MINUTES Joint Classroom Steering Committee Wednesday, November 7, 2007 1:30-3:00 p.m. Green Hall, Rm 302 Attendance: Ann Morrissey, Dean Libutti, Janie Palm, Ken Sisson, Jim Kowalski, Karen Caines, Michael Pennell, Bob Bullock, Ryan Carrillo and Dave Porter. Introductions and Review of Committee Charge Introductions were made and Ann Morrissey reviewed the committee charge and its genesis (see committee charge). The committee was formed in response to expressed concerns by faculty during a Faculty Senate meeting nearly a year ago about classroom upkeep, access, scheduling, and coordination. Discussion of FSEC proposal for large classroom technology planning It was explained by Ann that, in recent discussions, the Faculty Senate Executive Committee proposed that idea of focusing on improving technology in largest classrooms as way to improve faculty student engagement. Technology-enhanced large classrooms would entice more faculty to teach in them and perhaps this would translate to greater willingness on the part of faculty to teach classes after 2pm if they could teach in those enhanced classrooms. This committee could respond by developing a plan for improving the larger classrooms. There was discussion about the NOMAD Education grant which is money being used for technology to help improve classrooms. It was decided that the committee would like to get an update on the NOMAD grant and related planning, including specific progress to date and plans for the future. An idea was raised about conducting a survey of faculty about the kinds of technology they would prefer to have in larger classes. Other ideas involved soliciting from other universities best classroom technologies. Sources of information would include architectural firms and URI’s IDP and related research from sources like Educause for best practices. Dave Porter will work on these issues in follow up and report back to the committee at our next meeting. Dean Libutti will follow up with the committee by sharing a summary report and master list of classes that have 75 or more students. The idea to develop a minimum standard of classroom technology was discussed. This would involve a proposed standard equipment list as well as defining a “ smart classroom.” Discussion ensued about the role and activity of other classroom management and planning teams. It was reported that the Classroom Mgt Team: (Janie, Ken, Paul, Dave) is active and handles follow up of requests for technology, repairing classroom technology, and scheduling technology for classes. This committee may need to redefine its priorities for work and how it functions to align with the directions of the Classroom Steering Committee. Updates from Subcommittees: Data Based Management: Ken Sission provided a brief update to the committee. 1. Enrollment Services has utilized the Insight program to keep data on classroom There is a need to link this data base with that used for classroom management. 2. These databases should be more end user friendly 3. Need to have greater communication with departments about what exists in classrooms. 4. There is a need and challenge to updating the databases. 5. Work towards standardized classrooms. The committee urged that recommendations be developed by Ken by others working on the issues of improving the data bases and other areas of challenge, so that if resources are needed to make improvements, the committee can advance those issues. Design Standards: Ryan Carrillo indicated that this committee has not convened. There is a need to establish design standards for new classrooms. Technology would need to be incorporated with the design standards Next Agenda: Report from David Porter on best practices research and the faculty survey to improve classroom technology. Future work: Develop an improved system or process for access to classrooms by faculty and resolving problems. Assign faculty to related committees Develop a more effective communication process between classroom management and faculty. Meeting adjourned at 3:00 p.m.