Summary from iLevel Advisory Meeting, April 2, 2003
Apr 21 2003
Members Present: Maureen Anthony, Elaine Bell, Tony Drommi, Dina Dubuis, Tom Jeffrey, George Libbey, Chris Odionu, Marcel O’Gorman, Mark Ottenbreit, Lisa Rood, Sarah Swart, Michael Witkowski, Emmy Yousey.
1) Summer Institute
Plans for the Summer Institute are moving along very well. The Institute sponsors have selected 12 faculty members to attend the institute. Dick Hebdige has confirmed that he is available for the keynote on May 12. The decision was made to go with Dell laptops, hopefully leased, as an ongoing initiative to standardize hardware at the University.
2) Mini-grant update
Only one application remained to be reviewed. All mini-grants have been disbursed for Year 3 of the grant.
3) iSmart classroom updates
We discussed the issue of spending the allocated funding on iSmart rooms in Year 3, given that Ford Life Science renovations are still up in the air. One possibility to is to move a Year 4 projcect, Psychology iSmart room, to this year. The Psych Dept. seems committed to investing that money in Reno Hall. It is best to wait until decisions about Reno are absolutely firm before and final decisions about iSmart implementation can happen.
ILevel is going to work hard to integrate FLS iSmart funds into funds already dedicated toward the renovation of that building. One possibility is to create a “smart corridor” in the main floor wing of the building. This would include the installation of a high-tech smart classroom in FLS 115. The goal is to create a permanent, well-designed, and functional room that would also serve as a showcase of iLevel initiatives.
4) Level II Credentials
Tony Drommi and Mike Witkowski have joined Marcel O’Gorman in an ad hoc committee on the Level II Credential. This committee determined that perhaps the most viable solution in developing this credential is to identify a course or series of courses in each discipline that would insure the discipline-specific IT proficiency of students. Tony and Mike have gone through course catalogs so that we can approach each Dept. Chair with recommendations when we introduce the concept of the Level II Credential.
There is still a question of incentive for students. What does this Credential get them and does it matter? Is this simply an IT “quality control” initiative to insure the proficiency of students? Emmy Yousey noted that students should definitely get something concrete out of this, at least some sort of award.
Problems with this Level II Model: How many courses per discipline? Who will retrieve data and disburse Level II Credentials? How do we make this a permanent part of each participating department’s curriculum? How do we legitimize this credential (and Level I) within greater University apparatus?
Opportunities created by this Level II Model:
The Level II Credential could indicate to all disciplines that their students need discipline-specific IT proficiency to compete in the workforce. Could lead to the creation of new, “needed” (not frivolous) courses; example: Psychology. Chris Panyard has indicated Psych’s need for a “Psych. E-Tools” course.
The following are the Objectives of the Level I and Level II Credentials:
End of Year 3: 20% of all Depts. offer Level II Credential; 20% of students in THOSE DEPTS. Earn Level II; 60% of undergrads earn Level I
End of Year 4: 40% of all Depts. offer Level II Credential; 35% of students in THOSE DEPTS earn Level II; 60% of undergrads earn Level I
We may be able to achieve these objectives by simply identifying departments that have, de facto, a Level II sort of credential (e.g., Computer Science, CIS, Biology, E-Crit, Nursing, etc.)
The next major initiative that iLevel must tackle is the Student Digital Portfolio concept outlined in the grant. Marcel will work with Co-Op to try to integrate a digital portfolio into their classes. Tom Jeffrey noted that it would be good to have these portfolios archived on the iLevel site, where students would be allocated space that would last for up to 4 years after graduation. Emmy Yousey noted that the Tech Mentors are developing digital portfolio instruction with students. Hopefully we can coordinate all of these efforts.