Distance Education Steering Board
Juneau --31 March 2006
03 Apr 2006, 13:17:39
Step Name: 90 Day Working Groups
Tool Name: Categorizer
1. Working Group Concepts
 Make it early in the week so we don't conflict with the state reading conference.
1. 1-800-UADistEd. A 24/7 State-wide DE advising desk to answer questions for
prospective students and route current students to their proper advisor.
 One place for students to go to will limit confusion and show one united front. There would
be no "sorry I can't help", no frantically calling multiple numbers trying to find someone to
answer the question.
 Anyone who is looking at distance education is faced with a plethora of options and
channels. There needs to be a single point of contact to get them pointed in the right direction.
And it should be in all media - telephone, online chat, and print.
 For distance ED to be effective and successful from the beginning this support service
needs to be in place. This will provide the needed support for students.
 This would be a faultless, seamless way to recruit students and get them started, or
continuing, in a UA class or program.
 Communication within UA is so bad that not even the MAU offering the certificate or degree
does a good job of advising
 While having a statewide advising desk might help produce less confusion, there would
likely be heavy antagonism to such a system by faculty who saw it as a statewide incursion of
their MAU's ability to advise students.
 Do we really want to create an additional place for someone to go to get another answer?
The students need to have a designated adviser and contact that person only.
 GOOD advising requires a relationship between the advisor and the advisee, adding yet
another layer of advising will ONLY confuse the student. It's far more effective to train the
current advisors in DE, and give the students a single source for all advising needs.
 I think this will add confusion because many students will have a relationship with a regular
advisor. What should they think? How do we avoid confusion between students who would
access a statewide DE advisor, and when they would be moved to a regular advisor?
 The scope of this concept is too broad and it will be very difficult create and coordinate
proposed system.
 Initial Statewide advising could be a voluntary option for those students who do not have a
relationship with a local or program advisor. This will only work if the student affinity can still be
counted by the serving campus and/or program.
 Keep the student in mind. This would not be an advising desk. It would be a single point of
contact to direct students to the information (advising) they need.
 Katy Spangler
 Doug Desorcie
 Holly Royce
2. 1-800-Help-Me-DE. A statewide 24/7 technical help desk for UA DE students.
 For many students, the technical and skill requirements to join an online class are a
daunting barrier against being prepared for class at the first hour they join. We must help with
this.
 Because we assume that students will have the technology (by putting courses up that
require it), we have an obligation to support that assumption. Even computer literate students
need help at times with new technology, and many of our distance students don't have
computer literacy skills.
 Students will have a single point of contact to answer the DE needs.
 Students will always have questions that will require more information or the need to
research their needs and this will add another step in the process of getting them to the right
place which will cause more frustration. Most students want to talk to the source directly.
 Alot of people that work at the help desks are not helpful; they really are not able to respond
to local needs for administrative passwords, repairing or loaning computers.
 Students need to have technological skills in order to begin to take distance courses.
 Clearly students need help from time-to-time, but I don't see Statewide as being the answer
to this. The student needs to be channeled to someone close to the unit that is providing the
instruction. Most questions that come up relate to content and course details, so the best
Statewide could do is simply refer the caller to the right place. There are other ways of
generating the referral.
 This can be the way to connect students to someone at their perspective campus. Having
switched MAUs for one semester I found it hard to find IT help, having a number I could call
just to find out were that help could come from would be wonderful.
 A statewide technical help desk could result in efficiencies, since it would minimize the need
for resources at the MAU level. If the technology is uniform statewide, then technical help
probably should be uniform statewide.
 Statewide doesn't have to be the answer, but perhaps each campus could have equal
access to these important resources.
 A 1-800 Help Desk should have staff at work VERY CLOSELY (assigned) to supporting a
local campus. This person would help with training the local rural village campus help desk
person and the system would be more strongly supported.
 Local campuses know their own students and their own technical needs, but they don't
always have the staff to be open at all hours. If the help desk function could be shared
electronically, each campus could contribute some of their staff time. This would also require
good training and good solution protocols to be shared across the system among help desk
personnel.
 While we often would like to have students who enroll for DE courses with a wide
technological background--and often are surprised to find this actually happen--we must
accept that as we reach more general populations/audiences, we must be able to provide
technological assistance for any account of student success. Having the technical support in
one place will likely make it easier for students to contact the help when they need it,
especially if the help desk is designed specifically for their technological needs.
 This is a service that needs to be in place for distance ed to be successful. There needs to
be adequate funding in place to make sure students are provided the support. If this support is
not in place then distance ed will not provide the students the needed resource.
 While most of the time there are no issues for the students, it seems when there is an issue
the campus helpdesk is either too backlogged to respond in a timely manner or they are
closed. Consolidation into one helpdesk would allow for 24/7 and bridge the gap for those who
take classes across the MAUs.
 if the UA username is implemented across the system and one type of course management
system, it could be effective to share the helpdesk responsibility between MAUs - of course it'd
take a statewide helpdesk database to keep track of work orders.
 There is already one helpdesk between SW and UAF (or suppose to be) but we still get
routed back and forth. Creating one helpdesk would become very political. Instead how about
just a simple answers and routing to local campuses for more technical assistance with follow
up.
 Have Technical Help Desk staffed with tech specialists and advising specialists.
 Susan Warner
 Kate Gordon
 Heidi Simmons
 susie
 Better inform CIOs of the project so they don't throw clinkers in it because they weren't
informed.
3. Define faculty development needs for effective DE.
 People make things happen. You can analyze and study data till the cows come home, but
that won't create meaningful distance courses and degrees for students to pursue better lives.
If you create great courses and programs and train faculty how to teach and advise students
well, much of the game is won.
 Identifying faculty who want and need DE training and the type and amount of training
needed to meet their needs.
 All campuses can receive increases in headcount by developing the courses our students
want and need. Distance Delivered courses are absolutely essential for rural Alaska. Faculty
must be given support to develop courses.
 If faculty aren't capable or willing to implement distance ed courses with correct pedagogy
AND if they are not supported in their understandings of current as well as future technologies
available for online delivery, distance education cannot proceed. We will simply continue to
have too many courses offered before they are ready to be published.
 faculty development can influence course development ----- that can then influence student
retention
 Without a well trained faculty and staff and professionally presented course site we cannot
expect our students to enter the classes prepared
 The first two are not good ideas to start with and the last is too political. The faculty
development is interesting to me, since most of my colleagues are not interested in DE and the
development hinges on good communications with this group - preach beyond the choir.
 Without high quality instruction, the rest of the process is irrelevant.
 We need to be aware of faculty needs to create a powerful system for professional
development in DE
 There are a lot of opportunities for faculty. They just need an incentive to take advantage of
them.
 Until it is clear what the UA Statewide or MAU Academic plan is, it is a waste of money to
work on the faculty development piece.
 Well then maybe we need to take a survey of what the current Academic Plans are and who
is lacking an Academic Plan to determine need. Perhaps we provide support, in the form of
extra training or seminars, to the MAUs or campuses that have Academic Plans as incentive
 A definition of what "faculty development needs" means would be useful in clarifying the
situation. As it is stated, it is so vague that there's bound to be disagreement. Clarity is called
for. What do we mean? Then we can address how to achieve it.
 Margie Draskovich - Kodiak
 Melissa Brown
 Sheri Denison
 perkins
 Victor Zinger
 Steve Gillon
 Matt Olsen/Cathy LeCompte
 joe mason
 How do faculty find out about other types of information - the Senates? governance?
Provosts? Blackboard? Would that be a way to inform them of this training?
2. Working Group Plans
1. Deliverable: Design for 1-800-UAHELPU - In-house pilot -- $6.12K.
Leader: Katie.
 Make sure there is an online chat function that is accessible from each campus website.
 perhaps invite someone from each campus, including database developer for input
 ask for a UA-wide student services audio conference
 Make an incentive as part of the plan for each campus to place a link to the online chat on
their website
 more people to help input
 Plan to create an advisor manual to be used by the people who answer the phone
 get SW behind you, start with Saichi and Mary Gower
 don't rely on the each MAU's catalog! talk to the people on the ground
 This group needs more people.
 Particularly address investigating routing of DE-related inquiries in this effort as it would be
very easy to become lost in the hugeness of University programs, procedures, and practices.
 Plan to send around a draft copy of the plan to the DESB with enough time before June 30
so that comments can be included in the final
 Thank you for all the good ideas. Please give us more.
 Make a [beginning] inventory of the existing resources for this service a deliverable of the
90 day report
 #278 are you volunteering to help them?
 This is a huge project for three people, calling all volunteers?
 survey campus directors for buy in
 HELP HELP HELP WE NEED BODIES
 Who else would be interested in working with us?
 Katy. I am on sabbatical until May 15, however, I am so enthused that I will work on this
before I return to work.
 Holly Royce
 Doug D.
 Set up a regular meeting day and time. The 90 days will slip by if you don't.
2. Deliverable: Four-phase plan for developing recommendations for statewide
tech support -- $11.35K
Leader: Susan
 I believe that inventories are done regularly about hardware, so you would probably want to
find what info is currently available.
 contact each it at each campus, perhaps onsite visits if possible
 I think you may need more people to help.
 Research for existing models.
 I'm not sure this will help since the main focus of your rec. will be on inventory, but Mat-Su
recently finished a survey of online students; interesting responses found on problems
(technical and otherwise).
 each campus is suppose to have an inventory person - use them to help you get a detail list
 As well as contacting the MAU IT departments, contact the distance offices as they have
also prepared many items of use and have another view of what help is needed.
 Yes, this group will need more people. Include your name if you want to join Susan, Kate,
Susie and Heidi. Or suggest folks from your campus we should talk to.
 what about campus's that don't have an IT person?
 Define what tech support is, exactly.
 A specific list of activities or presentation; as reason why committee members will be
attending i-design needs to be discussed.
 How long will it take to hire a person to do the work. They need to be done by June 30.
 Will the EDIR help?
 some campus's just have a name listed to fill in the blank for the IT inventory, but they're job
is in another area
 Re MatSu comment #277, who might we contact there for the survey results?
 re iDesign comment #295, of the 4 people in our initial group, 3 of them were already
planning on attending iDesign. Thought we could do double duty.
 I can get it for you: Sheri Denison
 Thanks, Sheri. Susan W
 susie
 Kate G.- on working group
 Heidi on working group
 Susan
 Bob Perkins
 Cathy LeCompte/Matt Olsen
3. Deliverable: Fill 3 more I-teach sessions this summer. -- $2.29K
Leader: Joe
 Since there seems to be a fully developed Instructional design/delivery function, why not
just "cut a check" and let those already responsible for the function allocate the resources
however they want to maximize faculty development within the next 90 days.
 Ensure that I-Teach, if UA statewide funded, is absolutely marketed to the whole UA
community.
 Have developed brochure, poster, e-mail ad for the three new sessions
 Find out the sites of the 30 plus faculty that want to do to iTeach and recommend where you
would like the three sessions to meet.
 It will be useful to broaden understanding of I Teach by relating it to the Understanding by
Design model that is quite familiar to many faculty.
 Have current iTeach instructors place material they have in a website course faculty could
access to get a taste of what the course is like.
 Really go for adjuncts and other teachers who are marginalized.
 Utilize current marketing structure from CDE to perform this task.
 Create website to promote iteach seminars if not already done
 Develop color brochure to send to all UA faculty/adjuncts explaining the future of distance
education and how/why they should become involved.
 make sure the directors know what is going on and encourage them to get with their faculty
- also inform those in course scheduling - they often know who is teaching what and how.
 Create a short video clip about iTeach program
 Train more designers to instruct to meet the needs of the faculty
 Do a survey of faculty to see when and where they could go to a 3-day faculty development
seminar.
 Adjuncts may feel marginalized (if only because they're compensated so little) but they
remain resources to which the institution has made no long term commitment. It may help in
the short term to provide opportunity to adjunct, but diverting funds away from the tenuretrack/term instructors to do so is not cost effective.
 Excellent idea to focus on adjuncts, who teach a large % of the online courses, usually
without much help or development time.
 Design on-line workshops for the iTeach follow ups.
 Place I-Teach on internal email servers for full-time and adjunct faculty.
 Work to teach more people to teach the workshops and be sure content is constantly
updated and reviewed so it is current and best practice.
 Identify and train mentors for local community campuses.
 Construct Teach the Trainer courses so the instructional designers at the campus level can
help faculty at those campus who need the skills
 I'm not originally on this group but I still think they need more money and support.
 The marketing and ed of I-teach is needed as more faculty will want to be involved once
they realize the possibilities.
 Joe Mason
 Melissa Brown
 Margie Draskovich - Kodiak
 Steve Gillon
 Sheri Denison
 Victor Zinger
3. Meeting Commentary
1. Curt Madison
 The group addressed priority issues surfaced by the Educational Technology Team on
Wednesday of this week. We expect to get reports back from three of the priorities before June
30. The group is enthusiastic and engaged.
2. Kate Gordon
 This was a terrific combination of people from across the University. UAA needs to maintain
involvement with this group, particularly as funds are being distributed for projects. See the
three funded projects which resulted from this meeting. It would be good to have clear
knowledge of UAA strategic direction regarding distance. Thanks for allowing me to participate.
-Kate
3. Margie Draskovich
 Hi Connie, The DESB was very productive as always and you will be receiving the details of
our work in a formal format soon. I enjoyed seeing you on the AK ICE presentation. I would like
to offer to be more involved with AK ICE for the Kodiak campus. Thanks for sending me - I
enjoy being a part of the DESB committee.
4. Sheri Denison
 The meeting covered several points of particular interest to Mat-Su. I think one of the most
valuable things we discussed was promoting I-Teach, an instructional session/workshop that
allows faculty to learn both the technology and the pedogogy behind online courses
(particularly developing a course). This is an excellent tool that I hope to interest several
faculty members in from Mat-Su. Another excellent discussion we held related to assessing
technological issues at the major campuses; after having recently reviewed the Academic
Affairs report on online issues, I think several of the problems we encountered may be
examined by the group. Thank you for allowing me the time to participate in this discussion.
5. Steve Gillon
 A good meeting. It's good to connect with DE people across the system, and build
networks. Some good iedas came out of this meeting. We even had good weather in Juneau.
6. Heidi Simmons
 The ability to meet with other colleagues through the Statewide Steering Committee is
appreciated. I can already see that in these past two years the cooperation and unity amongst
MAU's and different campuses is greatly improving. We need to, through recommendations
made to President Hamilton, (from both this group and the ETT) continue to provide strong
communication and dissemination of the information discussed.
7. Holly Royce
 The collaboration and feedback from the ETT and DESB in beneficial in realizing what is
important and impacting other campus, providing us with insight on issues that we share. It
was wonderful to see other campuses wondering how issues effect rural campuses and how
we can find unique ways to get information to all students. Three workgroups have been
charged in the areas of faculty development, Distance Education HelpDesk and a UA wide
Clearinghouse for students to obtain information and be referred to appropriate
campus/advisor. More information will be provided when I return.
8. Joe Mason
 The format of the meetings really allowed a lot of work to be accomplished in a short time
 These meetings are very valuable as exchanges of ideas in addition to the working groups
that are formed
9. Melissa Brown
 The following is a meeting summary. The meeting proved to be a great chance to touch
base once again with others in the distance ed field to share ideas and problem solve ways to
serve students better. Three work groups were established to follow through with shorter terms
issues.
10. Robert Perkins
 Good meeting for me to connect with the state-wide issues in DE. The "special needs" of
the on-line teachers of math and math-based science and engineering have not really been
addressed, nor the issues with research-oriented faculty to expand their teaching via distance.
11. Susan Warner
 The structure of this meeting and the use of the collaboration tools, supporting continuous
and parallel contribution to the works in progress, has left me feeling this is one of the most
productive meetings I have ever attended. Kudos to Curt, Bob Briggs, and the CDE team for
facilitating this work with such panache.
 I am feeling some trepidation at the magnitude of the task my work group has taken on for
the next 90 days but am thankful of the opportunity to contribute to improving distant student
support services.
12. Victor Zinger
 This meeting was very informative and very useful for me. I was updated on current issues
and status of Distance Education in the State of Alaska across the boarders with specific
emphasis on needs and challenges of community campuses similar to those we are facing at
Bristol Bay campus I think that presentations on topics of AK ICE (course sharing program)
and on implementation of Distance Nursing program were especially valuable. In my opinion
the Distance Nursing program has potential to be replicating as a model for Teacher
Education.
A lot of very important topics and critical areas related to Distance Education were discussed
and plans for implementation were outlined. Personally, I think that any efforts to coordinate
and articulate the distance offering across the University system are very important and help to
make the University stronger and more competitive in the world of education.
13. Matt Olsen
 Good meeting with some goals that should be attainable within 90 days. A good first foray
for me in the group with some very valuable contacts made and a better understanding of
statewide distance structure.
14. Katy Spangler
 We had a great meeting, made easier using internet technology. Imagine groups coming to
consensus in 15 minutes!
Please be sure to take a look at AK ICE....I have some materials on it that I would like to share
with our registrar, John and Robbie about facilitation of sending and receiving courses
between campuses.
This is an action oriented group: we are working on 3 projects. One is way to make information
about technology more accessible to everyone; the second is to advertise and support more
faculty development in instructional design and technology. The third project is one I'm really
excited about: an 800 number that is answered by a real person and serves as a UA clearing
house to get people's questions answered by the right person.
Please take a look at this report and ask me about any details that are of interest.
The Center for Distance Education may be housed in Fairbanks, but it is truly working for all of
us. I'm proud to serve on this board.
Katy
15. Susie Feero
 Thanks to Bob, Curt & the CDE staff for another great meeting. I appreciate the tools and
the direction from the ETT. I feel we've learned from our previous meetings and will be more
successful in our work teams. We need to continue the communication!
16. Doug Desourcie
 Productive meeting in the past two days. The meeting software is incredible. The ETT group
established priorities and we are moving forward. The fall meeting is tentatively scheduled in
Valdez.
4. Future Meetings
1. Next DESB meeting: Valdez, Oct 16-20, 2006
 While accommodating another workshop/conference may be important, remember that at
least one MAU (Anchorage) relatively few classes are held on Friday, so an end of week
meeting will disrupt classes less.
 Try to hold it early in the week so it doesn't interfere with the state reading conference.
Step Name: Evaluate 90 Day Working Group Proposals
Tool Name: Alternative Analysis
Ballot Details
Ballot Items
1. Deliverable: Design for 1-800-UAHELPU - In-house pilot - 10,000
 I like it.
 Would like to see budget for $20,000.
 Are advising needs that great? What is the problem with the advisors in place at each campus? I
don't think this is a necessary deliverable
 This is not for advising, it is for informational purposes of students who don't know where to go.
 I'd like to hear more about this task before allocating $$
 This is a must for a broader range of service than just advising of students. The pilot project
would test the system on a small scale and develop access for students.
 This seems to be the cart before the horse. UA needs to coordinate/develop its distance
programs before any sense of uniform marketing/advising can take place.
 What are the details of the this 10,000 budget?
 I don't think a piloted projected is feasible with only three of you, perhaps you should change it
to a maped out plan or what is being offered and what the needs are.
 I would also like to hear more as I don't know enough about the deliverable to determine if it
would require $10K
 While the $10K for a pilot test would be excellent--providing a concrete result--advising doesn't
seem to be as necessary as the technological or pedagogical concerns. Perhaps narrow the focus
and reduce the cost.
 I don't think it is needed after 9 at night through 6 in the morning in any case. Also, traffic will be
heaviest for four weeks each semester and very little traffic other times.
 Each MAU has its own advising system. That system must be improved rather than new
created.
 This is a marketing tool that would aid every student service, program and course in the system,
as well as providing a pathway to information within the UA system. Everyone wins.
It is NOT advising, just routing to the right person.
The "smart person" at the end of the phoneline would use a database to direct the caller to the right
person within the UA system, and then would follow up by contacting that person and verifying a 24
hour turn around time. Metrics would be part of the plan.
We could do a pilot project this summer. Need one person to compile the database, or pool the
info. Then, try it in house for a week in the summer, using UA employees and selected students to
try it out.
Such a program could cost a lot to try and to keep running, but start-up would be the most costly.
We would ask for some funding from Statewide PR dept, as it could only benefit everyone.
Ask for one "detractor" and students to be in on the planning committee.
It's a simple idea that can put a voice, a real voice, to the university.
 Will this be combined with other efforts such as the ems software?
 This is a clearinghouse not just for DE but for all programs/services. Remember, it's not
advising, it's routing to the advisors and other people who know.
 This group needs the entire $20,000. The live person could direct students to tech support as
well as academic support.
 Do we have enough time to get this running?
 We need to concentrate on the number one priority????? Students
 Would anything done here be sustainable past the 90 days? Perhaps this group could focus on
these issues as a subgroup of the DE Help desk
2. Deliverable: Four-phase plan for developing recommendations for statewide tech
support - 8300
 5,000 is needed for staff buyout as not all in group are on contract for 90 days.
 what about fxhelp? there's an 800 number available for tech support. Don't the other campus's
have similar tech support numbers? What's the advantage of adding yet another one?
 support for current students, faculty, participants in distance is a higher priority than recruiting
new students into the system.
 This is important to tie together existing help desk and have understanding of what is out there
and to create a cohesive user-friendly system both students and faculty.
 I don't think the tech support is only for new students.
 the fxhelp 800 number is internal -- not available for students
 there is a new software in place at statewide that may help tie all of the help desks together -knowledge base and trouble tickets
 This is one of the first aspects of distance education that needs to take place - while the MAUs
all have helpdesks - they cannot assist the students for other MAU issues (username/passcodes
for one example).
 the fxhelp number is available to students
 perhaps we should link the two help lines together, couldn't there be one line and a quick
transfer to the appropriate person. It seems you could share funds and resources.
 phone technology can direct students to their home campus helpdesk during regular hours and
then to a different location after hours
 Tech support is different from "getting into Blackboard."
 There are many resources for help within the UA system but even the tech-iest of the tech don't
know of them all, or how to properly categorize or forward calls for help. No help is available 24/7.
Even in 90 days (much less a longer effort) this group could make a real contribution to improving
UA responsiveness.
 This is an area that needs addressing, but is there a way of using what we currently have and
reducing cost? I'd like to see the issue defined more, perhaps.
 I can get all the tech support I need from my home campus. Why do we need another layer of it?
 The purpose of this survey is to start to determine duplicate services and provide a better way to
communicate what is out there including combined look at management of services such as BB/elive support.
 I believe there are mechanisms already in place to provide this support locally.
 Tech support is very valuable thing.
 we're not necessarily saying we need another helpdesk # -- just taking an inventory of what's
currently available and asking DE stakeholders for input on their challenges and priorities and then
analyzing the 2 sets of data before making any recommendations
 This proposal is for Phase 1 of the 4
3. Deliverable: fill 3 more I-teach sessions this summer - 20,000
 Planning is good, but this solution actually produces results!
 this is an important task
 It seems horrible to turn away any faculty who want this training.
 The need has been clearly demonstrated with the number of applicants exceeding the number
of seats available at iTeach each year
 Funds for this are available from other sources.
 The interest expressed by applicants is also a form of research: what faculty need the
development, what kinds of development faculty feel they need, and which colleges/disciplines, et
cetera have bought into distance delivery.
 Training is important for those who are interested and will benefit should have access.
 What other sources?
 The need is already defined so the money will produce a known result - use it as described.
 Yeah we know alot of you want training, but what about surveying what training is needed by all
faculty at the community campuses.
 What about adjuncts?
 One idea is to develop an I-teach session for science and math.
 Why would we sell a product and not adequately train our people to deliver it? By continuing to
limit this training we increase the amount of students and faculty who are becoming disheartened
with distance ed.
 #98 excellent point
 The trouble with workshops is that they are for the group rather than individualized to specific
needs. I prefer a short visit from a consultant.
 Curt has already said that their will be funds for 3 iteach this summer so now we are up to six
ITeaches which is quite a few....
 What is I Teach?
 I’d like to know the sites of the 30 applicants registered that can't get in to the current iTeaches.
Criteria
1. Allocate
Cell Explanations
Row: Deliverable: fill 3 more I-teach sessions this summer - 20,000
Column: Allocate
Comments
Row: Deliverable: Four-phase plan for developing recommendations for statewide tech support - 8300
Column: Allocate
Comments
Ballot
Criteria
Ballot Items
Allocate
Polling Method:
Allocation1
Allow Bypass:
Yes
Deliverable: Design for 1-800-UAHELPU - In-house pilot - 10,000
Deliverable: Four-phase plan for developing recommendations for statewide
tech support - 8300
Deliverable: fill 3 more I-teach sessions this summer - 20,000
Polling Guidelines:
1
Allocation Polling Guidelines *8*Please allocate 20 points among the three proposals. Each point represents $1000.
Polling Details
Cell Statistic: mean
Number of Ballots Cast: 17
Number of Ballots Abstained: 0
Ballot Details
Ballot Items
1. Deliverable: Design for 1-800-UAHELPU - In-house pilot - 10,000
 I like it.
 Would like to see budget for $20,000.
 Are advising needs that great? What is the problem with the advisors in place at each campus? I
don't think this is a necessary deliverable
 This is not for advising, it is for informational purposes of students who don't know where to go.
 I'd like to hear more about this task before allocating $$
 This is a must for a broader range of service than just advising of students. The pilot project
would test the system on a small scale and develop access for students.
 This seems to be the cart before the horse. UA needs to coordinate/develop its distance
programs before any sense of uniform marketing/advising can take place.
 What are the details of the this 10,000 budget?
 I don't think a piloted projected is feasible with only three of you, perhaps you should change it
to a mapped out plan or what is being offered and what the needs are.
 I would also like to hear more as I don't know enough about the deliverable to determine if it
would require $10K
 While the $10K for a pilot test would be excellent--providing a concrete result--advising doesn't
seem to be as necessary as the technological or pedagogical concerns. Perhaps narrow the focus
and reduce the cost.
 I don't think it is needed after 9 at night through 6 in the morning in any case. Also, traffic will be
heaviest for four weeks each semester and very little traffic other times.
 Each MAU has its own advising system. That system must be improved rather than new
created.
 This is a marketing tool that would aid every student service, program and course in the system,
as well as providing a pathway to information within the UA system. Everyone wins.
It is NOT advising, just routing to the right person.
The "smart person" at the end of the phoneline would use a database to direct the caller to the right
person within the UA system, and then would follow up by contacting that person and verifying a 24
hour turn around time. Metrics would be part of the plan.
We could do a pilot project this summer. Need one person to compile the database, or pool the
info. Then, try it in house for a week in the summer, using UA employees and selected students to
try it out.
Such a program could cost a lot to try and to keep running, but start-up would be the most costly.
We would ask for some funding from Statewide PR dept, as it could only benefit everyone.
Ask for one "detractor" and students to be in on the planning committee.
It's a simple idea that can put a voice, a real voice, to the university.
 Will this be combined with other efforts such as the ems software?
 This is a clearinghouse not just for DE but for all programs/services. Remember, it's not
advising, it's routing to the advisors and other people who know.
 This group needs the entire $20,000. The live person could direct students to tech support as
well as academic support.
 Do we have enough time to get this running?
 We need to concentrate on the number one priority????? Students
 Would anything done here be sustainable past the 90 days? Perhaps this group could focus on
these issues as a subgroup of the DE Help desk
2. Deliverable: Four-phase plan for developing recommendations for statewide tech
support - 8300
 5,000 is needed for staff buyout as not all in group are on contract for 90 days.
 what about fxhelp? there's an 800 number available for tech support. Don't the other campus's
have similar tech support numbers? What's the advantage of adding yet another one?
 support for current students, faculty, participants in distance is a higher priority than recruiting
new students into the system.
 This is important to tie together existing help desk and have understanding of what is out there
and to create a cohesive user-friendly system both students and faculty.
 I don't think the tech support is only for new students.
 the fxhelp 800 number is internal -- not available for students
 there is a new software in place at statewide that may help tie all of the help desks together -knowledge base and trouble tickets
 This is one of the first aspects of distance education that needs to take place - while the MAUs
all ahave helpdesks - they cannot assist the students for other MAU issues (username/passcodes
for one example).
 the fxhelp number is available to students
 perhaps we should link the two help lines together, couldn't there be one line and a quick
transfer to the appropriate person. It seems you could share funds and resources.
 phone technology can direct students to their home campus helpdesk during regular hours and
then to a different location after hours
 Tech support is different from "getting into Blackboard."
 There are many resources for help within the UA system but even the tech-yist of the tech don't
know of them all, or how to proprerly categorize or forward calls for help. No help is available 24/7.
Even in 90 days (much less a longer effort) this group could make a real contribution to improving
UA responsiveness.
 This is an area that needs addressing, but is there a way of using what we currently have and
reducing cost? I'd like to see the issue defined more, perhaps.
 I can get all the tech support I need from my home campus. Why do we need another layer of it?
 The purpose of this survey is to start to determine duplicate services and provide a better way to
communicate what is out there including combined look at management of services such as BB/elive support.
 I believe there are mechanisms already in place to provide this support locally.
 Tech support is very valuable thing.
 we're not necessarily saying we need another helpdesk # -- just taking an inventory of what's
currently available and asking DE stakeholders for input on their challenges and priorities and then
analyzing the 2 sets of data before making any recommendations
 This proposal is for Phase 1 of the 4
3. Deliverable: fill 3 more I-teach sessions this summer - 20,000
 Planning is good, but this solution actually produces results!
 this is an important task
 It seems horrible to turn away any faculty who want this training.
 The need has been clearly demonstrated with the number of applicants exceeding the number
of seats available at iTeach each year
 Funds for this are available from other sources.
 The interest expressed by applicants is also a form of research: what faculty need the
development, what kinds of development faculty feel they need, and which colleges/disciplines, et
cetera have bought into distance delivery.
 Training is important for those who are interested and will benefit should have access.
 What other sources?
 The need is already defined so the money will produce a known result - use it as described.
 Yeah we know alot of you want training, but what about surveying what training is needed by all
faculty at the community campuses.
 What about adjuncts?
 One idea is to develop an I-teach session for science and math.
 Why would we sell a product and not adequately train our people to deliver it? By continuing to
limit this training we increase the amount of students and faculty who are becoming disheartened
with distance ed.
 #98 excellent point
 The trouble with workshops is that they are for the group rather than individualized to specific
needs. I prefer a short visit from a consultant.
 Curt has already said that their will be funds for 3 iteach this summer so now we are up to six
ITeaches which is quite a few....
 What is I Teach?
 Ide like to know the sites of the 30 applicants registered that can't get in to the current iTeaches.
Criteria
1. Allocate
Cell Explanations
Row: Deliverable: fill 3 more I-teach sessions this summer - 20,000
Column: Allocate
Row: Deliverable: Four-phase plan for developing recommendations for statewide tech support - 8300
Column: Allocate
Polling Results Table
Cell Statistic: mean
Criteria
Ballot Items
Allocate
Polling Method:
Allocation1
Allow Bypass:
Yes
Deliverable: Design for 1-800-UAHELPU - In-house pilot - 10,000
Deliverable: Four-phase plan for developing recommendations for statewide
tech support - 8300
Deliverable: fill 3 more I-teach sessions this summer - 20,000
6.117647
11.352941
2.294118
Vote Spreads
Column: Allocate
Polling Method: Allocation
Allow Bypass: Yes
Number of People Who Polled in Each Range of Values
Ballot Items
Deliverable: Design for 1-800UAHELPU - In-house pilot 10,000
Deliverable: Four-phase plan for
developing recommendations for
statewide tech support - 8300
Deliverable: fill 3 more I-teach
sessions this summer - 20,000
0
to
1
2
to
3
4
to
5
6
to
7
8
to
9
10
to
11
12
to
13
14
to
15
16
to
17
18
to
20
mean
2
1
4
0
5
3
1
0
0
0
6.117647
0
0
1
1
1
9
1
1
1
2
11.352941
4
10
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.294118