November 1, 2006 Minutes

EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY ADVISORY
COMMITTEE

11/01/2006, 12:30-2:00 pm

ATTENDEES: Linda Elvin, David Gillett, Jeanine Hawk, Stan Judkins, Chuck Lindauer, Sherri Mines, Mike Murphy, Fred Sherman, Alex Swanner, John Swensson, Takeshi Tsuji

GUESTS: Sharon Luciw

Convened: 12:35 pm

1. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE LAST MEETING

· Will stand approved as posted

2. INTRODUCTIONS

· New committee members for the 06/07 FY

            Stan Judkins - representing DA Classified Senate
            Sherri Mines - representing FH Classified Senate
            Fred Sherman of ETS - new Committee Chair
            Alex Swanner – representing DA Faculty Senate
            Takeshi Tsuji – representing DASB – VP of Technology

3. CHARTER / PROCESS

· ETAC makes recommendations to the CAC
· The committee creates policies that go the CAC for approval

If a policy for the District, the Board must also approve

· Each campus has a separate technology group

DA – The Technology Task Force

The goal was to provide direction, from the colleges, to the district in terms of prioritization of projects; the directions the colleges would like to go in terms of technology.
A cohesive means of bringing all the different areas together using technology
The District plan was driving the campus activity and DA wanted to turn that around by creating a committee that could develop the campus vision of priority and then provide direction for the District

FH – The Wheelbarrow Group

Hasn't meet for some time
This committee has been taken over by a technology plan that is created by each division during the summer and then turned over to the VP of Technology

This is composed into a campus wide technology plan
No plan was put together this summer because of the transition between Penny Patz and Sue Gatlin

The hope is that there could be purposeful overlap and that the three groups could collaborate so that any District policy initiated by ETAC would be taken back to the campus for discussion in order to bring input back to ETAC

· All the constituency groups are represented on the ETAC committee

It is the responsibility of each committee member to bring information back to their respective groups and bring back to ETAC any input from their group
It would be good to have an agenda item that would allow for a review of what went on in the Tech Task Force Meeting

· There was a review of the current ad-hoc and standing ETAC committees listed on the ETAC web site

Currently the only active committee is the HW & SW Standards Committee (standing)
The Information Systems Committee (standing) was formed to help guide ETS in picking a new ERP system

Should probably be reenergized with Measure C

Network & Systems Committee (standing) should be brought back based on the fact that wireless is coming out as well as Measure C
Jeanine thought it would be nice to have a place to have a dialogue/forum without entry into the network

Wanted to know if there was any protocol or standard for such a procedure
Does not have to be a formal committees, could just be meetings
Would be nice to have an opportunity to have a dialogue about prioritization of what is in the hopper, even between campuses

Appropriate Use Committee (Ad Hoc) does not need to be started up again, unless the Appropriate Use Policy needs to be looked at again
Strategic Planning Committee (Ad Hoc) does not need to be activated until we go into that planning process again
The original intent for all committees was to have representation from the various constituency groups

Was difficult to get people to commit on a regular basis

The subcommittees should be open and flexible

· Membership is through confirmation of the different senates

Length of time is up to each member and their senate

4. GENERAL NEWS

· iTunesU (through Apple computer) is really starting to take off

DA will institute a shuffle group to look at the notion of using iPods for teaching and learning
Without an identity management in place, it is all on the open air
A very powerful tool that will be with us for a long time

· ERP system

The ELP committee, recently recommended moving ahead with the ERP implementation

Reason for replacement is:

1)          the architecture that lies underneath the ERP system is not going to support the continued flexibility for business functions of the district - we are running out of capacity for certain data fields on the system
2)             The vendor (SCT/Sunguard) who currently supports the system has told us that they are going to withdraw support for the system

One of the key areas we rely on the vendor for support is financial aid and getting the annual updates every year for the legislative changes

Fred gave an over view of what it will look like to launch a new ERP – broken down into four phases

I)     Functionality Gap Analysis – Every functional department who will use the ERP system will look at their business processes and the functionality they are getting out of the current system – what functions we have, what functions we wish we had

Looking at a tool called Decision Director (by Advantiv) – was developed as a request by the Foundation of California Community Colleges

A tool that allows a structured amount of functionality, gives into the gap analysis and helps you with the decision

Will have a coordinator appointed to run the functionality gap analysis and work with the users

II)   Decision and Contracting Phase – Look at the different products that are out there – usually done through an RFP process – will probably start in January of 2007

III) Conversion & Training – Take all the data and prepare to move it from one system to the other. The functional users will take a look at the system they are going to adopt and start to configure it so the business processes in the new system, once they are automated, will reflect how they want to conduct business processes with the new system. There is also a significant training element in learning how to use the new system. You are converted once you leave the old system and move to the new system and are no longer dependent on the old system

IV) Stabilization - spend a lot of time tweaking the system

After the stabilization period, you are six years from the start date and are probably comfortable and content with the system

Phase I & II should take roughly a year (1/2007-12/2007)
Phase III will take about three years (2008 – 2010) – can be done in a little as 18 months
Phase IV will take a couple of years
Although many look at it as an IT project, it is really a business process project and most of the leadership needs to come from the campuses
Our current system should be able to last until we are able to convert it out– unless the vendor notifies us that they will no longer support it
The majority of the work will be done by functional departments – will be driven by departments on both campuses

Typically have a steering committee at the top
Then a Core group – from key user groups
Then implementers doing implementation

Fred would prefer to have a rapid implementation

· Have an offer out which has been excepted, pending approval by the board, for the Director of IS & Ops position– Chien Shih

He has managed operations since 1992
He currently manages three department managers and 51 direct reports
Has managed a $1/2M infrastructure renovation project that currently supports 1,800 users
Has had experience with disaster recovery
Directed a systems security team
Has implemented People Soft
He is scheduled to start November 27th

· ETS has a contract with Hyperion to replace MAUI

Turns out that the Hyperion software is not compatible with the RDB database that we are using – Hyperion said that it would
We are in the process of integrating to a new database – SQL
Currently don't have a time line of when Hyperion will be rolled out
No information on how frequently the database will be updated
Will invite Bob Barr to the next ETAC meeting

5. UNRESOLVED ISSUES

· Go Print Stations

Need to put in a ticket with the Call Center – to find out what the standard is
ETS is in the process of training Tech Services on how to deploy the Go Print stations
Go Print version IV supports wireless printing

ETS can't promise how it will work out

· John Swensson inquired about the issue of part timer e-mail addresses and the fact that it takes 3 weeks for them to get an address

There is a three-week delay because ETS waits for HR to enter the information for part timers
ETS will be working with HR to improve the process

· The prioritization of projects was discussed

DA has the recent created Technology Task Force to help with this issue
Fred is interested in putting together a prioritization process that works for both campuses and provides clarity to ETS on what to work on so we can focus our resources and get things done
Chuck suggested that we increase our staff to accompany the extra load as in the case of Measure E or C - ETS got twice the load and very few extra staff to help out
To help out with the extra load for the large number of computer installations with Measure C, ETS is looking to put together a contract with both Dell & Apple for their help with installation and removal of computers

· There is a lack of training for computer systems, software and multimedia classrooms for staff

FH has short courses in the KCI called LINC to address some of these issues

DA should look to create a similar program

· Good to establish a student intern program to help the Call Center
· Future ETAC meetings

The majority of the committee wanted to move to meeting only once a month unless more time is required
There was a request to meet on the Third Wednesday of the month at the same time (12:30 PM – 1:00 PM)
Will continue to be a videoconference between the two campuses

6. SERVICE LEVEL AGREEMENTS

· No discussion do to lack of time

7. REMOTE ACCESS

· Wireless – still on track to have the libraries come on line sometime in November

Mike Murphy thanked ETS and especially David for helping
IdManagement and wireless are still not integrated – so at this time everyone will log on as a guest
It has not yet been decided how login information will get to the students

8. ADJOURNMENT

· Adjourned: 2:00 pm

Next Meeting: Wednesday, November 15, 2006, 12:30 – 2:00, via videoconferencing?

Last Updated: Wednesday, December 6, 2006 at 11:38:18 AM
©2008 Foothill-De Anza Community College District