UNIVERSITY TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES
May 14, 1998

TECHNOLOGY PLANNING AND FUNDING - PERRY MOORE
Perry Moore expressed the importance of the University Technology Committee's continued involvement in University technology planning.

The 1% technology fee which, if approved, will raise approximately $430,000 in continuing funds for the University and will be combined with the 1% recommended by the ITPC of $300,000. The ITPC recommended this process be continued annually until the University realizes $2 million in continuing funds for technology use. The Provost noted that use of these funds must be directly related to instruction for students, primarily the open labs on campus and the replacement of the computers in the Library. In the future, funds may also be provided for the Center for Teaching and Learning and other areas where demands for instructional hardware and software are needed.

Q. What is the possibility of using technology funds to provide security for "dedicated" labs, thereby giving students better access to these labs and creating more "open" labs? The Provost responded that this was definitely a possibility.

Q. Would it be possible to accept proposals for the appropriation of technology funds? The Provost reiterated the need to make sure these funds are used in a maximum way to benefit instruction for the maximum number of students. Therefore, any proposals submitted to the University Technology Committee would be reviewed. Vicki Montavon discussed the recent formation of a best use technology committee and will present a draft proposal to UTC in the near future. This committee consists of: Vicki Montavon, Paul Hernandez, Shari Lewis, Jay Thomas, Oscar Garcia, Jim Brandeberry, and Roger Gilpin.

Q. How will House Bill monies affect technology fees? There is interest in another Faculty Computer Initiative. However, UTC needs to develop a criteria for distribution of the equipment and an indication of the level of demand (i.e. need) for faculty computers before a decision to continue with another initiative would be approved.

Q. Status of Vice President for Information Technology Position - At the present time, the Provost does not wish to add an additional position of Vice President for Information Technology as he plans to be very involved in the UTC meetings. However, he prefers not to Chair the committee, but will stay informed by attending as many meetings as possible. If, in the future, this arrangement does not work out, the subject can be brought up for discussion further.

Q. What does the Provost think are the most pressing issues for the committee to address during the next year? The Provost listed as a top priority a technology plan for the university that incorporates present plans with the technology plans from all the colleges. Therefore, it is important for the colleges to submit their individual plans as soon as possible. Included in the university plan, there should be a statement regarding distance education.

UPDATES:
Distributed Learning Committee
Dan DeStephen reported on the current status of this committee. The seven sub-groups have met, formulated sixty-six recommendations and presented them to the Distributed Learning Committee. The DLC will meet on Tuesday, May 19 to discuss and finalize these recommendations. The Provost should have the final report by the end of next week.

Policy for Responsible Use of Information Technology
Vicki Montavon discussed the most recent draft of this policy with the Faculty Affairs Committee. Several recommendations were made by the committee to clarify certain sections of the document. One of the recommendations was directed to the section on enforcement of violations and to whom these violations would be reported. It was suggested by the UTC members that instead of reporting to the Help Desk, any violations will be reported to the Department Chair and/or Dean. For faculty and staff, violations will be reported through the normal hierarchy. On May 18, the University Council will meet to review the draft. It will then be presented to the UTC at the June 11th meeting, followed by the Council of Deans for final approval.

Financial Systems Assessment
Scott Rife gave an update to the committee on the status of the financial systems assessment, along with a list of activities scheduled from mid-May to mid-June. He discussed several of the assessment highlights covered in the handout distributed to the committee members.

Year 2000
Kitty Friedman, CaTS, distributed a draft of responsibilities CaTS will undertake to insure a smooth transition to the year 2000, as well as a list of responsibilities for the university community. Also included was a draft letter from Paul Hernandez to the university community regarding CaTS responsibilities for the Year 2000 Project. Peter Cheng distributed a draft letter addressed to Janet Achterman regarding his recommendations for solutions to possible Year 2000 problems. This will be discussed further at the next meeting.

Faculty Handbook
The Faculty Handbook can now be accessed via the University Academic Web page. Agenda for next meeting on June 11, 1998 to be held in E157 Student Union (University Technology Committee will continue to meet during the summer months):

1. Discussion of the charge by the Provost to complete the college technology plans
2. The School of Nursing will present its technology plans
3. Faculty Computer Initiative discussion