Back to Minutes & Agendas

University of California, Berkeley

MINUTES OF THE E -BERKELEY STEERING COMMITTEE

Meeting of June 23, 2004
Chancellor's Conference Room, California Hall

Members present: : EVC and Provost Paul Gray, Chair, AVC Ron Coley, Director Jon Conhaim, Director Helen Diggs for VC Beth Burnside, Professor Ken Goldberg, Joe Hall, Graduate Student, for Professor Philip Stark, Director Phyllis Hoffman, Director Tom Holub for Dean Ralph Hexter, Charis Kaskiris, Graduate Student Representative, VP-Designate Catherine Koshland, Ralph Moon for University Librarian Tom Leonard, VC Christina Maslach, Dean Mary Ann Mason, AVC Jack McCredie, Chief Technology Officer Tessa Michaels, Director Barbara Morgan, Director Helen Norris, Professor Panos Papadopoulos for Assoc. Dean George Johnson, Director David Scronce for AVC David Moers, Barbara VanCleave Smith for Acting Controller John Ellis.

Also attending : Victor Edmonds, Educational Technology Services, Dennis Hengstler and Jill Martin, Business & Finance, Katherine Mitchell, CORE, Director JR Schulden IST-SIS, Director Shel Waggener, IST-CCS

1. Welcome and Review of Minutes

Paul Gray reminded members of the farewell event for VC Jim Hyatt taking place later in the day. He indicated that there would be announcements in the next few weeks regarding who will take on Jim's many campus roles until a new Vice Chancellor is named. Paul announced that the steering committee would be asked to vote today on the guiding principles for the new IT Strategic Plan, and said that the goal would be to vote on the principles presented rather than try to refine them. He referred to the planning document included in the meeting packet, which presents a diagram showing all the groups that had worked to develop the principles and how they inter-relate across campus. The minutes of the last meeting were approved as submitted.

2. Information Technology Strategic Plan

Jack McCredie updated the steering committee on the progress made since the kick-off of the planning process in early fall 2003. Jack described the process of determining how to go about formulating a plan, and he noted that the decision to work with existing committees to address important IT issues on campus has resulted in better understanding of basic IT principles and needs on campus. He said this effort would contribute greatly to briefing the new Chancellor on underlying campus-wide IT challenges, opportunities and key issues. Jack added that one challenge is the question of what needs to be done to support the five new academic initiatives identified in the Strategic Academic Plan. Ken Goldberg gave an overview of the IT Guiding Principles developed through working with campus committees and listed in the plan under the heading "IT Expertise and Coordination." He stressed that there was cross-campus cooperation in developing the following principles:

Katherine Mitchell introduced the next activity, "dot-voting" to gauge how well each of the above principles is being handled now, within a range of poor to excellent. She said that this would set a benchmark against which progress may be measured in the future. Jack encouraged the committee to be honest in their assessment. Katherine asked members to vote on each principle. Afterward, the tally showed low scores in many areas. Shel commented that it would have been worse one or two years ago. Katherine said that the findings would be returned to the IT-related committees working on the planning process for their use in evaluating their priorities, and also will be brought back to this committee for assessment in a year. Katherine outlined next steps on the large "Campus Issues" described in the meeting packet handout (page 3). She said that the first three broad areas, "Learning/Teaching Environments," "Information Technology Supporting Research," and "Customer Demand for Security, Reliability and Access" will be further defined over the summer. She also noted that campus IT-related committees will define the "IT Funding and Governance" and "IT Expertise and Coordination" issues in the fall. Katherine included an outline of the next steps in the packet which show the current status of work on clarifying the issues and identifying initiatives, as well as future plans.

The first issue, "Learning/Teaching Environments," has been the subject of the Teaching and Learning Initiative led by Christina Maslach, which she will present at later in today's agenda.

"IT Technology Supporting Research," was addressed by Ken Goldberg, who distributed the recent survey developed by Professor Merrill Shanks, Director of the Social Science Computing Laboratory. The survey was sent to Academic Department Chairs last spring by the COMP committee in an effort to ascertain the status of faculty computing. Ken said that the survey results thus far have confirmed that 100% of the faculty use computers in order to do research. The final results will also be used to provide data on the "digital divide" among departments. Ken promised to report again in the fall when more data has been collected.

Tessa Michaels reported on the work that ITAC has done to address the issue of "Customer Demand for Security, Reliability and Access," stating that the great challenge is to provide access while providing security. ITAC most likely will create sub-groups to analyze these topics. She mentioned that other campus committees are focusing effort on this issue: CISC (Campus Information Security Committee) chaired by Craig Lant, and the Network Advisory Group, headed by Cliff Frost. Katherine closed this topic, saying that these issues would again be discussed at the Fall meetings of the steering committee.

3. Teaching and Learning Initiative

Christina Maslach presented an overview of the Teaching and Learning initiative, which addresses the Chancellor's Cabinet Goal 2.2 "to ensure the quality of instruction." She noted that the initiative is aligned with the Strategic Academic Plan, the Campus Accreditation recommendations, the e-Berkeley Symposium and the IT Strategic Plan. E-Berkeley projects have contributed to the initiative, beginning with the BRIDGE (Berkeley Resources for Integrated Delivery of General Education) proposal initiated by Philip Stark, which has developed from a response to MIT's Open Source, to an integral part of the Teaching and Learning Initiative's priorities:

· Building the classroom technology infrastructure for teaching and learning;
· Coordinating and improving large course instructor development activities;
· Coordinating and improving academic support activities for students in large enrollment courses;
· Integrating assessment and evaluation of student learning; and
· Creating web-based tools to improve learning and reduce administrative drudgery.

Christina said that several projects funded by e-Berkeley have contributed to the initiative, such as the work on Course Web, the move toward a campus-wide enterprise system, and planning for classroom renovation. She added that the group working on the initiative, CAP (Council of Academic Partners), is composed of campus teaching/learning units that utilize the ideas and recommendations coming from the sources mentioned above to work collaboratively on these issues. Christina said the initial target would be large enrollment lower division courses, in order to benefit the most students. She outlined some of the challenges in this area, and said that the BRIDGE project includes improving our connection to community colleges.

The objectives of the initiative listed on Christina's handout recognize faculty discontent with the teaching environment in the areas of classroom technology and drudgery of administrative tasks. She said some of the aims are that a single enterprise learning system that will be implemented in Fall 2006; that a base-line assessment of web-based tools needs will be performed with increased adoption of web-based tools by Fall 2006 with the hope that use of the tools by instructors and students will reach a higher level.

Christina said she sees all of this as importantly linked to Sakai, and asked Victor Edmonds, Director, Educational Technology Services to present details on two new developments: Victor said that ETS received the New Media Consortium Center of Excellence Award for "exemplary support of faculty." The Consortium is comprised of around 200 colleges, universities and museums, which support innovative learning and creativity, and they were impressed with the Learning Management System and Webcast at UC Berkeley. Victor also explained that SAKAI has asked UC Berkeley to become a member of its board (Stanford, MIT, University of Michigan, University of Indiana are board members, with a general membership of about 30 other universities).

4. e-Berkeley Projects Proposed for 2004-05 Funding

Jon Conhaim presented a spreadsheet showing the five Innovative Project Proposals that have been approved by EBITF, ETC and ASSCS, as projects that tie into IT strategic planning essential to e-Berkeley. The spreadsheet also listed three other proposals recommended by EBITF for support if funds become available, or if one of the top five does not go forward. Jon said that the e-Berkeley Program Office would like the steering committee to decide whether to support the five top projects summarized below:

The three proposals not included in the top five are:

Paul Gray asked for further details on the WebCast Channel project. Victor said it was to prepare for integration of the Sakai tools with WebCast, enhancing the delivery of WebCast through an interactive television channel - the first of its kind in the world. Ralph Moon questioned whether the students working on the Campus Event Calendar System would still be available for support once the project is complete. Jon replied that the project is being handled on a sophisticated level, and that Public Affairs is very aware of their responsibility for ongoing support of the project. Ron Coley spoke in support of the EH&S Online Compliance Training System, and Tessa Michaels commented on the need for the web-based course evaluation system.

Paul noted that all three of these lower priority projects were very interesting; Jack McCredie added that the ranking of all eight projects was close, and said that funding should be sought elsewhere for these three. Paul Gray concluded by asking whether the committee agreed with the prioritization. No objections were expressed, and the project listing was approved as proposed. Paul asked Jon to contact the sponsors of the three lower priority projects and assist them in identifying alternative funding possibilities.

5. Data Management and Use Policy

Helen Kelly, Jill Martin and Dennis Hengstler presented an Executive Summary, a "lite" version of the Campus Policy on Data Management, Use and Protection, requested by the steering committee at the April 12 meeting. Dennis said that questions raised by several of the committees reviewing the policy had been addressed, and those responses are included in the Executive Summary. The summary defines the need to have such a policy, the kind of data the policy applies to, data stewardship roles with regard to data handling, training requirements, resources, policy violation parameters, and plans for additions to the policy in 2004-05.

Dennis turned the presentation over to Jill Martin, who handed out a summary of the issues and concerns sent to the Data Stewardship Council by campus committees. She said this feedback had been valuable, particularly that from the ETC. The question of why the policy had been written arose; Jill pointed out that the proper handling of data as a valuable campus asset was addressed by the Data Integration Work Group in 2001. That group recommended the policy be written to provide guidance to campus departments. She said that other people had brought the "ownership" of data into question, and that this became important to define.

While the administrative responsibility for following policy guidelines may seem burdensome, Jill pointed out that these requirements are in line with other administrative policies, such as the Minimum Security policy, the campus IT policy, and the Controller's Office Guide to Administrative Responsibility. The cost of following these procedures has also been an issue; Jill noted that there is also a cost when data is not handled properly. The timeline for implementing these procedures is flexible with departments being able to manage their compliance in their own time.

Dennis concluded by saying that the policy is not in its final form, however as a provisional policy it does perform the function of providing guidance in data management. Others agreed, and Paul said he appreciated the efforts that went into writing the Executive Summary. He commented that the summary does not explain what the policy is, and requested that the most important points of the policy be included. Paul Gray asked whether the steering committee agreed to adopt this as a provisional policy, and as there were no objections it was approved.

Announcements

•  E-Berkeley Symposium: A draft proposal for next Spring's e-Berkeley Symposium was presented by Jon Conhaim. "Teaching and Learning in the Information Age" is the topic for the symposium, and it will address challenges faced by faculty and students in today's information-rich environment. Partners for the symposium are the Division of Undergraduate Education, the Library, the Council of Academic Partners, and the Academic Senate. The symposium will draw on the collaborative efforts of these partners to help identify strategies for promoting information literacy and undergraduate research skills. Executive co-sponsors for the event are VP for Undergraduate Education Christina Maslach and University Librarian Tom Leonard. A steering committee will be convened, chaired by Christina Maslach and Associate University Librarian Patty Iannuzzi, and will include five faculty, two students, and five staff.

•  New Policy Web Site and Notification process: A new campus-wide Policy Website has been designed and posted by the Controller's office. Barbara VanCleave Smith presented an overview, and handed out copies of the home page which features a keyword search based on subject matter. The search will provide a summary of the policy, which links to the actual policy. Policies under review are also available from this site. A subscription service is also provided, with "Bear Alerts" for changes in policies. The change notification service allows the Controller's office to be notified of any changes being made by other departments, including UCOP.

•  Assessment of Campus Purchasing Functions: Tessa Michaels announced the launch of the UC Berkeley Procurement Initiative, which will begin with a review of procurement processes by the Huron Consulting Group. Interviews will be held with key customers to collect information, analyze data and make recommendations for an "effective campus-wide procurement system, designed to increase customer satisfaction, realize cost savings, and minimize risk." Tessa said the next steps would be to complete the assessment by mid-July, with recommendations to follow soon. AVC Coley is the lead for this initiative, and Tessa will act as contact for questions.

•  Data Center Move: Shel Waggener said the Data Center move is on time, on-schedule, and on budget, with the main cutover this weekend. The move will be complete by July 4. A schedule showing the phased cutover dates for the process was handed out. Shel said that he feels confident that the plan will go as anticipated, with no downtime for CalMail.

The meeting was adjourned at noon.

______________________________________________________________________

Next Meetings

Thursday, October 7, from 10 a.m. - noon, Chancellor's Conference Room, California Hall

Tuesday, November 23, from 2 p.m. - 4 p.m., Chancellor's Conference Room, California Hall