Transcript ATI WEBINAR “Year 3 – The ATI Self

ATI WEBINAR
“Year 3 – The ATI Self-Assessment Package”
Thursday, Nov. 19, 2009
Presenters:
Deborah Kaplan, ATI Chancellor’s Office
Mary Fran Breiling, San Jose State
Sue Cullen, Cal State Northridge
Carol Heins-Gonzales, Cal Poly Pomona
Overview
• Why are Self-Assessments requested this year and
how are they related to the re-draft of the ATI Coded
Memo?
• How were these Self-Assessment tools developed
and how will they be useful?
• What does the package include and how difficult will
it be to do a Self-Assessment?
• What benefits can campuses derive from this
process?
• What will be required for AY 09/10 and thereafter?
ATI is changing the approach to
campus implementation
• ATI Coded Memo will be revised this academic year, moving
away from general goals and deadlines to a more flexible,
campus-based approach
• Campuses will be expected to assess their current status in
implementing the ATI and plan for continuous
improvement that can be measured and validated, with
campuses generating their own assessment measures
• The ATI Department at the CO will monitor implementation
system-wide, identify common needs and respond to them
as priorities, foster collaborations between campuses,
provide guidance, identify best practices, and make
common resources available
Self-Assessments during a year of
transition
• During this year of transition, the campuses will not be
required to submit an annual report
• Campuses are asked to conduct a self-assessment of
current ATI implementation status
• This self-assessment will provide the basis for
developing campus-specific goals and deadlines
• The ATI Department is providing campuses with a set
of tools to use
• In November of 2010, reports will be required for AY
09/10 using a report format based on the Outline of
Goals and Indicators of Success
We encourage campuses to provide us
with self-assessments
We will use the information to:
– Identify Best Practices
– Foster collaborations and mutually-beneficial
relationships between campuses
– Identify needs for training, tools, guidance
– Respond to specific requests for assistance
Development of the Goals and Indicators of
Success
The Outline of ATI Goals and Indicators was developed by three task
forces, working together with the ATI staff
Procurement: Gwen Dapper - San Jose State; Dawn Futrell - CSU Sacramento;
Bill Grubaugh - San Francisco State; Carol Heins-Gonzales - Cal Poly Pomona;
Rosa Padilla - CSU San Bernardino; Mary Shaffer - Cal Poly San Luis Obispo;
Georgia Wells – Cal Poly San Luis Obispo
Web Accessibility: Sue Cullen – CSU Northridge; Carol Heins-Gonzales - Cal Poly
Pomona; Rosa Padilla – CSU San Bernardino
Instructional Materials Accessibility: Mary Fran Breiling – San Jose State; Laurie
Meschke – San Francisco State; Jeff Senge – CSU Fullerton; Mary Shojai – San
Diego State
Goals and Indicators of Success
• This major revision of the annual report structure was
initiated in part because of requests from ATI implementers
on campuses for a format that is easier to fill out, with
more detail to report about and that can be used internally
as a project management tool.
• We expect to refine and revise this format, based on the
feedback we receive from those using it as a SelfAssessment tool. We need comments about it by February
5, 2010. We will develop Version 2.0 from that feedback,
which will be issued in April 2010 as the format for the
required reports for AY 09/10. The basic framework will
not change after that point.
Desired Functionality of Program for SelfAssessments and 2010 Reports
• Request Assistance/Collaboration
– Ability to indicate areas for which the campus is actively seeking
guidance or collaboration
• Identify Potential Partners
– Ability to identify how other campuses plan to address subareas
• Leverage Existing Solutions
– Ability to identity how other campuses have addressed subareas
• Internal Accountability
– Ability to track their own progress via year-over-year
comparisons
• High-level snapshot
– Ability to compare progress with other campuses
General Structure of Outline of Goals
and Indicators
Organization
• A consistent structure is provided across all 3 priority areas
• Each priority area is divided into sections
• Each section includes an overall goal and several success
indicators
Goals
• Each goal is derived from activities specified in Coded
Memo AA-2007-04 and related documents
• They are generally intermediate to long-term in nature
• They generally involve multiple steps and stakeholders
General Structure of Outline of Goals
and Indicators
Success Indicators
• Reflect examples of benchmarks in support of the larger goal
• Address key process maturity tasks (commitment, ability,
measurement, verification)
• Allow campuses to document specific progress toward the
goal
Status Levels
• Based on a process maturity model
• Allow campuses to demonstrate continuous progress
• Emphasizes the importance of ongoing commitment
• Allow comparisons over time and across priority areas
Web Accessibility
Project Management Goals:
In alignment with ATI policy and goals, infuse
accessibility and universal design protocols
into the everyday workflow of staff and
faculty:
– Accessibility and Universal Design
– Taxonomy (navigation and nomenclature)
– Branding Directives
– Training
1. New website/web application and digital
Key Accomplishments
08/09
content
development complies with
all
Section 508 accessibility guidelines:
Key Accomplishments 08/09:
Item 1: Implemented a universally designed enterprise
level template system accommodating accessibility,
taxonomy and branding directives.
Item 2: Expanded customized faculty templates
Item 3: Refinement of compliance assessment process
Item 4: Developed and implemented an Accessibility &
Universal Design Toolbar a compilation of links to
streamline access to resources.
1. New website/web application and digital
Key Planscomplies
09/10with all
content development
Section 508 accessibility guidelines:
Key Plans 09/10:
Item 1: Deploy upgraded templates
Item 2: Refine campus assessment reporting of websites
and accessibility compliance
Item 3: Improve usability and accountability on campus
sites through improvements in page structure currency
Item 4: Best practices among faculty for development and
distribution of online training and materials.
Success Indicators
Success Indicator
1.2.1 Established a process
to ensure that new websites
and web applications are
developed with "designed
in" accessibility.
Assistance
Requested?
Yes
1.2.3. Developed digital
Yes
content: documents (word
processor produced, excel,
PowerPoint, PDF) in
accordance with the Section
508 accessibility guidelines.
Comment:
Area(s) of Requested Collaboration
Item 1: CSU system-wide purchases of
assessment web tools.
Item 2: CSU system-wide usability testing
guidance
Item 1: Additional tutorials to develop
digital content
Assistance
Offered?
Yes
Yes
Procurement Status Report
• Based on the Coded Memorandum AA-2007-04
• Gives campuses a tool for answering key questions:
• “How am I doing”;
– Allows campus measure to assess their own current status
at their desired level (at holistic and focused levels)
• “What should I be doing?”
– Provides best practices and guidelines (key processes and
indicators).
• “What should I do next?”
– Assists campuses to identify next steps for progressive
improvement.
3.5 Training-Goal Sample
Goal
Goal
Status
Key Accomplishments
08/09
All parties
Defined •Incorporated ATI training into
involved in E&IT
other department workshops
procurement have
on campus.
been trained, and
•Procurement training now
a continual
incorporates ATI awareness.
training program
•Departments call our office
is in place.
prior to making a large dollar
amount purchase.
•Increased awareness of The ATI
by educating department Deans
to purchase accessible products.
Key Plans 09/10
•Review and refine roles,
responsibilities, and processes
based on last year’s experience.
•Add links to campus ATI website
with VPAT samples and references
for different product categories.
• Create procurement checklist for
departments purchasing E&IT as
part of procurement process
• Document draft plan for
incorporating accessibility of E&IT
purchased with Pcards.
3.1.1 Success Indicator - Sample
Success
Indicator
Status
Worked Will work Assistance Area(s) of Requested
on
on 09/10 Requested Collaboration
08/09?
Developed Managed Yes
and
published an
Accessible
ATI E&IT
Procurement
Plan
Yes
Yes
Assistance
Offered?
Our campus would like to Yes
collaborate with other
campuses in the following
areas:
•Roles and responsibilities
for ATI procurement
teams. (3.2)
•Documentation
requirements for ATI
procurements. (3.1.x)
•Verification of VPATs
(3.1.8)
•ATI guidelines and
expectations for multicampus purchase
agreements (e.g., MEAs)
3.4.4. Success Indicator - Sample
Success
Indicator
Status
Established a Initial
process to
ensure that
accommodat
ions were
provided
Worked on
08/09?
No
Will work on Assistance Area(s) of
Assistance
09/10
Requested Requested
Offered?
Collaboration
Yes
No
No
Instructional Materials Report
•
•
•
•
Based on the Coded Memorandum AA-2007-04
Provides guidance in achievement of benchmarks
Allows for flexibility for accomplishing goals
Increases guided communication among the
stakeholders
• Celebrates our accomplishments and demonstrates
areas for improvement
• Identifies resources needed to succeed
• Offers an opportunity to be collaborative with other
campuses
6.0 Curricular Review Cycle at SJSU
Key Accomplishments:
– S08-3, Policy Recommendation, Incorporating
Accessibility into the Curriculum Review Process
– New Courses: Undergraduate Studies accepts only
digital syllabi for new course proposals
– Workflow for converting document into accessible
format by college faculty-in-residence, student-inresidence team
– Five year curricular review will use same workflow
6.1 Curricular Review
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Status: Established
Year Started: 2008
Worked on 08/09: Yes
Will work on 09/10: Yes
Assistance Requested: No
Areas of Requested Collaboration: Empty
Assistance Offered: Yes
Comment: Will attach documents; policy,
workflow…
Options for Self-Assessments
Option 1: Goals and Indicators with structured
format for data
Option 2: Report on accomplishments, based
on outline of Goals and Indicators
Option 3: Unique, campus developed
• Only one should be selected
• Voluntary to submit to Chancellor’s Office
Please provide us with your feedback about the
different documents
•
•
•
•
Are they complete?
Are they useful?
How can they be improved?
Other comments are welcome
Q and A
• Please type your questions into the Chat area
of Elluminate.
• Thank you!!