City College of San Francisco UNAPPROVED Minutes from ITAC Meeting March 17, 2015 in Batmale 108 Attendees
Committee Members: Craig Persiko, Jay Field, James Rogers, Joe Jah, Kimberly Ginther-Webster Resource Members: Carole Reitan Guests: Tim Ryan, Robert Lam, JR Hall, Sheila McFarland, Daniel Konhauser, Hal Huntsman Absent Committee Members: Jorge Bell, Cynthia Dewar, David Yee, Shawn Yee 1. Approval of minutes from last meeting (1:10-1:15) Approved with corrections. Old Business: Wifi – lock boxes being installed to prevent thefts of wireless routers 2. Plans for classroom projectors/smartboards (1:15-1:20) Planning meeting on determining prioritizing rooms. Have a list by usage, but questions about length of classes changes metric. Rooms in Program Reviews not specified – depts said they need classrooms, but they did not say which. Info extracted from PR was sent to Jay. Can spend money we need to spend now, and then finalize which rooms to upgrade when consensus with stakeholders is reached. Expect this to be a continuous process, more opportunities for upgrades. The draft State budget potentially includes more money next year for classroom technology than this year. 3. Replacement computers for faculty/staff (1:20-1:25) Continues. Latest update will be on web soon. If employee's computer is on the list, IT will reach out to them when a tech is available to do the work. If not on the list, write a helpdesk request so IT can review need/placement on list. Helpdesk contact is sufficient to get this done. 4. Tech Plan Revision – review 1st drafts of each section (1:25-2:35) We reviewed draft revisions of Library and Learning Resources and Broadcast Media Services portions of plan. LLR - Less detail in progress report would be good. BEMA – changed old reflections and rewrote goals. Hope to get some clarification on some goals, such as data collection for equipment delivery. Overall, need to ensure that college-wide goals coordinate, possibly have some of the same in other sections. This is a new 2-year plan, 2015-17. We can rewrite goals, progress report should be in the reflections section. Keeping the same format. Where do we promote initiatives that are broad? Process for changing the general topics in the plan – how will we do this? College-wide technology goals need to be based on EMP now, not strategic plan. Kim will draft college-wide tech goals based on EMP. Craig will work on planning background with Pam Mery. Key trends in technology – Jay and ITS – references will need to be updated too. Future technology planning process – Craig work with Pam. Everyone review Tech Guiding Principles and make suggestions if changes need to be made. Vision for CCSF Technology – get feedback from Jay on additions/modifications. Email proposed changes to ITAC. Need to see Ed Tech section, ITS, and Student Services sections. Future Tech Planning – we will have a rolling 2year plan, each year revising as much as needed. Plan covers what we are starting – 2 year plan time frame does not imply that all things will be finished within 2 years. For next year’s plan revision (not now) can review structures of other plans for potential reformatting. New Business: 5. Update on the Education Plan Initiative (2:35-2:40) – there is a meeting tomorrow 12-4 with Hobson’s, a company with a product called Starfish, to review with Counseling, A&R and others showing how this will improve tracking of student education plans, goals, etc. We are a pilot college for this comprehensive ed plan effort by the State Chancellor's Office, along with 2 other colleges using Banner (Santa Barbara City College and Fullerton). Other colleges with other systems are also in the pilot. This does degree auditing and education planning. Also has implications for enrollment planning. There was a long process to come up with an RFP, after review by the team Starfish was selected. Advantage of being a pilot school is that this is all being paid for, have state and vendor resources, and we’ll have opportunities to help vendor make this successful. Raises internal technology issues – the more digital data we can generate, the better this will work. For example, if we have an online attendance gathering process (such as in Moodle), that information can be collated automatically for use in improving student success. Question – will this integrate with CurricUNET? Don’t know yet. Getting Starfish going probably will be a 6-9 month implementation process, but not sure about the timeline. Reports: 6. ITS Report, including Ellucian report on Banner and Help Desk (2:40-2:45) Some Banner/Ellucian highlights: Finance Self Service Budget Development - Initial demo was given to the Finance staff on the use of Finance self-service budget development with spreadsheet budgeting. Next step is to work with Budget & IT to do the needed setup and testing before training other department users. Training will need to occur for all department dean, chars and administrative (~200+) staff. Training are being held in March. Argos report as well as training documentation has been created. Test instance is ready with data. Faculty Load and Compensation (FLAC) – Revised and expanded Desktop Procedures were provided to the end users, providing instructions on how to access FLAC records in Self Service (Web4). Delivered an initial document to the FLAC team to drive the delineation of duties in the FLAC process. The upcoming testing processes will refine the ownership responsibilities. Student section almost ready to test, creating plan to get rules into system with Tom B; HR needs to revisit salary table and position setup vs compensation rules – electronic W2 taking priority and 941 report reconciliation/submission; Continuing weekly meetings with FLAC team to determine how to build needed items on HR/Position Control side. Preparing to revert to baseline SIAASGN form for instructor assignments, and de-commission SWAASGN (custom/modded form). Financial Aid 8.22.1 Upgrade -Regulatory changes in the area of Direct Loans have resulted in considerable software changes to Banner Financial Aid for the upcoming aid year. As part of the software update, considerable technical and functional changes will be needed to be made by CCSF. All reports and custom scripts interfacing with old Direct Loan (DL) tables will need to be updated and tested with the new DL structures. This update changed DL Loan data structure and will require custom reports and custom scripts to be updated to point to the new locations. Created control/management document to ID all CCSF custom scripts/reports that work on old DL data for work planning to remap. ITAC appears headed toward inclusion in Participatory Governance Council (PGC). 7. Education Technology Department report (2:45-2:50) N/A 8. Student report (2:50-3:00) N/A