Meeting Minutes for
October 23, 2003
A meeting of the University Information Technology
Advisory Committee was called to order at 3:05 p.m. on October 23,
2003 in the Dean’s conference room in the Smith Building.
Dr. Lynn Nelson, co-chair, presided. Members present were Dr. Henry
Rozycki, Dr. Dianne Simons, Dr. James Shultz, Dr. Robert Mattauch,
Ms. Veronica Shuford, Mr. Charles Anderson, Mr. Rahul Khanna, Dr.
Phyllis Self, and Mr. Mark Willis. Ms. Fran Smith, Mr. Carl Gattuso,
and Mr. John Ulmschneider were absent.
I. INTRODUCTION OF NEW
MEMBERS
The two new student representatives, Mr. Charles Anderson and Mr.
Rahul Khanna, were introduced and welcomed to the committee.
II. REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM SEPTEMBER
8, 2003
Minutes were approved as prepared.
III. ATFAC MOTION ON COMPUTING AND NETWORK RESOURCES
USE POLICY
Dr. Nelson stated that ATFAC (Academic Technology
Faculty Advisory Committee) asked that this committee review a statement
passed by the committee at their last meeting. The statement resulted
from a faculty member having his computer and its contents confiscated
due to an alleged violation of the Computer and Network Resources
Use Policy. When the computer was taken, the individual did not
have access to it. The proposed procedure is to copy the hard drive
without the offending material on it and impound the original hard
drive. The Enforcement Procedures say that each school will have
an investigative officer who would be knowledgeable about the policy
and would report the violation. Mr. Willis or Dr. Self would also
be notified. After discussion by the committee, a change (marked
in italics) was made and the statement now reads as follows:
ATFAC requests that UITAC consider that any time
it is necessary to remove a faculty member’s hard drive or
computer to conduct an investigation into a violation of the Computer
and Network Use Policy, the university will copy the contents of
the hard drive for the faculty member’s use before the hard
drive in question is removed.
A motion was made to forward the statement to
the provost or vice presidents. The Enforcement Procedures should
be modified to include the statement as well.
The motion passed unanimously.
IV. MAJOR PROJECT STATUS
The five major projects are listed below with
a brief statement of their status:
- PORTAL
AT received a grant from Campus EAI/Oracle to provide software and
support. This tool will focus on students but will also have a channel
for faculty and staff. The “beta” version should be
ready around the first of March. For a well-developed portal site,
go to www.buffalo.edu and look at their guest portal.
- XYTHOS
This is a joint project between AT and AIT. The software has been
purchased and we are in the process of bringing it up. Hopefully,
the pilot will be ready in early spring. Xythos allows one to detach
attachments and put them into a file. The file is like a depository
and it could be kept private or be opened up to others. This system
was created for students, at their request, and with student dollars.
- E-MAIL REPLACEMENT
The goal is to:
a - Bring all users onto a single mail store – probably Notes
or
b - Spin students off into a separate e-mail system and run faculty
& staff on Notes.
E-mail 1 and 2 need to be replaced. The target date for replacement
is sometime next year (possibly in the summer). The replacement
will be a vendor-supported system.
- TELEPHONY MODERNIZATION
The goal is to merge the telephony network with the data network
so we can run telephone traffic as well as data traffic. We are
looking at three approaches:
a. Upgrade the problem systems (such as the Eagle phones)
b. Completely go to IP telephony. This would require complete replacement
of all phones and sets and would be very difficult to do.
c. Hybrid approach – Continue with some of the old systems
but move toward the new telephony system.
A one year implementation is planned. Verizon is willing to make
some concessions if we continue with our current Centrex system.
We will probably take this approach, slowly at first, then change
to the new phone system within 2 or 3 years. There will be no change
in phone rates. The slow phase is getting underway at present.
- ADMINISTRATIVE SYSTEM
REPLACEMENT
This project has become very active over the last couple of months.
HRS, FRS, and SIS are all over 25 years old. Replacement is included
in the Information Technology budget request made to the state.
There will be a $12 million commitment over a 4-5 year period, with
$8 million coming out of pocket. We are looking for general fund
support from the state and if that doesn’t materialize, we
are also looking at other funding possibilities. The Governor supports
this project, and it looks feasible.
V. IT STRATEGIC PLAN
The IT Strategic Plan was one of the major plans
for consideration when this committee began, and it should now be
a priority for the University. Mr. Willis stated that he would like
to get the process underway and offered a few suggestions for getting
started.
- REVIEW OF CURRENT PLANNING
DOCUMENTS
a. Review prior documents
b. Discuss how to go about it. Should we appoint a separate planning
committee?
Mr. Willis distributed the following handouts:
1. The original strategic plan
2. AIT Goals for last year (2002-203)
3. AT Goals for last year (2002-2003)
4. Cause/Effect document entitled Is Strategic Planning for Technology
an Oxymoron?
5. IT Strategic Planning
- SUMMARY OF INSTRUCTIONAL
TECHNOLOGY VISIONING SESSION
Dr. Self summarized the results of the AT instructional technology
visioning retreat.
- PROPOSED PROCESS
Mr. Willis shared some thoughts on how we might approach this planning
process. Since we typically get bogged down in details, we should
probably make notes about what we might want to do this time. What
are the trends? Everything is moving towards the Web, and there
is more sophistication in technology. What is our IT environment
and how do we implement that? We should identify the key components
of a new VCU IT Plan. The committee should spend at least an hour
or more at the next 3 or 4 UITAC meetings (November to January or
February) discussing the planning issues of the IT Strategic Plan.
By that time, a document should be ready to send out to constituents
for review, and in late spring, this committee should have a plan
ready to submit to VCU administration.
Dr. Self asked about the Library – how does it relate in the
strategic planning? Maybe new technology issues from the library
could be incorporated. Maybe we should bring in ATFAC and other
user groups or use technology support groups in the schools.
- NEXT STEPS
The next meeting agenda would be to go over in more detail the environmental
issues and then go from there to possible key components of a new
plan. After that, we should discuss the issues (2 or 3 at a time)
and flush out the details. Start with the big picture, then key
components, then details. Everyone agreed.
VI. MEETING SCHEDULE FOR REMAINDER OF YEAR
Ms. Barbie passed out a schedule of meeting dates
through October, 2004.
VII. NEW BUSINESS
The committee reviewed the emergency preparedness
procedures that were put in place during Hurricane Isabel.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 4:40 pm.
|
