TAC Meeting Minutes - October 2nd 2008

Technology Advisory Committee Minutes

October 2, 2008

WCC 219, 3:30 pm

Members Prese= nt: Val Bacik, Mark Jordano, Ward McCracken, Laurie Bednar, Michael O’Neill, Tim Downs, Carolynn Master= s, Melanie Hatch, Ken Brundage, Cindy Duda, Susan Grande, Nick Pronko, Virginia Arp, Carolynn Ross, John Crandall, Jeff Taylor, Eric Sponseller, Cindy Liot= ta, Chris Smolinski, Bri Dezsi

Guests: = Mike Gorski, Dan Gianelli, Tex Brieger

Approval of September 18, 2008 minutes.

John Crandall had one corre= ction. On the last page, the paragraph under ITS Start of Semester Updates,= It reads “John gave = an update on Colleague Advancement”. It should read, “Cindy gave an update on Colleague Advancement”.

Mike motioned to approve the minutes with the one correction and Bri seconded them. All were in favor, with= one abstention, and the minutes were approved with the noted correction.

Unit Plans
Presentation of Plans

1. Improved Web Content Management syste= m (funding and/or endorsement)

Mike Gorski, Webmaster in University Marketing, stated that the purpose of the system is to improve s= ite navigation, consistency and usability.&nbs= p; In addition, the new content management system will provide departme= nts with an easy way to edit and create dynamic content. The current content management system does not provide the functionality needed to globally man= age, update and expand our website. In addition, users have expressed difficulty= in managing content using the system. Following are existing issues with the current content management system;

1. Inability to change layout without erasing all content

2. Navigation is not automatically created

3. Does not reflect changes made outside the system

4. Inability to properly crop and resize images

5. Unable to obtain page modified dates or see who modified pages

6. No automatic sitemap

7. Unable to share access to content, documents and images

8. No spell check

9. No global broken link checking

10. Unabl= e to preview plates outside the system (through email or link)

The cost is estimated to be $40,000-$55,000 for the base package and does not include installation. A 2= 0% yearly maintenance fee is required and included in the first year estimate.=

Questions from the floor:<= /p>

Would this totally replace= liquid matrix?

Do we pay an annual mainte= nance fee now?

2. On-Line Test Capability, (funding and/or endorsement) Dan Gianelli and Tex Brieger

Dan G= ianelli, Manager of Academic and End-User Technology in ITS, stated that there is a need from faculty to conduct online secure testing f= or groups of student larger than 40. This plan supports the university’s strategic goal 5-C, to expand and enhance campus facilities to maximize sup= port for all teaching, working, learning and student life environments. The equipment needed:

a. = 50 laptops

b. 2 laptop carts

c. = Network equipment

d. Secure testing software (NetSupport) licensing

The estimated one time cos= t is $65,000 and annual replacement cycle cost is $15,100.

Questions from the floor:<= /p>

Is 50 a suitable number?

Do we have to buy addition= al batteries?

Need more staffing, advanc= ed notice to use, training?

Who would oversee it?

3. SPSS Licensing (funding and/or endorsement)=

Tim Downs, Dean of CHESS, = the current 25 licenses purchased about a year ago are not sufficient = for university-wide needs; there is now an annual site license option that may = be more appropriate, but requires on-going funding. The first cost is $41,254, $4700 for relicensing and renewal for 50 licenses would be $5600.

Questions from the floor:<= /p>
Is there a lower cost stud= ent solution?

Keep the same 25, student = version of SPSS, some other solution?

Tim stated that there is a= student software program, but not as robust, for $300-$400 and it never gets renewe= d. There are other ways to buy SPSS server versions, and he will look at other options.

4. Robust Survey Administration Capability (funding and/or endorsement)

Virginia Arp, Director of = CETL, stated that the TLTR Committee is requesting funding and support to replace Gannon’s antiquated, manual course evaluation survey system with an up-to-date solution that provides a centralized data collection system and = the ability to conduct on-line course evaluation surveys. They propose that Gan= non upgrade their current student course evaluation software from Scantron to the newer version Class Climate Software.= This solution would provide data collection through one tool for both paper based and online surveys.

The evaluation survey soft= ware presently being utilized was purchased in 1997. The ability to do online co= urse survey does not currently exist with this software system. The return rate = for paper evaluations of Distance Education courses is extremely low.

The total cost for Phase 1= , online course evaluations only, is $17,731.00 which includes:

Ø      Class Climate Software

Ø      Installation

Ø      On line training

Ø      Shipping

Ø      Server

The total cost for Phase 2= , online and paper version for all faculty, is $37,716.00= which includes;

Ø      Clarity Scanner

Ø      Class Climate Software

Ø      Shipping

Ø      Depot maintenance for scanner

Ø      Class climate support and maintenance

The recurring cost:

Ø      Depot maintenance at $403

Ø      Class climate support and maintenance at $7,= 528

5.      Institutional On-line Archive (fu= nding and/or endorsement)

Val Bacik, Associate Provo= st, and Ken Brundage, Director of the Nash library.

Val distributed a hand-out explaining that this project will create an electronic repository of import= ant university documents, ie, reports, photos, publications, that would preserve the information as well = as provide a searchable database for those needing to reference the documents.=

This unit plan requests fu= nding to begin to create institutional archives. At this time it is not known whether the ImageNow software has the necessary functio= nality to provide the search-ability and accessibility necessary for institutional archives.

To begin the process of bu= ilding institutional archives, a scanner, a server, OCR and indexing software are needed. The cost for these items is not known at this time. New funds are b= eing requested for this project.

6.      ANGEL Annual Licensing Increase (Endorsement Only)

Virginia stated that Gannon adopted AN= GEL in the fall of 2007, replacing blackboard. Since that time, ANGEL has been integrated into the University’s infrastructure through faculty course materials. With our increased enrollment and ANGEL̵= 7;s increases through the three years, our license agreement beginning FY10 will increase substantially. Virgi= nia is asking only for endorsement from the TAC. There is no choice, this needs to be funded by the University.

7.      Replac= ement Cycle for Multi-media lab (Endorsement Only)

Tim is asking only for end= orsement for this project. More people are using         the lab and more will be using it if we upgrade it, such as digital photography.

8.      Integr= ated Library System Replacement, (funding and/or

endors= ement) Ken stated that there is a need= for an integrated catalogue system. A vendor has visited the library and has pr= ovided some costs.

9. Telecommunications Technician, (endorsement only)=

Mark exp= lained to the committee that because of the expansive growth within the University over the past three years, the Telecommunications Manager responsibilities = have increased significantly. The Telecomm Technician position is being requested to support the expanding communications infrastructure. The budget is to be determined.

The committee ranked the projects and then Mark will e= mail the rankings to the committee.

Adjournment: 5:00 pm