The minutes from the last meeting were approved as submitted.

1. Net 21 Representative Approved
   The Network 21 Budget & Policy Oversight Committee approved Marilyn Sharrow as the Net 21 liaison on the Council.

2. Academic Senate Representative to the Universitywide Committee on Information Technology and Telecommunications Policy.
   Harry Matthews has been appointed as the rep.

3. New features on the Web site - security.
   The Members' Area of the AC4 Web page is now accessible by using your Kerberos login and password. Council minutes will be posted here. Abbreviated minutes will be posted on the public Web side. The public minutes will not show who said what at the meetings.

   The database to index documents is in the development stage.

Mel Ramey will serve on the AC4 Steering Committee. Other members are Harry Matthews, John Stenzel, and Peter Rock.

A Subcommittee of this council has been proposed to determine if UCD should have any role in CVU and if so, how to achieve it. The situation right now is vague as to the role of UCOP will play. Chair Matthews would like to find one other person to serve on the Subcommittee. There are lots of issues, one of them is how to give credit to people who take courses. This issue is going to need to be addressed some day. We can chose to deal with it now, or later. The issue of access to servers is another item, but one that would not be dealt with by the Council. More discussion followed about issues of copyright and intellectual property.

The subcommittee charge has not been drafted yet. One useful function for a subcommittee is simply to be charged with paying attention to the range of issues, distance learning in particular, and begin to identify where the forces of changes are. Unless somebody is looking at the whole picture you will have a fragmented response. In the future, courses will be available on the web taught by institutions like MIT and decisions about how we respond to that will have to be made. It is expected that this is in the near term of three to five years. Right now no degree is offered by CVU.

Chair Matthews expects the Council to produce a recommendation on the IT leadership position at next month's meeting. For more information on the specific discussion, see last month's minutes and the handouts mailed to Council members and URLs for Web sites listing organization charts from other institutions which was sent via email.

Doug Hartline, from IT: Communications Resources brought to the Council the question of planning for upgrading TV/video facilities. Dean Rock, Marilyn Sharrow, and Chair Matthews met with Doug to discuss this topic. It is expected that the next upgrades would cost between 1 and 2 million. The Network Budget & Policy Oversight Committee would like to hear from the Council on this subject. The question is whether the demand for these services is high enough to justify spending funds to upgrade. Dean Rock is looking into the La Rue Student Housing Project which will have connections provided by PCI and Cable TV. There doesn't seem to be much data on how much the Playback Center is used. We are not talking about video, this is called video but it's TV. It is where prerecorded materials are played from the Playback Center. It is used for classes such as the Washington Center.

This is a separate project which follows Net21. Originally informally called Net 21 Buildout, this summer the name was changed to UCDNet2. As part of the estimating stage, it needs to be determined whether video should be part of the UCDNet2 networking project or should it be separate. Instructional TV and contemporary video conference are likely to play an important part in our future. The video conference facility is very limited and the quality of signal poor. The system used by Engineering is different. Cooperative Extension has another system.

Current Video Environment - The existing campus video environment is currently comprised of both a 25+ year-old baseband and a 12 year-old broadband video system. The majority of both systems' connections are concentrated in the main two general assignment classroom buildings - Olson and Wellman Halls. There are 75 baseband connections reaching 15 buildings and connecting to five sources with many of these connections having multiple lines for two-way video. The broadband system interconnects 52 rooms in 15 buildings and can only support two simultaneous two-way connections between these rooms and/or the playback center. In many classrooms, both baseband and broadband are present because the aging baseband system has become so unreliable that it has had to be supplemented with the lesser-quality broadband system. The baseband system has reached the end of its useful life and the broadband system is rapidly reaching that point. A hybrid fiber/coaxial video distribution was installed this year to provide "cable TV-like" services to the Residence Halls.

UCDNet2 - A portion of the UCDNet2 scope was intended to replace the aging video infrastructure and to potentially expand it to sites where a need existed. The UCDNet2 feasibility analysis for estimating the cost of the replacement has been deferred until such time that they campus determines the strategic role that video will play in education. Once this has been determined, the feasibility study can be conducted based upon the best technology for the identified applications and service locations.

Action: Chair Matthews will send Doug Hartline email with the summary of the consensus of the discussion.

The fifth SITT was held last month. John Vohs explained that this is a group of campus faculty members who meet for a week on using technology to enhance instruction. There were about 39 participants this year. The Institute is superbly staffed by IT and an incredibly number of dedicated faculty, one of whom is Harry Matthews who presented a marvelous demo of his course, to discuss introductory and advanced issues with an array ranging from elementary to sophisticated home courses presented on CD and Web based courses. The questions that came up this year were student access, the issue of repeat participants, and the awareness of how to accommodate an environment for teaching and learning using the newer technology. Another topic to be considered is the length of the Institute and what to do the other 51 weeks of the year. Also the notion of maintenance and technical difficulties faculty have when using the technology.

Council members discussed some of the other issues and how it would have been helpful to have wrap up sessions at the end of the day to discuss some of the issues that came up. The use of technology is happening in the classroom and this is an opportunity to have a forum for discussion. Paula mentioned that the Institute has changed format from year to year - from the first year with little hands on work to this year's time for afternoons completely devoted to labs and project work. The idea of how to turn it into a year-round program is interesting and needs to be discussed for the future. The future effectiveness of the Institute is of importance to the Council.