Information Technology Advisory Committee (ITAC)

1:30 - 3:00 pm - Belk Library 119

1. Welcome & Introductions
2. Update on recent initiatives (Email, Banner, inventory)
3. Network Re-certification process
4. Planning Discussion
5. Other business

Faculty Expectations

Workstation/Access

• Access from your office to an adequate workstation (3 year replacement?)
• Access to high speed network connection
• Access to adequate local storage and backup media devices
• Access to adequate server based storage (250MB)
• Access to campus information from remote locations
• Expect dial-up access to those who don’t otherwise need access (questions raised on this)
• Provide transparent access to resources
• Wireless access on campus

Software/Tools

• Access to standard (current, core) software to perform tasks
• Access to department specific software to perform task
• Access to enterprise email system with adequate quota
• Access to similar setup for home use?
• Access to administrative services and tools for managing information

Support

• Access to training and support
• Access to consultation related to teaching and learning with technology
• Adequate, timely and streamlined process to services
• Access to tools to do their job well
• Access to service directory (what’s available)
• Expanded help desk support (after hours, match class schedule hours)
• Distance learning services and coordination with campus services
• Access to administrative services and tools for managing information
• Full integration with voice, data, email, etc

Classroom

• Classroom resources (smart technology, integrated with typical tools)
• Classroom equipment purchase, maintenance and support
• Remote facilities must have same access to resources as on campus
• Computer testing facility (available to classes)

Other considerations and Notes:

• Platform neutral access / purchase decisions
• Collaborate with all departments for group purchases of common software
• Process to consider requesting new resources, tools, etc
• Open to new ideas, processes
• Process to review, comment on changes before they occur

Student expectations (just started this list)

• Reliable, efficient access to services and resources
• Access to software necessary to complete class assignments
• Access to student lab computers to perform standard tasks
• Access to consultation and support in student labs
• Expect secured remote access

1:30 - 3:00 pm - Raley Hall - Room 2021
Persons Present:

Ex officio members: Jeff Williams (ITS, Chair), Doug May (ACS), Martha McCaughey (Faculty Senate)

Voting members present: Brian Brown (Student Services), Tom Leonard (Proxy for Teresa Canton - University Advancement), Gabe Fankhauser (SOM), Al Harris (COB), Len Johnson (HRS), Greg Lovins (Business Affairs), Tom Bennett (Proxy for Lynne Lysiak - Libraries), Emory Maiden (A&S), Ed Pekarek (A&S), Don Rankins (Registrar), Dragan Stefanovic (A&S), Peter Wachs (Student Development), Bill Ward (Acad. Affairs)

Guests Attending: Steve Breiner (ITS & ITAC Recorder), David Hayler (Network Services), Pamela Graham (Arts & Sciences), Jonathan Morefield (Registrar), Douglas Brantz (Fine & Applied Arts), Pamela Graham (A&S)

1. Welcome & Introductions

Jeff Williams called the meeting to order at 1:33 and welcomed those attending. He requested that business be handled quickly so that interested members might attend a Faculty Senate-sponsored presentation on Computer Privacy beginning at 3:00 PM.

2. Network Recertification Process

Williams reported that a process would soon begin to recertify computer systems on the campus network. He explained the reasoning that, due to machine handovers and pass-alongs, many machines were no longer correctly identified with their primary users - a situation that would likely create problems with the state auditors’ requirements for system-related accountability. The process, to be started on Monday, February 23, will be a matter of recertification of each networked system that requires the system’s primary user to verify that the currently logged information is correct. A machine not claimed in the process will require a full registration process after the 18 days being allowed for the process. Users will receive multiple e-mails notifying them of how to complete the reregistration process before the machine requires a fresh registration. David Hayler (Network Support Services) mentioned that each user will be asked to specify a “primary” machine among those s/he registers for the purpose of allowing ITS to examine accurately issues related to hardware adequacy and refresh cycles.

3. Update on Recent Initiatives (E-mail, Banner, inventory, etc.)

A) Williams stated that the recent e-mail migration process had proceeded relatively smoothly, with only a few problems cropping up, mostly related to high-volume and non-standard (e.g., organizational and departmental) accounts and users. Those problems that have been identified are being addressed both to correct the identified problems and to prevent their recurrence.

B) Greg Lovins (Business Affairs) reported that recent deployment of Banner HRS and Banner Payroll had occurred with a few well publicized “glitches,” but that, overall, things had proceeded mostly smoothly. Identified problems or errors that crop up are being fixed by designated troubleshooting teams and those teams are proactively addressing potential problems identified in the process. He further stated that deployment of the Banner Web for Employees product was imminent and initially should provide functionality similar to that available in the old PDIS system, with significant additional functionality being made available over time.

Lovins mentioned that next on the Banner implementation schedule are the Banner Alumni and Banner Advancement products, but that those products should affect significantly only the ITS, University Advancement, and Registrar divisions of campus. The Banner Finance product is due to come fully online in July 2005, with incremental pieces appearing sporadically until the full release. The Admissions component is projected to come online in September 2006 with the Financial Aid and Registration pieces appearing in Spring of 2007.

Lovins also mentioned that there is a new web site under construction to disseminate information about the Banner Implementation project (now designate as the LEAP project) at http://www.banner.appstate.edu/overview.html. As a work in progress, the site will contain detailed implementation plans and schedules, rationales for same, and other important information related to the LEAP project.

Brian Brown (Electronic Student Services) suggested that Banner-related applets and software, required for use of the system, be posted for download on that web site.

4. Planning Discussion

Williams asked that the meeting move into something of a “planning mode” in order to begin to reexamine and refine the IT plans for the institution. He noted that Appalachian is the only one of the 16 UNC Institutions without a formal technology refresh plan, and that, given the 11 million dollars spent in 2003 on information technology (including salaries, telecommunications, and other technology-related categories), the absence of an institution-wide, formal plan for IT, maximizing benefit from those expenditures would be very difficult.

He began an exercise for the rest of the meeting, in which the ITAC membership was asked to identify the specific services that reasonably constitute the expectations of faculty, students, and staff, with regard to information technology. He proposed that the results of the exercise should be used to help guide IT planning at Appalachian toward eventually meeting those expectations.

A vigorous and detailed discussion ensued, a summary of which will be distributed to the ITAC membership and other interested parties when completed.

5. Adjournment

In order to allow members to attend the aforementioned presentation, the meeting adjourned a bit before 3:00 PM.