• Created by Unknown User (jwerle), last modified on Sep 27, 2010

K20 Planning Retreat

Location: Museum of the Rockies - Bozeman, Montana
Date: August 19-20, 2010

The K20 Advisory Committee gathered in Bozeman, MT from the evening of Wednesday, August 18 to noon on Friday August 20, 2010. The purpose of the meeting was to define a set of priority work themes and create a road map for achieving them that leverages our collective efforts.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
FINAL AGENDA

Participants:

  • Carol Willis - Texas Education Telecommunications Network, carol.willis@esc13.txed.net
  • Bob Collie - ENA, bcollie@ena.com
  • Kaye Howe - National Science Foundation Digital Library, kaye@ucar.edu
  • Kim Owen - North Dakota State University, kim.owen@ndsu.edu
  • Kim Breuninger - Chester County Intermediate Unit (CCIU), KimB@cciu.org
  • Catherine McKenzie - California Community Colleges Chancellor's Office, cmckenzie@cccco.edu
  • David Underwood - Arkansas Tech University (ARE-ON), dunderwood@atu.edu
  • Ruth Blankenbaker - Center for Interactive Learning and Collaboration (CILC), rblanken@cilc.org
  • Kemi Jona - Office of STEM education Partnerships - Northwestern University, kjona@northwestern.edu
  • Denise Shorey - Centennial BOCES (Board of Cooperative Educational Services), dshorey@cboces.org
  • Marla Davenport - TIES, Marla.Davenport@ties.k12.mn.us
  • Larry Gallery - NYSERnet, lgallery@nysernet.org
  • Sherilyn Evans - CENIC, sevans@cenic.org
  • Randy Stout - KanREN, rstout@ksbor.org
  • Myron Lowe - University of Minnesota, mlowe@umn.edu
  • Heather Todorov - Internet2, heather2@internet2.edu
  • Ann Zimmerman - OARnet, annz@oar.net
  • Stephanie Couch - CENIC, scouch@cenic.org
  • Keith Kreuger - COSN, keith@cosn.org
  • Steve Smith - University of Alaska System Office, steve.smith@alaska.edu
  • Hilary Goldman - ISTE, hgoldmann@iste.org
  • John Pederson - WISCnet, johnpederson@wiscnet.net
  • Perry Movick - Centennial BOCES (Board of Cooperative Educational Services),  pmovick@cboces.org
  • Louis Fox, Internet2, lfox@internet2.edu
  • James Werle, Internet2, jwerle@internet2.edu

Thursday August 19, 2010

Brief History of the Internet2 K20 Initiative (Louis)

  • How we got to where we are today? Why organized the way we are. Want to do real work and lay out a real plan while we're here. Louis has been with K20 Initiative since its inception 10 years ago; worked with Tom West. SEGP program came about early on. Instantiation of RONs... connecting schools, museums, and RONs. Internet2 developed the 'SEGP' sponsorship program. Lots of states wanted to connect. Developed 'whole state network' (SEGP) model. 6-15 networks connected quickly. CIOs unsure about program initially.
  • Louis traveled around the U.S. and talked to folks in government, foundations, etc. Was clear that diverse K20 community needed a way to gather and interact with the research community. The K20 Initiative was born. Goal not to dictate what was most important to the group; rather, enable self-directed agenda setting where multi-faceted group could thrive.
  • Ours is a complex endeavor. We hope to surface important themes and come up with a working plan; who will take leadership; milestones? How will we resource these activities?
  • For me (Louis), a watershed moment. James has come on to be the new director of the K20 Initiative. Louis is stepping down/back - time committed over the next year to help in whatever way needed.

General Discussion of Broad Themes (James)

Outreach and Communications.

  • Our social networking tool (Muse) is avaialble, but hasn't been adopted by critical mass. Need to think about how Muse could work more effectively.
  • Look more broadly at communications for the K20 Initiative. Who is our audience? What are other possible strategies - develop a communications plan.

Community Colleges

  • Catherine: Many community colleges in CA are not very interested in Internet2.
  • Either see K-12 (oriented toward children) or higher education (research institutions).
  • Catherine looks at community college as the "bridge" between K-12 and 4-year institutions; how can you do a collaboration that flows through all of the segments to include community colleges. In CA, only 15% (remote districts) left to connect.
  • Myron: agrees, but community colleges have misinformed perception. More interest, but difficult for them to understand. Need to make message relevant with specific examples for community colleges. More emphasis on research at the undergraduate level... with this, presents opportunity to reach out and involve community colleges. Engage students with STEM, etc. How do we make progress here?
  • Kim Owen: is it appropriate to include tribal colleges as 2-year institutions?
  • Louis: it's been 5-6 years since they've met with Tribal College Association and HACU (Hispanic Colleges). BTOP may present an opportunity. Not many ready to connect early on. Some use satellite technology to connect rural areas.

Remote Instrumentation

  • James: in terms of applications, focus has been on videoconferencing. Not the only potential for the network. Kemi's presentation opened our eyes on examples of remote instrumentation applicability to K-12 (iLabs). Potential in this group over the next few years?
  • Kemi: iLabs project began at MIT. Some higher ed/research institutions starting to put lab equipment online for undergrads (their own) access. Also happening in Europe and Australia - gaining more traction than in the U.S. Purdue does some of this. Great application to demonstrate how networking can be leveraged to share resources and bridges K-12 and higher ed. Just at the beginning of this. Rolled out to ~1,000 students across 5 states. Move beyond videoconferencing as 'flagship' application. Much potential here. What would it take to address the needs of K-12 and community colleges. Especially engages kids in urban and rural schools.
  • Here is a pointer to the presentation Kemi delivered at the 2010 Spring Internet2 Member Meeting on remote instrumentation
  • Louis: Many major research initiatives (e.g., NSF) have education outreach and training components.  If we can engage the initiatives as they write grants; involve K-12 and community colleges constituencies. Greater impact if we can provide exemplars.
  • Kemi: over the past 5-10 years across all scientific disciplines are moving online - eScience/cyberinfrastrucutre. As this occurs, billions of government funding $$ available to K12 and K20. How piggyback on all of this investment? Not need to build a separate resource, just make it accessible to these audiences.
  • Stephanie: The Learning Village web site was exciting; links to textbooks. How do teacher integrate this into the curriculum. This may be a tool to place applications into the lesson plans; may serve as unifying thread across different initiatives. Partnership between Microsoft and Miami-Dade, FL.  From Houghton Mifflin Harcourt web site.
    • "A powerful curriculum management solution that enhances the teaching and learning experience by connecting educators to the best practices, instructional strategies, lesson plans, and resources that enable measurable student achievement. From one central portal, educators tap into a wealth of web-based curricula, and collaborate in the broader district-wide learning community."
    • http://www.hmhinnovation.com/LV.php
  • Kim B.: many schools in PA are moving away from textbooks and toward e-textbooks due to costs.
  • Kay: initiative in Vail (sp?), AZ school district. Superintendent for Tucson has worked out powerful standard with teams of teachers. Much is open source. Go to textbook publishers and ask for what's needed for the year vs. (e.g.) an 8-year contract. Wonderful use case at a critical moment; lots of $$.
  • Catherine: STEM as a topic within remote instrumentation.
  • Steve: STEM crosses boundaries, esp. with stimulus funding. Can integrate this into curriculum. Not limited to remote instrumentation.
  • Ruth: let's not forget the Arts - the "A" in STEAM.
  • Stephanie: STEM is not intended to the exclusion of the arts. May change it to 'STEAM' going forward.  (Louis - "we may not need more hot air!")

Middleware/Federated ID Management (Randy):

  • Identity management is a piece of middleware - the "connective tissue" that allows myriad systems to interoperate. Vast array of services out there that are leading edge for broader R&E community - seeks to find a way to coalesce the decision point for K12 districts, state education agencies, etc. a common framework for identify management and access management.
  • Deploy middleware (e.g., Shib) to enable applications above the network layer to talk with each other and exchange information. Very important. Opportunities  to advance the middleware/federated ID agenda.
  • End product should be to generate some real use cases in K20 where there's a need for interoperable middleware. Pass along use cases to the developers.
  • Kay: we have a network, central question is what do we DO with it?
  • James: groups should generate a strawman approach for each topic.

International partnerships (Louis):

  • what does it mean for K20 to participate in part of the Internet2 'global grid' of peering. International theme may be part of other topics.
  • Larry doing lots of work with JANET. Louis does international IT strategy for Duke and now Internet2.
  • Stephanie: less a communications issue and more a missing "bridge" between groups.

Small Topical Group Break Out Discussion Presentations

  • The goal of these teams was to articulate the who, what, why, how of developing each area of focus.

Digital Collections and Remote Instrumentation
Kay Howe (facilitator), Kemi, Stephanie, Hillary, Ruth, Ann, Marla, Heather (notes)

  • The flagship application up to now has been videoconferencing. But what else can we do to demonstrate the efficacy of advanced networking in schools, libraries, museums etc.?  Remote Instrumentation is an ideal place to demonstrate what else can be done with the network - it brings together innovators from K-12 and higher education, brings much needed STEM teaching capacity that many schools don't currently have, workforce training advantages, etc.
  • Moving beyond videoconferencing as the single 'flagship' application for K20. The structure of Internet2 organization particularly well suited for engaging higher ed in these discussions. Could the K20 group focus some energy on reaching out to Internet2 membership and accelerate the conversation? Even half dozen "takers" might be a way to demonstrate progress and highlight a success (momentum).
  • The Remote Instrumentation working group has already made some progress in identifying where RI resources might exist within the Internet2 member community and exploring the practical implications of sharing access more broadly.  Much more work needs to be done.  Below are a couple of links to the output of this group.
  • The group agreed a proof of concept approach involving early adaptors is necessary to develop momentum before trying to scale up.
  • We shouldn't loose site of major NSF funded initiatives (NEON, Ocean Observatories) as natural partners - already funded, there are expectations from NSF that they do some educational outreach.
  • The NSF rules governing outreach are very confusing and often result in ineffective and siloed outreach programs.  An effort to get these rules changes may be necessary.
  • We need to get clear in our own thinking on what needs to happen, then in conjunction with the next DC meeting, go to the NSF education directorate and make our case on what needs to be done to improve the rules around the educational outreach piece.
  • Stephanie Couch volunteered to help write a one pager "missing link" report (together with others on the team) which can be presented at the National Governors conference in May. The National Governors group can then help us take the ideas forward to DC.
  • Kemi invited the K20 Initiative to attend the Cyberlearning conference in March in San Francisco which brings together folks doing the R&D community (developers, etc.) and K12 to learn from each other and address issues of implementation at scale.
  • Stephanie: at CENIC and Internet2, it's about bits and bytes. Legislature dismisses videoconferecing as fancy expensive toys. Why is this a good approach for kids? Package with content in a way that demonstrates better outcomes for kids. Legislators need opportunity to understand how new applications will impact the classrooms. Need to have the models, communicate them effectively, and then make point that there can be many others.
  • Hillary:  Are you looking for early adopters of remote instrumentation? ISTE's local/regional networks and interest groups can help get the word out about this opportunity once additional RI resources are in place.
  • Kemi: goal for first phase is to see if idea has traction with the Internet2 community and can we move toward a 'proof of concept' level with early adopters? Can we put several examples out there to begin to collect efficacy data? Scaleabilty is not the first step (within a state or multi-state level).
  • Kemi: science labs are already recognized for classroom use. It's a matter of introducing a different way to achieve the same goal. Empowers new possibilities. Changes dynamic for kids who might not otherwise participate (be vocal) or might not have classes available. DoE wants to see increased productivity per student - how to best use technology to accomplish this?

Communications and Broadband Mapping
James Werle (facilitator), David Underwood, Denise Shorey, Sherilyn Evans, John Pederson

  • Muse (http://k20.internet2.edu) has been the K20 Initiative's central approach to connecting innovators in the K-20 community around Internet2 enabled opportunities and resources.
  • Muse works well though lacks the critical mass of institutions and people necessary for it to realize its full potential.  Additional care and feeding is needed to help build the community.
  • Is there an explore opportunity to bring on a few 'neterns' to navigate web resources, feed additional content into the system, and attract and welcome new K20 participants to Muse?
  • It would be useful to know what are our communities' preferred means of social networking (Facebook, Twitter, iPhone apps)
  • The group agreed a next step might be to develop a more detailed plan for how we want to approach communicating to our various audiences. Lauren Rotman at Internet2 is willing to help our group. Such a plan could include:
    • defining our various audiences
    • identifying the core messages we want to send to each group
    • identifying the appropriate types of vehicles, beyond Muse, we want to use to deliver our messages at the local/state/regional/national/international level.
    • figure out a more effective mechanism by which we can all share information about interesting collaborations happening in our various states, new resources we've discovered, interesting reports or articles, and then repackage and distribute (via multiple vehicles at the national/state/local level, as appropriate) to others across our communities who might be interested.
  • We also discussed the role our Initiative could take in helping to coordinate the mapping of broadband availability in K-20 institutions, including identifying key statistics and broadband benchmarks that are critical to tracking progress.
  • Collecting reliable building specific connectivity data for I2-enabled districts and library systems is not easy. Developing a sustainable update/refresh process is critical.
  • It would be worth exploring whether the data collection process could be automated (or semi-automated). The Internet2 Performance Initiative has developed many network monitoring and measurement tools that might prove useful.

Middleware/Federated Identity
Randy Stout(facilitator), Bob Collie, Keith Krueger, others??)

  • Discussion revolved around barriers to K12 adoption of ID management services. Bob Collie shared some information (problems) around this in ENA connected schools
  • Bob: 1) most schools don't have directories (many have no directory of any sort) or have directory but not populated with student information; 2) shared password with almost no customization
  • How to develop an identity management solution for K12: StateNets, Internet2, EDUCAUSE, others. Developing knowledge base and constructing outreach strategies to deploy these kinds of solutions. In most cases, there are many groups of allies converging at a particular point. Outreach and education needed to cascade out awareness.
  • Tactical approaches (next steps): 1) put together a concise business case that defines problem and presents possible solutions; 2) helps audience find what's relevant to them; 3) describe how solutions would work for schools. Keith and Bob have offered to help. Convene a group of vested stakeholders - have some experience deploying and implementing.
  • Keith: CoSN started working on this with StateNets a couple of years ago. Denise Shorey is chair of the task force.  Will expand to others in Internet2. Not helpful to have disparate efforts led by StateNets, CoSN, EDUCAUSE and others. Ask CTO's how to define the problem and capture their interest. What are the drivers right now that will get the CTO's engaged? How to educate K-12 technology leaders about identity management... perhaps with help from higher ed. Until we can identify the "real" K-12 pain points, outside forces will dictate what's needed.
  • Carol: Clare Goldsmith has a definition of identity management for K-12. He can enumerate all of the issues to look at. Our challenge will be to communicate the value for K-12.
  • Bob: Ken Klingenstein is also willing to provide assistance.
  • Louis: don't overlook school librarians re middleware. They "get" it.
  • There are quite a few existing resources that should be gathered together and used to develop the necessary materials for the "education campaign"
  • We should also convene with vendors to hear their questions and ask questions. Could be a 6-8 month timeline to ramp up activity. Internet2 FMM in Atlanta and CoSN meeting in NOLA will be check-in points.

International Partnerships
Kim B. (facilitator), Louis Fox, Myron Lowe, Larry Gallery (others?)

  • over 100+ global networks peer with Internet2. What programs are available? How does K20 work with them? Content of use for classroom?
  • Idea: develop clearinghouse of what has been done programmatically to date. Need a "learning space" (e.g., Muse) to capture projects of interest.
  • Keep grounded in resources and best practices.
  • Larry: need to build on existing relationships - e.g., teachers - in the small sphere and get something going. Find a few 'active' adopters.
  • 'Real Game' online resource = career exploration worldwide (out of Canada). Per Stephanie, this has been tailored for school use in CA: http://www.realgamecalifornia.org/
  • Louis suggested engaging Internet2 video working groups.
  • Emerging SIGs for international regions: should we engage with these groups as potential collaborative partners? (e.g., Middle East)
  • Louis: we all have our various silos within Internet2. International group largely keeps to themselves currently. Need to talk with scientists, K20, and others. Otherwise, it's only talking between international networks about the technology, not the applications. Louis will address this in his new role.
  • To the extent that K20 is interested in these things, there are a number of SIGs that K20 folks could attend (meetings during Fall Member Meeting).
  • Will also require more active participation and travel abroad.
  • Hillary: ISTE has many affiliations outside the U.S. that could be leveraged.
  • ACTION: request contact information.

Friday August 20, 2010

US UCAN (Louis Fox)

  • USUCAN is meant to be an organization that represents the needs of anchor tenants. This presents a few complexities
    • There are funds to build a network. There are no operational funds.
    • K20 Initiative doesn't have connections with all the proposed communities namely health care and public safety
    • Anchor institutions connect at the state and regional network level.
    • During the proposal process, the communities were not adequately engaged. There is a need to go back and engage in a process of consulting them on what they think about US UCAN and how it can best serve them.
  • Louis has urged Internet2 to be circumspect moving forward, go slowly, to create a federation of these anchor institutions, let them tell us what they think we can do for them.
  • There is an opportunity for the K20 Initiative to provide leadership, particularly among K12 institutions and libraries, which are core members of the initiative and have been so for the past decade. If we are silent things will roll forward, and we might not like the outcome. Important for us to think this through and communicate.
  • Our job is to define what we like about the potential of US UCAN, identify what the concerns are and why, define the current roles of the Initiative and the Advisory Committee, and make recommendations about how the I2 K20 Initiative can be useful. Bring our anchor institutions together and facilitate a conversation about what they want from US UCAN and then work toward making that happen.
  • US UCAN can help coordinate conversations amongst the national/BTOP award winners from our community.

Discussion

  1. Without knowing the details, What do you think the US UCAN is, should be?
  2. What questions does this raise for the K20 and SEGP Community?
  • Recommend lighter more flexible connection, Steve Smith
  • What does this mean for membership of any level of affiliation? Ann Z
  • RON's currently collect the fees for SEGP, what will happen to the framework and process? Sherilyn E.
  • What size and scope will the partnership organization be? Staffing? Individual per institution fees as cost is distributed will be barrier to adoption. What will sustainability look like?
  • Are we going be charged for something that we were not aware of before? Marla D
  • There has to be some coordination to provide information and education at various levels. Marla D
  • What happens to a state that doesn't have BTOP projects? Larry G.
  • What are the Partnership parameters? What about sustainability and exit strategy?
  • How do we grow the number of anchors connecting to US UCAN?
  • What happens if the new fee structure "depopulates" the Internet2 membership if the State R&E RON?
  • How will this impact the SEGP fees? If fees go higher, many states will likely opt out of the SEGP program. Will there be fees down to the individual school level? Concern is that schools can't afford.
  • If US UCAN has a role in governing, then governing what?
  • Much of the anchor tenant community may feel they were not consulted during the BTOP proposal stage of US UCAN.
  • Important US UCAN Links

e-Rate reform (Randy Stout, Carol Willis)

  • The FCC has asked the K20 Initiative to provide additional examples from our community that help strengthen the case for the FCC issuing new program rules for e-rate that permit the eligibility of dark fiber and lit fiber thus giving schools and libraries additional choices to potentially aid in lowering the total costs for telecommunications and internet services for these community anchor institutions.
  • Please take a few moments to follow the link below to the K20 Wiki page for this effort.
  • If you have concerns we'd like to hear them. If you have recommendations or examples from your state or region that help demonstrate the capacity of school districts and libraries to deploy fiber, activate its use, and arrange to operate/maintain the fiber, please share those with us by either posting your comments to the wiki or get in touch with:
    Carol Willis Carol.Willis@esc13.txed.net, James Werle jamesawerle@internet2.edu, Randy Stout rstout@ksbor.org
  • Hilary: EdLinc Organization which ISTE and COSN are members of are unified prior to submissions to the FCC- this organization deals with eRate. She invited Internet2 to participate in these discussions.

Identify areas of overlap and potential collaboration between COSN, ISTE, and the K20 Initiative

Keith Krueger - COSN

  • Keith identified the following as possible points of collaboration between our two communities.
    • Communicating what is possible - Muse - Improve and make more user friendly. Muse can serve as a great platform to help connect innovators and offer examples of what can be done with advanced networking in K-12. We can also work together to develop webinars, white papers and other distribution vehicles to get the word out on what is possible, best practices, etc. in a clear and consistent manner.
    • Mapping broadband availability in K-12 institutions, including identifying key statistics and broadband benchmarks that are critical to tracking progress.
    • Federated ID Management - coordinate existing efforts within the Internet2 K20 Initiative, COSN, and Statenets to raise awareness as to the benefits to K-12.

Hilary Goldman - ISTE

  • 20,000 members. ISTE is a membership association for educators and education leaders interested in effective use of technology in K-12 and higher education.
  • Hillary offered several channels within ISTE to help communicate the opportunities available through the Internet2 K20 Initiative. Find the existing ISTE members within the K20 Initiative and help them get engaged.
  • Teacher Ed SIG is very active. This is a good way to reach pre-service teachers. Others of interest include the IVC SIG and the Online Learning SIG
  • ISTE also has a great blog, ning community site, as well as an active facebook, second life, and twitter presence. It is also possible to publish articles in ISTE's membership magazine "Learning and Leading with Technology".

Articulate a work plan for the Initiative over the next year

  • Below are the 5 priority themes that emerge from our discussions. It will be up to each of these teams to work through specifics of resources (and resource development), leadership, participants, timeline, deliverables, and assessment. Teams should be prepared to report progress to the Advisory Committee at regular intervals (quarterly conference calls and Internet2 Member Meetings). Please let James jwerle@internet2.edu or Carol carol.willis@esc13.txed.net know if you need any assistance in coordinating the work.
  • For those who were unable to attend the meeting in Bozeman, please feel free to send comments on these themes as well as indicate your interest in contributing.
  1. U.S. UCAN
    • Goal:  Play a leadership role in helping shape the development of US UCAN
    • Next Steps: Develop a brief K20 Initiative position paper and share it with the Internet2 leadership. This needs to be done in fairly short order as things are moving very quickly and its essential we add our collective voice to this important conversation.
    • Participants:  Louis Fox (lead), everyone at the workshop raised their hand.
  2. Strategic Partnerships
    • Goal: Develop closer working relationships key strategic partners such as COSN, ISTE, STATEnets, the Quilt, and the American Library Association.
    • Participants: Carol (lead), Marla, Ruth, Hillary, Kim O., Denise Shorey
  3. Remote Instrumentation
    • Goal: Develop Remote instrumentation as a use case for the educational utility of Internet2.
    • Participants: Kemi Jona (lead), James Werle (lead), Kim O, Kim B, Kaye Howe, Ruth, Ann, and Marla
  4. Federated ID Management
    • Goal: Raise awareness of what Federated Identity management means to our various communities.
    • Participants: Keith Krueger (lead), Randy Stout , Bob Collie, Kim O., Kim B., Kaye Howe, Ruth, Ann Z., Perry Movick, and Marla D.
    • Next Steps:  1) Develop use cases starting with the K-12 community. 2) Gather existing resources to develop the necessary materials for the "education campaign", 3) Put together a concise business case that defines problem and presents possible solutions
  5. Communications & Broadband Mapping
    • Goal: Strengthen our ability to connect people and communicate innovative activities involving the use of advanced networking across K-20 at the local, regional, national, and international level. Additionally, this team will coordinate the mapping of broadband availability in K-20 institutions, including identifying key statistics and broadband benchmarks that are critical to tracking progress.
    • Participants: James Werle (lead), Dave Underwood, Steve Smith, Denise Shorey, Heather Wells, Sherilyn Evans
  • No labels