Campus Council for Information Technology Discussion with Provost Hexter June 10, 2013

Campus Council for Information Technology

Discussion with Provost Hexter

June 10, 2013

ccfit.ucdavis.edu

Today’s Discussion

1. Brief overview of CCFIT

2. Recommendations• Research computing• Telecommunications• Educational technologies

3. Preliminary work plan for 2013-14

ccfit.ucdavis.edu

Overview | Recommendations| 2013-14 Work Plan| Discussion

CCFIT: Brief Overview

Charge• Bring our community together for campus discussions of IT

investments, priorities, proposals and plans• Focus on educational and information technologies

• Use in support of instruction, research, administration, and public service

• Critical importance of community input on significant technology-related projects and prioritization

• Recommendations to Provost Hexter and Campus CIO Siegel

Membership• Niels Jensen Gronbech, CCFIT Chair, and Professor,

Computer Science• Faculty, students, staff, and campus service providers

ccfit.ucdavis.edu

Overview | Recommendations | 2013-14 Work Plan | Discussion

MEMBERSHIP ccfit.ucdavis.edu


Member Department / Constituent Group Gronbech-Jensen, Niels*

Chair, and Professor, College of Engineering

Bishop, Matt Professor, Computer Science

Gepts, Paul* Chair, Academic Senate Committee on IT (CIT)Professor, Plant Sciences

Ghosal, Dipak* Chair, Telecom & Networking Subcmte (TANS)Professor, Computer Science

Kellogg, Louise*

Chair, Subcmte on Research Computing (SORC)Professor, Geology

Larsen, Delmar*

Co-chair, Educational Technologies SubcmteAssistant Professor, Chemistry

Allred, Mike ARM (Accounting & Financial Services)Behrens, Linda

UC Davis Extension

Bossio, Lora Jo Student AffairsBradnam, Keith

Academic Federation

Citron, Blair Graduate Student AssociationCohn, Ienae Graduate Student Association

Corbin, Bella Development & Alumni RelationsHull, Karen ARM (Organizational Excellence)

Hussain, Safa Office of Research

Jones, Andy Acad. Assoc. Faculty Director, IET (ex officio)

Member Department / Constituent Group

Kaiser, Tom Senior Advisors Group

Levin, David Director, IET (ex officio)

Maemura, Melanie ASUCD Representative

Mellor, Morna Director, IET (ex officio)

Ono, Robert IT Security Coordinator, IET (ex officio)

Orozco, Nora* ADMAN

Platten, Michele ARM (Information Systems)

Redican, Mark Director, IET (ex officio)

Sams, Bob Agric. & Natural Res. (Comm. Services)

Sandstrom, Carly* ASUCD (President)

Schmitt, Babette* IET (ex officio)

Shum, Su-Lin ARM (Budget & Institutional Analysis)

Smith, MacKenzie University Library

TBD Graduate StudiesWalker, Andrew Staff Assembly

Wall, Mary Undergrad. Studies (Summer Sessions)

Wrye, Sententia Academic Fed. (Univ. Writing Prog.)

Youtsey, Gabe Interim assistant CIO, IET (ex officio)

http://ccfit.ucdavis.edu/membership.cfm




Topics Reviewed in 2012-13

CONSULTATION• Chancellor’s Vision 2020 Initiative• Big Data Implementation Committee’s recommendations• High-performance computing support• UC Davis student services portal• University Library strategic plan• Transition to Microsoft and Google email & collaboration services• UC Davis data center initiative• Automated course evaluation project• UC Davis IT project registry• Clickers (follow-up to June 2012 recommendation)• Classroom technology upgrades• MOOCs and online/hybrid learning


Topics Reviewed in 2012-13

ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS• Research computing

• Big Data• High-performance computing• Data Center facility• Open data (national trends)

• Telecommunications and networking• Bring Your Own Device strategy for UC Davis• Cellular coverage• Horizontal wiring upgrades

• Educational technologies• Electronic textbooks• Evaluation of SmartSite• University testing center


Subcommittee on Research ComputingMembership

Louise Kellogg (Geology), ChairMatt Bishop, Computer Science Mark Rashid, EngineeringRaissa D’Souza, Engineering Mark Redican, IETMark Goldman, NPB MacKenzie Smith, LibraryFrancois Gygi, Computer Science Dave Zavatson, IETBernd Hamann, IDAV

Charge • Advise on effective strategies and priorities in IT support for

the research community • Define & prioritize campus needs in high-performance computing

Issues discussed: • Big Data• High-performance computing• Data Center facility• Open data (national trends)

Overview | Recom.: Research Computing | 2013-14 Work Plan| Discussion

Big Data

1. Background: SORC met with Big Data committee co-chairs Patrice Kohl and Tony Tyson and reviewed the submitted report.

2. Brief analysis: An important and timely topic for UCD to address, closely connected to high performance computing and to the construction of a data center.

3. Recommendation: SORC endorses many of the ideas in the report. It is important that the Big Data Initiative support the diverse research & teaching needs across campus, while building on UC Davis’s strengths.


High Performance Computing

. Brief analysis: UCD hosts a large array of

HPC-based research programs, but lacks an integrated strategy to sustain the research, influence teaching, and increase visibility.

There are new opportunities to build partnerships with national providers (NSF, DOE, NASA), including LLNL

Recommendation: Continue developing support for campus efforts; implement relevant portions of Big Data plan.


Concept adapted from Fred Streitz, Director of High Performance Computing, LLNL

Background: There remains an ongoing need for systematic, campus-wide approach to support HPC. This is closely related to big-data needs and construction of a data-center.

Leadership computing

Desktop computing

UCD

Data Center• Background

• Planning underway for construction of a new Data Center with adequate power, cooling, and security.

• Will increase cyber-infrastructure capacity required for 21st century teaching, research, and administration.

• Brief analysis: Will yield a return on investment via energy & reduced need for costly retrofitting of distributed spaces

• Risks of acting: A significant capital project; long-term operational costs and responsibilities must be spelled out.

• Risks of NOT acting: Increased cost of operating CI will impact research and teaching mission of campus. Harder to recruit or retain faculty who use computation or big data for research & creative activities and teaching.

RECOMMENDATION: SORC strongly endorses UC Davis’s plan to construct a high quality data center.


Background: Federal agencies & state of California moving towards requiring that funded scholars provide open access to publications and data.

Brief analysis: A complicated issue; the landscape is evolving rapidly. UC Davis faculty and staff have the vision and expertise to take a leadership role; campus could be responsive to emerging opportunities.

Recommendation: Begin implementation of the relevant Big Data committee recommendations (specifically those related to data management infrastructure). SORC and CCFIT will continue monitoring the national trends in 2013-14.


Data management/Open data

Telecommunications and Networking Subcommittee

-- Dipak Ghosal, Chair& Professor, Computer Science

Overview | Recommendations: Telecom | 2013-14 work plan| Discussion

Telecommunications and Networking Subcommittee

Membership• Dipak Ghosal, Computer Science, Chair

Jan Ilkiw, Vet Med Mark Redican, IETTom Kaiser, CA&ES Bob Sams, ANRChip Mrizek, GSM Steve Schwarz, Law School Minh Nguyen, L&S Dale Snapp, LibraryJames Quinn, CA&ES

Charge• Guide and prioritize both short- and long-term telecommunications

upgrade/replacement efforts • Develop recommendations regarding deployment priorities, as well as

network service options and technology enhancements that effectively meet the telecommunications needs of faculty, staff, students, support units, and administration


Key Issues1. Bring Your Own Device (BYOD)

2. Cellular Services

3. Horizontal Wiring Update

Overview | Recommendations: Telecom| 2013-14 work plan| Discussion

1. BYOD BackgroundThe use of personally owned devices in rapidly increasing.

Overview | Recommendations: Telecom | 2013-14 Work Plan| Discussion

• Users value the integration of personally owned technology with institutional systems and resources.

• Consumer based apps and services are often “free” and reflect personal preferences

• Improved productivity, learning and collaboration

• Becoming a primary tool instead of supplementaryAverage Number of Wireless Devices per User

Source: Educause

• Wireless demand – More devices, higher bandwidth demands

• Security policies and guidelines – Defining acceptable uses, user responsibilities, limits of IT support, device disposal

• Cloud services – consumer services often lack expected security

• User education

1. BYOD Analysis


How can UC Davis proactively support the use of personal, enabling technologies while still protecting institutional data, mitigating security risks and providing infrastructure?

Devices and apps may be “free”, but they have costs in terms of our infrastructure, security risks and support models

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Jun-10

Sep-10

Dec-10

Mar-11

Jun-11

Sep-11

Dec-11

Mar-12

Jun-12

Sep-12

Dec-12

Mar-13

Jun-13

Wireless Access-Points

1. BYOD Recommendations Wireless Demand

• Address increased wireless demand by continuing to invest in current expansion efforts through UCDNet3 funding and other sources

Security Policies and Guidelines• Charge a committee or taskforce, led by CIO, to examine 1)

acceptable use policy and security guidelines, 2) update with best practices for BYOD use and user responsibilities and 3) identify specific methods to leverage wireless access to enforce security


1. BYOD Recommendations

Cloud Services• Endorse and support the efforts of IET and the College of

Engineering to establish a more secure enterprise level data storage service with Box.com

• Endorse and support additional initiatives and service offerings such as Microsoft’s Office 365 to encourage and incentivize more secure use of cloud services

User Education• Through IET, the campus Compliance Council, University

Communications and other avenues, aggressively pursue educational campaigns to increase user awareness of potential risks and threats, best practices, and security requirements relating to BYOD


2. Cellular Service BackgroundSimilar to wireless (WiFi) services, the demand for cellular data services is increasing due to the rapid growth of BYOD


• Currently there are 10 “Macro” sites on campus (all major carriers)• Upgrades to “4G” service largely complete• Outdoor service generally very good• Indoor service is mixed – improvement are needed in many buildings

Cellular Coverage MapSource: Sprint

2. Cellular Service AnalysisOptions examined for improving cellular services and coverage:

• Add macro sites – Helpful but impractical for campus-wide improvements

• Distributed Antenna System (DAS) – Looked promising a year ago – flaws in business model surfacing, risk from new technology

• Cellular Access Point – Compact device, low cost (provider pays), coverage where you need it. Need to convince service provider to install it.

• Leverage Campus WiFi – Cellular service providers pay to use campus WiFi providing revenue to support and expand wireless. No one doing this yet, but emerging as a win-win solution.


2. Cellular Service Recommendations

Given that DAS solutions are complicated and appear to be headed for obsolescence, monitor technology development, evaluate cellular access points and leverage campus WiFi


• Work with cellular service providers to install cellular access points to improve indoor coverage• Explore contract and service opportunities for leveraging campus WiFi as a revenue source

Cellular Access Point

3. Horizontal Wiring Update

Upgrades Approved - Total $1.4M • VMTH, VMTH Out-buildings, Young Hall, School of Education, Storer

Hall, Chemistry (partial)

Upgrades awaiting approval – Total $1.1M• Bainer Hall, UCDMC TS Building

Detailed estimates being finalized – Estimate $1.2M• Schools/Colleges have programmed funds• Meyer, Asmundson, Asmundson Annex, Mann Lab, Veihmeyer,

Hoagland

Estimates requested – Estimate $2.0M• Tupper, Vet Med 2A


Educational Technologies

-- Delmar Larsen, Chair& Assoc. Professor, Chemistry

Overview | Recommendations: Ed Tech | 2013-14 work plan| Discussion

Membership

• Delmar Larsen - Chemistry (Chair)• Elizabeth Applegate - Nutrition• James Butler – College of Engineering• Linda Behrens – Extension• Rosemary Capps – CETL• James Carey - Entomology• Daniel Comins – IET-ATS• Paul Gepts- Plant Sciences• Kerry Hasa – Education• Lynette Hunter – Theater and Dance• Andy Jones - UWP and ATS • Amy Kautzman - Library• Susan Keen – Evolution and Ecology• Timothy Leamy – IET-ATS


• David Levin – IET-ATS• Elias Lopez - Registrar• Melanie Maemura - ASUCD• Marco Molinaro -IAMSTEM• Jennifer Radke – Mat. Management• Paul Salitsky - NPB• Daniel Starr - MCB• Rebecca Sterling - ASUCD• Mary Stewart – IET-ATS & Student• Christopher Thaiss - UWP• Mary Wall - Summer Sessions• David Webb - Physics• Tobin White - Education• Carl Whithaus - UWP

EdTech subcommittee Charge Identify, assess, and make recommendations on promising emerging technologies and future directions for educational technology on our campus.

Three Primary Concerns Discussed

1. Electronic Textbook Alternatives (“E-Textbooks”)• Growing political pressures to address rising costs of education• Implement novel technological advances in education

2. UCD Testing Center• Better accommodate test proctoring needs for disabled students• Circumvent potential lawsuits due to ad hoc disability accommodations• Increasing number of online/hybrid courses require proctored exams

3. SmartSite Successor• The current engine that drives SmartSite (Sakai) is approaching end of

life (2 years)• The faculty and students require a learning management system (LMS)

that will grow and adapt to evolving needs


E-Textbooks BackgroundEducational costs are growing rapidly resulting in increasing pressure toward higher education institutions. Calls for wide-spread adoption of E-textbooks to alleviate rising costs: SB 1052

and SB 1053 (California) and Textbook Affordability Act (US).

Overview | Recommendations: Ed Tech | 2013-14 Work Plan| Discussion

• Unclear of “true” cost reduction of E-Textbooks• Unclear of “true” efficacy of E-Textbooks• Unclear if UCD faculty and students would adopt E-Textbooks• What are current costs and potential future costs after adoption• Limited Academic Freedoms?

Recommendations 1: Continue evaluating and tracking e-textbook activity on campus and coordinate with below pilots2: Two pilots should be implemented (total: $70,000)

• Pilot 1: Commercial E-textbooks: $35,000 (subsidized E-text at 250 students with $100 per E-text)

• Pilot 2: Faculty created Open E-textbook via the UCD ChemWiki: $30,000 (three quarters of GSR support).

Identical assessment protocols for complete evaluation: Karen Dunn-Haley, Marco Molinaro, Terry Westover ($5,000)

Goals of the pilots:1. To determine if E-Textbooks save money for students (full cost

analysis)2. To determine if e-textbooks are easier to use and more

functional for the students and faculty3. Establish efficacy of faculty created open textbooks


Testing Center BackgroundGrowing demand: 10,000 accommodated exams last year, plus exams for athletes, increasing online/hybrid classes, and missed exams.

Costly: With current system, UCD spends an estimated $400,000+ in hidden costs yearly on testing accommodations (faculty time: $300,000; TA time: $72,000; staff time: $25,000).

Potential Legal Liability: UC Davis and the other UC campuses have received complaints and have been investigated by the Office of Civil Rights (OCR) several times.

Reduced Education Integrity: Inadequate addressing of disabled student needs results in poorer experience for all. Online and unproctored testing facilitates cheating.

Solution: One efficient, cost-effective, and legally defensible solution to the above problem is a UCD campus testing center


Testing Recommendation

Overview | Recom.: Ed Tech | 2013-14 Work Plan| Discussion

Phase Staff Space Estimated Budget

Proctored Exams

1AY 2014-2015

Short-term hire; task force (June 2013)

One FTE proctoring coordinator; 10 part-time

proctors

Distributed across campus

$150K/yr;$10K/yr

potential revenue

3000

2 AY 2016-2017

One FTE proctoring coordinator; 1.5 FTE staff;

up to 35 proctors

Begin centralization: 50 seats for

exams

$250K/yr; $85K/yr

potential revenue

22,000

3AY 2018

and beyond

One FTE proctoring coordinator; 1.5 FTE staff;

up to 50 proctors

Centralized: 100 seats in exam room; computer lab

$400k/yr; $175K/yr potential revenue

35,000

Current budget request: $150,000

SmartSite Successor

Overview | Recom.: Ed Tech| 2013-14 Work Plan| Discussion

The current engine that drives SmartSite (Sakai) is approaching end of life at UCD.Alternative LMSs are being investigated, which will have to grow and adapt to the evolving needs of its users on campus. This requires a careful review of our options.

We will work with a LMS company and/or hosting solution that offers dependable uptime, and superlative customer service that is sufficiently communicative and responsive to the expressed needs of UC Davis staff, faculty, and students.

LMS Recommendation

We plan then to invite UC Davis faculty to pilot the two or three best LMS choices:•Conduct review of LMS choices during the summer of 2013•Present findings and holding LMS-centric learning institutes in the fall 2013 •Invite faculty to pilot the best LMS choices with students in the winter and spring of 2014•Final recommendations in the spring of 2014•Migration beginning that summer and during the subsequent academic year (2014-2015).

Overview | Recom.: Ed Tech | 2013-14 Work Plan| Discussion

This requires approximately $150,000 for year 1

CCFIT: Preliminary 2013-14 Work Plan

• Electronic textbooks• SmartSite successor• Testing center• Big data• High performance computing• Data management/open data• Bring-your-own-device strategy• Cellular services• Horizontal wiring

Overview | Recommendations| 2013-14 work plan | Discussion

Discussion

Overview | Recommendations | 2013-14 work plan | Discussion

Campus Council for Information Technology Discussion with Provost Hexter June 10, 2013

Documents

iet ex officioshum

iet ex officioorozco

iet ex officioono

iet ex officiomaemura

iet ex officiotopics

iet ex officiosams

ccfit chair

work plan discussionccfit