Outside the Sessions
Day 3 opened with the kind of conversations that only happen when higher ed AV people get together. Discussions ranged from calculating the real cost per minute when a learning space is down, framed against cost of attendance per student, to informal but insightful moments like “Cooking with Steve Borho.”
There was also a strong focus on professional development and engagement. Attendees talked through the goal of earning RUs via the Virtual Conference, Lunch and Learns, and other HETMA events moving forward. Of course, there is a goal to break tonight’s HETMA Happy Hour record of 8 hours and 16 minutes. Equal parts learning, community, and fun set the tone for the day.
HETMA Presents… The #RoadTo10K / This Month in Higher Ed AV – Live Recording!
Gina Sansivero, Tim Van Woaert, Britt Yenser, Ryan Gray
This live recording leaned heavily into professional growth, self‑awareness, and sustainability in our careers. Gina Sansivero emphasized the importance of meeting employees where they are. She described an employee she asks to share work when it feels about 80 percent ready, recognizing that waiting for 100 percent may mean never finishing, and that their 80 percent is often exceptional. The message was clear: know your people, understand where they are today, and support intentional progress rather than chasing perfection.
Britt Yenser encouraged attendees to pause and ask themselves guiding questions. What are you actually supposed to be doing? What does your job description say? What work would genuinely make you happy to do? Those questions, while simple, can expose gaps between expectations and reality.
Tim Van Woaert spoke to the balance between technical expertise and leadership skills. While technical fluency is still critical in AV, developing management and business skills is just as important. He shared his experience pursuing an MBA and the value of being back in a classroom, this time as a student rather than support staff.
The conversation also touched on focus. Multitasking has its place, but sustained focus can be a superpower, especially in complex environments. Writing things down, rather than keeping them as mental images, forces deeper examination and often reveals gaps we did not realize were there. That realization took a humorous turn into discussions of mortality, wills, and planning, a reminder of how easily conversations wander when thoughtful people are thinking out loud.
The session closed with a discussion of an AVNation op‑ed on wasteful spending in higher ed and K‑12 AV. Panelists acknowledged that while waste does exist, framing the conversation as “us versus them” does little to move the industry forward. Education, empathy, and self‑care matter, especially when AV teams are already stretched thin and feeling under attack.
Data Analytics in AV (Measuring Impact)
This session focused on how data can help AV teams better understand impact and prioritize work. At smaller institutions, it can be easier to feel the pulse of the campus, but data still plays a critical role. Room usage statistics can help teams decide when to schedule maintenance or upgrades and where to invest limited resources.
Many institutions already have access to useful data through scheduling platforms like 25Live, but purpose‑built AV analytics tools offer deeper insight when properly tuned and maintained. Solutions from companies like Crestron and Xyte were discussed as examples of platforms designed specifically for AV environments.
Lifecycle planning came up as both an ideal and a challenge. While lifecycle models are useful, many institutions are operating well beyond them due to budget constraints. At the same time, students increasingly expect more than “good enough.” One proposed approach was to reassess what is truly needed in a space, removing unused components and replacing individual parts instead of refreshing entire rooms.
With the volume of data constantly increasing, access and interpretation remain major hurdles. The group expressed optimism that AI‑assisted tools may eventually help AV teams make sense of the data they already have, turning information into actionable insight rather than noise.
Digital Whiteboards – And the Faculty Who Refuse to Use Them
John Douglas, Andy Vogel, Troy Powers
This session tackled one of the more persistent challenges in higher ed AV: balancing accessibility, pedagogy, cost, and faculty autonomy. With new accessibility requirements taking effect in April, the panel emphasized that more engaged students are more likely to learn, and accessible content plays a major role in that engagement.
Some faculty push back on digital tools, arguing that students should pay attention and take their own notes. Traditional chalkboards and whiteboards, however, are not accessible, and many instructors have never been trained to consider accessibility in their teaching. The panel encouraged AV professionals to learn more about language, pedagogy, and frameworks like Bloom’s taxonomy, noting that these conversations often resonate more than purely technical arguments.
Cost and longevity were also key points. Traditional whiteboards can last decades, while smart boards and interactive displays have much shorter usable lifespans. Security adds another layer of complexity. Devices must align with institutional group policies, avoid storing credentials, and remain usable without creating friction for faculty. Striking the right balance between usability and security is difficult and, in some cases, unrealistic without broader institutional support.
Changing Your Filter: Sifting Through the Noise of New Technology
Brittney Grant, Tim Van Woeart, Will DeWitt, Ryan Corcoran
This session began with a brief presentation from CDW highlighting their growing focus on higher ed and encouraging institutions to engage early for planning and support.
The panel discussion centered on standardization and user experience. While identical hardware across every classroom is often unrealistic, especially given supply chain issues and product discontinuations, providing a consistent control and user experience is critical. Faculty should be able to walk into any room without surprises, and support staff should know exactly what they are supporting.
Testing and demoing equipment was strongly encouraged. HETMA’s Approved program was highlighted as a valuable resource, offering insight into products that have been tested across multiple campuses. Panelists noted that many manufacturers are willing to provide demo units, and that testing should include networking and security teams whenever possible. Creative testing approaches, including unconventional use cases, can reveal issues that standard demos miss.
All panelists had participated in the HETMA Approved testing program and spoke positively about the experience. Some tested products become standards, while others are evaluated simply for the benefit of the broader community. The group emphasized that HETMA is always looking for more testers to expand the program.
While price matters, it is not always the top priority. Ease of integration, control, and long‑term support often outweigh initial cost. The final takeaway was clear: do not assume. Ask questions, do the demos, and do your homework.
In Closing
Day 3 capped off a virtual conference marked by strong attendance, thoughtful discussion, and practical insight. Sessions will be available online for those who want to revisit the content or catch anything they missed.
HETMA continues to build momentum with regular advisory board meetings, monthly Lunch and Learns, and a strong presence at upcoming events including MCUAV, Enterprise Connect, InfoComm, and roadshows at Thomas More University in Flanders on May 26–27 and Creighton University in Omaha on July 9. The energy and engagement from this virtual conference made it clear that the community is eager to stay connected and keep the conversation going. Make sure you register for InfoComm with code “HETMA”. Check back on the HETMA website and Higher Ed AV every day for tons of new content, connections, and more!
