Administrative Computing Committee
April 4, 2000 3:30pm
|Members Present||David Heise, Chair; Gary Dickerson, Secretary; Dan Cress, Emilio García-Marenko, Ron Herr, Sue Schwab, Mencia Shelley (for Derek Bradfield), Steve Sowder|
|Members Absent||Elaine Hoilette, Lisa Jardine, Robert Moon, Pat Mutch, David Penner, Marlene Jorgensen, Ed Wines|
|[*]Administrative Computing Committee - charter, membership, attendance||Sharyl Turon will be asked by the President to be appointed to this committee to replace Rich Forrester. David Heise wanted to know if anyone had suggestions on how we could increase the attendance of the members of this committee. No suggestions were presented.|
|Spring Registration||Mencia Shelley reported that the the
administrative computer was too slow during registration. She was not
able to prepare the budget for students so they could register.
Gary Dickerson reported that two problems surfaced during registration. One was that there were more requests for connections to the database than we have licenses for. Connection requests after the first 250 were denied. The second was that there was a shortage of resources causing a slow down in the performance of the system. Some of this could have been alleviated by asking users to open only one Banner session at a time, and to close it when not in use. The combination of registration, payroll processing, web registration, and for the first time this quarter, students looking up their grades on the web proved to be too much for our present hardware to cope with.
For future registrations, it was suggested that an electronic message be posted to request that users do not keep idle Banner sessions open. This will relieve the pressure on resources, and help us stay within our license limits. New disk architecture and a dedicated server have been ordered, and it is anticipated that these will improve performance, but it cannot be predicted to what extent.
|Project Priorities and Budgeting||David Heise reviewed the projects that were determined to be the most strategic as voted last year. He then showed how the ITS capital budget has been allocated to begin those projects, and to maintain and develop the IT infrastructure at Andrews. The $300,826 that has been allocated consists of this year's appropriation of $155,000 plus the $145,826 carryover from last year.|
|Time and Attendance||Gary Dickerson reported that we are currently looking at two different vendors for the time clocks. When $24,000 from carryover funds is added to this year's allocation of $30,000, we expect to come close to being able to purchase the 30 new clocks that are needed.|
|SCT Summit 2000||Workflow - David Heise reported on the SCT
process, which SCT refer to as EPE - Enterprise Process Engineering.
SCT Workflow was delivered as part of the baseline Banner product in February of this year. We
have to be on Banner 4.0 before we can use workflow, and plan to do this in
the next 6 - 12 months. A significant part of implementing workflow
is to do a thorough, formal business process analysis, which includes
fully documenting processes, involving all the parties, and selecting
processes with significant improvement potential. Four steps were
suggested, to be performed in sequence: eliminate, simplify, integrate,
The software cost is included with our current licensing but would require the purchasing of an additional server.
Campus Pipeline - David Heise and Gary Dickerson reported on the Campus Pipeline web portal. There are three concerns that came out of the conference. First, we have to accept the advertising that Campus Pipeline has arranged in order to use the software under the "grant" arrangement, that is, free of charge.. If we do not accept the advertising then we have to pay approximately $110,000 for the purchase of the software and $22,000 annual maintenance cost. Under either arrangement, there is also cost of the additional server that is required. The second concern has to do with external content. Some items of content may be considered inappropriate under the Andrews University logo, or on a page with the www.andrews.edu URL. Third concern deals with the privacy issue. While they promise not to sell anyone's personal information they still can aggregate this information for marketing purposes.
CAPP - Sue Schwab reported that she has been working in setting up the M.Div. degree as a test. The major question Sue asked at the conference was whether CAPP would work with a student who has classes that span the quarter and semester cutover. It seems that this is not supported. There is one more possibility that Sue is checking out but she does not expect it to work. The University of Idaho is displaying has developed a workaround which we may find acceptable if a sharing arrangement could be worked out. Sue is also following this up.
Imaging - David Heise reported that imaging with workflow makes a powerful combination. It was revealed at the SCT Summit that SCT will be dropping their imaging product in the future. SCT has elected to partner with a third party for the future development of their imaging offerings. Emilio García-Marenko said that the Student Records office is looking at contracting with a third party to archive some of their information. He asked if they should continue to pursue this or if they need to wait until the imaging software is available. Since scanning for archiving purposes alone is a only a subset of a full imaging/document management solution, it was felt that the Records Office should proceed with scanning for archival purposes, and not wait for the integrated imaging product that will be available through SCT at some point in the future.
|Next Meeting||June 6th, 2000 at 3:30 p.m.|
Chair: David Heise
Secretary: Gary Dickerson