NOTES
K20 Initiative Executive Committee
Friday, June 3, 2011
Present: James Werle, Carol Willis, Ryan Bass, Myron Lowe, Ann Zimmerman, Ruthie Blankenbaker, Bo Lowery, Marla Davenport, John Korb, Tom Rolfes, Heather Weisse-Walsh, Larry Gallery, Denise Shorey, Heather Todorov
Introduction of Ryan Bass – Internet2 K20 and U.S. UCAN Communications liaison.
James: Thanks for joining on a Friday. We have a full agenda (one hour). Primarily, our focus is to explore where we stand in terms of partnerships in K12 with the big associations that are out here. We've been engaged with ISTE and CoSN over the years with Internet2 K20, both from our own institutions and with Internet2. In Bozeman last August, we set as our goal to deepen our functional collaborations with these associations. AT top of the list were ISTE and CoSN. Hillary Goldman and Keith Krueger were in Bozeman. That speaks to their willingness to engage with us. We've had some good initial conversation in Bozeman. We've been able to capitalize on this with CoSN over the past year – i.e., building trust with Keith as a wiling and capable partner to identify common needs. The product of our collaboration was an excellent primer on federated identify and access management. The WG formed to develop that is now discussing how to socialize that and convene the K12 community around that topic.
James: The CoSN example speaks to what's possible when we make a concerted effort to collaborate with these national associations. Today, let's think about how we might develop that same level of engagement with ISTE – opportunities are immense. Strategic direction setting. James sent around some thinking on this over email, collected all thoughts and sent to the list this morning (~12:30pm EDT, 6/3/11).
All: To summarize: 1) recognizing the importance of understanding the culture of ISTE, what makes them tick at the leadership level, their priorities and key accomplishments. We need to be sensitive to the fact that they've been successful in reaching constituencies over the commodity Internet, particularly SIG IVC; 2) ISTE is international – they travel the world providing training on how to integrate education technologies into learning systems; 3) ISTE's focus is on K-12. Tom got involved in ISTE back in 2000... besides 12,000 members of "mother" organization; ISTE also has the SIGs and each has individual members. Besides that, ISTE inherited regional chapters or affiliates both in the U.S. and Internationally (70 or so e.g., "NETA", the Nebraska Educational Technology Association). Ought not to overlook the regional ISTE conferences (TX, FL, etc.). Calendar of 50 or so state and regional based conferences. Reaching into those affiliates is a powerful way to supplement work with the "mother" organization. Largely classroom practitioners – interested in application based presentations.
James: it feels like an emerging potential strategic engagement with ISTE is twofold: 1) identify individuals within Internet2 K20 community that are already engaged with ISTE on some level and 2) look within ISTE at the SIGs and other existing vehicles they've established to bring folks together topically. Activate within those groups to animate the conversation that occurs by including, where it makes sense, the applications and resources that we're aware of that are powered by the advanced R&E network. Not focus on the network, but the applications. Incorporate into various projects and events that ISTE is engaged in.
Marla: many more folks than we know that are part of ISTE. The audience is pretty diverse and focus is still learning and classroom application, but a number of administrators, technologists, media folks. We shouldn't discount this. Every state has at least one affiliate in their region. Let's identify how many people we do have and give us a charge to work toward blending Internet2 into that. Need to find something new and fresh to present to them.
Denise: Yes, many of us have been involved with ISTE for some time. At their regional/state level, I've done presentations for CO. When doing SEGP work, I presented on I2 and applications – some well attended, some weren't. Marla's comments about finding something new and fresh, and scalable (i.e., for teachers) will take some work so we have a consistent message.
Carol: I too have done presentations at the TX affiliate about Internet2. I think we're at a point now (not what is Internet2) where we need to frame what it is we all want to accomplish with ISTE. Not only just our message, but framing that relationship. What will it look like? We've talked about logistics (to be more visible to ISTE), but not framed our value for the relationship.
James: I jumped ahead a bit on that. Implied in some of the strategy and critical is the recognition that however we approach ISTE, it must be on their terms and spoken in a language that reflects their interests and aspirations as a community a lot of which seems to focus on the ISTE technology standards. If we can reflect our value-add in this way, I think we have a strong basis for partnership and will have the attention of the ISTE leadership and membership community. What is our value add to this community? I think one important dimension has to be in helping raise awareness around the set of teaching and learning applications and services that are bandwidth intensive and work really well on the advanced networking environment.
Ruth: yes, absolutely spot-on with that comment. Must align to their vision and mission.
Carol: in conversation over the past years about scalability (e.g., Kemi)... ISTE is the place where we can have significant scaling effect. Work through appropriate SIGs. Have an audience that's easily reached.
James: those applications will continue to evolve and manifest themselves. Every month, new things coming out. This morning with Kemi – two more remote instruments available! We want to help Kemi promote these. There are many more efforts like Kemi's around the country and the world. Having a base of K20 Initiative activists within ISTE and the SIGs, sitting in on their meetings, we'll have a continuous and open dialog to share applications and resources that are available. This will feed the need for something fresh and new.
Larry: Should we focus on applications that work better on advanced networks?
Ann: I hear this every day: "We can do it on the commodity Internet." Is there a way that we can combat this?
Larry: We went directly to the end users... because video conferencing wasn't working. Now they're wowed.
Marla: In rural areas, videoconferencing is in strong demand. In metro areas, not a need for interactive television classes. Not growth in HD video as much as Skype and lower-level video that people are using. Would like to see more databases, rich video repositories to say there's more streaming, faster, etc.
Larry: What about newscasts from around the world? Was squelched by legal issues? E.g., French news program? Will get more information off-line.
Ruth: Agree with wanting to find unique applications and align with ISTE. What about demonstrating that we can reach their international audience?
ALL – agree. This is an important point of intersection between ISTE and Internet2 K20
James: To move this forward, one potential next step could be to start by identify folks with I2 K20 Initiative who are active in ISTE and learn more about how they've been engaged, find out what is important to the special interest groups (SIGS) they are involved in. In parallel we should be talking with ISTE leadership
Carol: I also propose that we should have some sort of pilot project, whether part of a SIG, but something concrete to work on together with ISTE.
All agree.
Carol has some ideas around potential projects.
James: other ideas to include? Myron?
Myron: en route to the airport and it's been noisy there. Good exchange – and endorses the "authentic work" represented by a pilot. Shared value with ISTE critical.
Denise: are we only talking ISTE or CoSN too?
James: Today our conversation has been focused on ISTE. For the last few months, our approach with CoSN, centering engagement around a project/effort of common concern (a shared foxhole) has been successful and can likely serve as a roadmap for what a really functional productive partnership with ISTE might look like.
Denise: just noticed that the CoSN call for presentations is out. Do we want to do this?
James: if everyone agrees, let's set up another call to focus on next steps with CoSN including topic of putting in proposal(s) for CoSN 2012 (30 minute call).
Denise: Highlight our joint Task Force on IDM. Just talked with George Laskaris on Weds. George is more than amenable to continuing with EDUCASE, StateNets, Internet2 and CoSN dialog. Good to find a common focus.
James: Let's move to Larry who will provide an update on what we have planned at ISTE 2011.
Larry: Yes, we used James' CoSN preso and tailored to the ISTE conference. Anyone who's at ISTE can be part of the presentation. Larry, James, Ruth, Kim B., John C and Tom participating. Do you have suggestions for the presentation? Larry needs them ASAP. Goal is to generate a partnership. ILabs is locked in, but hasn't heard from Kemi about the shift in presentation time. (James: yes he seems ok with it)
Teacher on-site at ISTE to guide the room in tandem with Kemi's presentation. Also two teachers remote from NY along with folks from London to talk about videoconferencing over Internet2 vs. I1, student experiences, why supportive of this in the classroom.
Larry will talk with Heather W. 2-3 international groups to put into showcases.
Heather: looking volunteers to help man the booth at ISTE. Contact Heather if you can help.
James: Let's shift now to Tom's update on work of the U.S. UCAN Task Force, which met face-to-face in Chicago on Weds, 6/1 and hear about what's coming up next.
Tom: Yes, we met at the Chicago Airport Hilton. Tom sent around an anticipate timeline for report editing and posting for public comment. This is if everything goes as planned on a tight timeline. Must turn in edits by next Weds to Mike Roberts. Membership, Cost Recovery – discussion, conclusions and recommendations. Not edging toward provocativeness, but some recommendations will appear that way. Thanks all for input, edits and data. James gathered CAI numbers (total possible for 50 states). Left Weds very optimistic and congenial... some "warm spots" during the day, and not total consensus on proposals. You'll be interested in reading report with forecast for next 3-5 years of growth in CAIs, and as relates to the K20 Initiative.
Anticipated Timeline for U.S. UCAN Task Force Report & Editing:
Wed, 6/8/2011: All chapter draft revisions to Mike Roberts & cai-tf@internet2.edu
Mon, 6/13/2011: Mike sends completed version to Task Force
Wed, 6/15/2011: Deadline for Task Force review, comment, & edits
Fri, 6/17/2011: Public Posting of document for 2 week comment period
Fri, 7/1/2011: Deadline for public comment
Fri, 7/15/2011: Task Force reviews and incorporates constructive suggestions
Fri, 7/29/2011: Task Force report is sent to Dave Lambert and the Internet2 Board
Denise: It was good to see a number of folks represented by K20 Initiative. Rest assured your voices have been heard in that group.
Carol: Your timeline is great. Who is the "public" for comment?
Tom: Could be anyone in regional R&E networks, connectors, K20 committee, universities, BTOP recipients, end users, etc. Calling it "8 wide by 50 tall": 8 CAI sectors K12 schools, libraries, 4-year colleges, 2-year colleges, public safety, healthcare, museums and local government by 50 state networks. In SEGP, there are only 39 or 40... 10 more to be added. Not finished until we have all 50 states connected. Many prevented by policy or statute from serving certain constituencies.
James: It is absolutely critical that we craft a compelling, powerful response from the K20 Community, ideally in one voice if possible, to the recommendations that will be put forth in the Task Force report.. If we disagree with them, its our responsibility to propose an alternative view. Stay tune, I will be in touch to coordinate these discussions very soon.
Tom: Mike Roberts will be out of the country for 10 days in mid-June. May be delayed by ~2 weeks.
James: Thanks all... notes will be available shortly.
Next Meeting |
James will send out a doodle poll to schedule |