Admin 01.23.18 Minutes

Attending:

Heather O’Leary, Mike Kamowski, Eric McMinoway, Cynthia Cobb, AJ Lavender, Aaron Rosenthal, Monica Tith, Gloria Keeley, Kathleen Engstrom, John Fudacz, Jackie Finch, Tony Kerber, Todd Van Neck, Therese Molina, Dale Rush

  • Wait Listing for Courses
    • Issue with Students Holding Courses
      • Suggested that a note came from Engineering regarding wait list options for high level courses and the provost has asked for a solution
      • Issue that any graduate student could hold a course in any graduate level course
      • Suggested a decision be made to restrict sections rather than create wait lists
      • OSS will continue looking at wait listing in the future
  • ITPC Update
    • My UI Financials
      • A brief update of the ITGC January report was given
      • Noted there are issues with loading data in My UI Financials which the team has been working to address
      • Suggested that the project may be complete by March
    • Biennial Inventory
      • Mentioned the Biennial Inventory has been postponed until April
      • The project will coincide with a BPI project for the biennial inventory process
      • Discussion of issues with disposals as well as other possible updates to FABweb
    • START myResearch
      • Suggested some of the requirements for the dashboard have changed
    • Identity and Access Management
      • Suggested that IAM work is nearing an end
      • The timeline will be reviewed and any outstanding items will be put into a new ITPC project
    • List of Projects for ITGC Admin
      • Suggested that many of these projects are closing
      • The committee was asked if they would like to add any more projects
      • Mentioned that there was a discussion about getting updates on a number of projects during committee meetings in the spring
      • Suggested that these presentations would provide more information and allow the ITPC to gather feedback
      • Mentioned that the committee had discussed the possibility of compiling a list of administrative process and assessing which need to be addressed
      • Discussion of how this project might work and what sorts of processes would be considered
      • Source to pay was mentioned. Suggesting that5 there is a BPI project that will finish in March
      • Mentioned that the team is currently writing the requirements for an RFP
      • Data reporting was suggested. Followed by a discussion of various reports
      • Discussion of the BAT conference which will be a future agenda item
      • Suggested adding the initial collection of the process improvement recommendations to the committee Box folder
      • Discussion of procurement
      • The committee agreed that it would be helpful to review the RFP together
      • Suggested that the committee compile the list of administrative processes and prioritize them
      • A schedule for presenting on source to pay and BPI will be worked on
  • Employee Training Infrastructure
    • Discussion
      • Suggested that the last meeting was a brainstorming session of what types of training should be included in the LMS
      • Suggested that the LMS could have a variety of uses
      • The committee reviewed the data being entered into the LMS
      • Discussion of where data can be pulled from and what information is needed for each employee
      • Suggested that initial rollout will support enterprise-wide compliance training but long-term will support other trainings
      • Discussion of issues that may arise in tracking training
    • Dashboard
      • A demo of the LMS dashboard was given
      • A brief update will be given at the next meeting

Research 01.11.18 Minutes

Attending:

Henrik Aratyn, Colleen Kehoe, Karen Dunn Lopez, Andy Boyd, Andy Johnson, Allen Randall, Ed Zawacki, Himanshu Sharma, Lindsey McQuade, Annette Valenta, Min Yang, Bob Sandusky, Heather O’Leary

  • Notes
    • Noted that the committee is now using WebEx for meetings
    • Suggested that ACCC is working support but will make WebEx available to the university soon
    • Discussion of conferencing options
    • Discussion of how WebEx licenses will be assigned
  • Subcommittees
    • Research Computing Infrastructure
      • Noted that ACCC will be working with OVCR to create an event for Computational Research Day
      • Suggested that the ITGC Research Committee has a legacy of supporting the Extreme cluster
      • Mentioned that there is an agreement in the works to create a GPU cluster
      • Suggested that the goal is to allow everyone on campus to have access to the new cluster
      • A brief history of research computing at UIC was given
      • Noted that the GPU will not work for all research types
      • Mentioned that the fee structure is still being considered
      • Noted that the cluster will have 200 GPUs, 50 nodes
      • Discussion of how the cluster will compare to clusters at other institutions
      • Discussion on whether students will have access to the cluster
      • Further discussion of how the cluster could be used
      • Suggested that ACER might be able to provide a helpdesk or similar support service for students and others to get research help
      • Suggested that the committee propose a name for the cluster
      • Mentioned other institutions offer services which allow students to log into their accounts and have access to super computers
      • Noted that ACER is hoping to offer a similar service running on top of SABER
      • Suggested that the goal is to offer an easy-to-use service that can be used in courses
      • Discussion of software available in labs and how web applications might be used
      • The software issue will be brought to the ITGC Education Committee
      • Suggested that there will be license issues related to this service
      • Further discussion of the best way to offer the service
      • Suggested that a new service, Secure Computing Environment for housing high risk data, is being worked on
      • Mentioned that ACCC is working with the Care Center to collaborate on this service
    • Institutional Stewardship of Data
      • Suggested that the library is negotiating with Digital Science on acquiring Figshare for Institutions to replace the old institutional repository
      • The repository would be put in the cloud, help with access and other benefits
      • Noted that it does not come with a BAA and could not be used for other data
      • Suggested that there will be a discussion on how to set it up and help colleges utilize the rool
      • Discussion of how data will be stored and backup options
      • Suggested that there is currently a search for a new VCR
      • Asked that data needs be considered in the interview process
      • Discussion on how the committee can promote research needs to VCR candidates
      • Suggested requesting that the ITGC Research Committee be included in the interview process
  • New Business
    • February Meeting
      • The chair is unavailable for the next meeting and will reach out to one of the past chairs to substitute

Admin 12.19.17 Minutes

Attending:

Tony Kerber; Heather O’Leary; Jackie Finch; Kathleen Engstrom; Todd Van Neck; Dale Rush; Joe Patzin; Mint Simagrai

  • Employee Training Infrastructure
    • Discussion
      • Suggested that the committee brainstorm ideas about the employee training infrastructure
      • Suggested beginning with the RFP but considering what might be missing
      • Lab trainings, such as laser and chemical safety, were suggested
      • Noted that the training infrastructure will be an LMS, not a system that does the actual training
      • Discussion of whether Blackboard could be used
      • Suggested that the training system will likely be separate from Blackboard
      • Suggested that the goal is to be able to put modules into the system for each training and allow employees to track what they have completed
      • Mentioned that trainings in Blackboard are possible, but the instance must be tracked separately
      • Discussion of reasons why Blackboard would not work well for this training system
      • Additional ESHO trainings will be added to the spreadsheet
      • Discussion of how to differentiate research/lab compliance trainings from other types of compliance
      • Suggested that if clinical training is done within the LMS, the system may have to be HIPAA compliant and have a BAA
      • Further discussion of how current trainings are tracked by EHSO, HR, etc.
      • Looking to address gaps in information needed to determine who needs to do specific trainings
      • It was asked whether employee reviews could be included in order to track professional development goals
      • Suggested that this might be possible through the individualized development program
      • Suggested that supervisors would have to be added to ensure completion
      • The committee was asked to create case studies of specific situations that might occur so that the vendor can determine how best to handle
      • Noted that supervisors could go into the system to confirm trainings
      • CEUs were asked about
      • Suggested pulling information into the system from external sources
      • Further discussion of how various trainings are being tracked and how medical residents are handled
      • Requested that the system allow employees to self-track completion in addition to supervisors being able to view trainings
      • Discussion of how to track off-campus training such as conference attendance
      • Suggested that if employees upload their own training there should be a process of supervisor approval
      • Suggested that the new system will initially focus on compliance before branching out to other training needs
      • Noted that each university in the system will have its own portal, style, and ability to customize trainings
      • Discussion of Cleary training, currently available on Blackboard
      • It was questioned what would be helpful to managers when it comes to training
      • Suggested having a list full of available trainings rather than occasional emails with upcoming trainings
      • Discussion of employees’ reviews and how this system might help

InfraSec 12.13.17 Minutes

Attending:

Frank Cervone, Phil Reiter, Marcin Hiolski, Ed Zawacki, Kevin Shalla, Ian Huggins, Sandeep Dath, Jason Maslanka, Therese Molina, Bala Ramaraju, Lalo Camacho, Esteban Perez, Allen Randall, Mark Goedert, Kirsten Pielstrom, Dean Dang, Ateeq Rahman, Lisa Blake, Elizabeth Romero, (Education), Dan Pollack, Ron Fernandez, Ashok Bennett, Matt Miller, Ilir Zenku, Vinay Surpuriya, Andre Pavkovic, Chris Barton, Pedro Valencia, Mike Kirda, Heather O’Leary

  • Updates from Other ITGC Committees
    • Intro
      • Noted that the chairs of the ITGC committees meet regularly to discuss what each committee is working on
    • Education
      • The Education Committee is looking at sustainable printing at UIC
      • They started by looking at how much printing is done by students and realized that students make up a small portion of printing compared to faculty and staff
      • Noted that this effort is not directly related to the Ink printing pilot, but some information for an Ink evaluation survey is being used
      • The committee is looking at a way for faculty to request tools that they may need for teaching
      • If committee members are interested in joining these efforts, they should reach out to the chair of these subcommittees
    • Admin
      • Noted that the committee has concerns about the lack of strategy for how administrative systems are handled
      • Suggested that the committee keep this issue in mind as they consider related items
  • Ongoing Reports and Discussion Topics
    • Rate and Funding
      • Noted that the Rate and Funding Committee met to discuss the FY18 rate and how ACCC is calculating the rate
      • FTE accounts were questioned
      • ACCC is working to develop long-term plans for the rate in furfure years
      • Suggested that the committee is largely composed of admin/finance people and should include more T staff to consider strategy and what services are included in the rate
      • Suggested that there is not consensus between the departments on how to decide what is included in the rate and how funding is provided
      • The committee had some discussion on how costs beyond the FTE rates will be covered
      • There are concerns about transparency around central funds and what they are being applied to
      • Suggested that this issue must be addressed for FY18, but there is some urgency since the FY19 rate is already being prepared
      • The purpose of the committee and how they are working to set a rate was questioned
      • Suggested that the rate has been aimed at covering current service costs
      • Noted that more work needs to be done to consider long term needs and service priorities
      • Suggested that the charge of the committee is not well defined
      • Further discussion on the role of the committee and how to decide what goes into the basic bundle
      • Suggested that IT Governance should be the group determining what goes into the basic bundle
      • Suggested that the InfraSec committee should review the ACCC service catalog
      • Suggested that the rate and funding committee should be formally integrated into the IT governance structure
      • Concern was expressed about who decides what is in the bundle and how InfraSec can address this issue
      • Suggested creating a subcommittee to work on this
      • The basic bundle list will be sent out to the committee
      • Noted that the hospital has a different rate from the rest of UIC
      • Motion to create a subcommittee to review the basic bundle of services for rate and funding, seconded, no oppositions voiced
    • Azure/AWS/POC
      • Suggested that the cloud services are not ready yet
      • Meetings have been conducted with representatives from each university to discuss how to rollout these services
      • Noted that there are unresolved issues around billing
      • Discussion of billing models and what they might look like
      • Suggested that subscriptions will be set up for each unit and there will be policies around how the services can be used
      • Suggested that there is not a launch date set, but the project is in feasibility
      • The contract goes for two years starting in October
      • How to get involved in pilots/use cases was questioned
      • Suggested that once the portal is available volunteers will be asked for
      • Suggested that units need to plan for the future rather than wait for services to be made available
      • Suggested that units begin training on these services now to prepare to use them in a year
      • Discussion of training opportunities
      • Suggested that ACCC is working to set up a billing system that allows the bill to go straight from the vendor to the client
      • A general timeline on when these services will be made available was requested
    • 2017 HIPAA Audit
      • A brief overview of the HIPAA compliance of the HSCs was given
      • ACCC is working with IT directors in those units to address audit findings
      • Suggested that the end point management discussion is relevant to one of the findings and that the security program addresses many of them as well
      • Noted that, for units outside of HSCs, there will be changes that affect them
      • Discussion of audit process
    • Project Reporting
      • Requested greater project visibility on the committee
      • Suggested that the committee should not get involved in operational issues, but should help set strategy
      • Discussion of what the committee would like to see
      • Further discussion of how to improve the committee’s understanding of how ACCC resources are being used
      • A new report will be drafted to address committee concerns
    • AITS Realignment
      • Noted that there were a number of working groups formed by AITS that looked into what it would take to reallocate specific resources from AITS to the universities
      • The working groups created proposals which are being considered by the CIOs
      • Suggested that, if the proposals go forward, a number of services would come to ACCC
      • Discussion of how these changes might affect ACCC and UIC
      • Noted that the proposals were reviewed by the IT Leadership team in detail, but there is still more to be considered
    • Security Policy Rollout
      • Noted that the subcommittee did not meet due to the UISO meeting
      • Suggested that there have been issues about how consistently security training has been implemented across the university
      • It was asked how best to collectively provide for better support for training
      • Suggested that ACCC centrally manage training for consistency
      • Suggested that deadlines can be set and Audits enforce compliance
      • Further discussion of how training can be improved
      • Suggested that there need to be consequences for those who do not complete training on time
      • Suggested that ACCC will set a date for units to roll out training
      • Questioned how consequences used for not completing other trainings coul be used for security training
    • End Point Management
      • Suggested that the committee is evaluating a number of systems and working to get it down to three to share at the next meeting
      • KACE and Kaseya are possibilities
      • Some features of the different options
      • Suggested that there is an evaluation form being used for each option
      • Noted that a decision must be made urgently
  • Announcements
    • Exchange Migration Deadline
      • Noted that the deadline for migration has been extended to January 29, 2018
      • More deadline communication will be going out soon

Education 12.05.17 Minutes

Attending:

Martina Bode, Anthony Marino, Michael Scott, Annie Armstrong, Ernie Duran, Elizabeth Romero, Alana Steffen, Judith De Long, Clare Ardizzone, Marieke Schoen, Mike Kamowski, John Fyfe, Nathan Phillips

  • Subcommittees
    • LMS Governance Board
      • Noted that a graduate student who could act as a consultant to the LMS board as a research project has been identified
    • Instructional Technology
      • Noted that this will be discussed at the next ITGC Chairs meeting
  • Learning Technology Support Metrics
    • Printing
      • The November report was shared and some of the metrics were gone over
      • Outliers that are pulling down response times are being investigated
      • Discussion on how resolution times are calculated and related issues
      • Noted that the ongoing problem with the Pharos printing system has been resolved and printing incidents have significantly decreased
  • TLC Assessment
    • Recent Events
      • Mentioned that the committee met with the provost and handed off the recommendations
      • Noted that a decision is expected soon
      • Suggested that the TLC may be expanded
    • Light Board
      • Mentioned that a former TLC project for the Light Board is now set up and an opening ceremony will be held in late January
      • A link will be sent to the committee
      • A brief overview of the project was given
  • Old Business
    • Printing
      • The proposal for a printing subcommittee was filled out, but did not receive volunteers for members
      • The committee was asked if anyone would like to join
      • Noted that it is fine to have non-committee members on the subcommittee
      • Suggested that the subcommittee will work on a project for the spring semester, but that this will be ongoing
      • Suggested that this subcommittee could also offer an opportunity for encouraging faculty to use instructional technology to require less printing in their courses
      • Discussion on the potential name ofr the subcommittee
      • Suggested that this is an opportunity to improve the student experience by providing resources to faculty
      • The charge will be edited using the committee’s suggestions
      • Suggested that the goal is to consider central printing, while the other ITGC committee might consider departmental printing, etc.
      • Further discussion of scope and charge of the subcommittee
      • Emphasized that the subcommittee should research educations benefits or costs of not printing materials, and also consider the level of benefit of reducing printing
      • Suggested adding a targeted timeline to the charge
    • Blackboard
      • Mentioned that Blackboard will be upgraded in January to update inline grading
      • Blackboard will now integrate with Box
      • Communications will go out to the campus
      • Discussion of current grading in Blackboard
      • Noted that the new system can now be tested if members are interested
  • New Business
    • LMS
      • An LMS being considered by the ITGC Admin Committee was asked about
      • Noted that this system is for employee training rather than student use
      • Noted that it is being considered at the system level rather than at UIC

Admin 11.28.17 Minutes

Attending:

Todd Van Neck, Dale Rush, Joe Patzin, AJ Lavender, Eric McMinoway, Mint Simagrai, Kathleen Engstrom, John Fudacz, Tony Kerber, Jackie Finch, Mike Kamowski, Gloria Keeley, Jon Santanni, Heather O’Leary

  • ITPC Update
    • ITPC Status
      • Noted that not much has changed in the project timelines
      • QA testing was added to START myResearch
      • Discussion of what is currently available in the portal, reporting, and how many people are using the available tools
      • The biennial inventory system will be in pilot for April 2018
      • Noted that testing has discovered some performance concerns with My UI Financials, delaying December release
      • The different reporting options in START myResearch and My UIC Financials were gone over
      • Discussion of IAM and preparation for new student admission
    • Employee Training Infrastructure
      • Noted that it has not yet been decided which trainings will come first in the employee training infrastructure project
      • Discussion of how trainings might work in the new system
      • Suggested that a governance group will be put in place to govern the trainings made available
      • Further discussion of the best way to develop the training portal
      • Suggested that the goal of this system is for it to be an enterprise system that will be available for anyone to use
      • Suggested that a new level of skillsets will have to be developed to fully utilize the system
      • Discussion of issues that have come up in past projects and the importance of user input
      • Suggested that there may be an opportunity for the vendor to give a demo
      • Suggested that the scope of the project has not yet been determined
      • Discussion of holding a focus group
      • Will share the RFP with the committee
      • Suggested to use the December meeting to discuss ideas
      • A list will be created in Box and sent out to the committee to write down ideas
      • Broad discussion of trainings and what would be required of the portal
  • Old Business
    • Data Governance
      • A meeting was held to discuss the creation of a data governance group
      • Noted that a proposal to create an additional ITGC committee has been created, but it would require funding to hire an FTE data officer
      • This will be brought to the IT Governance Council to re-affirm their support before being brought to the provost
    • iBPMS RFP
      • Suggested that a group is being put together to draft the RFP
    • TEM Redesign
      • Suggested that this project is on hold
      • It was asked that users be involved in the design process once the project goes forward

InfraSec 11.08.17 Minutes

Attending:

Jason Maslanka, Matt Miller, Kirsten Pielstrom, Phil Reiter, Esteban Perez, Mark Goedert, Elizabeth Romero, Allen Randall, RIMS people, Shannon Redden, Ernesto Reyna, Bala Ramaraju, Therese Molina, Bob Sandusky, Mike Toussaint, Ron Fernandez, Marcin Hiolski, Andre Pavkovic, Doug McCarthy. Kim Charles, Ed Zawacki, Chris Barton, Lisa Blake, Mike Kirda, Heather O’Leary, Julio Chavarria, Daniel Paz-Horta, Miguel Martin, Dan Pollack, Deric Criss, Brent West, Ashok Bennett, Lalo Camacho, Ilir Zenku, Ian Huggins

  • Service Issues and Updates
    • UIC Red Infrastructure
      • A brief overview of the Red project was given
      • Noted that the provost had set a deadline of migrating everyone to the new platform in two years
      • Suggested that work has been done with the Web Advisory Committee to address needs, currently working to determine the priorities of these needs
      • Suggested that work is being done to keep up with immediate need and require additional resources to move forward on others
      • Suggested that the goal of moving into Red is to create a common interface and experience for users and templates in Red are limited to maintain the UIC brand
      • Noted that speed and support of Red is being discussed
      • The provost set the deadline and communicated it to the deans
      • Discussion of committee concerns about Red and that public facing sites should be on Red while others may link to Red sites
      • Further discussion of need for analytics
      • Discussion of defining the scope of the Red migration
      • Documentation of the project was asked for
      • Suggested submitting a request for a formal project manager
    • RIMS
      • Noted that a task force for digital content was created by the UI IT LT with a designee from every CIO
      • The group is currently working to address data that is left behind when employees leave
      • The group is looking at use cases and potential solutions and will create a policy for data retention
      • Discussion of off-boarding policies in different departments and the need for improvement
      • Discussion of need for better process to have HR notify IT of off-boarding
      • Further discussion of concerns around data access
      • Discussion of how the policy would be implemented and the process for approving it
      • Noted that there is a feature in Exchange to set retention on individual folders
      • Discussion of email retention and what should be stored
    • Rate and Funding
      • ACCC met with the Rate and Funding advisory committee to gather feedback on the rate for FY18
      • Regular meetings with the committee are being scheduled and the group will work on a process to prioritize the services that are included in the basic bundle
      • An email will be sent to the committee listing the committee membership
      • Discussion of membership
      • Discussion of involving InfraSec in determining the services provided as part of the basic bundle
      • Suggested that InfraSec have a chance to review the included services as part of the annual process
      • Discussion of how best to get IT input
    • Exchange Migration
      • Some statistics on migration were shared and noted that communications that had been sent out increased the number of migrations
      • Discussion of specific cases
      • Noted that mail will be maintained on the servers for a short time after the deadline
      • Discussion of email forwarding and related issues
  • Shared Services
    • End-Point Management Working Group
      • Noted that the group looked at a Garner guide which listed approximately twenty end-point management services
      • The technical group identified seven potential vendors which will be reviewed to make a final recommendation
      • When asked how the committee would like to provide input on the vendors being considered, it was suggested that the subcommittee make a recommendation to the InfraSec committee
      • Discussion of next steps, once a recommendation is made
      • Noted that there is currently no service offering of SCCM from Urbana
      • Some end-point management services have been offered by Urbana but do not meet the needs of UIC
      • Noted that there is some urgency in finding a solution to meet university risk management requirements
      • Once a recommendation is made, it will be sent back to the requirements group for review
  • Strategic Issues
    • HIPAA Audit
      • There was a HIPAA audit of the HSCs and a report was generated
      • Recurring meetings with HIPAA liaisons have been set up to address the audit findings
    • Cloud Computing
      • Working on completing security policies to be able to roll out the service
      • No timeline is currently available
    • IT Strategy
      • Mentioned that the IT Strategy document was presented to the Main Council at their last meeting
      • Noted that the Council made some suggestions such as including UI Health, which will be worked on
      • Noted that the chairs had additional comments and would like to meet with the CIO and integrate all of the comments into the final draft of the strategy document
    • iLeCT
      • Noted that there is an upcoming iLeCT event on Outlook calendars and meeting management, members were encouraged to attend
      • Another upcoming event at SPH on emotional intelligence was mentioned
      • Committee members were encouraged to consider their staff members who may be interested in joining iLeCT
  • Subcommittees
    • Security Program
      • Noted that the UISO Q5 meeting is upcoming, an email announcement went out
      • UISO rollout documents are available in the subcommittee folder
      • Noted that the security program timeline has been adjusted
      • Suggested that the subcommittee has a goal of increasing UISO community interaction
      • Discussion of changing language of “quarters” to “phrases” in the security program timeline
    • Regional Sites
      • The subcommittee is looking at a way to look at student IT fees
      • Questioned how to find out how the IT fees are being spent on UIC’s campus
      • The annual meeting of the Student Fee Advisory Committee, where the library and ACCC share how the fee was used in the past year, and plans for the upcoming year were spoken of
    • Risk Management/Risk Assessment
      • Suggested that email communication will be going out
    • Digital Signage
      • A solution is being worked on
  • Announcements and Updates
    • Symantec
      • Suggested that Symantec at AHS has been deployed
    • VM Servers
      • Suggested that work is being done to move VM servers to the new infrastructure but it will take time
    • Encryption
      • Noted the ongoing problem of encryption not working on Apple OS will be looked into

Education 11.07.17 Minutes

Attending:

Judith De Jong; Clare Ardizzone; Tim Sullivan; Elizabeth Romero; Anthony Marino; Joe Iosbaker; Michael Scott; Mike Kamowski; Marieke Schoen; John Fyfe; Annie Armstrong; Janette Maldonado; Ernie Duran; Alana Steffen; Cathleen Bimmerle; Michael Siciliano; Heather O’Leary

  • Sustainability Initiative on Printing Reduction
    • Overview of Current Printing Service
      • Mentioned that there is a central student printing service called “U-Print”
      • Suggested that the trend of increased printing each year is not sustainable and does not line up with cloud technology
      • Mentioned that there have been issues with the printing service which ACCC has addressed
      • Noted that the printing program Ink is being piloted this year with hope of expansion
    • Sustainability
      • Noted that the university is working on the climate commitments project which includes efforts to reduce waste, use less energy, etc.
      • Suggested that the university recycles about 45% of 800 tons of waste, that most of the waste comes from paper, and that the best way to encourage recycling is to make it easy to do so
      • The Office of Sustainability joined the Association for Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education in working to change recycling behavior
      • An evaluation of behaviors was shared and suggested that the next step is creating a survey to identify barriers for student printing
      • Some methods for identifying barriers and reducing printing in Facilities were outlined
    • Discussion
      • Suggested that if ACCC went ahead with the Ink printing system, printing quota and fees may be changed
      • Suggested encouraging faculty and students to use more electronic systems rather than printing
      • Discussion of in-quote printing and associated costs using U-Print vs. Ink
      • Suggested that decreasing printing would save the university money
      • Discussion on best places to cut down on printing
      • Clarity on the role of the committee in this effort was questioned
      • Suggested that there is a request to form a subcommittee to work on this project and determine the best way to identify barriers
      • Discussion of Ink survey sent out by ACCC
      • Further discussion of the importance of paper in learning and costs/benefits of paper and electronic options
      • Suggested that the goal of the committee could be to reduce printing
      • A subcommittee form will be filled out and brought back to the committee for review
      • Requested that more information be shared from the Office of Sustainability and ACCC
  • Learning Technologies Support Metrics
    • Discussion
      • The LTS CIO/Governance Dashboard was shared with Support KPIs per service
      • Noted that the spreadsheet is available for committee members to view
      • Discussion of response time, SLAs, and recurring faculty problems
  •  Subcommittees
    • LMS Governance Board
      • Suggested that the new Blackboard update will allow for inline grading
      • Noted that Box.com will also be integrated into Blackboard
      • Suggested that available training opportunities are being sent out to Blackboard instructors every Monday
      • The committee was asked if they would like a presentation on the preparation for testing Ultra
    • Instructional Technology (Request Forms)
      • The state of the subcommittee was presented on
      • The most recent version of the submission survey was shared
      • The Techstarter Process at Iowa was gone over
      • Suggested that the subcommittee is requesting clarity on a funding model before moving ahead with launching a pilot of process
      • Suggested that there must be an incentive in submitting proposals
      • Discussion on how to get buy-in from upper administration
      • Suggested bringing this to the committee Chairs meeting
  • TLC Assessment
    • Updates
      • Mentioned that a survey had gone out to the teaching scholars, deans, and department heads and there was a high response rate
      • Suggested that there was not much approval of the mission
      • Report is being finalized and will be presented to the provost soon
  • Old Business
    • Wait Listing
      • Mentioned the committee’s request to look at wait listing for course registration and noted that it will be evaluated in 2018

Research 11.02.17 Minutes

Attending:

Andy Johnson, Henrik Aratyn, Jacqueline Berger, Karen Dunn Lopez, Himanshu Sharma, Allen Randall, Bob Sandusky, Mike Toussaint, Heather O’Leary, Andy Boyd, Ed Zawacki

  • WebEx/Spark
    • WebEx Demo
      • A WebEx demonstration was given
      • Noted that it is encrypted and HIPAA compliant
      • Suggested that it is user friendly and has a number of features
      • UIC Faculty and staff will be able to request an account, which will provide each person with their own personal landing page and personalized link
      • Noted that backup hosts can be designated to carry on a meeting if the host is unable to attend
      • Whether administration privileges are required was questioned
      • Suggested that WebEx has a base tool that does not require installation
      • Various call-in options, screen sharing, passing presenter mode, etc. were gone over
      • Noted that WebEx allows hosts to save meeting content in the cloud
    • Spark Demo
      • Spark was presented on and it will roll out after WebEx
      • Spark does not require dialing in, but allows for a persistent room, instant messaging, file sharing, etc.
      • It also has to ability to collaborate with people outside of UIC
      • The service is currently available, but has not been rolled out by ACCC yet
      • Committee members are able to test out these services
      • Spark allows for instant collaboration
      • Discussion of storing date in Spark – HIPAA/FERPA compliant, access to data if an employee leaves, etc.
      • Mentioned that Spark offers 5GB of data storage
      • Suggested that this change to WebEx and Spark is intended to get all users onto the same platform rather than using many different services across the campus
  • Subcommittees
    • Research Computing Infrastructure
      • Noted that an announcement went out to campus about the SABER cluster being available
      • Committee members were encouraged to spread the word to researchers who may be looking for high performance computing
      • SABER is pay for service, rather than an initial investment like with the Extreme cluster
      • An overview of the service available with SABER and how clients will be charged was given
      • Big data analytics were also talked about
      • SABER is currently only available for data simulation but will soon be available for big data research
      • A computational research day at UIC in January 2018 was mentioned
      • It will be a day-long conference where researchers can present their work to each other
      • Suggested that the CIO will be contacting OVCR to work on this effort together
      • A planning committee will be put together to plan the event and select proposals for the conference
      • The High Performance Research NSF grant has a deadline of November 30th and the installation is running on time
      • Suggested that this research will help researchers to transfer large volumes of data
      • Internet 2 is a network designed specifically for academic and research institutions and UIC will have access to this network
      • Suggested that UIC might use Globus to transfer data
      • No timeline is yet available for this service
      • Discussion of other possible future research services
      • The “Year of Cyberinfrastructure” at UIC was mentioned
      • ACER will go to each college and meet with faculty to present what ACER does and ask about their needs
      • The committee members were asked to help arrange meetings with colleges and individual departments
      • Suggested that these meetings will also help develop use cases for grant proposals

Admin 10.24.17 Minutes

Attending:

Mike Kamowski, John Fudacz, Dale Rush, Eric McMinoway, Todd Van Neck, Joe Patzin, Therese Molina, Jackie Finch, Monica Tith, Aaron Rosenthal, Dimuthu Tilakaratne, Cynthia Cobb, Kathleen Engstrom, Heather O’Leary

  • ITPC Updates
    • Status Update Document
      • The ITPC Status Update Document was shared, noting that relevant points have been highlighted
      • Noted that the Capital Programs project has been canceled leaving 2,500 hours which may be used to improve existing systems
      • A number of other projects were gone over
      • Suggested that the START myResearch focus group went well, other than concern over routing issues
      • Discussion of customization options
      • Suggested that there is a steering committee across all thee universities that work to address these issues
      • Noted that there are monthly IAM status meetings
      • Discussion of scope of Employee Training Infrastructure project
      • A presentation on this project was requested
  • Course Wait Lists
    • Course Wait Lists
      • Suggested that one of the recommendations in the ITGC Assessment was to improve cross-committee communication
      • The ITGC Education has requested the consideration of possibly having wait lists for classes
      • An overview of what has been done with wait lists in the past was given
      • Noted that there is Banner solution that did not work well
      • Discussion of current options and requirements of a system if it were implemented
    • uic.edu
      • Noted that the faculty and staff my.uic.edu portal is going live next week
      • Noted that there were focus groups and other means of inpit in the process of creating the portal
      • Some of the tools and links that will be available were listed
      • Discussion of how user friendly the portal is and how the old site will be taken down in November
      • A brief demo of the new portal was given
  • UIC IT Strategy
    • Strategy Goals
      • Concern was expressed about this not aligning to the business needs of UIC
      • Suggested that it should be less focused on IT services and more focused on supporting services in general that are supported by IT
      • Specific term changes were discussed
      • Suggested to include clinical
      • Suggested that a goal of this is to reduce duplication
  • Rate and Funding
    • Going Forward with the New Model
      • Noted that ACCC moved to a new Rate and Funding model last year to better fund their services
      • Suggested that the committee created to review the rate before it was rolled out could play a role in reviewing and vetting the rate and basic bundle going forward
      • Suggested that the committee could play a leadership role in considering where technology should be going and considering deferred maintenance
      • Suggested that there could be involvement from the ITGC Admin or InfraSec committees in proposal processes
      • Discussion of financial concerns related to rate and funding model and whether those considerations fall under the scope of the ITGC Admin Committee
      • Suggested that there is little cost change related to number of users
      • Suggested that the rate has caused behavior to change, which is positive
  • Activity Reporting System
    • Issues
      • An update on this issue was asked for
      • Suggested that the advisory committee will be brought back to discuss issues
      • Discussion of issues with the system