1-25-01

Draft

Information Technology Committee

January 25, 2001

Minutes

Present: Alison Baker (CS), Lowell Ballard (TSS), Max Bassett (CS-chair), Tom Butler (AN), Gen Chu (AN), Sue Hintz (WO), Kevin Kelley (LO), Bob Loser (ELI), Dan Riley (MA), Steve Sachs (CS), Lionel Sylvas (WO), Tony Tardd (LO), Peter Tharp (CS), Dave Williams (AL), Barbara Wyles (AL)

Absent: Gail Kettlewell (MA), Charlotte Wilhelmi (CS)

Guests: Patricia Hussein, Stacey Pendleton, Carol Turner, Cathy Simpson

Minutes of the November 2 ITC Meeting were approved.

Status Report on the Technology Plan Budget

Dr. Sachs distributed a handout showing the current budget status on all Technology Plan items. The replacement of SNA printers to meet the needs of the new SIS, and the purchase of all SIS servers other than those needed for testing will probably be postponed until the 2001-2002 Technology Plan so that results of the first college implementations can be reviewed. The cost of Anti-virus software cost more than budgeted due to the increased number of PCs at the college and increases in cost for the site license. The cost of the Campus Server Project also was over budget. Dr. Sachs pointed out that there are contingency funds built into the Technology Plan budget. These are allocated in the current plan to projects that have not been initiated so the funds can be appropriated to cover emergencies or new projects with a higher priority. They are not there to fund routine requests for additional funding for such items as cabling. Dr. Sachs proposed using funds originally scheduled for firewalls to build a test network in order to avoid some of the problems experienced with the recent student email upgrade. A number of other requests for funding were discussed. Two software requests were considered and will be referred to the discipline related software project. The high cost of Windows 2000 server licenses for the academic program was discussed. The need for an additional Blackboard server and license to handle increase load was discussed. The following technology budget changes were approved by the ITC:

The $24,000 originally budgeted for the Kiosk Project will be transferred to cover the actual cost of anti-virus software.

$37,631 of the available ETF Funds originally proposed for SIS servers and SNA printer replacement will be used to cover the actual cost of the Campus Server Project.

The $80,000 originally proposed for the Firewall project will be used for an additional BlackBoard server license, for software to set up a College test network, and to pay for Windows 2000 server licenses for academic needs. Any remaining funds can be used to provide a test firewall.

Approximately $5,000 of the available ETF Funds originally proposed for SIS servers and SNA printer replacement will be used to purchase an additional BlackBoard server.

Some of the available ETF Funds originally proposed for SIS servers and SNA printer replacement will be used to create a College Test network. The exact amount will depend on the exact specifications to match the current College network. The total amount should not exceed $80,000 without ITC approval. The total cost may need to be spilt between fiscal years.

Training Budget

Stacey Pendelton distributed a handout showing the current status of training funds and showing who had received various types of technical training. This is training designed to provide the technical staff with the specific skills needed to do their jobs in our current environment. All but approximately $1,673 in training funds has been committed. The training has been broadly distributed across all technical staff at the campuses and TSS. Dean Baker responded to a question by pointing out that there is not currently any policy that requires a person who has received training at the College's expense to continue working at the College for any length of time. Mrs. Pendelton was asked to attempt to set up next year's training plan through the College Continuing Education Offices. She reported that she had tried to do that this year without success in meeting the content or schedule needs.

SNA Printer Replacement

There was discussion of the aging SNA printers and the need for replacement. The current plans are not to replace SNA printers until the actual needs of the new SIS are known. Campuses can use laser printers for mainframe printing. There was some discussion about whether the SNA printer replacement funds in the Technology Plan budget should be used to buy laser printers for divisions that do not have them. The discussion suggested that these were a campus responsibility. There was also a suggestion that existing SNA printers could be moved from their current uses (and replaced by existing laser printers) to uses where a laser printer would not meet the need. Dr. Sachs was directed to work with the Provosts to develop an SNA printer status report and contingency plan for the next ITC meeting. The campuses are to include their Business Offices in that plan. The ITC will determine if current funds should be allocated based on those reports.

2001 - 2002 Technology Plan Priorities

Dr. Sachs distributed copies of NVCC's responses to the annual VCCS Technology Survey which included a list of College Technology Priorities, and a copy of a study on the number of classrooms equipped with computers and projectors that was conducted by the College TLTR. This information, along with the review of the current Technology Plan, was used as a starting point for a discussion of priorities that should be considered in drafting the 2001-2002 Technology Plan. The first draft of the plan will be presented to the ITC at its March meeting. The priorities that were listed are shown below. The number in parentheses indicates the number of individuals who ranked the item as one of the top three priorities. Providing SIS equipment was automatically considered a top priority. While a new phone system was considered a top priority, there was concern about using Technology Plan funds to pay for it. It was pointed out that the funds would have to come from somewhere--either the regular campus allocations or the Technology Plan. Dr. Sachs and Dean Baker are working on a funding plan to present to Administrative Council in the near future. It was noted that some items that are not identified on the following list as top priorities might still have to be in the Plan to meet VCCS and College requirements.

New Phone System (10)
SIS/AIS Equipment
People Soft Training
Technology Training for faculty and technical staff
Lab Support (3)
Technical Support (9)
Testing Center Environment - increased hardware and staff (10)
Discipline software
Curriculum development support-reassigned time, expert held, software, materials (3)
Distance education technical support (2)
Hardware replacement (5)
Campus servers (1)
Ethernet upgrade (2)
College-wide application server
Help Desk
Cabling
Web page support

IT Governance Task Force

Dr. Butler and Dr. Wyles provided a handout with recommendations of the IT Governance Task Force established at the November ITC meeting. There was discussion of the recommendations and some modifications made to the recommendations. The following list of recommendations was approved by the ITC and will be forwarded to the Administrative Council.
a. IT Managers will work as partners with TSS, and at times with TSS and HR, to establish, promulgate, and implement standards, policies, procedures and guidelines. This will help to achieve some standardization and will help provide consistent information integrity among the various departments. The result will be a more effective system that is progressive and productive and will eliminate duplicate efforts among various departments and groups within the college.

b. IT Managers will meet with their respective Provosts and/or Provost Staff meetings (for partial time of the meeting) on at least a monthly basis so that there is a direct line of communication between where we are now and where they would like to be in the future. Currently, they are not aware of all the Information Technology changes that are occurring on their campuses among their instructors, staff, and students. There are too many links in the chain, which causes information to get distorted and lost by the time a decision is made.

c. College Technology allocations that are made public will be sent to the IT Managers so that they can review and study them for changes, suggestions, fairness, and additions for the following year. (How do we know if changes need to be made if we don't see the results?)

d. Planning Meetings, for all upgrades, changes, additions, etc. between TSS and the campus IT Managers is imperative if we are to avoid information gaps. Campuses will have a detailed plan in hand as to what changes TSS is going to do to the network, when and what effects these changes may have on their campuses. IT Managers will also provide TSS with information about their campus plans and changes. This will be accomplished through a Partnership formed between TSS and the campus IT Managers.

e. Project Managers will be assigned to high priority projects to make sure projects are organized and completed in a timely manner.

f. The role of the campus directors of learning resources is analogous to that of the dean for information and instructional technology; i.e., as the dean is the administrator primarily responsible for taking leadership in technology-related issues at the Administrative Council, the director of learning resources should be taking a similar leadership role with the campus Provost Staff.

g. The directors of learning resources should have formal representation at the ITC. The directors of learning resources believe that the personnel and functions of the campus information technology office (network, server, printer, email, voice mail, etc.) properly belong in Learning Resource Services.

h. The Provost should be involved in IT decision-making.

In allocation of resources
In setting and/or approving priorities-for resource allocation or implementation.
In implementation of components of the College Technology Plan, as well as the Campus Technology Plan.

i. The Provost's role in moving information, issues, and decision to the end -users should be:

As members of the reconfigured ITC, provosts are responsible for carrying IT decisions, issues and information back to the campus, and particularly to IT committees or workgroups; e.g., TLTR.
As members of Administrative Council, provosts are responsible for carrying IT issues/decisions back to the campus, and to other relevant groups for broad distribution.
Provosts will clarify goals and expectations of the various IT-related groups, and managers responsible for IT on the campus.
ITM's should be invited to provost staff meeting for periodic updates; ITM's will be expected to have a voice in discussions and decisions on IT issues.
As appropriate, the dean of information technology will send relevant IT information/decisions to the provosts, who are then responsible for disseminating that information to the campus, as deemed appropriate.

j. The Provost's role vis-à-vis the dean of information technology is to:

Provosts pass on information to the dean from the VCCS. Some of this information deals with committee assignments; some is issue-specific.
Provosts will also contact the dean when an IT project is not moving forward, or when problems occur with IT implementation.
Provosts will work with the dean in developing the College Technology Plan.
Provosts will disseminate IT information, as appropriate, from the dean to the appropriate campus parties.
Provosts will use the dean in information-gathering and as a reliable source on IT issues.

k. The role of the Provosts with TSS is:

Provosts are expected to have little direct association with TSS. Instead, most communications regarding IT will be with the IT dean or with ITM's.

l. The ITC should no longer be the authorizing entity for college-wide information technology decisions. The Dean of Information Technology should have decision-making authority. The Dean should submit all major policy decisions to the Administrative Council. The ITC's role should be to advise and make recommendations to the Dean.

m. The ITC membership should be composed as follows:

Dean of Information Technology, chair
Associate Dean for Instructional Technology
Two Provosts
TSS Director
One Teaching Faculty representative from the Campus TLTRs
One representative from the Information Technology managers
One LRS Director
One representative from the IST Cluster
One representative from the Dean of Academic and Student Services
One representative from the Dean of Financial and Administrative Services
One representative from the SIS staff
One classified staff member
One Division Chair
One Continuing Education representative
(Committee membership should include representation from each campus) n. The Dean of Information Technology should inform the college community of new directives and initiatives in information technology. At a minimum, this should include an email of a short summary of the decisions/directives resulting from each ITC meeting.

o. ITC representatives should keep their campuses and constituent groups fully informed of ITC activities. This must become part of the role of each ITC member. It may be advisable for them to report to/participate in the campus regularly scheduled Provost Staff meeting.

IT Managers Role Change

The proposed Role change for IT Managers prepared by the LRC Directors was considered. Due to the late hour, and the nature of the proposal, the ITC approved forwarding the proposal directly to the Administrative Council without any recommendation.

Next Meeting

The next meeting will be March 22, 9:30 am, in the Brault Building Board Room. Chair:

______________________________

Max L. Bassett

Notes Prepared By:

_______________________________

Steven G. Sachs