Wednesday, September 17, l997

Monica Brooks, John Buskey, Randall Comm, William S. Deel, Jan I. Fox, Tony Keys, Akhtar Lodgher, Michael McCarthy, Michael McGuffey, Patricia O'Reilly, Allen Taylor, Linda Wilkinson Added member Tom Hankins.

Absent: Ken Lindsey (sent Randy Comm), Cal Kent, Jim Stephens (excused), Barry Beckett (excused)

Jan gave a brief history on what's going on and why the request from the group. There has been an on-going problem not only at Marshall University, but the entire state and county to hold on to technical people. The state salary structure does not meet the needs to try to hold on to people and the problem being the more technologically literate people at college institutions more focus on the key technical people to keep the data bases merged as well as the whole infrastructure of the library technical people. Companies want to pay skill set. Many of the people we lost are making a minimum of $12,000 increase. Of all the threats we have in technology, I would consider maintaining the staff is the number one threat. An incredible problem is keeping the core technical staff.

There is heavy usage of extra help because of personnel management who changed hours where you cannot exceed 1,020 at anytime for extra help load. Once you exceed l,020 hours you cannot be considered extra help. That was the majority of the people running the labs and library in that zone. The only option is to try to hold these people that are already trained. If we take them through someone like Kelley Services this is on their resume and not coming from an institution of higher education and they also wanted health benefits. An issue of key groups is with the library with 2 library positions needed on-going computing service positions and the Graduate College is down 3 positions. Bell Atlantic has 67 open technology positions and we are seeing that same roll out in just about every single company. Advantage Valley is one of the big issues with MU Economic Development as a key factor in our workforce. We do not have a strong technical training work force. If we did we could attract all kinds of companies. Same issue goes for the core competency documents that need the same technical skills. We maintain all our staff and faculty so we have on-going multiple problems and issues.

Training on campus is a real issue. We have 20 Power Point training classes, but they are not coordinated. It's very difficult to build on technical training spectrum with a concern of stepping on toes. The Community College does a great deal of training as well as the Byrd Center. We need to focus all in one spot for marketing. There is training all over the place so everyone is afraid of getting on everyone's turf. The idea for Institute for Technology is that it doesn't step on anyone toes. Everyone provides training. The technical trainers are a large part of our key technical staff who can gain additional money for the work above and beyond their state salaries, which has been a real problem. Hopefully, we can hold to the technical staff by providing additional money. Dr. Gilley is willing to put forth free tuition waivers for certain students to offset work so that they can work in the labs and get real hands on training. There is an incentive for students in the program and students who leave the program who are truly technically trained for this type of market. We need to use the same facilities to do whole global market for faculty and staff. We are also partners with community businesses so we don't want to step on their toes either. It's still uncertain, kinda like a puzzle, and the picture is not clear. It is still being very much focused, but what we are doing is trying to interest a lot of different people.

How is this to be marketed? Marshall University and computer technology where we do the training is a much bigger market. We need to agree on types of training and how to organize it. Dr. Gilley expects to put a person in charge of this to coordinate all the training and services.

Jim Stephens from Human Resources could not attend today but voices his concerns in the document provided you today. He feels somewhat threatened from the training perspective. We shouldn't threaten anyone. We are not going to take over anyone's training. It's strictly coordination and collaboration factor who our trainers are. Actually pushing people. If you are offering training make people aware of that training so that we can fill the classes. We need coordinated training for the whole campus. Need to negotiate that classes are full and build the next level of expertise. We need a solid training program. We are putting a great deal of money and effort and not getting key people to do the training. There is very good training and very poor training. Again, we don't want to threaten anyone.

How to sell ourselves and improve ourselves? Not just through training but also consulting. Putting a bunch of faculty together may not give us the results but with a coordinator that would be their job. Other companies want to partner with us like Bell Atlantic with 67 open positions. They are in such desperate strains to get their people technically trained. Willing to bring their people to help train here so they will have some resources. Also, Telemarketing in Huntington has contacted us for training. They are in desperate need for computer skills to enter information into the database and for retraining. Anything we can come up with to help support them.

What about facilities? There are facilities in Huntington and Charleston, but also other areas. We need to know where these facilities are located. When we bring people from outside to campus is not conducive with parking and finding their way around campus. Bankers come in one week a year. Lot going on already. MUGC has most of their classes in the evening. Also MUGC is bringing in one new lab with their new building. There are 3 facilities in Drinko library that will not go with the general classroom schedule, although they could. Community College is self-supported. We need to know who is charging what and not feel threatened that they are going to loose money. Marshall University seems competitive price wise but Dr. Buskey said there are 15 training computer centers in the Charleston and very competitive. That area is where MCI has a big push and want to buy up all the space they can get.

What about salaries? Adjunct faculty are already underpaid. An example, Community College has one teaching with a MS degree and one working on MS degree. They are very good at what they do and meet the needs of people but salaries are really low. Need to coordinate pricing charged making sure there are some fair equitable method to go back and market these salaries. Need to find out all the users on campus. Companies don't want training on something if it's 2 years old, but right when it comes out is when they want the training. Our market is tough to hit that front edge.

A method used by faculty is an Instructor Evaluation in which the student evaluates the person teaching. Don't hire back regardless of their credentials if they rate low. Sometimes the teacher teaching it is so technical that you can't understand it.

The issue is to try and make sure we label these courses right, that there is a progression. Right now there is no way to sequence these. Training area definitely overlap with our existing curricula. Consulting area is pretty clear cut but not the training area. A professor in the College of Business needed someone to teach Virtual Basic course, but needed an MS Degree. Example: someone in the Community College who doesn't have an MS degree but is an excellent instructor. You have the technical skills, but not the degree. We need to get input from others. There is a huge market. Do we take advantage of it or not?. When you talk to someone make sure they understand the concepts. My biggest concern is not to threaten anyone. Primary benefit is for us to move froward in the community, the state and the region. We need to make Marshall successful. Jan's said her main purpose in going to Dr. Gilley was that salaries have to be maintained here. This is a key issue. Dr. Gilley has a sub-committee and we need comments with as much input as you can provide for this document which must be written in a fairly short turn around time. It kind of goes with everything we are dealing with core competencies and our strategic planning. The MUIT document has been updated due to the work of Dr. Lodger and Dr. Hooper. I have made some additions.

Dr. John Buskey will survey existing training, centers and clientele.

Allen Taylor will provide write-up on compensation.

Review Updated link; http://multimedia.marshall.edu/itstrat/muit.html

This is a hot issue. There are several departments looking to invest in some sort of Imaging Technology. We need a sub-committee. Need this sub-committee to look at different imaging technology strategies and make a recommendation so that we can push forth a recommendation from this committee on what used. What our recommendations will be. The technology keeps changing so it's very difficult to make recommendations. The Graduate College has the Menolta System and there is a Menolta system in the library. Incredible amounts of paper and we need a mechanism to scan it, research it on all our campuses on key things, like people in student areas, who has student records. A special issue is at the Graduate College because they already selected the Menolta System. Want to make sure we use their system remotely on this campus.

Two other products we need to be aware of 1)Banner Imaging System developed by Banner for student information and 2) a third party Microsoft product.. I requested information on that system and have yet to receive it. The sub-committee will review existing products. These products I mentioned and any other and make a firm recommendation to this group by next meeting. A lot of offices want to buy imaging systems and not aware of what technology can do and what commitment they have to make. It is not a small path to look at. The needs of the purchasing office won't necessarily meet the needs of another office. Needs have changed significantly in the Graduate College and us just given the separation of distance which wasn't a problem at Graduate College before July 1 is one now. Getting paper records down here to up there, security and a multiple levels of issues.

The Committee:

Allen Taylor, Chair

Monica Brooks

Mike McCarthy

Mike McGuffey

Three Documents:

Main Document - WV 2001

ATM Overview

The WV Telecommunication Enterprise

How to make connections from Huntington to Charleston getting enough bandwidth making sure of its expansion. Having bandwidth issues all over the state with different technologies. The state is not willing to conduct multiple technologies. For example IS&C reported this one is not available in a large portion of the state. West Virginia does not have the same opportunities with different telecommunication strategies as other states. VA network has been real successful. The state decided to go from frame relay to the next level up which is more than one level up to jump on the newer technology. Marshall is the first institution to take advantage of Bell Atlantic grant. Bell Atlantic will provide additional money for training. Chancellor Manning has 2 million dollars on the table for training. We need to position ourselves in the market. Letters are already in the works and have gone out to Bell Atlantic. Bell Atlantic does not have a switch server. It charges flat rate whether you use it or not. I think it stands to change the whole structure how we do everything if we can do away with the concept of having dedicated networks and do away with having concepts of dedicated spaces to do anything. Find the arch and go in. Idea of technology is to keep turning it up. Cost will go down dramatically and we will be right there to take advantage of it. There will eventually be a lot of other players. Arnold Miller is in Flatswoods doing heavy training now. This is a 3-year agreement. Bell Atlantic has a lot more at stake if it doesn't work. Bell Atlantic will come in and interview the state because Marshall was the implementor. What they will ask and what we have to produce for them are (l) applications we are running across ATM (2) issue for Multi Point controller is a huge issue, (3) what to expect from our resources now and in the next 2-3 years Application is especially needed in Health Care. ATM has successfully driven Health Care. Look at where we have been, where we are today, and where we will be tomorrow. John Buskey will report on next meeting as to the accuracy of the Major Networks. DLCC stands for Distance Learning Coordinating Council that was established in l99l to coordinate telecommunication for distance learning. At next meeting Mike McCarthy will discuss on healthcare issues and John Buskey will discuss the Byrd Center. There are two Strategic Plans. Patricia O'Reilly has the long document. The other Strategic Plan is what we consider the real strategic plan because the one going to the state really asks very detailed questions that don't necessarily give the whole campus view of flavor of what we are doing. Need anything you want included in the plan, describing your area in paragraph form to be included in major plan and goals. The group will review for accuracy before going to faculty senate.

Need to find out what systems on campus have year 2000 problems. That problem primarily effects mainframes but effects all kinds of different systems including PC's bio that the clock doesn't set right, D-base file system and various things. For the past couple of years computing services we have looked at various major systems we had in place on campus and have fazed all those out. The only major system that we are aware of in computing services is CUFS area - our financial system that is run by the Graduate College and our main campus. The finance office, as well as others has been reviewing alternatives. Another report Tulley's office wants is on the 23^rd, which is much more detailed on the year 2000 problem. Doesn't give much time to go out on campus. Would like to ask the group if they were aware of any problems or anything they would like our technical group that maybe year 2000 face running your own. Tulley's office is making this a big issue and impact on the state. Possible legislative dollars will be made available to help department offices to help offset cost to solve the 2000 problems. Some amount of money might be available to do that. My report on the 23^rd is to reflect this CUFS problem and attempt to get funding for a new financial system. Any feedback you can give or anything you are aware of or what us to look at in terms of any major systems would be very helpful.

We had a Technology Symposium where we had half a day where we had all the people that were awarded the Technical Advantage Grant came in and gave a 15 presentation on their progress. The rest of the week we had training on Web CT and a whole series of things. Money was available to do this over the whole fall semester. What is needed is to make sure that the symposium meets the needs of what the campus really wants. We need topics for the whole institution for that week like things that people need information on. Have had requests for University Calendar, mail list, list serve, where people aren't aware or may not know how to use it. Have purchased Web CT license for 800 users and did another purchase order to upgrade to unlimited user accounts. Any topic like imaging to have someone come in and do a presentation whether free or we pay a fee for them to do the presentation. Our aim is to make people aware of what the possibilities are and what technologies are. Need your ideas and topics. Should be particularly useful for Graduate College with all those changes. Just completed a l hour multimedia videotape presentations with Technical Advantage Grant receptiants to show faculty what other faculty is doing. We need to set a date sometime in October for this symposium.

Not sure if this is a planning issue or a policy issue. Right now we have 3 different domains for Marshall University (l) Marshall University.edu (2) MUGC.edu (3) RCBI.org. (The last one probably could be left since it is outside Marshall). MUGC.edu is a bit of an issue. Who might be next? Thoughts are that every organization within MU should be in Marahall.edu domain. We are proud of who we are and should be advertising that out there. When you see Marshall.edu you know who it is. When you see MUGC.edu you wonder who it is. For example when the library subscribes to electronic server vendors they do not want to extend service to MUGC.edu because it's not Marshall.edu domain. This year Celene Seymour had to pay $10,000 for separate entity. Other issues are who is managing the domain with Internet, registration issues. In order to get a domain you need to have a primary domain name server and back up server. Also some confusion with software site license between the two institutions which seems to be o.k. We are looking at an agreement with one major strategic planning group that offers a subscription accessible for single domain pay based on head count. When you go through a domain you pay double. We administer a domain for Cabell Huntington Hospital and Advantage Valley Group. Another question is to how many mail messages you can forward. There are 2 million mail messages a month. Need to work to address the plan on e-mail in general. Whether it is group wise, pine vs user Netscape mail. Need to centralize all e-mail from an administrative perspective. Make sure we have all the issues on the table, legitimate discussion, poll other areas and be prepared to vote next week. A motion was made to have all Marshall entities placed under Marshall.edu domain and it was seconded.

We have a number of buying contracts. In l992 Dr. Gilley passed some guidelines for the review of purchases by computing services. There are a number of products and number of contracts to buy from. WVNET had about 20 or so different types of contracts for hardware and software. We have set a minimum buying standard and restriction over the last 2 years to buy on Tier l and Tier 2 based machine. The Gardner Group is an independent group that looks at what the true cost of ownership in hardware, for instance. We are in the process of negotiating a contract with them right now. Our major vendors are Dell, Gateway, IBM, HP - there are about 12 of them. Our intent was to buy computer hardware from manufactures that will have support. Need a group view what our current restrictions are and either indorse them or not endorse the Gardner Group. Our major contracts like Gateway 2000, Comp. U.S.A. Direct, who bought out PC Complete, the contract expires the end of December with no option for renewal. Have to re-negotiate contract with a vendor like Comp USA Direct. Also looking at Computer Discount Warehouse and Micro Warehouse who provide us with good discounts. Softsmart is the largest vendor with software

This deals with Senate Bill 547 in trying to get students personal machines. In the new library we have all kinds of ways to connect personal machines to the center. The problem is how do we support these machines on campus. How do you tell parents which machine to buy or how to get support and maintenance on that machine. We need one stop shopping and maybe negotiate with bookstore on campus. Where to go to get good deals and support. This also would effect student loans.

Meeting Adjourned: 3:30