ITAC minutes for Sept. 15, 2004

1. WebCT-Vista migration: Lovely Lewis talked about the upcoming switch 
to WebCT-Vista. The BOR has decided that we will discontinue the current 
WebCT and begin using WebCT-Vista next Fall. WebCT-Vista is different 
from the current version, like "oranges and apples" according to Lewis. 
Some positive aspects are that WebCT-Vista will integrate with Banner 
and courses can be based on templates. The early adopters of this system 
have reported a lot of problems, however, mostly with the limitations of 
the network that currently runs the system. We need to begin thinking 
about how we will switch to the new system. Decisions need to be made 
about the order in which courses should be moved to the new system. New 
training will be needed for faculty who use WebCT. We also need to 
consider the appearance of the courses. For example, we may want a 
consistent layout and appearance for all GSW courses. There was a 
consensus to begin addressing these issues with the WebCT Teaching 
Circle led by Gary Fisk. This group will begin considering WebCT 
migration at the next meeting (Sept. 29).

2. Wireless network plan: Royce Hackett and Janice Cliett addressed the 
group on wireless network connections. There are currently 4 different 
wireless systems on campus. These systems are incompatible to various 
degrees. There are also potential security problems because wireless 
technology can be insecure if it is not properly implemented.  Hackett 
said that we need to have a comprehensive master plan for providing 
wireless networking on campus. Issues to be considered include 
feasibility, pros/cons, the need for uniform hardware/protocols, and the 
number of people who will be needed to support this infrastructure. Carl 
Mueller suggested that it would be inappropriate to expand wireless 
technology at this time because we do not currently have enough money to 
properly support it.  The committee agreed that there was a need for a 
master wireless plan. One of the possible options that this plan should 
consider would be denying requests for future wireless networks until 
enough personnel and support is ready for proper implementation.  
Hackett will take this proposal to the administration.

3. Technology fee funds: The committee discussed the Technology Fee funds. 
There is about $200,000 in funds. Approximately $100,000 has been set aside 
for personnel and approximately $46,500 has already been spent on various hardware. 
The status of funds for student workers in computer labs is unclear at the moment. 
It is not certain whether this money is included in the $100,000 for personnel 
[it is; $38,755 of the $98,914 budget - note: the $38,755 does not have to be spent 
on student wages - it is an estimate and some of it could be used for other things] 
or if funding for student workers would need to come from the remaining budget. 
Or it could be some combination of the two. There were several requests for funding, 
including proposals from Boris Peltsverger ($4700 per semester, possibly $9400 for the year), 
Paul Shapiro ($1500 semester, $3000 for the year), Stephanie Harvey ($8000) 
and Chuck Lawson ($14000). These requests were tabled until the budget situation 
could be clarified. They will be considered at the next meeting.


Next meeting: Sept. 22 at 3:30 This meeting will focus entirely upon 
Technology Fee funds.

Attendance: Stephanie Harvey, Todrick Webb, Bryan Davis, Curt Howell, 
Chuck Lawson, Vera Weiskopf, Carl Mueller, Arvind Shah, Steve Galatas, 
Gary Fisk, Lovely Lewis, Royce Hackett, Janice Cliett, Boris 
Peltsverger, Ginger Perry and Nancy Morris