CITAC Minutes
December 19, 1997

The meeting was held at 3:00 in Room 208 of the K-State Student Union. In attendance were: Attending were Dan Bernardo, Ken Brooks, Mel Chastain, Ken Conrow, Fred Damkroger, Matt Dwyer, Neil Erdwien, Jeanette Harold, Brice Hobrock, Faye Kennedy, Douglas King, Diane McGrath, Tom Schellhardt, Bradley Shaw (chair), Gail Simmonds, John Streeter, Roger Terry, Harv Townsend, Beth Unger, and Fran Willbrant (for Keith Ratzloff).

Shaw distributed committee lists for the year. He explained that he thought it best to create a committee for each of the five basic charges given to CITAC by Vice-Provost Unger. The new committees are:

Shaw distributed the list of committees and committee appointments for the year. He also gave each council member a 1997-98 CITAC Roster and the general "mission statement" for which CITAC was established. [Note: These are located on the CITAC home page.]

Agenda:

1) Committees. Shaw explained his criteria in making the committee appointments: 1) having a teaching faculty member on committees of particular interest and importance to faculty, and on the strategic planning group; 2) have diversity in terms of interests, job responsibilities, and work environments; 3) avoid having CNS or Telecommunications people on committees that oversee their projects and activities; 4) use ex-officio members as well as "regular" CITAC members. He asked that council members contact him if they felt that their talents and interests would be more suitable for another committee assignment.** [Note: See separate page for revised CITAC committee lists.]

2) Proposed KSU Webpage revision (Neil Erdwien, CNS). Webmaster Erdwien described with a handout a the newly designed KSU home page. He explained that the new design was developed after a review of the features of many university home pages, and an evaluation of our own particular needs. The page has a more artistic and pleasing "look" (with a variety of alternating logos), it provides easier access to links, the search feature is greatly improved, and the menu has been expanded. In the general discussion that followed Erdwien's description, members expressed support for his work and the desire to see the implementation of the new design as soon as possible. Many hoped that the "Power Cat" logo would be used, since the recognition of the image has increased greatly in recent years.

3) CNS removal of lab from Nichols 126 (Ken Conrow, CNS). Dr. Conrow explained that the room in question was to be returned by the spring (1998) semester to the Department of Computing and Information Sciences as per their long-standing agreement. Conrow explained that the Sun, Unix, and PC work stations would be moved to other lab sites. At issue, however, was the disposal of six Macintosh computer work stations. Since there was no CNS lab site with room for them, different options were considered. One suggestion was to use them in Consulting with the goal of enabling the consultants to provide better support for Mac users. Another option was to have them sent to Technical Services, again, with the idea of having staff become better able to provide support in that work area. Dr. Conrow asked those in attendance for recommendations. Most of the discussion that followed centered on the issue of support. It was mentioned that certain colleges and departments which use Macintosh computers primarily have their own labs which are restricted to members of their own unit. They are not "public" or "open" labs. It was unclear how much the Macs in Nichols 126 were used, and to what extent the users by affiliation with a "Mac" department or college would have access to Macintosh work stations. The consensus of the group was to recommend that CNS make an effort to identify the Mac users and to dispose of the Mac work stations according to their best judgment regarding service, particularly to the users displaced by the elimination of the lab in Nichols 126.

4) Calendar/Scheduler (Harv Townsend, CNS). At the request of administrative units in Anderson Hall, CNS reviewed on an ad hoc basis calendar/scheduler software for them and eventually installed an evaluation copy of Synchronize because of features that seemed favorable for their needs. In light of requests for a campus-wide software program that would facilitate communication in arranging meetings, CNS reviewed three commercial products: Meeting Maker, Synchronize, and Netscape. Because of its multi-platform capabilities, CNS testing, its web interface, favorable comments by current users at KSU, and competitive cost, CNS recommended a 1000 user license for Synchronize. In the discussion that followed, Roger Terry expressed concern not so much about the quality of the program (i.e. Synchronize), but the procedures by which CNS conducted its evaluation of the products. He recommended that CITAC endorse the current decision by CNS, but that chairperson Shaw express to CNS and to Vice-Provost Unger CITAC's desire that decisions of this type in the future be made more openly, and with a clear statement about the criteria used to make the final decisions on projects such as these that have a direct impact on academic and support units throughout the university.

The meeting was adjourned at 4:50.

For CITAC,

Bradley Shaw, Chairperson and Secretary Pro-Tem

Attachments: CITAC roster; CITAC Mission Statement

Computing and Instructional Technology Advisory Council (CITAC)

CITAC Strategic Planning Advisory Council

Committees: 1997-98

  1. Instructional Servers (Brooks, Dwyer, King, Knupfer, Rahman, Townsend). Recommendation of a supported environment on instructional servers for academic departments to allow faculty to create, store, update, and generally manage digital modules of instruction and to create and maintain course materials and evaluation processes for students in courses. Includes software user interfaces to the systems which may have to be created locally. Recommendation of policy to support the use and management of this environment to IRMC via VPAST.
  2. Campus Network (Chastain, Miller, Ratzloff, Streeter). Study of plans by CNS and Telecommunications to upgrade campus network. Recommendations based on unmet needs by May 1 to Executive Computing Committee.
  3. CITAC Development and Services (Bernardo, Damkroger, McGrath, Ortiz). Study and recommendations of this user support facility, based in part on examination of facilities at other universities who are leaders in providing such services.
  4. CITAC Lecture Series (Kennedy, Schellhardt, Simmonds). Continuation and development of lecture series to examine forefront ideas and to create a knowledge base on Information Technology.
  5. Vision 2020 / Strategic Planning (Dougan, Harold, Hobrock, Ottenheimer, Shaw, Terry). Examination of Vision 2020 and the university strategic planning initiative, with special attention to international programs, graduate programs, distance learning, and general education.

****

Computing and Information Technology Advisory Council [CITAC]



Mission Statement



To proactively represent the computing, communications, and information technology concerns of the faculty, staff, and students in visioning, policy setting, and strategic planning at the University level.



To provide timely input, advice, and feedback to the Vice Provost for Academic Services and Technology (VPAST) on policy, proposals, implementation projects, and other information technology related issues.



To be a catalyst within the University community in adapting technology to meet the mission of the University as the needs of the people of the State of Kansas evolve.



Strategies for achieving this mission include:



Assess short-term technology needs and develop long-term technology strategies



Be a major contributor to the University's technology visioning, policy development, and strategic planning process



Respond to administration's and staff's needs for timely input, advice, and feedback as it relates to implementation of the University's technology strategic plan and policy development



Recommend priorities for technology development after considering resources available and new resources needed



Values: As an organization representing the interests of many groups and individuals, we value:



Open and honest communication



Risk taking and informed decision-making



Leadership



Full participation in policy formulation, strategic planning, and decision-making



Commitment and responsiveness to customer concerns



High quality information and educational products


Home | Search | What's New | Help | Comments
Kansas State University | University Committees | CITAC
February 18, 1998