1. Review and Approval of October 29, 2003 Minutes

A motion was made to approve the minutes of October 29, 2003 and post to the public VCCS web site. The motion was seconded and approved.

2. DL course coding and the e-rate

Current structure for coding (Course Coding in PeopleSoft092903.doc)

Instructional modes (Discussion of what is currently used)

Virtual campus issue (Location vs. Campus)

Times (One-minute intervals for DL classes)

Rebecca Kittelberger reported that in November 2003, a new code was put into PS - WWW-er. There are several types of instruction modes. We need to update the list. Some preliminary research has been done and three (3) types are being used. Many courses are hybrid, using multiple instruction modes - all sorts of combinations. Rebecca will follow up on this. She worked with list she thought was complete, but list is longer (modes) - If codes are not used, we should eliminate them and update list with correct modes used. This information is shared with students and we need to have this more clearly defined.

The Virtual campus issue and times: The issue that we have run into is the difference between "campus" and "location" codes. Courses should be assigned to a physical campus. For every physical campus, there can be a "Virtual" location.

PeopleSoft does not allow a blank time for virtual classes. You must enter a time frame. Course Conflict box, early in PS setup, must be unchecked. (per course) at course level, you may enter the same time for all classes. TCC is not using the option to use the basic data panel, item number 5. TCC does not have web access for students to view all virtual campuses. However, they can look up an individual course, which will show all sections of the course.

MECC has no consistency how DL courses are entered. Three divisions enter data. VW receives templates from individual divisions, but one individual enters the data into the system.

For SU scheduling of classes, when would you have to have the information; February (early) - DDL committee should send out information, as well as the Utility, to all colleges. Suggest perhaps a Best Practices sent to all for summer, and definitely Fall 04.

Scott Langhorst and VW to help Rebecca. The modes came over what was in legacy. Scott Langhorst, in records workgroup, created the modes. A couple of items have been added: combination - in person; in person distance Ed; and in person tech-enhanced and now www-ER.

Course attributes is strictly for distance Ed courses. DED and DLM was the old legacy structure to redistribute funds. We do need to track information on distance courses. The definition of tech-enhanced (or hybrid)-Tech Enhanced is on campus all the time - hybrid could be mixed (releasing seats).

Suggest "In-Person-Distance ED/Hybrid"

3. E-rate -- discussion and clarification on implementation

Link to e-rate document http://www.vccs.edu/admin/Controller_Office/Fiscal_Services/MemoERATEdeployment.pdf

Dr. Toni Cleveland explained that there was a miscommunication in memorandum - spring may show rate and tech fee only. All of those fees that are collected - assumption for any student, in or out of state, college will keep all of the tuition Spring 04. This issue will be discussed as part of the allocation model and ACOP on December 16-17. We will have to pay a consultant. This was never intended for in-state students.

In future, e-rate courses - students may be in-state students, but they will have to pay applicable fees associated with that college/campus. Out of state students will not have to pay the applicable college/campus fees, just the technology rate, plus tuition.

The e-rate suggests that the student does not have to attend a class on the campus/college.

At this time, there is no option for e-rate in VCCS On-Line.

E-Rate is a tool. There is no requirement that each college use it. It is the decision of the college to use or not to use. We will put on agenda next time.

4. Online tutorial services (Tim Tirrell)

Smarthinking activity (SmarthinkingInitiative.doc)

Discussion of where to go next

Academic Systems - has English piece. VP's were hesitant to add in the cost of Smarthinking + text books.

How does the cost compare: facilities + faculty or fee for Smarthinking?

PH has a large tutoring program. We must make sure that peer tutors know how to access Smarthinking during the day. Students have computers and are able to access Smarthinking in the evening hours when not with peer tutors.

We (VCCS) need guidance on this issue. Are we going to do this in-house or use out-sourcing? We must build this into the Dateline 2009 recommendations.

Mary Clare DiGiacomo (PVCC) and Carolyn Byrd (PHCC) volunteered to work with Tim Tirrell. Bill Hightower (Southside) will provide assistance. We would also like to include a faculty member and a tutoring center individual.

We have one additional year federal earmark funding for tutorial services.

(for the 2004-05 academic year).

What are people doing

A suggestion was made that we initiate an informal survey on other options and how folks like them. We will draft a proposal for early spring. Survey will go out in the winter. We also need to get ideas of how much these things cost and other places where funds are available for the future.

We also need to survey students about what they feel about Smarthinking.

Gene has an on-line reference library. Tutor.com wants to move out of the high school area. Middle college may require a different level of tutoring that general education courses require.

5. Migration to BB6 and alternative Course Management Systems (Bob Vawter)

Schedule of migration (See backup document)

Issues

Migration schedule on BB is an old document. Larger issues exist. Will we be migrating to version 6.1 or choose another product altogether. We can't ask faculty what they want as they feel they have too much invested to change from BB. The issue should be, we are changing, what are your suggestions. We need to find out how courses will migrate to the new system.

Bob Vawter would like to choose six courses, including a couple of foreign language courses, and watch vendors migrate these courses. Neil wants us to tell where we want to go and have the vendors demonstrate products. Should have an Enterprise version or it is not what we want.

John Ambrose (JSRCC) thinks we should abandon talking about migration to BB6 and focus on where we are, what we are and where we want to be, focus on criteria for a new vendor. Will we be able to find a company that can support a system as large as ours. We must develop a 'good' relationship with a vendor.

Fact-Finding activity

Carole Schultz reported that a RFP was sent out for a state-wide license of a course management product - We would probably use that as a template for securing a purchase. At this time, we do not know who is responding. Now we are using BB, WEB CT, Desire to Learn and Angel. It will have chair of CFAC, tech council individuals, VP's/Provosts, deans, faculty. The ODU, JMU, Northern, Illinois will act as an outside panel to react to the vendor's demonstrations. We have one installation: do we need multiple installations? How big we are really isn't the issue. We are committed to running centrally? Is that in fact the way we need to go? All of the reasons for going to running centrally, have virtually disappeared. Is one of the fundamental principles going to be that we have one license/one installation?

Do we want to go back to 'regions' like we used to have (EASA, WESA, Central, Northern, etc).

We need to let all BB Faculty users know the situation and be continually updated on the status.

Get FAQ'S FRP, Administrators

6. DL relationship to existing DL/IT groups

A motion was made and seconded to approved the proposed addition to the VCCS Policy Manual, Section 2.4.5, Distance and Distributed Learning Committee (C) as part of the governance structure.

Proposed Addition to VCCS Policy Manual, Section 2.4.5, Distance and Distributed Learning Committee (C)

2.4.5 Distance and Distributed Learning Committee (C)

The Distance and Distributed Learning Committee for the VCCS serves as an advisory body to the Vice Chancellor of Academic Services and Research on system-wide matters related to distance learning.

The Committee shall be comprised of one member per college to be selected by the college president, and shall meet at least three times a year in person or electronically, at the call of the Chairman- and proceedings of the Committee meetings, as well as the exchange of information among the participants, will be posted at www.vccs.edu and distributed to the Chancellor, Vice Chancellor for Academic Services & Research, the Chancellor's staff, and the Advisory Council of Presidents (ACOP).

Recommendations on system-wide policy matters will be forwarded by the Vice Chancellor of Academic Services and Research to the Chancellor who will channel them to appropriate entities (e.g., Academic and Student Affairs Council (ASAC), Advisory Council of Presidents (ACOP), State agencies, etc.) for further consideration, review, and/or action.

Motion APPROVED -- Dr. Cleveland will take it to Dr. DuBois and we will include as an information item on the ACOP Agenda.

BB Administrators

A Motion was made and seconded to invite BB Administrators to submit any recommendations they wish to go forward to Vice Chancellor for consideration.

Motion APPROVED

A Motion was made and seconded to invite the BB Administrators to become an official work group of the Distance and Distributed Learning Committee.

Motion APPROVED

The Distance and Distributed Learning Committee will establish relationships with other groups and components of the governing structure. Below is the list of these constituencies and the representative to the group:

• Chancellor's Faculty Advisory Committee (CFAC)
  CFAC creates their agenda and then they ask us questions.
  Toni Cleveland serves in an advisory capacity.
• Tech Council - Steve Sachs
• VP's/Provosts - Geoff Hicks
• LRC Peer group - Gene Damon
• New Horizons - Bob Vawter
• Professional Development Committee - Carole Schultz
• Workforce Development
• Deans - William Dey

7. Schedule of meetings

Master Calendar http://www.vccs.edu/conferences/mastercalendar1003.pdf

New Horizons April 4-6, 2004

February 2004 - Meeting using a distance technology

March 2004 - Face-to-Face meeting

April 2004 - Meeting using a distance technology

May 2004 - Face-to-Face meeting

8. Creation of DL Faculty Issues Subcommittee

We should have a standard committee that has a conduit to faculty issues. Toni suggested we use CFAC as a stepping stone; then BB Administrators list.

John Downey, Sara Brown, Ruth Smith, Rebecca Blankenship.

We will contact Susan Coffey and/or Nancy Nicholson to include a standard agenda item on each peer group meeting.

9. VITA Approval Process - Project Management Forms

Project Management forms

Gene explained that plans in the state changed for projects over $100,000.

Gene got stuck in the middle. Very elaborate; risk analysis; risk management; and projected consequences of failure. VITA does not know at this point how they are going to do this. Be aware that if you enter any project over $100,000 that you need to allow more lead time. Must be approved then go to Secretary. How does the project fit into the state's IT plan; how will it affect enhanced learning? (many features)

10. ECVA and the VCCS (Carole Schultz)

http://www.e-cva.org/

Carole Schultz reported that we are still a member, but group is not what it was.

11. Report from Scott Langhorst on Portal sub-committee
       Portals Presentation

TCC has received some outside funding and Scott would like to put something together with TCC that would work with and for everyone. Scott has sent an e-mail out to the sub-committee members letting them know of other options: UPortal; Campus Pipeline and Unicom.

The portal subgroup will get back into full swing after the first of the year. Inez Farrell sent Scott a note asking: What do we expect out of a Portal? This will make a difference on how we go after a product.

Leslie Smith hired a consultant to do a study on portal that would fit into their business processes. Study determined RCC needed a Portal.

Leslie would like to work with Scott, but they need to do this now as it was approved in their Tech Report.

Leslie should contact James Davis at Systems Office.

SO was going to send a training session to UPortal but it fell through. To host, we could commit two people. Collegis is another option.

Linda Claussen reported that she was part of a committee on student portals at New River.

12. Report from John Ambrose on DL Plan Review sub-committee

We originally felt that the plan was over two years old. We want it to be reviewed to ensure that we are using it and using it properly. Do we need to change anything in the plan; eliminate or add to the plan? Steve Sachs suggested that John and his sub-committee review the June 1997 VDEN Administrative Procedures and December 1, 1998, McCartan memorandum, etc.

13. Content repository update

Carole Schultz reported that we are Federally earmarked - we currently do not have a way to get the data to the faculty. We need to develop some interim steps to determine what we have and then some formal steps to incorporate outside sources.

We need to plan on digital librarian; people who have expertise to catalogue content; and will continue to update. Carole is required by the federal earmark to respond to certain items at certain times.

John Ambrose wanted to know if there was group working on this.

Carole responded no. There of course is a relationship between the course repository and course management systems. Carole will work with Gene Damon and John Ambrose to develop a report and status to come back to the group at the next meeting.

14. VDENAdministrative Procedures

http://www.vccs.edu/vccsit/vdenproc.htm

Fee structure, review and guidelines
http://www.vccs.edu/vccsit/commfees.htm

John Ambrose's DL Strategic Plan review subcommittee was charged with reviewing the VDEN Administrative Procedures in addition to the DL Plan. Colleges need to provide feedback on how the Commonwealth Classroom Fee guidelines are being implemented so that there is consistency across the System when exceptions on charging fees are made.

15. Creation of VCCS DL Policies/Procedures Web site committee

Evie Tobian, John Ambrose, and Rebecca Blankenship - will need to determine if there are any consistencies for the DL sites, i.e., VCCS On-Line, DL initiatives, etc

16. Best Practices/Hot Issues/Statistics/Profiles/News

We need to find a better way to provide information to the various distance learning individuals at the campuses.

Distance Learning List Serve; Web Site and Portal.

Rebecca Blankenship will work with Gene Damon and Bob Vawter to come up with an avenue for the group.

Add Virtual High School as an item to agenda for next meeting -

Raising Issues; Follow-up and Status Reports will be the format of the meetings.