ITC Meeting Minutes

November  15, 2004  2:00- 3:30

In attendance were: Fran Ayres, , Cheryl Carney, Robert Dougherty, Robert Kelly, Donald Maletz, Matthew Matos, Sarah Robbins, Mike Sewell, Adam Westerman, Deborah Trytten.

Absent: Nick Hathaway, Hunter Crowther-Heyck, , Dimitrios Papavassillou, Dennis Aebersold, Burr Milsap, and Nathan Kula

Visitor: Matt Younkins, Matt Singleton

 

The meeting was called to order at 2:00.

 

The minutes from the October meeting were approved without corrections.

 

Course Management Systems

The committee received a report from the Course Management Task Force. The Task Force is now looking at shareware options for course management systems (Astra from Kansas State, and Sakai), and has also begun investigating other vendors (eCollege, and Desire2Learn). It is possible that two CMSs will be run in parallel for a period of time. This is an expensive option, particularly given the continuously increasing expense of each of these systems individually. 

 

IT has a strong commitment to providing course management systems to the faculty and students of OU.  The market for CMS is not expected to stabilize in the next few years. No matter which product we select, the risk that the company will not survive exists.  The three market leaders remain Blackboard, WebCT, and Desire2Learn.  Moving the CMS to campus seems to be likely.

 

The migration from Blackboard 5 to 6 did not go well. For the spring semester, a decision has been made to go with dual systems (Blackboard 5 and WebCT).  The decision for Fall 2005 will be made at the next CMS Task Force Meeting.

 

Vision Task Force

The Vision Task Force did not give a report.  Several members of the task force have been recruited.

 

Dennis Aebersold will present his long term vision at the next meeting.

 

Web Policy

The remaining time in the meeting was spent discussing the proposed Web Policy.

 

Matt Younkins raised questions about whether student run web pages without an ou.edu address must comply with this policy.  We need to consider whether this policies applies to student web pages with a numeric IP address within the OU domain, whether or not they use ou.edu in their address. A generic name for these web pages may need to be found.

 

A new firewall has been implemented in the dorms. This need for this system was created by the quantity of viruses spreading around campus.  Students now have to inform IT when they want to run an internet server.   This is being policed by a student committee.  The current implementation has been that gamers are being given free reign, while web servers are being closely scrutinized.  IT intends to allow the students to police this in the future.

 

A sample student web page was discussed.  This web page advertised a band that of which the student is a member.  Whether this was or was not appropriate was discussed.  It was determined that even if a schedule for the band were given that it would be OK.  What would clearly not be acceptable would be for a student to sell advertising space to other students, or to take credit card numbers and sell tickets.

 

The question of whether OU wishes to standardize on web page formats was discussed. The current implementation of the policy does not support this.

 

We started to review the proposed policy.

 

The third bullet needs to have “define”  or “enable” added.

 

The first bullet point should have “traditional” removed.

 

The description of the web sites to which this policy applies needs to be clarified to read “official web sites of the University of Oklahoma (e.g. those on ou.edu).”

 

The question of whether the first two bullets are saying the same thing was brought up. The first bullet was removed.

 

The question of whether soonersports.com needs to comply with this policy was brought up.  The need for a way to obtain exceptions to the policy was discussed.  The OU Licensing and Trademark program handles exceptions to the rule that products should not be sold on the university’s web site.

 

The need for talent release forms for people in the pictures on web sites should be included in the policy.  This is true even if the student names are not used.  This should be included after the copyright section.  A proposed heading was “Image Permissions”.  There also is a space release which gives people permission to use pictures of University buildings in pictures.  There also has to be a release from the photographer. It was recommended that the Web Policy Task Force investigate this matter further.

 

The fact that the Library will seek copyright permissions for faculty for course materials should be added to the section on copyright.

 

Student Information Disclosure needs to be strengthened.  It was decided that faculty should not try to interpret FERPA without the advice of OU’s Legal Counsel.

 

The need for informing faculty that putting research results on a web site could amount to publication, which has implications in the patent process was discussed. Also, the need to inform faculty that putting copies of their publications on their web sites may infringe on the copyright holders should be discussed.

 

The question of whether faculty plagiarism of materials in PowerPoint presentations was raised.  It was determined that this was an individual accountability instead of institutional policy.

 

The need for some weasel words to cover some issues that have not been considered was discussed.

 

The section on privacy was considered. The need to include a prohibition on collecting credit card information, and social security numbers without strong security was considered.  IT recommends that this kind of information be collected by an outside agency, such as the OU Foundation. Wording suggested was: “Anyone who collects or stores credit card numbers, social security numbers, or other sensitive personal information should consult with the IT Security Team”.

 

The Accessibility Section was considered and approved.

 

The separation between linking to a web site and an endorsement was discussed.  The exact wording for the disclaimer should be determined by Legal Counsel.

 

Whether individuals should be permitted to register domains to point to OU resources, or addresses within the OU domain was considered. We cannot allow .com addresses to be registered in our address space, or we risk using our .edu address. This issue will have to be addressed by Legal Counsel.

 

We returned to the student web page with the advertisement for the band.  Following substantial  discussion we decided that “Personal web pages are subject to all existing laws and University policies forbidding use of University resources for personal gain.”

 

These suggested changes were sent to the Web Policy Task Force to allow them to continue to develop this policy.