Task Forces Address Distance Learning


  • The Distance Learning Task Force (Brooklyn College)

    • The Task Force on Distance Learning, chaired by Lilia Melani, was appointed in the spring 2000 semester, the successor to the Virtual Core Task Force. In May 2001 the Task Force completed and submitted its report, and in the fall Faculty Council accepted this document. The document recommends that the College undertake a programmatic approach to online teaching and learning.
  • The Task Force on Educational Technology (CUNY)

    • In the spring 2001 George Otte chaired the University's Task Force on Educational Technology (TFET). Barbra Higginbotham and Howard Spivak represented the College on this group, which completed its work and submitted a report to Vice-Chancellor Louise Mirrer. The question will be resources: can the University support an expanded Web-based teaching program? We are hopeful that some additional lines for instructional technology staff, lines supported by the University, may come to the campuses as a result of the TFET's recommendations, which appear below. A proposal for some $2M for this purpose has been presented to the University's Board of Trustees' Fiscal Affairs committee.

    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

    On December 8, 2000, the newly formed for Task Force Educational Technology, a broadly representative group convened to guide the University's use of technology in instruction, met with the Executive Vice Chancellor. She asked them to resolve what, in using educational technology, the University should do to improve professional development and effective instruction, to address key policy issues, and to manage resources more efficiently. Recommendations were developed to fulfill the three-fold charge. Here is a sense of the recommendations for each main point of focus.

    RECOMMENDATIONS RE FACULTY AND CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT

    Setting and Achieving Goals: The commitment to instructional technology on the part of the University and its campuses should be stated in terms of explicit goals, priorities, and plans.
    Community-Building: The University should do everything possible (and urge campuses to do everything possible) to ensure the sharing of information about instructional technology.
    Sustainability: The University and individual campuses should affirm that the commitment to instructional technology is an enduring one.

    POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

    Faculty Workload and Support: The University and its colleges should support and recognize work with instructional technology according to established processes.
    Access: The University and each college -- and, indeed, each faculty member -- should commit to assuring students the greatest possible access to technology-enhanced instruction.
    Intellectual Property: The University (and each college) should ensure that standing provisions of academic freedom and faculty prerogatives as well as copyright law extend to work produced and/or used in technology-enhanced teaching.

    RESOURCE MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS

    Budget: Budgetary resources devoted to instructional technology must be increased.
    Personnel: The number of personnel available to support the use of instructional technology must also be increased.
    Infrastructure: The University should do all it can to ensure the compatibility and quality of technology platforms and networks.
    In the 2001-2002 academic year, a modified Task Force continues to meet (largely, electronically) and advise the Vice-Chancellor. Dr. Howard Spivak and Professor Arthur Bankoff (Anthropology and a former chair of the Advisory Committee on Academic Computing) represent Brooklyn.mailto:getbh@cunyvm.cuny.edu