University of Minnesota

Institute of Technology

 

Minutes of the ITICC Meeting,

March 22, 2007

3:35 p.m., Physics 133

 

Present: Mark Anderson (Chem), John Baxter (Math), Bryan Carlson (ADCS), Rob Edman (Math), Michelle Forster (CEMS), Peter Hudleston (IT Dean’s Office), Terry Jones (Astro), Phil Kachelmyer (ADCS), Kent Kirkby (Geol), Joe Konstan (CSE), Satish Kumar (CEMS), Larry LeMay (ADCS), Dan MacEwan (Chem), Kent Mann (Chem), Kent Mein (CSE, IT Labs), Sean O’Neill (Astro), Roger Rusack (Phys), Tom Shield (AEM), Dale Swanson (ECE), Juan P. Trelles (ME)

 

1)         Status reports from CSciE and ADCS and PJH

 

Mein reported that the labs had shut down for three hours due to a problem with the network in the EECS building.  One response to the shutdown, according to Kachelmyer, came from users of Matlab, which was unavailable during the down time.  Mein also said that the profile issue had resurfaced briefly when the newer, problematic version of Norton antivirus had been loaded on some machines instead of the older, problem-free version.  Norton is still working on the fix.

 

LeMay reported some problem with lab consultants.  Two had quit and another was delayed in returning after spring break.  He said lab operations were now just about normal.

 

[Note:  The order of and within the next two agenda items was modified to accommodate scheduling conflicts. The presentation of the lower division maintenance proposal from Physics, under agenda item #3, was given ahead of agenda item #2.  The minutes preserve the original order.]

 

2)      Public Lab Improvements – Spring Round, final presentation

 

Mein distributed a revised version of the proposal developed by the IT Instructional Computing Technical Committee for making lab improvements for 2007-08.  The proposal is unchanged from what had been presented at the February ITICC meeting, except that the final item had been dropped.  This was the proposal to increase the disk storage quota made available to students.  The issue is not urgent and the ITICTC will take more time to carefully assess the needs.

 

Hudleston said he would now bring this proposal to the vote of the committee by email ballot.

 

3)      Lower Division maintenance 3-year proposals - Initial presentation

 

Each department with a lower division instructional computing facility supported by ITICC funds was invited to present a proposal for continuation of funding of these facilities for a further 3-year period.

 

Rusack presented the proposal for Physics.  It represents maintenance of facilities to support all the introductory physics courses for different audiences.  This involves replacing on a regular basis, computers, printers, cameras and projectors. The overhead projectors are installed by the department, resulting in a savings. The requested support also includes 50% of the cost of a programmer and 50% TA support for upgrading the lab manuals.  The cost over 3 years represents about $20K in savings over the previous 3-year period. The total is $485,027. 

 

Swanson asked about non-IT students taking IT courses. Hudleston said they are not charged a fee for taking physics courses or other courses in lower-division supported labs, but they are in the courses supported by upper division fees.  Swanson noted that the administration will not allow colleges to charge a technology fee to students from other colleges. Hudleston said he was aware of the problem of charging fees across colleges and would like to see a fairer system in place.

 

Jones presented a proposal for support of 3D visualization in astronomy labs, using the AstroWall, a parallel system to the GeoWall in Geology. A new element is development of a system that allows students to work interactively as a small group.  The support requested from ITICC is in the form of a 25% TA who works on software development for extending the applications. Other support is provided by the department. The total cost to ITICC is $42,000.

 

Mann described the proposal from chemistry to continue support of computer use in the first and second-year chemistry courses. The department uses 220 laptops in 4 laboratories serving these courses, which are replaced on a 4-year schedule. The support is for replacement of the laptops, software, and partial funding for staff support and a 50% TA programmer.  The proposal represents no new initiatives.  The total requested is $737,450, which is more than in the previous 3-year period.  Mann pointed out that the number of computers being replaced differs in each 3-year cycle, and that the upcoming cycle involves the highest number (205). This is 50 more (representing about $130,000) than in the past cycle or than would be needed in the next cycle. Hudleston said that the lower division budget could cover the amount requested.  On the issue of retirement of old computers, he suggested that we consider giving some of the old laptops to local schools.  He has received requests from schools for this from time to time, and this would be good community support. Others pointed out the limited usefulness, however, of older machines, especially with the introduction of Vista to replace Windows.  There would likely be software compatibility issues.

 

Kirkby presented the proposal for continued support of computers used for visualization in the introductory geology courses, using the GeoWall system.  This involves replacement of computers, workstations and projectors and ongoing partial support for a visualization specialist.  The department also provides support for this program, and geology has been successful in getting external support from the Department of Education.  Kirkby pointed out the collaboration for the visualization project, including sharing of funding, that exists among the University of Minnesota, the Science Museum of Minnesota, and the Electronic Visualization Lab at the University of Illinois at Chicago.  He also emphasized the assessment being done to evaluation effectives of the use of the GeoWall.  The total requested from ITICC is $126,578.

 

Questions were raised about a proposal from Mathematics, which has a lower division instructional computing facility in Lind 24.  Hudleston said that this was implicit in the proposal for upper division lab improvements, in that half the cost of replacing computers in Lind 24 will be assessed to lower division to reflect the use of this lab for use in instruction for the IT math courses.  Because the room is used both as a classroom by Math and as a regular lab at other times, the cost of maintaining this lab is split evenly between upper division and lower division funds.  Hudleston said the lower division part of this will be presented as an explicit proposal.

 

Hudleston asked each of the departments to provide him with an electronic copy of their proposal to put on the web.  He said that there would be an opportunity for changes to be made, if necessary, before final presentation at the April ITICC meeting, after which the proposals will be put to the vote.

 

 

4)      Other business

 

None.