Thursday, November 20, 2008

2:30 – 4:00 p.m.
Rm. 35-315

Agenda

  1. Educational Video Strategy for MIT
    • Steve Gass, Associate Director for Public Services MIT Libraries will present a report on recent educational experiments involving video leading to a discussion on Implications for MIT Strategy on educational video services and infrastructure.
  2. Global Experiences RFP

Thursday, November 5, 2008

8:30-10:00 a.m.
Room 12-196

Agenda

  1. Discussion of RFP for MITCET sponsored experiments (demonstrations) for advancing Global Experiences for students
  2. MITCET relationship and linkage to Educational Technology related committees: What would be a useful structure for governance, communication and decision making?
  3. Report on Provost’s discussion with SPARCC
  4. Upcoming topics: Educational Video; OEIT’s work; Classroom/Learning Spaces

Wednesday, September 17, 2008

2:00-3:30 p.m.
Rm. 11-103

Agenda

  1. Welcome
    • Membership, Charter
    • Focus for 2008: Agenda Topics and strategic focus
  2. Update on Student Innovation Award
  3. OCW Organization update and plans
    • MITCET’s ongoing engagement in Educational Content lifecycle planning.
  4. Strategic Discussion:
    • Launching educational technology innovation experiments for MIT educational priorities.
    • Increasing focus on providing global educational experiences for all our students.
    • Present opportunities for technology-enabled innovation in areas such as flexible education delivery, collaboration, as well as blending situated and remote experiences.
    • What recommendations should MITCET make for launching a process to better understand and implement these opportunities through engaging faculty and students?
  5. Plan for next set of meetings

Thursday, May 22, 2008

4:00-5:30 p.m.
Room 1-114

Agenda

  1. Potential opportunities and approaches for funding educational innovation –
    Even as we articulate activities and experiments that will help us understand emerging educational technology opportunities, it will become important to develop funding strategies to support them. Sufficient resources on a sustainable basis to support educational innovation are an issue. In the past we have had “central” initiatives such as iCampus, d’Arbeloff, the Alumni funds, which have fueled the front end of educational innovation activity. The future trajectory is uncertain. We will brainstorm ideas for funding and a coordinated institutional model that includes external, central and decentralized funding.
  2. Update on the DOS (DSpace, OCW and Stellar integration) project and MITCET review process for this and similar initiatives.
  3. Key elements of MITCET report to the Provost.

    The major areas** identified in the CSET report that we used as a baseline for our discussions provide a useful organization/framework for developing this report. Our discussion should help identify major initiatives, their status, issues and concerns in these areas and any proposed major directions.**Academic Systems & Services, Educational Process; Technology Support; Technology Planning; Comparative Assessment

Thursday, April 17, 2008

4:00-5:30 p.m.
Room 1-114

Agenda

  1. Cost of Educational Technology (Jerry Grochow)
    Even as we articulate activities and experiments that will help us understand emerging educational technology opportunities…
    • How do we understand what educational technology costs at MIT?
    • What are the priorities and directions reflected through our
      expenditures and allocation? How do/should strategic priorities be?
  2. ACCORD; The Academic Computing Coordination effort (Vijay Kumar)
    • What is it: Mission, Goals, Activities
    • How can it best serve its goal of providing easily accessible and
      seamless service for academic technology for faculty and students?
  3. Summary of our discussions so far
    • Status of Issues/themes from last meeting: progress, gaps
    • Priorities
    • Next steps

Friday, March 21, 2008

10 – 11:30 am
Room 1-114

Agenda

The general context of the meeting is the various reports we should be
receiving as a council, and the recommendations we should be making in
turn.

The attached materials should help prepare for Friday’s discussion. As
some of you will remember, Sapient Corporation was engaged in fall
2005 to undertake a review of the state of MIT educational technology.
That review has informed some of the changes over the past two years,
including, for example, the reorganization of MIT’s educational
technology organization and the formation of ACCORD.

Now that 2 years have passed, this might be a good time to consider
progress we’ve made over what was observed in fall 2005. If you get a
chance before Friday, please look at the “Current State of Educational
Technology” White paper, paying particular attention to the various
themes that were called out. Please form your own judgment about
which of which of the concerns raised then are still pertinent, and
which of the recommendations remain to be addressed

Overall, our discussion should help us address the following questions:

  1. How is MIT addressing the implications of its past investments and initiatives in educational technology?
  2. How is MIT responding to key strategic imperatives (Curriculum Reform etc) at the present.
    – grants; infrastructure; key initiatives and projects
  3. What is the role of educational technology in advancing MIT’s leadership and strength in light of the opportunities/challenges ahead of us?
  4. How should we continue to provide and support an environment that catalyzes and facilitates faculty innovation?

Wednesday, February 13, 2008

2-4:00 pm
Room 1-114

Agenda

  1. MITCET Priorities and Business: This will be an informal agenda-setting discussion for a strategy and process to address:
    • Opportunities and issues from our discussions so far to inform educational technology strategy and framework for investments. Our discussions so far have identified some important opportunities to direct our educational technology efforts and resources, coming out of the DUE priorities, the Task force recommendations for curriculum innovation/reform, from our discussions on leveraging OCW for greater value to MIT education as well as the need to institutionalize innovations launched in recent years.

      Examples of these directions include an increased focus on global experiences, advising/mentoring, addressing the diversity of preparation among our students, innovating with new mixtures of residential and cyberspace in UG courses, more personalized attention to learning with enabling technology as well as linking research and teaching more closely.

      MITCET needs to develop a strategy and process to prioritize and address these opportunities.

      • What are key educational priorities to be addressed through educational technology?
      • What are the kinds of activities that we would undertake to understand evaluate and realize these directions?
    • MITCET Deliverables and Reports – MITCET has to deliver or receive, reports on the topics below: Review of the status, format and schedule.
      • OCW Recommendations for Sustainability
      • MITCET Annual Report: State of MIT educational technology: Vision and Strategy elements; Key Initiatives; resource allocation priorities; Policy and Organizational implications
      • Ed Tech Priorities and resource allocation (Provost and for IT-SPARCC)
      • Ed Innovation Grants (d’Arbeloff) Update
      • Student Information Systems – Status and Visions
      • Subject Evaluation
      • Report on ACCORD
      • Innovation Outreach Progress Report
      • OEIT Update
      • New Teaching and Learning Spaces (includes Athena Cluster transition plans; Classroom Committee Report; Level5 classrooms; Task Force recos).
      • Educational Content Roadmap: Stellar/Course Management System; Repositories (DSpace)
  2. Educational Technology Student Innovation Award. (iCampus): Scope and Process
    MIT received a special endowment gift from Microsoft Research on behalf of iCampus, to support awards to recognize creative student projects in information technology that improve education, community, and learning was established. The DUE Office of Educational Innovation and Technology (OEIT) has established the annual Student Technology iCampus Innovation (STICI) Awards.