Page tree

Versions Compared

Key

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

Date

  13:00 to 17:00 (local time Wellington New Zealand)

[click this link for other time zones] 

GoToMeeting Details

Click here to see GoToMeeting joining information

Click here to see GoToMeeting recordings (ELAG members only)

Key Goals for this Meeting

  1. The AG will provide advice and feedback on E&PS team plans for expansion of Open Access E-Learning in the first quarter of 2017 with an approach that enables addition of alternative study pathways.
    • To provide background for this, the team will report plans for easier and more open access to course and training materials and the planned approach to enable addition of audience specific study pathways.
  2. The AG will provide advice on specific content to be included in the short course (' 2 day crash course') for implementers, which will be developed by the team in response an MF priority item of 2017.
    • To provide background for this, the team will report plans for a  'crash course' for implementers to be the first of the more audience specific study pathways.

Other Objectives

  • Planning for ELAG meetings and work in 2017 including:
    • Establishing which Members are planning to undertake or supporting course material translations in 2017
    • Considering possible approaches to delivery of translated or localized SNOMED CT courses include whether there is interest in using an E-Learning Platform hosted by IHTSDO as a 'managed service' for Members.

Attendees

Observers

Elaine Wooler (UK), user-dc4ef (India) user-a9d5e (Canada)

IHTSDO Staff

Cathy Richardson (Senior Terminologist), Linda Bird (Senior Implementation Specialist), Anne Randorff Højen (Implementation Specialist), Jon Zammit (Implementation Specialist)

Agenda and Meeting Notes

ItemDescriptionOwnerNotesAction
1Welcome, introductions and apologies

ELAG meetings will be recorded and recordings will be accessible to ELAG members.

 

  •  Check attendance details and apologies
2Conflicts of interest

Refer to Conflicts of interest section in the Advisory Groups Manual

  •  All members to confirm they are aware of need to declare any conflicts of interest.
3Update on Advisory Groups

Changes to Advisory Group Manual - Yearly Calendar - note on timetable for selection of AG members.

Newly chosen AG members begin their terms on 1 October.

There is no changes to the terms of reference for the ELAG.

 
4Report on Course Status and ProgressTeam

Update on course statistics and feedback

WRT Implementation course we work towards getting a zero backlog. Which we can with the increased capacity in the team. We are considering options for more frequent intakes - we do not have the solution yet.

Same demand for Content course as Implementation course - however, the resources available for the content course are less.

Additional notes:

Within the last 6 month. the Implementation course has been updated.

We are now four people tutoring/leading webinars. The induction of new members of staff will finish within the next month.

Related to content development course. Cathy has been supported by a contractor, Geraldine Wade, who is also doing webinars. Related to capacity, the content course is the one with the highest demand.

There was a discussion about why people choose to withdraw from the course. We do not currently monitor this, besides from the reasons we are given by students via freshdesk. Our feeling is that it primarily is because of increase in workload, unforeseen illness etc. We could consider to more formally track the reasons for students that drop out.

We also discussed that it could be beneficial for the future evolvements of our courses that we develop a follow-up questionnaire for students that have completed the courses.

Heather will share follow-up questions. Suzy suggested that we add a discussion on the ELAG confluence page on what follow-up questions that would be relevant, in order for the ELAG to suggest and discuss what questions to ask.

Looking at figures on whether the depth of coverage met learning needs…. Heather made a comment that we need to be very clear about why certain topics are important. Eg. do we explain why DL is important for the different types of audiences to know about.

Heather asked whether we track the questions that we get on freshdesk to provide more FAQs? This is a challenge currently, because we have different, several places for FAQs at the moment. But this is definitely a thing to look at in future.

 
5Open Access Learning Proposal DiscussionGroup

The AG to provide advice and feedback on E&PS team plans for expansion of Open Access E-Learning in the first quarter of 2017 with an approach that enables addition of alternative study pathways.

Foundation course. We have found a way so that we can provide immediate enrolment on the Foundation course. This has been requested by vendor engagement. So, in the nearest future we will have zero delay on the foundation course. (POST-MEETING NOTE: As of October 31st auto-enrollment access of the Foundation course has been launched)

With open access we can then provide assessed and un-assessed pathways. We also have the option of postponing webinars and assessments to allow people to just do the presentations… (sign up/request webinars?)

 
6Proposed 2017 2-day Crash Course for Implementers - Discussion on Topics for inclusionGroup

The AG to provide advice on specific content to be included in the short course (' 2 day crash course') for implementers, which will be developed by the team in response an MF priority item of 2017.

We need a clear picture of what needs to be within that course. Include some topics from the foundation course - basic information about components etc. Ian suggest that not all of the material in the presentations should be included - maybe just some parts/slides of a single presentation.

We talked about whether or not we can assume that people who take the crash course have taken the foundation course. This would be preferable, but probably not what will happen.

Discussion about timing/duration of such course. Ian commented that the key thing was that 6 month was too long - therefore, just allowing people to complete at their own pace - that would help a lot. 

There should be no assessments for this course. We should consider whether we will offer a statement of attendance/completion. But we should choose our word carefully, e.g. not use the word certificate.

 Discussion about importance of getting directions to source material. I.e. to provide a grand overview of the material with clear references to more detailed material.

Heather: Important with clear specification about the outcome of the course.

Ian: A lot of this will be covered by the open access. Point that many software developers will look at material when they need it… Therefore the course should position them to know where to look for material.

The outcome of the discussion was that we will work towards a more generic approach to the crash course that can be used by any type of audience. And also a more use case- driven approach. Here, the students can build there own course based on their individual needs... I.e. by selecting specific topics and and maybe a statement of the level of detail required. This approach also align with the ideas we have for open access to our E-Learning material.

Pim asked about hands-on elements? We are considering providing demonstration videos. Team response is that this is something we are looking into and will include where feasible.

 
7Updates from Member activities related to EducationMember Representative

Please notify the chair in advance if you have a planned detailed report for this agenda item. Otherwise the chair will invite short summaries from Member Representatives on any significant new educational activities or progress with existing activities.

No updates provided by those present

 
8Note ELAG 2016 assessment responseGroup

See ELAG 2016 Group Self-Assessment

DMA showed the self-assessment, which was positive in the sense that the group met the goals setup. The group is therefore recommended to continue.

 
9Work plan for ELAG in 2017Group
  • AGs have to develop their work plans for 2017 by end of year
  • AG work plans must support work plan priorities for 2017
  • Team to 
    • Summarize E-Learning work items and agreed priorities for 2017
    • Specific areas where advice is requested
  • Group to discuss relevant updates to 2017 work plan to meet requirements in 2017

 

10Setting dates for future meetings
  • Teleconferences.
  • April 2017 face-to-face.

ELAG members expressed that they want to be engaged, like they were in the workshop that we held in April 2016.

Suggest another ELAG call before the end of this year to also engage the people that are not here - attendees agreed on this.

  •  Agree how much time to request for next face-to-face
11Any other businessPlease notify before start of meeting
  • Any other business at discretion of Chair subject to available time.

Update on documentation:

Almost all the product support documents are now on Confluence. The TIG has been separated into different spaces to make it more manageable. We are looking for ways to approve it in terms of appearance and access.

Encourage group to comment on our documents.

Ian requests the option of getting notified about changes/updates to specific sections in the TIG. DMA illustrated that this is supported by watching the space or individual pages and that history of changes can be reviewed by comparing earlier versions of any page.

 

Meeting Files

Attachments