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