Versions Compared

Old Version 3

changes.mady.by.user Ellen Augustiniak

Saved on

compared with

New Version Current

changes.mady.by.user Ellen Augustiniak

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

Regrets

Item

Desired Outcome

Time

Who

Notes

Decisions

Actions

1

Meeting notes, times, attendance

Previous meeting notes are reviewedok’d 2022-12-01 AASA-PT Meeting Notes

Tasks reviewed: Tasks

5m

Ellen

  • Notes are public & imperfect

    		• Speakers confirm content of notes

    Decision: We agree that for meeting notes, we’re not seeking perfection but to capture major topics and decision/actions. If folks feel something has been incorrectly represented, they are welcome (and expected) to make the edit.

    Action: All - in advance of each meeting, we will review the agendas and any documents circulated (which should be ready 2-3 days prior). Agenda links will be made available in email, calendar invites, and Slack.

    2

    Work plan draft review - discuss and share suggestions

    Any agreed-upon Work plan elements are recorded.

    Priorities for next meeting’s discussion & further work are developed.

    If overall Work Plan is ok’d, Subteam membership is established for Harmonization Review and Survey Subteams.

    40m

    Ellen, All

    • Last meeting agreements:

    • Dec is for work plan development

    • Recommendation to stop counting element is in scope.

    • Need to determine how to format and compare data about our current processes.

      • Shared reporting for Statistics is a goal; charged to “recommend systemwide analytics harmonization policy, including a centralized reporting and analytics service.”

      Decision pages serve as the public repository for decisions.

    • A march deliverable will be centered around a report (see linked work plan narrative for proposed report components). We are also building out an overview (potentially a detailed table) of how we presently report data through Alma and how we propose harmonizing and what’s functionally possible (i.e., how/who reports it).

    • Activity: Based on what we know about our charge, does the work outlined in the work plan make sense? And, based on our timeline, does this feel doable? (The project team divided into 3 breakout rooms to discuss.)

    Decision: Overall, the project team endorses the work plan; it represents what we’re charged to do.

    Decision: The timeline is very tight; there’s potential to work within it; to the extent we also need to rely on others for collecting how we currently report in analytics (the data we’re pulling, filters, additional calculations, etc.) - we might need more time.

    Decision: Harmonization review subteam 1: Danielle, Heather, Sarah, Michele

    Creating survey instrument subteam: John, Chan, Lisa

    Decision: The two subteams do not need to complete their work before winter break, but are expected to meet and make as much progress as is possible

    •  Ellen Augustiniak will confirm the end of April timeline extension with Lynne/SILS-LG
    •  Ellen Augustiniak + Steering, Danielle will update the timeline/workplan (pending the April extension is approved by SILS-LG)
    •  Danielle Westbrook will schedule harmonization subteam 1, to begin their work.
    •  Chan Li will schedule survey instrument creation subteam, to begin their work
    3

    Wrap up

    Review actions and decisions

    5

    Danielle

    4

    Parking Lot

    Capture important topics for future discussion

    ...