1

ICT Profile–IT Rep Testimonials May 2011–September 2012 Synthesis of Interview Grids

Target How do we integrate the ICT Profile into a program?

Objective To better understand the processes, tools, and resources used; the work performed; the results; the context; and the stakeholders in the local process of integrating the ICT Profile into a program.

Testimonials from Drummondville, Geneviève Lizée

Granby Haute-Yamaska, Huguette Dupont

Jean-de-Brébeuf, Jean Allard (Magellan project)

Jonquière, Manon Lessard

Lanaudière à L’Assomption, Jean-Luc Trussart

Lanaudière à Terrebonne, André Beauregard et Martin Pelletier

Limoilou, Séverine Parent

Marie-Victorin, France Séguin

Rivière-du-Loup, Roger de Ladurantaye

St-Félicien, Bernard Gagnon

St-Hacinthe, Gilles Boulanger

Victoriaville, Lorraine Ouellette Programs considered in the context of these interviews

[Work in progress or completed at the time of the review of practices]

081.01 Reception and Integration

081.03 Transition Session

111.A0 Dental Hygiene

200.B0 Natural Sciences

243.B0 Electronics technology

300.A0 Humanities (multiple profiles)

300.10 Social sciences/Humanities International Baccalaureate

310.C0 Legal Techniques

2

322.A0 Early childhood education

388.A0 Social work

391.A0 Recreational intervention techniques 410.A0 Transport logistics

410.B0 Accounting and management

410.C0 Insurance and financial services consulting 410.D0 Business management

411.A0 Medical archives 412.A0 Office automation

414.A0 Tourism

420.A0 Information technology

500.A1 Arts and letters

500.A5 Arts and letters (Theatre profile) 510.A0 Plastic arts

570.C0 Industrial design

570.E0 Interior design 571.A0 Fashion design 700.A0 Sciences, letters, and arts

3

Block A: General

Questions Answers

1. In what specific context did ICT Profile integration take place? • What were the key moments or opportunities that

enabled you to integrate the profile? As part of ... an action plan resulting from a program evaluation? a pedagogical project? a pilot project? a research project? an institutional directive?

• Is the profile part of an institutional vision? a process connected to an ICT integration plan or a strategic plan? a general structured process?

Drummondville: In giving it a local identity. A portable program project. Program review. Connection with the three-year professional development plan for ICTs. Voluntary programs first. Granby: Several times, the ICT Profile is tied to institutional initiatives—the provincial reinvestment plan, ICT committee, (tour of the departments), pilot project in two programs and specific target in the new strategic plan (6 programs must develop an ICT plan that includes the integration of the ICT profile). Jean-de-Brébeuf: Strategic plan of the college. The Magellan project in partnership with Université de Montréal.

Jonquière: Mandate of the Academic Dean, very proactive in integrating ICTs. Lanaudière L’Assomption: Institutional directive, desire of the Office of the Academic Dean. Is neither a pilot project nor a process related to program evaluation. The ICT Profile is in the regional ICT plan and the local ICT plans, and all the programs are targeted. Lanaudière Terrebonne: The ICT Profile is part of the 2008 Strategic Plan of the constituents and is also in the ICT plan. Simplified approach to motivate everyone to participate (there is also a simplified Terrebonne profile, among other things). The first programs chosen for implementation, opportunity. Limoilou: Project related to documentary training given to teachers. Librarians overwhelmed. Shared responsibility and openness to other skills. Choice of programs that are doing well or that present a good opportunity. Marie-Victorin: Is done during program evaluations. Rivière-du-Loup: During program evaluations, with the help of the Office of the Director General and the Office of the Academic Dean. Projects to come: formalize this process in the institutional policy on program evaluation, and produce an ICT integration plan. Saint-Félicien: At first, the initiative of a teacher involved in reception and integration Projection: integration during program evaluations. The strategic plan is very clear on this topic. Saint-Hyacinthe: Initiative of the work team of a very active program. Aim for voluntary and gradual implementation. Victoriaville: A pilot project with two programs, then, as part of program evaluations. Is part of an institutional vision for ICT development (strategic plan, ICT plan).

4

Questions Answers

2. General Education: • Was general education involved? If yes, how?

What was the people’s reaction? If not, why not?

• Has it contributed? Was there any subsequent action? If yes, how? If not, why not?

Drummondville: Not technical enough to take that route and already well covered in the program courses. Granby: From the outset it has been an objective to integrate the four disciplines into the process, in the spirit of the program approach. Jean-de-Brébeuf: The GE people participated in the validation of the profile developed. Jonquière: No formal procedure to approach them for now. Lanaudière L’Assomption: The GE people have been involved from the very beginning; a GE ICT profile was developed; the four disciplines have part of the ICT Profile.

Lanaudière Terrebonne: They began with the voluntary programs. There was no momentum in GE at the beginning. They will be approached separately. Steps taken with Philo and French. Limoilou: No Marie-Victorin: The GE people are not really that involved; ad hoc participation in program evaluations. Rivière-du-Loup: No, the working climate is not conducive to this approach. Saint-Félicien: They are not contributing, refused to participate. The intention is to include the GE people during program evaluations. Saint-Hyacinthe: Yes, approached for the part involving word processing in connection with the French writing guide. The GE people are aware they have to do a little more.

Victoriaville: The Table de concertation was approached but no steps have been taken, neither yes nor no.

5

Questions Answers

3. Teaching mandates and duties • Did one or more teachers receive a mandate to

integrate the profile into their program? What was their mandate? What was the duration of the mandate?

• As part of this mandate, was there some release time for carrying out the work? If so, what was the form of this relief (FTE)?

Drummondville: No relief, programs on a voluntary basis, program coordinators are responsible for implementation. Granby: Integration of the ICT profile is a rigorous procedure to update the ICT of the study program; a teacher responsible for the project has full-time release to carry out the work involved in submitting an ICT program plan (strategic plan target). Jean-de-Brébeuf: Release times connected to the development and review of teaching material for the Magellan courses. Jonquière: No, no release time because it is not a departmental mandate. Volunteer teachers work with the Pedagogical Counsellor’s team. Lanaudière L’Assomption: Yes, release time for teachers in charge of the process together with a pedagogical counsellor, work over at least a year. Lanaudière Terrebonne: Yes, release with a mandate to analyze the integration and the production of a profile specific to the program. Limoilou: Generally speaking, no, except in Humanities to develop various questionnaires including some related to the ICT profile. Marie-Victorin: No specific release for the ICT profile because these allocations are made as part of the program evaluation process. Rivière-du-Loup: The departmental coordinators. Done as part of the release time for program evaluation and follow-up. Saint-Félicien: This would be done by the program evaluation committee. Saint-Hyacinthe: No, it is a voluntary project. Victoriaville: Yes, there was a release time for the pilot project. Otherwise, it is the departmental evaluation coordinator who has this mandate.

6

Questions Answers

4. ICT Committee • Was an ICT committee formed at your

college as part of the work involving the ICT Profile?

• If so, what was the composition of the committee (functions/roles)?

• If so, what is the mandate of the committee and its way of operating?

Drummondville: Yes, committee formed for implementation and follow-up–teachers, PC/REPTIC, assistant, PC-library. Granby: Yes, committee tied to the Academic Council. Initially formed for reflection in regard to the ICT Profile, and now a standing committee for follow-up on the ICT Profile, the institutional ICT plan, etc. Composed of about 25 key people from the academic and other departments. Jean-de-Brébeuf: Yes, for development, then for follow-up–Office of the Academic Dean, pedagogical counsellor, and teachers. Jonquière: Not really an ICT committee connected to the ICT Profile, work done by a team of pedagogical counsellors. A more formal committee formed for the ICT plan. Lanaudière L’Assomption: A committee formed when the project was started to promote the process. Is no longer linked to the process, a unionized consulting committee formed of four teachers. Lanaudière Terrebonne: Representation for each program and for General Education, PC-ICT, assistant, SMTE (school library media specialist), and the IS coordinator. Subcommittee of the Academic Council; monitors work on the ICT Profile and a broader mandate. Limoilou: No Marie-Victorin: No specific ICT committee for the ICT Profile (work done by the program evaluation committee). Rivière-du-Loup No ICT committee, but the three academic advisors work as a team. Saint-Félicien: Not yet discussed by the Academic Council, no formal ICT committee. There are, however, on a larger scale, an annual review committee for the strategic plan. Saint-Hyacinthe: There is an ICT committee, but not connected to work on the ICT Profile. The ICT Profile is connected to program management. Victoriaville: Yes, for the ICT plan, but not for the ICT Profile.

7

Block B: The process (Stages–Tools–Stakeholders)

Was the Lanaudière à l’Assomption Guide based on your process? For some programs, YES:

Lanaudière L’Assomption (obviously), Lanaudière Terrebonne, Granby, Victoriaville (and an attempt at Jonquière).

What sequence of tasks, operations, stages, or steps were necessary to carry out the work? What tools are being used? Did you use grids? surveys? interviews?

focus groups? What does the tool look like that presents the result of the integration of the ICT Profile into the program? What documents now refer to or will

in future refer to the ICT Profile (framework plans, implementation documents, course outlines, etc.)? Who are the stakeholders that participated in the process

and what was their role?

The table that follows provides an overview of the practices in the colleges:

Stages or steps Tools and resources (what + use) Stakeholders involved (function + role)

Specifics or details

Prior establishment of a culture and of clear orientations

Strategic Plan, ICT plan, work plan of the Office of the Academic Dean, Mandate, etc.

Office of the Academic Dean Office of the Director General Academic Council ICT Committee ICT PC-ICT, etc.

Institutional commitment

Presentation, groundwork, project planning

Various teaching and management tools (Excel files, presentations, diagrams, texts, brochures, etc.)

PC-ICT and Office of the Academic Dean, then the coordinator and/or teacher in charge

Presentation of the project to the program team, to the department

Project management coaching, instruction

Tools and strategies of the pedagogical counsellor or of the college

PC/PC-ICT + Teachers in charge

As part of the working sessions

Development of the generic profile of the college (only some colleges)

Various frames of reference, including the ICT network profile, student assignments, etc.

PC-ICT with collaborators (other PCs, teachers, ICT committee, etc.)

Some colleges have developed their basic profile (Brébeuf, Drummond, Jonquière, Terrebonne), subsequently improved by programs

8

Stages or procedures Tools and resources (what + use) Stakeholders involved (function + role)

Specifics or details

Analysis of the current situation • Ministerial guidelines and framework plans

• Ministerial guidelines analysis grid (Skills–competencies grid)

• ICT activity review grid • Skills–course matching grid

•

PC/PC-ICT Departmental teachers Coordinator Teacher responsible for the project

• Based on what they do, determine the skills already present in the courses, review the activities that integrate ICTs. Teachers often fill out their own grid.

• Some systematically start with the guidelines (e.g., Rivière-du-Loup, Marie-Victorin, Granby, Terrebonne) and others do not (only a reference). We sometimes start directly with the framework plans.

Development of the generic profile

• Skills–course matching grid

• Documentation of activities

• Framework plans

PC/PC-ICT Coordinator Teacher responsible for the project Program committee Department

• Sharing of responsibilities, distribution of skills. We distribute the skills throughout the courses throughout the program in a way considered to be consistent, logical, and progressive. We determine what is taught, evaluated, reinvested in, etc.).

• We agree on expectations, on what they represent.

• Must usually be approved by the program committee.

• Some colleges use specific ICT profile grids, others use tools program management tools like the framework plan instead.

Planning and implementation PC/PC-ICT Coordinator Teacher responsible for the project Departmental teachers

• It seems this step is often hidden and we go directly to implementation and meet needs as we go on a case by case basis.

• Little or no training offered; numerous challenges related to teacher training.

• Sometimes linked to producing a schedule (L’Assomption).

• Sometimes linked to creating materials (Jonquière, Limoilou).

• Sometimes linked to producing an ICT program plan: procedure, action plan, development tools, etc. Follow-up by the evaluation committee and the academic committee (Granby).

9

Stages or steps Tools and resources (what + use) Stakeholders involved (function + role)

Specifics or details

Implementation On-site stage Eventually update management and program promotion documents (program description, exit profile, Web site, brochures)

Departmental teachers PC/PC-ICT

• To be further developed. Teaching materials, teacher training, student support.

• Integration into framework plans, then into course outlines. Strategies often need to be defined.

Evaluation • Still too soon for well-defined practices, but generally speaking, in continuous improvement mode with an evaluation objective at the end of the cohort.

• Special cases:

• Magellan is very advanced, a mature project, updated regularly

• Jonquière on-site at the beginning, regulation continues to meet needs.

Other procedural information

Stakeholders, roles:

• Involvement of PCs at varying levels. Project leader, coaching, tools, process

• The coordinator and/or teacher responsible for the project carry out the work (analyses, grids, etc.)

• Departmental teachers are involved in reviewing practices

• "Departmental" and "Program Committee" entities: discussion, validation of the profile developed, action plan

• Sometimes relationships with institutional entities: Office of the Academic Dean, evaluation committee, academic committee

Some specifics:

• Some have mentioned the possible updating of their policy on study program evaluation (Granby, Rivière-du-Loup)

• Framework plans: almost always mentioned, at one stage or another

• Jonquière specifics: research–action, one skill at a time at the institution, until everything has been tested. Structured integration later. Web Site, resources for teachers (validation grids)

• Involving students does not seem to bring results (Jonquière attempt)

• Traceability: Two colleges use or plan to use a traceability tool specific to the ICT Profile: Drummondville (external database, skill achieved or not achieved) and Jonquière (Colnet tool under development)

• Importance of greater involvement of General Education, the contributory disciplines

• Guide and grids: too complex, mentioned several times

10

We discover stages not cited elsewhere:

• Consultation with current students - Survey and Focus Group (Granby)

• Consultation with graduates (Granby)

• Consultation with people in the workplace (Granby, and also Terrebonne for programs under development)

• Job analysis (Granby)

• Analysis of university programs (Granby)

• Integration of the ICT Profile into the program work plan. Follow-up by the office of the Academic Dean, especially the report on the traceability database (Drummondville)

11

Block C: Results

Questions Answers

1. Integration of Profile skills into the program What was the approach? E.g., Identification of special courses throughout the program? Addition of a course that includes many of the profile elements? Optional workshops outside the course? Use of a portfolio?

Drummondville: Usually, an initial special course for the explicit teaching of software bases, then special courses for further development (about 12 special courses per technical program). Granby: Identification of special courses throughout the program? Seeking progression, continuity, relevance, meaning, effectiveness. No optional workshops or addition of specific courses to the profile, excluding complementary courses. Portfolio envisaged for numerous programs. Jean-de-Brébeuf: Magellan courses added to the course grid. Learning outside the program courses.

Jonquière: development of a basic profile for Jonquière, then on-site skills experimentation with teachers (Skill 1 to begin with). Special courses in the programs after all the skills have been tested. Eventually, a portfolio. Open house for workshops outside of courses if considered necessary Lanaudière L’Assomption: Integration-oriented approach, identification of special courses. Portfolio envisaged but are not yet convinced Lanaudière Terrebonne: Numerous possible paths considered. Leisure time workshop project outside the course. But generally speaking, skills distributed among numerous courses, numerous times (application throughout the program) Limoilou: Sharing skills, reinvestment in a subsequent course, integration into an activity connected to the competency of a discipline Marie-Victorin: Special courses targeted using a responsibility sharing grid Rivière-du-Loup: Responded with a grid for skills selected/not selected Saint-Félicien: For the reception and integration into a course project: classroom exercises for Skill 1, then self-directed learning Saint-Hyacinthe: Identification of courses in which skills will be taught, evaluated, and reinvested Victoriaville: Special courses were chosen

2. ICT skills training and support - resources and learning and guidance methods

• Who teaches the profile elements? The program teachers? Teachers of contributing disciplines such as office automation or computer sciences? Outside collaborators such as the librarian, technician in the audiovisual and computer department, PC-ICT, etc.?

Drummondville: Teachers for specific training, sometimes including contributory disciplines. Workshops given by the librarian. Multimedia workshop given by a technician. Granby: The goal is to have the teachers do the teaching. This will be done primarily by the teachers of specific training courses, with the participation of contributing disciplines if required. General Education teachers will also provide some instruction. In short, everyone helps! Other resource persons are called upon to support the teachers. These include the librarian (information search workshops) and Carrefour ICT staff (technicians for some more complex skills). Still a lot of questions being asked about the roles, expectations, and methods. Aside from the usual technical support, few student services are offered; to be developed (e.g., help centre).

12

Questions Answers

• What activities enable skills development? Is it self-directed learning with InukTIC or other online resources? Lessons and classroom demonstrations? Workshops outside of class? Has there been or will there be content production (procedures, video capsules)?

• Are there guidance and technical support services for students? If yes, which ones? (tutoring, help centre), computer sciences department, etc.)

Jean-de-Brébeuf: Teaching specific Magellan project courses (2x14h + certification exam), for which teachers take responsibility for the skills. Information-related competencies assumed by librarians. Explicit teaching and teaching materials created for these courses. Upgrading and tutoring available. Jonquière: responsibility should mainly be assumed by program teachers. Collaboration of the librarian for information searches. Good support from practical work technicians. Concept supported by a Web site containing the Jonquière profile and resources. Presence of a tech pedagogy help centre for teachers but also for students (in addition to the computer sciences department). Lanaudière L’Assomption: The SMTE collaborates on information retrieval. Support from technicians for audio/video presentations. No tutors or help centre, but project tutoring by peers. Reliance on training and guidance of teachers; dissemination of information and development of materials. Lanaudière Terrebonne: Supervision by program teachers, at various levels. The SMTE (school library media specialist) and the PC-ICT collaborate upon request. Some self-directed learning using various capsules. An ICT tutor in connection with the Carrefour de la réussite and supervised by the PC-ICT supports students in difficulty (service + appointment). Limoilou: Supervision above all for Skill 1, in collaboration with the librarians. For the other skills, above all references and tools, and the support of the PC-ICT as needed. Marie-Victorin: Explicit teaching of certain skills for which responsibility is assumed by teachers (information search provided by resource persons from the library), use of capsules for others when the bases are considered sufficient (for reinforcement and to ensure that an acceptable level is achieved). Rivière-du-Loup: Responded with a grid for skills selected/not selected. Saint-Félicien: Not very developed for the time being, one course taught. Eventually, a systematic approach considered for all students in regard to Skill 1. Saint-Hyacinthe: Are not there yet.

Victoriaville: The teachers give this training in their courses. We train teachers. One at a time. Developments with the new librarian. No special support for students apart from teachers.

13

Questions Answers

3. ICT Profile skills • General: Was the profile adopted overall or

was it adapted? What means did you use to make these decisions?

• Skill 1: Do you approach this skill together with the librarian? If yes, how?

• Skill 5: What do you think about this skill? How did you approach this skill with the programs? What were the reactions?

Drummondville: Drummondville profile built using the network profile based on the skills selected for the programs. Skill 1 together with the librarian (workshops). No portfolio, programs did not want any. Granby: Variable. In Tourism, everything is there, even the skills of the expanded profile. In Arts and Letters, several elements were cut back. The guidelines are very different. To keep skills, they must be perceived as being necessary and as fitting the program, and the teachers have to agree to be responsible for teaching them. Skill 1 is quite well integrated into practice, at least in the early course (workshops given by the librarian). Skill 5 has been quite well received, integration in future plans. Jean-de-Brébeuf: Profile developed by examining the work and assignments of students and through consultations. In comparison with the ICT network profile, some skills have been more developed; others, less so. Profiles are customized for each program. Jonquière: Network profile adapted by the PC team (essential skills only). Validation of Skill 1 by the librarian. Pronounced interest shown by several programs to eventually integrate the portfolio. Lanaudière L’Assomption: Almost integral use of the ICT network profile, with the exception of some expanded skills. Librarian participates in the process for Skill 1. Skill 5 is kept as a metacognition tool. Lanaudière Terrebonne: A simplified general profile for Terrebonne was designed by the PC-ICT and the ICT Committee, validated by the Academic Council. The profile can then be enhanced by the programs. Limoilou: Profile approached overall. It’s a big project, it takes a lot of time, but we gain in quality. Skill 1 together with the librarians. Skill 5 is interesting but difficult to understand; a tool more than a skill. Marie-Victorin: S0 in programs according to targeted needs, S1 by the librarians, S2 more difficult to put to use, S3 using conventional methods, S4 basic, No S5. Rivière-du-Loup: Responded with a grid for skills selected/not selected. Saint-Félicien: Adapted based on a reception and integration course. Steps to come for Skill 1, document retrieval trainings under development, sensitization to plagiarism. Not very open to Skill 5 Saint-Hyacinthe: Profile adapted (46 skills of 72) based on the graduate exit profile. To build a connection with the librarian for a brief training. Possibilities in connection with the portfolio and certification. Victoriaville: Adopted overall initially, but in the end became impossible, we must adapt it.

14

Questions Answers

4. Skill 0 • Is this skill considered as part of the work? Are

some elements supported?

• How do you ensure that students have the necessary minimum requirements when entering Cegep to meet the profile requirements?

• Are there diagnostic tests to determine the entry profile? Other methods?

• Is there a make-up process offered to students? If yes , in what form?

• What resources are available to help students?

Drummondville: No need to worry about technical programs. Ideas for future less techno programs. Granby: It is a concern for us. Few programs explicitly support Skill 0. Institutional projects as part of our ICT plan to better support programs and students (help centre and tutors, reception activity and dissemination of resources, self-diagnosis, etc.). Jean-de-Brébeuf: No diagnostic test, but a make-up capsule is available. Skill 0 has mostly been integrated into the ICT secondary school program at Brébeuf since 2010.

Jonquière: Not yet integrated for the time being but many profile elements retained. Jonquière intends to take the necessary measures. Lanaudière L’Assomption: No diagnostic or upgrading, or referenced resources. Associated with courses but no explicit activities except programs where there is a computer course. Lanaudière Terrebonne: Diagnostic test available for some programs. Hours sometimes allocated for ICT reception. Students in difficulty are referred to the help centre (tutor). Limoilou: No. Marie-Victorin: Done in the programs, by teachers, according to needs targeted by teachers. Rivière-du-Loup: We do not have Skill 0. It is already done in the courses. Saint-Félicien: No. Saint-Hyacinthe: No diagnostic test, but retained several elements associated with a special course. It is important to check the students’ previous practices. Victoriaville: No, it does not seem to be a problem.

15

Questions Answers

5. Skills evaluation What practices are used to properly assess mastery of the ICT Profile skills in your institution?

• Are ICT skills added to the criteria for evaluating activities connected to them? Or is there a concurrent/simultaneous/parallel evaluation specific to ICT profile skills? An observation grid?

• Are these practices connected to an activity, a course, or the entire profile?

• Is the evaluation part of the comprehensive program assessment or not?

• Is there an integrated portfolio approach or is one planned, and what form does it or will it take?

• Is there a target to recognize the attainment of ICT skills? If so, in what form (certificate, mention on report card, etc.)? How is it or will it be implemented?

Drummondville: Not much evaluated at the beginning of the program, rather near the end in the reinvestments (5th/6th semester). Skills always connected to learning activities and assignments, so yes, skills are evaluated. Use the college database to monitor the profile (skills, special courses, students). Not really in the Exploration Science Program (ESP). In-house certification. Advanced Technological Education (ATE) programs, must be functional very quickly. Granby: A topic to be developed. Not really addressed for the time being. We are focusing on planning, requirements, consistency, harmonization with current assignments, student supervision. Evaluation practices vary widely from one program to the next and from one teacher to the next and we are working on the long term. We plan to use the portfolio approach which would help us to make progress. No certification objective. Some skills in the Exploration Science Program (ESP). Jean-de-Brébeuf: Because Magellan is a course, it is a learning topic; there are assignments, minicontrols, and exams. No portfolio approach. Indirect evaluation during reinvestments. Magellan grade = 10% of the ESP. Recognition of the attainment of objectives (note on report card, UdeM diploma, Magellan certification one of the criteria of the “Distinction Brébeuf” Interordres Certitude project. Jonquière: Evaluated when the skill is a competency of a discipline (e.g., in computer. courses). COBA/Colnet project in progress to keep track in an ICT profile table. Mention on report card planned. Cegep portfolio procedure to come. Lanaudière L’Assomption: Certification no longer really being considered, too complex in terms of results. Evaluation overloads courses. Approach of integration into learning activities of the discipline, in connection with the competencies. Not considered for explicit integration into the ESP but sometimes present depending on requirements. Lanaudière Terrebonne: Certification wanted, recognition project (certificate). Direct or indirect evaluation of skills a given. No specific project tied to a portfolio or the ESP. Limoilou: No portfolio, no recognition of skills. Skills assigned to courses; we aim to add it to activity evaluation criteria. Marie-Victorin: Assignments are evaluated, so ICT skills are also incidentally evaluated. No certification planned. Rivière-du-Loup: Impossible for the time being. Saint-Félicien: Evaluated if directly related to performance criteria. The evaluation of ICT skills seems generally problematic. No foreseeable plans for projects connected to the ESP, the portfolio, or certification. Saint-Hyacinthe: We are not there yet, for the time being. Victoriaville: We mention it in the activity evaluation grid. Ideally, the goal is certification. No link with the ESP, too much variety.

16

Questions Answers

6. Experience with the ICT Profile • What obstacles did you encounter?

What solutions did you apply?

• What are the positive or negative spinoffs of the integration of the ICT profile?

• How do the teachers experience the implementation of the ICT profile, during the development process and during implementation?

• If you could start over, what would you do differently?

Drummondville: Difficulties encountered–teacher adherence in the programs, many reinvestments, evaluation, parallel DB, change in the person responsible for the file. Strength: voluntary nature of programs. Granby: Challenge to guide and to support heterogeneous groups. Cumbersome processes, roles to be clarified, steps simplified. Difficulty in finding the best time to do the work. More work close to the institution (research-action, resources). Jean-de-Brébeuf: The skills were taught in the Magellan course, there is no more resistance, program teachers can reinvest and raise requirements. Jonquière: Resistance to going ahead with program integration method (Lanaudière guide). The new strategy is very effective (self-regulation, teachers feel supported, development of tools). Lanaudière L’Assomption: Initial process too cumbersome, too complex. Does however improve joint effort. Added value, impact on students. Lanaudière Terrebonne: Misconceptions, insufficient release time granted to teachers, network documentation too heavy. Very positive impact in the environment. To develop a good evaluation tool. Limoilou: Resistance from teachers and many other expectations for program development (demands made from all sides). However, when you master it, you get a better quality of training. Marie-Victorin Departments are having difficulty appropriating the profile. Rivière-du-Loup: N/A Saint-Félicien: Little interest from teachers, the Office of the Academic Dean does not prioritize this issue, the Academic Council is waiting for a rationale and new allocations. Saint-Hyacinthe: Work team vs receptiveness of the department. Victoriaville: The first programs chosen were less appropriate (nature of the program, many teachers). Change in special courses. Positive impact of integrating the PC-ICT into the program work. First work with voluntary programs, but in a structured way with the support of the administration, otherwise, once the teacher’s release time ends...

17

Questions Answers

7. ICT Profile tools Did the Excel file providing detailed information on the ICT Profile meet the needs of the process? Was its use effective? Is there room for improvement (amount of information, level of detail, presentation, format, etc.)?

Drummondville: Very important file for understanding how far we want to go, the essence of the skills. Granby: Essential file for several stages of assignments, for the PC-ICT and teachers responsible for the project. Jean-de-Brébeuf: N/A, Magellan was created with the network profile. Sometimes a reference among others. Jonquière: Was the basis for the work of developing the Jonquière profile. Lanaudière L’Assomption: Profile file too detailed, the first 2–3 levels are sufficient. Simplified, local tools in three simple parts: existing practices, learning progress, and summary of activities. Lanaudière Terrebonne: The file was completely redone and simplified. Original file used as a reference only. Limoilou: OK. Enabled us to understand where we wanted to go. Marie-Victorin: File too detailed, teachers get discouraged if we go beyond the level of Skills/Operations/Objective. Rivière-du-Loup: N/A Saint-Félicien: Is only used by the PC-ICT for the time being. Saint-Hyacinthe: Grid adapted to TEE. Victoriaville: Essential to knowing what level we should work at. We will use it when the time is right.

8. Other useful information Enter here any other information not addressed in the questions provided.

Drummondville: Adaptation of the network profile for Drummondville: programs can make choices for skills 2 and 3. Numerous complementary documents available. Granby: Numerous examples of tools and procedures shared with IT reps. Jean-de-Brébeuf: Magellan funded by the students (tuition). Promotion of the course, present in the grids as a compulsory course. Web pages dedicated to the Magellan project. Jonquière: Web site dedicated to the Jonquière ICT Profile. Lanaudière L’Assomption: Despite the difficulties and cumbersome document, the college is continuing in the same direction. Lanaudière Terrebonne: Web site available for monitoring work. Limoilou: N/A Marie-Victorin N/A Rivière-du-Loup: N/A Saint-Félicien: N/A Saint-Hyacinthe: N/A Victoriaville: Too many programs at the same time, takes time to provide guidance for them.

18

General and Specific Information

• Integration context:

o Often connected to the ICT plan or strategic plan: Brébeuf, Granby Haute-Yamaska, Lanaudière à L’Assomption, Lanaudière à Terrebonne,

Victoriaville. More to come with this approach

o Often connected, in whole or in part, with program evaluation, review, or implementation: Drummondville, Marie-Victorin, Rivière-du- Loup,

Lanaudière à Terrebonne, Victoriaville

o Sometimes comes from the motivation to give a local identify to the profile or to associate it with a project such as the implementation

of a movable program

o The heart of the project is sometimes tied to Skill 1 as a starting point: Jonquière, Limoilou

• General Education: limited or no involvement, few colleges have applied these disciplines

• Release time: Varies. Usually no specific release for the ICT profile or release for the program evaluation project. Release as part of pilot projects

• ICT Committee Varies. Some colleges have, or have had, an ICT committee in connection with the ICT profile process. Others have an ICT committee, but

tied to broader targets such as the ICT plan. Others do not have an ICT committee. The composition varies, but usually the committee is made up of the

PC-ICT, an assistant from the Office of the Academic Dean, teachers, and occasionally other resource persons such as the librarian, other PCs, the person

in charge of computer sciences, etc.

• The approach using the distribution of skills in the special courses is almost unanimous

• Specific training teachers are usually responsible for the teaching and supervision and are sometimes supported by other resource persons such as the

librarian (Skill 1), the PC-ICT, a technician, etc. In some cases, self-taught learning through capsules or optional workshops is planned. Few services are

offered, but we noticed some trends in regard to help centres and tutoring. We also see the need to develop help resources and materials for students

and teachers

• Collaboration with librarians for Skill 1: the majority do collaborate, the others are also in the process of collaborating. Often limited to a short

workshop in the first semester. Very important to develop ties with librarians

• Generally speaking, the 2009 profile has been adapted by colleges and in programs (additions, deletions, vocabulary, etc.) Development of a

college profile: Drummondville, Jean-de-Brébeuf, Jonquière, Terrebonne

• Procedures or intentions in connection with Skill 0: Brébeuf, Granby Haute-Yamaska, Jonquière, Saint-Hyacinthe, Terrebonne

• Certification: few colleges have this objective (Drummondville, Jean-de-Brébeuf, Terrebonne). Others are planning certification, many have set it

aside almost definitively

• Skills evaluation: Very varied and a sensitive situation. Often perceived as an integral part of the evaluation of a competency. Direct or indirect

evaluation. Some keywords: Impossible–Challenges—Issues

• Portfolio approach: much interest in regard to the relevance, much work on the approach and means. Some set it aside, others promote it or are

planning its eventual integration

• Major impact: enabled progress with the program approach