UP-GRADING THE TEMPLE COLLEGE COMPUTER NETWORK SYSTEM
PHASE FIVE
Prepared by
Group Eight
Kenneth Gray
Jeannie Tyler
Angela Wilkenson
for
Prof. William Feagin, Jr.
Government 2301/2302
Spring Semester
May 5, 1998
The many students served by Temple College are privileged to avail
themselves of a quality education, a variety of course offerings, skilled
instructors, reasonable tuition rates and numerous other benefits.
Temple
College
comes
up
short
in
technological
However,
accessibility
and
progressiveness i.e. the inability to access college e-mail or library network
services from off campus locations.
One of several difficulties is that the lab hours conflict with students'
personal life and work schedules. This is especially true for those students who
commute, both locally and from out-of-town.
Another problem is encountered when the instructor wishes to
communicate with the student via e-mail. If a particular student does not have
the right computer program on their computer at home, this communication is
impossible. Internet access does not even fix this problem.
If the computer access was expanded to include the library network,
students would be able to conduct research from their home. This would be an
instant benefit in that library hours are not “user friendly." In addition to that,
workstation availability in the library and computer labs is limited.
In a review of potential political allies and opponents of increased
computer access for Temple College, it has been determined that the number of
allies far outnumber the opponents.
It is expected that all of the students
attending Temple College would be in favor of upgrading their computer access
to their residence hall accommodations as well as local commuter students to
their homes.
The Temple College Computer Information Systems Department could
also be considered an ally. Due to the rapid flow of technology, the Computer
Science Department is always in need of upgrading their services and
equipment.
The upgrade to allow off-campus access would benefit the
2
Computer Science Department, greatly extending degree plans and courses in
general.
It is expected that the Temple and Belton Independent School Districts
would favor the change being proposed. New guidelines in academic standards
have enabled Temple High School and Belton High School students to acquire
dual credit for courses offered simultaneously at the high school and college with
corresponding curriculum requirements. The increased access would allow the
students at the high school level to avail themselves of helpful instructional
resources offered at Temple College. Temple High School, in particular, has a
growing microcomputer environment which currently has limited networking with
Temple College.
The University of Mary Hardin Baylor (UMHB) could maximize the time of
students enrolled in the Nursing Program
availability between the two institutions.
more effectively by networking
UMHB students are benefiting from the
increased access on their campus and their capabilities would allow them to
easily access Temple College instructional services, should the capability exist.
Temple
College
Taylor
Campus
students,
Telecourse
students,
chronically ill students, out-of- town commuter students, and students that have
legitimate absence excuses would all be afforded a greater opportunity to
compensate their alternative learning environments and acquire missed
assignment information.
As mentioned earlier, the subject of feasible opponents to this proposal
are few. It is expected that the Board of Directors may have a problem with the
proposal due to budget constraints. They also may be leery about investing in
such a complicated project as it is sure to require annual revisions and upgrades.
Should the figure required to necessitate such a change be excessive, it may
3
end up requiring a tax-increase. The addition of this step would create a whole
new battery of opponents.
Another group that could express a lack of support would be the people
who currently service the computers the students can work on. Kim Houston,
who works within the Information Systems Department, is currently responsible
for hardware problems. She also assists with software problems. She may see
this as an increase to the department workload, and feel that monitoring and
servicing a system with increased capabilities would severely tax the Information
Systems Department's work force.
It is also expected that there are some students who are perfectly content
with the system as it exists. They may also feel that the current tuition rate is all
they can handle and would not be in favor of increased rates for a service they
do not wish to partake of.
As the institution of off-campus access to Temple College Computer
Information is concerned, we do not believe that it will be necessary to involve
any outside educational boards other than the current Temple College Board.
Consequently, information in this section will be pertinent to the governing forces
within Temple College.
In order to achieve the goal of getting our subject to the governing board,
it will be necessary to gain the support of an influential person or persons. Initial
contact would be made with Gary Jackson who is in charge of the computer
systems we wish to effect a change in.
Dr. Patricia Smith who is head of
Computer Information Systems would be another contact, as would Dr. Gwen
Hauk in Student Services as this is a student related problem. Dr. Hauk also
serves as a part of the administration of the college. Once fully apprised of the
situation, she would present it to Dr. Marc Nigliazzo, the college president.
Providing he finds the proposal plausible, the student group responsible for the
4
proposal would be offered an audience with him to defend and discuss the
proposal. Once he is satisfied that the proposal has merit, it would be placed on
the agenda for discussion at the next Board of Trustees meeting. Louise Cox,
the Assistant to the President, could also be helpful in answering questions
pertinent to the meeting with Dr. Nigliazzo. Garnering the support of these
individuals would be the first step to take in effecting the change that we
propose.
One would assume that when a favorable response to a proposed change
had been received and a proposal prepared, the next step would be to submit
the proposal to the Temple College Board of Trustees. This board meets on a
regular basis the third Monday of each month at 6:00 p.m. We would anticipate
that the matter would be tabled and sent to committee for further study and be
resubmitted to the Board for further review at a later meeting. Anytime an issue
is raised that will require financial support, it is usually assigned to a committee
for analyzation. Knowing that money will be an obstacle, it is at this point the
Board would look at it more closely.
One of the biggest hurdles in any proposition for change involves the
amount of money necessary to effect the change.
We would suggest the
following in an effort to fund any costs associated with the change we are
proposing:
1.
Increase the overall rate of student tuition.
2.
Increase the technology fee for each student at registration.
3.
Charge an optional lab fee for students wishing to gain off-campus
access.
4.
Rely upon budgeted monies or encourage a budget request to
subsidize the expense.
5
5.
Work with the Institutional Advancement Department and Dick
Archer to seek private grants from community philanthropists,
businesses and organizations.
We feel the key points and effects can be presented in very positive
language in the written, as well as verbal proposal.
We feel also that students
find it much more convenient to study and work on assignments in their own
homes. Outside assignments could be dealt with in greater detail, and students
would be more likely to spend more time and thought on their assignments. .
Another benefit of home access would be convenient access.
The
Temple College labs have a tendency to be crowded and many students are
denied the use of a computer during busy times. A student's own computer is
always available to the student. Relieving the lab traffic would in return decrease
the crowding in the labs making computers more available to those who would
still need to use them. Convenience is a big issue, but this could also be seen
and a positive tool in a student's educational process.
There are basic rules that can have an effect on our desired outcome.
Measuring the impact of these rules could result in difficulty finding a way to fund
these services. A mandatory increase in tuition does not sound very appealing,
and if it had to come to a vote, many would probably vote no. A way to get
around a vote may be the option of an increase for rates to those who actually
wish to increase access to their homes. However, if only a few students desire
this, the money spent on creating the opportunity for the systems to work
together would have to be subsidized. An increase in tuition rates would then be
a major effect. We may also have to put forth great effort for our proposal to
make an impact and to insure a positive response. The language in the
correspondence to students needs to be presented in order to obtain the
6
sympathy of the reader. It needs to sound appealing and necessary to insure
approval.
There are several tactics that would play serviceable roles in the adoption
of our proposal. One of the key tactics would be conducting surveys of the
students enrolled at Temple College.
Several different groups of student types exist. The first we will discuss
are the dual credit high school students that attend Temple High School and
Belton High School. Dual credit is a growing trend and also financially beneficial
to Temple College. Garnering support from these student groups would aid in
strengthening our proposal. The dual credit students juggle high school and
college work loads and the convenience of off campus access would prove
positive. Their feedback on the subject is anticipated as favorable since having
Temple College computer services in their homes could enhance both aspects of
their educational process.
Another student group would include the University of Mary Hardin Baylor
nursing students. They study at the University while maintaining their enrollment
at Temple College. Their response to and support of the survey would provide
key information that would be beneficial to our endeavor.
The students attending on the Temple College Campus and the Taylor
Campus would be another source of positive feedback. It is anticipated that the
majority of them would enjoy the increased access that would be available with
the adoption and implementation of our proposal.
Another tactic would be to petition students. Presenting a petition with the
names of all the students that support the increased computer access would
help show the necessity of it and desire for it. This proposal is offered with
student interest in mind; therefore, valid support should come from the student
population.
7
The Computer Information Systems department would offer important
input. Their support of our proposal is necessary to the eventual acceptance.
As mentioned earlier, a survey is a key tactic that would be written and
submitted to the groups mentioned above.
Highlights of the survey would
question the use and convenience of the present computer services at Temple
College. To clarify our purpose, there would be a series of questions to obtain
information from the students about what is set forth in the proposition. An
example of a question would be "Does this sound like a good idea to you?" A
response would be requested on the possibility that the system would be used
more frequently for enhanced research and school work. There would also be a
section questioning and seeking comments on the aspect of more efficient
communication with other students and faculty through e-mail.
As with any proposal, communication needs to be sent to the right person
or persons. If we communicate with parties that have little or no interest and are
not influential on our desired outcome, there would be no point in making any
kind of attempt to implement this suggestion.
We have already established the fact that the only governing boards we
need to involve are with the Temple College Board. The contacts that need to
be made were previously stated beginning with Gary Jackson in Computer
Systems. Our other contacts, such as Dr. Smith and Dr. Hauk are steps that
need to be taken in order to get our proposal to Dr. Nigliazzo. Of course, we are
unable to ascertain whether any of them will provide opposition or be supportive,
but regardless of that, contact needs to be initiated anyway. Also, the results of
student surveys can help sway any opposed opinions to see the "real" effects of
our proposition. These anticipated favorable results will help them to see the
change as commendable and hopefully attain support.
8
In order to get and keep group members, obviously we need those that
would readily be in favor of off campus access. We need student support since
this proposal is based around their needs and to assist in adding to their
education. It can start small by getting friends involved which in turn will lead to
their other friends. Other contacts may be made by these individuals. This
process may also prove helpful in acquiring funding.
involved, more contacts and connections can be made.
If more people are
This can lead to
businesses, organizations, or community philanthropists viewing our cause as
worthy, and in return could possibly provide funding for the implementation of our
proposal.
Another helpful strategy is generating publicity. An effort needs to be
made to locate all of the students who are truly unsatisfied with the current
computer access situation. This needs to be adressed as a "real" problem
before it can be "fixed." This issue is important to Temple College students'
educational process. To make the potential audience (Temple College Board)
understand this issue, we need those who are directly involved with and have
knowledge of the problem to communicate it.
The students who desire the
change and are currently hampered by the several inconveniences, can show a
genuine, authentic side of the issue to any board member or opponent of this
proposal.
In order to establish timely goals for the implementation of the stages
necessary to achieve our purpose, a hypothetical case based upon our problem
will be presented in the next few paragraphs.
On September 11, 1998, a small group of students were unhappy with the
current computer networking system at Temple College. We distributed a survey
based on the current system credentials and asked the students if they believed
the new system we wanted to propose was sufficient in providing more freedom
9
and increased communication.
Over ninety percent surveyed supported the
upgrade.
After gaining an opinion on system standards, Dr. Gary Jackson was
contacted. Dr. Jackson was recruited to price the changes necessary within the
hardware infrastructure. Ms. Kim Houston assisted him in this process. After
establishing the amount of capital necessary to make the upgrade, we began
work on a more reformed petition.
On October 9, 1998, petitions based on the costs required to upgrade the
system were distributed to the same students that had received the survey
originally.
The petition focused the bulk of the costs on private grants
contributed annually from private interest groups, philanthropists, and business
organizations. The petition also noted an increased technology fee which would
aid in maintaining the system.
After gaining a positive response to the petition, the proposal was then
applied in detail to paper and introduced to Dr. Gwen Hauk in Student Services
on November 4, 1998. Dr. Hauk made it clear that the Grants were our largest
obstacle and made it obvious that conciliation with Mr. Dick Archer in Institutional
Advancement was necessary.
An appointment was made with Mr. Archer and after fully advising us on
the probabilities of our situation, we were supplied with a restricted list of local
grant contributors. Although our resources were limited, we still had a chance to
reform the computer system.
Following our meeting with the Office of
Institutional Advancement, we presented our proposal to the Temple College
President, Dr. Marc Nigliazzo on December 6, 1998. Dr. Nigliazzo found our
proposal intriguing but needed to analyze it further within the President's Council.
On January 3, 1998, after meeting with the President's Council, our
proposal exhibited enough merit to be submitted to the Temple College Board of
10
Trustees on February 16, 1998.
The Temple College Board briefly
acknowledged our proposal, but tabled it because of previous engagements with
building contractors. It wasn't until the spring of 1999 that the Temple College
Board was able to fully discuss and evaluate our proposal. Budgets were
exceeded as a result of the previous building additions to the Temple College
campus and our grants were absorbed forcing us to wait another two years for
the computer access upgrade.
The most positive result to come out of our run with the proposal is the
new interest and publicity sparked within the community and on the Temple
College campus.
It is rumored that Texas Instruments is discussing a large
contribution in the year 2000.
The task of arriving at a topic and working through the different stages
made us realize that nothing is simple.
Choosing the topic was done very
carefully. One of the chief aims in making a choice was to keep it small. We did
not have to make any major changes in our proposal as we went along, but that
is because we did not try anything beyond our reach. We also made sure that
our topic was something that was of interest to each of us as members of the
team.
The process of working through the steps helped us to realize that
whether we are dealing with politics on a campus, local, county or state level,
the process is intricate. There are numerous steps that must be taken to insure
that every angle has been examined and a defense made for every opponent to
the plan. The political system on the Temple College Campus is such that we as
individuals are granted the right to pursue our goals and state our case. Our
local, county and state governments also allow us that right. The difference
between our small scenario and a larger proposal, involving
higher level
government officials is that we would be allowed to present our ideas to the
11
authorities. A proposal would have to be presented through a representative at
all other levels with the exception of the local government.
It is interesting to note that most ideas probably begin very small, with one
or few individuals. One of the greatest lessons that all of us as citizens need to
learn is that if we want change, we must either propose it ourselves or get on
board with someone else to get it done. Politics may be complicated, but the
process is not above the reach of any citizen.
12