CITIE Steering Committee Meeting
1/23/2002

Agenda
1. Announcements and review of minutes
2. Update on the student technology support initiatives
3. Discussion with Provost Lang

Members present: Mike Pickett, Lynne O'Brien, Pat Thibodeau, Abhijit Prabhu, Melissa Mills, David Brady, Michael Baptiste, Ginny Cake, Roger Loyd, Pat Halpin, Bertie Belvin, C.J. Walsh
Guest: Peter Lange, Jen Vizas

Mike Pickett provided and update on CITIE Sponsor Committee discussions. The Sponsors have met two times since the last Steering Committee meeting. The student technology support initiatives were presented to the sponsors.

Ginny and Jen went through the document with the Sponsors. It was expressed that there were a couple of time sensitive programs that needed Sponsor approval, as soon as possible, to move forward in preparation for Fall 2002 - the RTC Program (Residential Technology Consultant) and the print management / print release stations.

Plans to continue to advance the technology training initiatives - continue to offer the training sessions, reach out to faculty to promote the just in time training program, work with Dean Thompson to further the IT Skills Assessment, and develop and implement a New Student IT Orientation.

The IT Service Center is quickly coming to the forefront of discussions due to the need to find 5000 square feet of contiguous space in the North Building for the Bioinformatics program. Tallman Trask and the Provost have asked OIT to investigate possible areas to relocate the majority of the OIT-Customer Support. If the Help Desk is required to move it would make sense to create the Service Center at that time. This will include co-locating the Help Desk
and some of the services offered by Jim Rigney's group (Duke Computer Repair). It has been a challenge to identify available space on campus. The target date for OIT to vacate the North Building is June 1, 2002.

In general the response from the Sponsor Committee was favorable. They made comments and requested some explanation but were supportive. Next steps were to put together a detailed budget and timelines, and to reach out to
Larry Moneta to help identify funding for the RTC program and IKON for the print management / print release stations.

Mike explained that he and Billy Herndon went to the Common Solutions meeting and had an opportunity to meet with Tracy Futhey, who was representing CMU. Tracy will be vacating her position at CMU in mid-February and should be at Duke around earlier than first expected. Billy and Mike had an opportunity to go through the student technology support initiatives with
Tracy and get her observations and input. Her first impressions were that the initiatives were reasonable ideas, some have been done at CMU and some had not. In general she was very supportive. Her primary concern was the budget. OIT must be very careful about the budget commitments it makes.

Mike Pickett outlined next steps - Lynne O'Brien and Melissa Mills will talk about faculty support. Lynne will build off of the programs/initiatives that CIT is already doing. Melissa will discuss some of the facilities initiatives she brought to us earlier in the year.

Mike Pickett mentioned that by the time Tracy comes on board he would like the steering committee to give her a package that includes student technology support initiatives, faculty support, and facilities.

Mike opened the floor for discussions.

Roger Lloyd explained that we haven't heard anything about ISIS in a while and asked what the status of ISIS was. There was discussion regarding a recent advertisement in the Chronicle - What is ISIS? The ad pointed people to the website. David Brady mentioned that the certificate was going up for approval on February 1st and courses would be in place for the Fall. Mike
suggested that he get Eddie Shanken provide an update to the Steering Committee.

Mike Pickett explained that the North Building computer lab was part of the space the Bioinformatics wants for their program. Melissa Mills mentioned that 54 sections were taught in the lab and space would need to be identified as soon as possible. There was discussion about possibly expanding the Old Chemistry computer lab. Ginny Cake asked Melissa if there were any ICCs available or were scheduled to be created. Melissa explained that the ICCs are
set up for collaborative workspaces and not one person per workstation which is what is needed. Melissa also mentioned that there is a request to develop an ICC for the Writing Program. It was mentioned that it may not be possible to identify one solution but be creative and come up with multiple solutions.

Pat Halpin mentioned that he is interested in the possibility of creating a computer lab for undergraduates to use in the LSRC. Not sure if there is space available.

Provost Peter Lange joined the meeting. Mike explained that the Provost was interested in getting an update from the committee and give the committee and opportunity to ask questions of him.

Provost Lange explained that it was his impression that the CITIE initiative was moving forward at a good and steady pace and is pleased that we are not jumping into voids because there is empty space.

Provost Lange brought up the recent article in the Chronicle about Blackboard. He explained that the most recent developments in the program were a big leap upwards - over 520 courses were up on Blackboard. Lynne mentioned that 300 courses were created on the first day of the semester.

It was asked if Blackboard could auto-create courses with information fed from SISS. This could eliminate the need for faculty to manually create the course. Is this something that makes sense? Is this a direction we want to go? Provost Lange mentioned that the faculty would need to make that decision. It could be perceived as invasive and students would want to know why the course exists but isn't being used by the faculty to distribute information.
Melissa Mills commented that students already feel that faculty should be using Blackboard, they are frustrated when they can't find their course and that it is a student expectation.

Provost Lange explained that after watching the debate over he has found that a lot of faculty are intimidated by this electronic environment, it causes anxiety. Especially over security issues - Who sees what? What's mine? What's theirs? We need to be more sensitive to these concerns; before we push we need to try to get as much buy-in as we can. If we just move forward and "do
it" there will be a sub-group of faculty who will be very unhappy.

Lynne O'Brien suggested that there is probably some middle ground. It would be possible to create the site automatically but allow the faculty to flip a switch to turn the site on. Provost Lange suggested that an advisory group put together a plan and run it by a number of review groups (ITAC, A&S Council, and the Engineering Council) to get broad review and discussion - look at the logistics and politics. See what kind of feedback we get - allow
people to push back.

It was mentioned that the big issue was about control. Who should and does have control? The students or the faculty?

Pat Halpin mentioned that the students will push the issue. Students will be disappointed if there is only a front page with a course description but nothing else.

Peter Lange mentioned that part of the discussion should be - what should be done centrally?

Abhijit Prabhu mentioned that students want to see more information, they want to see the syllabus of all the courses, especially during the drop/add period.

Pat Halpin suggested that some parts be locked down to class participants only and other sections be open to everyone. Have two classes of documents - private and public.

Roger Lloyd mentioned that he is glad to hear that we use caution. There was an edict in Divinity that all classes be in Blackboard - there was interesting principled discussion on both sides.

Provost Lange said there needs to be a plan. It wouldn't be bad to see what type of push back we receive.

Lynne O'Brien mentioned that whatever is done it must be transparent/easy and we must not make the faculty jump through hoops.

Provost Lange suggested that it might be helpful to have faculty write up their concerns and publish in the Dialogue and other faculty forums to get the discussion going across campus. What hurt the course evaluation discussion was that there was no open discussion in a public forum. Must get the faculty involved as change agents - can't keep coming from the administration.

Lynne O'Brien mentioned that information is consistently being posted but it is very difficult to get people to read. It was discussed that there was a need to publicize both positions.

Mike Pickett asked if there were any other issues.

Pat Halpin brought up the issue of electronic media and incidents where people are stealing work, intellectual property, and putting course materials online. Should we publish the "rules of the road."

A question was raised, if Blackboard had the capability of creating non-course related discussion forums for faculty and students.

Lynne O'Brien mentioned that the new version of Blackboard included the possibility of creating communities - clubs, committees, etc.

Provost Lange was asked where he sees emphasis on technology being placed over the next 4-5 years. Provost Lange mentioned that the biggest area of substantial change is research. There is a lot of data in research - we need to think about how we manage that data and how we link with other schools. How do we equip the campus to meet the demands?

Someone brought up the possibility of doing more wireless, it is relatively easy and its not costly.

Pat Halpin mentioned that he felt the big issues center around implementing technology and getting the necessary resources is a difficult sell to the deans and department chairs. Even if a grant is received or special funds are allocated it is difficult to get people to plan for replacements/upgrades 3 years down the road. Need to plan for self-sufficiency.

Provost Lange asked how we get the Deans involved. Strategically placed seed money?

Mike Pickett suggested that we try to pull together rough information on the ratio of IT support staff across campus and within academic departments.

Michael Baptiste mentioned that security is a big issue and in order to get a handle on security there needs to be funding for support staff and/or resources.

Pat Halpin suggested that another area that we may focus on is helping to create a more formal IT review of new faculty hires. If they don't have the skills they place a burden on the system.

Provost Lange mentioned that the 3 things that came out of the meeting are:

1. Planning document for Blackboard utilization
2. Some kind of strategic vision for research
3. Assist schools in planning for technology implementation and
support

David Brady wanted to clarify an earlier comment made about wireless not being costly and easy to implement. He mentioned that wireless isn't as easy as one thinks. If Duke is going to be a leader in this area it is critical that we not put out old technology but to truly think globally and strategically about the wireless implementation.