TAG Meeting Notes 2014-03-12

12 03 2014

TAG Meeting March 12, 2014 12:00pm-1:00pm

Attendees:
Tim Cannon, Paul Cutrufello, Kim Daniloski, Dave Dzurec, Tara Fay, Jim Franceschelli, Eugeniu Grigorescu, Katie Iacocca, Charles Kratz (guest), Sandy Pesavento, Kristen Yarmey

1. Lunch

TAG members thanked CAS Dean Brian Conniff for sponsoring lunch for our meeting. Dave thanked Mary Ann Maslar in the CAS Dean’s office for making the arrangements. Charles noted that he is willing to sponsor lunch at one of TAG’s remaining Spring 2014 meetings.

2. Items for Discussion

WordPress

Dean of the Library and Information Fluency Charles Kratz asked to come to a TAG meeting to speak about the campus WordPress network (sites.scranton.edu), which has been a topic of TAG discussion since 2011. (In preparation for today’s meeting, Kristen emailed TAG members notes summarizing the history of the campus WordPress network as well as a justification for the academic use of WordPress that former TAG co-chair Jeremy Sepinsky had composed for IR in Spring 2013.)

At our last meeting in February 2014, we received word from Jim that IR would not be expanding support for sites on the campus WordPress network until at least 2015. Subsequently, at the February 14 Faculty Senate meeting, Senator Terry Sweeney expressed concerns about access to the campus WordPress network. There was seemingly some confusion at the Senate meeting about CTLE’s role in the WordPress network and a misunderstanding that CTLE staff were responsible for determining which requests for WordPress sites would be approved, when this decision actually rests with IR staff.

Charles (who oversees both the Library and CTLE) has since met with IR and CTLE staff in order to seek clarification on the criteria and process for WordPress site requests, as well as to ascertain whether there might be a middle ground for supporting faculty use of the campus WordPress network. Charles noted that the CTLE, while currently very busy with the Desire2Learn transition, is interested in supporting faculty use of WordPress and would be willing to support a few pilot sites in fall 2014. He suggested that TAG might identify faculty who would be interested in a WordPress pilot in the near future, and advocated for transparency for faculty regarding the criteria and process for site requests.

Prior to today’s meeting, Kristen had asked Jim for IR’s criteria for reviewing requests for WordPress sites, which she then emailed to TAG members. These are as follows:

Blogs are available to the University community to provide an area for discussion and collaboration. The following criteria will be applied to these requests:

  • Blogs can augment University web sites on www.scranton.edu which are built in the Web Content Management System (CMS). They cannot be used as a replacement for a department or organization’s www.scranton.edu site.
  • Blogs are only for University-related purposes, not personal interests.
  • Only faculty & staff members of the University community can be given access to post to the blog site.
  • All blogs will be accessible for public view access.
  • The URL for the blogs will be in the form of http://sites.scranton.edu/blogname/
  • No redirects of the form www.scranton.edu/xxxx will be set up for blogs so they are not confused with University web site(s).

Related information:

  • Desire 2 Learn (D2L), the University’s Learning Management System, has blogging functionality that can be used as part of a course offering.
  • Faculty & staff desiring to use wordpress.com for other blogging services should refer to our policy website (www.scranton.edu/pir/policies.shtml) for the Guidelines for the Use of Cloud Computing Services.

Jim noted that IR has limited resources and has to weigh what services they can support. He also explained that since this is a new service, it has taken some time to develop the criteria for what requests could or could not be accommodated. For example, individual student blogs (as one faculty member requested) could not be accommodated due to the difficulty of maintaining an accurate user list for that class within WordPress – while the campus network is integrated with Active Directory authentication, it is not integrated with Angel or Desire2Learn, so class lists must be manually added and maintained for WordPress sites. (As a side note, Charles mentioned that CTLE is working with a few faculty members to test Desire2Learn’s blogging function for student blogs. Results have not been encouraging so far, but testing continues.)

Charles and Kristen asked for clarification on the site request and decision-making process. Jim said that WordPress site requests could be submitted via Footprints (tsc.scranton.edu) and promised to add a request to the service menu within Footprints. He said that Connie Wisdo, director of IT Development & Applications (ITDA), will review the requests and make a decision based on the above criteria. If the decision is clear-cut, the response will be immediate, but if a request falls along the edge of the criteria, there might be some delay to allow IT staff members to discuss it first. Charles asked if there would be an appeal process for a faculty member whose request was denied. Jim answered that appeals could be directed to him.

Sandy asked if faculty could use third-party (external) blogging or web development sites (e.g., Blogger or WordPress.com). Jim said that faculty were free to use whatever tools they liked, on the condition that they review IR’s Guidelines for the Use of Cloud Computing Services and consider potential threats to privacy or security of students or other participants. Kristen said that as a librarian she had significant concerns about the privacy implications of requiring students to use third-party cloud services for class projects. An advantage to the on-campus WordPress network is that site data remains on campus and under University administration rather than entering the commercial data tracking and aggregation marketplace.

Tangentially, IR now offers server space to faculty and academic departments, with roles and support responsibilities enumerated in a service-level agreement. IR provides the server environment, while the faculty member/department is responsible for installing/maintaining the applications they wish to use on the server. There is a one-time licensing fee charge for this service. Kristen asked Jim for more information about this service, as TAG had been previously unaware of it.

Discussions about WordPress and related service offerings will continue. Kristen and Dave will meet with Jim and Robyn Dickinson (Interim VP for Planning and Information Resources) on Monday, March 17, and separately will meet with Interim Provost Pat Harrington and the academic Deans (date TBD). Charles suggested that, in addition to working with Jim and IR directly and reporting to the Faculty Senate,  TAG should also communicate with the Deans and Provost to keep them informed of technology needs on campus.

To further facilitate communication among all stakeholders, Katie suggested that TAG remind the Faculty Senate and the rest of the faculty to share their concerns about academic technology with TAG, such that TAG members can continue to work constructively with IR staff. Dave will include this reminder (as well as an update and clarification on WordPress) in his report to the Faculty Senate this week.

Faculty Specialized Software/Computer Lab Questionnaire

Back in November, TAG sent out a questionnaire to all faculty to ask for input on their use of specialized software, computer labs, lecture capture, and learning management systems (Angel/Desire2Learn).

Kristen apologized for the delay in sharing results, but has finally finished a qualitative summary of faculty responses, shared here for preliminary review by TAG members. Only 52 responses were received, and respondents tended to be faculty interested in software/lab issues, so the sample did not seem representative. The summary is almost entirely qualitative, so anyone interested in performing a quantitative analysis should contact Kristen for access to the full data set.

Kristen asked that TAG members review the results and identify any action steps or areas for further research. 

3. Brief Updates

Identity Finder Automated Scans

Back in April 2013, Information Security Officer Adam Edwards brought a proposal for automated Identity Finder scans to TAG for consideration. At our February meeting, Adam Edwards and Scott Finlon from Information Security came to the second half of the TAG meeting to demonstrate the administrative side of Identity Finder automated scans, which non-Mac-using TAG members have been piloting since September. They also demonstrated TrueCrypt as their recommended tool for encrypting sensitive data (including confidential human subject research data, as Adam has discussed with the IRB).  Scott has since shared step-by-step instructions for TrueCrypt, which Kristen posted to the TAG site. Update 2014-07-02: Support for TrueCrypt has been discontinued, so Information Security now recommends using 7Zip for encrypting sensitive or confidential data.

Adam and Scott would like to begin the roll-out of automated Identity Finder scans for faculty desktops, starting with departments that would be unlikely to have confidential subject data stored on their computers. Scott sent Kristen a list of departments as they appear in Identity Finder (based on Active Directory groups) as a starting point. Kristen asked at today’s meeting for TAG member volunteers who were willing to confirm their department’s readiness to begin automated scans. Dave has already spoken to the History Department, and Kristen will speak with Library faculty at their next department meeting. Kim and Paul were willing to speak with their departments (Management/Marketing and Exercise Science) but asked for some additional information that they could refer colleagues to. Kristen will write up a summary/FAQ on Identity Finder for faculty and post to the TAG site for reference.

Kristen suggested that faculty members run their own Identity Finder scans  to understand the software and results (the software is already on all faculty PCs, via KBOX). Any sensitive data can and should be encrypted with TrueCrypt. Jim reminded the group that Identity Finder also helps IT Services deal with faculty computers that have been infected by malware — a recent scan confirming the absence of confidential data makes it much easier and faster for them to clean and return the machine.

There were a few remaining questions about the automated scan process, which Kristen and Jim will review with Adam:

  • Who exactly is included in a department group? Full time faculty, adjuncts, department staff (e.g., departmental administrative assistants)? Jim believes that the groups include *only* faculty members (including part time/adjuncts), but we will confirm this with Adam.
  • Automated scans are currently scheduled in batch for Fridays at noon. What happens for faculty members who are never/rarely on campus, with their laptop, at that time? (Katie noted that this is common among KSOM faculty.) Could an alternative scan time be scheduled? Or do scans begin the next time you turn on your computer?
  • What happens if you turn off your computer during a scheduled scan? Does it pick up where it left off when you turn your computer back on?

Departments that are ready to begin automated scans should contact Kristen and/or Adam. Adam and Scott are also available to answer questions about Identity Finder, TrueCrypt, or other information security issues.

Lecture Capture – Panopto Pilot

On Wednesday, March 5, Dave and Kristen attended a meeting with Jason Wimmer, Jason Oakey, Jim and Eugeniu for an update on lecture capture and the pilots taking place in PCPS this semester with Panopto. (Full notes from that meeting, summarized here, are on the TAG site.) 

IT Services began piloting lecture capture back in Fall 2012 with two installations of MediaSite (LSC334 and LSC433). TAG members Jeremy Sepinsky and Tara Fay tested out the technology in their classes. While there were some good things about MediaSite, IT Services discovered lots of complications that would make it difficult to scale and expand across campus (see Jason’s article in the Winter 2013-2014 IT Matters for more details).

As of Fall 2013, IT Services has been working with faculty in PCPS (Counseling, Nursing, and Education – including TAG member Sandy Pesavento) to pilot a different lecture capture technology – Panopto.  Panopto is a hosted service, which makes installation faster and easier in comparison to MediaSite. IT Services set up 13 rooms in McGurrin, and already over 790 sessions/interviews/classroom scenarios/nursing simulations have been recorded. Feedback to date from faculty and students has been very positive – even enthusiastic. Sandy has been using Panopto in her education classes to record students teaching sample lessons. She invited interested faculty to visit one of her class if they would like to see it in action. (As a reminder, on last spring’s ECAR survey on undergraduate students and information technology, 63% of our student respondents said they wanted their professors to use lecture capture.)

Our current license for Panopto only covers PCPS (where the pilots were taking place), but IT Services has put in a request to the FMC for a full campus license. IT Services plans to expand access to lecture capture across campus (potentially enabling 5-6 additional classrooms next year) and to integrate Panopto with Desire2Learn. Jason Wimmer will be giving a presentation on Panopto at an IT Forum on March 27 at 11:30am – all faculty and staff are welcome to attend (please register).

PR Department/Program Website Initiative

This project is on the agenda for the next meeting of the Committee on University Image and Promotion (CUIP), scheduled for Monday, March 17 from 2pm-3pm. In addition to regular CUIP faculty representatives Terry Sweeney, Abi Roy, Jack Beidler, and George Gomez, PR has also invited TAG to send representatives — Dave, Teresa, and Sandy will be there (and maybe Kristen).

It is not yet clear which department/program pages will be in the first wave of updates, nor is it clear who will make that decision. Katie noted that from KSOM, OIM department chair Nabil Tamimi was interested in participating in a department website update, particularly since OIM is a growing program and the home of the E-Commerce major.

TAG Leadership for 2014-2015

Kristen will be rotating off as TAG co-chair at the end of Spring 2014. Dave will continue as co-chair for 2014-2015, but will be on a Fulbright sabbatical in Slovakia (congratulations!) in Spring 2015. Andrew LaZella has volunteered to serve in Spring 2015 while Dave is away, but we are still looking for someone to begin a full two-year term as co-chair. Please contact Kristen or Dave if you are interested/willing. Dave noted that, pending the results of the Faculty Senate election, we should make sure that we have a Senate liaison for 2014-2015 as well.

Adjournment

The meeting adjourned at 1:10pm. TAG’s next meeting will be Wednesday, April 9 from 12pm-1pm, location TBA.


Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Categories : Angel and Desire2Learn, Announcements, CMS and University Website, Minutes, Security

TAG Meeting Notes 2013-10-02

3 10 2013

TAG Meeting October 2, 2013 2:00pm-2:50pm

Attendees:

Jeremy Brees, Tim Cannon, Kim Daniloski, Dave Dzurec, Tara Fay, Jim Franceschelli, Eugeniu Grigorescu, Andrew LaZella, Sandy Pesavento, Kristen Yarmey

Mary Goldschmidt, newly appointed Faculty Development Specialist in CTLE, sat in on our meeting to introduce herself to TAG members and gain familiarity with TAG-related projects.

1. Brief Reports

Desire2Learn (Eugeniu)

Staff members in CTLE and ITDA continue to develop an implementation plan for our switch from Angel to Desire2Learn. More details are forthcoming, but here’s what we know so far:

  • Desire2Learn will be in place in January and available for Spring 2014 teaching
  • By default, 2 years’ worth of past courses will be converted from Angel to Desire2Learn (academic years 2011-2012, 2012-2013). Faculty will be able to request that older courses be converted (e.g., if you’ve used Angel to teach a course that only runs every three years).
  • Desire2Learn support staff will do training for on campus trainers and administrators.
  • In mid-November, there will be 2 introduction sessions for faculty.
  • CTLE will be working with a few faculty members to pilot courses. (Eugeniu will let us know who.)
  • Angel will be “turned off” in May 2014 (that is, it won’t be available for teaching), but it will still be available for content retrieval until September 2014.

Let TAG know if you have questions or requests related to the LMS transition and we’ll pass them along to CTLE and ITDA.

Identity Finder (Kristen)

At our September 2013 meeting, TAG members volunteered to serve as pilot participants for faculty implementation of automated Identity Finder scans (prior to full rollout). Automated scans were to begin at noon on Friday, September 19. TAG members reported no indication that scans had taken place, but Jim explained that users are not necessarily notified by the Identity Finder application when a scan is running and that users cannot see their own scan results. Kristen will contact Adam Edwards in Information Security for clarification on this point.

Kristen continues to work with Adam on preventing Identity Finder scans of confidential human subject research data or client files. Adam met with Joe Dreisbach and University Counsel Rob Farrell for additional discussions about managing sensitive research data. Adam reported that Joe would meet with the IRB.

Automated scans do not apply to faculty members using Mac or Linux machines.

Active Directory – R Number Log in (Jim)

On September 25, Kristen and Dave met with Jim, Jerry DeSanto (VP of Planning and CIO), Robyn Dickinson (AVP of Planning and Information Management), and Lorraine Mancuso (Director of Project Management) to discuss IR’s current and planned projects for this academic year. There were three major projects of particular interest to or impact on faculty: implementation of Active Directory log-in for faculty desktops, phasing out of Windows XP, and a new lecture capture pilot.

Jim reviewed IR’s plan for converting faculty desktop PCs to Active Directory login – which on the user side essentially means that we will log into our desktops using our R numbers, as we do for lab or classroom computers. The conversion just began and will roll out over campus through the rest of Fall 2013, scheduled by department. Users will get email notifications one week prior to their scheduled conversion, as well as an email reminder the day before conversion that will include instructions. Triage teams of IR staff members will be available to assist users.

This change will only apply to Windows PCs (XP and Windows 7). The change does not apply to Macs, laptops, or tablets. Connections to networked printers, copiers, etc will be maintained.

Faculty members in Psychology were scheduled for the first rollout (with IR staff, since they are all in AMH) on September 30, but an unexpected issue delayed the conversion. Tim reported that this was confusing for users who tried to log in with their R numbers as they had been instructed to do and were not able to access their machines.

Windows XP End of Life (Jim)

Microsoft is discontinuing support for Windows XP in April 2014. There are about 1,000 XP machines on campus at this time – about 400 of them in Academic Affairs (including faculty but also adjuncts, academic staff, etc). IR plans to update all remaining XP machines to Windows 7, though not all of them will be completed by April 2014. For faculty desktops with XP, the conversion will involve downtime. Jim said that conversions are being scheduled with the academic calendar in mind, and once the schedule is released, faculty will be able to request alternative dates for conversion if the assigned date conflicts with teaching or research. Training on Windows 7 is available from Jack Williams.

Lecture Capture (Jim)

Last year, MediaSite lecture capture systems were installed in two rooms in LSC. TAG members Jeremy Sepinsky and Tara Fay were among the faculty who piloted the technology. This year, there was increased demand for lecture capture in LSC, but it was not feasible for IR to install MediaSite in additional classrooms, since each MediaSite installation requires its own, local server.

This year, faculty in Nursing and Counseling are piloting a different, cloud-based tool for lecture capture – Panopto. Feedback so far is positive, and installation is much easier and faster. At the end of the semester, IR will seek feedback from the pilot faculty to decide how to extend lecture capture services on campus.  TAG member Sandy Pesavento will keep tabs on faculty feedback. Kristen suggested that CTLE arrange a Faculty-to-Faculty workshop or demonstration for Panopto.

Angel Support (Dave)

The Faculty Senate executive committee reported concerns from at least one faculty member about the availability of support for Angel during off hours (nights and weekends). Jim said that faculty can contact the Technology Support Center over the weekend (9am-5pm Saturday, 12pm-10pm Sunday) for support. On Saturdays, students work the TSC but can escalate a major issue to staff. On Sundays, a staff member is present.

3. Items for Discussion

Budget Priorities – Software and Labs

IR administrators are preparing contingency plans should budget cuts be required for the future. Two areas that may be at risk for cuts are specialized software licenses and computer labs. In order to minimize the impact on teaching and research, IR needs information from faculty about what is most important to us. Dave and Kristen would like TAG to gather faculty feedback in October and November that can be submitted to IR in time for discussions in December. Several points from our discussion:

  • There was general agreement that a survey would be more effective than a faculty forum. We also agreed that we would need to work through department chairs, Faculty Senate, etc to encourage responses. We could especially focus efforts on departments that we know rely heavily on specialized software and labs.
  • Jim will provide a list of specialized software and computer labs currently available. For software, Sandy asked if the list could include prices to give faculty a better understanding of which licenses are most costly. Kristen suggested that we could break the list into pricing ranges or levels if actual costs cannot be shared. Dave suggested that a financial incentive could be explored — for example, the Library’s acquisitions budget is allocated to departments, which then can use that funding for databases, journals, and books.
  • We need to understand how specialized software is used — e.g., whether a faculty member needs one license for his/her research, a handful of licenses for his/her lab, or lots of licenses since the software is a required part of a course.
  • We would also like to understand if faculty would consider alternative software options. For example, Tim suggested that we push faculty and students towards R rather than using SPSS, which is extremely expensive.
  • The Library’s Learning Commons initiative will include providing specialized software at dedicated machines (possibly reservable), so the Library may be able to cushion some of the impact of cuts. Kristen and Jim will work with Learning Commons Coordinator Sheli McHugh to coordinate and share feedback from the faculty survey, such that the Library can anticipate new faculty and student needs.

Kristen will email all TAG members to ask for volunteers (at least one from each college – either a TAG member or another interested faculty member) to assist with developing and disseminating a survey (ideally by the end of the month). Please contact her with suggestions or concerns.

Adjournment

The meeting adjourned at 3:00pm. TAG will reconvene on Wednesday, November 6 at 2:00pm in WML305 (Library instruction classroom).


Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Categories : Angel and Desire2Learn, Announcements, Minutes

TAG Meeting Notes – 2013-09-04

5 09 2013

TAG Meeting September 4, 2013 2:00pm-2:50pm

Attendees:

Jeremy Brees, Tim Cannon, Paul Cutrufello, Kim Daniloski, Dave Dzurec, Tara Fay, Jim Franceschelli, Eugeniu Grigorescu, Andrew LaZella, Sandy Pesavento, Kristen Yarmey

1. Introductions

We introduced two new TAG members for this year: Dr. Andrew LaZella (Philosophy, CAS) and Jeremy Brees (Management and Marketing, KSOM). We’re still hoping to recruit an additional faculty representative from PCPS – please let us know if you have any suggestions!

2. Brief Reports

LMS Group (Tara)

The Learning Management System Working Group recommended at the end of Spring 2013 that we switch from Angel to Desire2Learn (see full report for details). TAG members Tara Fay (Biology), Sandy Pesavento (Education), and Teresa Conte (Nursing) all served on the LMS Group, along with fellow faculty members Maureen Carroll (Math) and Julie Nastasi (OT).

The University has since signed on with Desire2Learn. As VP for Planning and CIO Jerry DeSanto announced in July, Desire2Learn will be available for use in Spring 2014, and Angel will be available until June 1, 2014 (so D2L and Angel will run in parallel in Spring 2014).

Staff members in CTLE and ITDA have been working on an implementation plan. We’ve been asked not to share details yet, since the plan hasn’t been finalized, but the LMS Group will be presenting their plans to the Faculty Senate and Deans Conference in the very near future. We’ll post a conversion schedule here when there’s more information available.

Eugeniu noted that CTLE plans to do some pilot course conversions with several faculty members early on in the process – particularly faculty members whose Angel courses have a lot of specialized content.  (Tara has already volunteered to be one of the pilot participants.) There will be trainings and demonstrations available for faculty.  Let TAG know if you have questions or requests related to the LMS transition and we’ll pass them along to CTLE and ITDA.

Website Proposal Group (Dave)

Dave, Jeremy S., Kristen, and Katie met with Hal Baillie, Jerry DeSanto, Gerry Zaboski, and Vince Carilli in May to discuss the Website Maintenance Proposal that members of TAG drafted last year as a solution for the complex issue of maintaining and updating departmental websites. All parties generally agreed that maintaining departmental websites is a serious issue affecting recruitment of students and faculty, but unfortunately a new position (full time or part time) is not an option. TAG will table this issue unless we come up with other options to explore.

On a related note, during the switch to the new responsive design for the University website this summer, some departments were prepared for the conversion and had sized images uploaded in time, but others did not.

Acceptable Use Policy (Dave)

The Acceptable Use Policy drafts are moving forward and will go to the University Governance Council and the Faculty and Staff Senates this semester.

Identity Finder (Kristen)

At our April 2013 meeting, IT Services Director Jim Franceschelli and Information Security Director Adam Edwards brought a proposal for Identity Finder Automated Scans to TAG for faculty feedback. TAG shared two main concerns from faculty:

1) Decreased performance of computers during Identity Finder Scans — Adam had explained that the automated scans would be implemented with IT staff members first, so that he’d be able to smooth out the process before implementing with faculty. Jim noted that the staff rollout had gone smoothly and IT Services had not received any complaints about decreased performance. The *first* Identity Finder scan tends to take the longest, but subsequent scans are quick.

2) IRB data – concerns that Identity Finder scans of machines storing human research subject data or client files would breach subject confidentiality. We were working over the summer on preparing recommendations for faculty members who store IRB data on how to encrypt and password protect their data folders, such that the data would be protected from Identity Finder scans but (perhaps more importantly) also from external malicious attacks. Kristen will check in with Adam to find out the status of the recommendations.

All TAG members in attendance volunteered to serve as pilot participants for faculty implementation of Identity Finder prior to full rollout.

Jim recommended that faculty members run their own Identity Finders scans ASAP due to the increase in malicious attacks on campus computers — IT Services can clean and return faculty desktops much more quickly if a recent Identity Finder scan has confirmed the absence of confidential or sensitive data.

Information Resources Advisory Council (Kristen)

IRAC will meet twice this academic year, in October and March. TAG normally sends two faculty representatives to IRAC meetings. Paul Cutrufello volunteered to continue serving on IRAC this year. Andrew LaZella volunteered to serve as the second representative depending on the schedule for IRAC meetings. Kristen will contact Robyn Dickinson for IRAC meeting dates.

3. Items for Discussion

University Website Changes (Kristen)

During the summer, there were several major changes to the University’s web presence. Kristen opened the floor for feedback or comments on these transitions:

  • Academic server (academic.scranton.edu) decommissioning — Kristen worked with Adam Edwards in Information Security to reach out to faculty members who still had content on academic. CTLE offered support for faculty who needed help moving their content, generally recommending that faculty members use existing templates in the University’s content management system (CMS). While the transition seemed to go smoothly, there is still a need for a place or host for faculty and student web development. At least one faculty member had needs that could not be fulfilled in the CMS.
  • Responsive redesign of www.scranton.edu — There are several reports of templates not quite making a smooth transition – e.g., Faculty/Staff pages like the History Department’s, dropdown links on the Provost’s website, etc.
  • m.scranton.edu takedown — The Library had issues with this, but TAG members hadn’t heard any other concerns. [Update 2014-02-12: Lori Nidoh in PR clarified that m.scranton.edu had not been taken down. Instead, automatic redirects had been implemented.]
  • my.scranton.edu (Luminis) upgrade — TAG members reported several ways in which the new interface unintuitive. Student schedules are difficult (for students) to find, as are the Faculty/Staff directory, class rosters, and course evaluations. However, TAG members agreed that by now most people have figured out where links are, so we don’t want to request changes to the Faculty Tab at this point.

WordPress (Kristen)

The University set up a local WordPress network in late 2011. It now hosts admissions blogs, the Library blog, and the History Department blog. IR staff members had indicated that they were working on developing guidelines for how the WordPress network could be used and creating a process through which sites on the network could be requested.

In the meantime, several faculty members have requested WordPress sites for other uses – internal collaboration, classroom use, etc.  To date, while internal collaboration requests have been accommodated, IR has denied requests for classroom use. Jim explained that IR is working on determining what level of support they can provide. For example, while supporting one faculty member’s WordPress site would not be time intensive, supporting 30-40 classroom sites would be an issue — whose job does this become? There are also other issues IR wants to consider before providing class-based WordPress support – e.g., archiving student work, providing access and security, etc.  IR’s preference would be to provide support for classroom blogs via Desire2Learn once we convert over from Angel. Kristen asked Eugeniu if one of the D2L faculty pilots could include a blogging feature so that faculty members can see what blogging features are or aren’t available in D2L.

IR staff members are meeting to discuss the WordPress service in a few weeks. Kristen asked if faculty members can participate in this conversation, and Jim said that he will let TAG know when faculty input is needed. TAG will expect to see drafted language on service levels for WordPress at our November meeting, in the hopes that the service may be available for use in Spring 2014.

TAG Senate Status (Dave)

Dave (as TAG’s Faculty Senate liaison) reported that Senate president Rebecca Mikesell would like to propose that TAG become a full Senate Committee, (possibly called the Technology Advisory Committee). The membership criteria would be the same as we discussed last year for TAG as a subcommittee of the Academic Support committee — that is, flexible membership aiming for representation from CAS, PCPS, KSOM, and the Library, with at least one faculty Senator, who will serve as TAG’s liaison to the Senate. Dave noted that if TAG is a full Senate committee, TAG’s Senate liaison will serve on the Senate Executive committee.

TAG members had no objections to the proposal, which will likely be brought up for a vote at the September 13 Senate meeting.

4. New Business

Jim gave us some quick updates on changes that will affect or interest faculty:

  • Desktop computer logins — by the end of 2013, logins for desktop computers will change to the user’s R number and my.scranton password – so users will not have to remember a separate desktop password. This is part of the continued implementation of Active Directory authentication.
  • Google Chrome browser — IR will begin providing Google Chrome to University computers via KBOX. There are still some details to be worked out on this – Jim will let us know when it will happen and what will happen for users who already have Chrome installed.
  • Office 365 — We converted to Office 365 from Live@Edu over the summer. We’ve already benefited from increased email storage space and access to “lite” cloud versions of Office software. We will see a few new features later this fall, including Lync instant messaging and SharePoint collaboration software.

Kristen and Dave will meet with Jerry DeSanto, Robyn Dickinson, Lorraine Mancuso, and Jim on September 25 for a full “road map” discussion of what’s coming this year from IR for faculty.

The meeting adjourned at 2:50pm – TAG will reconvene on Wednesday, October 2 at 2:00pm in LSC591 (CTLE Conference Room).


Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Categories : Angel and Desire2Learn, Announcements, CMS and University Website, Minutes, Website Proposal

TAG Membership and Meetings 2013-2014

22 08 2013

In the middle of getting organized for Fall 2013-2014 and just thought I’d post about some of the membership changes for this year. Here’s who we have on board so far:

Faculty – CAS
Dave Dzurec, History (co-chair and Faculty Senate liaison)
Tim Cannon, Psychology/Neuroscience
Tara Fay, Biology

Faculty – KSOM
Kim Daniloski, Management/Marketing
Katie Iacocca, Operations and Information Management [on leave for Fall 2013]

Faculty – PCPS
Teresa Conte, Nursing
Paul Cutrufello, Exercise Science and Sport
Sandy Pesavento, Education

Faculty – Library
Kristen Yarmey (co-chair)

Staff participants
Jim Franceschelli, Director of IT Services
Eugeniu Grigorescu, Director, CTLE
Lori Nidoh, Director of Marketing, Public Relations

Past co-chair Jeremy Sepinsky (CAS) has stepped down for a leave of absence, and past member Kevin Wilkerson (PCPS) has stepped down after a three-year term of service. Current member Katie Iacocca (KSOM) will be on leave for Fall 2013 but will return for Spring 2014. With those changes in mind, we’d like to recruit additional faculty representatives from CAS, PCPS, and KSOM to join us this year — please let us know if you’re interested or if you would like to recommend someone from your college! We’d like at least one new member from each college, but we’re happy to add more if there are enthusiastic volunteers :)

Our monthly meetings are scheduled for:

  • Wednesday, September 4 – 2:00pm-2:50pm in LSC591 (CTLE Conference Room)
  • Wednesday, October 2  – 2:00pm-2:50pm in LSC591 (CTLE Conference Room)
  • Wednesday, November 6  – 2:00pm-2:50pm in WML305

Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: ,
Categories : TAG Administrative

TAG Meeting 2013-03-04

4 03 2013

TAG’s second Spring 2013 meeting was this morning – and we actually finished up 5 minutes early! Here’s what’s going on:

1. My.Scranton/Luminis upgrade

We spent most of the meeting talking about the upcoming upgrade to Luminis 5 (Luminis is the software platform behind the my.scranton portal), which will happen during spring break. Thanks to IR, TAG has had the opportunity to weigh in with faculty feedback on what the new portal page should look like – especially the Faculty Tab.  IT staff member Joe Casabona was kind enough to stop by our meeting to answer questions and listen to comments and suggestions about what’s most important to faculty and where it should go.

More details about the Faculty Tab in a following post, but the short version is that TAG and IR will be continuing to work on it both before and after the upgrade goes live. The new version of Luminis is thankfully a lot easier to update than the current version, so we’ll have an easier time making changes.

IR will be sending out a University-wide email later today about the upgrade.  The TAG members in attendance agreed to remind their departments about the upgrade at their next department meetings, and Dave Dzurec (History) will give a brief announcement about the upgrade at the next Faculty Senate meeting.

TAG asks that all faculty members 1) report any problems you have with the new portal to the Technology Support Center (tsc@scranton.edu or 570-941-HELP) and 2) send any broader questions or comments to TAG so that we can share them with Joe and the rest of the IR staff members working on the project.

2. TAG Leadership for 2013-2014

TAG co-chair and co-founder Jeremy Sepinsky (Physics) will be taking a leave of absence for the 2013-2014 year, which means there are some big shoes to fill for next year. We discussed how TAG leadership should be determined, now and in the future, especially in the context of the formalization of TAG’s status within the Faculty Senate. We didn’t come to any conclusions today, but there was general agreement that:
  • Having 2 co-chairs is beneficial due to the time commitment and workload.
  • Having (at least) 1 co-chair be a Faculty Senator would be ideal, since TAG needs a Faculty Senator to serve as a liaison between TAG and the Senate’s Academic Support Committee.
  • A rotating chair model (each co-chair serves for two years but with staggered terms, so each year there’s one outgoing co-chair and one incoming co-chair) would be helpful so that there’s continuity. This would also make the commitment of chairing more manageable, since it would only be a two-year commitment.
  • Rotating membership in general might be beneficial in order to sustain the group and prevent burnout.

Kristen Yarmey (Library) is willing to continue as co-chair in 2013-2014 to smooth the transition for the incoming co-chair.  Jeremy will look into existing Faculty Senate committee models for selecting leadership. Kristen will follow up with the Faculty Senate executive committee for an update on TAG’s Senate status.

3. Technology and Learning Discussion Group and Communicating about Technology on Campus

This semester Kristen and Bryan Burnham (Psychology) are hosting an informal Technology and Learning Discussion Group as an extension of a Clavius-like faculty seminar on Technology in the Mind they hosted during Fall 2012. The group’s purpose is to discuss readings and issues relating to technology and learning in a broad sense. All University community members are welcome to attend – meetings are biweekly on Monday nights at 6pm. Kristen is posting topics and meeting announcements to Bboard and here on the TAG site.

We had a brief discussion about how various technology groups on campus (like the Discussion Group and the newly formed Social Media group) can share what they’re doing and talking about with IR, CTLE, TAG, etc. Jim Franceschelli (IT Services) noted that communication about what technologies are being discussed would help IR staff members prepare for and respond to emerging needs. Communication between IR and TAG has been helpful to both groups – can we establish that kind of channel with the Discussion Group and other similar efforts? (IR staff members are welcome to participate in the group, but evening meeting times are difficult for most staff members’ schedules.)

Sandy Pesavento (Education) agreed that more communication about what technology is being tested or implemented around the campus (especially within different colleges/departments) would be useful. She suggested that TAG members share brief updates about technology initiatives in their departments/colleges at the beginning of TAG meetings (or possibly on the TAG WordPress site, since meeting time is short).

Kristen floated the idea of a collaborative blog or website for technology on campus, that could aggregate feeds of posts/events/news from IR, TAG, CTLE, the Library, and any other technology-related groups (formal or informal) on campus.

Kristen will discuss the idea of a shared technology site with CTLE, Library, and IR staff members to see if it might be of interest. She will also work with Jim and Bryan to look for ways in which IT staff can connect with the discussion group, possibly via daytime scheduling in future semesters and/or by integrating discussions into existing events like the Library/CTLE Technology on Your Own Terms workshops or IR’s IT Forums.

4. Ongoing Projects

TAG input is still needed for discussions about faculty course data and FERPA considerations for cloud computing. Faculty members should let Kristen know if they are interested in leading or participating in these discussions.

5. Code of Responsible Computing / Acceptable Use Policy

Dave has posted the latest draft of the revised Code of Responsible Computing, now the Acceptable Use Policy. Faculty should send feedback to either Dave or Jim so that their committee can incorporate comments before the draft goes through the formal policy process next semester.

 


Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , ,
Categories : Announcements, Minutes, TAG Administrative

TAG Meeting 2012-11-07

8 11 2012

On November 7, TAG held its third and final Fall 2012 meeting.

1. Code of Responsible Computing Committee update

Dave Dzurec (History) and Jim Franceschelli (IT Services) are co-chairing a committee charged with drafting an update to the Code of Responsible Computing. The goal of the committee is to create a single policy for faculty, staff, and students that will define responsible use of information technology at the University.

Dave and Jim have been reviewing acceptable use policies from other universities  and have almost finished a draft for the rest of the committee to review.  After review by the committee, the policy will go to VP/CIO Jerry DeSanto, and then it will enter the University governance system for full approval (probably in 2013-2014).

Faculty representatives on the committee (as appointed by the Faculty Senate) are Dave, Wesley Wang (Economics/Finance), and Bob Spinelli (Health Administration and Human Resources). The Staff and Student Senates also have two representatives each.

We discussed briefly how the new policy should be disseminated and shared with students and faculty after it is approved. Sandy asked whether new students/faculty/staff will need to sign off on the policy when they begin using University services to make sure they are aware of it. Kristen suggested incorporating a mention of the policy into the New Faculty Orientation. She will also suggest to the Associate Dean of the Library, Bonnie Strohl, that public patrons using Library computers would be informed of the policy in some way.

2. CTLE Technology Liaison

The Center for Teaching and Learning has two faculty liaisons (currently Anthony Ferzola and Marian Farrell) who provide an interface between faculty teaching and the CTLE’s resources. Faculty can reach out to the liaisons for support (e.g., teaching observations), and the CTLE can reach out to the liaisons for input on needed resources. The liaisons also run the faculty mentor/mentee program.

The CTLE wants to establish a similar faculty liaison who would specifically address academic technology questions and needs. They did a pilot project last year, with Sandy Pesavento (Education) serving as the faculty technology liaison, to see what role(s) a liaison should fill. Eugeniu asked TAG (including Sandy) for feedback on what a technology liaison’s “job description” should look like.

During the pilot year, Sandy did some technology trainings (higher order thinking, student response systems, smartboards, etc) and teaching observations (e.g., coming to a class to suggest technology tools that might be helpful to the instructor). One of the difficulties during the pilot year was that few faculty members outside of PCPS were aware that Sandy was available for consultation on technology issues, though, so a challenge for the future will be finding ways to promote the services the liaison provides.

We discussed other needs that a liaison could address. Several TAG members suggested a repository or database of some kind that would identify 1) educationally relevant technologies and 2) if/how faculty at Scranton and other universities have implemented them.  Katie noted that sometimes faculty don’t necessarily know what tools are available to them. Jeremy and Dave expressed interest in hearing from faculty members who have been doing pedagogical research with technology in the classroom – e.g., via Friday presentations like the Office of Research Services seminar series.

We also discussed the difficulty of knowing who to call for help – that is, CTLE supports faculty use of technology for pedagogy, but IT Services supports the actual hardware and software that faculty use in the classroom. Teresa suggested a flow chart to indicate who to call and when.

3. Windows 7 and Viewfinity

As Windows 7 is rolled out with new University computers, your account on your desktop/laptop will change from being an administrator account to a standard user account. This is a security measure to try to prevent users from downloading and installing malicious software. By default, standard users can’t install or delete applications, as administrators can.

We were concerned about this limitation when TAG first learned about it, but IT Services has put in a lot of work to figure out a good solution for faculty members so that this change doesn’t affect our work. Using Viewfinity privilege management software, faculty users can be automatically and temporarily elevated to administrators so we can install whatever software we need when we need it.

Kristen has been piloting Viewfinity as a faculty user since the middle of the summer, with excellent results.  There’s a small popup window that comes up each time you begin to install a program that asks for a “business justification,” but you can simply say you are using the program for teaching, research, etc – no lengthy explanation required. When you click OK, you are automatically bumped up to administrator while the program installs, and you are automatically bumped back down to standard user once the installation is complete. Commonly used software (Skype, iTunes, etc) is whitelisted to speed things up. Overall, the process is smooth and seamless — many thanks to Jim and the IT Services staff for finding a way to accommodate faculty needs.

Viewfinity has another big feature – Remote Desktop assistance! When you call the Technology Support Center, you’ll be able to share your desktop with the support staff so that they can help you easily from a distance. This service is in development and will be available soon. It will always have a prompt – your desktop won’t be shared without your approval.

Faculty members with XP machines will get Viewfinity via KBOX, so you’ll have Remote Desktop capability, but you will still maintain an administrator account (and XP) until you get a new computer.  Faculty members receiving new machines will have Windows 7 and a standard user account, with Viewfinity.

Viewfinity is not supported on Mac or Linux, so faculty using Mac or Linux machines are not affected by any of these changes.

Classroom and lab computers are all Windows 7 now, but they do *not* run Viewfinity — they have Deep Freeze instead. So you can install programs on classroom and lab computers, but those installations will disappear each time the machine shuts down. If you need to install software in a classroom or lab that you need to use frequently, submit a request to the TSC via Footprints.

4. Infrastructure for Computerized Testing

We were running out of time, so we didn’t get to discuss this agenda item. Jim suggested that a work group form to work on some possible solutions, since we haven’t made much progress on this issue. Jim, Teresa, Sandy, and Eugeniu will start to work on this.

5. & 6. WordPress Site Organization & Luminis Tab

No time for these agenda items either – Kristen will be in touch with TAG members via email.

TAG will not be meeting in December, so our next formal meeting will be in Spring 2013. TAG members will still be communicating and working throughout December and January, though, so as always please feel free to contact us with questions, concerns, or suggestions.


Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
Categories : Announcements, Minutes, Network and Infrastructure, Security

TAG Meeting 10/3/2012

8 11 2012

On October 3, TAG held its second Fall 2012 meeting.  [Yes, that was more than a month ago — many apologies for taking so long to post the meeting notes!]

1. Departmental Websites and the CMS

We’ve been discussing departmental websites for quite a while.  Lori Nidoh (PR) brought us some analytics from the University website (June 2012 – September 2012, all excluding internal traffic) to give us a better idea of how these pages are being used:

  • The Undergraduate Programs page is the 5th most visited page on the University website – after the home page, HR vacancy list, HR home page, and Admissions home page. (report)
  • From the Admissions home page, the Undergraduate Programs page is #5 on the list of what pages users visit next – indicating that prospective students are indeed looking at departmental web pages. (report)
  • This spreadsheet shows the most heavily visited scranton.edu/academics/ pages.
  • Lori broke out additional analytics on a few department and program pages to give us a sense of how they are used: Biology, OT, PT, and Pre-Med.

We continued to discuss options for how to keep departmental pages up-to-date. Eugeniu noted that the CTLE TechCons help faculty members with their personal websites, but that access and permissions in the CMS (content management system) are an issue for departmental pages – a department wouldn’t necessarily want to grant publishing rights to a student who is editing their page, but it’s hard to catch quirks and mistakes if you can’t publish and review your recent edits. Lori asked that any observed CMS quirks be reported to PR.

Jeremy will be convening a group of interested faculty to discuss this concern in more detail offline. The group will outline a proposal for how departmental websites could best be maintained,  in collaboration with staff from Public Relations and Academic Affairs. Teresa Conte (Nursing), Katie Iacocca (OIM), Kevin Wilkerson (CHS), and Sandy Pesavento (Education) volunteered to participate, but any interested faculty (especially those with experience using the CMS) can join the discussion.

2. FERPA Considerations for Cloud Computing

Kristen asked for input on what cloud computing tools faculty are currently using and how those tools are being used for instruction. She noted the distinction between “internal cloud” services (e.g., Royal Drive, Angel) versus “external cloud” services (Gmail, Dropbox, etc).

Kristen will meet with IR staff from the Information Security office to nail down specifics on what faculty can and can’t do with these cloud tools in order to comply with FERPA regulations (see previous FERPA post for details).

3. Faculty Input on the IT Tactical Plan

Over the summer, TAG was asked by IR to respond to a number of technology questions posed by Jerry DeSanto, VP/CIO. Planning and Information Resources is in the process of creating their 3-5 year IT Tactical Plan, and the questions were targeted at the expected needs of the faculty in the coming years:

  • How can IT better support faculty research?
  • Given the influx of new, younger faculty what kinds of technology needs/support do you anticipate they are going to need?
  • How do you see the classroom experience changing over the next several years, and how can IT assist in this evolution?
  • What new academic programs do you see developing over the next five years, and how can IT help?
  • With the President’s stated intentions about the University and globalization, how do you see this playing out with web-based education, study abroad, and perhaps the development of satellite campuses in other parts of the globe?

Jerry asked for feedback by November 1 such that faculty input could be incorporated into IR planning. Jeremy asked the group how TAG would like to gather faculty input. We decided on a two-pronged approach – a brief survey sent to all faculty, and a more detailed response from TAG members. [Update – see the results in Jeremy’s 2012-11-05 post, Feedback Regarding the IT Tactical Plan.]


Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , ,
Categories : CMS and University Website, Minutes, Security, TAG Administrative

TAG Meeting Notes 9/29/11

29 09 2011

We had our first TAG meeting of 2011-2012 this morning.  We had a lot to catch up on from the summer, so apologies for the long notes! As always, post a comment if there are any questions or concerns.

  • New members. Teresa Conte joined us from Nursing as a replacement for Cathy Lovecchio. Ben Bishop (Computing Sciences) joined us late last spring, as did Lori Nidoh (representing Public Relations). S.P. Chattopadhyay is currently on sabbatical, and Kevin Wilkerson has returned from his.
  • Novel Pedagogy Cohort. Jeremy and a few other CAS faculty members have formed a small group to explore and implement new pedagogy techniques in their classes – some of which involve technology while others don’t.  Tools to be explored include lecture capture and clicker systems. If any other faculty are interested in innovative pedagogy, let Jeremy know.
  • Lecture capture.  A team of stakeholders (including TAG members Jeremy, Kristen, Sandy, and Eugeniu) met several times in the spring and summer to review possible products for lecture capture.  The final recommendation was a hybrid solution of Media Site (as a back end) and Crestron HD appliances for the actual capture. Implementation will start in the Science Center and then spread to other departments. Right now, IR is working on setting up the back end servers while VistaComm is implementing the front end capture devices. The goal is to have LSC lecture capture ready to go by Spring 2011, and then expand to other departments next year as funding allows. Sandy and Teresa noted that Education and Nursing would be very interested in implementing lecture capture in their classrooms. Thanks to Jason Oakey over in Instructional Technology for taking the lead on this project!
  • Office 2010.  The upgrade to Office 2010 for faculty and staff is tied to the email conversion (see below) due to the incorporation of Outlook.
  • Windows 7. The upgrade to Windows 7 for faculty and staff machines currently running Windows XP is held up due to a security issue. XP users are currently admin users on their computers. While this gives us a lot of flexibility and control over our own machines, it also introduces security risks – users can accidentally install malicious code.  When we move to Windows 7, IR will change XP users’ roles from admin to standard user accounts. By default, standard users wouldn’t be able to install or delete applications, but ideally there will be a way for users to obtain temporary admin status when they need to install programs. IR is currently working out these privilege management issues, so Windows 7 deployment is pushed back to (tentatively) Spring 2011.   Wesley asked about 64 bit vs 32 bit machines – Jim said that by default new machines will be 32 bit, but faculty who need 64 bit should let him know.
  • Email conversion. The Microsoft Live @ Edu email transition has been delayed by issues with identity management (e.g., automatically assigning set permissions to new hires, and removing permissions from retirees, departing employees, etc). IR is working on a workaround plan that would let us go forward with the email conversion while temporarily skipping over identity management. IR is aware of “crunch times” in faculty schedules, so faculty email conversion will probably wait until intersession or beyond.
  • Personally identifiable information.  Ben asked about security concerns for faculty members who don’t use University email.  Jim recommends that any University business, and especially any University business that involves confidential information, be done using University services (like Angel and Royal Drive). The Identity Finder tool is available to help faculty and staff find any PII that might be on their machines. IR also has security training videos that faculty can watch to get an entry-level awareness of PII.
  • Information Resources Advisory Committee.  IRAC had been inactive for a year but is now reconstituted. IRAC members will be providing input on IR’s service portfolio. TAG members Dave, Paul, Eugeniu, and Lori will be on it as CAS faculty, PCPS faculty, CTLE, and PR representatives, respectively.
  • TechQual. IR ran this customer service survey over the summer. Preliminary results just came in, but IR is still processing them and will present them to IRAC next month.
  • Loyola Science Center. Most of the IT work in LSC is done, but there are still a few equipment issues popping up in classrooms. IR will continue working on this. Remaining projects include lecture capture, the auditorium, and RoomView, a tool that will allow Instructional Technology to monitor and maintain classroom equipment (e.g., whether or not a projector has been left on).
  • Wireless. The wireless upgrade project was approved.  Phase I (freshmen residences, the new Mulberry Street residences, and the LSC) is complete and adds 350 new WiFi points to the campus. Phase II is currently underway and will add 252 WiFi points in 21 buildings (residences, St. Thomas, and the Long Center). Phase III is scheduled for summer 2012 and will include the remaining academic and administrative buildings as well as outdoor coverage.  This is a big improvement – many thanks to the Network Infrastructure staff!
  • CTLE liaison. CTLE used to have two faculty liaisons who focused teaching and pedagogy. They have now added a third faculty liaison, TAG member Sandy Pesavento, to provide input on faculty interests and needs regarding pedagogical uses of technology.
  • Mobile access to Angel. CTLE and IR experimented with Blackboard’s iOS app for Angel, but found it to be a very limited tool, particularly for teachers (e.g., faculty can’t enter grades or interact with Angel dropboxes).  So mobile access to Angel still isn’t conveniently available at this time.
  • LMS review. Our contract with Angel expires in 2013, so a review committee will begin exploring other learning management system (LMS) options in January. Connie Wisdo in ITDA will lead the group. Eugeniu said that we might have an opportunity to use a “free” installation of Blackboard temporarily (on top of our existing Angel installation) so that faculty could try it out. Dave asked whether or not we would be able to migrate courses from Angel into a new LMS. Eugeniu said that from our current version of Angel (7.4), we could export/import single courses into Blackboard, with some imperfections. If we upgraded to v8 of Angel, we’d be able to batch migrate courses. Blackboard would also complement our Royal Card and emergency notification systems, since they’re Blackboard products (Transact and Connect), but it might not be easily tied into Banner.
  • Academic Technology Plan. The Provost’s office has no updates on the Academic Technology Plan.
  • Mobile website and app. Lori shared some analytics to give us an idea of how the mobile website and mobile app are being used. The app has been downloaded 7,604 times (mostly by iOS rather than Android devices). An in-app poll asked about the user’s identity, and 57% of the poll-takers were current students, 28% were alumni, 10% were prospective students, with faculty, staff, and other community members making up only 6%.  New app modules include Admissions and the Library (live but still being tweaked), with an Alumni module on the way. An iPad version is also on the timeline for this year, and hopefully mobile authentication is on the horizon.  The m.scranton mobile site is getting plenty of traffic. The most commonly viewed mobile pages are the home page and the admissions and academics home pages. [Note: Stats on the mobile app are here (in PDF). Stats on the mobile site are here (also in PDF).] PR is also setting up automatic redirects from the full site to the mobile site for recognized mobile devices – right now, the only active redirect is from the full site home page to the m.scranton home page.
  • Faculty websites. We’ve figured out a good workflow for faculty websites with CTLE. Any faculty member who wants to create a new website in the CMS should contact Aileen McHale in the CTLE. The CTLE TechCons will set up the faculty member’s web space, and then can help him or her as needed with templates or other support.  Sandy and Anne Marie would like to encourage faculty members (and any other page admins) to keep their websites current.
  • Continuing education. TAG members interested in learning more about academic uses of technology should keep an eye out for continuing education opportunities, since funding may be available. Jeremy and Sandy will each attend a day of the EDUCAUSE conference, courtesy of the Provost’s office.  Anne Marie and a few representatives from IR will also attend. TAG members who do participate in continuing education are asked to report back and share conference highlights.
  • Computerized testing. Teresa reported on concerns from the Nursing department. Nursing licensing exams are all online, so the department uses computerized testing to help their students prepare for the licensing environment.  Nursing faculty have run into trouble finding places to conduct their computer tests – there isn’t enough space to accommodate large classes, and classrooms that do accommodate that many students have been booked for other courses.  An ideal solution would be a large “shared resource” lab (possibly run by CTLE/Library) that faculty could schedule for tests, with computers set up to restrict access to the testing environment. Anne Marie suggested that we look at how other schools have solved this problem. Teresa will get more details on Nursing needs. Jim asked if other departments have this need, and for what class sizes. Once we have more information, we can agree on a good solution and then seek funding.
  • Our next meeting will be October 27. TAG members are asked to keep collecting (specific!) feedback from other faculty members on technology concerns or issues, and we’ll keep sharing information here as projects continue.

——

Note: Updated 10/24/11 with PDF docs of mobile app and website statistics shared during the meeting.


Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Categories : Angel and Desire2Learn, Email, Minutes, Mobile, Network and Infrastructure, Security, TAG Administrative, Upgrades

TAG Meeting Notes 4/28/11

29 04 2011

Yesterday was our last TAG meeting of the 2010-2011 academic year.  Hard to believe, but it’s also (approximately) the one-year anniversary of TAG’s founding.  We spent the first part of the meeting reviewing the past year of projects (some more successful than others):

We then had a discussion about where TAG should go from here and what its level of involvement should be like.  Some of the key points of the discussion:

  • What is the most important role for TAG? Our original goals were pretty ambitious. Some members felt that it was bridging the communication gap between IR and faculty.  Others felt that TAG should focus on making sure that IR resources are deployed in the most effective way.  Another thought was that TAG should be a campus leader in using and reviewing new technology tools. There was general agreement that our efforts should focus on teaching and learning, and that our goals need to be more realistic.
  • How involved should TAG be? We discussed a 1-10 scale of involvement with  “1” being just a discussion group and “10” being a highly active group lobbying for campus-wide changes.  We’ve been debating about this since the beginning of TAG.  The members present settled somewhere around an “8,” noting that we should continue to ensure that the faculty voice is heard on technology issues.
  • We also talked about how to manage TAG’s workflow.  One suggestion was to come up with a prioritized list of things that TAG wants to accomplish, and then have each member take responsibility for one or more of those items.  Some could be accomplished by individuals, others would be more of a group effort.
  • Department visits were seen as one of the more effective ways of communicating with faculty.
  • TAG has earned respect on campus from doing good work in the past year.  It’s important to the members that we maintain this reputation.

Bottom line – Jeremy and I will be making up our list of TAG to-do items, and we’ll be sharing them with the TAG members to figure out what TAG’s priorities are and then split up the projects.

If anyone else has thoughts on where TAG should go in 2011-2012, please let us know!


Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags:
Categories : Minutes, TAG Administrative

TAG Meeting Notes 3/3

4 03 2011

Just a few quick updates from yesterday’s TAG meeting:

  • We have three new members! Welcome to Dave Dzurec (History), Wesley Wang (Economics/Finance), and Sandy Pesavento (Education).
  • The Classroom Mediation survey has been distributed and is due today (Friday).  There was some confusion reported between the Classroom Mediation survey (which focused on equipment and was distributed by department chairs) and the Knowledge Base survey (which focused on software and was handed out in department meetings visited by TAG members).  Unfortunately, our timing didn’t work out as well as planned.
  • The Identity and Access Management system upgrade is still in progress. User IDs will likely be R numbers, but current email addresses will be carried forward.  You’ll likely be able to log into the my.scranton portal using your email address rather than your R number.
  • We discussed the plan for the email transition and debated how to get the word out about this plan to faculty members.  We recently sent out an email to all full-time faculty via FAC, and Jeremy, Kristen, and Jim will present to the Faculty Senate next Friday (March 11) about the transition plan.  We’re not sure how to reach part-time faculty.
  • TAG members have been visiting academic department meetings, to varying degrees of success.  We’ve gathered a lot of feedback from faculty about their technology needs.  The more specific feedback (e.g., projectors in a certain room not working) can be addressed by IR.  But TAG needs to address some of the larger issues (e.g., how do we get faculty to report problem computers/equipment to Tech Support so that they can be fixed?).
  • Faculty are still concerned about the lack of Mac support on campus, especially for things like antivirus software and uploading files to ANGEL from Safari (though that’s an issue with ANGEL rather than with our IR division).
  • There seems to be a need for discussions with faculty about academic & pedagogical uses of social media tools.  TAG will be looking into this more in the future.
  • There is a reported perception that TAG serves as a mouthpiece for the administration rather than as an independent body – but we’d like to beg to differ.  TAG has been asked by Academic Affairs and Information Resources to provide feedback on technology issues, not to repeat a previously determined message.  And communication between TAG and both Academic Affairs and Information Resources has been two-way rather than one-way.

Thanks to everyone who attended – and as usual, please feel free to address any of these points in the comments!


Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , ,
Categories : Classroom Mediation, Email, TAG Administrative

« Previous Entries