Future of the Group

From OUCEL Wiki

• Read COU paper Working Paper: The Challenge of Participatory Technologies for Teaching and Learning at Ontario Universities
• Do we want to be a part of the affiliate, COED?

Linda: we could be a subgroup or intermeshed; a number of ways and many pro's and con's

CON's -little sister to the group -if we meet as one unit, may not be interesting to the larger group -curriculum issues may not be a perfect fit -we could work with that if we were to meet in a larger group and then come back and report what we found

Sandy: -potential for gain not so much risk; not too much to lose -might the gov look to groups for funding

Andrew: -what do we have to lose?

Richard: -there is a sentiment that we are different than the T&L; may have difficulty convincing the group; work through the skepticism getting a voice heard through to the COU -there are a whole set of concerns and issues that the COU will have to listen to -we fall between the pedagogy and the technology; kind of the glue

Karen: -without trying to underestimate the value of COU affiliate status -there is no fear certainly in COU in telling us what we are interested in -OCAV reports to COU, other groups report to OCAV -they like an update, and an opportunity to have a presence at your meeting -in terms of knowing that having them understanding that "we are the experts" in the area -it has been in no way controlling

Richard: -might not spend time working out the constitional relationship

Aldo: -one model could be that we get recognized as an advisory group to the affiliate -we have members that participate in meetings or act as liaisons -there is that recognition -if there is an issue that COED is dealing with, perhaps we could be the "go to" group -I think there is that recognition by the affiliate

Richard: -Bill said he'd like the COU to recognize us as a group to seek consultation from -we may have a bit of work to do to have us be recognized as that group -think about the governance model of other groups we are involved in; fee, membership, etc. -if we want to formally

Trevor: -I wouldn't want to have this group 3rd removed from COU -If COU itself wants to deal directly with this institute and have some back and forth

Richard: -we need to follow up on the paper; how serious it is

Jeanne: -they put out this paper without any heads up or consultation -can going out on our own is somewhere that we have any clout

Richard: -two people were commissioned to make a report -"unofficially pulled together" -we were flagged as potential players

Sandy: -have we really identified what we really are about -learning and sharing has been the best part -why can't we meet as a group and still have some sort of recognition within the affiliate

Andrew: -the informal working relationships are really useful -three bullets added: -software, hardware, knowledge sharing -e-portfolio solutions, evaluating solutions together -informally within our own groups -existing models within existing organizations -consortium software buying -there was some success in some areas, requires some effort

Richard: -we should continue to meet informal

Sandy: -IDO group has a TA Group -we could still be that way -especially since we have such a focus on pedagogy

Richard: -we may not have the space to articulate our needs -do we want to define ourselves within a group or separately as a group

Aldo: -how much effort is required -if there are challenges, too much negotiation -could extend a proposal

Trevor: -initial there was a group of TA developers, became Canada-wide, then international -with the TA developers may want to have a voice; many of the people are the same, but as centres grow, but this grows -for example, grad student training- COU would go to COED -OCAV and COU looking for participatory learning input do they go to the elearning group, or do we go to COED

Karen: -we have been going through consitutional streamlining, what does it mean to be an affiliate -COU has added in, "reporting to OCAV", being available to consult with OCAV at request

Richard: -what's in it for COED

Trevor: -deeper impact, having access to academic leadership; advice giving function is more clear; & funding -e.g. curriculum processes; uses of tools;

Aldo: -having a greater influence and impact at home institutions; however, a lot of what we do is governed by CIOs; certainly we want to influence pedagogy but need to be able to lobby the technology aspect

Trevor: -there isn't any reason that an affiliate with OCAV isn't also an affiliate somewhere else

Jeanne: -weren't they going to support the summer institute

Trevor: -funding has been more for projects

Richard:

Patrick: -what is our purpose, what is our goal? -do we want to influence policy or do we want to network, share, connect and learn -and if we want to inform, and create a community of practice -informal relationship, available to connect, collaborate etc., ready to put energy into influencing

Aldo: -see tremendous benefit to networking -would like to be the group re: special initiatives

Richard: -could they know about us by formally or informally in many ways

Andrew: -question to Trevor: funding

Trevor: -HECQO $, not dealing directly with the ministry -could be used more efficiently -which institutions should be involved was a concern -there are research projects to be done; sharing; repositories; exemplary practices

Linda: -costs could be a factor

Karen: -small universities; cuppa(?)- MTCU, COU, negotiating federal transfers

Richard:

1. formally affiliated with the group
2. informally affiliated with the group

• how we want to meet; can we meet again
• how do we want to position ourselves
• we should do this via email, help formulate the questions

Aldo:

• question is simple: no objections to terms, do we validate these?

Trevor: -partner with Richard to write a joint letter; what does OCAV want? Two groups and OCAV

Aldo: -two pronged approach, don't ignore; can we channel the response based on the report

Richard: -reps should be informal -push for formal???

Sandy: -the letter, COED vs OCAV

Conclusion: Trevor and Richard will draft a letter to COED, OUCEL and OCAV. Sooner than later is better, to be able to inform the letter and the constitution.