AAA
Academic Technology Committee
MINUTES OF MEETING: 5/3/13
Submitted Exec. Committee:
Submitted Academic Senate:
APPROVED BY COMMITTEE: 9/6/13
Approved by Exec. Committee: __________
Approved by Academic Senate: __________
ATC Members Present: Soheil Boroushaki, Xiyi Hang, Helen Heinrich (chair), Gina
Masequesmay, David Miller, Sydni Powell, Ron Saito, Chris Sales, Sally Spencer,
Michael Sullivan; Excused: Mary Schaffer; Absent: Jussi Eloranta, Mellad Khoshnood;
Executive Secretary: Hilary Baker, Recording Secretary: Jennifer De Iuliis; Guests:
Elizabeth Adams, Karen Girton-Snyder, Chris Olsen, Ben Quillian, Paul Schantz, Deone
Zell
1) Announcements
Baker shared a flyer for the third annual CSUN technology fair, which will be held on May
29th. There will be two guest speakers at the event, Laurie Burress from Lynda.com and Dr.
Clifford Nass from Stanford. Several vendors will have tables set up to provide demos and
information on the latest trends in technology for higher education.
2) Approval of Minutes – The minutes from the April 19, 2013 meeting were approved.
3) Old Business
a. Student/faculty Electronic Communications (Sales & Miller)
Handout – Draft statement regarding electronic communication, prepared for ATC
Heinrich thanked Sales and Miller for preparing the draft document for ATC to
review. Sales read the document aloud and the committee discussed concerns and
edits they would like to have included.
Baker suggested removing any proper names in the document, such as vendor product
names and use general terminologies instead. This was agreeable.
Saito noted that there is a difference in statements regarding response time and a
providing a response and suggested the focus should not be on a timeframe. This was
agreeable.
Miller explained that each faculty member needs determine for themselves and share
with their students on what they expect and what the students should expect regarding
communications. Sales added that each faculty member gets to define their
appropriate methods; the document is purposely vague to allow for this
determination.
Heinrich asked what the committee would like to do next with this draft document, to
submit as a policy recommendation to Faculty Senate or include as a topic within
ATC’s meeting minutes (which are reviewed by a Senate liaison).
Sales suggested taking small steps might be best to get some more base-line support
prior to bringing to Faculty Senate.
1
Spencer noted that the topic should get exposure because it is a big workload issue
and needs to be addressed; it is about setting parameters.
Baker and Heinrich asked for the committee to clarify how they would like to move
forward with the topic. The committee members agreed they want to have a revised
version with the changes discussed and have the document be part of the minutes and
brought to the attention of Faculty Senate.
Miller proposed a motion to include the revised statement in the meeting minutes and
Sales seconds the motion. All were in favor.
Sales and Miller will provide the revised statement.
b. Video Captioning (Schantz & Zell)
Schantz explained the company that is being used currently costs approximately $400
per event and they do a good job but the files are not perfect. Schantz and his staff
and student assistants work on the files to make them as perfect as possible for rebroadcast. He has actively recruited CTVA students since they have a good eye for
and attention to details. Once an event is complete, they receive a video file and a
very large text file (may or may not have a time stamp included), they uploaded both
and let YouTube do the best it can to match up the content. Schantz noted that it is a
pretty imperfect process and then a student assist will watch the footage and make
adjustments where needed. This process takes about 4-6 hours to go through for an
event that ran for only 2 hours. For commencements they try to do a quick turnaround time and these are human provided caption files. Schantz explained that there
is a lot of detailed work involved and that there are some other technologies that can
perform the task, however not that well.
Sales asked how the names are included on the commencement videos. Schantz
stated that they do not caption the names, they are provided in advance for each
ceremony on a separate web page.
Zell shared that the FTC offers captioning services via automatic sync company for
captioning lectures for professors. The service costs are on a scale from $37 per hour
to $118 per hour. The FTC ships the lectures to the company and they ship it back.
They recognize that covering the expense for these services is a funding and policy
issue.
Baker noted that on several occasions the question keeps arising on how captioning
services are funded to be able to meet the increasing needs for faculty and others
around campus. Currently the departments and colleges determine if they have any
room in their budgets for these services. She added that it is expected that the
technology will become more enhanced and more options available.
Schantz noted that in Student Affairs they have a cadre of experts but their focus is on
the services and needs of students but not as a service provider; however this may be
something that becomes a service in the future.
2
Heinrich suggested that the committee should keep a watch on what is going on with
captioning options and availability for the campus and keep this as a potential topic
for future ATC meetings.
4) ATC Chair election for AY 13/13
Sales was the sole nominee; all were in favor of appointing him as the new ATC chair and
Sales accepted the appointment. He provided a brief outline of his prior roles on campus in
IT and as a faculty member.
5) Chair’s Report – none
6) VP/CIO Report
a. Upcoming technology projects with potential faculty impact
Handout titled – Technology projects with possible faculty impact, May 3, 2013
Baker highlighted projects outlined in the handout.
Summer 2013:
Moodle 2 – All courses have been moved over into the new environment; courses
edited in Moodle this semester will be moved between June 10th through July 8th. Go
live is scheduled for May 28, 2013.
Voicemail upgrade – This upgrade will consist of mainly behind-the-scenes changes
and is necessary in preparation for the Exchange Online migration scheduled for fall
2013. If you have a lot of saved messages they will be available to review via a
separate number and in email. IT is encouraging people to listen and clean up their
messages if possible; this storage will not be permanent.
Fall 2013:
Exchange Online – Faculty and staff email will be migrated to Exchange Online over
a 6-8 week period. This will have a new webmail look and Mac users will have full
webmail features via Firefox and Chrome. Olsen explained that only very old
versions need to be upgraded and there are only a small number and college technical
staff will be working with those individuals directly. It is compatible with Mac mail
and the browser view will be the same as a PC.
Network switch and router upgrade – This will be rolling implementations to replace
aging Cisco equipment with Alcatel Lucent equipment in all state-owned buildings.
This project is funded partially from the Chancellor’s office and we are an early
campus adopter. IT intends to keep classroom disruption to a minimal and will have
a lot of signage posted to inform faculty and students.
myCSUNbox – Box.com is the vendor name for the cloud storage we are rolling out to
campus as a new storage capacity for faculty, staff and students. Faculty and staff
will have 10 Gig and students will have 5 Gigs of space. Over time this will replace
the campus U-drive or other storage services used in your areas. This storage space
should not be used to store and sensitive or confidential data files.
Olsen explained that there can be ad-hoc groups set up individually and then shared
within departments/divisions with tiered file structures and this storage would be
3
separate capacity from your individual space. IT will be providing support for this
service and you will sign-on with your CSUN credentials.
Spencer inquired about the advantages of Box.com over Dropbox.com. Olsen stated
that the main items are around Box.com’s security and accessibility (much stronger
version for accessibility) and they have a good tie-in with educational communities.
Baker noted that as we sunset the U-drive, we will announce where to store
confidential information.
7) Discussion Topics
a. Waitlist (Elizabeth Adams)
Adams explained that the spring semester was pretty much the same as the fall and
prerequisite checking was done and repeaters were kept in a holding pattern. A few
issues were fixed that were in fall, such as when it showed students being enrolled and
they actually were not. She stated they tried to communicate more with faculty to
figure out how to review the waitlist and when it would be purged so they had
opportunities to print the waitlist if they choose to use as a way to further prioritize.
One discussion item was regarding running the waitlist into the start of the semester
and there was no consensus but students felt strongly about this option. In fall 2013
the waitlist will run it through the first week of term to add or drop. Adams noted that
this does not take away the faculty’s ability to decide to pull a student if they are not
showing up for class. It allows students that are trying to repeat more of a chance to
get enrolled in classes they need. The A/S leadership and students are very pleased
with this decision. In week four, everything gets done on the forms and we are also
adjusting the forms. Not much else has or will be changed.
Adams mentioned that one item many are looking for is more priority for graduating
seniors and unfortunately the system does not recognize student standing. Priority is
given to seniors by giving them the earliest enrollment option and can enroll in 19
units.
Masequesmay thought the waitlist would be more useful to add additional classes that
are needed but confusion arose because it seems students are on several lists. Adams
stated that they are limiting the number of waitlists students can get on and she
estimates that 50-60% section/classes she opens are based on waitlist demand. She
further stated that they are strongly encouraging departments to contact students to
inform them of new sections as they are opening.
Miller shared that once the waitlists ends he gets a lot of emails with student
expectations/thoughts on where they are on the waitlist, etc. He asked if
communication could be sent widely so the word is out that it reverts to the
departments. Miller expressed concerns about the waitlist going into the term and
giving students an opportunity that may be false hopes. Sometimes its professor
shopping instead of schedule shopping that students decide to waitlist. He inquired if
there is a way to block this so those that do not have any class can get into one.
Adams will check with A&R to see if it is possible to block students. She agreed with
Miller in that she does not want any shopping considering the number of incoming
4
students for fall 2013. The process runs four times a day to notify students and most
students are very savvy about the system. Many have asked about if-then statements
and the answer is no, we will not even look into doing something like this. Baker
added that you can usually program software in many ways but we do not necessarily
want to always do these changes. Adams mentioned that the my-path-to-graduation
should assist by having courses plugged-in to help students get enrolled in courses
they need. This should be available in about one to two semesters.
Adams noted that is the intent is not to impose upon faculty how to use the waitlist in
accepting students into classes and departments are taking some different approaches.
Miller asked if a lower student to room capacity could be imposed. He noted that his
classes were filled up and other classes had 15 seats each still available. Adams said
that this could be considered.
8) Department/College Issues - none
9) Previous Meeting Action Item Review
Waitlisting column view confusion regarding status – There are three enrollment status
options faculty can select from in the Class Roster for all, enrolled, and waiting. There is a
guide posted online that shows examples for where and how to navigate. Under the waiting
option, it will display the priority of their position number.
Lab/lecture – Adams explained that there is a way to tie these in the Schedule of Classes and
Anita Robinson can help department SOC coordinators with this.
Lecture capture – Zell shared the digital story at a previous meeting and Baker noted that not
enough people know about this feature and had received input to support this on the recent IT
Annual Survey data.
Education building, room 311 – The VGA cable and audio equipment has been moved for
easier access.
10) Policy – none
11) New Business – none
A few suggested items to include on ATC agendas for AY13/14:
Student/faculty electronic communications - Lecture capture - Video captioning - IT updates on
technology changes with possible impact to faculty - Dept/University integrated calendar Mobile access features and campus maps for students
Meeting adjourned at 3:02 PM.
5