eLearning Committee Meeting Minutes Date: Wednesday, November 4, 2015 Time: 8:30 AM – 10:00 AM Location: University Hall, Room 450 Present: Jason Green, Deb Brandenburg, Eugene Rutz, Vernon Jackson, Paul Foster, Pat Reid, Julie Breen, Bill Nicholson, Joni Torsella, Dani Peterson, Don Hodges, Josh Heinrich, Kyle Sliney, Sue Trakas, Susana Luzuriaga, Taylor Gary, Bryan Smith, Tina Meagher, Mel Clark, Marie Knecht, Mike Mitchum, Chris Edwards, Dave Rathbun, Kent Meloy, Don Hodges, Dawn Clineman Apologies: Michelle Conda, Warren Huff, Emanuel Lewis, Pam Rankey, Matt Rota, Leslie Schick, Sarah Schroeder, BJ Zirger, Ruth Benander, Rafael Castaneda 1. Review and Approve Minutes (Chris Edwards)

a. Eugene Rutz motioned to approve the October meeting minutes. Pat Reid seconded the motion. The committee unanimously approved the minutes as written.

2. New eLearning Champion Format (Marie Knecht)

a. The Office of the Provost is sponsoring a bi-weekly champion. b. Nominees must be at rank of instructor or higher prior to submission. c. Champions will be awarded a $250 honorarium beginning January 4,

2016. i. Honorarium will appear on UC payroll check and is taxable.

d. Nominations will be accepted on a rolling basis. e. Nominations are reviewed by a selection committee comprised of the

CEeL, CET&L, and faculty reps. f. Champions are not limited to Canopy tool users only but that is focus. g. Winners will be asked to develop KB articles or video/in-person

interviews to promote awareness about the tool they use. h. Other eLearning champions will be nominated who are not faculty

and will not receive an award from Office of Provost. i. Marie will follow up to see if there are other option for the award –

does it have to be in the form of an honorarium?

3. ID/P Subcommittee Update – Training (Issue Action Form attached) (Pat Reid)

eLearning Committee Committee Chair Chris Edwards AVP, eLearning, UCIT edwardcp@ucmail.uc.edu (513) 558-5233 Committee Co-Chair Joni Torsella Assoc. Professor, CEAS torselja@ucmail.uc.edu (513) 556-1224 Committee Members Deb Brandenburg Julie Breen Melody Clark Dawn Clineman Michelle Conda Paul Foster Don Hodges Warren Huff Emanuel Lewis Delmer (Bill) Nicholson Pam Rankey Dave Rathbun Pat Reid Matt Rota Eugene Rutz Leslie Schick Sara Schroeder Bryan Smith BJ Zirger Ex Officio Members Ruth Benander Rafael Castaneda Jason Green Vernon Jackson Susana Luzuriaga Kent Meloy Mike Mitchum Students TBD (U) TBD (G) Meeting Schedule: The committee meets the first Wednesday of the month: December 2, 2015 January 6, 2016 February 3, 2016

a. Pat’s team is hiring two GA students to help with developing training materials. One will be technical writer.

b. CEeL team brainstormed appropriate training resources for WebEx and will send their recommendations to the ID/P subcommittee for input.

c. A Box account is created and IDs are uploading existing training materials per service. d. KB articles will be developed for every service, one for faculty/staff, and one for students. e. Pat will provide monthly updates from the ID/P subcommittee on training. f. Marie will develop a marketing campaign to reintroduce the KB when more training materials

are available. g. The ID/P subcommittee is inviting colleges without IDs to elect one or two members to attend

meetings to provide input.

4. Bb Privileged Access for Athletics (Issue Action Form attached) (Paul) a. The goal for observer accounts in Bb is to provide early intervention with student athletes. b. Observers will see course content and student grades (not the grade center) but not

communication areas in Bb. c. Instructors have the ability to turn off observers accounts at course level or content area. d. Paul presented the observer role issue-action form to LMS subcommittee in their meeting on

11/3/2015. i. Some members have reservations.

ii. Observer role feels like “big brother”. iii. Observers appear as student in the course. iv. Some faculty prefer direct communication with advisors rather than have observer role

but Athletics has had problems with delays in faculty response. v. Instructors have concerns about observers having access to course materials.

vi. Need to implement controls: 1. Advise instructors of observer in the course. 2. Instructors can restrict certain areas from observers. 3. Everything is logged in Bb and logs will be reviewed to ensure advisors don’t

share inappropriate information with advisees. e. Observer role has some overlap with Starfish, but Starfish does not give advisors access to Bb.

i. Observer role is more proactive, allows advisors to see what and when assignments are due.

ii. Starfish is reactive and raises red flag when assignments were not completed. f. Paul suggests a pilot for observer role start in spring semester 2016.

i. Six Athletics academic advisors need to be granted observer role for ~ 500 students. ii. Technical solution must be manageable by Bb sysadmins.

g. When it is implemented, A4L will provide reports for advisors in Athletics in addition to observer role.

h. Paul shared a document that details FERPA information. i. All students will need to sign a permission form for observer role to access their courses. j. Chris and Joe presented to the Athletic Advisory Council. k. Chris and Joe will present the issue of observer role for advisors to Faculty Senate IT and IT

Council. l. UC has experience with observer roles from Archdiocese hosting. m. Chris motioned the committee to endorse an observer role spring pilot, with an-opt in

process, review the process at end of spring semester, and have external audit. Audit information will be shared with the eLearning Committee and Faculty Senate.

i. Committee unanimously approved the motion.

5. Coordination of Online Course Offerings (see attached Issue Action Form) (Mel Clark)

a. Concerns are with individual online courses not programs. b. Melody motioned the committee to endorse coordination of online courses and forward the

issue to the appropriate Provostal area for further consideration and/or appropriate action. i. Motion was passed with unanimous approval.

6. Final Membership Review (Chris & Joni)

a. What is process to replace members at end of term? Process will be determined. b. Future Outlook meeting invitations will be based on membership.

i. Subcommittee chairs and managers should invite subject matter experts and subcommittee members to eLearning Committee meetings when appropriate.

c. Committee discussed voting member issue. i. Subcommittee co-chair votes should represent the subcommittee, not the co-chair’s

personal viewpoint. d. Committee agreed that both subcommittee co-chairs will be voting members. e. Co-chair terms should align with subcommittee charters. f. Jane will make changes to spreadsheet and send it to everyone.

7. New Video Subcommittee

a. Paul will submit an issue-action form for the next meeting to propose that a video subcommittee be formed to review and address issues with the various enterprise level video tools.

8. Review Subcommittee Charters (see attached) a. Need to specify in all charters that one permanent co-chair must be from CEeL. b. Analytics subcommittee is still adding members and working on the charter. c. All committees need to develop metrics for measuring goals and include them in charters. d. Subcommittees should discuss and determine membership terms, including at-large co-chair.

i. eLearning Committee co-chair terms will be based on subcommittee recommendations.

9. Meeting Adjournment a. Chris thanked the committee for their attendance and productive discussion. The meeting

adjourned at 10:05 AM.

ELEARNING COMMITTEE ISSUE/ACTION FORM (REVISED 11/3/15)

AGENDA ITEM: COORDINATION OF ONLINE COURSE OFFERINGS INITIATOR: ONLINE LEARNING SUB-COMMITTEE Check Here if Action Item ___X___ Check Here if Discussion Item _______ Date of Meeting: ______11/4/15__________ Estimated Time Needed @ Meeting ___10 min____

I. ISSUE/QUESTION/PROBLEM: Lack of university policy or strategy around coordination of online course offerings (as opposed to programs)

II. BACKGROUND DATA: Academic units maintain autonomy for course/program offerings, regardless of mode of delivery. In the f2f environment, duplication of course offerings across colleges/campuses may not typically be a concern, as campuses generally appeal to specific geographic base or cohort of students, etc. In the online environment, however, this rational for duplicate offerings across campuses is not clear, as any number of audiences can be served, regardless of geographic location. For example, in fall semester 43 students were enrolled in two online sections of POL1010 at one UC regional campus: 10 A&S; 4 CECH; 6 UCBA; 1 CCM; 1 CEAS; 11 CAHS; and 10 CLMNT. Lack of coordination among campuses may mean that students do not have predictable access to online offerings. The lack of alignment has been noted as a concern by some faculty/department heads who have questioned the impact on resources when offerings are redundant. The need for alignment of online course offerings was also acknowledged in the work of the Faculty Senate DL and Online Learning Task Force Recommendations/Report.

III. ACTION OPTIONS AVAILABLE:

Option A. A group convened by the Provost’s Office coordinate scheduling of online courses across colleges/campuses on an annual basis.

Option B. Recommend that enrollments be restricted to students associated with the college offering the course

Option C. Do nothing

IV. RECOMMENDED OPTION WITH RATIONALE AND IMPLICATIONS: It is recommended that the appropriate Provostal area convene cross-college curriculum conversations (such as occurred in semester conversion) in order to coordinate scheduling of individual online courses across campuses/colleges, on an annual basis, to ensure courses are available in a rational and predictable way, for students and for academic planning.

V. DISPOSITION (WHO DOES WHAT, WHEN) INCLUDING TIME FRAME: It is recognized that the eLearning technology organization is not the appropriate oversight/governance structure to take this on/lead this initiative. However, is willing to participate as needed.

VI. MOTION: MELODY CLARK PUT FORTH THE FOLLOWING MOTION: THE ELEARNING GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE ENDORSES THE RECOMMENDATION AND FORWARD TO THE APPROPRIATE PROVOSTAL AREA FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION AND/OR APPROPRIATE ACTION. THE COMMITTEE UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE MOTION.

ELEARNING COMMITTEE ISSUE/ACTION FORM

AGENDA ITEM: _APPROVE BB ACCESS FOR ATHLETICS ADVISORS INITIATOR: __PAUL FOSTER/JOE LUCKEY____ Check Here if Action Item ___X__ Check Here if Discussion Item _______ Date of Meeting: ____11/4/2015_______________ Estimated Time Needed @ Meeting _10 mins____

I. ISSUE/QUESTION/PROBLEM: The academic advisors in Athletics are charged with ensuring that student athletes meet all of their academic requirements in accordance with NCAA regulations, UC policies, and local UC Athletics department rules. To fulfill this responsibility, the academic advisors frequently and proactively contact each athlete’s instructors to identify what academic work a student must complete and the associated due dates for each assignment. This is a somewhat inefficient process in that it requires an instructor to receive and respond to each inquiry from an advisor.

II. BACKGROUND DATA: The academic advisors in Athletics have a legitimate educational interest in obtaining information about the students in their charge. Further, each student athlete signs an appropriate release form that grants the academic advisors permission to access their academic records. Rather than requiring each advisor to contact every student’s instructors individually, there exists functionality in Blackboard Learn, called the Observer account, which will allow academic advisors to shadow individual students. Observer accounts are often used in K-12 schools to afford parents the ability to see a child’s assignments, due dates, grades, etc. By default, Observer accounts are able to see most content areas in a Blackboard course, with the exception of some of the communication tools. Instructors retain the right to override the default settings and prevent Observer accounts (i.e., the academic advisors in Athletics) from seeing specific areas in a Blackboard course. In addition to the Observer role in Blackboard Learn, Blackboard’s Analytics for Learn (A4L) product also has the ability to make certain performance dashboards available to academic advisors that provide insight about a student’s overall performance in their Blackboard courses.

III. ACTION OPTIONS AVAILABLE:

Option A.

Option B.

Option C.

IV. RECOMMENDED OPTION WITH RATIONALE AND IMPLICATIONS:

The Center for Excellence in eLearning would like to partner with the academic advisors in Athletics to pilot test the use of Observer accounts to make more efficient the process of gathering data about a student’s progress in their classes. When the A4L product is implemented at UC (estimated in spring semester), the Center and Athletics would also like to pilot test the use of the dashboards in that product to provide greater insight into a student’s performance in their classes. Given that the academic advisors in Athletics already have a legitimate educational interest here, the use of Observer accounts and dashboards is appropriate.

V. DISPOSITION (WHO DOES WHAT, WHEN) INCLUDING TIME FRAME:

VI. MOTION: Chris Edwards motioned the committee to endorse an observer role spring pilot, with an opt-in process, review the process at end of spring semester, and have external audit. Audit information will be shared with the eLearning Committee and Faculty Senate. Committee unanimously approved the motion.

2ND BY (MEMBER MAY BE IDENTIFIED AT THE MEETING): _____________________________________ (Submit to Jane Haniefy, combsjl@ucmail.uc.edu by 5 p.m. the Wednesday before the meeting.)

FERPA Reference Sheet for Office Personnel

REGISTRAR’S OFFICE

University of Cincinnati P.O. Box 210060, Cincinnati, OH 45221-0060

Telephone: 513-556-9900; E-mail: registrar.info@uc.edu

The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974, as Amended (FERPA) requires institutions accepting

federal monies to protect the privacy of student information. In addition, FERPA affords students the right to

review their education records, to request correction of inaccurate records, and to limit information disclosure

from those records. An institution’s failure to comply with FERPA may result in the Department of Education’s

withdrawal of federal funds.

All UC personnel are obliged to comply with FERPA regulations.

As a University student service provider, you need to know the difference between

Directory Information and Personally Identifiable Information or Education Records:

Persons who may be provided access to personally identifiable information or education records without the

student’s prior written consent (not a comprehensive list):

University Personnel with “legitimate educational interest” (consult the Registrar’s Office)

Certain government officials (refer to the Registrar’s Office)

In compliance with a judicial order or subpoena (refer such to the General Counsel’s Office)

Respondents to a health or safety emergency (first contact Registrar’s Office and University Police)

In all cases, refer callers to the Registrar’s Office. This office will review the requestor’s authorization

documents, consult the instructor and other offices as necessary, and release information as appropriate.

Directory Information These items may be disclosed, unless the

student has placed a “block” on Directory

Information release. Check UniverSIS or

consult the Registrar’s Office.

Name

Student Identifier (non-SSN)

Current mailing address

Current telephone number

UC e-mail address

College

Class

Major

Dates of attendance

Enrollment status (full/part-time)

Degrees/honors/awards received

Personally Identifiable Information

(any identifying data other than “Directory

Information”)

Including, but not limited to:

Social Security Number

Date of birth

Residency status

Gender/race/ethnicity

Religious preference

Education Records Including, but not limited to:

Class schedule

Grades/GPA and academic standing

Test scores

Academic transcripts

Student Requests for Records Information

Prior to discussing personally identifiable information or education records with a student, you are

required to make a “reasonable” effort to confirm the student’s identity.

When working with the student in-person, require that the student first present photo-identification.

If contacted by telephone, require the student to correctly provide more than one piece of identifying

information (e.g., DOB, address, major, classes currently enrolled).

Regarding e-mail, the Department of Education’s Family Policy Compliance Office (which interprets

FERPA) recommends that you avoid including personally identifiable information (e.g., the Social

Security Number) or specific education records. That office contends that despite the issuance of a student

e-mail account such as UC Connect, institutions cannot be absolutely certain that the student in fact is the

receiving party.

The following is a list of information items that are not considered educational records and therefore are

not subject to a student’s request for review:

o Law-enforcement records, medical treatment records, alumni records;

o Records maintained exclusively for individuals in their capacity as employees. Records of those who

are employed as a result of their status as students (i.e., work-study, student workers, etc.), however,

are considered educational records;

o Sole-source/Sole-possession documents: these are notes (memory joggers—not grade or GPA related)

created and maintained by you, meant for your personal use exclusively.

So long as no one other than you ever reads these notes they remain private and are not subject to

FERPA. If you share them with another person, regardless of the reason, these notes no longer are

considered “sole source.” They become part of the student’s educational record and are subject to

disclosure under FERPA.

Parent Requests for Student Records

FERPA rights transfer to the student at age 18 or once he or she attends a post-secondary institution,

regardless of age.

Parents or legal guardians may obtain their student’s education records, at the discretion of the institution,

only if: a) they can establish that the student is a financial dependent; or b) by obtaining the student’s

written and signed consent.

The student is considered “financially dependent” if either parent or the legal guardian claimed the student

upon his or her most recent federal income tax return.

All parent requests should be referred to the Registrar’s Office for review. Prior to reaching a release

determination, the Registrar’s Office will require that the parent(s) or legal guardian provide a copy of the

filed tax return or the student’s written/signed consent.

Records Access by University Personnel

As University personnel, you may be allowed access to a student’s educational records if you can establish

legitimate educational interest for the request — meaning that you need the information to fulfill a specific

UC-assigned professional responsibility.

Office of the Registrar Department of Enrollment Management Office of the Senior Vice President and Provost

Last updated: 3/1/2013

For More Information or a FERPA Consult

Douglas K. Burgess, Ph.D.

Assistant Vice President & University Registrar

Phone: 513-556-9930

E-mail: Douglas.Burgess@uc.edu

ELEARNING COMMITTEE ISSUE/ACTION FORM

AGENDA ITEM: ___TRAINING RESOURCES UPDATE______ INITIATOR: _______PAT REID________________ Check Here if Action Item ______ Check Here if Discussion Item __X____ Date of Meeting: _____________________ Estimated Time Needed @ Meeting ____5 minutes_____

I. ISSUE/QUESTION/PROBLEM: Action taken: the ID/P subcommittee discussed the training and resources requirements and agreed that the first tool to work on will be WebEx. Further, we identified the work flow as:

1. Subcommittee will identify tool priority (which tool first, second, etc.) 2. CEeL will brainstorm tool training requirements and present to the subcommittee 3. Subcommittee will review and revise requirements and prioritize topics 4. Subcommittee members will add any resources they currently have to Box 5. CEeL will develop/revise resources based on priority

CEeL has completed initial brainstormed resource requirements for WebEx and will review/revise and present to the subcommittee before the next subcommittee meeting. This support suite will focus on a variety of delivery methods, focusing especially on just-in-time and mobile options, including but not limited to: 1. Help guides 2. Recorded webinars 3. Simulations (Storyline or other) 4. Video demonstrations

II. BACKGROUND DATA: At the last governance committee meeting, the following resolution was passed: The eLearning Organization, in partnership with the Instructional Design/Pedagogy Subcommittee, will develop a plan to be implemented by spring semester 2016 that will focus on providing training and support resources for the UC community around the enterprise level tools, e.g., Blackboard, Echo360, Kaltura, WebEx, Respondus Monitor, etc.

III. ACTION OPTIONS AVAILABLE:

Option A.

Option B.

Option C.

IV. RECOMMENDED OPTION WITH RATIONALE AND IMPLICATIONS: CEeEL will begin by Spring semester to implement this new priority and begin to provide these training and support resources to the UC Community.

V. DISPOSITION (WHO DOES WHAT, WHEN) INCLUDING TIME FRAME: 1. Subcommittee will identify tool priority (which tool first, second, etc.) – Completed 10/23 2. CEeL will brainstorm tool training requirements and present to the subcommittee - Initiated 3. Subcommittee will review and revise requirements and prioritize topics – 11/20 4. Subcommittee members will add any resources they currently have to Box - 11/20 5. CEeL will develop/revise resources based on priority – TBD based on volume, priority, and

resourcing VI. MOTION:

2ND BY (MEMBER MAY BE IDENTIFIED AT THE MEETING): _____________________________________ (Submit to Jane Haniefy, combsjl@ucmail.uc.edu by 5 p.m. the Wednesday before the meeting.)

College/Unit Voting Member Term College/Unit Voting Member Term

Co-chairs (2) Accessibility Co-chairsChris Edwards eLearning Yes Permanent Member Dave Rathbun eLearning CEeL Technology Yes Permanent MemberJoni Torsella CEAS Yes 9/2015 - 9/2017 Sarah Schroeder CECH Yes 9/2015 - 9/2016

IT Reps (2) Analytics Co-chairsBJ Zirger LCoB Yes 9/2015 - 9/2017 Paul Foster eLearning Analytics/CEeL Technology Yes Permanent MemberDon Hodges CAHS Yes 9/2015 - 9/2016 Susana Luzuriaga Provost - IR Yes 9/2015 - 9/2017

Students (2) ID/P Co-chairsUndergraduate Student Rep TBD Yes One Year Term Pat Reid eLearning CEeL Design/CET&L Yes Permanent MemberGraduate Student Rep TBD Yes One Year Term TBD Yes Two Year Term

Admin/Unit (5) Online Learning Co-chairsEmanuel Lewis Learning Support Yes Permanent Member Melody Clark eLearning Distance Learning Yes Permanent MemberPam Rankey Blue Ash Yes 9/2015 - 9/2017 Eugene Rutz CEAS Yes **No Term LimitLeslie Schick CoM/UCL Yes 9/2015 - 9/2016

Bryan Smith CET&L Yes Permanent Member LMS Co-chairsSue Trakas Clermont-Business Division Yes 9/2015 - 9/2016 Deb Brandenburg eLearning CEeL Technology Yes Permanent Member

Don Hodges CAHS Yes **No Term Limit

Faculty & Faculty Sentate Appointments (3)Warren Huff A&S Yes 9/2015 - 9/2016

Bill Nicholson Clermont Yes 9/2015 - 9/2016Subject Matter Experts

(Regular Guests)College/Unit Voting Member

Michelle Conda CCM Yes 9/2015 - 9/2016 Brenda Frankenhoff eLearning Analytics NoElicia Flom eLearning CEeL Design No

IDs (3) Taylor Gary Learning Support NoMatt Rota CoN Yes 9/2015 - 9/2016 Josh Heinrich eLearning CEeL Design NoJulie Breen CECH Yes 9/2015 - 9/2016 Ben Hutchison eLearning CEeL Creative NoDawn Clineman CAHS Yes 9/2015 - 9/2016 Marie Knecht IT@UC PIO No

Joey Lyon Learning Support No

Ex Officio (8) Kuyler McComas eLearning CEeL Design NoKent Meloy eLearning CEeL Creative No Permanent Member Tina Meagher eLearning CEeL Technology NoMike Mitchum CEeL Technical Team Lead No Permanent Member Kyle Sliney eLearning CEeL Creative NoVernon Jackson IT@UC No Permanent Member Janet Staderman eLearning Distance Learning NoRafael Castaneda UCRI - UC2U No Permanent Member Various Subcommittee MemberVarious NoJason Green A&F Internal Audit No Permanent MemberRuth Benander Blue Ash No *

*NOTE: Role ends when ePorfolio Task Force completes its work.

eLearning Committee Charter Members eLearning Subcommittee Co-chairs

**NOTE: Appointments do not carry term limits to ensure adequate operational expertise, but can be replaced by the AVP due to attrition, reassignment, or voluntary resignation from the committee.

Instructional Design/Pedagogy (ID/P) Governance

Subcommittee Charge

Committee Charge: The subcommittee will work in partnership with other groups on campus to be advocates for students and faculty by making recommendations regarding course design and technology and how they affect the experience eLearning at UC. Goals: The work of the subcommittee will include:

• Reviewing and making faculty support recommendations regarding enterprise eLearning technologies in the context of instructional design best practices and pedagogical application of these technologies

• Identifying student concerns regarding eLearning use thru surveys, focus groups, and/or other engagement strategies as needed

• Identifying faculty concerns regarding eLearning use thru surveys, focus groups, and/or other engagement strategies as needed

• Sharing and supporting unit level initiatives for Quality Matters professional development and course review

• Approving University generic eLearning course template(s) and recommending best practices

• Informing faculty about policy and processes to ensure compliance and accessibility (such as Copyright, Fair Use, TEACH Act, ADA 504/508, FERPA, HIPPAA, etc...).

Committee Composition: Co-Chairs(2): Nominated and Approved by the eLearning Committee

• One Co-Chair from the central CEeL Design Unit • One Co-Chair, Faculty Member with significant eLearning Background

Members: • At least one representative from each Instructional Design unit and the

CEeL Design team • Colleges without Instructional Design staff can nominate a representative

of their college. • The Director of Learning Technology Support. • Faculty: (3) Recommended by Academic Units and agreed to by the

committee

Membership Roles and Responsibilities: The Co-Chairs will be responsible for:

• Scheduling and maintaining regular meetings • Keeping minutes • Writing reports and recommendations • Submitting Action Items to the eLearning Committee

• Present members may vote, including proxies.

Meetings: Meetings will be held bi-monthly or as necessary.

Learning Management System (LMS) Subcommittee Charter

LMS Subcommittee Mission Statement

The mission of the Learning Management System (LMS) Subcommittee is to review and establish policies and practices regarding support, maintenance, upgrades, and communication for UC’s LMS. This subcommittee will review and validate new releases and system extensions to make recommendations to the eLearning Committee (and potentially the IT Council) about what updates should be installed and when. This subcommittee will also establish a yearly calendar for when course shells are to be created; enrollments are to be added or disabled; scheduled maintenance will occur; and when building blocks need to be installed or updated.

Annual Subcommittee Goals

The LMS subcommittee will establish annual goals specifying its principal work and focus areas for the academic year:

• Review and establish policies and practices regarding how UC’s LMS is managed. • Review new software releases and system extensions to make recommendations to the eLearning

Committee (and potentially the IT Council) about what software should be installed on the LMS • Recommend the timing for any installation. • Establish an calendar of dates for when course shells are to be created, and when faculty/student

enrollments are to be added or disabled • Establish an annual calendar of dates for when scheduled maintenance will be performed on the LMS

(including the installation of building blocks) • For 2015-2016, they will focus on investigating current academic policies and make a

recommendation to the eLearning Committee on a course retention policy for the Blackboard LMS.

Committee Composition, Appointments, and Term Limits

• Co-Chairs (2) - nominated and approved by the eLearning Committee

o 1 co-chair from the central IT unit

o 1 co-chair from an academic/administrative unit These appointments do not carry term limits to ensure adequate operational

expertise, but can be replaced by the AVP due to attrition, reassignment, or voluntary resignation from the committee.

• IT personnel (3) – nominated by AVP o 1 from CEeL o 1 from Bb sysadmin team o 1 from central IT

These appointments do not carry term limits to ensure adequate operational expertise, but can be replaced by the AVP due to attrition, reassignment, or voluntary resignation from the committee.

• Academic faculty (4) – appointed/elected by Faculty Senate serve an initial two-year term with the option for an additional year renewal for a

maximum of 3 years no more than one faculty per college

• Students (2) – nominated by student government o 1 undergraduate o 1 graduate

serve an initial two-year term with the option for an additional year renewal for a maximum of 3 years

Membership Roles and Responsibilities

The co-chairs will schedule the committee meetings and communicate meeting information with members. They will prepare agendas, convene meetings, call for votes on requests submitted through TeamDynamix, and submit Issue/Action forms to the eLearning Committee as required. Meeting notes will be shared under the LMS Subcommittee folder on SharePoint.

Voting members are required to attend all regularly scheduled meetings. Attendance is required in order to participate on the LMS subcommittee as voting members on how the LMS will be managed. Therefore, meetings will be scheduled at the beginning of the academic year and will utilize web conferencing to help facilitate member attendance. If there is a work-related conflict, it is expected that members will provide at least 24 hour notices and they will have the option to send a representative on their behalf. However, proxy representatives are not voting members. Members with more than 2 non-work related absences per academic year and/or who do not provide advanced notice, may be requested to resign from the committee. If a voting member will be absent for an extended period, they can work with the co-chairs to assign a voting proxy.

LMS subcommittee meetings are open to advisers, subject matter experts and additional IT personnel; however, they are not voting members.

Meetings

The LMS subcommittee meets once per month (or as required, depending on pressing matters) in order to discuss and/or or vote on submitted requests at the call of the subcommittee co-chairs. Meeting dates and times should be specified a year in advance.

Please Note: In order to accommodate member faculty teaching schedules, meeting times may need to be adjusted at the beginning of each semester.

Online Learning (OL) Subcommittee Charter

Mission Statement

The Online Learning (OL) Subcommittee will work in partnership with other key groups across campus in efforts to recommend policies and practices to support the unique aspects and approaches of wholly online learning. The work of the subcommittee will include input and guidance on procedures for state authorization; defining UC’s approach to emerging technologies and strategies in online learning; ensuring adequate development opportunities for all faculty prior to teaching online courses; defining the faculty, unit, division, and college support models; ensuring robust and appropriate student support; partnering to develop policies and practices around intellectual property and control of course content; defining key considerations to guide the creation of online courses and programs; document process to help ensure alignment of online courses/programs with face-to-face courses/programs (as regards intellectual property and course ownership, course quality, faculty workload, etc.); and work in partnership to develop assessment strategies to support ongoing quality improvement.

We recognize that many of the issues associated with online learning and the potential guidelines developed through the work of the subcommittee have implications for hybrid and traditional courses. The focus of the subcommittee will initially be on working to ensure that experiences for both students and faculty teaching in a wholly online format are addressed.

Annual Goals (deliverable/s)

The OL subcommittee will establish annual goals specifying its principal work (deliverables) and/or focus areas for the academic year.

2015/2016:

• Address significant items common to all online programs; particularly those that have to be addressed to meet OBR approval for programs offered online. Deliverable – template with recommended language (and/or contacts for additional information regarding processes, procedures, resources) that will help make the submission of the new program approval consistent and easier for all academic units at the University.

• Document business/budget models for online/distance learning currently in use at the University including models including third party providers. Deliverable – document comparing costs and incomes of various models.

Committee Composition, Appointments, and Terms

• Co-Chairs (2) – nominated and approved by eLearning Governance o 1 co-chair from eLearning/IT@UC (Melody Clark) o 1 co-chair from an academic/administrative unit (Eugene Rutz)

To ensure adequate operational expertise, appointments do not carry term limits

Appointees may be replaced by the AVP due to attrition, reassignment, or voluntary resignation from the committee.

• Academic/administrative personnel (8-16) – nominated/elected by academic units o Representatives with administrative oversight/coordination of online programming

within college o Representatives with student support and business systems oversight/expertise

Serve an initial two-year term with the option for additional year renewal; maximum of 3 years.

• Academic faculty (3) – nominated/elected by Faculty Senate or academic units Serve an initial two-year term with the option for additional year renewal;

maximum of 3 years

• Students (2) – at least one who is (only) in a fully online program • Others (TBD) - Other representatives will be drawn from the community to assist specific

goals, on an as need basis.

Membership Roles & Responsibilities

Co-chairs

• Schedule committee meetings and communicate meeting information to members. • Prepare agendas and convene meetings • Submit Issue/Action forms to the eLearning Committee as required • Share meeting notes under the OLC Subcommittee folder on SharePoint

Committee members

• Attend regularly scheduled meetings and fully participate in subcommittee work and focus areas

• Provide advance notice if unable to attend scheduled meeting, and send a representative on their behalf, as appropriate.

Meeting Schedule

The OL subcommittee meets once per month (or as needed, depending on scope of work and project target dates/timelines). Meeting dates and times will be specified a year in advance. In order to accommodate member faculty teaching schedules. Meeting times may be adjusted at the beginning of the semester.

Meetings will supported by a WebEx or Lync session. Attendees may participate either face-to-face or through the web conference.

2015/2016:

TBD

Accessibility Subcommittee Charter

Committee Charge:

The Accessibility Subcommittee will work collaboratively with key constituencies to coordinate the compliance and usability of instructional tools and academic content in the Canopy eLearning Ecosystem. The subcommittee is committed to increasing access to instructional technologies and course content for students of all abilities. The subcommittee will recommend “Best Practices” for online and face-to-face instruction, course curriculum and materials and will guide the adoption and development of instructional technologies, university websites and other learning resources.

Objectives: 1. Mark the recommendations for complying with Federal Regulations the Amended

Americans with Disabilities Act (AADA) and sections 504 and 508 of the Rehabilitation Act and set the university’s agenda and timeline for meeting these recommendations

2. Adapt industry standards (e.g., World Wide Web Consortium’s Web Content Accessibility Guideline 2.0, Quality Matters Standard 8), to develop a common protocol for the creation of universally accessible websites, course content and other instructional materials.

3. Identify and recommend the type of institutional support necessary for meeting or exceeding accessibility standards.

4. Connect all university groups working on issues of access and inclusion (e.g., Student Services, IT@UC, UC Libraries, University Communications) to aggregate information and documentation and coordinate efforts.

5. Host regular events to promote the understanding of and best practices related to accessible technologies.

Membership

Subcommittee Composition, Appointments and Term Limits Co-Chairs (2) - nominated by any member of the subcommittee and elected by a majority of the subcommittee’s voting members.

• 1 co-chair from the central IT unit • 1 co-chair from an academic or administrative unit.

Co-chairs, once approved, shall serve terms of one academic year and must be re-nominated by a member of the subcommittee and approved by a majority of the subcommittee’s voting members. IT personnel (3) – nominated by any member of the subcommittee and approved by a majority of the subcommittee’s voting members.

• 1 member from Center for Excellence in eLearning • 1 member from the eLearning Support Team, IT@UC Service Desk or the Knowledge

Base • 1 member from Systems & Operations (e.g., Blackboard System Administrator.)

Academic/Administrative (6) – nominated by any member of the subcommittee and approved by a majority of the subcommittee’s voting members.

• 1 member from Student Services • 1 member from UC Libraries • 4 full time faculty members (1 from Main Campus, 1 from the Medical Campus, 1 from

UC Blue Ash and 1 from UC Clermont) Students (2) – nominated by any member of the subcommittee and approved by a majority of the subcommittee’s voting members. The list of voting members will be presented to the eLearning Governance Committee for a vote of approval, at the first scheduled meeting of that committee following the subcommittee election. Voting members, once elected and approved, shall serve a term of one academic year, starting on the first day of Fall Semester and concluding on the last day of Summer Semester. Voting members are not term limited, but must be re-nominated by a subcommittee member and approved by a majority vote of the previous term’s voting members. Should an officer vacate their officer prior to the conclusion of their term, a special election will be held at the next regularly scheduled meeting. Members at Large – These members may participate in the Accessibility subcommittee and its project teams, but may not vote. Membership Roles and Responsibilities

The co-chairs will schedule the subcommittee meetings and communicate meeting information to the members. They will prepare agendas, convene meetings, call for votes and submit Issue Action forms to the eLearning Committee as required. Meeting notes will be shared under the Accessibility Subcommittee folder on SharePoint.

Voting members are required to attend all regularly scheduled meetings; therefore, meetings will be scheduled at the beginning of the academic year. Voting members are expected to provide at least twenty-four (24) hour notice for work-related absences. A representative may be sent on their behalf, however, their representative may not vote. Voting members with more than two non-work related absences per academic year and/or who do not provide advanced notice, may be requested to resign from the subcommittee. If a voting member will be absent for an extended period, they can ask one of the co-chairs to act as a proxy.

Accessibility subcommittee meetings are open to advisers, subject matter experts and members-at-large; however, they are not voting members.

Meetings

The Accessibility subcommittee meets on the second and forth Friday of every month (or as required) to discuss and/or or vote at the call of the subcommittee co-chairs. Meeting dates and times should be specified a year in advance. A web conferencing link will be provided for remote participation. Meetings are to be recorded and made available to all users for asynchronous participation.