Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Meeting Information


August 28, 2009


9:00 AM CDT/10:00 AM EDT/4:00 PM CEST

Attending:  Kim Hoffman, Chair; Carol Aschenbrenner, Michael Barbouche, Carol Clothier, Elaine Danefer, Jeroen Donkers, Bob Galbraith, Simon Grant, Lindsey Henson, Linda Lewin, Neil Mehta, Amber Montañano, Hettie Till, Paula Wales

Agenda Items

1 Review minutes of last meeting

Kim began the meeting commenting that the time of the teleconference was difficult for colleagues on the West Coast of the US. She and formally asked the group if they would be available for calls taking place an hour later. Most group members indicated that they would.

Valerie will send a formal doodle pool to the group to verify their availability. 
Simon made a correction in the URL for the monograph in the proceedings on the minutes from the prior meeting.  The minutes were approved.

2 Describe your interest in developing standards for sharing information

3 Describe any related work to date

Kim requested feedback from each group participant regarding their interest in this project and related work experience at their organization.    
Michael mentioned he is a data guy and the establishment of standards serves as a starting point to establishing infrastructure for moving and reporting data.  Once this is achieved, the use of data for research moves to the forefront. He recently completed a similar project across the state of Wisconsin.   

Linda is focused on sharing competencies among educators in ways that help the learner. Carol commented that she thinks the work is important to advancing the use of e-portfolio's and expressed the AAMC's support. Simon explains that he is from JISC, the UK's Joint Information Systems Committee and their Center for Technical Interoperability Standards, CETIS. He helped to create the technical specifications for each portfolios called Leap 2A. He hopes the specification can get the working group a head start.  

Elaine is interested in a competency-based assessment system and managing all assessment data collected for each student. The key question for her is how you display data across the continuum. Neil added that the process for students to build a portfolio is important is hoping to capture that. They have used custom applications for their a portfolio; it would be beneficial for custom applications to be able to generate data for other users. He believes we need quantitative data to captures what e-portfolio captures for each person.   

Lindsey commented that she approached e-portfolios from the perspective of a department chair.  She is interested in measuring competency and coming up with a way to share data about doctors trying to move into different hospitals and jobs. Hettie introduced herself. She is from University of Dundee and is looking forward to learning more about electronic portfolios. Portfolios are difficult to evaluate and score. 

Paula commented that her institution has a competency based curriculum. Her interest is in developing a competency-based transcript for graduates. They have piloted and e-portfolio. Jeroen commented that his interest lies in the interoperability between residency programs and other programs. They are beginning to build a portfolio in cooperation with the Cleveland clinic. Carol Clothier introduced herself, she is from the Federation of State Medical Boards.

Neil then discussed the e-mail that he sent to the group earlier in the day. He would like to gather from the group a list of different types of experiences and then classify them as required or elective/optional. He would also like to include the specific amount of time it took and whether the experience was completed in the specified amount of time.  They wanted to capture the date for each experience and create a table for each student.    

Kim asked about the use of the term "elective", a type of course or a truly open-ended experience?  Neil replied it was to differentiate required verses optional core information.  Valerie asked what type of data he was collecting now.  Neil mentioned they are collecting different types of data regarding experiences, which are required and which are not.  Kim asked whether Neil was suggesting qualitative and quantitative.  Neil said he was looking to collect quantitative initially.  Kim shared the importance qualitative data in residency programs and credentialing.   

Linda commented if we are being interoperable are we providing data that is useful to learner and to the institution to which they are moving, ultimately you want qualitative data.  Lindsey shared the idea that it's not how long it took them to complete the competency but did they learn the set of skills.  Kim mentioned if time is a factor the belief is that there was a problem that it took longer.  Valerie questioned whether we wanted to codify a time-based system. This has big implications for the learner information. Simon thought the important thing is to produce a means of representing this data that allows time-based and competency-based representations so that people have a choice.  We have to find a way that the technical system does not constrain the educators options.  Bob agreed with Simon and added that we need to capture the data for two questions: 1) what did the learner experience and 2) are they competent?   

Kim commented that the most important thing initially was to be able to align experiences and compare across institutions. Neil agreed that time still has an important place in competency-based education. 

The group then returned to a discussion of the data described in Neil's email. Kim proposed merging Neil's comments with prior work done in the EII, and Neil agreed.  Valerie and Kim will work on this. 

4 Review one learner scenario - Pat

5 Review sample use case

Valerie posted a link to an EII scenario for a fictional student named Pat which represents several different formal and informal learning experiences. There is a great deal of information in the scenario that is not currently codified.  Using the Pat scenario, she and Kim created two use cases, one where Pat requests for his data to be sent to a residency program, and the other where the residency program requests pat's data. In both cases, the medical school sends data to the residency program.  If we do codify the data, where do we want to send it and how do we want to use it? She also pointed out that there may be issues to think through when the learner requests that a subset of the data be sent. 

Simon commented that in the UK they've distinguished between primary source verified information and learner assembled information.  The University has people putting together their own documents, and then you have the official university transcript.  We need to get away from the question of either or, but use both and be clear which one you are talking about.   

Kim suggested merging what Neil has provided with work EII has been doing and send it around to the group for comment with questions related to the use cases.  Conference calls are scheduled for Sept. 11 and 18; and we will try and find a more agreeable time for the group so as to continue with our momentum.  She asked if anybody had anything they want added to the agenda for the next meeting.  No one had any additions.   

Simon will not be in attendance next time but he asked if they might create a wiki page for members to put their introductions and related work. Valerie mentioned she had started a wiki page for that purpose and planned to take data from the minutes to populate that page.  The wiki provides an opportunity for those who can't join the call to still see what is being discussed, and it's a nice way to refer back to what everyone is doing.    

6 Open discussion


Action Items

  • Kim and Valerie will merge Neil's suggestions for data collection with work underway at EII and circulate to the group
  • Valerie will populate wiki page for background and related work.
  • Valerie will send a Doodle poll regarding teleconference times. 
  • No labels