EBSCMinutes

Back to Minutes & Agendas

University of California, Berkeley

Members present: Professor Alice Agogino, AVC Greg Brown, VC Beth Burnside, AVC Ron Coley, VC Ed Denton, Graduate Student Representative David DeGusta, EVC & Provost Paul Gray, Professor Michael Frenklach, Dean Ralph Hexter, Director Phyllis Hoffman, VC Jim Hyatt, Executive Director Helen Kelly, University Librarian Thomas Leonard, AVC Matthew Lyon, VP Christina Maslach, Dean Mary Ann Mason, AVC Jack McCredie, VC Don McQuade, VC Horace Mitchell, Director Ralph Moon, Director Barbara Morgan, Dean Richard Newton, VC Genaro Padilla.

1. Approval of Minutes from March 28 Meeting: Minutes were approved as distributed.

Helen explained that the number of projects would be narrowed down at today's meeting, through discussion and a voting process, from 20 to10. The cost of the projects was not to be taken into consideration at this time, because the task was to identify the top priority projects for presentation to the Cabinet on May 1 (cost estimates will be revised as needed for that meeting).

VP Maslach, Chair of the Educational Technology Committee, gave highlights from the evaluation of e-Berkeley proposals related to teaching and learning. This committee grouped two pairs of inter-related proposals as top priorities: the Learning Management System and the Berkeley Internet Broadcasting System. The New Century Classroom proposal was also ranked very high, although this is not clearly e-Berkeley and may be funded through another initiative. Other highly-ranked proposals were briefly described, including Digital Chem1A, the Multimedia Authoring Center for Teaching in Anthropology, and two proposals from the Library: Public Electronic Access System and Information Literacy. Three proposals (E-Grades, Student Portal, and Research e-Protocol System) were in the top 10 even though they were not directly related to instruction. Two interesting proposals (Faculty New Media Center and Digital Library Services) did not seem "ready to go."

VC Hyatt, Chair of the Administrative and Student Services Computing Subcommittee, summarized the ASSCS evaluation of projects related to administrative and student systems, and basic campus infrastructure. The top priority was given to Paperless Payment Processing, because many e-Berkeley projects will need to accept credit cards. He commented on the rest of the ASSCS top 10: e-Grades, Kronos, Campus Systems and Network Security Office, e-Travel Expense Reimbursement, Graduate Admissions, GradLink, Windows 2000 Active Directory, Streaming Media, and Berkeley Reporting Portal. These are all key to moving forward with e-Berkeley initiatives, and several projects build on work being done now. The e-Procurement and CalCart projects are important, but it was thought that some other source of funding might be found. This applies to other projects as well. VC Hyatt suggested that Vice Chancellors might find a way to fund some of these projects through their units. He believes multiple funding sources should be sought. Dean Newton commented on the potential of some of the projects to become the subject of fundraising campaigns; for example, Microsoft might support the Windows 2000 Active Directory project.

VC Hyatt and Professor Alice Agogino, Co-Chairs of the E-Berkeley Implementation Task Force, reported on the EBITF evaluation of the entire set of projects. The first priority again was Paperless Payment Processing, as a core piece of the architecture required to support many e-Berkeley projects. The criteria EBITF applied to evaluate the projects included the question "Who are these services for?" and those that are scalable and beneficial campuswide were given a higher rating. Other criteria included projects that contribute to a standard architecture and those that are well-supported in their control units. Risk was also a factor; projects already underway are considered less risky. EBITF rated the Student Data Warehouse and CalNet Enhancements more highly than the other committees; all other top 10 recommendations were in agreement with ASSCS and/or ETC priorities. Jim noted that EBITF also recommended that new applications be required to use the CalNet infrastructure and that existing applications (such as BAIRS, UCLink, LMS, BFS) be migrated to CalNet.

EVC Paul Gray asked Jack McCredie to comment on the J2EE and other infrastructure projects that did not rise to the top. Jack noted that these projects are a problem. They need to be tied to a real application - but underlying work also has to be done (and funded) to prepare for the new applications. IST will continue to move forward on essential parts of the infrastructure (J2EE, CalNet, Credit Card Processing, Windows 2000 Active Directory), although additional funding is needed to "do it right."

EVC Gray noted that this is a multi-year effort and projects that are not selected among the top 10 will not be dropped from the list. They may be considered at the May budget meeting, and other partnerships and funding sources should be explored as well.

VC McQuade questioned why there are proposals related to Network Security, asking whether we have a secure system. AVC McCredie answered that the Campus Security Office has had temporary funding for only two years, and that this is the third year that permanent funding has been sought for this office. The campus now has a Campus Security Officer and some staff. VC Hyatt added that the budget process is different this year; it is an integrated process where all have agreed that the campus must have a secure system. AVC McCredie said that parts of the network are state-of-the-art secure, but we have a long way to go and will have new demands for security as we move forward with the new e-Berkeley projects.

VC Hyatt explained that the group would prioritize the 20 projects listed as "E-Berkeley Review Committees - Recommendations." These are listed on a spreadsheet showing the name of each project, the evaluation by each of the three committees, the initial cost, and the ongoing cost. The goal is to select the top 10, although all projects will be kept visible and become part of a three-year plan. The Steering Committee members voted; the votes were tabulated, and the outcome was as follows:

#1 E-Travel Expense Reimbursement
#2 Learning Management System
#3 E-Grades
#4 Paperless Payment Processing (tie with #5, #6)
#5 Campus Systems and Network Security Office
#6 Graduate Admissions - Final Phase Enhancements
#7 Streaming Media/BIBS
#8 Kronos Timekeeping System
#9 New Century Classroom
#10 Research e-Protocol System
#11 Undergraduate and Graduate Student Data Warehouse
#12 Digital Chem1A
#13 GradLink (tie with #14, #15, #16, #17)
#14 Windows 2000 Active Directory
#15 Public Electronic Access System
#16 Student Portal
#17 Berkeley Reporting Portal
#18 CalNet System Enhancements (tie with #19)
#19 Multimedia Authoring Center for Teaching in Anthropology
#20 Information Literacy via Online Tutorials

EVC Gray stated that the next step would be to massage the dollars and fold these recommendations into the budget process. Deans Newton and Mason noted that a process like this tends to favor projects of broad interest; we need another process to support more focused innovative projects.

5. Communicating Results of Prioritization Process to Campus Departments

VC McQuade emphasized that the language used to describe what happened must give a positive sense to the people who made proposals that all projects are considered important.

Action: Director Kelly and VC Hyatt will draft a memo from Paul Gray back to the departments originating the proposals.

VC Burnside suggested that the committee analyses be circulated, with some revisions; VC Hyatt agreed that these reports would definitely be included when the recommendations are presented to the Cabinet.
EVC Gray congratulated everyone involved in this energizing process, and the meeting was adjourned at 11:40 a.m.