Advisory Council on Technology

DRAFT

4/25/97 Minutes

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

319 Kent Student Center

Kent Campus

Present: Johnnie Baker, Ali Bliss, James Boyd, Dave Cannon, Helen Carpenter, Raymond Craig, Lowell Croskey, Rosemary Du Mont, Peggy Doheny, Alan Evans, Paul Farrell (Chair), Barbara Hanniford, Alice Iden, John Kerstetter, Terry Kuhn, Dewitt Latimer (Secretary), Pamela Mitchell, Bruce Petryshak, Pam Ramey, Greg Seibert, Darre;; Turnidge, Jim Barrett for Roberta Sikula and Audrey Tillis for Denise Zelko

Absent: Catherine Bakes, David Baumgartner and Larry Jones

Dr. Paul Farrell (Chair), welcomed everyone and called the meeting to order at 3:07 p.m.
The minutes of the March 14, 1997 meeting was read. An amendment was made to letter B's last paragraph striking the words "since there is no longer a Distance Learning committee." An amendment was also made to letter C's second paragraph, Pam Mitche ll's name replaces Barbara Hanniford's name. It was discovered that a draft and not the final minutes were published. Dewitt Latimer stated that he would publish the final minutes. A motion was made to amend these items and voted on unani mously. .

Past Council minutes and agendas can be found at http://www.kent.edu/UCT

III. Informational Items

Report on meeting with Provost and Interim Vice-President for Business and Finance.

Paul Farrell distributed a summary of the meeting that took place between Myron Henry, Ilee Rhimes, Dewitt Latimer, Bruce Petryshak, and himself conveying the views of the Provost regarding the structure of the standing subcommittees and ad-hoc committees. Dewitt Latimer stated that the Provost did not want a committee of committees, he wants a working committee. It is not necessary to go outside the group, it is acceptable for the council to form committees of themselves. Greg Seibert stated that we could go outside if necessary and it was confirmed that yes we could. Dewitt Latimer stated that we did not need to be so formal, just do business as needed. Greg Seibert said that t his was a benefit to us because we have more flexibility by not having to consult everyone. Paul Farrell commented that this does not limit us.

John Kerstetter requested keeping his committee since it is 99% formed. It was agreed upon that the committee would stand as formed.

Rosemary DuMont commented that her committee was very faithful and did good work. Dewitt Latimer stated that if it works, don't break it!

Paul Farrell brought up the issue of precisely what do we want to deliver and how do we want to convey the information so it will be useful.

1. There needs to be a major review of this and the USC report as a single report with both areas covered, strategic plan and ??

Before revision starts a strategy of where it is going and who is going to use it needs to be discussed with the Vice President and Provost.
Ex-officio members
Distance Learning area - there is nothing clear that can be integrated. It is our decision as to what we see fit.
We have been in existence for only six months. Would it be useful to continue membership as it is now. Faculty Senate should be consulted.

Paul Farrell stated that he was going to be on a research leave for the spring semester and would not be here for two to three months. Dewitt Latimer stated that the Vice-chair would take over. Rosemary DuMont < /I>suggested that the committee could be revised and see what they say and bring forward at the next meeting and for now just continue working.

Paul Farrell stated that he was going to include Lyle Barton as a member of this committee, but if he did it would change the balance of the committee so he will invite Lyle to the meetings.

IV. Old Business

A. Discussion on distributed learning policy committee recommendations and interim policy on copyright

Paul Farrell suggested not discussing this until we listen to Don Tolliver. It was put to a motion and voted on to table this until the next meeting .

Ad-hoc committee on remote access

Bruce Petryshak stated that he has responses from regional campuses, the

library and food service. This should convene shortly and they will do what they can do. Work on this will begin this summer. Dewitt Latimer made a motion for approval to let Bruce go with what he has so work can be done on this over the summer. This was voted on and approved.

Ad-Hoc committee on classroom technologies.

John Kerstetter distributed the committee membership with the charge to develop a plan to integrate instructional technologies into classrooms and lecture halls by working in concert with the committees of the University Council on Techno logy and other University units. John said that he would have the graduate student body vacancy fulfilled by next week. A motion was made to move forward with the slate as recommended and presented. This was voted on and approved.

Ad-hoc committee on research computing

Dewitt Latimer asked if a survey needs of the research side of the house needs to be done, we need to know if the resources we are offering are meeting the needs of researchers and instructors, and if not, we need help with this.

-Dave Cannon, Roy Lilly and Dimiter Dimitrov ??????

Dewitt Latimer stated that responses should be sent to him and when the meetings convene in the fall it will be worked on. This was voted on and approved.

Standing committee on academic computing.

Dewitt Latimer stated that he would not constitute this until he sees a need to do it. A motion was made and it was voted on and approved to table this until the need arises.

Terry Kuhn said that the three met and talked about general technology requirements. Terry stated that he missed the last meeting and asked if there were any thoughts or talk about it, or if it was ever formalized. Terry asked if it is a utomatically not happening if the committee does not constitute it. Paul Farrell stated that discussion not be initiated at this level. Dewitt Latimer stated that they come up with their own conclusion without the committee.< /P>

Paul Farrell asked the council how to proceed with updating and budgetary issues and does it belong to ACS.

Ray Craig stated that it is important to constitute this now and that it has not been fully discussed. He stated that there is good reason to have this done.

Dewitt Latimer stated that he would convene the group.

Paul Farrell said that there was a need to look at and bring back here and identify those reasons. Everyone should look at and see how we need to proceed. Dewitt Latimer stated that he would do an assessment of Academic Computing an d Technology and that Bruce Petryshak would do University Information Services bringing the results back in the fall and looking at them then.

Lowell Croskey stated that the capital appropriation plan is due in September and will cover a six-year term, 1999 - 2004. There is nothing more than a $1,000,000 placehold on the money. There is no definition of what the money is allo cated for. Lowell stated he feels we have a very good chance of receiving this money but we need to defend and bring forward the needs. This can be for single or multiple projects, it just cannot exceed the $500,000 limit per project. This informatio n is needed in the next month or two and needs to be accurate because once the description is received we cannot be changing gears. Dewitt Latimer asked if Moulton Hall has fulfilled our needs or if there was a need for additional rooms ou t of that money. Lowell Croskey said we need a broad picture with the types of projects defining general categories of where this money will go. It was confirmed that movable equipment cannot be funded, however, there are two types of app ropriations and possibly a very small percentage of movable equipment could be included with a project.

Rosemary DuMont asked how were we going to collect the requests. Paul Farrell asked for suggestions on how the council would like to proceed with this. Barbara Hanniford asked what would happen if this council were not together. Lowell Croskey stated that this is first come first serve as happened four years ago. We are now getting sophisticated and need to know where our needs are.

Alan Evans stated that there was a need to increase and update student labs as they are very busy. Some labs need to be remodeled, and some need to have equipment taken out and replaced, for example digital photos instead of filmstrips. Paul Farrell stated that there was a need for increased labs as well as special purpose labs, however, we need to get priorities as to what is most important. Johnnie Baker stated that we need to provide more te chnical training and that there is not enough lab space to teach.

A motion was made and approved to have a meeting on May 16, at 1:00 in room 319 KSC and to have proposals to Dewitt Latimer by May 9 . The proposals should be a definition of the needs only no dollar amount is necessary. These proposals will be reviewed and given to Lowell at this meeting.

New Business

Open discussion

Paul Farrell stated that this has already happened.

Presentation by Don Tolliver on distributed learning policy committee recommendations.

Don Tolliver handed out a Distributed Learning Policy Team Report to be used at the primer for discussion. Don pointed out that two members of the council, Barb Hanniford and Terry Kuhn were also members of the Policy Team membership. D on requested that he focus on the philosophy and conclusion and then would accept questions.

John Kerstetter asked about copyrights, what was recommended and how the new policy will handle them. Don Tolliver supported the concept of sharing royalties stating that there needs to be a partnership approach with both the Uni versity and faculty getting royalties. The interim policy does not reflect what the team thinks, but he is hopeful it will change.

Don Tolliver stated that this was a staff developed report and was widely distributed to various organizations, committees and to anyone who called and requested copies. Rosemary Dumont asked it any departments have disc ussed this and Dewitt Latimer asked if there was anything controversial. Don Tolliver said that there wasn't anything controversial and that the Provost was supportive of the recommendations and conclusions.

Pam Ramey said that Tuscarawas had to deal with two different forms of distance learning and it is a hassle to get courses running on two different standards. Paul Farrell said that the technology and equipment is not there. Technologies need to be combined so they can have more than one class at a time. It would be useful to facilitate the exchange of information but there is no common place to go for this. Lyle Barton suggested putting out an an nual report with a summary of what has happened and what will happen. Paul Farrell stated that the information is not good unless it trickles down to the committee. The Provost needs to be reminded to give it to us. Don Tolliver does not think this group will see this. Paul Farrell stated that it is not our job to plan, but to advise. Don Tolliver said that this needs to be discussed with the Provost and made clear that we do not want to plan, just give advice.

Presentation by Lyle Barton on Moulton Hall.

Lyle Barton handed out a April 14, 1997 Inside Kent Special Edition: Moulton Hall Issue. Lyle presented to the council the history of Moulton Hall and described how the ballroom has been historically restored to look like it did in 1917 yet meeting the current standards and be used for trade shows, receptions and conferences. Lyle gave a detailed explanation of each room of the three floors giving in-depth information on the usage of each room. He gave specific facts such as seating c apacity and equipment. Lyle stated that each classroom is networked for computers and each station equipped for a possible phone line for transmission of video over the network. Each classroom will have a professor camera that could be used to teach stu dents in any or all classrooms within the building and projectors and a document camera. Media labs were described as being equipped with computers, scanners and digital cameras to be used for faculty and staff training. Lyle gave a breakdown of fundin g for Moulton Hall stating that the building renovations were received from State Capital appropriations and equipment coming from donations made by organizations such as Ameritech, Anixter, GAR and IBM as well as other smaller businesses and donations r eceived from Development and the Foundation. Lyle stated that they are hoping for a Winter 98 opening and open for full time classes by Summer. Tours can be arranged during the construction by calling Teri at 2285.

Discussion of council structure and role for academic year 97/98

Paul Farrell explained how committees should be put together and said not to feel frustrated by the slowness because UPBAC had been in existence for two years before they became functional.

Strategies to update NISS and ACS studies.

Discussion was had on how to update, should we have opinions, surveys, and focus groups or use e-mail. Dewitt Latimer and Bruce Petryshak will access the current plan after the information is contributed. A strategy will be evolved and presented to t he Provost and Vice President for Business before any action is taken.

Terry Kuhn stated that we need to know what we were are doing and what the outcome will be. We should not have to second-guess. Paul Farrell reviewed what has been do so far and asked if anything has changed or become obso lete, what's new and what should be included. This is what he sees they are suppose to do. Tell the process, phrase use strategy and identify the remaining priorities. Access, check the validity, add real items, prioritize and integrate.

Alan Evans agreed with what was said, but stated that if the council waits until September to get the results from Bruce and Dewitt it will take another couple of months to get going. He asked if there wasn't something that could be done ov er the summer. Discussion was had about producing assessments, distributing them to the council for reading over the summer and then be ready to go in the fall. It was also discussed that there it is not unrealistic to have meetings for twelve months rather than nine. Paul Farrell stated that this is a working group and it would be appropriate to have summer meetings if people were interested. It was decided that meetings would be called and those who could come would come and if not it was ok to send an alternate person because alternates are already attending regular meetings.

Election of chair and vice-chair

It was unanimously voted on that this be tabled until the next meeting.

VI. Spring Meeting Schedule

May 16, 1997 1:00 p.m. Room 319 KSC

VIII. Adjournment

A motion to adjourn the meeting was made and seconded. The meeting adjourned at 5:20 p.m.

c: Provost Myron Henry

VP Ilee Rhimes

President Carol Cartwright