CCFIT > Calendar & Minutes > 1998-2003 Minutes > May 21, 2001 AC4 Minutes

Agenda

1. Welcome-Chair Plant
2. Report from the Education Subcommittee - Chair Plant, for Subcommittee Chair Bishop
3. Report from the Research Subcommittee - Chair Tripathi
4. Report from the Course Management Systems Subcommittee - Harry Matthews
5. Allocation Policy for ITF Funding - Chair Plant
6. Electronic Communications Policy - Randy Moory
7. Results of the Remote Access Pilot - Kevin Rhodes, Manager-Network Operations Center

Minutes

Excused: Matthew Bishop, John Bruno, Jack Farrell, Bill Lacy, and Paul Singh.

Absent: Angela Cheer, Cristina Gonzalez, Lamar Heystek, Dorothea Howe, Jennifer Ramesh, Peter Jay Salzman, Kevin Smith, Remington Stone, John Vohs, and Caroline West.

Staff to the Council: Randy Moory and Babette Schmitt.

I. Welcome - Chair Plant

Chair Plant opened the meeting and introduced Janette Dickens of Information and Educational Technology (IET). Approval of the April minutes was deferred until the next meeting of the Council.

Chair Plant reported that the Education Subcommittee is making progress on a number of initiatives. The subcommittee is engaged in the following activities:

• Examining potential changes in the use of the instructional computer labs as a result of the student computer ownership expectation;
• Developing a faculty computer ownership expectation statement as directed by the Council at its April meeting.
• Moving forward with the printing fee for printing in the instructional computer labs. The campus rate committee has approved a fee of $.05 for each page printed above the first 200 sheets (front and back) in a quarter. Plant also reported that the Academic Senate has not commented on the proposed rate yet.

One member asked how the new printing policy would be affected by the possible retirement of the modem campus pools. Chair Plant indicated that he will convey this question to Chair Bishop for consideration by the subcommittee.

Dave Shelby, Chief Operating Officer for IET, added that the rate would be adjusted if the campus funds committed to support the labs were not fully expended after the first year.

Shelby also suggested the process on rate proposals should be improved. He pointed out that in this case the Campus Rate Committee took action before the AC4 officially endorsed the subcommittee's proposal. He suggested that, in the future, formal guidance from the Council should be obtained before submitting the proposal to the Rate Committee. The Rate Committee should be the final step in the review/approval process. Should the Rate Committee raise issues or questions about the basic principles agreed upon by the AC4, the proposal will be re-submitted to AC4 for further discussion and refinement. The Council concurred that the process should receive Council and IT Policy Board (ITPB) endorsement before proceeding with a rate proposal.

The Council moved and approved the printing rate in the instructional computer labs.

Chair Tripathi reported that the Research Subcommittee is reviewing the following three issues:

• Costing for NAMS - The subcommittee is assessing the costing structure to departments for network access.
• Web support for Committee on Research - The subcommittee is investigating how to obtain Web support for the Committee on Research. The subcommittee has funding to integrate Web features into MyUCDavis but has not identified support to facilitate this action. The Council suggested working with IET to investigate how to incorporate the service into MyUCDavis.
• Plan for Wireless - The subcommittee is investigating faculty's need for wireless access to the network. The committee recognizes its work follows installations and is tracking the work of IET in the policy development. (Vice Provost Bruno has appointed a workgroup to develop a campuswide policy on the deployment of wireless technology.)

Subcommittee Chair Matthews reported that Provost Grey has approved and supports the proposal to offer an all-day symposium on course management systems on campus. The committee plans to hold the symposium on October 3, 2001 from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. at the Alumni and Visitors Center. Invited presenters will be:

• Fred Beshears, UC Berkeley, WebCT & Blackboard
• Jay Fern, University of Indiana, Angel System
• Tom Lewis, University of Washington, Catalyst System
• Gail Persily, UC San Francisco, Decision Process
• Ruth Sabean, UC Los Angeles, Academic and Technical discussion

The target audience for the symposium is any faculty, academic staff, support staff, and administrators on campus with an interest in course management systems. Through discussions and presentations, the group will investigate which course management tool would be most appropriate for UC Davis. Matthews is planning the symposium for approximately 60 attendees. (See http://ac4.ucdavis.edu/subcomm/cms.html for more information on course management systems.)

Chair Plant introduced the draft Policy for Disbursal of Instructional Technology Funds. Plant reported that the policy statement was discussed at the April AC4 meeting; at that same meeting, he proposed to formalize the statement into a policy the Council would follow each year as it reviews proposals and develops recommendations for instructional technology fund allocations.

Plant asked for a motion to establish the proposed policy. Council members moved and seconded the motion. During discussion of the motion, Council agreed to add a fourth category to guide the allocation of the funds: Appropriate projects arising from the campus budget process.

Members also discussed the timing of Council's funding decisions and its potential impact on the Instructional Use of Computers (IUC) funding program. The May timeframe proposed by Council members would pose problems and delays for the IUC program. Council commented that they would work with Vice Provost Turner to address the timing concern, but the campus often does not know what funds might be available until January, at the earliest.

Council members asked whether there is a difference between the category 3 (special projects generated by the AC4) and the proposed fourth category (projects arising from the campus budget process). How would Council handle projects that are not specifically 'owned' or likely to be championed by any specific campus department, particularly when these projects support the general mission of the campus? MyUCDavis is one such example. There likely will be many more. Council would sponsor these projects with seed money.

Council adopted the motion as amended.

Chair Plant then asked Council to prioritize the technology funding requests received to date (see Technology Funding Requests - 2001-2002 Annual Budget Process). Plant summarized Provost Grey's preferred approach to funding allocations for instructional technology projects (see Email from Provost Grey to Chair Plant). Plant noted that the Governor's budget does not include new funds in support instructional technology. Bob Loessberg-Zahl added that the Governor's proposed budget has already allocated the $4 billion in reserves this year and that next year's budget could have a bigger impact on the University. Loessberg-Zahl then presented the annual budget proposals for 2001-02 (see Instructional Technology Funds - Revenues and Expenditures). The document summarizes the requests for information technology funding and the availability of permanent and one-time instructional technology funds. Loessberg-Zahl noted that there is $112,200 in permanent funds not committed to ongoing/multi-year projects and $380,000 in one-time funds carried forward.

Council then discussed the Registrar Farrell's funding request for the classroom upgrades project and Vice Provost Turner's request for support of the IUC program.

Council moved to make the following recommendations to the IT Policy Board:

• Allocate the $112,200 in permanent ITF to MyUCDavis,
• Use $90,000 of the one-time funds to support the IUC proposal, and
• Reserve $225,000 of the one-time funds to support MyUCDavis.

Council adopted this motion.

Moory reported on the status of the UC Davis implementation of the Electronic Communication Policy and outlined the most significant features of the draft policy now under review. The new policy will replace and integrate into one the UC Davis Electronic Mail Policy (PPM 310-16), the Computer and Network Acceptable Use Policy, and the Emergency Network Security Policy. Significant elements of the policy include:

• Its applicability to all means of electronic communication, including voice, email, Web, and other forms of communication that rely on computers, telecommunications, networks, and other forms of electronic communication resources.
• New provisions, such as protections for privacy, new consensual and nonconsensual access provisions, and the delineation of roles and responsibilities for system administrators.
• Potentially controversial provisions, such as the prohibition of violent and obscene materials.

Moory reported that the informal review phase concluded on May 18, 2001. The policy development workgroup is now addressing the comments and feedback received. A revised proposed policy will then be circulated to the campus for formal review through the Chancellor's office.

The Council deferred this item to the next Meeting.