CIS Meeting Minutes (20180919)

A meeting of the Committee on Information Systems (CIS) was held Wednesday, September 20, 2017 from 9:00-10:30 AM in Library Room 143. This was the first meeting for the Fall 2018 Semester. The attendees were:

1. Stefano Costanzi (CAS)
2. Nancy Davenport (LIB)
3. Michael Fernandez (LIB)
4. Alan Isaac (CAS)
5. Katie Holton (CAS)
6. Kiho Kim (CTRL)
7. Joseph Mortati (KSB)
8. David Spratt (WCL)
9. Stef Woods (CAS)
10. Sonja Walti (SPA, standing in for Jennifer Gumbrewicz)

The following items of business were discussed.

Chair Alan Isaac called the meeting to order. The April 2018 minutes were reviewed and approved.

The decision process to select the chair was reviewed and Stefano explained the Senate Faculty process changed to replace CIS’s longstanding three-person co-chair model with a Chair and Vice Chair model, with the Vice Chair assuming the Chair role in the following year.

Since the meeting scheduled for Wednesday, November 21st (Day before Thanksgiving) will not work for most of the Committee members, the November meeting will be held Wednesday, November 14th, from 9:00-10:30 AM (room is TBD).

Nancy Davenport (LIB) briefed the following items:

• First floor renovation completed this summer.
• Library moved to a new library services platform, which has been relatively smooth but there have been a few issues.
• Ensure hardcopy textbooks have a copy on file with the library.
• Library is about to start the budget cycle.

Michael Fernandez (LIB) explained he is leaving AU to work at Yale and this would be his final CIS Meeting. We thank Michael for his service and wish him the best in his new endeavors.

Stef Woods (CAS) briefed the following items:

• Online Leadership Learning Council has been extended.
• What happened to the pilot implementation of Blackboard Ultra? Xref Scott Vanek’s meeting in October 2017.
• Nancy to follow-up with Scott and report back prior to our next meeting.

Kiho Kim (CTRL) briefed the following items:

• All statistics applications except Stata have a university license. For this app, there are per-seat (individual) licenses, which have been issued on an as-needed basis. This sparked a discussion as to which organization – CTRL or individual schools – should be responsible for individual licenses, an issue larger than this Committee. He further explained he can take inputs to the Budget Committee and we agreed this issue needs further discussion at the October CIS meeting.

Alan Isaac (CAS) raised the following issue:

• Accessibility (508) Compliance (for details, see: https://www.section508.gov/manage/laws-and-policies). The goal is all public-facing documents should be compliant, but this becomes an unbearable burden for certain departments that extensively use equations, tables, and images (e.g., Statistics, Math, Economics). Likewise, instructor and student working papers, some of which are public-facing, are required to be compliant (AU treats this as an accessibly issue). For example, Economics Department uses a non-AU website, LaTeX (a document preparation system; see https://www.latex-project.org/ for details), but some files are blocked from being uploaded due to non-compliance. However, there is no current technology that can quickly and easily convert such content, so expensive manual intervention is required. Alan will provide CIS a summary to of the problems of generating accessible PDFs with LaTeX.
• The Digital Communication Strategy Team appears to be moving forward without faculty input, which is concerning. How will faculty get timely updates to their working papers (which are works-in-process and may change frequently)? It appears this is an undue burden.
• Alan proposed CIS send an email to Digital Communication Strategy and a robust discussion followed with Katie Holten and Stef Woods raising the concern that a meeting with Rachel Weatherly (Director, Digital Communication Strategy) should precede an email to ensure the severity and timeliness of the issue is understood. That said, Alan was charged with sending an email to Rachel expressing the desire of CIS to meet with her very soon so that CIS can understand her working group’s activities.

A corollary item arose regarding Graduate Leadership Council and AU Student Government representation at CIS. For the AY 2018-2019, both these positions are unfilled.

With the expiration of time and there being no other items to discuss, the meeting was adjourned. The next meeting will be Wednesday, October 17, 2018 from 9:00-10:30 AM.

A meeting of the Committee on Information Systems (CIS) was held Wednesday, September 20, 2017 from 11:00 AM to 12:00 PM in Library Room 143. This was the first meeting for the Fall 2017 Semester. The attendees were:

1. Robert Adcock (SIS)
2. Stefano Costanzi (CAS)
3. Nancy Davenport (LIB)
4. Michael Fernandez (LIB)
5. Terry Fernandez (OIT)
6. Katie Holton (CAS)
7. Billie Jo Kaufman (WCL)
8. Sarah Menke-Fish (SOC)
9. Joseph Mortati (KSB)
10. Rick Semiatin (SPEX)
11. Sonja Walti (SPA)
12. Stef Woods (CAS)

The following items of business were discussed.

1. Chair Stefano Costanzi opened the meeting by welcoming the new members to the Committee. This was followed a discussion on whether to continue with two co-chairs or return to the three co-chair model used in previous academic years. By unanimous vote, the three-chair model was adopted and Billie Jo Kaufman (WCL) and Stef Woods (CAS) were elected to be the other co-chairs.

2. The minutes from the April 19, 2017 meeting were approved (https://blogs.library.american.edu/cis/minutes-april-19-2017-approved/).

3. Stefano Costanzi then directed the committee’s attention to the CIS Issues List, not all of which can be resolved within this academic year. Therefore, he proposed we do the following, which was unanimously-agreed upon:

Friday, October 20th Meeting (11:00 AM to Noon in SIS260)

Since Blackboard is such a central platform to most faculty and students, Joseph Mortati will request that Scott Vanek, Assistant Director, e-Learning & Instructional Design Services, give a detailed presentation on what new features are coming in Blackboard and when they will be implemented. The intent is to share this knowledge with our respective schools be and to provide useful advice on future Blackboard development.

Alan Isaac raised the issue about scheduling classrooms based on software or equipment needs vs. enrollments and modernization schedule. He will present a draft document to survey AU faculty on their software needs at the October meeting; a further discussion is scheduled for November (see below).

Wednesday, November 15th Meeting (11:00 AM to Noon in BLIB143, Library Conference Room)

Revisit discussion of classroom allocation issues with a representative from the Registrar’s office (ideally, Stephanie Brookstein, Assistant Dean for Online Learning SPExS Graduate and Online Learning Programs). Likewise, we need to discuss the requirements and schedule for classroom modernization.

4. Terry Fernandez then explained our new president’s asking about online learning platforms is an opportunity for CIS to give inputs; Sonja Walti then asked, what is the appropriate approach to online learning regarding staffing? That is, should there be a CIS response or individual ones for each school? This was tabled till Spring 2018, along with issues regarding Intellectual Property.

5. Alan Isaac raised the issue of Accessibility, that is, making legacy content accessible has resulted in some data being removed, which defeats the purpose of accessibility. Time precluded any substantive discussion on this topic.

6. There being no additional business for the good of the order, the meeting was adjourned. The next meeting will be held on Friday, October 20th in SIS 260 (note the different room).

A meeting of the Committee on Information Systems (CIS) was held Wednesday, April 19, 2017 from 1:00-2:00 PM in Library Room 115. This was the final meeting for the Spring 2017 Semester. The attendees were:

1. Robert Adcock (SIS)
2. Stefano Costanzi (CAS)
3. Alan Isaac (CAS)
4. Terry Fernandez (OIT)
5. Stefan Kramer (LIB)
6. Joseph Mortati (KSB)
7. Lindsay Murphy (CTRL)
8. Sarah Menke-Fish (SOC)
9. Scott Vanek (eLearning, guest speaker)
10. Stef Woods (CAS)
11. Chenyang Xiao (CAS)

The following items of business were discussed.

1. March 2017 minutes (https://blogs.library.american.edu/cis/minutes-march-22-2017-draft/) were approved.

2. The composition of the Committee and its leadership was discussed. The following members’ terms are expiring and they will not be returning in the Fall: Stefan Kramer (LIB), Sarah Menke-Fish (SOC), and Chenyang Xiao (CAS). Their replacements are yet to be named but a formal announcement should be made by mid-June. Additionally, after three years as co-chair, Joseph Mortati (KSB), said he would like to step down from that position (but he will remain a member). Stefano Costanzi (CAS) expressed interest in returning as co-chair in the Fall. That said, an election for a replacement for chairperson will have to wait till September.

3. The majority of the meeting was spent continuing our discussion from last month with Scott Vanek, Assistant Director, e-Learning & Instructional Design Services, University Library, regarding closer cooperation between CIS and the e-Learning (formerly AU’s Blackboard Support). Items/questions discussed were:

• A CIS issue is certification for online teaching varies across schools and vendors (there are multiple Learning Management Systems). This should be queued up for the next meeting.
• Technical “Teas” (a suggestion from the previous month) were discussed among the eLearning Team and it was decided to work in conjunction with CTRL at the beginning of next semester.
• Encouraging faculty to use Blackboard more.
o Having school or department experts; need to flesh out the plan.
o Discussed students being tech support. Joseph Mortati offered the 10 TAs he will be managing this Fall as a test group; if it’s successful, it could be rolled out to TAs for other courses in other schools.
o eLearning Team is working on several self-produced video tutorials that will be available before the Fall 2017 semester.
• Scott said that a job posting for a student to work technical support; he will email the requisition to the committee to ask for our help in identifying candidates.
• There was some discussion regarding the difficulty of using Blackboard help functions. Scott pointed out there is a clearly-marked Help function on the login page (i.e., before you login) with the following links:

BLACKBOARD HELP
Help for Students
Help for Faculty
Contact Blackboard Support

4.  The following CIS issues list items were discussed:

Online Learning Review

Resulted in a discussion about online learning and copyright issues related to who does the work – faculty (current copyright protection) or staff (no copyright protection because they are considered Work for Hire). Scott Vanek mentioned that Stephanie Brookstein, Assistant Dean for Online Learning SPExS Graduate and Online Learning Programs, to our first Fall 2017 meeting.

Chris Lewis, is copyright person at Library; he may be another person to be invited to speak in the Fall.

Action Item: follow-up with other committees – eLearning and Copyright – to see who has discussed this before (Terry Fernandez, OIT).

Big Data Policies

What agreements or policy is in-place regarding use of data collected on third party platforms (e.g., Blackboard, 2U, etc.).

AU-Wide license to Top Hat or similar (e.g., Pearson Mobile)

Third parties sell software learning packages to individual faculty members (e.g., Top Hat, Pearson Mobile)

Sarah Menke-Fish (SOC) said there are issues related to using Top Hat (https://tophat.com/). Stefano Costanzi raised a similar issue regarding requiring resources that result in costs beyond tuition and fees.

Alan Isaac asked if an attendance or polling feature could be added. Scott Vanek said such a feature was demonstrated in Blackboard World in 2017 but it looks unlikely to be added anytime soon.

4. There being no additional business for the good of the order, the meeting was adjourned. The next meeting will be held sometime in early Fall 2017.

A meeting of the Committee on Information Systems (CIS) was held Wednesday, February 15, 2017 from 1:00-2:00 PM in Library Room 115. The nine attendees were:

1. Robert Adcock (SIS)
2. Stefano Costanzi (CAS)
3. Alan Isaac (CAS)
4. Billie Jo Kaufman (WCL)
5. Stefan Kramer (LIB)
6. Joseph Mortati (KSB)
7. Lindsay Murphy (CTRL)
8. Sonja Walti (SPA)
9. Stef Woods (CAS)

The following items of business were discussed.

1. Co-Chair Stefano Costanzi called the meeting to order and for the January 2017 minutes to be approved, which was done.

2. Sonja Walti (SPA) raised the issue of faculty (re)engagement with Blackboard. Some faculty use it more than others (recent versions have made significant improvements, particularly in the areas of Collaborate (sharing tool) and usability (e.g., instructors can now drag and drop attachments). However, other faculty use a mixed bag of platforms (emailing files directly, Google Docs, Google Calendar, and others), which presents dramatically different communication methodologies to students. Sonja asked if this was an issue for this Committee and, if so, what should be done?

Stef Woods (SPA) discussed the issue from the perspective of the students (who may prefer a platform other than Blackboard) and Lindsay Murphy (CTRL) from the perspective of the faculty (who may prefer to standardize on a single platform). That said, should there be an effort to encourage faculty to use Blackboard more?

There was further discussion about the possibility of standardizing syllabi verbiage to state what the method(s) of communication, file availability, and assignment submittal should be. Alan Isaac (CAS) raised the question, “Is Blackboard not used more because it’s too hard to use or not useful?” Lindsay Murphy added, “Does it fit the instructor’s teaching style?” Stefan Kramer raised additional questions, “Why should students learn to use something they won’t use in business? I used to use Blackboard but stopped because it’s no longer useful or there is a feature not available or not sufficiently useful?” Alan raised the issue of staying within the secure confines of Blackboard.

The Committee also discussed the proliferation of LMS platforms other than Blackboard. For example, Kogod uses Blackboard for in-person classes and 2U for its online programs (although for students, these are mutually-exclusive – they use one or the other but not both; however, some faculty must be proficient with both). Billie Jo Kaufman (WCL) added that the Law School uses AppointLink for its MyWCL (Blackboard-like) system and Desire2Learn D2L (Brightspace) for our online LMS. They use Adobe Connect for users to see each other.

Lindsay suggested we invite Scott Vanek (AU Blackboard) office to attend the March meeting to discuss the possibility of doing some outreach to the larger campus community.

3. Stefano Costanzi then reviewed the CIS Issues List at the end of this message to update statuses and determine which items need CIS attention. To recap, Items #1-7 and #17 were discussed and their statuses updated during the January 2017 meeting. In today’s meeting, Items #8 and 9 were discussed and their updates are reflected below.

Likewise, a tangential issue arose regarding classroom space that is configured for online learning. The discussion also referenced purpose-built rooms (e.g., at George Mason University) that are a radical departure from the traditional lecture where the focus is on the front of the room (i.e., either the instructor or the screen). It was agreed to table this issue till next month’s meeting.

5. The final item was that Joseph Mortati mentioned he invited Tara Sabbagh, Associate Registrar, Student Information Systems, to explain the room scheduling process at the university-level and what the various “tiers” of classrooms there are.

6. There being no additional business for the good of the order, the meeting was adjourned. The next meeting will be held on Wednesday, March 22, 2017 at 1:00 PM in Library 115.

A meeting of the Committee on Information Systems (CIS) was held Wednesday, January 25, 2017 from 1:00-2:00 PM in Library Room 115. The twelve attendees were:

1.  Robert Adcock (SIS)
2. Maria Beltran (GLC)
3. Stefano Costanzi (CAS)
4. Nancy Davenport (LIB)
5. Terry Fernandez (OIT)
6. Alan Isaac (CAS)
7. Stefan Kramer (LIB)
8. Sarah Menke-Fish (SOC)
9. Joseph Mortati (KSB)
10. Sonja Walti (SPA)
11. Stef Woods (CAS)
12. Chenyang Xiao (CAS)

The following items of business were discussed.

1. Co-Chair Joseph Mortati called the meeting to order and for the November 2016 minutes to be approved, which were. New member Robert Adcock of SIS was welcomed.

2. Joseph Mortati provided an update on the topic of Information Literacy as it relates to AU Experience (AUx) Courses, which in this context, means being literate about types and sources of information, not anything to do with Information Systems.

3. Sonja Walti raised the issue of allocation of classrooms based on pedagogical needs. It appears that different schools allocate classrooms differently based on course, section, or instructor needs – it is currently not possible to change rooms based on inadequate setup including layout, furniture, and technology. There should be a way to request features ahead of time. It should be technically feasible to flag special needs when requesting classrooms as such capability is available when scheduling events. Upon further discussion, it was agreed to invite Tara Sabbagh, Associate Registrar, Student Information Systems, to explain the process at the university-level and what the various “tiers” of classrooms there are.

4. Stefan Kramer provided an update on the Fall 2016 ATSC (Academic Technology Steering Committee) meeting.

a. Student Computing Devices – a survey showed that 10% of about 350 recipients did not bring any kind of computing device to campus. A small-scale needs assessment to establish a baseline is necessary but students should not have to self-identify – this is a chair issue and a policy problem without a procedural solution.

b. $164,000 has been allocated for Priority 1 & 2 upgrades to classrooms. There are three “tiers” of classrooms [note: we need definitions for these].

c. For all online video content used in teaching – includes Blackboard and non-AU sources such as YouTube – to have closed captioning would require 5 full-time equivalents (FTEs). This item needs further discussion by CIS.

5. The CIS Issues Lists was reviewed to update statuses and determined which items need CIS attention. Of the 19 items on the list, #1-7 and #17 were reviewed.

6. There being no additional business for the good of the order, the meeting was adjourned.

A meeting of the Committee on Information Systems (CIS) was held Wednesday, November 16, 2016 from 4:00-5:00 PM in Library Room 115. The eight attendees were:

1. Stefano Costanzi (CAS)
2. Nancy Davenport (LIB)
3. Alan Isaac (CAS)
4. Stefan Kramer (LIB)
5. Joseph Mortati (KSB)
6. Lindsay Murphy (CTRL)
7. Stef Woods (CAS)
8. Chenyang Xiao (CAS)

The following items of business were discussed.

1. Co-Chair Stefano Costanzi called the meeting to order and for the October 2016 minutes to be approved, which were.

2. The topic of Information Literacy as it relates to AU Experience (AUx) Courses was reviewed and it is not clear to this committee what this means. That is, Stefano, Nancy, and Stefan asked questions relating to whether this refers to using Information Technology, research and application of information, or some combination? Likewise, Chenyang Xiao asked does this fall under CIS purview?

This led to an agreement that if this is a curriculum issue, CIS does not have a say but if it has Library/OIT impacts, it does. To this latter point, when developing courses, Literary I & II should discuss how courses should actively involve the Library, CTRL, and any other campus units supporting information systems.

Joseph Mortati took the action of asking what vetting is or will be done of information literacy learning objectives.

3. Mobile devices in classrooms. Lindsay Murphy briefed the committee on the draft top takeaways CTRL has identified for this topic. Alan Isaac commented the draft is great and asked, “What about students understanding their part with respect to information systems?” Stefano added that student takeaways are instructor-specific and Alan added this should be brought to the attention of our constituencies.

4. The Spring 2017 meeting schedule was briefly discussed and Stefano agreed to circulate a poll to find the best day/time to meet.

5. There being no additional business for the good of the order, the meeting was adjourned.

A meeting of the Committee on Information Systems (CIS) was held Wednesday, October 19, 2016 from 4:00-5:00 PM in Library Room 115. The nine attendees were:

1. Stefano Costanzi (CAS)
2. Terry Fernandez (OIT)
3. Nancy Davenport (LIB)
4. Joseph Mortati (KSB)
5. Lindsay Murphy (CTRL)
6. Sonja Walti (SPA)
7. Stef Woods (CAS)

Co-chair Joseph Mortati brought the meeting to order and the following business was conducted:

1. Meeting minutes from the September 28, 2016 meeting were approved.

2. AU Experience (AUx) Courses

The latest draft (http://www.american.edu/provost/gened/upload/Reimagining-General-Education-5-4-16.pdf) raised two issues for which this committee has an interest – one in a general sense and one specific to Information Services.

1. Some core courses, which are designed to integrate students into the AU experience, are not academic courses but are for-credit. They use a hybrid delivery system where video lectures are standard across sections but are not necessarily taught by full-time faculty. There are some concerns that these courses border on advocacy and threaten academic freedom, which is tied to critical thinking. This is not a CIS-specific question but a broader one.

2. Some courses have Learning Objectives for information literacy; the Reimagining Education draft states (page 2) that, “We also seek to address current deficits in quantitative literacy and writing and information literacy training that were identified by recent campus task forces.” Two of the courses that address are Information Literacy I and II, the former’s description including, “This course sequence focuses on learning how to make effective writing choices, including formulating original theses and well-supported, effectively organized arguments. Students will learn how to write in several academic genres and how to produce error-free prose. In addition, they will acquire the conceptual knowledge needed to negotiate a complex information ecosystem, which includes web sites, social media, databases, visual media and other sources of information.” Information Literacy II states, “Students will learn to recognize the role of research and information in creating new disciplinary knowledge, thinking critically about how information is created, valued, stored and shared in specific disciplinary conversations. W2 courses need not be in the English language.”

One of the questions relevant to CIS is, are these objectives adequate? This question was tabled till the next meeting.

3. Mobile Devices in the Classroom

The discussion centered around whether mobile devices in the classroom are a distraction or an opportunity and what the committee (this is to be sensitive to reservations expressed by Chenyang Xiao in the September 2016 meeting about promoting best practices or “how to” approaches not being under the purview of this body). The idea of a process flow guide to assist faculty was discussed and Lindsay Murphy (CTRL) mentioned her organization is working on a set of guidelines faculty should consider when developing policies for their classes. Discussion on this issue will continue during our next meeting.

4. Who will attend ATSC Meetings?

The last scheduled piece of business on the agenda is, who from CIS will attend ATSC Meetings, which meet on the third Wednesday of each month from 3:00-4:00 PM? Sonja Walti attends representing SPA but there should be a CIS member attending to represent this committee. Joseph Mortati agreed to poll the AUINFOTECH distribution list to see who can attend.

5. There being no other business for the good of the order, the meeting was adjourned.

A meeting of the Committee on Information Systems (CIS) was held Wednesday, September 28, 2016 from 4:00-5:00 PM in Library Room 115. The nine attendees were:

1. Stefano Costanzi (CAS)
2. Terry Fernandez (OIT)
3. Stefan Kramer (LIB)
4. Sarah Menke-Fish (SOC)
5. Joseph Mortati (KSB)
6. Lindsay Murphy (CTRL)
7. Sonja Walti (SPA)
8. Stef Woods (CAS)
9. Chenyang Xiao (CAS)

Former Co-chair Joseph Mortati brought the meeting to order and the following business was conducted:

1. For the benefit of new members, a brief review of the Committee’s charter and previous engagement on information systems-related issues was done (e.g., Social Media policy, accessibility, copyright and intellectual property, email conversion, research databases, and student pictures on class rosters). To recap, the Committee has the following responsibilities:

• to maintain liaison with the Director of the Center for Teaching, Research, and Learning;
• to maintain liaison with the University Librarian concerning plans and programs, and, in cooperation with the library, to assess the varying library needs of undergraduate students, graduate students, and faculty and examine the adequacy of the delivery of library services to students and faculty, in particular facilities, budget support, staff, and cooperation with the Washington Research Library Consortium;
• to maintain a liaison with the Office of Technology (OIT) concerning plans and programs, and in cooperation with OIT to assess the varying technology needs of the university and to make recommendations on those needs;
• to maintain a liaison with the Center for Teaching, Research, and Learning to assess and make recommendations on technology needs related to the teaching and research support and services provided by that office; and
• as appropriate, to report its findings and recommendations to the Committee on Academic Budget and Benefits, including recommendations about long-range financial planning.

2. Due to timing issues of new CIS members being appointed after the end of the Spring 2016 term, the committee was chair-less so after a brief explanation of the circumstances, Joseph Mortati moved to vote on new co-chairs for the 2016-2017 Academic Year; he and Stefano Costanzi were unanimously elected.

3. A letter drafted by Alan Isaac regarding committee inputs on the AU Experience, a holdover item from Spring 2016, was reviewed and the committee agreed that we need to see the current version of the AU Experience as it may have changed since the Spring. Stef Woods pointed us to the latest version: http://www.american.edu/provost/gened/upload/Reimagining-General-Education-5-4-16.pdf and that Cindy Bair Van Dam and Jessica Waters are the General Education Implementation task force co-chairs.

4. The question of integrating new technology into classrooms, specifically smartphones and tablets was discussed and a robust discussion was had, reflecting the different views of the members and with the dividing line being the contention between such devices being a distraction vs. a learning aid. Lindsay Murphy cited Educause (educause.edu), a nonprofit association whose mission is to advance higher education by promoting the intelligent use of information technology as a potential source of information regarding best practices, assumptions, and learning outcomes. While this is an issue for which CIS can add value, Chenyang Xiao expressed reservations about promoting best practices or “how to” approaches not being under the purview of this body so the discussion redirected to the line of creating a flowchart or similar aid to guide faculty when considering integrating new technology into the classroom. Joseph Mortati mentioned there is precedence for this as CIS created and distributed a decision-making flowchart regarding software options for faculty (attached). Additionally, after the meeting, Lindsay provided the following link at a starting point: From Distraction to Engagement: Wireless Devices in the Classroom.

5. Stefan Kramer pointed out the Academic Technology Steering Committee (ATSC) which holds monthly meetings regarding Information Systems but from the Provost’s perspective and our committee is obligated to send a representative. Joseph Mortati will work with Mike Piller (ATSC Chair) to ensure we have representation.

6. Sarah Menke-Fish pointed out that with the migration of faculty and staff voicemail to a new platform, some users have not yet setup their mailboxes (the old ones were not migrated to the new system) resulting in callers not being able to leave messages.

7. There being no other business for the good of the order, the meeting was adjourned.

A meeting of the Committee on Information Systems (CIS) was held on Wednesday, March 16, 2016 at 1:00 PM in Library Classroom 306. The eleven attendees were:

1. Kara Andrade (GLC)
2. Alan Isaac (CAS)
3. Stefan Kramer (Library)
4. Carl LeVan (SIS)
5. Michael Manson (Dir, UG Research and Integrity)
6. Joseph Mortati (KSB)
7. Lindsay Murphy (CTRL)
8. Chris Simpson (SOC)
9. Lyn Stallings (Vice Provost, UG Studies)
10. Sonja Walti (SPA)
11. Chenyang Xiao (CAS)

Co-chair Joseph Mortati brought the meeting to order and the following business was conducted:

1. A motion to approve the draft minutes of the previous meeting was made and approved.

2. The remainder of the meeting was dedicated to Lyn Stallings, Vice Provost for Undergraduate Studies, and Michael Manson, Director, Undergraduate Research and Integrity, who were seeking CIS inputs on an issue related to undergraduate research opportunities. (As an FYI, Lyn also has a faculty/staff undergraduate research committee exploring these options and advising her along with convening some student focus groups.)

The problem-to-be-solved is that AU currently lacks a robust process of identifying and disseminating undergraduate research opportunities (such as publications, conferences, and mentorship) and then “match-making” them with students who could serve as research assistants. A corollary issue is that other faculty are often not aware of these opportunities. The current process is mostly ad hoc whereby most of the matches between research opportunities and students are the results of professor and students who happen to know each other.

A potential part of the solution is to adopt a platform where faculty post research assistantships, summer research experiences, and other research opportunities, and students search and apply, as well as a clearinghouse for research opportunities elsewhere (these could be in the student’s hometown over the summer, undergraduate research journals, opportunities within the consortium, etc.).

A very good example of such a solution is Boston University’s Research Undergraduate Research Opportunities Program (http://www.bu.edu/urop/), which Michael Manson demonstrated. (The appendix of these minutes includes the various options under consideration.)

Given that introduction, Lyn and Michael ask the committee members for thoughts. X main issues were identified.

Issue 1 – How are research opportunities identified? FARS is a possible source but because data entry is inconsistent in both content and format, it’s problematic to use it as many opportunities can be missed. Joseph Mortati (KSB) suggested that perhaps research funding data (less likely to be inconsistent) could be used as a starting point. A related question is, until we know the opportunities size, how can any kind of cost-benefit analysis be done?

Issue 2 – Chris Simpson (SOC) raised several, related issues, the first of which is, how do the people, processes, and systems overcome existing obstacles to students participating? That is, lack of interest or time or pay have historically been problematic. Likewise, how do we measure the potential student population interested and available for such opportunities? Knowing this could be used to determine how much money should be invested in any system solution. Lyn mentioned the population is at least 200 students + honors students.

Issue 3 – How hard is it for faculty to post opportunities and search for matches? What is the incentive for faculty to use any system?

Carl LeVan (SIS) raised two, related concerns that self-selection and timing (if I post a research opportunity, am I first or last in the sequence and would this create competition?) raise issues of fairness.

Chris Simpson (SOC) questioned the need for such a system given free and ubiquitous social media platforms frequently used by UG students. Chenyang Xiao (CAS) questioned the wisdom of soliciting the Committee’s inputs because it runs the risk of coming down to opinions or individual experiences.

Stefan Kramer (Library) added that AU doesn’t have the ability to systematically and effectively share faculty research with other faculty.

Alan Isaac (CAS) asked why opportunity sharing isn’t being done via Career Web (http://www.american.edu/careercenter/AU-Careerweb.cfm). Michael replied that this is an option in addition to the platforms listed at the end of these minutes. This could be done via another link.

Lyn and Michael closed by thanking the Committee for our inputs and promising a follow-up on whatever decisions are made.

There being no other business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned. The next meeting will be held Wednesday, April 20, 2016 at 1:00 PM in the Library Conference Room (BLIB 143, the conference immediately to the right of the main entrance to the Bender Library).

Appendix

There are four platforms being considered:

Research Connection – https://researchconnection.com/

Scholar Bridge – http://www.scholarbridge.com/

Student Opportunity Center – https://www.studentopportunitycenter.com/

AU Career Web – https://american-csm.symplicity.com/students/

A meeting of the Computer and Information Systems (CIS) Committee was held on Wednesday, February 17, 2016 at 1:00 PM in Library Classroom 306. The eight attendees were:

Terry Fernandez (OIT)
Alan Isaac (CAS)
Joseph Mortati (KSB)
Lindsay Murphy (CTRL)
Yana Sakellion (CAS)
Amy Taylor (WCL)
Sonja Walti (SPA)
Chenyang Xiao (CAS)

Co-chair Joseph Mortati brought the meeting to order and the following business was conducted:

1. A motion to approve the draft minutes of the previous meeting was made and approved.

2. The Committee discussed the issue that some student roster pictures (e.g., those in PUAD606-001) show up as distorted in Blackboard (described as “adding several pounds to their faces”). Fernandez explained this is a function of the images being loaded and is not a Blackboard import issue. She provided the following link that lists Photo Submission Requirements for the AU ID Card System (which includes the requirement to be at least 300 x 375 pixels): http://www.american.edu/ocl/housing/auidphotosubmission.cfm. Faculty who notice distorted images should advise their students to submit a revised photograph.

3. Co-chair Joseph Mortati then proposed the committee research the topic of leveraging smartphone technology in the classroom as an aid to teaching. This is not whether or not devices should be allowed – that’s normally left up to the instructor – but in cases where they are allowed, how can faculty best use them as a teaching aid?

This led to a spirited discussion of personal experiences with a prevalent issue of using such devices for non-class use during class time and a few success stories. The Committee agreed this is an appropriate topic for further investigation and discussion and the following aspects were discussed:

Textbooks on devices (which seem to work well).

Photographing project screens instead of taking notes (creates an issue with memory recall).

Syllabus statement regarding recording lectures and content presented.

Lindsay Murphy pointed out that Naomi Baron (CTRL) has already created some guidelines for using technology in the classroom: http://www.american.edu/ctrl/techinclass_resources.cfm and they are organized around the following functional categories:

Presenting Course Content
Facilitating Student Feedback
Annotating Course Content
Delivering Course Materials
Visualizing Course Content
Building Collaborative Environments

Additionally, the Ann Ferren Conference features a session on “Technology in the Classroom”.

All that said, it would be useful for this Committee to provide the larger AU Community information on best practices without regard to specific technology. To that end, the Committee agree to the following steps:

Amy Taylor will do a literature research review.
We will look at crowdsourcing lessons learned from the community
Legal implications of such technology (e.g., social media guidelines) need to be considered

4. Chenyang Xiao raised the issue that some department websites have outdated content with respect to registrar prerequisites. For example, the following Sociology courses list incorrect prerequisites:

This remains an open issue and was tabled to our next meeting.

5. There is an issue of some faculty email addresses being incorrectly identified as spam and the sender may not be aware of this. Terry Fernandez provided the following information showing that OIT is aware of this issue and has a fix:

In March of 2014, the Office of Information Technology undertook a professional services engagement with Sophos, the vendor of our anti-spam solution, to perform a health check of our system. This process was thorough and productive; and we have implemented several suggestions from Sophos to improve our detection of spam and phishing messages. One of these suggestions was to improve our existing detection rule for incoming messages that originated outside of our network, but had forged sender addresses so that they appeared to come from AU (spoofed email address.) As a result, a long-standing anti-spam rule, the spoofed email check, is now much more effective. Customers will no longer be able to send email from outside providers using their AU email address, a practice that only worked previously, due to poor spoof detection.

Customers who use Gmail can configure an alternate address to send from, specifying that the mail is sent through the AU outgoing mail server, mailout.american.edu, to avoid this problem. To do so, please follow the instructions found here: https://support.google.com/mail/answer/22370?hl=en

We regret and apologize for any inconvenience that this may cause, but look forward to continued improvements in the detection of unwanted email. Please contact the Help Desk at x2550 or helpdesk@american.edu if you have any further questions.

There being no other business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned. The next meeting will be held Wednesday, March 17, 2016 at 1:00 PM in Library Classroom 306.