Steering Committee Meeting Notes Thursday February 23, 2006

Mini-session review of last meeting - 3:00 - 3:30 - notes of last meeting

Completed notes posted March 1, 5:30 pm - Jo

Agenda : posted final version 2/22 4:00 pm

Notes: Complete notes - click here or access them topic by topic from the agenda

Location: The Capital Center, Suite 1065, 18640 NW Walker Rd, Beaverton OR 97006.

Resources:

Related Events, Activitities, and Websites: click here

For a list of all subcommittee members click here

For a list of all subcommittees, missions, recommendations & webpages click here

Agenda, Thursday February 23, 2006 - finalized Wednesday, February 22, 2006

3:30 – 3:35

 Introductions, opening remarks - see Attendees

3:35 – 3:45

 Informational review of ETIC CS Task force activity - printable version - see notes

3:45 – 3:50

 Informational review of ETIC RFP Grant Proposal Review - printable version - see notes

3:50 – 4:20

Subcommittee activity monitoring - printable version

  • Chairs & Liaisons - see notes
    • Di Saunders - Marketing Engineering & Applied Science Careers (MKTC) - example CS Task Force Communication Plan
    • Dick Knight, Alignment & Coordination: Curricular & Co-curricular (ACCC)
    • Susan Boyanovsky - Alignment & Coordination: System-Wide
    • Jo Oshiro -
      • Career Pathways (CPTH) still an orphan
      • Instructional Professional Development (IPD) under way

These items led into a major discussion of issues, priorities, definitions -- click here to see notes.

  • Monitoring Process - what should it be? - see notes
  • Expenses, budgeting?
  • Expectations
  • Timelines
4:20 – 4:40 Overview of next steps (refer to last meeting's notes) - see notes
  • Development of strategy summary
  • Communication of strategy and recommendations
  • Development of detailed plans in focus areas
  • Implementation of plans
  • Identify priority action items
4:40 - 4:50 Open forum for upcoming events
4:50 - 5:00
Scheduling of next meeting and adjournment Wednesday, March 22, 2006 - 3:30 - 5:00 pm, Capital Center Suite 1065

Notes:

OPAS Steering Committee Meeting Notes
February 23, 2006

Items in Italics came up in pre/post/peripheral discussions

  • Attendees – Susan Boyanovsky, Don Domes, Larry Flick, Don Kirkwood, Dick Knight, Ben Manny, Jo Oshiro, Ginger Redlinger, Skip Rochefort, Di Saunders, Bruce Schafer, Michal Young
  • ETIC CS Task Force Activity – Informational Report
  • Subcommitte Chair Reports
    • Marketing Engineering & Applied Science Careers (MKTC) - Di Saunders
      • Possibilities:
        • A broad campaign – perhaps modeled on the ETIC CS task force’s “Getreal” campaign; see the CS Task Force Communication Plan – Bruce suggests that OPAS info could be folded into the “Getreal” website, going live (but probably incomplete) on March 1, 2006.
        • Act as a “service department” for other committees – brochures, press releases, websites, etc.
        • First meeting March 7 – will solicit ideas for a campaign.
        • Ginger & Susan mention career fairs, particularly a “manufacturing” one.
    • Alignment & Coordination: Curricula & Co-curricula (ACCC) – Dick Knight
      • One ETIC RFP grant proposal overlaps with ACCC mission – we’ll wait to see if it gets funded.
      • Need to do further recruiting to ensure both K12 classroom and co-curricular participants to look for opportunities for mutual enrichment and common ground for Curricular  & Co-curricular spheres.  Ginger suggests asking Eda Davis-Butts (OSU SMILE) and Carla Faini (PSU MESA) for her suggestions on K12 people.
    • Alignment & Coordination: System-Wide (ACSW) – Susan Boyanovsky
      • Still adding members to committee
      • Challenges:
        • How to create an infrastructure to support change at the state-wide level; currently does not exist
        • Definition of “Pre-Engineering” – see Issues bullets.
        • Focus & integration of committees – see Issues bullets.
    • Instructional Professional Development (IPD) – Winnie Miller (written)
      • Short written report of first meeting held February 15
      • Kathryn Schwartz is collating materials from that first meeting & will forward them to Jo for web posting
      • Susan & Ginger points out that this committee lacks a representative from TSPC (Teacher’s Standards & Practices Commission) – they will brainstorm & talk to Winnie.
      • Further meetings: March 13, (virtual) & April 21 (PSU).
  • Issues
    • Vision -
      • Dick -
        • Oregon needs World Class Innovation to drive economic development
          • 4 year & post-graduate engineers with high skill sets
        • Oregon needs a world class workforce to implement that innovation
          • Technician, 2 and 4 year engineers with solid skill sets
        • An educational system that supports those needs
      • ETIC -
        • Double the number of engineering & CS graduates; "Grow our own"
    • Priorities
      • Dick – must focus to be able to take effective action; committees need to look for leverage points.
      • Bruce – original mission of OPAS focused on “Pre-Engineering” as an academic track to at least a 4 year degree; would try to help technician career education where the two overlap or the primary mission is not compromised.
    • Definitions
      • Engineering, Pre-Engineering, STEM
        • Ginger – at the federal level, there is movement towards creating technical skill standards relevant to industry; any such standards also imply the ability to assess performance to the standard.
        • Larry –
        • Skip – examine what Purdue and others (Harvey Mudd and ??) do at the freshman level that is common to all of their engineering degrees.  There is wide divergence in the knowledge and skill base between types of engineering, e.g. “hard” engineering such as mechanical or civil, compared to applied sciences like Chemical Engineering or BioEngineering. Jo provides links to Purdue & Harvey Mudd but not, at this point, analysis.
        • Dick – Universities should be able to help us identify what prep makes a difference for college success.  Interest and motivation are a separate issue (emphasis Jo’s).
        • Don Kirkwood – There can be a big difference even at the HS level.  Any technology standards that embrace the work in robotics at Hillsboro HS would probably not include North Salem’s Advanced Placement (AP) Computer Science.
      • Academic vs. Technician tracks
        • Skip & Dick - Based on above points, we need (at least) two analyses.
    • Infrastructure
      • Susan – “The infrastructure at Oregon institutions to support statewide work does not really exist.” – how can we implement such an infrastructure?
    • Prerequisites for Action
      • Insight into
        • How it works now
        • How to make it work better
        • How to change it
        • How to make an innovative but practical plan
    • Need more kids – In order to meet the ETIC goal of doubling the number of engineering graduates, must quadruple the numbers of kids entering college – Don Domes & Don Kirkwood. Jo - this feeds back into exposure to subject matter which engages kids with subject matter or a skill set and motivates them to continue.
  • Subcommittee Monitoring
    • Integration & Focus
      • Ben – a longer format meeting, e.g. a summit, would be valuable at least yearly.  Is eight subcommittees too many?
      • Susan – concerned about overlap, coordination, integration, interconnections, vision, mission: a retreat-like meeting of the steering committee & subcommittee chairs would be valuable now.
      • Dick – we’re looking at lots of issues; need to choose a few big things to move forward.  Integration in the fall?
      • Jo – need to enhance momentum, even if direction needs correction later.
      • Skip & Larry agree; Larry points out that NSF would use a professional facilitator/evaluator for this.
      • Bruce – there is a tradeoff between focus & integration.
    • Reporting
      • Ginger - monthly (approximately) written status reports desirable.
        • Jo – these need not be very formal; I can extract info from an email & post it to the relevant webpage.
      • Quarterly status – 15 minute report to the steering committee – committees can be staggered.
    • Rosters
      • Jo provided hardcopy for those attending in person; we agreed that these can be lifted off the web & distributing this list on a regular basis is not necessary. (NB This roster outdated on Monday, February 27).
      • Examine the rosters for other “obvious oversights”, missing stakeholders & perspectives.
  • Next Steps –
    • Strategic Statement – “We need to articulate the strategy of this group.” --1 page strawman condensed from OPAS Summit Executive Report; Bruce will call a meeting to review the Strawman, for which Susan suggests that everyone do their homework – therefore, Bruce & Jo need to have this document available with reasonable lead time.  We’ll assume not all the committee will be able to make this meeting, we’ll take whoever we can get, assuming that it’ll be a nice working-size subset of the whole group.
    • Additional Subcommittee recruiting – see Action Requests checklist; Susan is also talking with Community College people (CIA).
    • Additional Meetings –
      • Definitions, Focus, Integration, Models discussion with subcommittee chairs & steering committee, probably a full-day retreat format, the result of which is both a concise vision and a tactical plan;
      • Meeting of a self and/or schedule-selected subset of the full steering committee to review the Strategic Statement Strawman.
  • Action Requests
    • Bruce & Jo - Strategic Statement Strawman
    • Bruce – coordinate/inform OCCC – Bob Broeg – to explore opportunities & commonalities for CS, Getreal, and OPAS marketing & perhaps more.
    • Bruce & Jo – additional brainstorming & recruiting for Sean Gallagher, SCC Chair
    • Ginger & Susan – identify TSPC person for IPD; coordinate with Winnie
    • Susan – reference for “Manufacturing Fair” to Jo for posting
    • Larry – ITEA/ Project 2061 references to Jo for posting
    • Dick – contact Eda Davis-Butts & Carla Faini to help fill out ACCC
    • Don Kirkwood – contact Eda Davis-Butts to volunteer for DIVR
    • Jo – check out & post Purdue & Harvey Mudd freshman engineering programs/curricula
    • Jo – ETIC CS Marketing plan to Steering Committee
    • Jo – Getreal brochure/poster to Steering Committee
    • All – review subcommittee rosters for potential holes.

Steering Committee Members:   email to entire committee-

William Becker PSU Center for Science Education
Susan Boyanovsky Oregon Dept. of Community Colleges & Workforce Development
Robert Damiano Synopsys
Steve Day Beaverton School District
Don Domes Hillsboro High School
Larry Flick OSU Dept. of Math & Science Education
Scott Huff Portland Community College
Don Kirkwood North Salem High School
Dick Knight Saturday Academy Board
Dave Krumbein Blue Mountain Community College
Diana LaBoy-Rush Society of Women Engineers
Ben Manny Wireless Networking Research Lab, Intel Research & Development
Ron McGuire Roseburg High School
Dale Merrell CAPITAL Center Technical High School
Gary Naseth Associate Provost, OIT
Jo Oshiro OPAS staff support
Ginger Redlinger Oregon Dept. of Education
Skip Rochefort Professor, Chemical Engineering and Director, OSU and COE Pre-College Programs
Diane Saunders Director of Communications, Chancellor's Office, Oregon University System
Bruce Schafer Director, Industry Affairs, Oregon University System
John Tortorici Software Association of Oregon
Jim Troisi IBM
Hyacinth Williams Columbia Gorge Community College
Michal Young UO Computer Science Department

For questions or information regarding this webpage, please email Jo Oshiro or call (503) 725.2910