REDWOODS COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT
Meeting of the Distance Education (DE) Planning Committee

Eureka: 7351 Tompkins Hill Road, SS 104
Thursday, September 10, 2015, 1:00-3:00 pm
AGENDA
1. Call to Order
2. Introductions and Public Comment: Members of the audience are invited to make
comments regarding any subject appropriate to the DE Planning Committee
3. Approve Previous Meeting Notes (May 14, 2015)
4. Summer DE update
5. Action Items
There were no actions from the last DEPC meeting other than revisiting the course
evaluation process (item 6.7, below)
6. Discussion Items
6.1 Waitlist Management for Online Classes
6.2 Access to Orientation Letters
6.3 Student Online Handbook
6.4 Faculty Resources
6.5 OEI online orientation modules
6.6 Functional Plan for Distance Education
6.7 Course Evaluation Process
6.8 DEPC Program Review
7. Reports
8. Future Agenda items
8.1
9. Announcements
10. Adjourn
CCC Confer Participant Details:
Toll free number: 1-888-450-4821
Participant passcode: 603422
Telephone Conference Feature: *6 - Mute/unmute your individual line
Presenter passcode: 6581347
REDWOODS COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT Meeting of the Distance Education Planning Committee Date: Thursday, May 14 Time: 3‐4:30 pm Location: SS 104 Present: Mark Renner, Mark Winter, Mike Butler, Reno Giovannetti, James Hayes, Wendy Riggs, Lisa Sayles, Lynn Thiesen Guests: Mark Bernards, Tina Vaughn for 4.3 Summary notes: 3. Minutes of April 30, 2015 meeting were not available. Mark Renner will email to all members; Mark Winter will post to web if no objections received. 4. Action Items 4.1 Student Complaint Process – committee reviewed the proposed Student Resources webpage which includes a link to the Student Complaint AP as well as a process for student to send an email specifically regarding complaints. Committee discussed the process appears efficient and direct. Some concern expressed about confidentiality if complaint email goes to Reno and then forwarded to Dean. After discussion, agreed that once new DE Director begins in mid‐July, the email address will be changed and be routed directly to her. Mark Renner will follow‐up with Instructional Council so they are aware of the process. 4.2 “Go live” with the new website ‐ Reno showed a demonstration of the website; still work to do but it is much better. All are encouraged to view the pages and suggest changes to Reno, particularly the FAQ section. Agreed to move to ‘live’ environment ASAP. Reno will verify with Brian if there is ‘network caching.’ 4.3 Respondus trail summary and recommendation – it was reported that no faculty used Respondus during the trial period due to limitations of program. There are huge hassles with Respondus and we do not want another barrier for our students. Discussed product ‘Netop’ and how currently portions are being used in labs; so could use existing license for evaluation of the product. Mark Renner discussed his conversation with another school that stopped using ‘lock‐down’ type programs due to similar issues we discovered with Respondus. ‘Netop’ a solution that is not a ‘lock‐down’ browser but a surveillance of the computers. Students can be notified upfront ‘you will be electronically surveilled.’ Students could go to other websites, but would get ‘caught’ vs. lock‐down products where they can’t get to other sites at all. These types of products not necessarily available at remote sites. Remote proctor needs to follow their own process for ensuring integrity. Discussion centered on how we maximize success for our students when there are limitations on remote proctoring and the ability to use Respondus or similar products. We must take a serious approach to integrity and need a product that is more endemic to assessment process. Recommendation to ‘table’ the Respondus recommendation over the summer and re‐visit other proctoring solutions as well in the fall. 5. Discussion Items: 5.1 Online faculty evaluations during 14‐15 – will need to revisit the issue in the fall; deans want to operationalize the online evaluation checklist; however, the process is still with CRFO. Concern expressed that we are failing to provide students the ability to provide feedback on online courses as only 4 sections out of 47 had student evaluations submitted. Committee recognizes we have limited authority in this process as it is a negotiated process. Mark Renner thanked everyone for their hard work on the committee; a lot of progress was made. Mark Winter expresses his appreciation to Mark Renner for his leadership.