Category Archives: Core Team

Notes for Core Team October 18, 2016

Moodle Archiving

  • No courses using Moodle sites after December.
  • Q: What form does the Moodle archive need to take?
    • A: Read-only
  • Q: How long do we need to keep the sites?
    • Policy says 2 years, until December 2018
  • Q: Can Segue decommissioning be used as a model?
    • Q: Can Moodle sites be exported in a usable format?
      • A: They can be exported as .mbz files, we may be able to extract files and pages from them.
    • Q: Is that enough?
      • Review process may need to see student data, this is stripped on an import into Canvas
    • A: Segue model is probably not viable
  • Q: What hosting solutions are possible?
    • Local – considerations are that it needs to be set up the same way as the R-L hosted version. Adam will follow up.
    • Keep at R-L for a reduced cost. Joe will follow up.
    • MiddCreate – concern is the Moodle instance may be too big. Sean will follow up.
  • Q: How long do we have before an archive solution needs to be in place?
    • A: August 2017
  • Other considerations
    • Leng course content. Sean will follow up.
    • Chinese Placement Exam. ODL is working with the Chinese School to use the UNC hosted version of the adaptive placement exam for the near term.
  • This is the start of the conversation, please be prepared to discuss in the future.


ACI (Academic Cyberinfrastructure Inventory)

  • Doreen has been adding inventory items (THANK YOU!!!). She is currently working on the items in the ITS Service Catalog.
  • Joe will present the inventory at an all-Library meeting. Please share with people you feel are interested in the inventory, we would like to know how it can be useful. We also need to update the information and make additions.
  • Most of the dependencies are in the ITS list, these will be added.
    • Q: Should dependencies be a cascading or a flat list?
      • A: TBD these are the kinds of questions and discussions we want to have.
  • Needs taxonomy definitions.
  • Extended Team will be asked to review items from their area on a 2-4 times per year. The ACTT will update based on the progress of our evaluations.
  • Inventory is available at or


The Team sorted values collected in Padlet, then each member summarized the values in a category. The results are below.


Collaborative Partnerships

We engage in our work with Middlebury community partners, colleagues, and amongst ourselves with a collaborative spirit and a commitment to fostering and supporting agency, empathy, and curiosity on all sides.

Critical Thinking

We approach our work from a critical lens, taking into consideration the technical, administrative, as well as pedagogical sides of each recommendation to ensure that solutions truly address underlying needs.


We strive to serve all our constituents equitably across campuses. This necessitates intentional and mindful communication internally, as well as with the parties represented/impacted by our recommendations and decisions.


We lead and participate in complex evaluations, balancing the current needs of the institution with the need to change and innovate. We encourage exploration of what is possible, and inspire others to do the same.

Openness & Growth

We are open to new ideas, suggestions, and ways of doing things; continually inquiring and learning as individuals and a team.


ACTT activities are accessible, discoverable and visible to the Middlebury community. Secrecy is utilized as little as necessary.

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.


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



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.

Notes for Core Team Septembr 13, 2016

Google Hangout

  • Took some time to get the meeting going, meeting was not showing up in some people’s Hangout dashboard
  • Sean showed Joe how to park a Hangout url, we will use that from now on

Canvas LTI Governance

  • Joe shared Bill K’s feedback with the rest of the ACTT
  • Requests should be submitted to ATG/DLC/ODL by faculty, requests should be shared with the ACTT
  • ATG/DLC/ODL members will evaluate the LTI
    • Test installation
    • Confirm utility with requestor
    • Check use of student data by the LTI
    • Complete the SaaS if necessary.
  • ACTT will confirm completion of the evaluation, and will evaluate for the sub-account and platform levels.
  • A flowchart of the process is available here.
  • Q: Can we create a list of LTIs and where they are in the process?
    • A: yes. Let’s start with a spreadsheet, then see if that is adequate
  • Q: Do we know what LTIs have been installed already?
    • A: yes. Canvas can export an LTI report. Joe will run the report and share it.
  • Attendance tool was disabled, it creates conflicts with the gradebook. We’ll collect requests, examine the feature, and maybe address the conflict with education for the following semester.

Web Conferencing/Adobe Connect Replacement

  • Bob, Sean and Joe met with Petar and Mack to discuss a plan for looking at 4 services in a short amount of time. The hope is we can either eliminate a few, or identify one that is noticeably better than the others.
  • In one meeting the Extended Team and other guests will spend 10-15 minutes in each services, test features, then jump to the next service.
  • The invitation will be shared on the All Things Digital Slack channel, as well
  • Interested faculty can join via invitation.
  • Plan is to do this at the Extended Team meeting on October 4th.
  • Bob, Sean, Petar, Mack and Joe will design a detailed plan on October 3rd, Joe will share out with the meeting invitation.
  • We will have an open In-progress Project meeting on October 11th to discuss the results.

Notes for Core Team May 18, 2016


No decision yet on Canvas. LS pilot is up and going with user/group provisioning via the Course Hub.

Basic Canvas overviews will need to be added to Language School orientations.

Discussion of location for Midd-created documentation about Canvas should live. ? Library and ITS wiki?


Joe has been trying out Palladio and Google Fusion Tables for visualizing the data. Mixed results, no tools totally satisfactory yet. Bob will put Joe in touch with META Lab who may have some suggestions around visualization.

What questions come to mind looking at the inventory data?

  • How many tools are in the life-cycle stage bucket compared to the total number of tools? Is this sustainable?
  • What criteria would trigger an evaluation? Can this be a score?
  • Agreement renewals
  • Budget
  • Utilization
  • Changes in the environment
  • New pedagogies and practices
  • New programs


The next large goal is to make 1/3/5 projections for items in the inventory so that the administration & community at large has some idea of where we see this inventory shifting.

Assignment for the next meeting: Look at the Classification 2D Array and pick an intersection. Come up with a set of questions that will help us make projections for 1, 3, 5 years out.

Notes for Core Team March 29, 2016

[RE] Introductions

We all knew each other from the CTT, so this was a chance to reaffirm a commitment to looking at technologies and the services around them that make them successful. The re-boot to the ACTT structure provides definition and focus, while sticking to the mission to evaluate and recommend technology services and innovations for teaching, learning and research.

Review Charge and Process

We reviewed the slides at go/delta, paying attention to the responsibilities of the various Team members. The Extended Team is made up of experts, Program Teams, and Project Teams.

Program Teams

The Middlebury Institute of International Studies is in the process of forming a Team, similar to the CTT, that will focus on cyberinfrastructure conversations pertaining to Monterey. They will have their own sponsorship (Amy McGill) and leadership (Bob Cole), set their own agenda topics, and determine how they will communicate together. Bob and Amy will share information between the MIIS Team and the ACTT.

Other Program Teams may develop in the future. MIIS has a head start, the DLC is a good hub for these conversations.

Project Teams

Small Project Teams carry out the charge of the evaluation. Their activities may include gathering requirements, identifying solutions, contacting vendors, and starting drafts of recommendations. These Teams will share information with the Extended Team, this allows the Project Teams to be nimble while still gaining a variety of perspectives. The ACTT Core Team is responsible for the final proposals.

Academic Cyberinfrastructure

We agreed on the importance of looking at the practices and people associated with technologies. Joe presented a short definition of cyberinfrastructure, others provided their own understanding. The Core Team is currently working on a shared definition that will help describe what we do. Joe will start share his definition, others will contribute.


Make Decisions About Communication

We decided an email group and slack channel, Joe will make these happen.

We have started building a schedule of meetings.

Plan Open Kick-Off for April 5th

Joe will present the slides avalable at Everyone will provide their own input. MIIS will have a number of people who are interested in their Program Team attend.

Set Agendas for Future Meetings

Future topics include video streaming, RStudio, and the Academic Cyberinfrastructure Inventory. There is also an interest in learning about GoogleAppsforEdu and One Drive, especially knowing what will be available for the fall. Joe will confirm presenters, then we will share the topics and dates as far out in advance as we can.