Left gradient
Students learning
announcements ANNOUNCEMENTS


Agendas & Minutes

Technology Committee Meeting: Tuesday  9/28/10 12-1pm

1. Chabot Website
2. Other
Polices and Procedures Impacting Technology and our College are posted at:


Technology Committee Minutes, Tuesday, Sept. 28. 2010


Jim Baum (chair), Tom Clark (Dean of Applied Tech. & Business), Catherine Powell (SOTA), Yvonne Wu Craig (Grants/Classified Senate), Kurt Shadbolt (Auto), Norman Buchwald (Library), Abdullah Yahya (Webmaster), Lisa Ulibarri  (CWS), Danielle Maze (Language Arts), Kathy Kelley (Social Science/ Academic Senate Pres.), Tim Dave (Math/Science), Cedric Pounds (DIGM), Isabel Seligo, Mark Schaeffer (SOTA), Arlene DeLeon (SOTA), Ashley Long (Applied Tech.), Yulian Ligioso (VP Administrative Services), George Railey (VP AS), Howard Irvin (VP SS), Begona Cirera Perez (PE/Health), Desmond Chun (Math/Science/Computer Science), Chasity Whiteside (Learning Connection), Caren Parrish (Language Arts), Ramona Silver (Lang. Arts, SOTA, COOL Chair), Anne Brichacek (CAS), Jay Mumford (Applied Tech & Business), Kathleen Allen (DSPS), Lani Wilson (Counseling), Tiana Velasquez Munoz (Financial Aid), Wanda Wong (Business).


1.       Jim Baum (chair): Approval of Minutes  from the previous meeting, including the shared governance document.

2.       Wi-Fi – the faculty request an update on the status of Wi-Fi on-campus as discussed in last year’s Tech meetings.

        a.       Jim will follow up on Wi-Fi with Computer Support or ITS.

        b.      Mark Schaeffer stated that the committee last year discussed the need for campus-wide Wi-Fi.

        c.       Wifi map and update was requested, including by Scott Hildreth, in Sp 2010.

        d.      Jay Mumford inquired about this issue on behalf of his students.

3.       Telephones – Des reported that there are issues with the phone system in 3900. They can call in, but cannot call out. They have reported this issue and it has not been addressed.

         a.       Jim will follow up on the status of support tickets.

4.       Kathleen Allen inquired as to what kinds of technology needs can be take care of without district assistance.

         a.       Jim stated that some policies are stated on the link that was sent out with Tech Polices from CLPCCD. He noted that some policies are marked as drafts, but have been such for a number of years.

         b.      Tom will discuss with Yulian to follow up regarding help ticket status and feedback about support needs.

5.       Kathy Kelly brought up that in the last Academic Senate meeting, District and a Sungard representative presented the waitlist function in Banner.

        a.       The Sungard representative discussed the possibilities of Banner and noted that there are many features that have been purchased but not yet implemented.

        b.      Kathy inquired as to how we can go about finding out the features that are available, and perhaps what other colleges are using.

        c.       The waitlist feature will provide students a more effective way to add courses that are already full. ITS is working on this tool and in the next few months will provide a timeline.

        d.      Kathy asked Tech Committee members to provide input on what they would like to see with this tool.

        e.      Jim will reach out to Sungard/ ITS to see if we can get information/ overview on the possibilities of Banner.

6.      Yulian Ligioso :  It might be helpful for the Technology Committee to invite Jeanine/ ITS to present the Technology Master Plan for the district in an effort to overlay that with the College Technology Master Plan.

         a.       This could be a way to recognize and approach differences.  It could give us an opportunity to start a dialogue to address if there are campus needs that haven’t been addressed in the overall district Technology Master Plan.

7.       Des Chun brought up that faculty and staff could assist with technology needs on campus and help to better address the immediate needs of the campus through a volunteer basis.

        a.       Tom stated that this is an ongoing idea of restricted-access support through faculty/staff volunteers, and the Tech Committee will continue to address this.

        b.      Tim Dave noted that a similar structure of volunteers is used for emergency response on campus; the same could be applied to local technology needs.

        c.       Mark noted that this is an ongoing policy issue that he also tackled as former Tech Committee Chair, with no result due to the inability to change the policy. College Council, who were in agreement with this need.

        d.       Jim noted that we should address this need with those that made the related policies.

        e.      Kathy suggested that the Academic Senate take up this issue with the policy makers, as the faculty should be allowed input on these decisions and policies. She suggested that the Tech Committee bring this issue to the Academic Senate.

8.       Lani Wilson noted that the institution needs an Online Counseling capability. The college is way behind in the services it provides to serve the students of our successful online course program. She was told that the college needs to provide the funding, which attributes to the college begin behind in the services it is required to offer online to coincide with the online program.

9.       The College Website: Tom presented a PowerPoint presentation regarding the recent issue involving the Chabot Website (version 3.0).

        a.       Tom apologized for the confusion surrounding the recent website changes.

        b.      A week ago, the new college web design was announced and launched.

        c.       Tom showed the website announcement and design explanation.

        d.      Tom thanked the faculty and staff who were involved in the new website design team that worked over the summer to review the website design (including Scott Hildreth, who is currently on leave).

        e.      Tom stated that he had to “take the website down because the site was compromised and failed to meet some state and safety guidelines.” This was the reason for the site being abruptly taken down.

        f.        Tom will update on website policies as he has more information.  Jeanine Methe is a resource about web, technology policy.

        g.       Tom showed a detailed report of the website consultant’s (Interact (?) Communications Plan) findings that show that a more student-focused website was needed. The firm noted that the website was nicely suited for those who are already part of the organization. This demonstrated the focus on the needs for students.

        h.      Jim noted that most of the attendees agree that the changes were needed and well-thought out, but they want clarification on why it was only up for a short time. Tom responded that had he had proper communication with the district and other entities, the website probably would not have had to be pulled so abruptly. In Shared Governance, communication is key and he pledges to make a better effort to improve such communication

         i.        Cedric Pounds inquired as to when the website will be put back online. Tom responded that he does not yet have a timeline, but he will inquire about it.

         j.        Mark asked if Tom could explain what was meant by “the site was compromised.” Tom responded that he doesn’t yet have the details to fully explain that. Mark inquired as to “who” could explain this. Tom responded that there were many people involved in making that determination, and he is not sure of how many were involved directly, but he respects their decision. He was informed from a combination of both district and college parties.

         k.       Lani asked if we could know the specific “state and safety guidelines” they were referring to in the violation. If the Technology Standards are published, we should be able to know exactly which guidelines were not fulfilled by the new web design. Tom responded that he heard a few mentioned, including the presence of a prominent link to Alert U. Jim noted that it only takes a minute to fix such small items, so there must be more to the situation.  Those in attendance overwhelmingly agreed.

        l.        Tom again apologized for miscommunication. Jim responded that such obvious silence on this issue indicate that it is not being handled appropriately. Faculty should be made aware of the details of issues directly impacting the college and their students.

        m.    Begona Cirera stated that there should be a list provided about the specific details on the website that should be changed, especially given that faculty and staff spent time on this new design to improve the college community. Tom believes that such a list is most-likely in development, as reviewing parties agreed that the website was an overall improvement to serve the student needs.

        n.      Mark stated that it appears that the lack of transparency is more of an issue than the “problems” with the new website design.  “Why don’t we know who the people are that made this determination? Why don’t we know on what grounds they made this determination?”  Tom responded that it may involve personnel actions and other official actions and therefore may take a while before details can be made public.

        o.      Kathy stated that the faculty care about this issue and Academic Senate will handle this inquiry. Tom noted that the faculty have made a positive impact in the past, so with some active participation in shared governance groups we could make a better college for our students. He plead that faculty be persistent in their efforts, yet not confrontational. Kathy stated that we gain more through collaboration.

        p.      Lani added that her concern is that if communication was optimal in this situation, her suspicion is that the website still would have been pulled despite faculty support. Tom responded that he feels the Chancellor is committed to listen to all good ideas, and as ideas are shared we can change the perception that such positive changes do not come.

10.   Tim brought up that technology is a part of education as much now as table and chairs. The larger issue is that technology support at Chabot is not directly in response to the needs of the users. He shared that he has experienced a negative approach to technology needs and inquiries, much different from other institutions. He doesn’t feel the support, but rather direction of what he is allowed to do. Tim feels that the faculty should be driving, and allowed to give input on, all technology needs on campus. His program has suffered as a result of this approach to technology support.

11.   Cedric stated that in the brief time the new website was up, he had a chance to explore the design and wanted to recognize the ease of use and what a fine job the website team did. Those in attendance responded with applause.

12.   Lani asked about a program for texting students, as discussed at a previous Tech Committee meeting. Abdullah updated that the committee had interest in this function, and he did some research and presented an option, but there was a lack of follow-through on this project. Tom suggested that we look at this need in conjunction with other technology projects, as we move to a more mobile focus.

13.   Arlene DeLeon stated her hope that Computer Support and District ITS will attend the next Technology meeting, as they were noticeably absent at today’s meeting. She’s concerned with the balance of technology support needs and the security of the network, which they could provide insight on.  It would also be helpful for them to hear concerns and provide their input. She asked that Jim share with them the need for their representation at these meetings.

        a.       Tim added that the same questions, issues, and solutions have been addressed over many years at the institution. He added that while he recognizes the need to address security issues, they have been shared many times.

14.   Jim stated that the faculty are greatly dissatisfied with the answers that were provided today and inquired with George as to who is in charge of the college website. George responded that District ITS/ Jeanine Methe is in charge of the website and all technology needs for the campuses.

        a.       Kathy added that the whole idea of service, including IT, is that they should be providing a “service” to the users. And it should be a service to serve the primary mission of the college, which centers on teaching. She concluded that is the approach we should take on the campus.

        b.      Jim concluded that the faculty will take up this issue for the college.

15.   Tom again apologized for the miscommunication and looks forward to faculty and staff working together to serve the needs of the students, and commended those in attendance for caring so much about the college community.


Gradient right  
    Phone: (510) 723-6600 | Last updated on 4/25/2013