Student Computer Requirement Committee
Meeting Minutes
February 22, 2006 1:00 – 2:00 PM
Attendance: Debbie Justice, Newt Smith, Gary Jones, Mary Teslow, Chris Snyder, Sue
Grider (Anna McFadden), Bob Houghton, Debasish Banerjee, Scott Philyaw
Absent: Terry Kinnear, Beth Coulter, Ben Coulter, Beth Huber, Allen Lomax, Larry
Hammer
Guest: Mark Holliday

January 19 meeting minutes were approved

Chris Snyder demonstrated the committee Web site which is available at
http://www.wcu.edu/it/compreq/ Navigation is from the main IT Web site,
Governance link, and Student Computer Requirement Committee link.

The Committee formally approved the Student Computer Requirement
Committee Charge document. (attached) The charge document will be forwarded
to the Academic Technology Advisory Committee for action.

Mark Holliday presented on the Open Office suite, the open source alternative to
Microsoft Office. The software suite is free to users. Mark demonstrated the
functionality of the software. The software generated considerable interest and a
number of questions concerning functionality comparisons between Open and
Microsoft Office, E-mail clients, Web browsers, and total cost of ownership.
Mark Holliday and William Kreahling will research and present follow-up
information at next meeting
 The Suite of software includes the following software:
Word processing (export to PDF is built in)
Spreadsheet
Presentation
Database
Draw program
 Open Document Format (ODF) is used by Open Office but MS does not
subscribe to ODF and has no plans to at any time.
 Open Office is highly interoperable with MS Office.
 Mark feels that if our students use Open Office it may help them in the
work place by exposing them to other software that is similar.
 It was felt that although the Open Office software is free, there are still
costs associated with it as it will have to be supported by IT and by the
Faculty and staff.
 It was noted that different disciplines will use the software in different
ways.

Including students in the Microsoft Campus agreement was discussed. Students
would have access to operating system upgrades as well as Microsoft Office
professional for $18 to $21 per year. Discussion of add-ons for other Microsoft
titles occurred. Chris Snyder will research the costs associated with adding
addition software titles such as Visual Basic, Visio, Project etc. and report at next
meeting.
 The software included would be the most current OS and office suite as
well as share point.
 The cost would be figured on an FTE basis
 The Office suite included would be the Professional which includes MS
Access (database)
 Students will get to keep the software when they graduate.
 Most universities in NC go with the State contract but there are a couple of
schools that have negotiated their own contract with MS.
 If we did choose to change the base package, we would have to change it
for all the students.
 A demonstration of Visio was requested. Dr. Banerjee will prepare this.
 It was noted that the Student/Teacher version of MS Office has been
replaced with the Student/Home version of MS Office.

The committee discussed next steps and identified these action items
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Software recommendation
Consideration of freshmen composition proposal for technology integration
Development of health and wellness integration proposal
Development of communication integration proposal
Student computer competencies, documentation and standards development
Formation of a sub-committee for hardware discussions.
Next meeting Monday February 27, 4:00 PM, Outreach Conference Room
Approved February 22, 2006 and forwarded to Academic Technology Advisory
Committee
Student Computer Requirement Committee Charge
Western Carolina University established itself as a leader in technology use for student
learning when it implemented its student computer requirement in 1998. As with any
initiative, processes for evaluation and refinement are a critical part of best practice. To
that end, the Student Computer Requirement Committee was created to provide necessary
oversight and guidance ensuring the student computer requirement’s purpose is enhanced
student learning, that the requirement obtains stated goals and objectives, and that the
purpose uses assessment results and research in the field to refine and excel.
Upon recommendation from the Faculty Senate (December 5, 2005), approval of the
Academic Technology Advisory Committee, the Chief Information Officer, the
Information Technology Policy Council, and the Provost, the Student Computer
Requirement Advisory Committee has become a standing committee of the Academic
Technology Advisory Committee.
This committee shall be composed of faculty members, IT staff, representatives from
those departments that are most engaged with the program and others as needed.
Membership will include curriculum representatives and campus organizations that have
ownership in this requirement. The committee will be responsible for establishing student
computer requirement and competency standards, as well as monitoring implementation,
assessment, and auxiliary instruction. The committee is also charged with setting
hardware and software specifications. The Faculty Senate will choose the chair of the
committee. The committee will report to the Academic Technology Advisory
Committee. In addition, all reports of the committee will be shared with the Faculty
Senate and the Chief Information Officer. The Faculty Senate and the Chief Information
Officer will also advise the Provost on issues of oversight and implementation of the
Computer Requirement in addition to the Academic Technology Policy Council.
The Student Computer Requirement Committee is asked to review purposes for the
student computer requirement—and computer competency requirement—and monitor
best practices in this educational domain in order to ensure the currency and
appropriateness of the requirements. The committee shall evaluate and produce an
annual assessment report with analysis of the state of the requirements indicating
successes and calling attention to those areas that are falling short of expectations.
Finally, the Committee is asked to chart strategic directions for the student computer
requirements that ensure successful integration of technology into student learning along
with providing directions for the institution to better support and integrate this student
technology.
To these ends the Student Computer Requirement Committee will provide meeting
minutes to Faculty Senate, the Coulter Faculty Center, Educational Technology, the
office of the director of University Planning, and the office of the director of University
Assessment—and seek feedback from those units, as may be appropriate to the
committee’s charge and the university strategic plan.