KVCC Instructional Technology Committee

ITC Home | ITC Documents | ITC Timeline | Discussion Boards

March 23, 2016 - ITC Meeting Agenda

Present: Steve Duren, Kathy Englehart, Nick Runco, Stephen Larochelle, Toni Fredette (Chair), Marcia Parker, Jim Guillmette, Jennifer Annett, Mark Kavanaugh

Agenda Item
Review of minutes.

Kathy noted that Nick had discussed having a technology plan for students as well as faculty/staff.

Minutes were approved with amendment.


Nick brought up how we might identify technology pre-requisites for courses/programs.

Steve outlined that we need to be sure that technology does not become the focus of the course.

Kathy suggests a numbering system (Technology Skill Level 1 or 2 or 3) as a way to designate classes and the technology requirements for those classes.

Technology presents the opportunity for problem solving and the expression.

Agenda item for next time to discuss levels of technological proficiency in specific classes.

Agenda item related to student technological proficiency will be added to the next meeting.

Mission and Purpose


Item was tabled
Learning Management Systems (LMS)

Document was started online to outline needs that we have in our LMS in order to develop and assessment process.

Extension of Blackboard license to avail time for full evaluatin is likely (reported by Toni from Kevin C.)

Toni presented a document on the overview, goals, resources, and information related to the review of our LMS.

Blackboard has all kinds of tools that are underutilized. We need to look into tools like "reset" and "bulk delete"

We need to consider both instructional and institutional needs for the LMS.

Kathy - Faculty are the primary users and thus we need a very effective process to gather thier thoughts and expectations. We also need input from those who are dealing with students with disabilities.

Toni - If we are to stay the course with Bb then we need to develop strong arguments.

Steve - "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!" Technology is the same way. We need to be mindful that changes we make have to be pedagogical in nature and not just for the sake of technology.

Are the features in Bb customizable for each user (advanced vs. novice)

Nick - we need a strong connection between technology and pedagogy.

Discussion about file types, ADA access, Universal Design, Universal Design for Learning, and access issues.

Toni - suggests a repository for training materials on how to do things with technology.

Mark - we are moving toward a concept of a "Teaching and Learning Center" to support technology and instruction.

We also need to evaluate the nature of our materials based on student access to broadband. We may need to utilize tools that allow students to make decisions about using materials based on their access speeds.

Exploring the extension of the Bb license was mentioned in the prior meeting but we have not heard from Kevin C regarding the status of this option. Toni will email him.

We need to develop strong arguements.

Focus groups of studnet services and faculty to identify needs.

We will also need to identify the "closed" features of Bb that other institutions seem to make available for their faculty.

Instructional design appraoch needs to be emphasized across the campus.

We added "Assessment" and "Institutional" needs related to the LMS to Toni's document.

We need the survey on how Faculty are using Bb.

Mark - get a list of resources availaible in Blackboard (Master List)

Kathy - will organize the development and administration of the survey for the next ITC meeting.

Video Conferencing

We are unsure what Kevin C means by this agenda item.

Let's examine issues related to teleconferencing related to lighting, audio, video presence (positioning of individuals in the room in relation to the camera)

Kathy and Mark will explore audio options for next Faculty Senate meeting.
Next Meetings - April 13 and May 4