University Council on Technology

9/10/99 Minutes

3:00 p.m. to 5:00.p.m.

309 KSC

Kent Campus

Guests: Tom Klingler, Terry Kuhn, Lois Muir and Steve Tapp

I. Welcome and Call to Order.

2. Approval of 5/19/90 Minutes

A motion was made and unanimously approved to accept the minutes as submitted.

3. New Business

1. Introduction of new Vice President for Information Service

Paul introducted Don Tolliver as the New Vice President for Information Services.

2. Proposed Amendments to Mission and Bylaws of the University Council on Technology.

1. That council requests that the mission be redefined replacing " The council will make their recommendations to the Provost and the Vice President for Business and Finance" by "The council will make their recommendations to the Vice Pres ident for Information Services".
2. That in the Bylaws III, "Chief Information Officer" be replaced by "Vice President for Information Services."

1. Current Issues and Concerns in Information Services

Don Tolliver stated that a copy of the report given to the Board of Trustees regarding our status on Y2K would be mailed to the members. Our human resource system, our financial systems and alumni system are all Y2K compliant. The student information system is being concentrated on and we are confident that it will be compliant by December. Extensive testing of the entire system will be done in November including those renovated by the SCT Corporation.

In January or February we will be starting to move to version 4.1 of the human resources system improving our functionally. We have successfully gone to the new operating system. The machine has been partitioned in the machine room so we can do the t esting.

Concerning external clients, Bruce Petryshak stated that they have met with different groups and do have some relationships, responsibilities managing some networks in some departments and those departments have been active identifying and making modif ications. There is a web page with a 10 point questionnaire on it. Representatives from all the departments are to sign on and report their status. This is a critical path indicator to identify areas at risk and find out what the difficulty is and then analyze those responses. The survey should be completed by the fifteenth of the month.

The backbone network has been tested and is fine. There are a couple of areas in the telephone system that need to be looked at. Geauga and Ashtabula have already been cut over with Tuscarawas being cut over tonight.

Don stated there was concern raised about how far we expand V-tel and the number of classrooms to convert. This is not a networking issue, but is because of the cost alone of renovating the classroom. The verbal recommendation made to Dave Creamer wa s that perhaps at some point working with the provost’s office and the deans we say enough is enough and go with portable units that move from classroom to classroom or at least try to sidestep the cost of major renovation.

V-tel will always be used but we need to begin thinking about when to plateau so we can migrate into other kinds of distributed learning models. This would give us more flexibility in reaching students at their locations. Although this would be a lot more work, it would be a good investment in the long run.

The use of a portable V-tels was discussed. They work well because they are a kind of a black box , which is rolled in, plugged in, turned on and ready to go with no one touching the dials and buttons. These are only suitable for classes with 5 to 10 participants.

Greg Seibert stated that there is another branch of this type of technology that our new system will enable us to do. This is IP based video conferencing. The University is taking part in an international test over the next few weeks to prove this te chnology for proof of concept. Within the next three years for a few hundred dollars ($1500 for high quality), you will be able to tie into the backbone through the university switch and you can simply video conference people all over the country in cust omized spur of the moment or ad hoc video conferences and set them up individually.

Don Tolliver distributed a handout of an overview of what was going on in the Institutional Research and Decision Support Office. This is critical year to decide where we want this office to go and the kinds of work we want it to engage in. Jeff Gatt on, who has an analytical background, has been asked to identify some of the issues and possibilities related to institutional research and how this office might play its role out in the future.

Don Tolliver distributed the Administrative Information System Assessment prepared by consultants, Ken Blythe and Jerry Nogy for Kent State University. It was stated that these are recommendations and not all of them would be followed but that there a re points of view that need to be considered.

Concerning the search for the Director of Academic Computing Technology, Don Tolliver indicated that the position should be reviewed as part of the Integrated Plan. Pending its completion the position would remain on hold.

2. Discussion of Charge, Timing and Scope of Integrated Technology Plan

A motion was made that the Council on Technology to establish a subcommittee to write a charge for the committee to produce an Integrated Plan on Technology. This motion was passed unanimously.

The committee shall consist of Carlos Vargas-Aburto, Paul Farrell, Barb Hanniford and hopefully Roberta Sikula. Don Tolliver stated that he will be involved and will serve as liaison between the EO’s and the UCT so this effort does not collapse. Rosemary Du Mont volunteered to be the resource person. It was stated that for now the committee would stand at four people with the right to add a fifth person. This was approved unanimously.

3. Reviewing Grants to Fund Technology Initiatives

Rosemary Du Mont stated that based on recent experiences in helping faculty, departments and campuses facilitate their proposals there was no effort to encourage or discourage applications. As a result, proposals were submitted, some of which compete d and some were redundant because they did not know about each other.

It was suggested that a pool of individuals volunteer on an as needed basis to develop an internal screening process to help create proposals that are winners making the opportunity better and having the University put its best foot forward. This wou ld allow everyone an opportunity to apply but the group would use the best judgment to encourage and support groups to go forward and possibly bring groups together who would never have thought of working together. Rosemary stated that she would be glad to facilitate this. It was suggested that a pool of fifteen people be put together drawing on those people who had previously submitted or received a grant. Rosemary stated that she would approach other councils on campus for volunteers.

4. Strategic Planning in the Information Services Division

Rosemary Du Mont stated that the division is going through the University Strategic Plan and the Strategic Plan for Technology. The first manager’s meeting occurred and is collecting information and input from various departments. This information w ill be shared with the council through the term. It is very important that the committee starting in January needs input from Information Services Division.

Don Tolliver stated that he also needs something to go in the Goal Book. This is a book presented to the Board of Trustees stating the goals we think can be accomplished by each division during the year.

5. Y2K Issues in the Academic Affairs Division

2. IV. Old Business

1. Microsoft License Agreement

A motion was made and unanimously approved to adjourn the meeting at 5:25 p.m.

C: President

Provost

V.P. Information Services