|
University Archives of Virginia Tech |
Virginia Tech
Governance Minutes ArchiveJanuary 27, 1993
Minutes of the University Communications Resources Committee Meeting held: Wednesday, January 27, 1993 - 3:00-5:00 pm Location: Board Room, Newman Library Present: Fred Bailey, David Bevan, Erv Blythe, George Crofts (Chairman), Ron Daniel, Ed Fox, Carolyn Furrow, Gail Gray, Marcia Harrington, Judith Jones (for Tom McAnge), Judy Lilly, Charles Litchfield, Mark Sanders, Arthur Snoke, Robert Sumichrast, Matthew Swift (for K. Johnston) Guests: Phil (Theta) Bowden, Tom Head NOTE: Two new items were added to the agenda: 6) Qualifications for Position of Vice-President of Informa- tion Sytems 7) Inbound Modem Users Dial-out Capabilities Blocked * * * * * 1. The December minutes were approved. 2. The proposed membership of the committee and proposed methods for appointment were approved. The designation of "public service" was corrected to "university outreach and international programs." The corrected list will go to the Commission on University Support. 3. Ed Fox spoke to the committee about Kodak's efforts to make an easy transition from storing images on paper (e.g., printed photographs) to storing them digitally on compact disks. The product of the process is sold under the name Photo CD. Images stored on Photo CDs may be retrieved for printing, for viewing on television screens, and for manipulating through computers. The ability to pull image files into computers provides ways to insert pictures into computer generated documents. The ability to display the images on television and through computer-driven devices means the technology can supplement lectures and other instructional tech- niques. The Photo CD process provides an inexpensive way to get images into electronic form. Some local commercial firms may begin offering the service. Media services is investigating the feasi- bility of buying the processing equipment. This could invite questions regarding inappropriate competition with commercial firms; plus, Kodak may be reluctant to enter such an arrangement. Robert Sumichrast suggested that equipment to display images from Photo CDs should be of a higher priority for university funds than processing equipment. 4. The faculty network access subcommittee had no report. Bernard LaBerge, chair of the mail regulations subcommittee, was unable to attend the meeting but did submit a report. It reads: The subcommittee convened to consider the charge. Substantial progress was made on the matter of printed mail. Apparently, there are some special problems of con- fidential mail in the dormitories. Since roommates share mail boxes, some confidential mail gets opened by roommates. Notes were sent to offices that deal with special types of mail--grades, financial matters, disciplin- ary actions, health records--to learn if confiden- tial mail gets special treatment. The issue of electronic mail was discussed and it was agreed that Kay Heidbreder should be invited to discuss these issues with the subcommittee. Carolyn Furrow reported that the subcommittee is separating campus and e-mail in their deliberations. Arthur Snoke suggested that the subcommittee expand its charge to include making a recommendation on a regulation for campus mail. 5. Earving Blythe reported on activities underway for Phase II re- structuring in information systems. He and Mike Williams have made presentations on the implication of restructuring to central admin- istrators and deans. They have proposed that funding and account- ing for computing be divided into instruction, research, adminis- tration, and outreach/extension. A clear understanding is needed of the source of funds and how the moneys are used. Initial plan- ning includes pilot projects in writing, mathematics, and humani- ties instruction. These choices were influenced by a call for proposals from the State Senate Finance Committee for use of com- puters in writing instruction. State funds would come in the form of facilities support. The university should learn soon whether these funds will be available in the 1993-94 fiscal year. Expecta- tions are high for some limited amount of new funds. In the longer range, all faculty should have access to computing and to user services. The latter would help faculty take advantage of computing devices. With distributed computing comes the need for continuous support, not just one-time outlays of money. The models for the continuing support are based on a four-year cycle for equipment purchases and retraining of faculty; i.e., one-quar- ter of the faculty would be trained or retrained each year. There is wide-spread university and state support (at least moral sup- port) for the plans. Following restructuring of faculty computer support would be restructuring of administrative support. Buddy Litchfield asked if the university would cover the costs of equipment for faculty or would the departments be required to purchase the devices. Erv responded that it may come from the university. The pilot projects should indicate how the decision will go. During this stage of "selling" the concept of distributed computing, it is too early to know. In response to several questions, Erv said that much thought is going into the transition from "mainframe thinking to thinking about distributed computing." Daily communication occurs that will reduce problems with the transition, but some disruption is bound to occur. The vision is for a richer, more diverse environment than now exists--albeit a more complex one. Ed Fox suggested that the UCRC should be actively involved in the restructuring of information systems because of the many constitu- encies represented by the members. The committee should be review- ing the plans and have reactions and opinions of the members heard. Erv agreed and will present descriptions of the pilot projects at the February meeting, with progress reports planned for the March and April meetings. Arthur Snoke requested that members be given brief written descriptions before the next meeting, so as to facil- itate more discussion and less presentation time during the meet- ing. 6. The search committee for the position of vice president for infor- mation systems is formulating a list of qualifications for viable candidates. The UCRC was invited to propose qualifications. The membership felt ill prepared to respond during the meeting. Judy Lilly was asked to circulate, or bring to the next meeting, the qualifications the search committee has assembled. Such a list should stimulate thinking by the UCRC membership. 7. Judy Lilly responded to a question of why faculty were blocked from dialing off-campus databases through the inbound modem from home computers. Consultants on computing networks repeatedly advise against "dial-out" capabilities for inbound modem users. With the "cracker codes" used by "hackers," fraud is too easy. Examples are widely known to network professionals of organizations that have lost large amounts of money through dial-out systems. Judy cited a case of losses in excess of $1,000,000. The suggested approach for faculty needing access to electronic archives is to obtain a uni- versity credit card and make the calls directly from home phones, with the charges coming to departmental accounts. Furthermore, many of the data-bases can be reached through the internet. Al- though internet access may have some drawbacks, it is clearly the cheapest. NEXT MEETING February 24, 1993 - 3:00-5:00 pm Board Room, Newman Library
VT History | Digital Library and Archives | Special Collections | University Archives
Send questions or comments to:
Tamara Kennelly, University Archivist
University Libraries
Virginia Tech
P.O. Box 90001
Blacksburg, VA, 24062-9001URL: http://spec.lib.vt.edu/minutes/cnc/1993/January+27++1993.html
Last modified on: Tuesday, 25-Sep-2001 13:57:23 EDT