Computing Resources Committee

Members Present: Lois Brooks, Stefanie Buck (minutes), Amy Flint, Stu Sarbacker
Guests: Jon Dorbolo, Richard Nafshun

Review of December 11 minutes

New day and time – Stu would like the third

Updates of SafeAssign (Jon Dorbolo)

• Lynn has sent out basic agenda for rolling out Safe Assign.
• TAC is actively pursuing some things we have discussed and keeping an eye on the assessment process.
• TAC will be assessing training. CRC could have role in developing best practices and assessment of the tool and the approach we are taking to plagiarism prevention. TAC is developing assignment models. Jon feels the OSU plagiarism definition is not totally clear, so there may be some work in clarifying that.
• Lynn has suggested CRC revisit SafeAssign post-activation to see how it is being used and what the reaction among faculty is to the tool.

Photo Roster (Jon Dorbolo)

• Process started about 3 years ago
• Jon talked to Registrar and ASOSU about changing the photo roster from opt-in to opt-out.

ASOSU:

• Agreed as opt-in only so faculty don’t see it (advisors see pictures).
• Only if the system will allow disable printing. Don’t want pictures and information lying around.

• After a change in ASOSU government, Jon and Malcolm went back to ASOSU and recommended turning this into a mobile devise so printing can be limited.
• Worked with a group of students to build an app (currently proof of concept).
• Registrar believes can do this within FERPA.
• The user can view, scroll and search for student photo. Can add notes to student picture, email them.
• After a change in ASOSU government; Jon went back to ASOSU who don’t like it because concerned about discrimination. Jon points out already happening if can see the student face-to-face. ASOSU has agreed to support app and opt-out method. Malcolm and Jon are working on TRF to build app and make it completely secure.
• Students like it when instructors know their names – it’s one of the top things students feel builds community; they don’t feel so anonymous. The app also helps with name/face recognition. We still need the policy and training plan.
• For courses of 40-50, knowing names can really change dynamics of class.
• Some use of photos to check that students submitting their own work.
• CRC could help with development of feature set if the grant is approved.

Questions and issues raised:

• Discrimination was the main issue with ASOSU. Is there a possibility of pre-conceived notions if the picture is seen ahead of time?
• Discrimination is an institutional issue and needs to be addressed on that level. There are instructors who are currently taking pictures of their students. Students who don’t want their picture to be available can always opt out. Will existing system go away?
• The existing system would not change. Opt-in/opt-out is very hidden. Jon would like to see that at the top of the screen so it’s more obvious. Other possibilities are to restrict the online version to opt-in or get rid of the online version since it is still possible, with difficulty, to print. These are issues that still need to be worked out.
• What kind of training – safety, discrimination
• Jon says TAC may be able to do that. They are also looking at FERPA training and looking to streamline this so everyone gets the same training. Students with confidentially on their record would (presumably) be automatically opted out Sometimes students want to make changes. This is an issue rather than a question.
• Pictures do get old and students change and don’t look the same.
• Lois noted that they have had students request to use a preferred name so this could be incorporated into the app.
• Who will own the app and who will maintain it?
• Jon thinks probably CWS, but that still needs to be determined. There needs to be a plan for that and build it into the TRF proposal. TAC would not be the owner, but is helping to get the process going.
• Who else will use the app?
• Advisors are another community who use the photo roster. Right now, for them, it is opt-out. Advisors currently use their monitor to see the photos, but would like to use a pad or phone for this.
• Things that still need to be outlined are the proper uses of this tool and assessment of the tool.
• What is the app timeline if the TRF is funded?
• Probably about a year.

LMS review (Lois Brooks)
Lois reported that IT governance will be undertaking a market review of different LMS. Right now this is an informal process but later (spring?) will probably do a call for RFP. She is looking for a cadre of people who will see all the presentations. How does CRC want to be involved? There would probably be 3-5 presentations over winter/spring. There will be a formal feedback mechanism and discussion mechanism for that cadre of people who see all or most of the LMS demonstrations. This would probably start mid to late quarter. Everyone on campus will be welcome to come to presentations/demos.

Action item – How does CRC want to be involved? Could we split this up among ourselves or is someone available to go to all 5 meetings?