DRAFT

Advisory Council on Technology

5/16/97Minutes

1:00 p.m. to 2:00.p.m.

319 Kent Student Center

Kent Campus

 

Present:

Catherine Bakes, Johnnie Baker, James Boyd, Raymond Craig, Lowell Croskey, Peggy Doheny, Alan Evans, Paul Farrell (Chair), Barbara Hanniford, John Kerstetter, Terry Kuhn, Dewitt Latimer (Secretary) Pamela Mitchell, Bruce Petryshak, Greg Seibert, Mike S human for Pam Ramey, Roberta Sikula and Denise Zelko

Absent: David Baumgartner, Ali Bliss, Dave Cannon, Helen Carpenter, Rosemary DuMont, Alice Iden, Larry Jones, Darrell Turnidge

 

Dewitt Latimer distributed copies of the proposals he received regarding the requests for the use of Capital Improvements

 

  1. Dr. Paul Farrell (Chair) welcomed everyone and called the meeting to order at 1:08 p.m.

  1. Paul Farrell stated that the purpose of this meeting was to discuss capital proposals and recommendations.

Pam Mitchell said that she thought some ground rules should be established before starting. Dewitt Latimer stated that some of the items that were requested were left out because it was purely equipment and that it did not qualit y as receiving capital funds.

Alan Evans stated that he could not read, look at, and make any decisions today. He thinks that contributions should be made today then and make decisions later. There should be general discussion of what is relative and the order of importan ce.

Greg Seibert stated that Lowell has submitted a placeholder only for the next six years and that this is a biennium. Dewitt Latimer stated that there is no specific line for technology.

Paul Farrell asked if only the dollar was submitted for the first two years was it too late to put anything in. Lowell Croskey said that it was not too late for the second or third biennium and if we could identify great and if n ot it was okay too. There will always be basic renovations.

Paul Farrell asked for guidance on this because some requests were for pure equipment.

Lowell Croskey thanked the committee for all the input and a job well done. The prioritization of projects will be passed on the Provost Myron Henry and interim Vice President for Business, Ilee Rhimes, out of the three and one-half million do llars five hundred thousand will go to basic renovations to the Kent campus. Regional campuses are handled differently; they will get a line item appropriation they are not competing for the Kent campus dollars. The regional campuses are a non-issue. W e need to know the linkages because we don't know them and can't do something at one site without it linking anywhere else.

Paul Farrell stated that some master classrooms don't need to link anywhere. The classroom may just be a video and they can stand alone.

Pam Mitchell said that she is not in a networked building and that everyone wants the ability to do networking. Cathy Bakes stated that she needs to carry down all her equipment. Raymond Craig stated that maybe the re should be one or two master classrooms to a building so everyone has access to them. Put a few in then work in bringing the networking in.

Dewitt Latimer stated that it costs between fifty and sixty thousand dollars to put in one classroom and there are between ten to twelve needed. Lowell Croksey said that the committee needs to tell him what the distribution is. Dewitt Latimer asked what rooms are the most utilized. There was discussion that some rooms are not being utilized because they are too big and the equipment is outdated. Lowell Croskey said that there were no rooms ideal f or conversion and just because the room is large does not mean it is right. John Kerstetter said there needs to be a range of distribution, lecture, master and standard classrooms. The needs of these rooms vary and some may just need minor changes. We need to get a listing of rooms and the capabilities; faculty needs rooms that can be scheduled. Pam Mitchell suggested putting proposals together regarding a stated need. Lowell Croskey said that the Classroom U tilization Study would give a good snapshot of what rooms are currently being used for. He will make sure that everyone on the committee gets one. Lowell stated that the nature of the work needs to be identified. A few projects are needed such at netwo rking and master classrooms. No location is needed.

Alan Evans stated that labs are critical. They have all kinds of labs and a variety of open access labs need to be addressed. It was agreed that the number of computer labs we have is inconsistent and that we do not have a good sense of how m any or what kind of equipment they have. Dewitt Latimer said that there needs to be a needs assessment on master and computer classrooms and open access labs managed by computer services.

Discussion was had on labs that are set up as a classrooms but used as a labs and classrooms that are set up as labs but used as classrooms. When do we call it a classroom and when do we call it a lab. What will it take for the Board of Regen ts to recognize that there are different types of classrooms and that some are more expensive to maintain. Lowell Croskey will contact the Board of Regents on this and we will need to keep to their definition on this. It was stressed that we can build these rooms, but someone needs to be able to equip them. It is very important to be able to bring to completion.

Ray Craig made a motion for a 50-50 split, 50% to intra-building wiring and 50% to classrooms and basic labs.

Terry Kuhn stated that the campus would be a ghost town in equipment is not put out there, the students will be gone. Dewitt Latimer brought up the fact that we should not overlook Moulton Hall because it will have 10 of these cl assrooms.

John Kerstatter made a request to have the motion repeated. The motion reads one million dollars to finish building wiring, two hundred fifty thousand to open access labs and two hundred fifty thousand to master classrooms. John suggested kee ping the motion and officially discuss it.

James Boyd stated that he did not have to have everything on his list, some will go a long way. He needs labs and he needs to be able to show how to use them.

Lowell Croskey suggested picking 30 rooms that required lighting improvements, window treatments and lecture stations with controls.

Paul Farrell said he would like to see actual recommendations rather than dollar amounts. He said we need functionally usable classrooms that address the students seeing these improvements.

James Boyd stated that there would be more usage if facilities were available

Paul Farrell suggested and asked for a more specific motion.

Lowell Croskey said that we should take a minimum approach with capital money. It is difficult if not impossible to under invest in that area. It would help the committee if we could decide what a master classroom contains.

Paul Farrell said that we need to identify generic needs and identify places for conversions and costs.

Lowell Croskey said that we can not overlook other needs. The money is only given once. We will want to upgrade everything bringing rooms up to the state-of-art classrooms.

Catherine Bakes said that we need a cost benefit analysis.

Lowel Croskey said that he needs to know categories not the money breakdown. The Provost and Vice President will sort that out.

Alan Evans stated that we need to make sure the money is available and that loose equipment can go in.

After discussion of what should happen next, Ray Craig withdrew his motion.

A small group was formed to put together a motion and get it e-mailed to all the members. The members of this group are Paul Farrell, Allen Evans, John Kerstetter, Terry Kuhn and Ray Craig.

The meeting adjourned at 3:17p.m.

 

 

C: Provost Myron Henry

VP Ilee Rhimes

President Carol Cartwright