Minutes Information Technology Council
Attending: Fran Ayres, Dan Hough, Loretta Early, Mike Sewell, Bob Dougherty, Robert Kelly, Jim Gardner, Hunter Crowther-Heyck, Burr Milsap, Deborah Trytten
Minutes of the November 19 meeting were approved. Dan Hough moved to approve and Bob Dougherty seconded.
Robert Kelley discussed the copyright policy at Michigan Tech University. He said that the Provost would like us to consider some sort of training program for students and possibly faculty to make sure all members of the University Community are aware of legal issues relating to copyright policies. He also distributed a copy of the material that describes how copyright violations are currently handled. Violators are currently referred to Legal Counsel and required to read and sign an “Affirmation of Compliance.” The nature of the violations is primarily copies of recordings and movies. The issue was discussed but no resolution was achieved. One possibility was to have something added to the student and faculty handbook. Robert suggested that we look into how much cost and effort was put into the Sexual Harassment project to estimate costs of educating people about copyright policies. The discussion expanded to cover plagiarism by students.
Considerable discussion focused on where we might proceed next. Possibilities included bringing this to the General Education Committee. One suggestion was coverage of the issue in an Introduction to English class. There was some discussion of faculty buy in to a proposal that something like copyright issues be covered in a course that they taught. The role of the Copyright committee was also discussed.
Actions recommended. Determine cost to do Sexual Harassment training (Robert Kelly). Loretta suggested talking to Student Affairs and seeing if they could distribute something to students.
Deborah brought up the policy on email as an official means of communication as it relates to staff. She said that staff needed to be omitted from the policy. The policy subcommittee plans to come back to the ITC with a revised policy. One issue that the policy subcommittee wanted to know was whether the policy should include faculty. Robert Kelly said he thought that stipulating students would meet the University requirements. Another issue related to a section that email could not be used for legal notification. It is in fact being used for legal notifications in some cases so that was omitted. We will revisit this issue at the next meeting.
The last item was whether we should have a student who is not a committee member come to a meeting. This student had raised some IT issues. Right now OU is a cold fusion shop. The issue was whether we should be a PHP shop or run multiple systems on the same server. To avoid problems with incompatibility across systems it is necessary to have two servers. The conclusion was that what the student wanted did not require PHP. The student has had contacts from IT and seems to be getting done what is needed so there was no need to invite him to a meeting. The committee decided that these issues were implementation not policy issues. Loretta Early said that the university did want people to have choices of platforms but that there are costs associated with supporting a variety of platforms. It was decided that Fran Ayres would email the student and tell him that the committee had concluded that he could accomplish his goals using the existing cold fusion framework and that IT could offer some help on that if he needed it.
The issue of the Tulsa meeting was briefly discussed. Pramode suggested we try to reschedule for January as only two people could attend. We decided to try to have the meeting in January in Tulsa. Spring meetings will continue on the 3rd Monday of the month. The 3rd Monday in January is Martin Luther King Day. One possibility suggested was spring break but committee members had activities then. We concluded that we should not meet in Tulsa on Martin Luther King Day because it is an official holiday. We decided to try to meet on January 12 in Tulsa. Some said they could attend then. The final issue discussed was whether we want the email policy to include faculty and students or just students. The committee wanted faculty and students. The meeting adjourned at 4:00 p.m.