Sunken Garden

Technology Task Force

Meeting Notes - January 20, 2010


1) Approve Notes from November 18, 2009

The notes were approved


2)  ETAC Representation

Chenoweth reviewed the representatives list and De Anza does not have strong representation on this committee.  It would be put on the academic senate agenda for discussion.


3)  Service Area Outcomes (SAO) Update

Chenoweth invited Jim Haynes to come to Technology Task Force (TTF) to talk about doing an SAO for the group. However, Haynes thought that SAOs should be done by the departments  that currently do program reviews and not by governance groups.

There is a still need to tie in the technology plan into the other plans at De Anza and District. The question is how to move forward on this topic.  During the discussion the following points were brought up:

  • Is TTF responsible for integration of plans from other meeting groups?
  • The College has a Strategic Plan but there is currently no budget to proceed.
  • Accreditation calls for the TTF plan to be integrated into the general plans of the College.
  • TTF has a comprehensive  tech plan and vision.
  • How does the TTF plan fit into the other plans of campus?
  • Perhaps the team could identify the top mission of the TTF plan and make it a simple statement e.g "learning any where any time".
  • Perhaps a second tier statement would be more appropriate.
  • What technology will be used in Mediated Learning Center & ATC?
  • There is a discussion at the Board level on the next series of bonds.
  • TTF could review the TTF strategic plan for 2007-10 and update it for the next few years.
  • Accreditation will ask 1) do you have a plan 2) is it integrated?
  • Accreditation will look to see if we have followed thru on the plan
  • Members of TTF should take the TTF plan to the governance groups and ensure that they know of the plan and will incorporate it into their program reviews.
  • Work has been done in many divisions (BUS/CIS) to incorporate some of the critical issues.e.g. online classes.
  • List what has been accomplished in critical issues and what still needs to be done.
  • Evaluate what we have done.
  • Energy conservation.
  • Measure C is a good funding source for technology.
  • Technology is changing so quickly. What will the campus be like in 5 years?
  • Printing is a huge part of the lab usage in the library.
  • Survey students on what they still need? Care is needed in writing the survey.
  • ETAC is working on a technology survey for students and staff.
  • Many 4-year college students have their own laptops.
  • Students are a good barometer on what is happening now, but perhaps not for what will happen in 2 years.

Jeanpierre will bring information on Measure C funding of technology to the next meeting.

The team would review the current tech plan's critical issues and make updates as appropriate. This summary would be taken to College Council and the PBTs.


4)  College Council Recommendation

Chenoweth asked that the team take a summary of the TTF plan and what has been accomplished to College Council and the PBTs.


5) Burning Issues

Kahn and Mowrey updated the group on the Fujitsu computers.  Remembering that the funding is primarily for instructional purposes, do we still want to buy tablets or something else? Equipment is not to be used as a primary computer replacement.

Possibility of full two-way digital TV receivers on campus.

Luciw reported that the new district data center is in design and it had the usual design vs. cost challenges.



Present: Chenoweth, Dolen, Jeanpierre, Kahn, Luciw, Mitchel, Mowrey, Shannakian, . Notes: Gibson.


Technology Task Force
Building: ADM 153
Contact: Vanessa Smith
Phone: 408.864.8948

Last Updated: 1/20/10