Agenda:

• More Q & A re: new website and options besides Segue (and future planning)
• How have budget cuts affected LIS services and resources
• Library print to digital initiative (journals, databases, reference materials, primary sources)

Segue Replacement Update: (Joe Antonioli)

Segue will continue to be available through this summer and probably through next fall as well.  Tools will be in place to migrate Segue content to other platforms.  We will be engaging various groups on campus to via surveys and focus groups to help us determine what features and functionality are most needed for course sites and online curricular resources.

Web Makeover Update: (Joe Antonioli)

The new website will run on Drupal.  Drupal workshops will begin the week of Oct. 12th. The Web Makeover committee has reviewed more designs from White Whale (the company that is designing the website).  The latest presentation from White Whale can be viewed on the Web Makeover Blog, where you can find more detailed updates and mock-ups of department webpage and a faculty page.

Q:  Who has editing ability for department webpages?
A:  This will vary by dept. and is determined by the Primary Contact.  In some cases, multiple people will have editing permission, while in other cases, content changes will go through the Primary Contact.  Some things will be standard across all departments, but there will be many additional options to choose from.  Faculty will have their own pages.

Q:  Will it be possible to upload files such as data sets or articles?
A:  Yes!

LIS Budget Cuts Overview (Carol Peddie)

Carol gave an overview of the various LIS budgets.  The Operating Budget was cut by approximately 9.5 % (-$340,000).  This includes library resources, software, professional development funds – everything but computers and network equipment.  Many cuts were made behind the scenes.  For example, some maintenance contracts were reduced to M-F 9-5 rather than 24/7.  Software packages weren’t automatically renewed (ex. dropped Novell license).

Q: How much is spent on software?
A:  Approx. 1 million, but much of that is administrative (ex. Banner).  Most software is paid on an annual basis and that cost goes up each year.  Faculty software ranges from $100 for site license to $1500 per seat.  No plans to cut faculty software but growth will be slower.

The library resource budget was cut by over $100,000.  More on that later in the meeting. The capital budget was cut by 35%.  This includes classroom equipment, computers, and network infrastructure.  The budget went from $2.5 million (high) to $1.8 million to $1.2 million.  Approx. $900,000 is spent annually on replacing desktop computers. In response, LIS is investigating virtualization of software and thin client computing and concurrent use software.  Also, LIS is analyzing lab and public computers and will reduce computers in underutilized areas.  Classroom upgrades will happen more slowly (comes from facilities budget).

Q:  What percent of students come with their own computers?
A:  Over 90% (mostly laptops)

Comment: There aren’t enough computers in geography to support GIS.

LIS Staffing: Carol reported that by the end of Nov, LIS will be down 22% of staff and there will be no rehiring of frozen positions until January.

Library Materials budget: (Joe Toth).  Last year the budget was cut 5% mid year (i.e. -$78,000) then was level-funded this year.  But because our subscriptions go up (this year it was less than usual because some publishers held the line), it resulted in the need to cut $100,000 from the materials budget.  In response, book selecting by librarians was shut down early last year, database usage stats were examined and low use databases were cancelled, and the book/media budget for this year was reduced.  LIS will rely more on NExpress for borrowing and reduce duplication with those libraries and will do more strategic purchasing in the future.  Overall book circulation is declining and statistics show that overall, there is higher circulation of materials selected by librarians, followed by approval books (profiles) followed by faculty selections.  Ann commented that faculty need to be made aware of these cuts and be asked to reduce their ordering.  However, there is great variation in ordering by faculty,  so only those faculty who do heavy ordering may need to pull back (selections should support the curriculum in any case) and liaisons can contact those faculty if needed.  Joe responded that he will soon be sending out a collection development newsletter that will help explain all this to the rest of faculty. [This newsletter has since been sent out via email as Library Collection News and parts of it can be found here.]

Q:  Is Middlebury going to participate in consortial buying plans?
A:  Colby, Bate, and Bowdoin (some of our NExpress partners) are already doing this and Middlebury would like to do something similiar with 1-2 other NExpress partners, if they are willing.

LIS Responses to all  cuts: (many of these are detailed in the campus letter from the Dean of LIS that came out the following day).  LIS has stopped staffing the info desk (except 1st week of semester); may reduce helpdesk hours; may revisit ILL policies; may reduce support for screening DVD’s; public printing reductions; stop providing phones in student rooms (hallways instead – $50,000 savings); 2 weeks notice for reserves; Exams – close the library at 1 am (not 24/7); stopped retrieving books from stacks (unless disabled); More reliance on borrowing materials from NExpress; changes in reference service (will have 3 fewer librarians) – Sat and Thurs. evening hours cut – the rest of time ref service offered from offices or special collections so librarians’ time will be used more efficiently. For details see http://go/refhours.  Also, the number of library subject guides have been reduced (some consolidated – mostly will use existing ones rather than create new specialized ones).  In general expect that projects requiring a lot of staff time will be prioritized and some won’t be approved.

Q: David asked why there was no announcement about dial-up access ending.
A:  Carol explained that it broke and it took awhile to cobble together a limited fix.  However this will probably be discontinued altogether in January.

Library Print to Digital Initiative (Brenda)

LIS has been moving a number of library resources from print to electronic access.  Where possible, we have changed journal subscriptions to electronic only and have expanded journal access through electronic packages of current journals.  Packages allow us to greatly expand the titles we get from a publisher for a small additional sum.  LIS has also purchased more digital archive packages of historical journal issues (JSTOR, PAO, American Periodicals Series).  Also digital archives of primary source materials (newspaper collections, Archive of Americana, etc.)   In addition, other areas where digital has been preferred to print are reference materials (ex. online encyclopedias), and statistical compilations (statistical databases such as World Development Indicators).  In the future, LIS will investigate which areas or disciplines might be appropriate for expanding E-books via E-book packages or individual selection.   Among the many advantages digital access provides, is 24/7 access to our local Middlebury users as well as Middlebury users who are abroad.  For a list of recent electronic purchases and subscriptions see this list by title and this slightly different list:  Major New Library Databases last 3yrs. To access any of these databases, see http://go/librarydatabases.  To access any of these journals or newspapers, see http://go/journals.

Announcements:

LIS and the CTLR are looking for examples of innovative uses of technology to feature on the new “Teaching with Technology Blog” (http://blogs.middlebury.edu/teachwithtech/) and in next year’s Pedagogy and Technology Fair. Please consider sharing your ideas for technology use with others. Let me know if you’re interested.

Agenda:

1. Announcements [5 minutes]

• LIS and the CTLR are looking for examples of  innovative uses of technology to feature on the new Teaching with Technology Blog and in next year’s Pedagogy and Technology Fair.
• Other announcements?

2. Effects of budget cuts on LIS services and resources (Carol Peddie) [20 minutes]

3. Updates and followup from previous meetings: [15 minutes]

• Is DFS/middfiles faster than Tigercat?
• Calendar for software updates:  coming.
• Network registration issues for fixed-location computers: contact Howie.
• Web Makeover:
  • Still haven’t determined date when old system will be unavailable.
  • Intellectual property:  The copyright guidelines in the college handbook are there to assist people to make this determination.  The handbook also has guidelines on sharing student records.  It is not our policy to review posted material unless we are notified that there is a problem.

• Segue blog for updates.  And, Alex Chapin is interested in coming to a future meeting.

4. Next steps for our May discussion on research and tech instruction [10 minutes]

5. Feedback, please:  Are these meetings useful?  How could they be better? [5 minutes]

6. Next meeting:  March? [5 minutes]

What is the policy on PC to Mac switch (for faculty)?

If the faculty member’s primary computer is due for upgrade, s/he can choose from either of our standard models, Windows or Mac, for her/his new primary computer.  If the end of the four-year replacement cycle has not yet been reached, and there is a desire to switch platforms, LIS will do what we can within budget limits to meet the request, but we cannot always guarantee that we can supply a brand new model.  LIS is committed to providing all faculty with the equipment they need for their teaching and research, within the limitations of the budgets we have available.

What’s the upgrade schedule for XP to Vista?

There is no upgrade schedule to Vista.  LIS has decided leap-frog over Vista and go directly to Windows 7 when the time is appropriate.  We have ordered all new equipment to date with a downgrade to Windows XP Pro with service pack 3.  Our reasoning:  Vista introduced too many challenges to our support structure and to our end users.

What’s faculty equipment replacement schedule going forward in the new fiscal climate?

There is no change to the LIS replacement schedule.  The replacement cycle is based on a four-year deployment.  The only caveat is that LIS will more closely scrutinize requests for any additional machines (i.e., beyond the standard “one primary computer per faculty/staff member.)

May 2009

1. We’ll try to meet two weeks into the fall semester in order to get right to work. Pathik will contact Mike when he arrives to work on scheduling and agenda.

2. Proposed Agenda topics for next year:

a) print management: How to establish policy? What sorts of controls are possible? What to do about coursepacks? How to handle students who print for departments or student groups? We’ve set up a website at http://go.middlebury.edu/printproject/ to keep track of issues and encourage discussion.

b) gmail: We’ll want to engage the community right away in the discussion of whether or not we want to move to google apps for students. We have most of the technology in place for this; we need to think through the policy implications. We’ll set up a site soon to allow people to better understand what we’re thinking.

c) bannerweb improvements: It would be interesting to hear more from students about what they don’t like about bannerweb. There are limited options because of the constraints of the system, but as long as everyone recognizes that, it would be useful to find out what’s bugging people.

d) dvds in the library: We can continue to talk about how we can improve access to this collection.

These are questions and suggestions that were raised in the Sciences Advisory Group’s May meeting.

Web Makeover:

1. When will LIS will provide each department with its inventory of pages?
   Outcome: We are reviewing and sorting the inventory lists of more than 50,000 url’s from the current web site, and will be asking each department to review our lists and edit them so that we have an accurate inventory by the third week in June.

2. Will departments get usage data (# of visits, eg) to assist with decisions on what to transfer to new site?
   Progress: Carrie is finding out to whom this question can be directed.
3. Will the archived old system’s data be available so that at a subsequent time it will be accessible in order to transfer content from old site?
   Outcome: We have not yet determined for how long we will archive the old system’s data, but we will archive it for some period to be determined.
4. There was a question about intellectual property.  Will someone be checking content to be sure it can be shared? For example, PDFs of articles, names of students.
   Outcome: The copyright guidelines in the college handbook are there to assist people to make this determination.  The handbook also has guidelines on sharing student records.  It is not our policy to review posted material unless we are notified that there is a problem.

5. There was a recommendation that LIS should provide specific advice about whether and how to post PDFs of articles, names of students, etc. Perhaps put this advice in the workbook to be distributed to faculty and academic offices.
   Outcome: See answer to #4, above.  Carrie is inquiring about the “workbook,” too.

Segue:

1. There will be a blog for updates on the Segue transition. The URL will be shared when it’s available.

Student Research and Technology Orientation Discussion

1. Carrie and Matt will meet to discuss next steps, and share recommendations with group. Next steps might include gathering and sharing impressions with other advisory groups.
   Progress: Carrie and Matt met, Carrie will write a summary to share with the group.

Attending: Carrie Macfarlane, Matt Landis, Jason Mittell, Steve Sontum, Bill Hegman, Pete Ryan, Matt Dickerson, Shel Sax, Stephen Ratcliffe, Bill Peterson, Roger Sandwick, Jason Mittell

The topics of this meeting were:

• Web Makeover
• Segue
• Research and technology instruction for students

Web Makeover: Jason Mittell shared information relevant to faculty.

Conversion:

1. each department will need to identify a ‘lead’ for each unit, department or office to spearhead the effort of converting content to the new site.
2. there will be no direct transfer of old pages – someone will have to go through the existing content and identify what is important that needs to be transferred and what doesn’t.
3. the inventory of existing content needs to take place over the summer (this is an issue and coordinators need to be informed now about this timetable and whether this can be undertaken in early June or late August
4. an inventory of pages will be generated by LIS in each department and this will include faculty pages (may also be pages to middunix pages) if it is not hosted by your departmental url, it will not be listed.
5. Carrie needs to find out when LIS will provide this inventory of pages  (Check Sciences Items for updates)
6. question raised as to whether we can get data on utilization of pages as a guide to utilization. Jason said that it is possible might not be useful given how pages are accessed (Check Sciences Items for updates)
7. question about who the point person should be – it should not be the departmental coordinator but rather someone who has a better sense of the discipline-specific content and/or a ‘vision’ for the new website
8. new faculty profile pages will be dynamic so that things that are tagged to an individual faculty member will show up on the faculty member’s page – the idea is to enter data once and then have it migrate to the appropriate locations on the new web site – so, for example, publication information and course information will show up in multiple locations
9. important to have a faculty member involved in the process who is sufficiently familiar with content to make decisions – some discussion as to whether the departmental coordinator can be the point person
10. question about whether faculty would be willing to take this on.  Consider that academic coordinators are cut down to 10/12ths time. The idea of revisioning a departmental web site did not fill the group with enthusiasm.
11. The new system is called Drupal
12. will take energy and effort to meet the timeline requirements
13. Jason noted that one can start with a very lean web site that has minimal content and add to it.  As people realize how easy it will be to develop and add content, and increased use of images, multimedia, etc. they may become excited by the possibilities
14. Question as to whether the archived old system’s data will be available so that at a subsequent time it will be accessible in order to transfer content from old site (Check Sciences Items for updates)
15. There will be a variety of design templates to choose from but the basic relevant categories will be there so that one will know if missing something
16. Question about intellectual property:  Will someone be checking content to be sure it can be shared? For example, PDFs of articles, names of students.  LIS should provide specific information about these issues in the workbook to be distributed to faculty and academic offices.  (Check Sciences Items for updates)
17. Idea of being able to share events brought up the question of someone tagging inaccurately in order to more broadly publicize an event – this will be checked but it is not in place yet and since the work flow process is as of now not yet sufficiently clear, we can’t answer now how this will play out.

Stories:

1. Jason went on to the 2nd point which is that we do not have  easily portable content and there is no opportunity in our existing web sites to highlight the interesting things that are students are doing
2. So the ‘story’ form is a web-based form that enables anyone to fill out a story to identify an interesting thing that people might want to know about (either internally or externally) and we will be building up collection of such stories
3. This is a way to make one’s program known – we want more students to know, for example, to know what is going on in Bi Hall in the sciences and want to publicize the work of our students and their levels of activity in the real world
4. the web will enable us to generate a collection
5. How to submit stories?  For now, go to http://go.middlebury.edu/webstories.

Segue: Shel shared updates on Segue.

1. Segue will fade away.  No replacement has been recommended yet, and there is no timeline
2. If you are currently using Segue, continue to use it.
3. If you have not yet used Segue, may wish to learn another system, for example WordPress
4. question as to why we’re making the shift – answer: too expensive to maintain,  new tools have sprung up since Segue first released and we can no longer compete
5. Shel noted that there is no alternative CMS selected, we’re hoping that Drupal will fit the bill, timeline is not yet firm and we are counting on extensive conversations with faculty to develop a timeframe that will accommodate their needs
6. There will be a blog for updates on the Segue transition, the URL will be shared when it’s available.

Student Research and Technology Orientation Discussion

1. Notes for Discussion document was distributed to participants as the basis for discussion
2. Goal of discussion:  Consider requesting that tech and library orientation be mandatory for students.
3. Carrie noted that the current situation is that FYS instructors have the option to have an orientation of either library or tech or both but does not provide universal coverage.
4. Matt circulated this document to his department and 7 faculty responded thinking that this should be mandatory.  Some of the feedback he received is to include a tour of the library, show students how to find print material and to provide a FAQ about the tech stuff on the home page of the website.  Clear sense that this information is not well known by first year students as it should be, hence the need for making it mandatory
5. Steve Ratcliffe had feedback that we already have orientation overload and that orientation should be ‘in context’ that is, should be connected to an actual research assignment – Matt said that if this was a required part of a first year seminar, it would help to customize the orientation to fit the specific research needs of the FYS assignment
6. Carrie said that some skills could be taught in an online handout or tutorial, some could be taught in a core class for a specific discipline instead of a first year seminar.  Might want to discuss how best to teach each skill.
7. Steve R noted that it should be up to the instructor if he/she wants to include this as part of the course
8. Steve S noted that way back when, there was a universal obligatory orientation for each FYS and that worked well
9. Matt Dickerson said that FYS are sufficiently crowded with other responsibilities that it is already difficult to add content
10. General agreement that the basic technological skills are essential but could be part of a general orientation rather than as part of FYS
11. General sense that targeted bibliographic instruction should continue to be part of the FYS and could be useful orientation within the FYS
12. Several said they had found research instruction in their first-year seminars valuable.
13. Several said it was difficult to imagine that a first-year seminar instructor wouldn’t feel it was important to teach students research skills. Perhaps some topics don’t lend themselves to research.
14. Bill Hegman thought that web-based instruction would solve a lot of the tech issues
15. Carrie said that some students won’t learn to use servers, etc., if they’re not exposed to them in the classroom.  Hands-on experience is meaningful to many.
16. Carrie said that most first-year seminars do request a support team, and the support team includes a librarian.
17. Steve R suggested that even if a student learns these skills in the first-year seminar, they might forget them by the time they’re a junior or senior
18. Ultimately doesn’t seem to be a consensus as to whether this should or should not be mandatory but there was consensus that the tech stuff doesn’t have to be part of the actual seminar
19. Depending on what (if anything) the group decides to recommend, we may wish to check with Katy Smith-Abbott to see if it would be possible to get tech stuff incorporated in general orientation
20. Carrie and Matt will meet to discuss next steps, and share recommendations with group.  Next steps might include gathering and sharing impressions with other advisory groups. (Check Sciences Items for updates)

Business:

1. next time to meet: after the 5th week of the semester, perhaps late October
2. Carrie will send url of list with updates on “Items for consideration” (questions and concerns) that were raised in our February meeting).  Progress has been made on all items, and some items even have answers.

May 19, 2009

Present: Bob Prasch, Thierry Warin, Anne Knowles, Bert Johnson, Brenda Ellis, Kathy Morse, Shel Sax, Joe Antonioli, David Stoll

Agenda: Web Makeover; Future Plans for Course Mangement Systems: Segue, etc.; Tracking Issues

Web Makeover (Joe Antonioli, Web Makeover Committee):

Joe mentioned the web makeover blog which is at blogs.middlebury.edu/webredo or just use go/blogs and choose it from the side menu.

First question was about timeline and transfer of content. A copy of the timeline from the blog was distributed http://blogs.middlebury.edu/webredo/about/timeline/. Mary Backus (LIS Director of User Services) will be leading a team to address these issues and provide support material, in particular, what steps are needed to take to provide the information, training, and support for each department. Joe said that each department should have someone in the department who has a ‘vision’ of the department’s web presence and the ownership and decision-making needs. Division of labor is at the discretion of the department. In this phase, White Whale is designing a set of templates from which departments can select. There will be some branding (similar elements) but each department can select from one of these templates. Thus there will be more options than in the past.

Thierry asked about how the webpages would be done for the International Studies program, since it’s one program with 7 tracks. How will this be addressed – what choices does the department have – can all seven tracks all look the same? or can each track have a different look and feel? Joe said it is up to the program itself to decide how much variation they want, based on the template selection.

Kathy has her personal page on middunix, courses on Segue and no presence on the departmental web site. How will she be able to integrate all of this material? Joe said that it would be up to Kathy as to how she integrates her personal web material into the new web site. She will have more control over her faculty page so it should be easier for her to add content and links.

Joe mentioned a number of the features that we’re looking to incorporate – single sign on, web makeover, course catalog, etc. so focus needs to be on the main College site in the current time frame.

Departments need to be ready with the person with the vision this summer. So, this summer is the time to evaluate current content, what needs to be transferred, what needs to be changed and added to. The new departmental sites need to be ready for January. White Whale and LIS are coming up with resources to guide departments through the process. White Whale and LIS are developing a workbook to guide departments through adding various elements to departmental web sites. Jason Mittell and Molly Costanza-Robinson will help to keep faculty in the loop.

Site design will be revealed to the community and makeover team on July 27^th. All information will be put on the web makeover blog. There will be opportunity for comment before we move to implement the design.

Anne asked if there is no current chair, or the chair isn’t around this summer, what will happen if there’s no one willing to take responsibility for the departmental ‘vision’. The answer is that there will be a default design that will be used until departments take more responsibility for their web presence.

Features of the webmakeover (we’re using a platform called Drupal) will include the ability to include images, video, a calendar (pulling information from the calendaring system R25 so can list departmental events or anything in the Master Calendar that is specific to a department), improved search facility. The question came up about how much of this initiative is about ‘marketing’ and ‘branding’.

Thierry asked about using Netvibes (an RSS aggregator) which can be a group homepage as well as an individual page. Thierry was thinking of using this as a home page for the international studies program since students don’t typically go to the IS’s current web page. Each person can personalize each home page and aggregate their relevant information. Should he wait to do this? Joe suggested he wait if he doesn’t need anything urgently this fall since next spring will be the go live date.

Monterrey will go first and graphic standards, design elements, etc. will be in place shortly since it needs to go live this September.

Brenda showed the group the ‘examples’ link on the web makeover page which links to a variety of web sites at other institutions that may serve as examples for us. http://blogs.middlebury.edu/webredo/category/examples/

Future Plans for Course Management Systems: Segue, etc. (Shel Sax)

Shel talked about Segue, its phasing out, the issues of timing, alternatives and extracting data. LIS will stop developing new features for Segue 2 but will fix any bugs that may arise in the current system. Shel explained the rationale for the decision. It is both an issue of economics (2 full time developers) and the inability of 2 people to keep up with developments in the field (there are other open source systems that have much larger communities of developers supporting them). We have not yet identified what system we will move to. There are other open sources systems such as Moodle that are possibilities and after the webmakeover migration is complete we may collaborate with Amherst who is customizing Moodle to use it for their course management system. The trend at other institutions is away from commercial ventures like Blackboard due to cost and lack of adequate development. As we move forward, LIS will consult with faculty about timelines, features, extracting data from existing Segue sites, etc.

The question arose as to what faculty should use in the fall. Faculty who already know how to use segue can continue using it or try out WordPress, our blogging software that may be adequate for some purposes. New faculty will be steered towards WordPress. WordPress has a blog feature (posts) as well as webpages and you can have links to media stored on MIDDMedia and you can upload documents. The disadvantage is that you can’t setup groups so if you want to limit it to a class or upload copyrighted material (such as course readings), you have to make it private which means you’ll have to setup individual logins for your students.

Shel said he would offer workshops on WordPress in August. Brenda noted that faculty can get help anytime before then from the Media Lab tutors, who will be working all summer.

Question arose about the future of ERes (E-Reserves) and whether its use will grow or wither. Segue is by default a closed system that prohibits public access – WordPress is the opposite. Brenda noted that faculty can currently manage their own ERes site but many faculty don’t know this. So those faculty who like segue because they can upload a course reading at the last minute can do this through ERes instead. To manage their ERes site, faculty need to contact Library Reserves to get setup as administrators of their account. Brenda noted the advantages of E-Res in terms of fair use, copyright/licensing, etc. (E-Res limits access to just those students in the class and the library can keep track of copyright fees we need to pay). Currently when faculty upload copyrighted material to segue, if its not limited to the class, it is a violation of copyright even if it’s restricted to the Middlebury community.

NOTE TO LIS: Faculty expressed interest in having future systems integrate ERes with their course website.

Tracking Issues: (Brenda Ellis)

Brenda mentioned that LIS will track some issues internally and post updates for faculty on the Advisory Groups Blog under the category of Items for Consideration.

Announcements:

June 4^th Tech Fair in the Great Hall of Bi-Hall from 10:30-noon. The media tutors will have a table and faculty will have posters of how they’ve used technology in their courses.

Action Items:

Brenda will send additional information to faculty re: managing their ERes accounts if they would like that option.

Brenda will keep the group informed over the summer as web makeover process continues. She’ll email links to important content posted to the blog since many faculty will be away and not think to check the blog.

Next Meeting:

We will aim to schedule the next meeting at the beginning of the Fall semester sometime between weeks 2 – 4.

]]> http://blogs.middlebury.edu/lisadvisors/2009/05/22/social-science-advisory-group-notes-from-2nd-mtg/feed/ 0 http://blogs.middlebury.edu/lisadvisors/2009/05/20/notes-from-meeting-2-of-the-humanities-advisory-group/ http://blogs.middlebury.edu/lisadvisors/2009/05/20/notes-from-meeting-2-of-the-humanities-advisory-group/#comments Thu, 21 May 2009 03:45:41 +0000 Andrew Wentink http://blogs.middlebury.edu/lisadvisors/?p=43 Humanities Advisory Group Meeting Notes

(recorded by Shel Sax ; reviewed by Andy Wentink and Holly Allen)

The Humanities Advisory Group met at 8:30 a.m., on Tuesday, May 19, 2009, in LIB105.

Attending: Holly Allen, Judy Watts, Brett Millier, MaryEllen Bertolini, Randy Ganiban, Heidi Graswick, Brenda Ellis, Dana Barrow, Pieter Broucke, Shel Sax, Andy Wentink, Amy Morsman, Will Nash, and for 10 minutes Joe Antonioli

Agenda

1. Impact of impending web makeover on departments

2. Sunsetting of Segue as a course management system and the process of finding its replacement

3. Discussion of research and technology instructions for students. What topics should be covered during the First Year Seminar orientations that are most relevant to the Humanities division?  What research and technology skills should students possess upon graduation and how can we best provide training, support and development of these skills

4. Open forum for additional discussion topics.

I  Web Makeover:

A fundamental concern is will the old content of departmental webpages be transferred to the new CMS or will the content need to be developed by each department and if the latter, if this is happening during the fall semester, do we expect departments to do this in the middle of the semester?

Note: we need to inform faculty of what they’re expected to do and when

Joe Antoinioli joined the meeting to offer the following:

• Mary Backus has been charged with the staging and implementation of the departmental web sites. Need to identify what can be transferred from the old site, what can be added to the new site, when and how. Mary will be looking after the training and support issues.
• Timeframe: Mary’s group will be meeting with her group starting next week. White Whale and Midd will develop a workbook to guide departments and faculty through the process.
• The Training & Conversion group will assign members to work with each department, using the workbook, to help guide the process.

Some issues that arose in discussion: timing ;  support for coordinators and faculty  ;  who’s responsible ;  content issues (support of test, media, etc.) and social networking – the social networking will include tools such as, calendaring

• currently, no automatic way of transferring content, so each department will have to decide what it wants to create, or copy and paste from existing web site
• Holly Allen suggested that we look at other departmental sites at other colleges to see examples of exemplary sites – Joe noted that from the beginning of June, the designs from the Monterrey site will be available
• Joe noted the Middlebury Makeover Blog at : http://blogs.middlebury.edu/webredo/
• Timeline for the summer will be made public this week and posted on the blog
• Will faculty be able to work on their new sites from off-campus – YES

ACTION ITEM: find link on web makeover blog that directs to sample

1. White Whale has been charged with a set of templates to offer a limited set of designs and choices from which the Departments will charge.

II  Segue

Shel spoke to the issue of the sunsetting of Segue

1. there were many questions as to why we’re making this change, what the ramifications are
2. Shel emphasized that we need faculty support and input on this process

Some important points:

• Segue will be around at least until summer 2010
• No timetable is currently available for a go live date
• We are evaluating alternatives including using Drupal or Moodle and that we’ll solicit faculty input
• Suggested that WordPress be used as the alternative
• Media Tutors can provide help with Word Press

Some faculty skepticism about whether Word Press is an adequate replacement for Segue

• Shel recommended that people comfortable with Segue continue to use it and not use WordPress as a stepping stone to the new system, whatever it turns out to do.

III First Year Students – Research and Technology Orientation (currently in place within FYSE)

Topics identified by the Sciences Advisory Group Co-Coordinators (see below) were used as discussion points

• Brett Millier thought the research steps a) through f) should be part of the FYS but the tech info should be presented before the semester starts
• Holly Allen wants to see practical assignments that incorporate the research component into a realistic, applicable assignment
• Will Nash echoed Holly’s suggestion about a research assignment that forces students to develop the requisite skills
• Will also thought the tech assignment works out better when done within class

- As social software sites have become increasingly easy to use, student’ tech skills have diminished so that mapping a drive or saving to a server is challenging

• Holly Allen asked about covering laptop etiquette, in particular discussion turned to banning laptops in class because students are not paying attention to what is going on in class

Discussion then covered laptops during screenings, classes, etc.

• Are there ways of reducing abuse or is it reasonable for an instructor to say ‘no laptops in class’
• Amy wants her students using laptops sitting on the perimeter so that they don’t distract the rest of the class
• Judy Watts mentioned that some of the students in a class complain about other students not paying attention with laptops as a big distraction
• Laptops as a pedagogical issue – there needs to be a discussion about the use of laptops – e.g. should they be allowed in discussion sections – Holly wants etiquette that includes no browsing the web during class, no instant messaging, no Facebook – also had student cheat on midterm using technology
• Brenda asked why each instructor doesn’t set the rules for his/her class at the beginning of the semester.

- ACTION IDEA: LIS/CTLR lunch bag noontime discussion on laptop etiquette

Will Nash (as Commons head) thinks it perfectly reasonable to help FYC’s acculturate students to Middlebury but there is a fine line between FYC’s conveying faculty expectations to new students – rather he thinks FYS is the perfect place for this – however, there is way for the Commons to come into this productively but would it’s a delicate balance to strike

IV Final thoughts:

• Holly – word press training
• Judy – forewarning LIS about large research projects, etc.
• Brett – puzzling about why it is so hard to keep a departmental web page up to date and whether the new system will make this easier
• MaryEllen – lauded Brenda for doing such a great job orienting students
• Randy – overwhelmed by what he’s heard and thinks it will be exciting for Classics department to jump into the 21st century
• Amy – doesn’t have a coordinator so good to know that web makeover will take place in fall
• Will – his first meeting and intrigued by way of using the FYS to get at some systemic issues
• Heidi – web makeover exciting but worried about expectations that faculty will keep their pages and information up to date
• Brenda – will be doing Social Sciences group and wants to know if there are any pointers for that meeting – recommendation was to have info on web makeover ready at the outset
• Dana – trying to figure out the Studio Art and HARC departments – it is hard to keep the information and communication lines flowing – information from the administration filters through all faculty lists or student mailings so that everyone is not always in the loop – the biggest challenge will be to keep everybody in the loop
• Pieter – enjoyed the discussion about computers in the classroom and the issues that laptops create and it will affect his syllabi and what he tells his students about laptop etiquette – hopes that the new website will actually be easy to add content to.

Research & Technology Orientation for First-Year Students

What could be covered in research and tech orientation for first-year students?

1. Research

a) How to make use of what the Library offers in all formats—print & e-collections, NExpress, reserves, digital projects, etc.

b) How to read citations and locate material

c) How to recognize scholarly & popular publications, primary & secondary resources

d) How to evaluate information, regardless of source

e) How to cite materials—and reasons for doing so

f) How to use resources legally and ethically—avoiding plagiarism and copyright infringements

2. Tech

a) How to get tech help: HelpDesk

b) How to get to servers and shared files, the importance of backing up files: Middfiles, Classes, course pages

c) What are the wireless options on campus and how to use them: midd_secure vs midd_unplugged

d) How to protect computer from viruses

g) How to access campus network from off-campus

h) Email: College considers Midd email an official method of communication, if you use another email account then you must set up forwarding

i) General awareness:

i. Protect your identity

ii. Protect your image

iii. Protect your savings!  Don’t risk a lawsuit! Don’t share music and videos you haven’t acquired legitimately. In most cases, file-sharing to the internet is a violation of federal law if it involves copyrighted files.

The meeting adjourned at 9:45 a.m., with thanks to faculty and attending LIS liaisons from the co-conveners.

These are questions and suggestions that were raised in the Sciences Advisory Group’s February meeting.

1. Are there portable classroom solutions, eg, a portable smartboard which provides projection & writing surface?
Outcome: There is little funding now.  Carrie forwarded request to Shel for future consideration.

2.  Investigate Wacom tablets rather than tablet pc’s
Outcome:

• There is little funding now
• Shel says, “I have a Wacom tablet that any of you are welcome to try. I tried it out a couple of years ago and came to the conclusion that it was too imprecise and clutzy for my purposes. My opinion is that a tablet pc is a much better solution, albeit a much more expensive one.”
• Ethan Murphy says, “We have a couple of the newer Wacom cintiq tablets that we use for animation and illustration. If anyone would like to try them out to compare them to the tablet pc we would be happy to help.”

3.  In 3 of 4 classrooms in Warner, switching to a non-computer source produces a black(blank) screen so that you can then raise the screen and write on the board.  In the other room (202 or 203), you get a bright blue screen.
Progress: HelpDesk responded: Can you give me some more details about which rooms have a blue screen? We have tried to switch ( if possible ) to a black screen though I believe some projectors do not have this option. We are in the process of including a ’screen blanking option’ in a newer programming change which will ultimately include all rooms.
Outcome: Frank checked the rooms. Good news! The projection has been either replaced or repaired. None of the rooms seems to do this anymore!  Carrie updated HelpDesk: Problem solved! Thanks!

4. Nwftp looks like an advertisement for netware and one of the links gets you to netstorage
Outcome: One side effect of the DFS project will be a replacement for Netstorage; shouldn’t have this problem after the changeover!

5.  Fix certificate issue.
Progress: Will check to see if anything has been done to remedy the problem.

6. HelpDesk could provide more assistance to users trying to access midd_secure.
Outcome: This will be brought up at next HelpDesk meeting

7. Biology had a request for a few classrooms to be converted to smart rooms.  Might these rooms be converted next year? Or are they out of the queue for good?
Outcome: The request still stands, but it is extremely unlikely to be filled in the next 2-3 years. There will most likely not be money available next year to add any new smart classrooms, and then additions will be slower after that.

8. Do not get rid of the Classes server and course folders. Please retain simple, non-Segue solutions.
Outcome: With the DFS project, LIS won’t get rid of Classes.  LIS will just move its function/files to a new server environment with equal capabilities and function.  We understand the virtues of a basic file server, and it is good to know that it is still useful and relevant for some.

9.  Students storing large data files cannot get the speed for read/writes that they need from Tigercat.
Outcome: This issue may be alleviated by the DFS project as load will be distributed amongst more servers

10.  Would it be possible for LIS to provide automatic file backups, similar to what the backup server in BiHall does?
Outcome: Someone should be able to come up with a creative solution to sync files to Tigercat or the new DFS environment in the future. There are external offerings that will be able to accomplish this type of function too.  Revisit this later.

11.  Track software updates in labs. Two issues:  a) All labs should have the same version of a piece of software so that classes can be scheduled in any lab that has the software, and b) License expirations should anticipated so that compatibility issues can be addressed before an old version disappears.
Progress: Shel will check on this.

12.  Revisit process for network computer registration.
Outcome: LIS is investigating other options.

13. LaTeX intro/support workshop for students would be useful (maybe Dave Guertin)
Outcome: Dave Guertin would be happy to provide LaTeX workshops.  Would need some notice to allow for preparation.  Carrie will share this with Sciences group.