Academic Technology Advisory Council Minutes
Monday, April 6, 2015
Barge 304, 2:00-3:00
Attendees:
Absent:
Guest:
I.
Chris Schedler, Josh Welsh, Sue Noce, Ron Tidd, Ping Fu, Greg Harvill, Mel Palm, Natalie
Lupton, Bill Thelen, Laura Portolese Dias, Michael Moon
Patricia Cutright, Ginger McIntosh, Tracy Pellett, Tina Short, Fillip Jagodzinski
Rhonda McKinney
Review of Meeting Minutes 3/9/15
a. M. Moon moved to approve minutes as amended, J. Welsh seconded, minutes approved.
II. Information Items
a. Task Force Updates
i. Clickers task force will be sending out a survey to faculty who have used clickers in the past
to determine their satisfaction with the two systems that we have been using on campus.
1. Have demonstrations kits from Turning Technologies and iClicker in the Multimodal
Education Center that faculty on the task force can use for comparison testing.
(a) Will collect feedback on survey and comparison testing and hopefully make a
decision this quarter on one enterprise system on campus.
ii. Proctoring Services task force also has a survey going out to faculty to find out their
proctoring needs for different modalities, will be kept out for two weeks.
1. Will have vendor demos with different solution providers to look at the options.
iii. DE task force that we had last year will be reconvened to look at alternatives to ITV.
1. In Winter the decision was made by cabinet to transition away from ITV.
2. Looking at internal solutions and external solutions from Cisco WebEx, Polycom, and
Microsoft Lync.
3. Investigation will be ongoing this quarter, and look to start piloting a chosen solution in
the Fall, with a transition complete by Fall 2016.
(a) Still need to look at how we deliver those programs to meet the needs of the
current students.
4. Include rep from Facilities (Doug Ryder or Joanne Hillemann) and Media Engineers (Rod
Venable or Zach Smith).
b. EISC Update
i. Talked about additions to the business case template. There was a suggestion to request
that sponsors do more analysis with strategic alignment and tying it to the core themes. In
addition, they should outline the ownership of the project: who would manage it, support it,
and security issues.
1. Project Management will write up summary reports of why a case was approved, how
Project Management will be assisting if they are involved, and the contacts that could be
utilized, in terms of Information Services, Facilities, etc.
ii. Changes to EISC policies and procedures went to UPAC for review and were sent back for
clarifications on definitions; haven’t been formally approved yet.
c. Student Tech Fee
i. A. Bohman wants to bring the Student Tech Fee Committee into more collaboration with
the EISC group.
1. Student Tech Fee is funding a number of different projects and want to be certain that
both groups are working in the same direction.
2. A. Bohman will be providing updates to the EISC regarding the Student Tech Fee on a
regular basis.
3. Going to look at rules and policies under which the Student Tech Fee operates, with
suggestions on how fees could be utilized for ongoing licensing.
d. iCAT Projects
i. Discussed doing a follow-up to all the iCAT projects, investigating what the return on
investment has been for the projects, and update to Board of Trustees in July with in depth
analysis on how the funds have been spent, and efficiencies that were created by them.
e. Projects
i. RFPS for Recruiting Solutions and 25 Live have had vendors chosen, still selecting vendors
for Redundant Internet, and McConnell is still in the works.
1. Central Learning Academy has pilot testers that they are starting to work with.
Action: C. Schedler will check with the other colleges to make sure we have reps from them for
the DE task force.
Action: J. Welsh will make an announcement about the Proctoring survey in the Faculty Senate
on 4/8.
III. Status Updates
a. Wireless Upgrades
i. Upgrades took place over Spring Break for Black and Farrell Hall, with a couple more
academic buildings to do before the end of the year.
1. The wireless hotspots map is also being updated.
2. Student Village needs to have wireless upgrades, and Student Tech Fee has willingness
to fund that.
b. MediaAmp
i. Signed the agreement for the Video Portal, development will begin this Spring with Public
Affairs being the main clients and managers for that.
1. Discussed digital signage, as well as MediaAmp being the content management
for digital signage.
(a) Enterprise Communications group is looking at digital signage on campus;
currently there is a moratorium on digital signage until a standardized policy
and procedure has been determined.
(b) Requests for digital signage can still be made for academic buildings.
c. Browsers
i. J. Hernandez sent the list of certified browsers for PeopleSoft, and it was suggested
at EISC that IS not push upgrades to browsers until they are tested with enterprise
apps.
Action: J. Hernandez will talk with A. Bohman and Service Desk about browser upgrades.
IV. Titanium Scheduling Business Case
a. Main reasons students come into the counseling clinic are anxiety, depression, and
relationship concerns.
i. Seeing a steady increase in the severity of student concerns.
b. In September 2013 the Student Medical and Counseling clinics transitioned from paper
charts to an electronic health record called Medicat.
i. Medicat was originally designed specifically for medical clinics and later adapted to
serve counseling clinics as well.
ii. Documentation needs for the counseling clinic differ from the medical clinic; there
are additional safety and confidentiality concerns.
1. A licensed person has to sign off on every note that a non-licensed person does.
2. A lot of group therapy is done at the center, and there are issues with how group
notices are sent out.
c. Proposed solution would be to remove the counseling clinic from the Medicat contract
and purchase new scheduling software, Titanium Scheduling, designed specifically for
counseling clinics.
i. Scheduling system comes up for renewal in May, electronic health records contract
is up in September.
ii. Medicat is overall $33,000 per year, with the first-year savings from switching to
Titanium being around $4,900, and $6,350 each year thereafter.
1. Annual costs are based on the number of computers.
2. The Medicat contract says we own the data; however, not certain on how data
would be transferred into Titanium and there may be possible extra costs if the
vendor has to do it.
iii. Titanium allows CWU to compare statistical data and trends automatically to a
national database of information.
iv. Titanium is HIPPA compliant.
d. Discussed evaluation rubric for the business case.
i. Voted on business case: approved.
Action: C. Schedler will send business case evaluation to sponsor and send information item to
EISC.
Next Meeting:
Monday, April 20, 2015
Barge 304, 2:00-3:00