Information Technology Committee
November 9, 2012 1:15pm Vance 102
Present: Z. Bello, S. Bernstein, T. Burkholder, D. Cohen, J. Estrada, J. Fanhat, J. Gamache, K. Kean, S. Kirstukas, C. Kurkjian, E. Makover, C. Menoche, H. Rudzinski, C. Labedz, R. Todd, S. Wu, Guest: L. Washko
Guest: Davis, M.
I. Call to order at 1:15 pm.
Appointment of Acting Secretary: Cathy Kurkjian
Minutes of October 5, 2012 Meeting approved pending spelling Eran Makeover’s name correctly. Eran seconds motion carries
Explanation of the timing for running our virus scans @ 11pm each evening. With security breaches the system offers prefers daily scans. Please leave computers on at night. If computers are turned off in evening, the scan will run when it is turned on in the am. However, it will be slow- and won’t get report until many hours later.
Laptop scanning- Please plug into campus network at least overnight once per month. If log in to VPN will talk to server for virus reports.
III. New Business
A. Software Request Committee- Henry noted that form is ready to go. There is a December 3 date for the submission deadline. An updated list of current software will be provided. The request for software is primarily for teaching purposes. There is more of likelihood to get monies if request for particular software packages are requested by many people. A note was put on the request indicating that Adobe is already available.
B. Report on Classroom Survey
Henry reports that there are facilities-related concerns such as screens and lighting. If technologies are changing should there be an investment in lighting and screening? Should we step back to learn about new technologies coming into play to reevaluate the committee and how requests are funneled? There was a suggestion that the committee include other stakeholders who may be more informed. The argument was made that the IT Committee is not a part of discussions on new technologies, so it is not directly in the loop. Right now the committee is looking at old technology and it was suggested that the committee should be more involved in thinking about other ideas.
Amy indicated that requests have been made in physics or science for renovations. Trying to see what is out there.
Henry suggests that the committee should be more involved in early stages before decisions are made. He argued for more of a role in new considering new initiatives.
Tom notes that there are advantages to fixing things even if they will become obsolete. He suggests that it may be important to address lighting issues and more immediate things that may need to be addressed.
Amy indicates that changes won’t happen overnight but just looking at things to see what is possible
Tom encourages the committee to focus on the immediate need of what needs to be fixed. He thinks it is a good idea to think about what comes next, as well.
He calls for a recommended list of what we want fixed to send to the Faculty Senate and UPBC will decide how to proceed with budget priorities.
Henry reports that most people want front lights to be controlled and indicates that there are lots of options to do this inexpensively. He notes that the labor will be costly.
Tom asks the committee to address where the need is greatest and to prioritize.
Amy reports that the new building is based on plans made 10 years ago. There is not a lot of flexibility and choice at this point. There is an attempt to build the infrastructure for smart board technology so it can be put in place in the future. Other decisions were made ten years ago, and the cost is prohibitive to do a change order.
Amy reports that there is a difficulty managing different interfaces if it is scaled down. There are user-friendly issues with continuity among rooms.
Tom requested that the survey be sent out by December with a copy to UPBC.
C. Report from Board of Regents Faculty Technology Advisory Committee (BORFTAR)(Mike Davis)
Mike reports what has been happening at BORFTAR (November meeting). The Committee met two times, once in spring and once in November. The agenda for the November meeting involved playing an advisory role in technology with representation from community colleges and the CSU system. Minutes have not been released. He will forward them.
Hi reports that the meeting focused on the topic of Blackboard.
There was a discussion by people who are just getting LEARN who were somewhat apprehensive. System Office is taking over Blackboard Learn System. Community colleges will be managed my ConnSCU. There was a concern that students will get even less support when Blackboard is no longer managing it. Computer help desk is not equipped to hand Blackboard Learn issues. Mike indicated that support would be provided at individual school level with monies paid to Blackboard to individual schools to provide student help.
Other topics under discussion included:
· Support hours for community college students,
· Blackboard contract extends through 2016.
· Online services that other institutions offer.
· Current service level of Blackboard. Maintenance window was Friday night 6 – 10 pm, a terrible time for Community College because the it was 4 hours before assignments were due
· Discussion of different down times for different institutions
Next meeting scheduled in the spring.
Tom invited an IT committee member to consider replacing Mike
D. Preliminary results of ECAR/Educause survey of undergraduate students and technology. Full discussion at December meeting. NO REPORT
E. Identify Finder- Dec. 2 Deadline-http://www.ccsu.edu/page.cfm?p=14348
Kevin, ITC’s representative at Faculty Senate: Identity Finder pushed to PCs and available for MAC. If you run before Dec. 2 faculty and staff get a choice about what gets kept or not. Otherwise IT chooses. Questions and Concerns include:
▪ the disposal of materials we are bound legally to keep
▪ the time it takes to run identity finder and the fact that it slows computers Suggest using Identity Finder in a phased way. Can run it at night.
▪ the difficulty to scrub information depending on where a file is stored.
▪ the location where material gets stored when there is a need to retain information. (PI cannot be stored on your local hard drive) (social security info mostly). Instead PI should be stored in a quarantined secure network environment off of local hard drive.
▪ the cost to notify an individual that their data has been compromised is $200 per person.
▪ faculty on sabbatical. Dept. secretary will initiate a scan for someone on sabbatical if the computer stays on campus. Not an issue if they take their computer.
▪ Material that must be retained that is infected with a virus.
The System will provide security training in the form of a Blackboard Learn course that will host the training units.
There was a request for the IT committee to discuss this with their respective departments and warn them that this is coming.
F. Registrar Assignment of Rooms with Technology Postponed
Respectfully submitted by
Adjourn, 2:48 PM