Technology Task Force

Report

The Technology Task Force finds that there are unmet computer service, maintenance and installation needs at Geneseo. These needs have occurred because of the large influx of new hardware, software and network systems on campus, the ubiquitous use of this technology campus wide and the relatively small CIT staff to deal with the high service demand. Given that the quantity, complexity and use of technology will most likely increase in the future, the T2F recommends the following actions be implemented to help alleviate these problems.

• That site specific Technical Support Teams be established ( a distributed work group)
• That a Standing Committee on Technology be formed
• That an advisor to the President on Technology be put in place at the cabinet level

We recommend that site specific "technical support teams" be established across the campus. These teams would form a distributed technical support group. The teams would maintain, repair and install the specialized computer and network software and hardware in those departments which they support. Each team would be composed of a full time technical staff person, department representatives, plus several temp service students. For example the physical sciences would have a team composed of one faculty member from each of the Biology, Chemistry, Geology, Math and Physics departments, plus a full time technical person and several student assistants. The staff members would be housed in the areas which they support, in this example Greene Science. Six teams would be required to minimally blanket the campus and form the nucleus of the distributed technical support group. Additional teams may be added depending upon need and funding. Two positions are already funded by the library and computer science. The other four may be filled by retirements from CIT, the student computer fee increase and recharges for computer service. The areas would be designated as follows:

Departments: Biology, Chemistry, Geology, Mathematics, Physics & Astronomy

Office Location: Greene

Supervision and review of the full time technical person: CIT with the advice from the team members

Funding: ~ $30K/year plus fringe

Departments: English, Foreign Languages, Music, Philosophy, Political

Science, School of Education, School of Performing Arts

Office Location: Welles

Supervision and review of the full time technical person: CIT with the advice of the team members

Funding: ~ $30K/year plus fringe

Departments: Anthropology, Communication, Communicative Disorders,

Geography, History, Psychology, Sociology, School of Business

Office Location: Sturges

Supervision and review of the full time technical person: CIT with the advice of the team members

Funding: ~ $30K/year plus fringe

Departments: Computer Science,

Office Location: South

Supervision and review of the full time technical person: Computer Science (Maintain the Status Quo)

Funding: Computer Science (Maintain the Status Quo)

Departments: College Libraries

Office Location: Milne

Supervision and review of the full time technical person: Libraries (Maintain the Status Quo)

Funding: Libraries (Maintain the Status Quo)

Departments: All Administrative

Office Location: Erwin

Supervision and review of the full time technical person: CIT with the advice of the team members

Funding: ~ $30K/year plus fringe

1. This is a "best guess" at a division of work load. We would expect some adjustment to occur during the first year. Perhaps sliding a department or two from one team to another. Except in the cases of the library and computer science.
2. Teams are clustered both by location and by the support work CIT finds typical in the specified departments. Location is used as a baseline clustering factor. Support staff are located with the faculty they support, so that faculty will have regular interaction with them and can reach them easily for immediate help.
3. Political Science, although more closely aligned with the Blake/Fraser/Sturges team in content (e.g., statistical packages), would probably benefit more from close proximity to the support personnel residing in Welles with them.
4. Math may need to slide to another team in South Hall given their distance from the natural sciences. However, their software overlap is sufficiently high to warrant placing them in the natural sciences team for the time being.
5. Of course, departments should be encourages to draw on the expertise of support staff from other teams as needed. We could even suggest that departments "self-select" their particular team membership as we gain more experience with the model.

Technical support teams would supplement and work in conjunction with the existing service given by CIT to the departments. Records of tech support team repair work would be submitted to the CIT data base so that others might benefit from their repair solutions. Individual Tech support teams would meet weekly to discuss problems and solutions and to disseminate technical information. During the meeting the members would also determine the task list for the following week and discuss solutions to technical problems in their area. The campus tech support group, all campus teams, would meet monthly to discuss common problems and solutions. Members of the tech support group would participate in common professional development and technical training. Periodic review and term contracts would be given to those technical persons hired for the technical positions. Training would be administered and funded by CIT with the consent of the various area teams.

A web site which contains a technical data base of problems and solutions would be established for the campus. The web site would be used to aid teams as well as individuals in their evaluation of technical problems. A technical experts list would also be included on the Web site.

It is further recommended that the faculty and staff team members be the primary trouble shooters. To what degree and extent a team member pursues a solution to a problem will be determined by their own knowledge and personal time constraints. However they will be the primary facilitators of the work. They will see that the job gets done. This is their chief task.

A Faculty and Staff reward structure should be implemented for those members who actively participate in a Tech Support Team. Rewards may be in the form of course release time, billed hours, new computer equipment, software, trips to national meetings or training sessions. The reward should be appropriate to the additional work load given to the member and the type of reward that best suits them and their department. This reward system may be adjusted by mutual consent of the member, the team and the departments supported by the team. Membership of the Tech Support team must only occur with the consent of the department chair or director.

Mission:

1. To identify technology needs and recommend campus programs to fill these needs.

Rationale: An on-going, College-wide, committee should be established to identify campus needs and recommend programs to the president to fill these needs. Programs should be developed quickly, within 6 months, and should be reviewed within 3 years so they may be modified if needed. Programs which take more than 6 months to develop will most likely be obsolete before they are implemented. Given the pace of technology no program can exist effectively without change for long. Thus programs which exceed 3 years must be reviewed by the committee.

2. Act as a consultant and referral resource for other College bodies facing technology related issues.

Rationale: Every aspect of the College's operation is going to be increasingly affected by technology. Groups not familiar with cutting edge technology will need general as well a specific advice. Some resources for such advice already exist such as CIT and others have been proposed such as the technical support group. The standing committee can't replace these resources, but it can serve as an advisory group to departments and areas concerning the broader technological issues and the achievement of common campus goals. The committee should meet with the President on a semester basis to give advice and to receive new charges. This biyearly meeting is in keeping with mission statement 1.

Membership (appointed by the president)

1) Representatives from each of the following groups:

• Each major faculty division (e.g., humanities, social sciences, natural sciences, library, etc.)
• Major academic services not represented above (e.g., CIT)
• Each major administrative division (e.g., approximately, each vice president's division).
• Student body
• CAS and other nominally private support organizations.

Despite wanting wide representation, the committee should be small enough to respond quickly to changing technologies. The above list of groups suggests a committee of approximately 15 people. Keeping the Committee small, however, means that every department cannot have a representative.

2) Appointment procedures, selection of Chair. The appointment of the chair of the committee should be made by the President. The President in consultation with the Provost, Associate Provost for Technology and the committee will appoint the Chair.

3) Term of appointment. No member shall serve on the committee for more than 3 consecutive years. In order to maintain the continuity of the program’s mission, only one third of the committee will be appointed each year. The initial committee will be composed of three equal groups having one, two and three year term appointments. This will allow the appointment cycle to begin after the first year.

The technology advisor should be a person who reports directly to the president at the cabinet level. This person may have the title of Associate Provost or Vice President or simply technology advisor. Since technology impacts all divisions of the campus and that it must be integrated in all aspects of the operation of the college, there should be one person that oversees the entire process. This person must have the authority to get the job done directly or indirectly via the president’s office.

At no time in the history of SUNY Geneseo has technology played such a profound role on the everyday operation of the campus. The future holds even greater technological advances for education. We are at the threshold of a new era of information access which requires the campus to become extensively interconnected to the world. If we are to achieve this goal we will need to recognize the importance of technology on this campus at the highest level by the formation of the technology committee and the technical support group. If we are to stay on the cutting edge of educational technology we must elevate the importance of campus technology to the cabinet level with the permanent addition of a technology advisor or Vice President.