Technology Advisory Committee
LI-141 – October24, 2014, 2014 – 8:30 a.m. – 9:30 a.m.
Meeting Called to Order: 8:32 a.m.
Present: Brian Baker, David Balogh, Anthony Celaya, Donna Chandler, Stephanie Harris, Richard Harrison, Marc
Haskell, Nickolas Lucio, Susi Nitzel, Jacob Page, Michael Rodriguez, Jeannie Santos, Roy Vasquez Don Lopez
Absent: Monica Cuevas, Sarah Edwards, Chuck Erven, Keelin McCabe, Craig Polanowski, Leslie Silva,
Approval of Agenda: (Balogh/Nitzel – MSC)
Approval of Minutes: 9/26/2014 (Balogh/Haskell – MSC)
New Business:
1.
2.
3.
Action Items for 2015-2020 FCC Campus Technology Plan Goals: (Discussion – No Action Taken)
-In reviewing the action items for Goal 1, Don Lopez discovered TAC has never done a technology survey
for staff. Classified professionals have done their own surveys. Should the committee even be surveying
staff or should that be left in the hands of classified? David Balogh said yes we should and suggested the
committee send out one survey each fall to everyone, faculty, staff, and administrators. The survey
questions could be directed so if an employee checks classified, they will not be required to answer
questions about instructional technology. It would be a chance to discover what technology training needs
are shared amongst all employee groups. Don will revise the action items matrix and adjust the timelines
and responsible parties accordingly.
-Don suggested two separate surveys for students each fall: one for incoming freshman and one for all
other students. The idea being to discover what their level of technology is when they enter the college
and how much, or even if, that changes as they matriculate. There was discussion about how to increase
student participation in the surveys, perhaps make them incentive-based. In addition, we need to explore
different mechanisms for distributing the surveys other than email. Some ideas were to administer them in
the classrooms, have them as a link on all lab computers, encourage faculty to offer extra credit if students
complete the survey. That would only work if we could use student ID numbers to identify respondents. It
was agreed that using one method is not going work for all students; we need to focus on multiple
platforms. Don said he has been looking at a marketing software, Constant Contact, which does just that.
It incorporates social media, surveys via emails, even going so far as to track whether a student has
opened the email, sending a follow up if not. Jeannie Santos pointed out that many students do not
activate their my.scccd.edu email accounts. Stephanie Harris asked if there was a way to tie in nonactivation of student email to a registration hold. As Ellucian stands now, no but it is possibly something
that can be done in the future.
Data & Network Disaster Recovery Plan Update: (Informational – No Action Taken)
The more Don thinks about this, the more he thinks it should not be about disaster recovery but data
disruption recovery. The subcommittee will reconvene and discuss.
One Card: (Discussion – No Action Taken)
Now that the District is taking steps towards implementing a portal, the One Card might be feasible. There
are so many possibilities we can tie to this. The card could be sponsored by a local business to defray costs,
it could be linked to a debit system that the student could not only use on campus but in the community,
although the potential for liability would need to be addressed first. Reedley already uses One Card. Don
4.
5.
reminded the committee that the college would not be forcing students to use the One Card, it would be a
more convenient way to access services, e.g., library, printing, labs, etc. Jacob page thinks this is
something his fellow students would be on board with. Anthony Celaya pointed out that it does not need
to apply to just students, it can be adapted for employees also. Don will redo and submit our old Action
Plan so see if we can’t get some traction. Marc Haskell suggested we start small and work our way up.
Have the One Card replace the ASB card and go from there, expanding services as funding becomes
available.
Classified Senate Staff Development Day: (Informational – No Action Taken)
Susi Nitzel reminded the committee of Staff Development Day on Tuesday, November 11. Students and
faculty are off that day but each year, Susi receives emails along the lines of why can’t faculty have fun
stuff like classified does so she issued an open invitation to the committee and their colleagues. All are
welcome to attend. Breakfast is at 8:00 and lunch is at noon. There is a full program of activities, which
will be going out in a mail-all sometime within the next couple of weeks. Please sign up if you are
interested in attending. The entire event is free.
Professional Learning Committee: (Informational – No Action Taken)
Like TAC, the PLS wants to disseminate the function of their committee to the campus community, which
means working closely with key stakeholders. TAC is one of those key stakeholders since we do technology
surveys and are in a place to provide the PLC with valuable information. If you are planning or know of a
professional development/learning event coming up, please send Susi an email and she will pass it on to
the PLC.
Old Business:
1.
Student Technology Survey Update: (Tabled – No Action Taken)
Other:
1.
2.
3.
Support for Online Instructors: (Tabled – No Action Taken)
One Drive: (Discussion – No Action Taken)
Jeannie expressed concerns regarding the ability to edit on tablets in OneDrive.
California Central Valley Project: (Informational – No Action Taken
President Cantú has identified four faculty to participate in the CCVP, which seeks to improve the K-16
pipeline through use of technology. One of the major aspects is the incorporation of tablets at all grade
levels.
Meeting Adjourned: 9:43 a.m.