ITC
MEETING
NOVEMBER
24, 2003
Present: Jan Fox, Monica
Brooks, David Johnson, Mike McCarthy, Dennis Prisk, Jody Perry, Tom Hankins,
Frances Hensley, Allen Taylor,
REVIEW OF MINUTES:
approved as amended
COMMITTEE UPDATES:
Jan: There was a
merger of the Governor's Office of Technology and IS&C. WVNet is still not a part of that group. The merger was a part of a Senate bill. Because of that, a group of CIOs, and Computer Center Directors, that Arnold chairs, in
the state will write a White Paper for higher education that defines what we
believe that higher education expects from WVNet; including governance, service
and a future network plan that would position WVNet in the appropriate area for
research in education. We are trying to
be pro-active. The concern we feel is
that there have been some various issues from WVNet with people trying to take
control of this resource and a percentage of our E & G Budgets were
redirected to support WVNet. Higher
Education is trying to take an aggressive role in the control of WVNet. What I would like to do in the portion I am
writing is have the state network, with potential fiber to major areas and
connect that network beyond our borders.
It would connect into the Ohio Network (ORNET) which goes to
There are some other
things going on with other state agencies.
They are working on a database for state contracts so that they know
when contracts are due. The state has
let lapse our telecommunications telephone long distance contract and didn't
bid. That has caused problems with E
rate.
Since we met last, we
had the Biotechnology Trade Mission, which was a success. There were 9 people here representing 5
companies. One group was directly from
Mike Dunn has
appointed Jody Perry to represent him as a member of this group representing
Classified Staff.
Allen: I reported last
time that we had hoped to have a legislative special session that would approve
the infrastructure wiring funding for capital upgrades to building. That did not go through, but will be
discussed in the Spring session. We may
miss the summer project list to get started on that.
Mike: The
Jan: Jon Cutler was one
of only 4 people in the state who have passed the National Security Exam.
Mike: The Workstation
Disposal Policy was adopted. I
understand that there is a general university procedure, but Chuck could not
point to an actual policy requiring the stripping of computers before
sale. Per Allen: Purchasing has developed a standard procedure
for disposal of items at the Yard Sale.
Donna: There are 43 new
E-courses ready to go into
Jan: We had a meeting
on Friday with the other campuses. We
have a request from Tom Blevins to take on other community colleges in the
state. We decided to work with Southern
Community College for a Service Level Agreement in a pilot program to determine
costs before we take on other institutions.
David: Policy 13 is on the
secretary's desk at Faculty Senate right now.
There were 2 changes that were requested. The references to Policy 9, needed to stay
for the most part because of the references to patent and copyright. The other change requested was a
clarification for the rate of pay for instructors. We used the standard university procedures
for determining faculty compensation.
Jan: We need to review
the compensation formula because the cost to the students has gone up but the
faculty compensation has not changed.
COPYRIGHT POLICY
Review of Marshall
University Copyright Policy – Draft
Jan: Two years ago WVU
came out with a Copyright policy. They
offered that policy to us. It is a huge
policy.
Monica is on the
Copyright committee. What she is
presenting today is clean and separates itself from the Intellectual Property
Policy. Committee consists of Donna
Spindel, David Johnson, Sue Tams, Lisa Heaton, Mary Moore, and myself.
The original policy
was not adopted and then it disappeared.
The committee reviewed the Policy in light of the Teach Act. We had a good foundation for revising this
document to reflect our responsibilities under the Act. The new Act provides a lot of flexibility for
us that we did not have before. There
are still some compliance issues that are incumbent upon us to communicate to
faculty. We have planned a couple of
seminars to occur in February. In the
new policy we have made a referral to Policy Bulletin 13 because we want to
make sure that the faculty knows that if they create an on-line course or
utilize multimedia in the creation of course, it does fall under Policy 13
issues and they need to be aware of both policies. The Definitions are not different from the
previous policy. We inserted Teach Act language wherever possible.
Page 4 Bullet 3
clarified that this Policy does not preclude
On page 5: Use and
Sale of Copyrighted material. Refers to
Policy 13 and the Intellectual Property Policy.
On page 6 we start
introducing Teach Act compliance sometimes called “fair use”. The Teach Act allows greater flexibility for
classroom. We wanted to communicate to
the faculty exactly what that means.
On page 7 David
provides some resources regarding what the Teach Act excludes.
Page 9 covers fair use guidelines.
Page 11 sites specific
items such as course packs. It also
discusses displaying the performance related works of others.
Page 13 covers music,
reserve materials for libraries. All of
these are within compliance.
Page 16 provides a
check list for development and distribution of copyrighted material in detail.
Pg 19 is the Teach Act compliance checklist.
My recommendation to
Jan was to let Layton's office review this before it goes on to Faculty Senate.
Layton suggests that
we treat the old policy like it doesn't exist and use this document as only
document. The deans will have to review
this document.
Jan: The goal here
today is to have this document approved as an Interim Executive Policy. Voted and Approved.
INFORMATION
SECURITY POLICY
Arnold: I have incorporated
the changes brought up by this group in the last meeting. The changes were mostly cosmetic with the
exception of the following:
3.3.5 – clarifications in wording only.
3.3.13 was changed to
come up with a classification system for information to be consistent with the
Definitions. I tried to give an example
of the classification and included it in the Definitions.
In 3.3.12: Each owner and custodian of information will
determine its classification based on the circumstance and the nature of the
information. This needs to be done in
order to decide how we are going to protect the information.
Various areas of the
universities are the owner of their relative information.
Layton has issue with
the terms owner/custodian from a legal perspective.
The Definitions
section will be hyperlinked whenever used throughout the document. Layton suggests using examples in the
definitions to clarify the definitions.
Jan wants a page that
sets out who the university contacts are for various statutes.
Allen: We need to establish
guidelines regarding email.
Jan wants to have
further review before the next meeting to make sure we are comfortable with the
terminology. Layton will read over the
existing document to see if further review/revision is necessary.
We may want to broaden
the reading by including the new faculty members who have security expertise.
Policy tabled until next meeting.
WIRELESS POLICY –
First Reading
Arnold: We advanced one
portion that covers the infrastructure, telecommunications, networking and
communications policies that need to be advanced to address people going out
and purchasing their own wireless systems.
This opens the network up to anyone from the outside. We need to do something about it now. This first cut defines that Marshall
University owns the ether/airwaves around the campus and we will control the
use of that space around campus. Until
technology comes along that encrypts data across the wireless, we are relying
on technology called Virtual Private Networks that does that for us. Data is encrypted at the wireless host and
are encrypted from end to end back into the network. We will not let anyone put their own
wireless device in their office for their own use.
We need to restrict
use of cordless phones in dorms that could interfere with other wireless. This policy should include any Marshall site
to keep people from doing other wireless activities.
Allen: In researching
this policy, I found reference in the Residence Services Policy from the 1960s
limiting use of ham radios in the residence halls. To interpret this policy today, it would
include cordless phones.
Jan: We need to make
sure our internal people understand that unsecured wireless transmissions could
be picked up off campus.
Allen: There is a
provision in the document that if there is an area of a building where wireless
cannot get access, they must get special permission before installing.
Jan: This is a concern
when teaching; the interference could interrupt class. This policy is not preventative. It can only track down violations and have a
policy to point to.
This is a first reading – The second reading will be in January.
We will plan for the
same time period for our meetings during the Spring Semester.
ADJOURNED.