still lot of room for growth in supporting the programs that are out there. ‘Can’t do this other than face to face.” Great op to share what has been learned to date.
  • What about conferences?
  • Great op for one big whopping regional conference. Focus would be determined over time.
  • Robin: Westfield U reached out to Pat who will hand off to Jen/UMassOnline. Core group that ran this and helped. Just MA schools. Premise, was about faculty and faculty development.  Not just about technology. Not a lot of vendors. Was very successful. Last year didn’t run. Faculty missed it. Early years vendor sponsored. Last 2 years, cut to 1 day since budget cuts prevented …combining UMO, CTDLA, SUNY. Biggest issue was space. Lots of work to cover. One person hired by MCO to dedicate to follow up with schools, manage money. Person not in place any longer. Would be open and willing to support this.
  • Ken: Big conference notion.  Wedding crashers. Idea of coattail riding on work that has already been done. Thematic sequence of events.  Idea of grassroots, community based development. New development and new technology. Support provided in accordance to adoption, need to develop community to help promote and develop together.
  • MCO conference was after semester in spring, got faculty to be there because of time.
  • Fall? Want something more.
  • Did that in Banner Users group. Each college hosted quarterly. Brought out things to take back to college but pulled together to hear various perspectives, use examples.
  • Would consider tracks. Track for ID (course designers), another for teaching and learning. To start seems huge. Need to talk about concept. Logistics, space. Need ot keep focused and relatively small. Nercomp might be one of the events the wedding crashers shows up to.
  • Maine does a nice job connecting with sloan c to bring to Maine, but also through video conference.
  • OP for another time to open up. League of Innovation is doing that this year. We could tac onto these types of events.
  • Unsure of SUNY and other services and systems…but value in collaboration would be to come up with innovative and cost effective.
  • Documentation: split the work to update and distribute content related to services. Also see if there is anything new or of interest, any expertise. Any case stories to develop repository.
  • Kevin: possibility of think tank. If folks identify problem to put out to the community to attack/answer/provide answers. The community could vet or push the vendor.
  • SUNY: ID community. Even on help desk side, script errors in firefox. Hit that right off the bat…through collaboration helps mitigate problems that come up. Knowledge sharing  to help mitigate circumstances. Always thinking of contingencies. Community amounts colleges that already exists and could build on. Like that Think Tank.
  • Kevin: Invite to states about conversation about this consortium. As we solidify action items and agenda, others will be very interested. Vermont wanted to be here but had a conflict. Could be a whole other state that joins this conversation.
  • Ken: Could reach out to Worcester and Amherst area consortium to bring a fair # into this group as well. Ops to build interest. Wanted to throw out there: would be interesting to see something like this happen. Lot going on right now. Only have so much bandwidth to handle. Investing a lot of time in HEA. Making the info publically available,. Also gainful employment now slid into regulation. Not a lot of interest but probably worth discussing and observing. Some accredited through NEASC, everyone looking at issues about student verification re: online students. Appropriate to all accredited by NEASC. Clock is ticking. ½ dozen pressing issues to address well but will all be impacted by them. As we investigate, making available, open sessions.
  • Would be good to pull NEASC schools together to put pressure and then pull in other states middle states in that we could go beyond to taking action. Absurd to get State Auth for state within NEASC when already accredited. Could be some tag along pieces, policy committees. Instead of letting policy happen, but have a voice on making policy happen to help and support online and other.
  • Ken: This is what we do. Distance ed. Guess that this group and groups like us who will probably have thoughtful and informed discussions …issues beyond regulation. Help us work with our campuses. Takes work to describe issues and why it is important.  
  • Pat: Would ad, agreeing with ken, development emergent bottom up innovation through use not top down approach. UMOL will go to a campus, have new tutoring op and help desk op. already gone to campuses about helix. Wondering how we might be able to out forward an authority, not to dictate, but to recognize this group I a set of SMEs who have done the due diligence, benefit through collab and participation. Nercomp can make recommendations…make more formal so campuses recognize the group is worthy of listening to …create credibility. When campuses are assessing opportunities that the ops are recognized as potentially viable. Difference in orging a conference versus investing in services where costs are truly shared. Provide continuity, leads to innovation…higher risk ops. How do we pitch this as conference approved.
  • If I want to do CC in  CT, do I have to go to CTDLC.  
  • Need seal of approval. If President of UMass gave stamp of approval. Will identify group as the SME to engender trust across the community. Outfits will be treated and supported more as a result of 3rd party validation. Going beyond just the ‘
  • Kevin: Joint press release to kick off consortium. Leadership group came together, would be national news.
  • Northeast consortia group comprised of XX colleges and Us. More solidified than just a council of key constituents. Northeast Consortia. Need something to showcase. Need key action steps to see key benchmarks in first 6 months, we have done xyz so we can get the press coverage and recognition. Need one good idea we can sell. Need to build credibility. Can’t be easily dismissed.
  • Pat re: SUNY Sharing presidents right now. Chancellor’s and CFOs sharing services.  Catalog of shared services …maybe not as unique as we think (re Burck). Put this list in front of the administration. Milestone 1: replicated costs already in existence. Begs the ? Why wouldn’t we take advantage of  shared resources. Show opportunity. Need some sort of authority (not dictatorship) but recognition of work as being valid, beneficial. Put together something that can’t be dismissed.
  • Duplicate services…not to duplicate the model, if we don’t do it, we won’t get the same level of service.
  • What can we get rid of individually, to do more of the service piece. Outsourcing (don’t have human touch points). Repurpose and reallocate to do more effectively. Not touching directly, but in back end.
  • Ken: There is inherent idea that as we turn to constituents, there are not trusting attitudes. Concerns exhibited on campuses …would rather spend more money (us) that make it possible to lower the costs for others. Form with idea that we can deliver value and free up resources, part of that s trusting the ability of others to deliver services. TO work internally, have to have confidence to say that we are helping all others to bring down cost and while good for all, especially good since cost savings are internalized.
  • Can’t just save, but saved cost is able to reallocate to on campus needs and innovations. To reward to be more effective and more efficient. Need incentives.
  • Development model : How do we identify areas of interest.  Has document repository has this so we don’t need to pay so save and apply savings to other items that might be in need for us and others (and shared).
  • Jennifer: Re: NIFTI, Can that be expanded across all institutions?
  • Think it is a little of both. Beyond basic services…where do you go beyond that?
  • Kevin: Wondering …today being day 1. Service catalog.

Action Items:

Action Item

Assigned to

Status

Notes

Service Catalog:

  • What do we all have to offer?
  • Where are the redundancies?
  • Partnership and collaboration opportunities?
  • Find out if there is interest. What are others doing?
  • Catalog, skill sets…etc.
  • Plus list of what each school needs.
  • Buy in from higher ups to buy or provide services to other schools (i.e., sharing resources, services, cost sharing); gaining support and credibility.

All Consortium Members

 

 

Consortium Member Outreach (to include more schools)

All Consortium Members

 

 

MCO Conference Planning Discussion:

  • Provide Jennifer Brady contact details regarding MCO conference collaboration.

All interested in 'resurrecting MCO conference' potentially through this collaboration

 

 

Charter/Mission Statement of Consortium

  • Aimed to do
  • Scope
  • Differences to other associations (i.e., Nercomp)

Ken Udas, UMassOnline
Kevin Corcoran, CTDLC

 

 

Next Meeting Scheduled:
November 15th at UMassOnline following Speaker Series event featuring Chris Tilghman, Inside Track

All Consortium Members