Friday, March 13, 1998

Present: Dick Berke, Hal Bertilson, Linda Carpenter, Lori Carrell, Bill Cerbin, Rex Fuller, Rene Gratz, Jerry Greenfield, Suzanne Griffith, Doug Johnson (Chair), Lisa Kornetsky, Ron Mickel, Erika Sander, Hal Schlais, Tim Sewall, Charlotte Stokes, Kathe Stumpf, Kay Taube, Greg Valde, Don Weber, Dave Zierath

UTIC Staff: Susan Kahn, Donna Silver, Rebecca Karoff, Renata Wilk

Absent: David Blankinship, Esther Fahm, Terry Gibson, John Grabel, Cathy Helgeland, Nan Jordahl, Kristin Kleinsteiber, Chuck Matter, Dan Riordan, Bob Skloot, Dave Staszak, Jim Taylor

Guests: Andrea-Teresa "Tess" Arenas and Bharati Holtzman from the UW System Office of Multicultural Affairs, and Mike Offerman, Director, Learning Innovation Center, Chris Bakkum, Administrative Intern, UW System Office of Academic Affairs

General Business

The Spring meeting convened at 9:30 a.m. Following introductions, the Council conducted its election of members and chairs to the UTIC Personnel and the Executive Committees. Because there was only one candidate for each slot, the election was conducted by voice acclamation. Tim Sewall was elected as a new member to the Personnel Committee; Suzanne Griffith was reelected as its Chair. Lisa Kornetsky and Bill Cerbin were reelected to the Executive Committee; Doug Johnson was reelected as Chair of the Executive Committee.

Doug Johnson and Susan Kahn reported to the Council on the Executive Committee’s February meeting with the Vice Chancellors’ Working Group on UTIC. This group is composed of Vice Chancellors and Provosts Howard Cohen (UW-Green Bay), Ralph Curtis (UW-Platteville), Leo Lambert (UW-La Crosse), and Marie Wunsch (UW Colleges). All of these VCs are and have been involved in UTIC and its initiatives in a variety of ways, and they are very supportive of the Council and its programs. The Working Group will be meeting again and will make some recommendations about UTIC’s future (its mission, its various initiatives, its priorities) to Susan, who will then share these with the Executive Committee. The Group will also report to the other Vice Chancellors in the System.

"Plan 2008: Educational Quality Through Racial and Ethnic Diversity"

The Council was joined by Dr. Andrea-Teresa "Tess" Arenas and Bharati Holtzman, of the UW System Office of Multicultural Affairs. Tess gave a brief overview of the goals, status and timeline of the new System diversity initiative, "Plan 2008: Educational Quality Through Racial and Ethnic Diversity." She asked for UTIC’s input in providing feedback to the diversity plan, which is still in draft form. All UW institutions will have to submit their own campus plans by June, 1999, so that UTIC reps. will also have opportunities to involve themselves in the process at their home institutions. Tess was particularly interested in the Council’s opinions about whether the word "curriculum" should be used in the "Plan 2008" document. Currently, it is not in the document. It was used in the 1987 plan, and became a real Pandora’s Box, in terms of allowing the Regents to mandate curriculum in the form of the 3-credit ethnic studies requirement. There are all sorts of other political issues surrounding the word curriculum, many of which Council members have had experience with themselves (e.g., the ghettoizing of ethnic studies, hiring problems, faculty resistance to mandates, student attitudes towards course requirements, etc.). But she does feel that the goal of nurturing and infusing ethnic studies in course and curriculum development is something that all campuses should pursue.

Tess emphasized two things: one is that the effort to diversify the UW System is never "done, whole, or fixed," but requires constant work and attention. Secondly, she noted that UTIC puts on great conferences in which faculty statewide want to participate. She would like to see UTIC work further on diversity and multicultural issues.

UW System Learning Innovation Center

The Council’s other morning guest was Mike Offerman, Dean of Continuing Education for UW- Extension, and the Director of the newly formed Learning Innovation Center. Mike gave an elaborate description of the Learning Innovation Center to Council members. Created in October, 1997, the Learning Innovation Center (LI) is a utility to help UW System faculty and institutions develop courseware, and to help faculty and institutions with intellectual property issues (e.g., helping faculty capitalize on the value of the intellectual property they generate via their use of learning technologies). The UW System is seen by many other institutions of higher learning, and by technology corporations (e.g., IBM, Lotus) as a leader on the use of the web in the classroom.

LI will work to further develop technologies to facilitate learning, e.g., groupware to use over the Internet. LI does not offer credit, programs, or degrees; it supports those faculty who want help in course development, and it emphasizes collaboration. In addition to helping to support faculty research and courseware production, LI serves as a clearinghouse and will work actively to distribute nationally the courseware produced. Mike urged Council members to check out the Learning Innovation Center through its website at http://learn.wisconsin.edu. In response to a question about how UTIC might involve itself with LI, Mike noted that a huge issue that needs to be dealt with is the egregious way in which textbook publishers are exploiting faculty authors of textbooks. He wondered if UTIC could find a way to facilitate faculty authors of textbooks coming together and talking about this problem, as a prelude to doing something about it.

The Council adjourned for lunch, and reconvened at 1:00 for committee meetings. When the whole group reconvened at 3:00, the following reports of committee deliberations were given.

Committee Reports

Student Learning Committee

Key issues discussed were the agenda and logistics for the April conference on Student Learning, the planning for which is proceeding nicely. The committee discussed UTIC’s 1999 conference, which would also focus on student learning. This committee will serve as the planning committee for the next conference. Possible dates are April 9-10, or April 16-17, 1999. A location has yet to be decided: Madison is always an option, but UTIC would like to see another campus offer to host it. The committee intends to have a tentative agenda for the 1999 conference by the Fall 1998 UTIC meeting. The committee also discussed the effectiveness and follow-up activities of campus teams to conferences. One suggestion for improving team effectiveness is to create more discipline-based teams, who might then be more inclined to implement back on campus what was done/proposed at the conference. Finally, the committee considered how UTIC grant programs might be used to encourage student learning, and whether some of the Student Learning conference sessions should be included in the Department Chairs Workshop, since chairs are logical implementation agents.

Grants Committee

The Grants committee discussed the Observer’s Report of the 1998 UTIG process. The Committee also discussed at length whether to merge all UW System grant programs into one program, covering such areas as how a unified program might be structured. The Vice Chancellors are also working on this. Whether there will be one program or several, it is clear to all involved that System’s grant programs need to be packaged in a more unified way (e.g., standardized budget sheets, one spring mailing to the VCs for all programs with fall deadlines). An email survey of campus grants officers will be conducted. Several aspects of the UTIG program were considered, including reworking the guidelines so as to refine the description of the technology emphasis, and to strengthen that of the diversity emphasis. The review sheet should also be modified, and the committee would like to see a more efficient and constructive way to get back to those campuses whose proposals have been rejected.

Faculty Roles and Rewards

The FRR Committee will be serving as the planning committee for the 1998 Department Chairs Workshop. The committee generated many good ideas, including: more emphasis on "nuts and bolts" as opposed to theoretical information for chairs; adding sessions on technology and diversity; making leadership a theme for the workshop (as opposed to focusing on management). A late-April conference call will be scheduled to continue planning.

The committee also discussed and decided that it should be dissolved, as the FRR agenda has succeeded in its purpose to disseminate a reconsideration of the nature of faculty work and rewards. While the goals of this agenda are still laudable and still need work, the committee feels that as a UTIC committee, it has lived out its usefulness, and that its tenets and initiatives would at this point be more effective if incorporated into the Student Learning and the Professional Development Committees. Further, the committee would like to make a proposal to the Executive Committee and the entire Council that a new committee be formed to address the issues of diversity and multiculturalism. A proposed title for this new committee is "Diversity in Teaching and Learning."

Professional Development Committee

The Professional Development Committee discussed the UTIC handbook draft; it will be reviewed, edited, handed out at the UTIC Fall Retreat, and possibly placed on UTIC’s website. The committee also made two recommendations for UTIC’s website: 1) that it be linked to all the faculty development websites at other UW institutions; and 2) that the UTIC website address should be included on all UTIC publications, if it isn’t. The committee also discussed the Wisconsin Teaching Fellows Program and the question of institutional support. The committee recommends equity in fellows compensation, and, specifically, that all campuses provide a minimum of $3,000 and up to a maximum of 1/9 of a fellow’s annual salary. This should be stated on the Program’s Call for Nominations and in the program description. Currently, the Fellows receive varied stipends, ranging from $1,000 to nothing to replacement costs. The committee would like UTIC’s Executive Committee to discuss this and figure out what, if anything, should be brought to the attention of the Vice Chancellors.

Technology Committee

The Technology Committee discussed the following technology initiatives at work around the state: 1) the WETC (Wisconsin Educational Technology Conference), which is unique in bringing together all levels of instruction (k-16), yet which does not have enough higher education participation; 2) the biennial budget monies available for technology; 3) and the LTDC (the Learning Technology Development Council). A discussion of money available to the LTDC and what it should support was held, covering such items as the fact that hardware support is desperately needed for more faculty; without such support, innovative programs will go nowhere. The committee also sees a need to align the LTDC with UTIC more, especially in terms of communication about what each programs is doing with technology. Greater visibility is sought for the Teaching with Technology virtual newsletter. The committee also noted that lots of money is available these days for K-12 initiatives, and questioned how we link up more with these projects? Finally, the committee discussed what it--as a technology committee--should be doing, and how it fits with other UTIC committees and initiatives. The committee feels isolated from relevant discussions of other committees, and queried how that should be dealt with? The committee proposes a Summer Institute for faculty, that will create good dialogue across the System, demonstrate hands-on applications of learning technologies, as well as conduct philosophical discussions of what technology is truly useful for (and what it’s not useful for).

Remaining Business

The Council was alerted to the fact that it would be receiving several virtual surveys in the coming months, including one from the Grants Committee.

Dick Berke proposed that greater attention be given to UTIC’s 20th anniversary, e.g., a birthday event at the Fall Retreat that includes administrators from throughout the UW System. He also posed the question of whether the Council is moving too far afield from its core agenda (e.g., with events like the Department Chairs Workshop).

A proposal was also made to consider a dual committee structure composed of function and thematic initiative committees, and in which UTIC reps. would belong to two committees, one of each kind.

The meeting adjourned at about 3:40 p.m.

Full Committee Minutes follow below.


Student Learning Committee

Present: Lori Carrell, Dick Berke, Bill Cerbin, Donna Silver, and Hal Bertilson. Dick Berke chaired the meeting. Hal Bertilson took notes/minutes.

SPRING 1998 STUDENT LEARNING CONFERENCE. Donna reported that all abstracts have been received and all rooms assigned and equipment reserved for the Spring 1998 Student Learning Conference. However, these matters were only completed two weeks ago. Team assignments by Vice Chancellors was difficult because the lead time was short. As a result committee members felt we need to get a head start on planning for 1999 Student Learning Conference.

Donna also reported that some/many of the pre-conference participants may not be staying for the conference itself. Committee members felt that it may not make sense to have pre-conference workshops that are not well-integrated with the conference. Having assessment and advising workshops complicated the assignment of people and diminished the ability to set up teams.

SPRING 1999 STUDENT LEARNING CONFERENCE. Based upon the groundwork done by Donna, committee members recommend that the Spring 1999 Student Learning Conference be held either April 9 and 10 or April 16 and 17, 1999. At the UTIC Business meeting Hal Bertilson invited campuses to host the conference. If there are no campuses expressing an interest, the committee recommends that it be held in Madison. We agreed that the Student Learning Committee will serve as the STEERING COMMITTEE for the Spring 1999 Student Learning Conference.

Several strategies will be used to develop ideas for topics/speakers for the Spring 1999 conference. The four UTIC staff members will attend the Student Learning AAHE meeting. The Steering Committee will observe the Spring 1998 Conference and look for the successful sessions/workshops. We will also be particularly alert to suggestions from Vincent Tinto's Closing Workshop, "What's Next." The Steering Committee will meet by TELECONFERENCE in April after the AAHE meeting and after the Spring 1998 Conference to discuss our ideas and suggestions.

The TIMELINE is to have a tentative agenda available in the Fall so the CALL for speakers and participants can go out in the Fall.

How should participants be recruited? What should the topics and themes be? We could do the same conference over and over again for five years. That would enable a wide range of people to attend. On the other hand, perhaps sessions should be developed by disciplines or disciplinary areas. Math and science session(s) or social science sessions might enable people from the same campus to take back ideas and work together to implement them. Perhaps it would even work better if it were departments that worked together and implemented together? How much carryover is there from the conference now to implementation on campus? Perhaps departmental colleagues would be a better implementation team? Are we accomplishing something with the current team method? Some faculty are going to the conference sessions they are interested in and not necessarily choosing sessions to be sure that someone from that campus has attended each session. We felt that momentum diminishes

after a conference if one can't see the connection to their discipline and has departmental colleagues who are also interested in implementation.

OTHER CONSIDERATIONS AND QUESTIONS include: (a) How can UTIC grant programs be used to encourage student learning? (b) Should some of the Student Learning Conference sessions be included in the Chairperson workshop? Chairs are the logical implementation agents. (c) It might be helpful to follow-up on campuses to see what follow-up teams have had. (d) We discussed having courseware demonstrations and vendors at the Spring 1999 conference.

Respectfully submitted,

Hal Bertilson, UW-Superior

Professional Development Committee

Present: Erika Sander (Chair), Greg Valde, David Ziereth, Ron Mickel

1. The minutes of 14 November 1997 of the Fall Meeting of the committee were approved as distributed.

2. The committee discussed the Wisconsin Teaching Fellows Program and institutional support. It was moved and seconded that the committee recommends that to achieve equity in compensation among Teaching Fellows across the UW System that institutions provide a minimum stipend of $3000 and up to a one-ninth of salary to each Fellow. Motion carried unanimously.

3. The committee agreed to recommend that the address of the UTIC website be included on all UTIC publications.

4. The committee agreed to recommend that the UTIC website be crosslinked to all existing faculty development sites within the UW System.

5. The committee agreed to recommend that institutional faculty development websites be linked to UTIC's site.

6. The committee plans to identify the websites of faculty development programs at each UW institution. The Administrative Representatives to UTIC will be asked to bring hard copy of such sites on his/her campus to the September 1998 UTIC Retreat. The committee hopes to assist in networking those involved in faculty development or with Teaching and Learning Centers.

7. The committee received from its chair copies of an existing draft of a proposed UTIC Handbook. The members of the committee will review the document and propose revisions with the possible goal of placing the Handbook on UTIC's website, using it during the orientation of new members, etc.

Respectfully submitted,

Ronald E. Mickel

Grants Committee

Present: Linda Carpenter, Chair; Donald Weber, Rene Gratz; Douglas Johnson; Susan Kahn; Charlotte Stokes, note taker.

Minutes from fall meeting unavailable to all members through e-mail, but provisionally approved subject to members receiving a copy of the minutes by mail.

Discussion of the changes in the configuration of grant programs, including the UTIG, sponsored by the UW System:

Currently, the UW System offers a variety of grants for which System institutions compete. Some of these grant programs may be combined or follow similar guidelines. Currently, the programs are undergoing internal review and a working group of Vice Chancellors is reviewing UTIG. The issues being discussed are whether or not various programs should be combined; if not combined, should there be consistent guidelines and submission dates; and reevaluation of the selection criteria and procedures. Because the call for proposals will be sent out in April, no changes in the grant programs will be made for the awards made during 1998/1999 for work to be accomplished during 1999/2000 year. However, the call for proposals for all grant programs will be sent out together in one packet with a cover sheet giving general information on all programs. In preparation for more substantive changes, a questionnaire will be sent out to Grants officers on all the campuses.

Two suggestions were made concerning the themes in the UTIG Guidelines. In number 4, there should be more emphasis given to Design for Diversity and in number 2 the technology concerns should be redefined in the light of technology issues in other System grant programs.

Discussion of the Observer's report of the Spring 1998 UTIG Review Committee activities: While the process for reviewing and making funding recommendations preceded in an orderly way through the process, some areas of concern were pinpointed by the report and discussed by the Grants Committee. These include reevaluating the UTIC requirement for matching funds from the university and the requirement that the proposals be collaborative. The suggestion was also made that the printed criteria for evaluating grant proposals be revised to be more useful during the evaluation and discussions of proposals. More useable criteria might act to discipline the discussions of proposals to avoid inappropriate assumptions or biases. Other review committee structures were also discussed, such as a smaller review committee to make the final recommendations after the subcommittee team deliberations.

Respectfully submitted,

Charlotte Stokes

The Office of Professional & Instructional Development, formerly UTIC, is part of the Office of Academic Affairs, University of Wisconsin System.

This page can be reached at: http://www.uwsa.edu/opid/conf/council/mar98.htm. Last revised: May 8, 2002 .