Information Technology Advisory Committee (ITAC)

1:30 - 3:00 pm - IG Greer 224

1. Welcome
2. Discussion of Classroom Technology Standards Proposal
3. Discussion of Workstation Standards Proposal
4. Close

1:30 - 3:00 pm - I.G. Greer Hall - Room 224

Persons Present:

Ex Officio members: Jeff Williams (Inf. Tech. Serv.), Doug May (Acad. Computing Serv.), Michael Moore ( Faculty Senate)

Voting Members: James Hayes (for Teresa Canton (Univ. Advancement), Lynne Lysiak (Belk Library and Info. Commons), Emory Maiden (A & S), Tom McDonnell (Music), Ed Pekarek (A & S), Don Rankins (Off. of the Registrar), and Bill Ward (Academic Affairs).

Visitors: Steve Breiner (ICS, ITAC Recorder), Terry McClannon (RCOE), Daniel Moorhead (ITC), Pamela Graham (A & S)

1) Welcome, Opening Comments

Jeff Williams greeted the group and opened the meeting at 1:34 PM. He asked and had the members introduce themselves, since several former representatives if ITAC had been succeeded by new representatives from their areas.He suggest that newer representatives might wish to review the earlier minutes of ITAC meetings, available online on the ITAC web site at http://www.itac.appstate.edu.

2) Discussion of Classroom Technology Standards Proposal

Williams noted that the major discussion items on the agenda had been discussed extensively in prior ITAC meetings and in the “Friday Morning Meetings” that included many technical support personnel from the various campus areas. Steve Breiner (ITS) distributed the latest draft versions of the documents Classroom Standards Overview and Classroom Technology Standards Process (with changes from previously distributed versions annotated for clarity).

Pamela Graham expressed the concern in her office (computing support in the College of Arts and Sciences) that support for classroom technologies remain distributed rather than centralized. Steve Breiner (ITS) replied that the draft proposal documents had been extensively rewritten to be explicit in proposing that a careful and deliberate study be included as part of an eventual Classroom Technology pilot to identify which support functions could best be provided via our current distributed support personnel and which could be provided more effectively through a central group. He suggested that, while the personal attention and comfort provided by distributed technology support persons was very effective for many functions, some maintenance and support functions (e.g., procurement of replacement parts, monitoring of bulb usage, and perhaps others) could likely be provided in a more efficient or cost-effective fashion using a well designed and appropriately staffed central support structure. He suggested that an eventual pilot program should provide an opportunity to identify which support functions would fit into those mechanisms.

Breiner relayed a suggestion from Scott Schneberger (WCOB) that any catalog of classroom technologies include coding that would clearly identify the specific types of equipment available in any particular “technology classroom.”

With little further discussion being offered, Williams observed that there were a relatively large number of ITAC members who were not present. In order to finalize a proposal to be sent to the provost, Williams stated that he would arrange for the proposed final versions of the documents be sent to the ITAC membership for e-mail approval and would, should that approval be forthcoming, forward the documents to the Provost as an ITAC recommendation regarding a university strategy for standardizing and supporting classroom technologies.

3) Discussion of Workstation Standards Proposal

Doug May (ITS) distributed the latest version of the proposed Workstation Standards documents. He, too, noted that these documents had undergone extensive discussion and that the latest version contained revisions suggested during the discussions in “Friday Morning Meetings.” The resulting specifications, currently available on Appalachian’s current “Dell Store” provided a number of similar configurations with differing physical form-factors and provided a means for addressing “exceptional purchases.” May stated that in the event that large numbers of orders comprised similarly configured “exceptional purchases,” the group that develops “standard” specifications would presumably move that configuration into the mainstream category. He noted further that the Dell configurations currently available would accommodate the upcoming Microsoft Vista operating system and that the published pricing offered outstanding values for the university. He mentioned that negotiations are ongoing with both Lenovo (formerly the IBM Personal Computer Division) and Gateway to obtain similar configurations and ordering capabilities, while offering purchasers a choice of manufacturers.

In considering how to avoid purchases that might bypass a standardized purchasing process, a number of possibilities were suggested. Michael Moore (Faculty Senate) suggested that the group not worry so much about developing a policy to accommodate all possible situations. He noted that the portions of the document listed under “Implementation Considerations” were unnecessary, since the document proposes a university policy to address the idea of standardization.- he suggested dropping the “Implementation Considerations” portion and forward the remaining parts of the document as a formal recommendation to the Provost from ITAC “without further ado.”

Williams stated that a final proposal for workstation standardization would be emailed to the membership for approval, after which, if approved, it would be presented to the provost.

4) Announcements and New Business

Williams informed the group that ITS has purchased and is now having installed a new data storage system capable of providing 4 Terabytes (approximately 4,400,000,000,000 bytes) of network storage proposed for faculty and staff. The storage system provider chosen was Netapp, Inc. and ITS is currently looking at how the new storage system can comply with efforts to provide multisite redundancy using a GA-proposed, remotely hosted facility. He noted that the Netapp we product purchased is capable of supporting up to 50 Terabytes of storage. He asked ITAC to identify any departments with special needs for storage (e.g., Geography and Planning) and have those areas contact him about special arrangements.

5) Adjournment

Williams adjourned the meeting at 2:26 PM.