See All Minutes

Present:Lisa Bartle, Kurt Collins, Tony Coulson, Steve Cuddigan, Marsha Greer, Ian Jacobs, Donna Rane-Szotak, Jason Reimer, Joe Scarcella, Charlie Tabbut (for Lorraine Frost)

Welcome & Introductions: Joe introduced Marsha Greer to TAC. Marsha will be representing the Faculty Senate to keep them informed of upcoming technology initiatives.

IRT VP Report

Charlie indicated that Lorraine had a concern regarding the university’s decision not to buy into the system wide contract for Respondus. Jim indicated that when they sent out the information on Respondus, there was only one faculty member on campus who liked it, however in doing research on the product discovered that there would be problems integrating it into Blackboard which would have outweighed the cost of buying Respondus. Jim indicated he would email Lorraine regarding the processes they used to make the decision on not to use Respondus.

Laptop Initiatives and Form Development and Committee Work

ATAC made a recommendation to the Provost that the university adopt a pilot program on the laptop initiative. Kurt and Tony are just waiting to hear back from the Provost. Jim indicated that there might be an issue if the student doesn’t get financial aid, how do they pay for the laptop. Tony indicated that departmental laptops and Apple indicated they would come up with a financing plan. Also, upon approval of the pilot project, Karen Dill-Bowerman will meet with Arrowhead Credit Union regarding a deal on financing and the Director of Development for the College of Business is looking into developing a scholarship fund. Jim recommended that they send a note to their deans and courtesy copy the Provost with their deadlines for when the initiative needs to get approved. Joe said he will send an email to the Provost as well.

Tech Committee Charter Discussion

Steve distributed the charter for the technical steering committee to be approved by TAC. There was extensive discussion regarding the purpose of the charter. Some council members were under the impression that if it’s an informal committee why do they need a charter. Steve indicated that the purpose of the charter is so the technical steering committee can act as a consulting body to the campus for technical initiatives; however, the steering committee needs an avenue of communication to administration on campus. They’re hoping TAC can provide that avenue. The history of the tech group is that it was formed at the request of Dr. Aguilar to be a resource to TAC and the IRT Vice President. Ian indicated that Lorraine wanted the tech group to continue in order to provide recommendations of training needed for technicians on campus. Currently, the tech group is an informal group that share suggestions and recommendations on implementation of technical solutions on campus. Before the group was formed, the techs worked individually on technical problems. One of the results of them forming is that security incidents have decreased on campus.

The following are suggestions for the charter:

• Include the who, what, where and why
• Include what they do and what they won’t be able to do without the charter.
• What does the university gain as a result of this charter?
• Explain times where they weren’t able to achieve a goal/objective because they lacked a charter.

Joe commended Steve for drafting the document. Lisa volunteered to help Steve edit the document according to the suggestions made. Jason recommended that Steve email the charter before the next TAC meeting so council members can review it and come to the meeting with suggestions/changes.

Clicker Tabled Discussion

Jason said the university has two alternatives for clickers – one is for the university to adopt a standard. The other alternative would be for faculty to use their own choice of clickers. Alternative 1 would be advantageous for students because it would be less expensive however one clicker standard may not be conducive to faculty who may not use the same publisher as the clicker. However, with alternative 2, students will lose out because they may have to buy different types of clickers for different courses. Kurt was concerned that if the university adopts a standard, then how do you uniquely assign that student to the clicker. Another concern is how soon will the clickers become obsolete and be replaced with a newer technology.

Jason indicated that it’s difficult to get a quote from vendors unless we decided what alternative we want to go with. Kurt asked Jason to recommend what’s the best approach to take with clickers. Joe would like to see a proposal so we can bring it back to the rest of TAC and discuss it. 

The clicker discussion will be tabled to the May 19th meeting.

Specification Sheet for Laptop Purchase

Tabled to the next TAC meeting on May 5.

Back to Top