Minutes from Student IT Fluency task force meeting 9/28/00

     *JoAnn M Burke ,
     *Julie Long , 
     *Julie Storme ,
     *Karen Chambers ,
     *Rick Tarara ,
     *Georgeanna Rosenbush ,
     *Lori G Maxwell 
Cc: Teaching Learning Technology Roundtable -- 
     *Joel Cooper ,
     *Dan Mandell ,
     *Kelly Dugan , 
     *Julie Long ,
     *Julie Storme ,
     *Peter Smith ,
     *Patrick White ,
Subject: Student Fluency Task Force

A group of us (see * before names) met at 3:30 on Thursday (9/28) to discuss the issue of student fluency with information technology, how to assess it, and how to make sure that every student who graduates from Saint Mary's can function effectively in a technologically-oriented world.

I started the meeting by clarifying the charge to the task force from the TLTR steering committee and reviewing the reading assignment from the Web. This student fluency task force has no direct connection to the strategic plan task forces, but our recommendations will be submitted to the technology and curriculum task forces.

Some of the issues we considered are as follows:

1. Students come to us at a variety of levels of IT fluency. We can say with almost certainty that no arriving student is any longer computer phobic. (The need to communicate via email and use a word processor has forced everyone to overcome their fear of computers).
   
   
2. Although students are comfortable using the internet, they all need to learn how to separate the wheat from the chaff. This analysis of web information must be part of IT fluency
   
   
3. Students will appear all along the continuum from novice to experts in understanding and using information technology. To assess where they are, we need a rubric which identifies different levels of fluency and some identifying characteristics of each level.
   
   
4. Many (perhaps most) students are motivated to improve their level of fluency on their own once they are aware of the possibilities.
   
   
5. It is important to create an atmosphere of high expectation and support rather than a focus on requirements.
   
   
6. In addition to classwork opportunities to improve fluency in information technology, we must create cocurricular opportunities, such as an SMC TV station, a video yearbook, or sistar projects. Perhaps we can create support groups (like RESNET) for various needs in the Residence Halls so students can improve their fluency by helping others.
   
   
7. Bringing back graduates, or using them in other ways to exhibit the level of fluency needed in the workplace, would motivate students.
   
   
8. We may be legally obligated to make sure students use the internet wisely and understand the consequences of their actions on line.

We brainstormed a number of ways to ensure that each student improve her level of information technology, but did not attempt to rank these or even to discuss them in depth. Some of the ideas are as follows:

1. Have each student create a technology portfolio into which she puts evidence to support her assessment of her fluency level.
   
   
2. Have each student develop a project (such as a sophisticated web page), with her advisor, which she works on during her four years and which constantly challenges her to improve her IT fluency.
   
   
3. A technical exam given by a national testing service.
   
   
4. A course or sequence of courses.

One constraint that kept coming up was time. Whatever we decide needs to be done will come on top of an already very intense course load for both students and the faculty who would assess their fluency. For example, the curriculum committee would not allow any additional course requirements without removing one of the current requirements. Since the strategic plan curriculum task force is currently studying the curriculum, it is a good time to be making proposals. One co-chair of the curriculum task force and one co-chair of the technology task force was at the meeting.

We decided to spend a month trying to set up a rubric to be used in assessing a person's level of IT fluency. I will start the rubric development by email and expect others to respond so we can have a working model by our next meeting which I will try to schedule right before Fall break. If you are interested in this project, but were not able to make the meeting last Thursday, please let me know the times when you have regularly scheduled classes or meetings. In fact, I would ask those who did make the 9/28 meeting to also let me know when you cannot meet.

If you are a department liaison and do not respond to this message, I will assume that you are not interested in the topic and will take you off the IT fluency list. (You will still be on the liaison list)

If you were at the meeting and would like to add or subtract anything from what I mentioned above, please do so.

Peter

Peter Smith
Professor, Mathematics Department
Saint Mary's College, Notre Dame, IN 46556