Adventures and Pitfalls in Going Electronic

1. Adventures and Pitfalls in Going Electronic A Tale of Three Universities Bree Callahan–University of Washington Chad Price–Arizona State University Heidi Scher–University of Arkansas Jon McGough–University of Washington 

2. Campus Info • University of Washington (UW) • Disability Resources for Students (DRS) serves 1350 students • UW total student population 42k • DRS serves 3.2% of student population • 7 full-time staff, 2 part-time staff & 12 student staff • Quarter system • Medical, Dental and Law Schools • 3 campuses in region

3. Campus Info • Arizona State University • Disability Resource Center (DRC) services 2477 students • ASU total student population 76K • DRC services 3.3% of student population • Staffing: 4 offices, 31 full time staff, 3 half time staff, multiple student workers • Semester system (3 sessions per semester A,B,C) • 14 schools/colleges, law school, multiple campus locations

4. Campus Info • University of Arkansas • Center for Educational Access (CEA) serves 2117 students with disabilities • UofA total student population 25k • CEA serves 8.5% of student population • Staffing: 13 full-time staff, 3 graduate assistants, 25-30 hourly employees (conversion specialists, transcriptionists, golf cart drivers, lab assistants, proctors), 1 part-time computer support specialist, *Others providing services: interpreters, notetakers • Semester system • 8 colleges, law school

5. Where we were prior to AIM

6. Needed something different • Continued increase in students requesting services • Bogged down with paper • Increasing demands by administration (do more with less) • Need more efficient and effective office procedures and processes • Need more efficient and effective student service processes • Need for better and increased reporting

7. Shopping for a System Features we were looking for: Appointment scheduling User management E-Application Integrated modules for service areas Bring us coffee in the AM Do our work for us  • Web-based system • Accessible for users (staff & students) • Customizable fields, labels, & school branding • Students access/request online • Automated communication to faculty & groups of students

8. Systems explored • Simplicity's Accommodate • http://www.symplicity.com/accommodate • Clockwork • http://microscience.on.ca/clockwork/ • Accessible Information Management (AIM) • http://accessiblelearning.com/ • UW chose for: Alternative Format module & was more user friendly for us • UofA chose for: Alternative Testing modules, Alternative Format, Note-taking, Faculty Notification Letters email capabilities

9. AIM Modules • Accommodations • Students request letters of accommodations online & select accommodations • Letters of Accommodation delivered to faculty via email • Appointments • Synchronizes with exchange server • Alternative Testing • Testing contract submitted, student schedules exams, faculty uploads exam in system. • Note-taking • Note-takers sign up online, paired with students, upload notes to the course for students to view.

10. AIM Modules 2 • Equipment Management • Scan or input serial numbers and attach to students profiles for management • Alternative Format* • Sync with bookstore information, connect requests to course information, track conversion tasks • Students request conversion online • Deaf and Hard of Hearing* • Student can submit requests and staff can track and pair interpreters to assignments • * optional modules

11. Implementation • UW - All in concept • 2013-2014: Launched all 6 modules • Winter Qtr: DHOH and Alternative Format • ASU - Piece-meal concept • Fall 2013: Launched Accommodations, Alternative Testing, Notetaking, and Equipment modules • Spring 2014: Alternative Format & DHOH • Current: Working on Appointments • UofA - Piece-meal concept • Spring 2013: Accommodations, Alternative Testing, Note-taking, Letter requests • Fall 2013: Letter email process, Equipment management • Spring 2014: Alternative Format, Deaf and Hard of Hearing • Summer 2014: Appointments

12. Automated sync options Bookstore Booklists for Alternative Format • ASU & UofA: Follett, UW: U Bookstore Student Registration Information • ASU & UofA: PeopleSoft, UW: homegrown, Student Demographic & Academic Information • UW: homegrown Single Sign-on to (placed behind campus portal) • UW & UofA: Shibboleth, ASU: CAS

13. What we learned • Preparation is key! • Templates – how are you communicating information • Know campus partners to help implement: IT, Bookstore, Enrollment Management, Web Services • Collect all electronic information you have It is easier said than done • Moving from paper to electronic can be painful • Understand your data security policies on campus Review your student file retention policies • Do you have an electronic file policy/process?

14. What we learned 2 • Need resources for students/faculty/staff • Online orientations, how-to guides Don’t be afraid to change current processes • Review office procedures and process • Review language used in communications Communication plan • Need to share upcoming changes with faculty/students • Consider holding orientations for faculty/students Assessment: • Quarterly surveys of system usage and feedback

15. Impact • Streamlined, less cumbersome process for office and for students (UW, UofA, ASU) • Re-allocated time to work with students (UW, UofA, ASU) • Enhanced student experience (UW) • Engagement and independence have increased with the online capabilities (UofA, ASU) • Increased control of accommodations (UofA, ASU) • Serves growing online student population (UW, UofA, ASU)

16. Impact • Mixed responses from students and faculty • Students: interaction with office changed (ASU) • Faculty: either like it or they don’t (UW, ASU) • Faculty: increased engagement in the overall accommodation process (UofA, ASU) • Generate more reporting information quickly (UW, UofA, ASU) • AIM = Students First! (UofA) Student contact & interaction Time required for administrative tasks

17. On-going efforts • Campus outreach • Academic Departments • Advising • Continual training • Constant review of processes

18. Was it worth it? • UW: YES!! • Spend less time with administrative busy work • More time for campus outreach • Quick reporting options for us and administrators • Clear and consistent workflows • Better quality program delivery: Note-taking, Alternative Format, Equipment management, DHOH, Letter of Accommodations delivery and management

19. Was it worth it? • ASU: Absolutely, YES! • Increased consistency across campuses • One University, many places • Focus on transformational versus transactional interactions with students • Quick and simple reporting • More effective tracking of services and students • Integrated communication across service areas

20. Was it worth it? • UofA: YES!!! • Spend less time with administrative “busy work” • Increased direct student contact & campus outreach • Quick reporting options • Clear and consistent workflows • Improved case management • Better quality program tracking and delivery • Faculty notification letters electronic delivery and management, Alternative testing, Alternative format requests and tracking, Equipment management, Deaf & hard of hearing services

21. Questions • Accessible Information Management (AIM) is in the AHEAD Exhibit Hall • Visit Booth 26 and talk to them • Website is: http://accessiblelearning.com/

22. Contact Information Chad Price Arizona State University crprice@asu.edu (602) 496-4321 Heidi Scher University of Arkansas hascher@uark.edu (479) 575-3104 Bree Callahan University of Washington breec@uw.edu (206) 221-2453 Jon McGough University of Washington jondm@uw.edu (206) 221-8543