EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY ADVISORY
COMMITTEE

6/20/2007, 1:00-2:30 pm

ATTENDEES: David Gillett, Beth Grobman, Scott Heffner, Stan Judkins, Chuck Lindauer, Mike Murphy

GUESTS: Sharon Luciw, Chien Shih, Bob Barr

Convened: 1:04pm

1. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE LAST MEETING

· Will stand approved as posted with two exceptions:
1) The insertion to agenda item 3, that Scott Heffner concurs with Fred that this should be a college decision.
2) In the last bullet on the last page, need to change fall quarter to winter quarter.

2. GENERAL NEWS (ALL)

· No general news was brought up

3. HARDWARE STANDARDS CHANGE (SHARON)

· The sub committee met and decided to go to the 13.1" version of the Mac Book

This brought the price down enough that:
1)    It is within the scope of the measure "C" average cost
2)    Allows those who couldn't afford a laptop before, at the $2,300 price, to purchase one
There was a discussion that some of the savings could be used to purchase a stand-alone display – a decision to be made by each department in the college
Didn't change the Dell laptop since there wasn't enough of a significant price change between the 14" & 15" laptops

4. EDUCATIONAL INFORMATION SYSTEM (EIS) (CHIEN)

· Overview of the EIS selection process:

The project kick off was March 13^th, 2007
Have completed the brainstorming forum, which is part of the review process
Just closed the functional requirement voting

· Have eight (8) functional teams to tackle this project

Have a total of 347 faculty, staff, and managers participating
Have received 453 contributions on the brainstorming items
Have received 4,570 votes on the current business process review
Have received 32,000+ votes on the functional requirements

· This week the team is going through the validation process

This process will give a final functional requirement for the vendor to come in and determine if they can do what we want or if they will have to customize their product in order to meet our requirement
This phase of the process will conclude the end of next week

· There will be three reports:

1)    One report will indicate the general public vote and the functional expert vote
2)    Any other items that are singled out and not included in the functional items
3)    Rank all the critical items by both expert and the general public vote, in terms of total score

· Each team leader and their teams need to go through these three reports to make certain that all ranking and all requirements are properly in place
· In July, the ITB (Invitation to bid) will be released to the vendors
· In August, will review the vendor's response and select the vendor's who will participate the campus wide demonstrations and site visit
· Sometime in September, will finalize the demonstration scenarios and the general questions to ask all the vendors
· In the October timeframe, will host the vendor's day to come to the campus for a demonstration and a site visit
· In November, will finalize the vendor selection
· In December, will make the final recommendation of the finalist to the board
· Scott suggested that ETAC should get a copy of the reports for viewing

Since the whole exercise for the functional requirements is part of the selection criteria to determine who will be the finalists,
Chein felt that ETAC committees time would be much better spent if he came back to do a presentation of the selection criteria
A summary, or the entire documents, will be posted to the EIS web site: http://www.fhda.edu/eis

5. ID MANAGEMENT UPDATE (Chien)

á The ETS technical staff is doing internal testing this week, to make sure the platform is ready for the users testing next week
· At this point, everything is on schedule
· Have already found some practical applications for the system

It can provide uniform lists: i.e. a list of all the student e-mails from a single course; dissected further by which campus the student attends, the courses they take, etc.
If a campus wants to send out an e-mail to all the students, a list can be formulated that can be linked to the districts e-mail system for its distribution

· Should be finished with Phase I by the end of July

Phase I is to get all the campus identity into one place

Will have the capability to interface with the web interface, which will allow faculty and staff to change their identity password

Phase II is to take Phase I and propagate it into the different sub string systems that we have, such as: Touchnet, FPS, Capture Card, Library System, wireless, etc

Have begun to prioritize the most important systems to be implemented after Phase I

· Currently have two different identity systems within our legacy system

1) HR – for faculty and classified staff
2) SIS – all the student ID's and their information

· The IDM has combined the two different databases into one, and propagated all the identity into a local portal database, the LDAP, the active directory, wireless LDAP directory and also into white page

The portal will be able to authenticate against the database

6. MAUI Replacement Update (Bob)

· Bob had electronically distributed an example of a MAUI replacement query report prior to the ETAC meeting

This report is an attempt to reproduce the MAUI productivity report and is still in draft form
There are several MAUI productivity reports that report: full-time equivalent faculty, related classes, WSCH, weekly student contact hours, reports the productivity ratio between them, a report where you can get estimates for WSCH for the current term and the actual final WSCH numbers at the end of the term

There may be as many as 6 of theses reports that can be combined together into one

It has taken a long time to get to this point, where actual clones can be created, because all the data bases which MAUI is based upon, had to be recreated and switched over from an Oracle RDB data base to a SQL server format
Contracted with a consultant to help create a template from which reports can be created

· Will need to determine how much flexibility a user will have

Currently, Bob feels that there should only be strict MAUI replacement reports, which mimic the MAUI reports as closely as possible

· Want to make the reports as user friendly as possible with the least amount of training possible
· Will open up other reports for power users later
· Users will be able to export Hyperion tables to Excel for the purpose of formatting and sorting
· Every existing MAUI report will be cloned

Should start seeing a lot of draft reports during the 2007 fall quarter

· In the fall, will have selected users try out the reports

Will make modifications to the reports, based upon their feedback
Towards the end of fall, plan to take the reports and publish them for authorized use – the most popular reports first
MAUI will not go off line until next year, unless it breaks down
Will have parallel systems for some time
As ETS gets around to doing a report, they will work with the appropriate end user and post it on the server when complete
The end user will access the reports through a web browser either through IE on the PC or Firefox on the MAC

IE has a plug-in that provides some capabilities that are not available through the Firefox browser

If a table is activated, it allows the end user to size the columns (default to the width of the longest name)

This capability may not be available in pure HTML mode – if this is the case, the reports will be formatted for the least capable user

· According to Chuck Lindauer, at least half of the current MAUI reports do not get used

Would be good to work on the more commonly used reports first
According to Beth Grobman there are some MAUI users that no one knows about and they might be using reports that no one is aware of

Chuck suggested that a questionnaire go out to find out what reports are used

· Hoping to use the ID Management system to provide authentication – but the cloned MAUI reports may be ready before the ID Management system is

If not under the ID Management system, will have to create an identification system within the Hyperion server
Any one who is in the ID Management system and has been authorized appropriately, will be able to access the Hyperion system

Anyone who has a legitimate use should be able to get an account created
There shouldn't be any problem reactivating someones account if it has lapsed, to allow them back in

According to Chien, the ID Management system should be ready after July

Anyone who is in the current HR system has already been propagated into the IDM system, the active directory and the LDAP
Need to build an interface between the MAUI project and the IDM in order to look at the directories for authentication

· Whether authentication is done through the portal or directly through the Hyperion server to the directory, is an architectural question
· Bob is hoping to have all the MAUI reports completed and available by the end of the next academic year

The three biggest problems were:

1) Converting the data bases over and creating a new architecture for them

2) Figuring out how to update the SQL server database

3) Getting a template to start creating draft reports

· MAUI users can still get new computers if an old computer is kept in their area, to run MAUI reports, until the new Hyperion system reports are ready for use
· Beth Grobman felt that: 1) the example of the report looked like it would be very easy to use and 2) having multi-year functionality would be very valuable for making comparisons
· Several attendees gave suggestions for renaming Hyperion System 9 Interactive Reporting Studio Web to:

1) Hyperion; 2) MAUI II: 3) MAUI Reloaded

· When you go to the website, there will be a public folder

You can run a report and save the results to a private folder

· Chuck suggested that there be some training set up when the product is ready to be rolled out

Such as a training session on opening day, or during a college hour

There will be a Hyperion tool training session, for experienced Brio/Hyperion users, on opening day, but not as the MAUI replacement

Will set up training for the general MUAI replacement population after some of the reports are ready

7. Additional Items

· Scott requested a final update, on computer provisioning, for the end of the year

ETS is currently waiting for a sku number from Apple to kick off the first order, on each campus, for factory imaging

Still looking at the details of what Apple provides

Good to go with factory imaging with Dell

Currently looking at a 22 page Statement of Work regarding additional provisioning such as delivery of equipment to a destination

Have gotten past the imaging portion of the provisioning and now focusing on the actual delivery of equipment

Delivery would only be for labs and classrooms and not faculty and staff, because of the data transfer that is involved
Vendors are very strict on what they will provide

Scott inquired about the concerns that many faculty have had about the length of time it is taking for them to get their computers (5-9 months)

Currently faculty and staff computers are deployed during the term
Labs and classrooms can normally only be updated during the breaks
De Anza's process for replacing faculty and staff computers was to have them fill out a PR without telling them when the computer was going to be ordered, based upon the college's funding and priority

The vendor services are only going to apply to labs and will allow ETS to refresh and deploy more labs during the break time

· Beth wanted to talk about communication with end users, i.e. 1) the computer a faculty member may need verses the computer standards and the computer they get; 2) She is a faculty member who uses MAUI and would like to be involved, by representing faculty, in any changes that are made for faculty users; 3) Faculty are not ask what they want or need when it comes to Smart Classrooms, nor are they asked after the installation if it works. Beth would like to see this committee or some committee deal a little more with the pre testing, testing and post testing with the actual users

1) As per Sharon Luciw – an individual faculty members needs should be communicated to their dean. When the list was created for computer replacements, the specific needs should have been communicated to the appropriate people at the college and then a faculty members specific situation would have been addressed appropriately. It has to do with the method that the college is using. If a faculty member's computer is not right for them, they should work with their dean to see what can be done.
2) Bob has nothing to do with who end users are, and at the present time is only replacing reports. He does not know why new faculty is not introduced to MAUI and its capabilities. He will keep Beth's' concern in mind and bring it up with Fred.
3) ETS would like to speak to smart classrooms users prior to installation, but DeAnza colleges' structure doesn't always allow for this process to take place. Regarding the post installation experience, it would be good to loop back, but there is one engineer and only a couple of people on each campus to support these rooms. Scott Heffner suggested that this would be an appropriate issue and directly related to the Technology Task Force and is an issue that they would pick up for a first priority. Scott, being a member of the committee, could raise the concern, but ask Beth if she could attend today's meeting at 3:00 PM to express the issue. Mike Murphy felt that it was more than a DeAnza issue, because with Measure "E" there were a lot of human factor designs that didn't go in. With Measure "C" beginning, there needs to be a design review process so that something a little more intuitive can be seen than just the blue print. According to Sharon, the district is putting together a standard document that will have uniqueness for each college but will have some things that are standard across the district. The district is currently in the process of interviewing new architectural and engineering firms, so we don't go with the same from "E" over to "C" and that the screening criteria has been updated based upon lessons learned from Measure "E". We also need to get the users and ETS talking more during the design process. Sharon would also like to see a change in the overall process on how the design process is managed, taking our comments and ensuring that there is feedback. Currently our comments go into a black hole, and ETS is not the only group experiencing this.

8. ADJOURNMENT

· Adjourned: 2:23 pm

Next Meeting: Fall 2007, 12:30 – 2:00, via video conferencing