Student Technology Fee Committee Minutes
January 22, 2014
Prepared by Alton Lu
Committee Members
Tyler Boonstra
Nina Dang
TamAnh Nguyen
Jared Miller
Bryce Kolton
Jenn Huff
Kevin Tahmoresi
I.
Ex-officio Members
Sara Torres
Jacob Morris
Jennifer Ward
Also Attending
Alton Lu
Martin Nevdahl
Rachel Mitchell
Natalie Footen
Craig Staude (phone)
Call to Order: 4:33pm
-
Approve Agenda
Approve Minutes
II. Business
a. Vice Chair Elections
i. Jared
1. I am a computer science major in my 3rd year. I would rather
prove myself through actions than through words. I did
debate and a committee similar to STF. It followed a similar
proposal model that STF does and that experience can
really lend to my contribution of the Committee.
2. Jared talks about his credientals working at Intel and Twitter
in the future.
3. Wants to be vice chair to give back to school, use skills I’ve
learned to help the University. I promise to help wherever I
can.
ii. Nina
1. I’m majoring in Informatics. You can think of it as a middle
ground between programming and design. Web
development is what I hope to end up in the future,
somewhere in China or Germany. I’m interested in Vice
Chair, I was on a committee on Renton that concentrated on
Non-profit funding. The system worked similarly to the STF
proposals. While this committee concentrates on
technology the experience lends some skill and knowledge.
2. This board exists for technology, a field I am extremely
devoted to. I’d like to be devoted to the Committee and give
as much time as I can.
iii. Move to a vote.
iv. Does anyone want to make a case for any member? None.
v. Vote by hand
vi. Nina is elected Vice-Chair
III. Proposal Presentations
a. Introductions of Members and Committee
i. Tyler is STF Chair, currently a 4h year student
ii. Kevin is a PHD student in Asian Language
iii. Alton is Program Coordinator in his 2nd year.
iv. Sara is HUB tech manager and advisor for STF.
v. Jennifer is Libraries ExO.
vi. Jacob is UW IT ExO
vii. Marty is from the Speech and Hearing department.
viii. Natalie, College of Forest department
ix. Jenn Huff GPSS Doctorate in Archeology
x. Tamanh, ASUW 2nd year
xi. Nina Dang, Junior, ASUW
xii. Bryce is from the Student Senate
xiii. Jared Miller, 3rd year, Comp Sci
b. Proposal 2014-001
i. Pg2, has pictures of what we want
ii. Mobile tech is growing rapidly, especially in speech. Growth of
therapy apps. Some apps are good and some not so good
iii. Many apps that can help students serve clients
iv. “Such as providing voice for those who can’t speak” – from Ipad
voice
v. Pg4. Mentioned 9000 clinic visits a year
vi. Pg5. We use them for undergrad and grad
vii. Pg6. Main purpose is clinic education and clinic practices. Use to
asses clients ability to use ipads as a voice tool. They will be used
quite a bit
viii. Pg. 7 ipads are becoming pervasive is speech areas, students are
expected to be tech-savvy in our new world. While teaching
students, we don’t’ have the actual equipment for them to learn
about these techs.
ix. If we can get the equipment now, we’ll be able to use them for
current students
x. Jacob asks “Is there any reason for not using protections.”
1. Oversight. Probably would have added protections.
2. “Normally supposed to be used in 3 years. Any additional
warranty?”
3. Not really sure. Is your department willing to fund?
xi. Kevin “Taken off site. What are the guarantees it will be returned?”
1. Grad students sign contracts. Same as computer checkouts. Never had a problem with losing equipment.
xii. Jared “Why Fast Track?”
1. Like all departments, have had a lag with having technology.
Trying to develop a key strategy to use technology. Looking
at the need, and students using proposal actually need
equipment before grad.
xiii. Kevin “Apps not free? Will department be paying?”
1. Yes. Department will provide all tech support needed.
Department will pay.
xiv. Sara “How many student will benefit?”
1. Have around 250 student each year. 150 per quarter will be
using.
xv. Bryce “iPad version”
1. Air. With smallest storage space.
xvi. Jared “Lack of android speech apps?”
1. Yes. Ios has the most speech apps available
xvii. Kevin “You mentioned 9000 client visits. How do these work? Make
any money?”
1. I wish we did. It’s on campus.
xviii. MBP sinking station to format all ipad at the same time. Reduces
tech time. Works into computer station that can connect to all iPads
at the same time.
c. Proposal 2014-020
i. Rachel and Natalie
1. Rachel is co-founder member for Engage
ii. Designed to give scientists a better way to communicate with the
public. Realized it was very difficult to get the public to listen to
scientists or public speakers
iii. Invited to Seattle Town Hall to give lectures on their research
iv. Only accessible to ppl in the Greater Seattle Area. Greater demand
to make ourselves available digitally. Put them basically online.
v. Allows us to serve as liaisons for the research community to the
public.
vi. Engange is volunteer run. Paying a lot out of pocket or rented STF
equipment. It is extremely limiting with our work.
vii. We are hoping to have a suite of equipment that will allows us to
record, edit, and broadcast lectures. Not trapped by the UW
campus. As participating with the rest of the Community.
viii. Any student who wanted to rent would be available to. Careful use,
to be taken off campus.
ix. Would really help improve impact on the campus. About 20 student
per year involved. Serving around a total of 100 students with future
expansion plans.
x. Kevin “How do you measure success of your program?”
1. Looking at several metrics. Longitudinal survey was just
launched. Have two elements. Student who take the course.
Evaluation from them, especially from the town hall
sequence.
2. Audience participation, attendance, demands for broadcast.
xi. Kevin “How many ppl are requesting web broadcasting?”
1. Don’t have this information. Anywhere half a dozen to tens
of ppl ask where they can find these lectures. 12-??
xii. Tyler “Why fast track?”
1. The class that prepares the speakers in going on right now.
Talks begin in late March. Normal funding would completely
miss the talks. With fast track, we can get 2014 engage
project up and running.
xiii. Jared “Applecare?”
1. Didn’t really think about it. Engage has been run out of
pocket. Would be willing to drum up the money for
Applecare because engage is mostly personal funded.
2. Cameras typically have limited warrantly.
xiv. Bryce “Own staff care for equipment?”
1. Yes. BOD member would have equipment under lock and
key. Ppl sign an agreement to check the equipment out.
xv. Kevin “How many ppl will this directly benefit?”
1. Min 20. 100 max. Planning to use equipment for three years.
Looking to expand course offerings in the future year.
Bumping up every year. Hoping to make it more impactful.
d. Proposal 2014-014
i. Computer Lab
ii. We have one major computer and an aux lab. Trying to move
dualboot imacs. Of these machines, 6 years old, are failing. Dim
screen. Had to replace hard drives. Also didn’t support windows.
iii. Asking for 7 machines to replace these older machines. No longer
come with optical drives. Asking for three super drives and three
adapters to make them compatible.
iv. Will improve performance. And make it easier to support the
machines.
v. Since I submitted the proposal, additional machines have also
dropped.
vi. Also tried to point out lessons learned from previous support.
Really appreciated fast track because Friday harbor’s main
academic quarter is in Summer. Sooner use would support a
greater number of students.
vii. Need to be self-sufficient. Three hour drive is too far for many
students. Labs at school don’t really help.
viii. Kevin “Will computers be used to boot into windows?
1. Half in win, half in iOS. Have not used parallels because it’s
easier for students to just grab one they like. However, still
able to dual boot whichever computer you want. There are
times when majority of students require a number of
windows.
2. Dependent on objective of the classes. Students come with
preferences to certain software. Lots of collecting images or
behavior studies. Some applications really give students.
ix. What about just windows machine?
1. Ease of maintaining the system. Really beneficial to just
have the same hardware throughout. However, ppl who
want macs are sort of lost. Friday Harbor has always been a
Mac place.
x. Bryce “Why Superdrive over other drive?”
1. Apple provides another device. It’s a good product. We are
able to purchases a different one.
xi. Jared “How often are students in the lab?”
1. 24 hours 7 days a week. Key combo to get in. Students are
there early morning.
xii. Maintain on site?
1. Yes. Two comp. support people.
xiii. Bryce/Kevin “When were the core 2 duo purchased? STF money?”
1. 6 years. STF funded. About 16
xiv. Jenn “How many students in residence?”
1. Visiting students and resident students. Anywhere from 6070, 120 in summer. 250 student would regularly use the
machines. Weekend ppl would use the machines. 1000 over
the year.
xv. Kevin “If department previous purchased, why not now?”
1. Budget issues. We don’t have the money. Clearly a student
need. Falls within the realm of your support.
e. Proposal 2014-015
i. First page, graphic of what goes on. # of students that come
through.
ii. Particular proposal for software. JMP and for Matlab. However,
since December, Key Server got Matlab. Just asking for JMP.
iii. Two fold package. Stats package and co-sponsored by the
department of surgery.
iv. Main interest on JMP. Easy to use program. Students not exposed
to statistics to grasp much easier…
v. Department of surgery much more interested in other parts of the
software.
f.
vi. In terms of funding priority, no other support for this software. The
same information is under lessons learned. Really do need this in
the academic year.
vii. Something about tax difficulties.
viii. Lastly, JMP is not available on the Key Severable, or offered
through the uware service. Would provide site license for the entire
university.
ix. Bryce “What happens if we don’t’ fund?”
1. Would just have to drop the hope. Have an open-source
alternative. Much higher learning curve, more bloated. JMP
is just a better product.
x. Jacob “Entire University would be covered.”
a. One year term, entire cover.
xi. Jared “Are resources being allocated to ensure students to use?”
1. Extra time as needed for students. No additional need.
xii. Are professors familiar with the software?”
1. Yes
xiii. Kevin “How many will directly use this software?”
1. Maybe 250 resident students. It could be a little less.
Between 100-250 students, rough guess. However, it could
benefit a lot more at the University.
xiv. Jennifer “Site license to eventually becoming self-sustaining?”
1. Administered through surgery. Negotiated with SAF
Company to get licensing.
2. Metrics of how many ppl will be able to use.
xv. If labs or library who manage 100’s computers, would you seek
funding from them?
1. We could ask. But not necessarily.
2. Ideal to get it on the Key Server.
xvi. Jenn “Training to faculty to TA? Any thought about that?”
1. Another software for statistical packages. However, JMP is
much easier to use.
2. If we don’t get funding, probably go with R, be nice for ppl
to come up.
xvii. Jacob “Gather info for next year.”
Proposal 2014-016
i. Wanted to show various tools.
ii. Tools essential for investigating changes in sediment load,
characteristics between sediment and animals. Things that burrow
into it.
iii. Few classes that have used sedimentary processes. One with Dam
destruction. Immense amount of load of material has come down
and began monitoring the changes.
iv. Many students interested in these processes. Looking at dynamics
of nutrients cycling. Particular, have been looking at baitfish, that
burrow into the sediment. Also with aquatic birds. Taking samples
of these locations.
v. General students doing independent research often need to assess
the sediment.
vi. Included a link to show how students work.
vii. Nice new cutting edge tech that uses vibrations that quietly
separates sediment.
viii. Vimeo link. Always interesting to see what’s in the water.
ix. Entertainment value. Students often choose to go out and look at
aquatic life.
x. Good light source for night time works. In Fall/winter, low tide is at
night. Need artificial light to be used in the field.
xi. Two important, Sieves and sieve shakers. Lowest opportunity, is
light. At least fund A and B.
xii. Jenn “Full sediment labs would have access to other tools?”
1. This equipment would be stored in the stockroom. Large
stock room, self-serve checkout, however always locked.
Can be checked out by anyone.
2. Classes would be reserved for anyone.
xiii. How would students know what equipment is available?
1. “Class syllabus. Searchable database. Word of mouth. TA’s,
researchers, other students. Two classes would be sitting in
their lab.”
xiv. Kevin “What is the direct benefit to the Community?”
1. Not much to Seattle Campus. However, they are able to
come up. Primarily, for student residents at Friday Harbor.
g. Requests for Information/Announcements
i. None
h. Meeting closed 5:57pm
The Student Technology Fee (STF) is designed to provide funds for the improvement of
technology used by the students at the University of Washington campuses. The Seattle
Student Technology Fee Committee ("the committee") determines the expenditure of this fee.
Students of the UW lead the committee and the committee allocates money for technology
resources for general student use pursuant to RCW 28B.15.051 and the agreement between
the Associated Students of the University of Washington (ASUW), Graduate and
Professional Student Senate (GPSS), and the Board of Regents.
Webpage: http://techfee.washington.edu/
E-mail: techfee@u.washington.edu
Campus mail: Student Technology Fee Committee, Box 352238 SAO #29