Hi Annette,

Thanks for posting the step by step. We are members of Unizin and we use Canvas. Which homework solutions are you speaking of? Sorry if I missed it in the conversation.

Aimee

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 25, 2018, at 11:10 AM, Beck, Annette L <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:

For members of Unizin, the links for homework solutions for LTI will work directly in Canvas and there will be no need for students to get access codes. This has proven to be a huge time saver for our faculty. I know that is only available via Unizin right now, but it is a huge plus for us. The codes sync with their HawkID and enrollments so they just have to login to Canvas and they have access, unless they choose to opt-put

________________________________________________________________
Annette Beck, Director
Enterprise Instructional Technology
Office of Teaching, Learning & Technology
The University of Iowa  •  2800 UCC  •  Iowa City, IA 52242
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>  • (319) 335-6043
http://teach.its.uiowa.edu<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fteach.its.uiowa.edu&data=02%7C01%7Caimee%40UCF.EDU%7C87e11721a011446fc29208d5aabe9c38%7Cbb932f15ef3842ba91fcf3c59d5dd1f1%7C0%7C0%7C636602658013278685&sdata=zCXLioXYwu44%2B1scDtXrlTjmH0Je%2FCsbqOzpgUgSUOw%3D&reserved=0>

"Life begins at the end of your comfort zone" ~ Neal Donald Walsch

From: The EDUCAUSE eTexts Constituent Group Listserv <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> On Behalf Of Evans, Gwen
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2018 8:41 AM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [ETEXTS] [External] Re: [ETEXTS] Pricing is Difficult. Buying...not so much when goals are clear

>>>Sounds more like a "required access" program?

This is true for any use of courseware by an instructor, it's not an inclusive access issue. If a faculty member decides to use courseware in their class for grading and assignments completely outside of inclusive access, a student gets the link, goes to the Pearson site (or Cengage, or WileyPlus platform), puts in their credit card/paypal information, and purchases the access code as an individual. If they don't want to do it (i.e. opt out of using a resource their instructor is requiring), then they put their grade/performance at risk -- essentially the risk would be similar to telling their instructor "I don't want the TA to grade my assignments/tests, I want you to do it" or "I don't want to use a scantron, I want to handwrite it and turn it in" or "I know you said buy oil paint and charcoal for this art class, but I chose to buy acrylics and watercolors." The instructor is requiring the use of this resource to manage and grade the class (it's not the same as as standalone textbook), not the IA model -- so almost all use of courseware is "required access" unless there are policy-driven options for alternative access that are acceptable to the instructor and institution.

The issue then becomes what are the market pressures vs. internal institutional/personal/professional/pedagogical issues of using courseware which is de facto compulsory, in the absence of market alternatives.

But be clear those concerns are not about inclusive access. They are about courseware.

(and for the record, if Pearson told me water was wet, I'd have it independently verified by NOAA).

Best, Gwen

Gwen Evans
Executive Director, OhioLINK
ph: 614-485-6608
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
www.ohiolink.edu<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ohiolink.edu&data=02%7C01%7Caimee%40UCF.EDU%7C87e11721a011446fc29208d5aabe9c38%7Cbb932f15ef3842ba91fcf3c59d5dd1f1%7C0%7C0%7C636602658013278685&sdata=ARnnp1hAMr5XeEykDFr4XuIwX4joH4vSqFHMwNhMKvE%3D&reserved=0>


Per Ohio Revised Code, this communication and any attachments may constitute a public record. (http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/149.43<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcodes.ohio.gov%2Forc%2F149.43&data=02%7C01%7Caimee%40UCF.EDU%7C87e11721a011446fc29208d5aabe9c38%7Cbb932f15ef3842ba91fcf3c59d5dd1f1%7C0%7C0%7C636602658013278685&sdata=VwCXB%2BoEC7sINzL%2FQVU0uQ%2FqLYRRJNRPjoa%2Bgx0hLpc%3D&reserved=0>
________________________________
From: The EDUCAUSE eTexts Constituent Group Listserv [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] on behalf of Scott Robison [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 3:38 PM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [ETEXTS] [External] Re: [ETEXTS] Pricing is Difficult. Buying...not so much when goals are clear
>>>3. What happens to the student who opts out with regard to quizzes, exams, homework, and other materials that are available only through the platform? How can a student pass the course in this case?

I attended the Pearson-IU webinar about their "inclusive access" program. I asked the "opt out" question three times and it was finally addressed right at the end. As Gwen said in this thread, they admitted that if a student opted out of the program, they would lose access to the content (textbook) and all supplemental resources. Essentially, they couldn't complete the course. So opting out isn't really an option. Quite misleading to say it is. Sounds more like a "required access" program?

Scott


[https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0B6w0IyLucV5aZGhwdGhYZ29OdlU&revid=0B6w0IyLucV5aeFJyeWdhVjk0bElUSHF4ZFRnWmZ2Z2hjWE1BPQ]
Scott Robison, Ph.D.
(pronouns: he, him, his)
Associate Director, Digital Learning and Design
Portland State University
Portland, OR 97201
503-725-9118
@otterscotter


On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 7:17 AM, Wheeler, Bradley C <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
Gwen has this right, and we have lot more of this coming as faculty and students find value for some courses in the evolving efficacy of "The Robotutors" as they have been described in Inside Higher Ed.  After years of little faculty interest in these Adaptive Courseware Systems, I can share that demand has accelerated at IU over the past 12-24 months.



It was this very economic concern that first motivated IU's 2009 exploration of eTexts.  Some know this story, but I'll share it again here as it is responsive to Jody and Gwen's points.  I was at the Consumer Electronics Show in 2009, and I was really surprised to see the vast improvement and a growing array of consumer tablet devices relative to what I saw in 2008 (recall that the iPad was introduced in 2010).  It struck me that if required course content all became digital and it was a required to complete a course, students would be left to a retail model where publishers could price at will with direct distribution to the student.  There might be no substitutes (e.g., used books, competition, prior editions, foregoing the materials) to provide any mitigating force on content pricing.



That is why we got involved in using the institution to help cut mutually fair, win-win deals on both digital versions of paper books and Adaptive courseware.  Absent institutional involvement, these monopolistic goods -- as they are chosen by faculty, not students -- have little check and balance on retail pricing.



I've also added a few >> Inline Comments to your list of good points/questions below.  We have worked through many of these over the years.  Yes, copyright remains an important means for authors to be paid for their work when they chose to do so just as many library books can affirm.  Some authors choose to distribute their works with open or CC licenses and those are very promising models as well.



Each time we discuss any aspect of digital course materials, I think it goes without saying, but let me say it again here.  High quality content provisioned in OER models (free or even modest fee) is a remarkable and highly valuable path where it exists for faculty and students.  IU embraces it and can even distribute some of it through the Unizin Engage reader/annotation software, and faculty sometimes just link directly to it in their course.  In our experience, there remains a very large percentage of courses where OER has not yet evolved with sufficient test banks, ancillary teaching materials, etc. to win over faculty adoption.  That gap is closing, and that is good for all.  Thus, we concurrently participate in OER development, evangelize its use by faculty, and seek to provide the best terms possible for licensed course materials with publishers.



I appreciate the good discussion this thread as we all continue to assess the institution's role in digital course content. I do strongly encourage institutional action even as these models evolve.  There are real gains for students today, and accessing those gains need not wait for everything to be resolved at these offers and terms will continue to evolve.



Thanks - Brad





-----Original Message-----
From: The EDUCAUSE eTexts Constituent Group Listserv <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> On Behalf Of Evans, Gwen
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 8:51 AM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: [External] Re: [ETEXTS] Pricing is Difficult. Buying...not so much when goals are clear



This message was sent from a non-IU address. Please exercise caution when clicking links or opening attachments from external sources.

-------



>>>3. What happens to the student who opts out with regard to quizzes, exams, homework, and other materials that are available only through the platform? How can a student pass the course in this case?



This isn't tied to the inclusive access model. Courseware like MindTap or MyLab are often assigned by faculty as a required resource while the textbook gets acquired independently by the student in whatever format they wish. Unless there is some kind of accommodation made and requested, students can't pass the class without buying the courseware. It has nothing to do with inclusive access as a model per se. And there are legitimate and defensible reasons for faculty to use courseware in certain environments, while developing OER courseware is much more challenging and requires more investment in time, technology and design than a traditional textbook, although there are efforts being made to develop OER replacements.



Best, Gwen











Gwen Evans

Executive Director, OhioLINK

ph: 614-485-6608

[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>

www.ohiolink.edu<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ohiolink.edu&data=02%7C01%7Caimee%40UCF.EDU%7C87e11721a011446fc29208d5aabe9c38%7Cbb932f15ef3842ba91fcf3c59d5dd1f1%7C0%7C0%7C636602658013278685&sdata=ARnnp1hAMr5XeEykDFr4XuIwX4joH4vSqFHMwNhMKvE%3D&reserved=0>





Per Ohio Revised Code, this communication and any attachments may constitute a public record. (http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/149.43<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcodes.ohio.gov%2Forc%2F149.43&data=02%7C01%7Caimee%40UCF.EDU%7C87e11721a011446fc29208d5aabe9c38%7Cbb932f15ef3842ba91fcf3c59d5dd1f1%7C0%7C0%7C636602658013278685&sdata=VwCXB%2BoEC7sINzL%2FQVU0uQ%2FqLYRRJNRPjoa%2Bgx0hLpc%3D&reserved=0>



________________________________________

From: The EDUCAUSE eTexts Constituent Group Listserv [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] on behalf of Bailey, Jody E [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>]

Sent: Monday, April 23, 2018 5:46 PM

To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>

Subject: Re: [ETEXTS] Pricing is Difficult.  Buying...not so much when goals are clear



I attended the Open Education Conference in Anaheim last October, and I learned a great deal from a panel that was focused on "inclusive access." This panel was organized by SPARC (https://sparcopen.org/<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsparcopen.org%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caimee%40UCF.EDU%7C87e11721a011446fc29208d5aabe9c38%7Cbb932f15ef3842ba91fcf3c59d5dd1f1%7C0%7C0%7C636602658013278685&sdata=h4AaWqTyoiL3C1uUyqyE26D3vCfvfL2rXT4ukZjA4DA%3D&reserved=0>), which is a big player in the OER world. At that meeting, SPARC personnel advocated for calling "inclusive access" "automatic purchasing programs" since their take is that this label is more honest. Off the top of my head, I'd say decision makers should be thinking or asking about the following:

1. Will students have access to the course materials after the lease period?

>> Yes, at IU, they have access to all the eTexts as long as they are a student.  They have print options as well.



2. Is the opt-out process clearly explained and easy? Or does the publisher try to hide the process and/or make it difficult?

>> Yes, it is an institutional process, not a publisher process.



3. What happens to the student who opts out with regard to quizzes, exams, homework, and other materials that are available only through the platform? How can a student pass the course in this case?

>> See above



4. What are publishers doing with student data? In the wake of the Facebook scandal, do universities want to find themselves in a situation in which publishers are selling student data or misusing it in some other way?

5. The 65% savings that are promoted by publishers are usually calculated from the list price, not the used book market that so many students purchase from. So are we really saving them that much money?

>> Institutions can do better than 65% discount off the made up list price number, and that was the point of my original post.  Do not offer institutional bursar billing/Inclusive Access for paltry discounts off of list as some publishers are now testing.  There is some pricing innovation in the market with flat fees and catalogue subscription models.



6. Many of these course materials are digital only; publishers do not provide a print option for the book since they don't want the materials to be shared among students. What happens to those students who prefer print, or perhaps even need it because of a disability?

>> IU's materials have print options, and our empirical data say two things:  Students tell us that printing is very important to them.  Students don't print much at all.  We work closely with our Adaptive Technologies Accessibility Center to accommodate any student needs for any course or course material need.



7. Are these platforms and digital materials 100% accessible to students with disabilities? My understanding is that many are not.

>> They vary greatly by publisher.  Our historical agreements, and now our publisher agreements via Unizin, have these provisions as I'm sure Gwen's do as well.



8. Many of these course materials have heavy-handed DRM incorporated in them, which means that often students can't copy/paste short sections into their notes or print even just a few pages. How does this rigid control support student learning?

>> Printing is watermarked to the student and the course.  DRM schemes were very heavy in the early years, and they are much less so today as most were more costly than they created value for publishers.



If you'd like to see the slides from the panel I attended, they are openly licensed and available here:

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1TEczfNO8d9N8u3E3rD92aN9idcMoT2cl1rSa5OuEM4E/edit?usp=sharing<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.com%2Fpresentation%2Fd%2F1TEczfNO8d9N8u3E3rD92aN9idcMoT2cl1rSa5OuEM4E%2Fedit%3Fusp%3Dsharing&data=02%7C01%7Caimee%40UCF.EDU%7C87e11721a011446fc29208d5aabe9c38%7Cbb932f15ef3842ba91fcf3c59d5dd1f1%7C0%7C0%7C636602658013278685&sdata=kpb7zS4iueTk1BXVdJPqUWGC4A%2FUiB45QoK3HOllFEk%3D&reserved=0>

Here's a shorter link for the same URL: https://bit.ly/2FbXLSH<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbit.ly%2F2FbXLSH&data=02%7C01%7Caimee%40UCF.EDU%7C87e11721a011446fc29208d5aabe9c38%7Cbb932f15ef3842ba91fcf3c59d5dd1f1%7C0%7C0%7C636602658013278685&sdata=MPiC6SVWUu2WmP2ilisqTqAyMju%2B91mmLKs81CF%2F44s%3D&reserved=0>



The last panelist for that presentation was Rajiv Jhangiani, Special Advisor to the Provost on Open Education and a Psychology Professor at Kwantlen Polytechnic University in Vancouver, BC. Rather than making several slides, he recapped this blog post from July 2017: "Just how inclusive are 'inclusive access' e-textbook programs?" https://thatpsychprof.com/tag/inclusive-access/<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fthatpsychprof.com%2Ftag%2Finclusive-access%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caimee%40UCF.EDU%7C87e11721a011446fc29208d5aabe9c38%7Cbb932f15ef3842ba91fcf3c59d5dd1f1%7C0%7C0%7C636602658013278685&sdata=97IeegxHdR0u5hpouWZLXZNAalKV0R2orIBr5%2B4Nb8A%3D&reserved=0>

Regarding accessibility, one commenter on this post wrote, " Many of the online publisher textbooks I've seen don't have image descriptions, have math content that's not in MathML (and therefore cannot be read by a screenreader), or have videos that lack captions."

https://thatpsychprof.com/just-how-inclusive-are-inclusive-access-programs/#comments<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fthatpsychprof.com%2Fjust-how-inclusive-are-inclusive-access-programs%2F%23comments&data=02%7C01%7Caimee%40UCF.EDU%7C87e11721a011446fc29208d5aabe9c38%7Cbb932f15ef3842ba91fcf3c59d5dd1f1%7C0%7C0%7C636602658013278685&sdata=rmzGdH%2FE8qOkAhPmEy%2FnrQdvPCCuiOyy67QLEk8TPTM%3D&reserved=0>



As a final but very important note, I'll provide a link to David Wiley's take on "inclusive access," which is not favorable. His main criticism is that the materials are 100% protected by copyright rather than being open, and copyright-protected learning materials hobble both faculty and students alike who try to engage with the subject matter: "If We Talked About the Internet Like We Talk About OER: The Cost Trap and Inclusive Access" https://opencontent.org/blog/archives/5219<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fopencontent.org%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F5219&data=02%7C01%7Caimee%40UCF.EDU%7C87e11721a011446fc29208d5aabe9c38%7Cbb932f15ef3842ba91fcf3c59d5dd1f1%7C0%7C0%7C636602658013278685&sdata=wkp%2BFaIdvyYhf3snNQwiu71yiQPOz6PZMhnyWcsLCa4%3D&reserved=0>



Best regards,



Jody



Jody Bailey, MA, MLIS

Linguistics/TESOL Librarian

Director of Publishing, Mavs Open Press

Central Library Room 410

University of Texas at Arlington Libraries [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4226-4173<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Forcid.org%2F0000-0002-4226-4173&data=02%7C01%7Caimee%40UCF.EDU%7C87e11721a011446fc29208d5aabe9c38%7Cbb932f15ef3842ba91fcf3c59d5dd1f1%7C0%7C0%7C636602658013278685&sdata=jR20b2GS6%2FJByrPuwiStnwj%2FGlMJ5%2FcZoBUgNZzF0vo%3D&reserved=0>





-----Original Message-----

From: The EDUCAUSE eTexts Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On Behalf Of Aimee Denoyelles

Sent: Friday, April 20, 2018 8:54 AM

To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>

Subject: Re: [ETEXTS] Pricing is Difficult. Buying...not so much when goals are clear



Hi Brad,



I want to thank you for taking the time to eloquently summarizing this trend and acknowledging the positives and concerns.



Your message could not be more timely for us at UCF. We are currently exploring the various platforms and providers that would enable a discount for students, as well as investigating the bursar/student account side. Personally, I'm cautious of diving into an agreement that may ultimately disadvantage the student (for instance, if the eText goes away after the course is over).



Are other institutions having these conversations? What are some questions we need to be asking providers?



Thanks again, Brad!

Aimee



-----Original Message-----

From: The EDUCAUSE eTexts Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On Behalf Of Wheeler, Bradley C

Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2018 4:32 PM

To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>

Subject: [ETEXTS] Pricing is Difficult. Buying...not so much when goals are clear



Dear eText List Colleagues,







I've noticed a few trends lately that I'd like to call out for possible discussion on this eTexts list.  In the decade-long evolution of paper textbooks into digital options (plus adaptive tutoring systems, etc.), we are now beyond "the end of the beginning" and into the next chapter of refining the economic relationship between students, faculty, institutions, publishers, and authors.







One clear signal of this transition was at the 2018 EDUCAUSE annual meeting in Philadelphia.  For the first time, I saw that many of the major publishers on the exhibit floor had signage and were trying to drive the eText model (sometimes branded as Inclusive Access, Day 1 Access, All Students Acquire, etc.).  While there are a lot of important details to consider, and many have been discussed on this list, the core of the new bargain is this:







If each student will pay for the digital materials through bursar billing, the publishers can dramatically reduce the cost to students and while still growing both their revenue and profits over the traditional paper book model.







The precise terms of this new bargain are still being sorted out, and now is a critical time for institutions to give very careful attention to these shifting terms and pricing.  Institutions are an essential part of this bargain if our real goal is to enable the lower prices for our students among the other favorable attributes of digital.  The bargain is made possible through our unique ability to enable direct bursar billing for each registered student in a course section (of course, there are opt-out options).  Institutional Bursar billing is the enabling element that makes the new bargain work.







From an economic perspective, you could fairly argue that institutions are essentially "renting" a non-substitutable service of bursar billing in each eText course section in exchange for obtaining the best prices for required course materials on behalf of students.  Again, this service is the essential element that makes the bargain win-win for both students and content creators.







For the most part, industry trends in this new chapter are very favorable for win-win terms.  The major publishers, many with somewhat recent leadership transitions, have moved quickly over the last 18 months to embrace the new bargain for eText models.  To repeat... this is a very rational behavior to lower digital prices AND get paid by each student as it is a win in revenue/profit to the publishers and is also a lower cost to the students.  At IU and through the Unizin Consortium, we have seen a string of increasingly favorable win-win terms that are enabling our faculty to make choices that drive volume in digital.  Our numbers continue to grow in significant ways every year including over $4M in real cost avoidance to IU students this year.







YET.. not all trends are favorable, and thus my warning note to our institutional community today.  We have also seen some publishers chase only half of the new bargain.  They (understandably) seek an eText/Inclusive Access model to get paid by each student, but they are going the wrong direction in pricing.  Their offers exceed the reasonable alternatives that students can find in the used book market and through other substitutes.







While there can be great variance across disciplines, in general, in 2009 an IU internal study concluded that any eText pricing to students in excess of 35% of print list (e.g., 65% discount off of print list) would be disadvantageous to our students.  Early offers to us, and sadly, some even today in this new chapter want to assert a high price and still get bursar billing for all students in a section.   IU did not then and does not now accept those terms for participation in our eText model as such terms are not in the interest of our students.  Most are much more favorable by 2018.







Thus as we accelerate into the next chapter on the path to digital course materials, I strongly urge deep diligence at each institution that assesses all the options to reduce the cost of required course materials (including OER).  I applaud those many, many publishers who are innovating with fixed or tiered pricing at very reasonable levels as one favorable step, and to those who are sharpening the bargain to further win-win pricing and volume deals where those meet the choices of faculty.







The worst outcome for students would be for institutions to sign on to (near) compulsory purchases for required course materials at prices that are structurally unfavorable to students.  In other words, don't accept only half of the new fair bargain.  I look forward to continued innovation in product and economics by content creators, faculty, institutions, consortia, and students as this chapter unfolds.







--Brad







P.S.  Some of these thoughts and more will be shared next week in a Chronicle of Higher Education Webinar on Tues, 24 April, 2p EDT.  Stacy Morrone and I will share a few insights and respond to questions in advance of the release of eText 101: A Practical Guide that is a collection of authored chapters on this topic and edited by IUPUI Dean of Libraries (Emeritus) David Lewis.



















**********

Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.educause.edu%2Fdiscuss&data=02%7C01%7Caimee%40UCF.EDU%7C6f42109a2ab24cb9c60c08d5a6349a63%7Cbb932f15ef3842ba91fcf3c59d5dd1f1%7C0%7C1%7C636597667261067636&sdata=8lEHX1X0vB8qbAvkFOCfJQ9dU52RB8VxRQ4lEvmvTmw%3D&reserved=0.



**********

Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/discuss<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.educause.edu%2Fdiscuss&data=02%7C01%7Caimee%40UCF.EDU%7C87e11721a011446fc29208d5aabe9c38%7Cbb932f15ef3842ba91fcf3c59d5dd1f1%7C0%7C0%7C636602658013278685&sdata=YnnJR0b%2FnBYA5UWC4VmHoee%2FajxfzEXDipSS9vk4L%2Fg%3D&reserved=0>.



**********

Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/discuss<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.educause.edu%2Fdiscuss&data=02%7C01%7Caimee%40UCF.EDU%7C87e11721a011446fc29208d5aabe9c38%7Cbb932f15ef3842ba91fcf3c59d5dd1f1%7C0%7C0%7C636602658013278685&sdata=YnnJR0b%2FnBYA5UWC4VmHoee%2FajxfzEXDipSS9vk4L%2Fg%3D&reserved=0>.



**********

Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/discuss<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.educause.edu%2Fdiscuss&data=02%7C01%7Caimee%40UCF.EDU%7C87e11721a011446fc29208d5aabe9c38%7Cbb932f15ef3842ba91fcf3c59d5dd1f1%7C0%7C0%7C636602658013278685&sdata=YnnJR0b%2FnBYA5UWC4VmHoee%2FajxfzEXDipSS9vk4L%2Fg%3D&reserved=0>.



**********
Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/discuss<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.educause.edu%2Fdiscuss&data=02%7C01%7Caimee%40UCF.EDU%7C87e11721a011446fc29208d5aabe9c38%7Cbb932f15ef3842ba91fcf3c59d5dd1f1%7C0%7C0%7C636602658013278685&sdata=YnnJR0b%2FnBYA5UWC4VmHoee%2FajxfzEXDipSS9vk4L%2Fg%3D&reserved=0>.

********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/discuss<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.educause.edu%2Fdiscuss&data=02%7C01%7Caimee%40UCF.EDU%7C87e11721a011446fc29208d5aabe9c38%7Cbb932f15ef3842ba91fcf3c59d5dd1f1%7C0%7C0%7C636602658013278685&sdata=YnnJR0b%2FnBYA5UWC4VmHoee%2FajxfzEXDipSS9vk4L%2Fg%3D&reserved=0>.
********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/discuss<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.educause.edu%2Fdiscuss&data=02%7C01%7Caimee%40UCF.EDU%7C87e11721a011446fc29208d5aabe9c38%7Cbb932f15ef3842ba91fcf3c59d5dd1f1%7C0%7C0%7C636602658013278685&sdata=YnnJR0b%2FnBYA5UWC4VmHoee%2FajxfzEXDipSS9vk4L%2Fg%3D&reserved=0>.
********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/discuss<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.educause.edu%2Fdiscuss&data=02%7C01%7Caimee%40UCF.EDU%7C87e11721a011446fc29208d5aabe9c38%7Cbb932f15ef3842ba91fcf3c59d5dd1f1%7C0%7C0%7C636602658013278685&sdata=YnnJR0b%2FnBYA5UWC4VmHoee%2FajxfzEXDipSS9vk4L%2Fg%3D&reserved=0>.

**********
Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/discuss.