Notes for Core Team September 20, 2016

LTI Report:

  • What does ‘public’ actually mean?
  • Partial list of installed LTI’s
  • Adobe Connect, Lib Guides, Chat Room, Course Load, Andover Fulcrum
  • Khan Academy
  • Ted Ed App
  • 3D game lab
  • Amy S. noticed some were added to course she and Bob are working, but they didn’t add them.
  • Didn’t know we already had so many already installed, many related to Adobe Connect.
  • What is Ref Me? Something of Stacy’s, American Studies? Likely research guide tool.
  • Need more info on the difference between public, name only and anonymous?

 

What do we do with this info?

  • -Most are LTI’s been installed by faculty
  • Contact Faculty, let them know they are sharing roster info with third party service via LTI? Who should take on that notification, ODL, GLC…? Discussion.
  • We now have LTI governance and use that to work through the existing LTI’s(Sean)
  • (Joe) most concerned with the LTI’s that are public.
  • Research to see if the publics are actually sharing information.
  • Name only, Arc(Canvas internal) and Ref Me(helps with Apa citations).
  • Is Ref Me legacy? Amy F. has looked in the course and isn’t sure what is creating it. May want to check with Brian Carson.

Amy F. will check with Brian about Ref Me

Joe will inquire with Instructure (Libby) about different categories; public, name only and anonymous. Are LTI’s auto enabled when using contact YouTube, Vimeo

  • Public FERPA violation? Joe believes students need to be notified and offered option to opt out of the service.
  • Concerns about how we are going to be able to police this.
  • Many may be activated based upon content being added, not deliberately installed.
  • Joe A. concern about public and name only.
  • Do we want to be gatekeeper or turn off faculties ability to turn on LTI?
  • Faculty have agreements when doing blog posts, that informs student that work will be available for world to see. Frequently used in writing program.

Dashboard for LTI’s in evaluation process. Old Project Academic Cyberinfrastructure Project, being reengaged to take on LTI’s we don’t want multiple inventories.

Joe A. will work on it and report back in about a month.

Had used Google Fusion tables and reached limits, going to make prototype, make searchable and we will try and evaluate.

Adam had gotten inquiry about the inventory and if their were any deliverables available to share. Joe A. said Fusion tables and spreadsheet are available. People can be pointed to spreadsheet for immediate future. https://docs.google.com/a/middlebury.edu/spreadsheets/d/1E97qVa22IviurL2NtRsgdWey05IkEntlaKNVj8ttUVk/edit?usp=sharing

 

ACTT Shared Values:

  • Sean, Joe and Bob had meeting with people who had been through process.
  • How do we go about creating our shared value as a group.
  • Values need to apply to work the group does.
  • Does Core Group know the work of the ACTT. If we don’t have clarity on the work, creating values will be more challenging.
  • What work, core team? Extended team? Touching work?
  • Amy S. start narrow, with recommendation process.
  • Part of work in evaluations, hard to evaluate without values.
  • Begin with core team?
  • Adequate Excellence, Legum(swedish for just enough)?
  • Adam? What is the point of exercise? Checklist for evaluations?
  • -originally context of class where working with clients, researching clients. Research context? How to do approach research ethically.
  • -Ethics for how you develop relationship with those you serve.
  • Project by project, or have overall values and apply overall to project?
  • ODL started to draft some values. For customers to know our approach. Ethics can become part of core message outward facing, can also help when doing the work.
  • Important to discuss how we would use this in our work. Perhaps each time we took on a project. And as recommendation is being finalized.
  • Bob C. having values informs the work and makes review less ad hoc.
  • Values could be part of the outward facing portion of the group. When working with us, this is how we would work.
  • Client’s values could be taken into consideration.

 

Next Steps:

 

  • Each team member identified 5 values and definitions for ACTT work
  • Focus on evaluation and recommendation work

 

  • Shared Google Doc for submission of values
    • Wordsmithing will occur during meeting discussion

 

Updates:

Bob hosting Panopto intro

Four courses including Panopto, including ‘Batman unlimited’

Jamie Cloud Storage

Home directory ITS project group reshuffled. Timeline laid out December, liscense renewal for backup software due in February with monitor implications.