Technology Coordinating Team Meeting Summary – October 9,
2000
Members Present: J. Franco, B. Bendotti, R. Sheets, P. Dale, J. Chavez, J. Storslee, R. Lang, C. Hart, M.L. Mosley, C. Hall, C. Durandet
Steve Platte’s replacement – Jeanne reported that Steve’s slot would not be replaced this year.
Citrix Presentation – rescheduled for November 1, 2:00 – 4:00 p.m. Jeanne will confirm.
APB Update – Bob reported that the fund 1, 2 and 7 criteria are “up.” He also welcomed feedback on the system. A demo of the APB will be made to the district strategic planning team.
Ocotillo – Jon reported that a new chair has been appointed – Doug Sawyer. Ocotillo is in the process of identifying goals including review of a technology fee, planning for technology goals in light of the end of bond money.
Technology Fee Proposal - $2 fee per credit for technology services as initiated by the administrative services deans was reviewed by Bob.
Obsolescence Status Report – The College is on target with the projections of the report.
Inappropriate Use of Technology – Rich reviewed the types of inappropriate uses of campus technology – primarily by students. PVCC is unable to track specific users involved in this type of behavior. System level account access (which may include a student e-mail package) is being reviewed as a tool. The discussion then moved into the larger issues related to the study of and planning for a log-in tracking and e-mail system.
Technology Training – A needs assessment will be developed (to be reviewed by TCT) to be distributed in early November. The survey will provide a basis for planning sessions to be developed and implemented. A review of the need for resources to support training (video, print, electronic, etc.) is also being conducted.
Criteria for Funding Occupational Capital Requests – Mary Lou fielded questions regarding the criteria- the set aside amounts are listed as a range, bond is to first support learning in the classroom environment or related activity; clarification of the priority order of the criteria. In addition, several editorial comments were shared.
TCT Objectives Review – Jeanne provided a compilation of all of the comments shared by College departments regarding future technology needs – overall comments include new faculty with an interest in on-line classes; need for training; and visioning shared on short term, one year or less time frame. Some of the objectives are in process – training, survey of future technology needs. Projects suggested: three-year financial plan for technology based on item 3.1 in the context of replacement needs and anticipated capital dollars available; objectives 2.1, 2.2; and training objectives 2.3-2.5.
· Forward comments/reactions of the Technology Fee Proposal to Bob – all.
· Forward evaluation of the APB through the system – all.
· An ad hoc group of (Jeanne, Cathy, and Rick) was identified to study the issue of a log-in tracking, e-mail, and shared disk space account access system.
· Provide questions for training needs assessment (and related technology issues) to Chrystle via memo.
· Rick will review budget needs/requests for training and follow-up.
· Mary Lou will take comments regarding the Occupational Criteria back to the occupational committee. Changes to be shared with TCT and reported to APB.
· Spring meeting times – Tuesdays 2nd and 4th with the 2nd as the required meeting. The first meeting will be January 30. February 13 will be the next required meeting. March 20 April 10, May 8 are also required. Additional as needed meetings includes 2/27 4/24.
· Respond to “other” questions from Jeanne’s technology survey – as assigned.
· Jeanne to send out summary of the technology future needs findings with a follow-up question addressing critical needs not previously identified.
· Jeanne, Bob, Rick, and Crystle to meet with Ken to develop three surveys to address training, and future technology needs.
Next Meeting -November 13 , 2000 J Conference Room