Archive for the ‘Committees’ Category

Thank you to Dr. Chuck Ziehr for composing and sharing this exceptionally well-written and explicitly detailed update on CTL. I especially like how he acknowledges the past, incorporates the present, and looks to the future.

It’s pretty incredible to see all the many issues CTL has been addressing over the past few months. We may have a small staff, but we have an exceptional one :-)

And the Steering Committee is pretty incredible, too. Thanks to each of you for the time and effort you so selflessly give in your service towards the continued improvement of the Teaching & Learning process at NSU and the communities it serves.


NSU Center for Teaching and Learning:  CTL Update,  February 4, 2011

The Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL) has undergone a number of changes over the past few months, while continuing its mission to foster a culture of excellence in teaching and learning, and more changes are on the way.  This update is designed to provide an overview of these changes and ongoing efforts and outline some plans for the future.

About 10 years ago the Center for Teaching and Learning was created to help the NSU faculty integrate technology and pedagogy.  The focus on the use of technology in teaching and learning continues and is being enhanced, but the mission of CTL is expanding beyond technology to include a broader emphasis on greater collaboration, innovation, and support for all aspects of teaching and learning.

Organization and Personnel
The Center for Teaching and Learning is a function of the Office of Academic Affairs and is supervised by the newly-created position of Assistant Vice President for Teaching and Learning (AVPTL); all CTL personnel report directly to the AVPTL.  After the former CTL Director (Jym Brittain) left NSU in Spring 2010, Dr. Tadlock appointed the CTL Steering Committee (CTLSC) to provide input and advice.   The formation of CTLSC resulted in sunsetting of two existing committees: Scholarship of Teaching and Learning committee and Distance Learning committee.  This semester we have been able to add a half-time Teaching & Learning Fellow, Linda Summers (Library faculty), who will work on various initiatives including Quality Matters and a film/discussion series to promote university/community conversations regarding current issues in education; we hope that this half-time Teaching & Learning Fellow position will be available for other faculty in the future.  We are in the search process for a full-time Online Instructional Designer, who should join CTL later this semester to assist faculty in the development and enhancement of online and blended courses. The search for a permanent AVPTL is underway.

CTL Personnel:

Interim Assistant Vice President for Teaching & Learning:  Chuck Ziehr [through July 31, 2011]

(A122, ziehr@nsuok.edu, ext. 2065)

Coordinator of Academic Services (full-time CTL):  Kip Finnegan

(WEBB 617, finnegac@nsuok.edu, ext. 5854)

Assistant Coordinator of Academic Services (half-time CTL):  Rick Shelton

(BALB 132, sheltorw@nsuok.edu, ext. 6630)

Administrative Assistant (full-time CTL):  Stacy Thompson

(WEBB 610, thomps30@nsuok.edu, ext. 5855)

Teaching & Learning Fellow (half-time CTL):  Linda Summers

(BALB 133, summerla@nsuok.edu, ext. 6455)

Student Assistants (part-time CTL):  Kyla Eden, Brandi Ross, Sarah Taylor, Amy Wilbins

CTL Steering Committee (CTLSC)

EDEN, Kyla, Undergraduate Student

FINNEGAN, Kip, Assistant Professor, Ex Officio, Center for Teaching & Learning

FULLER, Danny, Technology Specialist, College of Business & Technology

KELLER, Cari, Professor, College of Liberal Arts

KOZLOWSKI, Gene, Professor, College of Business & Technology

MCKEE, Earlena, Assistant Professor, College of Optometry

MOODY, Judy, Assistant Professor, College of Education

PARROTT, Martha, Associate Professor, College of Science & Health Professions

SHELTON, Donna, Associate Professor, College of Liberal Arts

SHELTON, Rick, Instructor, Ex Officio, Center for Teaching & Learning

SUMMERS, Linda, Instructor, University Libraries [CTLSC Chair]

THOMPSON, Stacy, Administrative Assistant, Ex Officio, Center for Teaching & Learning

THORP, Zac, Library Technician III, University Libraries

WHITLEY, Vanessa, Science Lab Manager, College of Science & Health Professions

WOODS, Evelyn, Assistant Dean, Student Affairs

ZIEHR, Chuck, Interim Assistant Vice President, Ex Officio, Center for Teaching & Learning

On-going Stuff

Kip and Rick continue to provide one-on-one assistance (or workshops upon request) in the use of Blackboard (learning management system), ITV faculty orientation, multimedia classroom orientation, smartboard training, multimedia production support (including podcasts and Camtasia), CheckBox (online surveys), and EvaluationKit  (online surveys).  The Center for Teaching and Learning provides service learning grants, teaching and learning fellowship grants, and online and ITV course development compensation.  The CTL website provides a number of online resources, application forms, and contact information at http://academics.nsuok.edu/teachingandlearning; this webpage can be accessed from the NSU homepage under My NSU—Faculty & Staff Links—Center for Teaching and Learning (under NSU).

New Stuff

  • Wimba provides “interactive technologies such as voice, video, podcasting, instant messaging, application sharing, polling, and whiteboarding.”  These capabilities may be accessed via the Communication button in Blackboard.  An introduction to the use of Wimba may be found in the Wimba LiveBinder developed by Rick Shelton http://livebinders.com/play/play/57757.
  • Quality Matters “is a nationally recognized, faculty-centered, peer review process designed to certify the quality of online courses and online components.”  The centerpiece of Quality Matters is the QM Rubric based on research-supported and published best practices which provides a set of standards by which to evaluate the design of online and blended courses.  We have 12 NSU faculty members undergoing training now to become QM peer reviewers (and more will be trained later).  The new Online Instructional Designer will help faculty to develop effective online and blended courses which will reach the nationally-recognized QM standards.  For more information about Quality Matters and online course development check the Online Teaching LiveBinder developed by Rick Shelton http://livebinders.com/play/play/58273
  • iTunes U – NSU has joined this distribution system as another means of providing and accessing audio and video content to a wider audience.  More about this capability will be forthcoming soon.
  • OpenCourseWare Consortium – This is yet another collaboration of higher educational and associated organizations that NSU has joined to distribute and access educational content.  More about this capability will be forthcoming soon.
  • Blackboard 9.1 — We will migrate to version 9.1 (from 8.0) this summer with 9.1 being the operational version of Bb running at NSU at the beginning of the Fall 2011 semester.  More information and training for this migration will become available later this semester and summer.
  • Campus Conversations and Collaborations on Teaching and Learning – CTL will host webinars, forums, learning communities, films, speakers, and debates/dialogues to address current issues and trends facing us in higher education and to develop a culture of sharing innovative ideas and best practices in the public endeavor of teaching and learning.
  • Help Desk – CTL is working with Information Technology Services (ITS) to develop an even more effective one-stop contact source for the NSU community when there are technology-related questions or problems.  NSU faculty and staff are asked to call the familiar 5-6-7-8 extension to report technology problems or to ask technology-related questions.  ITS will handle hardware issues and campus-standard software issues.  Questions related to using technology in course design and delivery will be handled by CTL; the Help Desk will create a work order and transfer such calls to CTL.  Details and procedures of this collaboration are still being worked out.
  • CTL webpage – The existing webpage will be enhanced and expanded to provide more information and greater resources for teaching and learning, including online tutorials for Blackboard 9.1, Wimba, Quality Matters, and designing online courses.  Given our very small CTL staff most of this expansion will have to wait until the new Online Instructional Designer is onboard in order to re-distribute the various demands on staff time.

Please let us know if you have questions or if you have suggestions for how to make CTL more responsive to your teaching and learning needs.

Dr. Chuck Ziehr
Interim Assistant Vice President for Teaching & Learning
Email: ziehr@nsuok.edu
WWW: http://arapaho.nsuok.edu/~ziehr/

***  NSU:  “Gather Here. Go Far.”  ***

Read Full Post »

Thanks go to Kyla Eden for taking these highly descriptive and detailed meeting minutes :-)

Tahlequah, Oklahoma

Minutes of the meeting:  January 14, 2011

The Center for Teaching and Learning Steering Committee met on Friday, January 14, 2011 at 3:00pm in Tahlequah (WEBB621) and via ITV from Broken Arrow (BALB105).
The following attended:

  • Linda Summers
  • Rick Shelton
  • Donna Shelton
  • Vanessa Whitley
  • Evelyn Woods
  • Judy Moody
  • Earlena McKee
  • Cari Keller
  • Kyla Eden
  • Kip Finnegan
  • Chuck Ziehr
  • Gene Kozlowski
  • Stacy Thompson

Absent with notice:

  • Martha Parrott

The meeting was called to order by Linda Summers at 3:00pm.

E-course compensation application evaluation:

Stacy Thompson gave an overview and general information about the e-course compensation application evaluations, specifically regarding the timeline.

  • Applications are graded on a twenty (20) point scale.
  • Each application has two evaluators, unless it is necessary to bring in a third evaluator (in instances where the scores are severely different).
  • The monetary amount of the grant is $1,800.00.
  • It is suggested that the decision for funding should be limited to, but preapproved for, those applicants who score an 80% or higher overall.


  • Documents should be e-mailed or otherwise delivered to Stacy Thompson by the Friday, February 4, 2011, so that the process can be finalized during the next CTLSC meeting, which is Friday, February 11, 2011.
  • Linda Summers agreed to send out an e-mail to committee members, reminding each of the February 4th deadline.

There is much discussion about whether or not to make the grant more exclusive.  This would be called the “Innovative Teaching Grant.”  Compensation could be made more competitive to promote excellence.  Because grant applications are increasing and award money is not, it is suggested that applicants be made to show innovation in teaching in order to receive the grant.

There is much discussion about the monetary amount of the grant, and how many classes the account can handle.  It is suggested by several that the amount of the grant should be decreased to accommodate more classes; it has been equally suggested that the grant amount is increased to increase exclusivity, meaning that fewer classes would be compensated.
Specifically, Rick Shelton suggested that the grant be increased to $2,000.00 and only compensate 25 courses.  Chuck Ziehr suggested that the monetary amount of the compensation should be decreased in order to extend the grant to more courses.

It is further suggested by Rick Shelton that the Quality Matters rubric should be applied to online as well as face-to-face courses.

There is much discussion on the application process and/or nomination process for the grant.  It is suggested that three application methods be made available to apply for future grants from CTL:

1.       Self-apply

2.       Nominated by colleague

3.       Nominated by student.

It is suggested that the policy containing the rules and regulations for this process should be considered and written over the summer.

A motion was made by Donna Shelton to vote on funding for applications receiving a score of 80% or higher.
Motion seconded by Judy Moody.
There is discussion on the topic . . . vote taken:
Motion to vote on funding for applications receiving a score of 80% or higher passed unanimously.

Recommendations for the Task Force on Online Education:

Cari Keller, a member of the Task Force, gave an overview of the document “Recommendations from the Task Force on Online Education.”

Issue #1:

  • The focus of the Task Force is to encourage a continued access to instructors who are qualified to teach online.
  • Issue #1 is related to online courses, online general education courses, and compensation in general.
  • No recommendations are made regarding Issue #1.

Issue #2:

  • A major concern with the document is the idea of “lowering the amount of money for course compensation, yet raising the bar for the course.”

Gene Kozlowski makes a motion to recommend keeping the course compensation amount at $1,800.00.
Donna Shelton seconds.
Much discussion about the topic . . . vote taken:
Motion to recommend that the course compensation amount be left at $1,800.00 passed unanimously.

Issue #3:

  • It is suggested that the online evaluation is flawed:

o   There is a low response rate from students.

o   Two extremes are present in the online evaluations that are completed:

§  A high or superior rating based on the student’s general acceptance of the professor

§  A low or negative rating based on the student’s dislike of the professor.

  • It is suggested by Gene Kozlowski that faculty be encouraged to give their own evaluations instead of, or as well as, the CTL evaluations.  He stated the method used in his online classes, which produces a higher amount of productive evaluations. He proposes that the faculty who are interested in giving their own evaluations should use the survey server, Checkbox.
  • A question is raised as to whether or not the problem with the CTL evaluations is the questions asked, or the method of delivery.  It is decided that the context in which the evaluation is given (face-to-face vs. anonymous) impacts the yield. Specifically, return rate is higher when the instructor being evaluated is involved in the delivery process and students understand the relevance of the evaluations.
  • Therefore, the committee recommends that the process by which evaluations are presented to online students should be revised; focus should be placed on getting a better response rate for the evaluations.

Kno Tablet:

Linda Summers tabled this issue for the next meeting, due to the amount of time left in the meeting and the amount of issues still left to discuss.

Currently in CTL:


  • Wimba Pronto is live, although one tab is not installed.  This program is capable of making multi-person video calls.
  • Wimba Suite is installed, but is only active in the faculty learning space.
  • Currently, there has been no testing in actual classrooms.
  • The full version of Wimba will be made to download, and pushed to the whole university.

There is much discussion regarding the issue of students with no computers or internet access at home.

**There will be a demonstration of Wimba on Friday, January 21, 2011 from 10:00am – 12:00pm in Broken Arrow BALB 110.  Demonstration will be given by Rick Shelton.**

Quality Matters:

  • Funded and ongoing.
  • A question is raised on whether or not to promote Quality Matters at this point in time.  It is decided that we should wait until we know more about the program.
  • The program is scheduled to be introduced Fall 2011 semester.

Blackboard 9.1:

  • Upgrade scheduled for Fall 2011.

AVPTL Search Committee:

  • Meets January 27, 2010 at 3:00pm.
  • There are 26 candidates in the pool.

Chuck Ziehr committed to sending monthly updates via e-mail to the University Community.

Online Instructional Designer Search Committee

  • Meets Thursdays at 3:00pm
  • Several applicants did not meet minimal education requirements, so were eliminated. The pool still contains a number of qualified candidates.

Tabled Until The Next Meeting:

Due to time constrictions, Linda Summers tabled the following business:

  • Official Description of CTLSC for website
  • Discussion on committee matters:

o   What the committee is doing right,

o   What the committee could be doing better,

o   And suggestions on how to improve the committee.

Meeting is adjourned by Linda Summers at 5:00pm.

The Center for Teaching and Learning Steering Committee will meet again from 3:00pm – 5:00pm on Friday, February 11, 2011 in Tahlequah: WEBB621 and Broken Arrow: BALB105

Minutes taken and prepared by:
Kyla D. Eden

Read Full Post »


CTL Steering Committee
Chair Notes
December 3, 2010




  • Kyla Eden
  • Kip Finnegan
  • Earlena McKee


  • Martha Parrott
  • Donna Shelton
  • Rick Shelton


  • Linda Summers
  • Vanessa Whitley
  • Chuck Ziehr

Absent with Notice

  • Cari Keller
  • Judy Moody
  • Stacy Thompson

Personnel updates in AA/CTL

Online Instructional Designer – Job ad posted online – https://nsuok.peopleadmin.com/postings/239 Eight applications received and reviewed by CTL staff thus far. Posted start date of January 4.

CTL Updates:

Wimba Collaboration Suite

Delay in implementation due to issues with vendor contract. This delay will affect original plans for IMLS grant, online graduate reading program, and others. As a result, Rick Shelton is revising plans for the IMLS grant. Chuck Ziehr will contact head of other programs impacted, after receiving list from CTL staff.

Quality Matters

  • Training has been scheduled for initial group of 10 faculty peer reviewers: Cari Keller, Diana Mashburn, Jeff Lowenthal, Judy Moody, Kip Finnegan, Marvita McGuire, Mike Wilds, Rick Shelton, Penny Sommers. Disciplines currently represented include Liberal Arts, Business, Science, and Education.
  • Linda Moss has accepted a position at UCO and will need to be replaced as a reviewer in this program. Requests will be sent to deans for recommendations.
  • The program still needs a faculty trainer responsible for future training of those assigned as peer reviewers.
  • The program requires that one peer reviewer come from outside NSU for each course being reviewed. The charge for this service is $600 per course, unless a reciprocal agreement can be arranged.
  • UCO was mentioned as a school that created their own review process modeled after the QM program. They will be contacted to determine why they chose to do so. A potential plus of a homegrown program is to save money. A negative is that the QM program is a nationally recognized standard, as respected as such.

OpenCourseWare Consortium

Application still under review by OC committee.

Blackboard 9.1

  • Faculty sandbox for training coming in Spring semester.
  • Linda Summers currently using both 8.0 as NSU faculty and 9.0 as part-time faculty at TCC. Says 9.0 has several benefits over 8.0, including fewer steps for many of the most popular functions, such as recording grades and adding announcements. Most new functions are intuitive and will require little training. The primary training needed will be how to set up the Gradebook, as it contains the most significant changes from 8.0 and is the least intuitive.

AVPAA Search Update – Martha

  • Committee just completed rewriting specs. Changes from the original include a change in the requirements for past administrative experience, in order to increase the pool of candidates who are both leaders and experts in contemporary pedagogy.
  • The job add will be posted upon completion – the goal being next week.


  • E-course Compensation Application – applications currently being processed in preparation for review.
  • Creativity World Forum – NSU had highly successful booth, interactive, professional, and fun.
  • Race to Nowhere/Waiting for Superman screenings – a program to screen the documentaries is currently underway. CTL will plan and sponsor the semester-long event.

Offer for Professional Development

Donna Shelton offered to host a workshop on how faculty can use Twitter for professional development purposes.


  • Survey will be sent to members to evaluate makeup and effectiveness of committee since inception last spring. Including what the committee did well, what the committee could have done better, suggestions on how to improve.

Next meeting:

Survey will be sent to determine best interval, time, and place for Spring meetings.

Read Full Post »


CTL Steering Committee
Chair Notes
November 12, 2010




  • Kip Finnegan
  • Cari Keller
  • Earlena McKee
  • Judy Moody


  • Linda Moss
  • Donna Shelton
  • Rick Shelton
  • Linda Summers


  • Stacy Thompson
  • Zac Thorp
  • Vanessa Whitley
  • Chuck Ziehr

Absent with Notice

  • Martha Parrott
  • Evelyn Woods

Organizational Changes in CTL

  • Assistant Vice President of Teaching & Learning – Chuck Ziehr has agreed to serve as interim, effective immediately, until a more permanent replacement is found. The responsibilities of this position are divided between the Center for Teaching & Learning and Academic Affairs.
  • Administrative Assistant to AVPTL – Jamie Wright was recently hired to fill this position. Her role is strictly to serve as assistant to the AVPTL. She has no direct formal responsibilities to CTL personnel.
  • Student workers – Brandy Ross was recently hired and is currently undergoing training. Plans are to hire a total of four students for CTL over the coming months.
  • Online Instructional Designer – Cabinet approved the addition of this position to CTL. The ad is scheduled to be posted next week. A few responsibilities for this position include designing eTutorials and providing on-demand assistance for faculty.

Current Issues in CTL

  • As CTL grows, professional responsibilities of personnel will become more specialized. Currently there is some confusion over the seemingly related responsibilities of CTL and ITS. Dr. Ziehr is meeting with ITS next week to discuss and clarify.
  • #1 priority of CTL = faculty development, not technical training, which is ITS responsibility. CTL is to work closely with ITS. Can offer brief assistance to tech issues, but defer more intense training issues to ITS.
  • Focus of CTL = pedagogy. How to achieve quality contemporary teaching. How to make a great learning experience for students. Dr. Ziehr thinks it important to link the processes of teaching and learning, as some see them as exclusive.
  • CTL began as a tech-based training department, now transitioning to pedagogy. To better understand this broader role, Dr. Ziehr recommended committee members read the About page of Georgetown’s Center for New Designs in Learning & Scholarship.

CTL Updates:

Wimba Collaboration Suite

  • Purchase order for 3-year commitment of Wimba Suite in works. Three programs included – Voice, Classroom, and Pronto.
  • Vital that Wimba be fully implemented in time for spring semester, as it is to play a primary role in both the IMLS Grant and in the Graduate Reading program. These early adopters will help work through any unexpected issues before CTL makes a big push of the program in Fall 2011.
  • Adoption of Wimba Suite increases geographic distribution of course, increasing potential to enroll out-of-state and international students. It will also help redefine the traditional face-to-face course, in that students can attend both physically and virtually.
  • Wimba Suite allows for technical assistance via virtual takeover of a client’s pc, eliminating the need to travel and reducing time needed to remedy.
  • Wimba will have a lot of tie in with Quality Matters, Open Courseware and other online programs.

Quality Matters

  • Status – cohort of ten peer reviewers begins training courses in January. Once trained, they will assist faculty in eCourse development.
  • QM will help define who receives grant money for course development.
  • Implementation – recommendations needed for workable timeline, including guidelines on adherence requirements. Cohort and steering committee can create both as more is learned via training sessions.
  • Long-term Plan – adherence will start with instructors who want grant money, followed by cohort going department by department reviewing and making recommendations. Order of course review to follow recommendation of deans. Future vision is that all eCourses, existing and proposed, will go through QM review.
  • Related – instructors to receive certificate upon completion of review.

OpenCourseWare Consortium

  • All application documents submitted and currently under review by OC committee.
  • Rick is the coordinator for this program.

Blackboard 9.1

  • Chris Loftis is setting up a test server, running Bb on 2 separate servers. He is confident that all will go well with scheduled full implementation for Fall 2011.
  • Chris also collaborated with Bb staff at TCC to better understand the high volume of stability issues they experienced. Considering how different the two networks, he is optimistc NSU will not experience same.

AVPAA Search Update – Judy

  • Committee currently rewriting specs, which will be posted upon completion, likely before end of November.
  • Goal is to hire AVPTL by early spring and to have in place by fall semester.
  • Chuck Ziehr says he is on committee to ensure his interim position remains just that J

CTL Role in Staff Development

A request was made that the role of CTL in the professional development of staff be clarified. The answer is twofold:

  1. Human Resources has primary responsibility for staff development.
  2. Staff are always welcome to workshops and training sessions hosted by CTL, should they consider it relevant to their position at NSU or simply have a personal interest in the topic. (Administration is welcome, as well ;-)

That said, CTL encourages everyone to submit questions and needs, as the staff thinks it important to promote collaboration in the effective training of all NSU employees.

Related – CTL is considering adding fellowships and scholarships, but has no formal guidelines for the process as yet.

eCourse Development Compensation

  • 30 faculty have applied for awards.
  • Stacy will scan applications and forward to committee, who will then review and select award recipients.

During this discussion, it was acknowledged that NSU no longer accepts applications from new faculty unless they can teach online, all general education courses are now available online, and no compensation is currently made for the development of face-to-face courses.

It was also agreed that the distinction between traditional and online classes is becoming blurred, due to programs such as Wimba. This transition suggests that the awarding of future compensation needs to be rethought.

Secure Online Testing Demo

Some instructors at NSU want a better security system than Lockdown Browser for eTesting. CTL has offered to set up a demo with Secure Testing, but need commitment there will be an audience prior to doing so. Vanessa offered to survey her faculty for interest. (Another option is for committee members to attend the demo and share what they learn with those they represent, as they have done in the past with other teaching tools.)

Low Turnout at Recent Webinar

CTL and its steering committee recently sponsored a webinar at the request of NSU faculty. Despite the collaborative effort of CTL and ITS, the event was poorly attended. Several solutions were offered on how to remedy: give faculty 30 days initial notice, so they can work the event into their heavily booked calendars; provide a follow-up reminder nearer the actual event, maybe a one-week reminder, then a 24-hour notice; require that faculty RSVP individually for each event.

Request from Faculty Council

Faculty Council has asked for assistance with two professional development issues:

  • Resources and services for faculty who teach, but do not specialize in, ESL and ADD/ADHD  students (Development)
  • Support for international faculty, those whose first/native language is not English (Mentoring)

Donna Shelton has experience in this area and has offered to create a workshop series in late spring or early summer, as long as she has a minimum of five faculty commit to the event – in particular, because it will likely take her about two months to create an effective program.

Thank you, Donna. You are awesome J

Free Webinar to Consider

Campus Technology Virtual Conference – November 18 from 9:30am-5:00pm http://events.campustechnology.com/events/virtual-conference-2010/home.aspx?utm_source=AttendeeMktg&utm_medium=E-Mail&utm_campaign=NX0V23

Next meeting:

The final meeting for 2010 will be held on Friday, December 3rd from 3:30pm-4:30pm.
Locations: BA – E105 & TQ – NET621

Read Full Post »


Center for Teaching & Learning Steering Committee
Chair Notes
September 17, 2010



  • Kyla Eden
  • Kip Finnegan
  • Earlena McKee
  • Linda Moss
  • Donna Shelton
  • Rick Shelton
  • Linda Summers
  • Stacy Thompson
  • Zac Thorp

Wimba Collaboration Suite

  • Status – Contract and Sole Source documentation in process. Scheduled to be complete within two weeks. Implementation timeline thus far unknown. Waiting on update from Barbara Brown to determine.
  • Technology – Once Wimba is purchased and available, CTL needs committee members to survey faculty to determine best way to configure classrooms for most effective incorporation of Wimba. Examples include deciding best method to add cameras and microphones, as well as what type and who is responsible for funding and purchasing. Once faculty determine best configuration, CTL will collaborate with ITS for a successful reconfiguration.
  • Interest – Several faculty have asked when the full suite will be ready to use. They are very excited to start using Wimba, both for courses and meetings. One has written a proposal for a CTL grant for a course that will be taught this coming spring semester. Both she and CTL need to know the timeline in order to determine the feasibility and to sign up students.
  • Training – Once the implementation date is determined, CTL will schedule demonstrations and workshops, which will be open to all faculty, staff, and administrators. ITS, as technology support, also need training in order to effectively serve those who call the helpline for troubleshooting assistance.
  • Promotion – How to let NSU affiliates know Wimba exists and is coming. The most successful rollout of Wimba requires a holistic approach. Best case scenario will include ambassadors, steering committee members and those familiar with Wimba, promoting the technology to their colleagues, getting college deans involved, and having Provost Tadlock encourage attendance of demos and workshops.

ITV Classrooms

  • Configuration of ITV classrooms costs around $70,000. Setting up a classroom for effective use of Wimba’s point-to-multiple-point can be accomplished for less than $500, as all that is needed is a camera and microphone.
  • Multiple remotes being replaced by touch screen in ITV classrooms in order to simplify instructional sessions.

Quality Matters

Both Contract and Sole Source paperwork have been completed. Actual payment, however, is still at issue. Unclear as to the current status. No specific rollout timeline as yet.

Open Courseware

Enrollment fee is $500. Unclear as to source of funding. Stacy will contact Susan Perry for clarification.

Learning Community

Rick gave a demo of Wimba Pronto. Linda gave short overview of full suite via her TCC Bb site. Those in attendance were both excited and inspired as to the possibilities. One submitted the draft of a grant proposal, including Wimba, just a few days later. A sampling of sentiments from those in attendance:

  • “Oh, thank you. Somebody’s out there.”
  • “We are getting there. Finally. I’m so excited about this.”
  • “Welcome to education in the 21st Century.”
  • “We should have our next meeting on Wimba. It takes me an hour and a half to get here.”
  • “I’m gonna rewrite my course to include Wimba. You’re gonna help me. Right, Rick?”
  • “Jackson & Tadlock are behind us. Pushing to help us move forward into contemporary teaching.”
  • “I can stay at home and only dress the top part of me.”

Marketing services

Rick created a flyer of CTL workshops, which he shared in both paper and e-copy formats. He has asked committee members to distribute the flyers amongst their colleagues. Place them in campus mail boxes. Tape them to office doors. Send them via email attachment. The flyer will be published on a monthly basis.

Distinction between CTL & ITS

  • Center for Teaching & Learning supports faculty by providing professional development training and workshops, awards and funding for Service Learning, Teaching and Learning Fellowships, Online Course Development Compensation, and resources such as hardware, software, printed material, videos, and instructional design consulting.
  • Information Technology Services provides support for campus-wide computing and telecomputing, including data backup and restoration, administrative support and maintenance of software systems, training in the use of NSU network services and standard hardware and software, administration of licensing for standard software on all university-owned computers.


  • Attendance has been an issue with members of the steering committee for a while, despite multiple surveys to determine the best meeting time. The format of meetings and discussions also doesn’t seem to matter, whether face-to-face, Bb, or emails. It’s nearly always the same members providing consistent input. Those in attendance discussed methods to inspire more dedication and commitment.
  • Receiving requests from faculty for iPad support, but CTL does not own an iPad.
  • CTL sent online submission form to Riverhawks Daily, but item was neither acknowledged nor added to the calendar.

General Comments

  • CTL will help organize and facilitate professional development presentations and workshops in the various colleges, should faculty want assistance. An attempt will be made to find funding for snacks.
  • Faculty’s preferred training method is one-on-one, just-in-time.
  • Though Blackboard has a phone app, Wimba does not.

Next Meeting

The next meeting is scheduled for Friday, October 1st from 3:30pm-4:30pm.
Locations: BA – E105 & TQ – NET621

Read Full Post »

Thank you to the Broken Arrow community, the BA Trail Committee, and Dean Jenlink for enhancing the fitness options at NSUBA.

Groundbreakers from left to right:  Melissa Mahan, Patty Kitchen, Kris Rider, Christee Jenlink, Star O’Neal, Olaf Standley, Eric Yost, Scott Esmond.

Read Full Post »

A friend and colleague recently asked why NSU didn’t have an iPhone app, and whether we will ever get one. I told him the Center for Teaching & Learning Steering Committee had discussed this same topic a few weeks ago, and offered to share our evaluation with him.

The following document is a collaborative effort generated by the committee in response to a proposal from a local business offering to create an iPhone app for NSU:

CTL Steering Committee
School Insight iPhone App Evaluation
July 1, 2010

The following information is simply an evaluation of the potential purchase of the School Insight iPhone app. No conclusion was drawn, nor vote taken.


  • Several optometry students own smartphones, as there are some specialized apps they are encouraged to use in clinical rotations and later in their own practices.
  • Optometry applicants judge our college and university by our integration of technology in our clinical instruments, electronic health records and the websites against other colleges and universities.
  • Use of new technologies, if not prohibitively difficult or expensive, enhances the progressive image of our university to potential students.
  • It could be handy for announcing special events (the push function on the iPhone sends automatic messages when something new is added) and important information such as upcoming deadlines, or financial aid info, or sporting events.
  • I do not have a smart phone, but I know a lot of people do and they love apps.  The cost is very low and affordable.  I do not see the harm in having it, I think it is a good idea.
  • iPhone apps are very cool, and easier to access away from a computer than a webpage for answering quick needs like schedules or special events on campus.
  • It might be good for weather warnings about closings and events.


  • Not enough students with smartphones?
  • It’s not practical on the Tahlequah campus at this point.  iPhones are expensive. A few of our students … in Tahlequah have smartphones, most don’t.
  • In a poll of my classes this last spring I found only 2 students who had iPhones, less than 1/4 had smartphones, of those less than 1/2 had text service. The remainder of the students had fairly typical phones with a few of those users having text service. This was not encouraging for a group of about 42 students.



  • Has the potential to give students another option for accessing course content.
  • I’ve been looking at the podcasts and vodcasts available on iTunes as potential resources for my online classes (or even live courses).  There are several OK universities and colleges that have both available.  ie; Rose State University has a couple on women’s history.   As we progress in our knowledge of using technology in the classroom, I think having a school app would make it easier for students to access these right (though I know it wouldn’t be necessary, it could provide a central location for students to search from).
  • If a department uses podcasts through iTunes, it’s easier to access them from an app.


  • Will the app work on the Blackberry, Blackjack, and other smartphones, or just on the iPhone?
  • Until a larger percentage of our students have smartphones, spending the money to develop apps is not advisable.
  • I don’t see us being able to deliver course content in this way in the immediate future.
  • One issue under consideration is using these apps as notification for events and warnings. Unless the student has the app set to accept these messages and it is active they will only get them once they do turn it on. Thus this makes it less than useful for warning students about say an intruder on campus.
  • I just wonder what students in Tahlequah would say if they were told that course content would be delivered in part by iPhone and that they not only had to buy the phone but sign up for a two-year contract at maybe $100 a month.  I have a young lady in our program right now that I am going to hire to help me with some painting jobs at home because she’s living in the dorms during summer school and she doesn’t have enough money to eat.
  • I am all for incorporating all sorts of technology into teaching, but I am concerned about the growing gap between what some of us would like to do (and what needs to be done) and the reality of what our students and faculty are able to do or want to do.
  • At the very least, when we adopt a new technology, the students should have access to it on campus or to be able to purchase it with financial aid dollars.

General Comments:

  • The $200 a month fee seems reasonable, it is less than the cost of 1 billboard per month, and it looks like we control the content.
  • If the administration is looking at an app that would provide schedule information or something else applicable to all or most students or perhaps also alums, that might be worthwhile, but I think most of the usage will be at NSUBA.
  • OU and University of Arkansas each have a school iPhone app.
  • I would like to explore it further.
  • Some university employees are not even using the more basic communication tools now at our disposal.  In our department, after adopting new and more stringent requirements for voting, some issues up for email votes have failed simply because many of my colleagues don’t, won’t, or can’t read their email, and hence they don’t vote.  I think that deans and department chairs will need to deal with issues like that before we can be very successful at expanding the forms of communication that we use.
  • I drag students kicking and screaming through using various Web 2.0 applications every semester, and they have quite a few problems, some of which are related to their own computer abilities and some of which are related to a lack of up-to-date computer equipment and consistent Internet access at home, as most of them are not resident students.  What I ask them to do is free of charge to them–I could not ask them to get a smartphone to view course materials as it would be too much of a burden for some of them.  I tell them that in my courses I have a secondary objective of improving their computer/Internet skills.  Other people talk about educating digital natives and how do we do that when we ourselves are not digital natives — well, in my classes, there are no digital natives.  I would imagine that the situation in BA is different, but in Tahlequah our traditional students are coming out of small high schools with almost nonexistent technology, and our nontraditional students are generally not people with much computer experience.
  • My colleagues have their own issues with technology — the number of people who use Blackboard as a supplement or even just as a way to disseminate information in a traditional format class is pretty low, and the use of other applications is very limited.  When I made the comment in my previous email about people not using their email, I was not kidding. There is a person in my department who comes to me for help when she has to send an email because she does not know how.  Other colleagues, including some former department chairs, are famous for rarely or never reading their email.  The email voting issue I described may become a serious problem.
    • So, I think creating iPhone apps for NSU is great, and I would certainly use them, but I am concerned about the cost and the technology gap.
    • There is a digital divide among the students at NSU, which is reflective of American society as a whole. If we are to invest wisely, we need to consider all factors of adoption and application of new technology.

Related Information:

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »