Category Archives: Closed

Books

Interlibrary Loan Winter Break Service Update – 2018

Books

Due to the holidays, shipping madness, the increased risk of losses, and the lack of open libraries willing to send things, the Interlibrary Loan Department limits ordering and shipping during the second half of December.

If you need anything before winter break request it now!  Interlibrary loan requests submitted to ILLiad after Dec. 15th will be ordered in early January.

ILLiad article requests will continue to be filled by RapidILL through Dec. 22st, but requests must have a valid ISSN and year to be processed by Rapid.

Use Worldcat to find your citations and submit your loan requests!

 

Interlibrary Loan Winter Break Service Update – 2017

Due to the holidays, shipping madness, the increased risk of losses, and the lack of open libraries willing to send things, the Interlibrary Loan Department limits ordering and shipping during the second half of December.

If you need anything before winter break request it now!  Interlibrary loan requests submitted to ILLiad after Dec. 15th will be ordered in early January.

ILLiad article requests will continue to be filled by RapidILL through Dec. 22st, but requests must have a valid ISSN and year to be processed by Rapid.

Use Worldcat to find your citations and submit your loan requests!

 

ACTT Notes

News & Updates

Joe is still working with Panopto on testing updated integrations before activating. Faculty are seeing errors when they preview a quiz in Panopto.

Agenda:

  1. Discussion: ITS Governance

The portfolio meeting last week provided a more formal review and discussion of the ITS governance process that ACTT has been introduced to in prior meetings. The team is hopeful that the process will improve prioritization of academic and digital learning projects relative to the other portfolio groups.

Questions remain about the relationship between the ACTT and the ATDL portfolio group. ACTT in its current configuration may well serve to help academic projects ‘bubble up’ to the next level for improved visibility and prioritization. ACTT’s work can help inform the governance process through evaluations, pilots, and recommendations. The portfolio group is a place where such activities can be shared to help inform decisions about projects.

The governance process will require some adjustment to technical processes and perhaps some additional communication and education of stakeholders to help non-IT community members engage.

Some questions arose in reflecting on the first meeting:

  • How might we better engage all members of the portfolio team in discussions of academic tech and digital learning beyond technical considerations?
  • How might we work to develop shared language to talk about academic projects and needs?

Additional questions considered:

  • First question: Do we all need to be there?
  • What representation do we want/need?

No immediate decision or changes agreed on regarding current membership or attendance at ITS gov monthly meetings. Expected organizational directions and may result in revisions to current portfolio group membership in governance process. This topic will be revisited.

 

  1. Discussion / Action: Canvas Orientation sites for students to be added to Course Hub as a resource

We briefly reviewed a couple of resources with a student audience:

Sean’s site – https://middlebury.instructure.com/courses/123

Bob’s site – https://middlebury.instructure.com/courses/364

Canvas orientation site for students project will need to continue to be improved and revised. Agreed on a desire to update a single resource for all Middlebury students and faculty. Monterey integrated the student quickguide for students at the course-level menu in the Institute’s sub-account for all courses. Based on schools abroad and Institute sites, different strategies for presenting Canvas orientations were discussed.

What do we want these sites to do for students? What needs to be there?

Sean is interested in getting some additional feedback from students (ODL and DLC interns) to determine how we to proceed. Expects to work with Amy S. on ways to collaborate, collect feedback, and improve the orientation experience for first-time Canvas users.

Action Plan:

  • Joe will add a link to the Student Canvas Orientation (Sean’s version) in the Primary Canvas HELP menu
  • Adam will add the Orientation site to Course Hub (College and Monterey) as a “shared Canvas resource”
  • Sean will follow-up with Amy Slay regarding input from students and revision of the orientation site for an all-Middlebury student audience
  • ACTT will plan to track usage of the orientation site through AY17-18 via Hub and Canvas analytics before making further recommendations

 

  1. Added Discussion: Course Hub Refactoring & Integration

Bob raised the issue of integrating College and Institute Course Hub sites. Adam provided an update on the status of the Course Hub Drupal 8 and Refactoring project which had previously been cancelled. Bob agreed to be a co-sponsor on the project to help advocate for continued integration of currently separate platforms (e.g. sites dot WordPress at Midd and MIIS) link to project: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fnzG_T18DP5E0ReWQ6PG39vSuSMBFwN8QiSTV3Gvf1M/edit#

ACTT Notes: Canvas Evaluation Review

Announcements / Updates:

Request to add “UDOIT” to Canvas: Accessibility LTI that generates a report on a Canvas site to let faculty know when accessibility issues are present in a course. Joe will meet with the faculty to determine what the implementation is for, and whether this should become a project.

No ACTT meeting next week as we’ll be meeting as IT-GOV-ATDL.

A couple of requests to add “Poll Everywhere” to Canvas. Allows for polls to be administered directly through Canvas in a synchronous / on-ground classroom.

 

Canvas Data Evaluation

How useful is the information? What can / should we use? What do we not need? And what is missing?

We have Canvas for three years. We need to be able to evaluate its use in order to determine whether Canvas (or any LMS) is a good technological choice for Middlebury.

Is there a reliable connection between statistics and “engagement” or “quality” of learning?

Numbers are not enough to say that “Canvas is improving teaching and learning at Middlebury.”

Biggest use at Monterey is for class resource web sites and for flipped instruction models. Monterey has very few purely online courses. There’s a certificate program with several online courses, but is blended with on-ground courses.

The College does not have online courses. The Hebrew School is “hybrid” but also fully online part of the year.

Can we define Canvas as a learning space–as more than a platform for distribution and submission? Should it / can it be used for more than file sharing? Or should we be looking at implementation of other technologies that accomplish the same thing?

What kinds of functions can we look at to determine if Canvas is being used well for teaching and learning? How do we measure those functions?

How do we apply an analytic to determine good pedagogy or successful teaching and learning? We can’t really understand what’s happening in classes without talking to students and teachers.

Should we figure out a way to do some qualitative research with teachers and students across Middlebury to determine how Canvas is being used? What works? What doesn’t work? What does teaching with technology look like at Middlebury?

We could try to align Canvas data with our findings from doing qualitative research. Start with “power users” to begin developing stories about how Canvas is being used. Expand the view out by looking at teachers who are using other digital tools in teaching and collect those stories — all to support an analysis of what tools are best for Middlebury.

Look for faculty from different programs to talk about use of Canvas.

Possible plan:

  1. Invite Canvas “power users” to discuss use of Canvas for later in this fall.
  2. Align findings with Canvas data.
  3. Expand that discussion to include other technologies.
  4. Begin larger discussion about use of digital technologies for learning and teaching in Canvas.

This could provide a model for qualitative research for future tech evaluations.

ACTT Notes: Canvas Evaluation

ACTT Extended Team Meeting August 29, 2017

Agenda

Instructure, the company that hosts Canvas, will be presenting an Executive Business Review, sharing data pertaining to Middlebury’s use of Canvas in the first year. This presentation will provide us with insights into how Canvas is being used and supported, and lay the groundwork for future evaluations.

 

Notes

Kelly Jerome, our Customer Success Manager from Instructure presented.

  • Stats are per-month, due to rolling on and off of terms, the data isn’t always reflective of a particular term.
  • Can get details on sub-accounts.
  • Includes support details, SLA compliance, support mechanism (phone, chat, email), and user-type.
  • For real-time reporting, the Canvas data-API would need to be used. For much custom reporting this would require our own developer time to leverage. Instructure has several pre-built reports that could be purchased that wouldn’t require local resources.

EBR

A copy of the report can be seen here. Please log in with your Middlebury username and password to view.

ACTT Notes: Canvas LTIs

LTI Review

 

Zoom LTI

  • Was convenient with Adobe Connect
  • Is there a cost?
  • Will there be challenges for SSO? Canvas uses CAS, Zoom uses ADFS.
  • Will bring it up with the Web Conferencing Team

 

GoogleApps and O365 Canvas LTI Evaluations

  • Both LTIs offer enhanced functionality and integration in Canvas
    • Slides and spreadsheets can be used in Collaborations, as well as docs.
    • Files from both services can be submitted for assignments, and evaluated using the SpeedGrader.
    • Access to both services is included in the Rich Text editor (similar to Panopto) in the “external tool” menu
  • Adam and Joe attended a brainstorming meeting for the Course Hub and O365
    • Discussing what a course space in O365 looks like
    • Discussing how to manage the course group
  • LTIs need to be added at the account level, cannot be added to a sub-account or course
  • Will test in https://middlebury.test.instructure.com this week
  • Assuming testing goes well we will pilot in the production instance in the fall, then evaluate.

 

Other Topics

  • Instructure will present a review of Middlebury’s use of Canvas in the first year. This will happen at the ACTT meeting on Aug. 22nd.
  • Joe is working on a launch roadmap for Panopto. Dates have been shared, please send feedback.
  • ACTT Core Group notes will be published to the site.

ACTT Notes: April 4, 2017

Language School Orientations

It is that time of year again! In this meeting we will be going over the orientation sessions for Language Schools and Bread Loaf.

Language pledge.

  • Each school interprets the pledge slightly differently. Hospital, Helpdesk, and Reference Desk usually “English Safe Zones”. (Chinese School more strict)

Campus changes over. Some undergrad dorms become administrative & faculty offices. People who miss arrival center on Friday are often challenged by not having assistance other than Public Safety over the weekend.

Bilinguals: Traditionally, these support staff have assisted with technology help by translating tech questions to students.

  • Also usually in charge of each school’s web presence during the summer.
  • Also sort of RAs.

Send requests related to the orientation spreadsheet to Joe A.

DMTs: Unclear how much DMT support will be available.

2 separate start dates. “Hard” languages get extra weeks.

 

General Tech Training

Every Curricular Tech & Library training will ideally be preceded by a General Tech Training as it can be hard to focus on other info if you can’t log in.

Often run by Pij & Zach (and their colleagues).

Banner, wireless, printing, email, authentication

  • Suggestion: Have someone who can reset accounts in room.
  • Alternate suggestion: Get people to set up their accounts before they come to campus.

 

Library Orientation

Challenge running orientation for different student levels (undergrad – masters – doctoral).

Library resources, ILL, purchasing.

 

Curricular Technology Orientation

1st half:

  • Course Hub intro (dashboard, resources, roster)
  • Canvas
  • WordPress
  • **Moodle will NOT be available for ANY language school courses**

2nd half:

Help instructors set up their class resources.

Challenge: different ways each school schedule their classes/sections.

Academic Tech staff available for consultations for those who need more in-depth help.

Notes: March 28th, 2017

Guest: Mike Roy, Dean of Library

Agenda:

  1. Overview of the IT governance process
 (Mike)
  2. The role of the academic portfolio group
 (Mike)
  3. Discussion: Questions we need to answer:
    1. 

what projects would we consider? which are too small? which are too big?
    2. 
how do we ensure that the projects are vetted both in terms of their technical feasibility and their degree of ‘strategicness’?
    3. what should be the relationship between this new group and the ACTT?
    4. what should be the membership of the group to cover the entire institution, and ensure proper vetting (see item b)

1. Overview of the broad governance process

Mike Roy and Jonathan Maddix are overseeing the Academic/Digital Tech & Learning “Portfolio team” which is one of a number of departmental and project groups designed to inform the ITS Advisory and STeering Committee groups within the new governance structure.

External consultant organization, *CIO Sensei helped to prepare new governance framework based on external review process in 2016. Mike referenced a deck of slides outlining the governance structure.

*Some discussion of CIO Sensei findings (not everyone had shared background knowledge)

  • External review of ITS looked into project load, efficiencies, decision-making
  • Create a structure that helps to align stakeholders in needs assessment and infrastructure that can scale across the institution

Proposed ITS Operating Model & Processes are informed by mission aligned strategy:

  • Governance
  • Organization
  • Processes and practices
  • Performance management

…to realize academic mission and create value across the institution

ITS is currently undertaking workforce planning which may influence future staffing and organization.

 

ITS Governance Objectives

  • Customer driven
  • Understand risk
  • Representation across the institution
  • Clarify capacity and resource allocation – “no” as an option
  • Improved communication and transparency
  • Ongoing participatory process
  • Proactive monitoring of demand and challenges
  • Connection between IT and institutional mission and deeper planning process

 

Governance Flow / Levels – bi-directional flow of information and activity

  • ITS Steering Committee
    • High level, priority setting, funding, staffing, risk, evaluation and validation of strategy implementation
  • ITS Advisory Team
    • Cross-institutional, review of portfolio teams, programs, institutional demand, risk balancing
  • Portfolio Teams* Mike and Jon charged with support of one of these teams
    • Determine departmental needs and priorities, anticipate requirements, identify opportunities and risks, approve new projects, review programs, etc…

The role of the academic portfolio group
 vis a vis ACTT

“All Things Digital” Portfolio Team

Questions

a) what projects would we consider? which are too small? which are too big?

  • Example projects discussed as cases for review; e.g. Canvas, Zoom, Panopto, current review of WordPress MU instances (Middlebury, MIIS)

b) how do we ensure that the projects are vetted both in terms of their technical feasibility and their degree of ‘strategicness’?

  • Suggestion that ACTT could serve as the recommender for the portfolio team
  1. c) what should be the relationship between this new group and the ACTT?
  • Is this portfolio team a distinct group or is it a slight expansion of the current ACTT model; need to articulate the key roles of the two groups and determine whether the roles are distinctive or overlap within the new governance structure [unresolved]
  • Strategic goals and cross-institutional planning may help to make the relationships between portfolio team and upper levels of governance [Mike suggested he would bring this back to Advisory Team for clarification]

 

Additional Discussion

Potential scenarios for portfolio and ACTT:

  • Continue as two separate teams (ACTT and a Portfolio team)
  • Integrate of ACTT and portfolio team into dual purpose group
  • Disband ACTT, take best of and bring to portfolio team

ACTT currently serves a particular purpose in reviewing cyberinfrastructure systems and platforms. It seems a Portfolio team would have a more governance focused role; the way it works now, is stakeholders present a need, and ACTT tests it out and helps to draft a recommendation…

Middlebury Space / Facilities Committee might offer a model for Portfolio team – this committee convenes people together at certain times during the academic year to share needs, projects so that there is awareness of what people are looking to accomplish; the committee then initiates process of prioritizing needs to draft recommendations and potential impact on budget

In this model, the separate Portfolio Team would engage programs to understand directions and needs; refer cyberinfrastructure projects to ACTT for research, review, recommend – help upper levels prioritize based on strategy

 

Concerns

Current ACTT Core members are on numerous teams and committees – it would be difficult to be called to participate on an additional committee

  1. d) what should be the membership of the group to cover the entire institution, and ensure proper vetting (see item b) [unresolved]

Additional questions

  • How does portfolio team’s project review work connect with the budget planning process? [unresolved]
  • Frequency of meeting (suggested bi-weekly)? [unresolved]

 

Action Items

 

  • Clarification and decision on unresolved questions, especially whether the discussed Portfolio team is a distinct group or whether there is clear overlap of ACTT and Portfolio group purpose [Mike and Jon – Portfolio Team Conveners]