Members present:  EVC and Provost Paul Gray, Chair, AVC Greg Brown, Principal Analyst Trish Cascardi for VP Bill Webster, Director Jon Conhaim, Professor Ken Goldberg, Dean Ralph Hexter, Director Chris Hoffman for Dean Mary Ann Mason, Director Phyllis Hoffman, VC Jim Hyatt, Assoc. Dean George Johnson, Student Representative Charis Kaskiris, Director Helen Kelly, University Librarian Tom Leonard, VP Christina Maslach, AVC Jack McCredie, Chief Technology Officer Tessa Michaels, VC Horace Mitchell, AVC David Moers, Director Ralph Moon, Director Barbara Morgan, Professor Philip Stark

Also attending: Dennis Hengstler, Planning & Analysis, Jill Martin, Budget & Finance, and Jacqueline Craig and Cliff Frost, Information Systems & Technology.

1.     Welcome and Approval of Minutes from January 23, 2003, Meeting

Chair Paul Gray has no new information since the last meeting regarding the State budget and how it might affect e-Berkeley.  Minutes from the January 23 meeting were approved as distributed.

2.     Plans for e-Berkeley Symposium

Christina Maslach updated the committee on the plans for the e-Berkeley Symposium, to take place on May 2, 2003, at the Clark Kerr Campus.  Invitations will be sent to faculty, deans, and chairs via CalMail.  The focus will be on the challenges of teaching large lower division gateway courses, and on new ideas and models that could transform current methods.  White papers on some of the issues have been prepared, and faculty who teach large courses are being interviewed.  The symposium will be a day-long event with lunch and will feature a number of interactive group sessions plus faculty demos of innovative teaching applications.  In the afternoon a list of recommendations and priorities will be developed from the working groups.  Christina said that the Academic Senate has agreed to co-sponsor the symposium, and she expects that 100 to 300 people will attend.  People from other campuses have not been invited, although there have been some inquiries.

3.     E-Berkeley Budget Process

Jim Hyatt reported that a call for new and continuing e-Berkeley Innovative Projects was included in the campus budget call.  A maximum of $20,000 can be requested from central funding; a matching component is required.  A handout in today’s meeting packet outlined the “E-Berkeley Budget Process FY 2004.”  Helen Kelly noted that, since only $100,000 is available, the review process will be abbreviated.  Proposals will be posted online, and reviewed and prioritized by EBITF, with input from ASSCS and ETC.  The E-Berkeley Steering Committee will review the EBITF recommendations and approve proposals at the May 14 meeting.  Jack McCredie asked whether there were any guidelines about funding for ongoing e-Berkeley projects.  Jim Hyatt answered that there are no specific guidelines; these ongoing projects will be reviewed by the Steering Committee and folded into the general budget process.

4.     Data Stewardship Council

Dennis Hengstler and Helen Kelly provided an overview of the Data Integration Project, started in 2001 to address major data coordination problems on campus, and resulting in the formation of the Data Stewardship Council in Spring 2002.  The url for the Council website is http://dataintegration.vcbf.berkeley.edu/.  The project concerns primarily administrative data.

The four primary goals of the Council are:

·       Develop policy to integrate, document and augment existing UCOP and campus policy, ensuring appropriate access to data, security of sensitive data, and improved efficiency and integration of data systems.  (A draft policy is included in the meeting packet.)

·       Develop a Data Dictionary framework, building a common base to control data redundancy and limit discrepancies, and to improve sharing of data across campus. 

·       Perform a “shadow systems” survey (mid-March), to identify and analyze needs for redundant systems and to aid in development of a logical data architecture.

·       Support data integration projects such as the Student Data Warehouse, Facilities and Spatial Data Integration, Institutional Data Gateway, and Cal Profiles.

Helen and Dennis proposed that the Data Stewardship Council be included as part of the e-Berkeley Governance structure, as a subcommittee reporting to the e-Berkeley Steering Committee. This would create a path for elevated policy discussion and approval, and would enhance collaboration with other e-Berkeley subcommittees.  (EBITF has endorsed this recommendation.)

Paul Gray asked whether there will be an ongoing need for the subcommittee once the policies have been established; several members expressed their ideas about future needs such as implementing changing UCOP requirements for data control and security.  The proposal was approved by the Steering Committee, and the Data Stewardship Council will be added to the e-Berkeley Governance structure.

5.     Portal Investigations

Student Portal.  Jon Conhaim handed out a paper summarizing research done by the e-Berkeley Program Office on student portals at other universities, and the chief portal features desired by Berkeley staff.  The paper also outlines the Student Portal committee’s criteria for success, and the next steps planned in the investigation.  From the interviews with portal managers at the six universities studied, the committee developed a table showing how long each portal took to develop, how many staff were needed to deploy the portal, and other resources used in its development.  The typical student portal services are:

·       Email

·       Calendaring

·       Student Systems

·       Learning Management Systems

·       Library services

·       Messaging based on demographics

·       Other (external news and channels)

Jon stressed that it is important to make it easier for students to find information, to give them a sense of belonging to the UC Berkeley community, and to improve technological support for learning.  Campus stakeholders identified important student services provided by their departments (also presented in a table in Jon’s report).  Essential elements of a useable portal include single sign-on, 24x7 availability, and fast response time even at peak periods.  A new subcommittee of the e-Berkeley Steering Committee was proposed to handle portal governance.

Jack McCredie referred to the article “Campus Portals Make Progress” in the meeting packet and pointed out that a university portal can be a very valuable and very expensive project.  He compared it to the recent Learning Management System that we were unable to fund.  Jon said the plan is to seek funding for a small pilot as a base to build upon, and he asked the committee members whether they think it is a good idea to pursue the pilot option.  Several members offered suggestions.  Philip Stark thinks some steps could be taken to prepare for a future portal, such as educating people about standards and the use of channels, and developing single sign-on between CalNet applications.  David Moers commented that it is important to have a strategy and determine what students want out of a portal.  Paul Gray addressed the expense in going from the initial outlay of funds to the full portal, and asked what the pilot would cost.  Jon estimates $200,000, depending on what services are included; he is working with JR Schulden, Student Information Systems, to put together a more accurate estimate.  Some funds might be found through a partnership with the department participating in the pilot, which may be a subset of L&S with about 2,000 students (Ralph Hexter would like to do this).  Christina Maslach said the portal comes up a lot in talks with students, and EECS students are offering to build one.  Jack McCredie noted that we could make calendaring available for students cheaply by July 1 but it wouldn’t be integrated with student systems.  Jack questioned how we can move forward with a new large project while we’re trying to cut $1.5 million by April 15 and we have ongoing projects that cannot be abandoned. 

Business Portal.  Tessa Michaels handed out information on the Business Portal Pilot, which she described as an effort to make Business & Administrative Services information easier to find, reflecting the UC New Business Architecture.  Tessa said that BAS offers many services, and the three areas being addressed at this time are:

·       MyBiz - resources on campus and outside (you choose what you want to see)

·       People - HR and departmental information

·       Buying - purchasing for authorized individuals

This project uses the PeopleSoft Portal software.  Tessa’s group has been working with the committee researching the student portal and with the Comptroller’s Roles project.  Paul Gray asked who would use the portal; Tessa said that all staff, student employees, faculty, anyone who uses business services would be users, with some areas restricted as appropriate.  Single sign-on using CalNet would be available on the BAS portal where possible, and security measures are being worked out to ensure that data is protected on all desktops.  Horace Mitchell noted that BAS has a responsibility to make their services easier to find and use, so he is providing funding.

Paul Gray asked how many other portal projects are going on?  Jon Conhaim mentioned EECS, UGA, and Haas.  Paul wants some kind of over-arching strategy, and he asked the portal committees to develop a Roadmap showing portal developments on campus; Jon promised a report in approximately two months.

6.     Privacy and Security

Jack McCredie noted that privacy and security issues are now a regular part of the agenda because so many changes in requirements are making it necessary to create new policies regarding information security and data management.

Senate Bill 1386.  Jack introduced Jacqueline Craig, who described the issues surrounding Senate Bill 1386.  Effective July 1, 2003, the bill places a new responsibility on UC to “disclose any breach of security to any California resident whose unencrypted personal information is reasonably believed to have been acquired by an unauthorized person.”

Jacqueline explained the campus’ obligation to notify anyone whose name, in combination with a social security number, driver’s license number, and/or financial account number and access code, has been accessed by an unauthorized person.  Jacqueline has been working with UCOP to establish guidelines for compliance with this requirement, including who will act as authority, what mechanisms will be used to identify a breach, and what kind of notice will be sent.  The Data Stewardship Council and the Computer and Information Security Committee (CISC) are participating in creating UC Berkeley guidelines.  One important element will be to identify where data exists that could be compromised.  UCOP has already written systemwide guidelines; however it is important to make the requirements clear for individual campus departments and advise them on how to proceed if a security breach occurs.

Network Usage Reports.  Jack McCredie asked Cliff Frost to talk about current practices in monitoring network usage and describe the new Network Data Reports being produced by Communication and Network Services; Jack noted the conflict between protecting privacy and managing the network responsibly.  Cliff demonstrated the type of reports being used to analyze cost and usage, plan for network growth, analyze attacks, and answer questions from individuals and departments.  He pointed out that the new “netflow” data CNS is collecting is much more revealing than the data collected for telephone bills (the closest analogy).  For example, the netflow data could be used to report on connections between specific UCB computers and network resources such as web sites about windsurfing, retirement planning, or political controversies.  The existing Electronic Communications Policy regarding use of this data for managing the network is ambiguous, although clearly privacy protection is a core UC value.

Cliff is working with the Network Advisory Committee to create summaries that campus departments can use to track costs and investigate network activity that may be inappropriate.  Cliff asked for assistance from the e-Berkeley Steering Committee in setting up guidelines for handling this kind of data; he distributed a draft document on “Guidelines for Use of Campus Network Data Reports” for review.

Paul Gray asked what other institutions do in this area; Jack McCredie answered that it varies widely.  The line between protecting privacy and gathering needed data is very fine, and several UC and national groups are discussing proper practices.  UCOP legal advisors and experts from the Law School have been consulted.  Berkeley is in the forefront of universities grappling with these issues.

The meeting was adjourned at 12 noon.

Future Meetings

Monday, March 24, 2003, 1:30 p.m.­ 3:30 p.m., Chancellor’s Conference Room, California Hall

Wednesday, May 14, 2003, 10:00 a.m. ­ noon, Chancellor’s Conference Room, California Hall

__________________________________________________________________

Email group: e-berkeley_steering@listlink.berkeley.edu

Please send corrections and comments to: Sheila Press, avc_asst@uclink.berkeley.edu