Institute of Technology
Minutes of the ITICC Meeting,
April 13, 2006
3:35 p.m., Physics 210
Present: John Baxter (Math), William Bear (Math), John Boggs (Geol), Bryan Carlson (ADCS), Thomas Chase (ME), Rayna DeMaster (AEM), Peter Hudleston (IT Dean’s Office), Michelle Jacobs (CEMS), Phil Kachelmyer (ADCS), Kent Kirkby (Geol), Satish Kumar (CEMS), Jerry Larson (ADCS), Larry LeMay (ADCS), Jim MacDonald (CSE, IT Labs), Dan MacEwan (Chem), Kent Mann (Chem), Sean O’Neill (Astro), Getiria Onsongo (CSciE), Roger Rusack (Phys), Tom Shield (AEM), Jerry Sobelman (ECE), Dale Swanson (ECE), Lucas Veverka (ITSB)
1) Status reports from CSciE and ADCS and PJH
There were no reports of problems with lab operations. Questions about three other matters arose, however. The first concerned Linux. DeMaster said she has heard students complain that Linux is not available in ME 308 and seem unaware that Linux is available in other labs. Information about all labs and platforms is available on the web, of course, but it was suggested that it would be useful to have posters near the door in each lab to inform users where other facilities are and what hardware is available.
The second question concerned the planned cycle for computer replacement of. Some units replace machines after three years, which is the standard length of warranty. Should IT Labs consider shifting to this, since problems with hardware tend to show up in the fourth year? There would be additional cost associated with a shorter replacement interval, and additional time spent installing and removing the hardware and software. It seems unlikely that there would be an overall cost benefit. As for computational power, in recent years there has been no problem in providing sufficient computational speed and memory to serve all lab and software requirements. It was agreed to stick with current practice.
The third issue concerns Matlab licenses. Once again we have had instances when all licenses were in use and students needing access to Matlab for a class were unable to get it. Swanson had brought this issue to Hudleston’s attention. Recently, students in EE 5545 were unable to get a license for any of the six stations in one of the labs. Later in the day when Swanson checked again all 250 licenses were still in use. Getting more licenses is a possibility, but it seems likely that not all users are IT students. If we do purchase more licenses, we should check the usage pattern to see whether there should be cost sharing. Unfortunately, currently we are unable to check who the users are and to see if some people are locking up licenses for long periods of time.
The simplest and cheapest solution for the present is to dedicate some of the licenses to computers in those labs where it is essential to have licenses available for a class. It was agreed to do this until the end of the semester for EE 5545. EE 5545 students will still have to compete for toolboxes from the U-wide pool of licenses, however. Since the Math classes in Lind 24 do not use Matlab toolboxes, buying extra basic classroom licenses (these are not allowed for research) and dedicating these to the computers in Lind 24 alleviates the problem. Hudleston had earlier approved the purchase of 40 such licenses for Lind 24, which have been purchased and are in use. These are handled by a different server.
2) Final Presentation of Proposals for Public Lab Improvements for 2006
MacDonald handed out the revised list of proposed summer purchases for lab improvements for the next fiscal year (FY 2007). The major elements are the same as in the proposal presented at the March ITICC meeting (see those minutes for details), but there are a few additions. The additional items include:
· Modifications to ME 308/032 to be made when the carrels are removed and replaced by tables. These modifications involve adding conduit and outlets, adding a bulletin board, chalkboard removal and painting.
· Purchasing embedded computers to replace the firewalls in the Rochester and North Hennepin Community College labs. We are already using two of these (Soekris embedded servers) as firewalls in Lind 24 and CE 230.
· Replacing 3 old HP printers with 2 new ones, which have the ability to send emails when paper is low, which is useful in unstaffed labs.
· Add the cost of service for the computers in Lind 24 (which will be in their fourth year). In the future, the recommending is to get four-year warranties for the computers in this lab. In Lind 24, there is no buffer if machines go down, so it’s important to have maintenance done right away.
· Replace the printer in ME 308 (the only such printer) that handles 11x17 paper with a new printer with the same capability.
Shield asked how long ME 308 would be out of commission to allow these changes to be made and the new tables installed. MacDonald estimated about two weeks.
Hudleston described a separate proposal that had arisen out of a recent meeting with staff from the Learning Abroad Center. The LAC has developed a web application that allows students planning to study abroad to get information about possible liberal education courses. Students can search using different criteria – by country, by institution, by course title, by CLE theme, etc. As more IT students study abroad, it would be useful to allow students to find equivalent information about technical courses by similar means. Hudleston’s proposal is to hire a student to modify and expand the CLE application for IT purposes. The data of the courses themselves already exist. Shield made the suggestion that someone from ITICC be asked to oversee or work with this project to make sure that the coding is done in such a way as to allow others to work with it after the student graduates. There are many examples of codes being useless after the originator leaves because the code is unorthodox and undocumented.
3) Discussion of Proposals for “New Initiatives” from Geology and Physics
Rusack described the proposal by Physics that also builds on earlier work to introduce computer simulations into introductory physics courses, as part of the Physics LabSim project. Simulations to complete those needed for Phys 1301 were developed last year, and steps were taken to redesign the user interface. Initial steps have also been taken to make the LabSims available on the web, so students can do them at home or away from the lab. This year, the plan is to produce for use of TAs full documentation of the simulations in the Honors courses. Also, prelab quizzes are being instrumented in WebCT.
[After the
meeting, and prompted by questions form committee members, Hudleston discovered
a new initiative proposal from Astronomy in his email. This proposal is a supplement to the regular
3-year project supported by Lower Division funds for 3D visualization in the
introductory astronomy labs (AstroWall). The current system presents the students with only a
passive, whole classroom experience. After viewing the AstroWall and listening
to the TA as a class, the students break up into groups and go to the computer
workstations. There they continue on with the lab, but without any interactive
3D software. This proposal is to test a new 3D
system that can be used by each group at their workstation and thus make the
labs interactive. This will provide
reinforcement of the physical principles underlying the demonstration.]
Hudleston said that he would conduct an email ballot of these proposals in the usual way.
4) Initial Presentation of the Report of the ITICC Review Committee
Rusack outlined the main elements of the report, noting that the committee had gathered a lot of data, including responses in the web survey from over 1300 students. The main points include:
· Most students are unaware of what the technology fee is paying for. The instructional computing facilities supported by the IT fee – both in the public labs and in the departments - need to be much better advertised. One possible additional service for students would be to provide training for software packages such as Matlab and Excel.
· The committee feels the split management is inefficient and that management should be under a single structure.
· Lab management should extend the services it provides beyond the IT public labs and use its technical expertise to meet other instructional needs in the departments.
· The lab attendants/consultants can be replaced by cameras. There is a sense that the attendants are not helpful to students and do not add value. They are not trained to answer questions about the software and they often just sit at their desks. They only need be in the lab when busy.
· 50% of the students in IT do not use the labs. This raises an issue as to what extent the technology fee supports infrastructure and to what extent it supports lab usage of individuals taking particular courses.
· A modified fee structure is proposed that would reduce the fee for students who use the labs less or who are already paying another technology fee.
There was some discussion about computer usage in individual labs. CE 230 is used almost exclusively by CE majors, while Walter 103 - which IT helps support and which has 15 workstations for IT student use only – is used by students from all IT departments. Students have expressed dissatisfaction with lab appearance; labs are often messy and do not create a pleasant work environment. Hudleston suggested that one of the problems with current usage – the under usage of CE 230 – might be solved in helping meet the perceived need for group work space at a single workstation.
Shield noted that some of the issues that face the college would best be addressed if IT had a chief information technology person, as many other colleges and units do. This is an issue that he and others have raised in the past.
Baxter asked if there had been an effort to calculate the net effect of saving costs and adding costs implied in the recommendations. Do they balance?
5) Other Business
None