Appendix A 2010 Annual Progress Report on the Strategic Plan for Information Technology

Transcription

1 Introduction Appendix A 2010 Annual Progress Report on the Strategic Plan for Information Technology This first annual progress report on information technology accompanies the recent 2010 revision and update of Sacramento State s Strategic Plan for Information Technology. The report actually serves two purposes, in that it reviews progress against both the Gap Analysis for Information Technology i and the Strategic Plan for IT ii. The Gap Analysis, completed in early 2008, identified critical deficiencies in campus information technology that called for attention prior to completion of the Strategic Plan for IT in The first section of this report thus provides an understanding of how those gaps were closed (or not), to help define a baseline from which to evaluate progress on the Strategic Plan for IT. This first section primarily covers progress over the time period. The final section of this report summarizes progress toward achievement of the sixteen major goals of the Strategic Plan for Information Technology, primarily within the time period. Progress Report On Gaps In IT Services The early 2008 Gap Analysis for IT provided a review of seventeen categories of information technology service at Sacramento State, including definition of intended target environments for each of those service areas. The main intent of this analysis was to identify key deficiencies in IT service that could reasonably be closed prior to development of a comprehensive strategic IT plan. A brief summary of progress against the identified gaps in each of those seventeen IT service categories is provided below. IT Governance: The target environment for IT governance in the Gap Analysis was based on national standards that call for: a) a clear, easily described governance structure; b) executive leadership by a position equivalent to a Chief Information Officer (CIO); c) involvement by all campus stakeholders; d) clear alignment with campus strategic planning; and e) active involvement by faculty and academic leaders. This gap was largely filled through creation in 2008 of a campus wide IT Steering Committee chaired by the new Vice President/Chief Information Officer, combined with creation of related campus wide advisory committees for both academic and administrative computing. The IT Steering Committee is comprised of representatives from all major stakeholder groups, including prominent representation from both the faculty and academic leadership; meetings were held monthly during each academic year. The Committee spent its entire first year of service creating the Strategic Plan for Information Technology, with the plan itself based entirely on Sacramento State s new campuswide Strategic Plan. IT Budgeting: Needless to say, the Great Recession that began in late 2007 plus California s accompanying fiscal crisis created a very challenging fiscal environment for all campus

2 programs. Nevertheless, a new Information Resources and Technology (IRT) division budget was assembled using existing campus resources previously allocated for the old computer center (UCCS), Telecommunications (UTS), Business Information Systems (BIS), and Common Management System (CMS) units. Additional all university budget allocations were recommended by the University Budget Advisory Committee (UBAC) in 2007 for campus hardware/software infrastructure, accessible technology, and information security. Subsequent to the establishment of the Information Resources & Technology division budget for , the IRT division experienced the deepest budget cuts of any campus division over the next two fiscal years, resulting in a reduction of those initial allocations by $1.8 million. Despite the obvious challenges provided by these deep cuts, improvements were nevertheless made in coordination of campus wide IT budgeting, resulting in significant reductions in the overall campus cost structure for information technology by the fiscal year, without any serious reductions in IT service. Although progress has been made on budget planning for ongoing replacement of essential IT infrastructure, the campus still lacks the type of comprehensive IT replacement plan that s been cited for years as a critical campus need. In addition, a serious funding gap still exists for ongoing support of our classrooms and student/faculty computer labs. Accessible Technology: One of the highlights of IT service improvement following the Gap Analysis has been the creation of comprehensive services to support accessibility in the use of technology. Services are now available campus wide for accessible web development, accessible instructional materials, and accessible IT procurement. A manager for accessible technology is now shared between the Provost and Vice President/CIO, providing clear leadership and placing a clear strategic emphasis on accessible technology as both the right thing to do and an important component of campus diversity and inclusiveness. A campus accessible technology policy was also developed. Help Desk: The target environment for this area was defined as providing the campus with a single point of contact for all relevant technical questions. Very substantial progress was made toward this goal through the combination of then existing campus Help Desk Services, classroom/computer lab help services, and CMS Help Desk Services into a single campus wide Help Desk. This creation of a more robust service headed by a professional manager provided both the leadership and resources needed for more rapid progress. The previous Help Desk services were subsequently reoriented into a Service Desk environment aimed at both building cooperative relationships with IT groups across campus and coordinating a much broader range of campus wide IT services. More recently, the Service Desk acquired new web based software (i.e. Service Now) that allows for greatly expanded self service by faculty, staff and students in resolving and tracking IT problems. Information Security: In 2008, The CSU Board of Trustees created strong expectations for campus information security through initiation of both comprehensive information security policies and IT audits for all CSU campuses. In 2008, our campus added two information security staff positions to the Information Security Officer and CMS staff position already available in 2007, providing the resources needed for a more effective response. The positive result was

3 that our responses to all twenty three of our 2008 information security audit findings were accepted by CSU auditors. The campus is currently moving forward to fully meet those audit requirements. Objective risk assessments conducted twice since 2008 indicate that we have significantly mitigated the information security risk that existed in 2007, although we have much more to accomplish. Throughout 2009, Sacramento State worked to develop supplemental campus information security policies, as also required by the campus information security audit. These policies were completed and initiated in fall Web Services: Gaps in campus web services comprised one of the most serious deficiencies identified in the 2008 gap analysis, especially given the rapidly growing importance of web services in all campus functions. In 2007, the campus had just one mid level professional webdevelopment position to serve our campus of 32,000 constituents. Part of this enormous gap was closed through the addition of the accessible web and accessible instructional materials positions noted above. Further progress was made through use of existing vacancies to create two additional web development positions. Finally, following the departure of the one existing IRT web services employee, a Web Manager position was created to provide strategic oversight to campus wide web services and leadership for the growing web development group. The above changes allowed fairly rapid movement toward the intended target environment for web services, in that the new web team: a) provided leadership in the creation of campus wide web standards and policies, b) worked with University Advancement to identify key web communications priorities, including redesign of the campus website, c) provided expertise, training, and assistance to part time web developers campus wide, and d) began to create a campus web development infrastructure through creation of a web working group, campus web templates, and acquisition of a comprehensive Web Content Management system (Hannon Hill software). Academic Computing: Although three quarters of Sacramento State s peer institutions already had robust information technology units to support instructional computing (e.g. portals and learning management systems, computer labs, and file systems for faculty/student use, and other related academic computing functions) our campus had no single organizational unit attending to these issues in early This large gap in academic information technology services was markedly improved through creation of the Academic Computing Resources unit within the IRT division, headed by a senior Associate Vice President. This unit quickly became the largest, best staffed, and best funded unit within the new IRT division. Specific accomplishments of this unit during this time period are addressed below in the additional sections related to academic computing and technology. Many of these achievements were done in close cooperation with the Academic Technology and Creative Services (ATCS) unit of Academic Affairs, especially in the areas of online learning, multimedia, and faculty training. Faculty/Student Training And Multimedia: Prior to 2008, support and training for faculty use of multimedia and online learning was provide jointly by the ATCS and University Computer Center Services (UCCS) units. In addition, most colleges employed (and continue to employ) IT personnel who often supported specific aspects of faculty use of technology. Support of faculty

4 use of technology in classrooms was markedly expanded as part of the creation of the Academic Computing Resources unit noted above, with this progress summarized in the Classroom Services section below. IRT and ATCS collaborated to co operatively manage the Faculty Staff Resource Center in the Academic Information Resources Center building (AIRC), with the facility there expanded to provide enhanced service and training for faculty. In particular, services were added to assist faculty with both accessible instructional materials development and accessible web development. Progress in online learning support is covered below in the Distance Learning and Learning Management sections of this report. Classroom Services: In 2007, Sacramento State was a long way from the target environment of meeting the priority needs of all faculty members who teach in classrooms. At that time, we had the lowest percentage of smart classrooms within the CSU and our staffing for support of faculty in classrooms was also weak, at best. Despite the fact that classroom instruction is critical to academic success for both faculty and students, classroom services had perhaps the biggest gap between campus need and available services of any area of information technology on campus. The first step in closing this large gap was to create a distinct Classroom Services unit within Academic Computing Resources and also to make support of faculty in classrooms an ongoing high priority for the entire IRT division. A senior manager was therefore assigned to focus on classroom support, several vacancies were utilized to add professional classroom support positions, and several additional positions were reallocated into the Classroom Services unit from other units of the old campus Computer Center. The CIO worked closely with both the Provost and Vice President for Business Affairs to also identify resources to begin renovation and improvement of campus classrooms. By the end of 2008, more than a dozen smart classrooms had been created and planning was underway to create more than a dozen more. Although a tremendous amount of further improvement was still needed, the foundation was set to make classroom improvement a key campus priority. Computer Labs & Desktop Support: Support of campus computer labs and desktop computers was also a quite uncoordinated aspect of campus information technology services in Only about 500 of our 2500 computer lab stations were then managed by the central computer center. At the same time, demand from both faculty and students for use of computer labs was both outstripping currently available services and growing rapidly. The new Academic Computing Resources unit moved rapidly to beef up computer lab support staffing by affiliating lab support with the abovementioned classroom support. Improvements were made in existing computer labs, student computer lab stations were added to our inadequate pool to meet student demand, while changes were also made in computer lab scheduling to allow for more instructional use of computer labs by faculty. Agreements were also reached with two colleges to provide shared support for college specific computer labs used by both faculty and students. In 2007, less than half of campus computer desktops were managed by a very undersized central desktop support group. In some respects, this lack of coordination is understandable, since by their very nature, desktop computers are spread across campus in virtually all program centers. For that reason, efforts were first focused on providing better coordination of desktop support among the various IT staff members already providing support in many separate

5 program centers. An ongoing monthly meeting was established wherein all IT personnel could review campus wide issues related to desktop support of computers; these meetings were used effectively to make improvements in the standardization of campus computer purchasing and configuration. Formal agreements were also reached with all campus auxiliary organizations, delineating local and campus support of desktop computers. Distance Learning (elearning): Prior to 2007, distance learning on our campus was conducted primarily through use of television distribution. Since that time, a concerted effort was made to transition the campus from this emphasis on traditional television based distance education to online learning. In 2008, the campus made a conscious decision to focus its efforts on elearning, with particular emphasis on both video streaming and hybrid learning (i.e. the combination of face to face and online teaching). The ATCS unit of Academic Affairs undertook a study of online learning in higher education and also surveyed Sac State faculty on the topic. Resulting campus actions have included: a) All televised learning was made available online through video streaming; b) faculty were provided with new services that allowed for the creation of online streamed instructional materials; c) a new elearning policy was developed, reviewed and supported by the Faculty Senate, and implemented; and d) targeted workshops were created for faculty to engage with online learning, including the recent creation of the elearning Academy. Further information on progress in the hybrid learning aspects of online learning is provided below in the Learning Management and Portal section. Learning Management and Portal Systems: In 2007, the gap in this area was easy to define, in that Sacramento State had only a very narrow and limited CMS specific web portal and also had only a basic version of a Learning Management System (LMS). In addition, both the existing LMS system (SacCT/WebCT) and the limited CMS web portal were then experiencing serious performance problems. To address the web portal deficit, the new IRT division created a web portal team in 2008 and also developed a web portal advisory workgroup with campus wide representation. The workgroup settled on use of an open source web portal product (the Java based uportal) and the first version of a student web portal based on this software was planned and introduced in That portal has been enhanced several times since then and is now used weekly by more than 90% of Sac State students. In addition, a preliminary faculty/staff version of the new web portal was introduced in Resources were also identified to enhance campus LMS services to a level that would support use by all Sac State faculty and students who desired to use it. Robust new WebCT software and hardware were installed, including redundant hardware systems that provided greatly improved reliability for faculty and students. Through the efforts of ATCS and IRT in enhancing support of faculty use of the LMS, both faculty and student use of WebCT increased markedly after that time. A survey of faculty use of SacCT in early 2010 indicated an extremely high level of faculty satisfaction with our improved campus LMS, with faculty utilization for course support having doubling since A separate survey of students in 2009 indicated both that

6 90% of our students use our WebCT system weekly and that most are satisfied with their experience. Student Technology Support: The Gap Analysis made the following stark statement about student technology support: Sacramento State has few strengths in student technology support at this time. Most IT services in 2007 were targeted only at faculty/staff support, with only Help Desk services targeted primarily at students. Even widely available campus technology services like were rarely used by students prior to A concerted effort was therefore made to both enhance technology services for students and to improve student utilization of those services. Responsibility for rapid enhancement of student technology support became one of the primary responsibilities of the Academic Computing Resources (ACR) unit. Among actions taken by ACR in 2008 and 2009 were: 1) Data from new campus surveys of entering freshmen and graduating senior students was mined for information on student technology needs and satisfaction; 2) Sacramento State students participated in a comprehensive national survey of student use of technology for learning; 3) a new Student Technology Center was initiated; 4) a comprehensive campus wide laptop loan program was initiated and then expanded; 5) the Associated Students board assigned representatives to serve on campus IT governance committees; 6) AIRC facilities were made available to students on a 24/7 basis; 7) PrintSmart services to facilitate student printing were markedly expanded; and 8) campus computer labs were expanded and enhanced to better meet student demand. Administrative Computing: Prior to 2007, information technology on campus was very heavily focused on implementation of the new CSU Common Management System (CMS). Since significant CSU wide planning for CMS implementation had occurred over the previous two years, the CMS finance and budget system had been implemented prior to this date and rapid progress was being made on implementation of both the human resources and student modules of CMS. Although transitions of this magnitude are always difficult, our campus CMS transition was well managed, resulting in significant improvements and efficiencies in most aspects of central administrative computing systems. In both 2008 and 2009, the campus experienced several serious growing pains during implementation of CMS, especially in the areas of registration and financial aid. In addition, central CSU management of CMS upgrades and implementation often overlooked the impact those upgrades would have on the campus. In particular, the Administration and Business Affairs, Student Affairs, Human Resources, and IRT divisions were heavily impacted by the labor demands required by CMS upgrade projects and problems. The above demands, as well as the fact that more than half of campus IT resources went exclusively towards CMS in 2007 (more than $2M annually was spent on CMS consulting alone) created an enormous backlog of campus specific administrative computing projects from academic advising to residence hall management, to parking. Therefore, among the first actions taken by the Vice President/CIO in 2008 was the re investment of previous consultant allocations towards new administrative computing specialist positions that provided four times the return on investment, while also providing long term expert support for a wide range of campus specific administrative computing needs. In addition, IRT was then able to return more

7 than $600,000 in annual funding to the campus that had previously been used for CMS consulting. As the initial implementation of CMS wound down in 2009, IRT worked closely with other divisions to turn attention to the backlog of administrative computing projects, making major progress on improving advising tools, financial aid processing, residence hall scheduling and management, cash and credit card handling, university fund raising, class scheduling, and many other administrative functions. In early 2009, a new Associate Vice President for Administrative Computing was put in place, bringing substantial expertise in both administrative computing and the use of data for decision making from her experience in the University of California system. This filled a significant further gap in administrative computing services by speeding the development of a comprehensive Data Services unit in early 2009; this unit began to make rapid strides in supporting the use of data for strategic decision making. Telecommunications and Network Services: IT infrastructure services, such as telephones and networking, comprised much of the remainder of services provided by the previous central computer center at Sacramento State. In addition, campus networking had long received substantial amounts of additional annual funding and support from the CSU system. These two facts meant that these areas had perhaps the smallest gaps in service of any IT function. Substantial progress was nevertheless made in both areas since Wireless networking across campus nearly doubled in coverage and capacity, expanding particularly in both indoor and outdoor public spaces. Sacramento State took a leadership role in modeling other advancements in CSU networking, by being the first CSU campus to implement advanced network security, Internet router replacement, and planning for the next generation of campus networking. In the telecommunications area, IRT generated long term savings of 20% or more by transitioning our campus telephone system from older traditional phone technologies to stateof the art Voice Over IP phones (30% of campus telephones have already been converted to VOIP). Finally, telecommunications and network services were combined under the leadership of a new director, with that manager playing a key role in development of both campus Emergency Notification Systems and new targeted messaging capabilities. Data Center Services: Much of campus information technology is quietly dependent on the servers, storage systems, directory services and other infrastructure housed in the so called Data Center. Sacramento State was in the very fortunate position of having opened a state of the art campus Data Center on the fourth floor of the AIRC building in This facility is the highest rated Data Center within the CSU, has the capacity to meet IT needs campus wide, and is truly the envy of our colleagues at other CSU campuses. In addition, at the inception of the IRT division in 2007, the most senior and most qualified staff members of the previous computer center were affiliated with the campus Data Center. The one significant gap that existed was that Data Center services were largely unavailable to the rest of the campus. The primary reason for this was that the previous computer center charged substantial fees to house and manage college and program center IT equipment in the Data Center. IRT immediately eliminated those

8 chargebacks in order to provide free Data Center services of all types to colleges, departments, and other state supported campus organizations. In addition, robust new resources were made available to the campus to accommodate growing campus wide demand for data storage and servers. The result was that more than one hundred departmental servers have already moved to the campus Data Center over the last two years, while the amount of campus data stored in the Data Center has more than quadrupled. Progress Report on the Strategic Plan for Information Technology The Strategic Plan for Information Technology, completed in April, 2009, identified sixteen major IT goals for the campus. The following section of this progress report briefly summarizes both advances made towards achievement of those sixteen goals and significant remaining gaps. I. A Focus on Teaching and Learning & the Student Experience Excellence in Teaching & Learning 1) An ongoing process will be implemented to identify, prioritize, and address academic technology needs at all levels The primary mechanism used over the last year to assess ongoing faculty needs for information technology comprised regular liaison with the Faculty Senate. Three members of the IT Steering Committee serve on the Senate s Academic Information Technology Committee, allowing regular communication and feedback to and from the Senate on a broad range of IT issues. Working with the Provost and Senate, a process was initiated this year to solicit faculty review and feedback on the entire campus wide IT project portfolio ( The CIO regularly attends Faculty Senate meetings to increase awareness of faculty concerns about IT needs. A survey was conducted of faculty satisfaction with our Learning Management System (SacCT, powered by WebCT) and a new Learning Space Advisory Workgroup was created with strong faculty representation (LSAW). Despite this significant progress, the IT Steering Committee determined that even more concerted effort was needed to gauge and respond to faculty IT needs. The Committee is therefore working on the first annual Faculty IT Needs Survey, which will be released no later than March, The Steering Committee also determined that it is important to develop clear outcomes and metrics for instructional technology needs based on that survey, as well as to clearly communicate all of the above to the faculty. Further assessment of faculty needs is required in the area of elearning, as the campus moves towards increased use of both hybrid and online learning. The IT Steering Committee also recognizes that a broader range of types of faculty needs assessment will provide a more balanced view of overall faculty need.

9 2) A reliable, scalable, and well supported system for delivery of learning resources will be provided As noted in the preceding progress report on our Gap Analysis, our course management system (Blackboard s WebCT) was substantially upgraded and improved in Since that time, the campus has been working with eleven other CSU campuses to further enhance our LMS by planning for a move to Blackboard s latest generation of course management system. This latest generation LMS will substantially enhance the basic course management features of our current SacCT by adding new features for assessment, mobile learning, instructional materials handling, social networking, and collaboration. IRT and ATCS will be implementing a comprehensive plan over the coming two semesters to fully inform faculty about the advantages of the new LMS, as well as to solicit faculty feedback on the best way to make a smooth transition to the improved product. Our delivery of learning resources has also been improved through marked enhancements in both campus wireless networking and accessible instructional materials, as well as through the expansion of online and hybrid learning noted above. As noted in the needs assessment section, continued robust consultation with the faculty about all instructional resource issues is essential. Similar progress has not been made in increasing the availability of non Library electronic learning materials through local and regional collections. However, a new service was provided to faculty and students that allows them to access any campus network files they need over the Internet (SacFiles). Additionally, a state of the art campus file management system (based on Blackboard s Xythos system) has recently been acquired that will allow for robust sharing of class based and other categories of instructional materials. Although planning has begun for making some essential IT services available through mobile devices (e.g. smart phones), this effort is just getting underway, at the same time utilization of mobile devices is increasing at a rapid rate. 3) Effective teaching and learning spaces will be created for both students and faculty, with particular attention to the effective and flexible use of academic technology in classrooms and computer labs Underlining the critical importance of improving campus learning spaces IRT, Academic Affairs, Facilities, and the Faculty Senate collaborated in 2010 to create the Learning Space Advisory Workgroup. This group has begun work on a comprehensive five year plan for improvement of campus classrooms. Very substantial progress was also made in the actual enhancement of campus learning spaces. More than twenty existing classrooms were fully renovated and turned into smart classrooms between 2008 and 2010, with emphasis first placed on improving our large classroom spaces. In addition, five new smart classrooms were created, including development of the second largest lecture hall on campus and a new

10 collaborative learning classroom (both in Del Norte Hall). Finally, five new state of the art smart classrooms are opening this spring in the new Folsom Hall facility. Campus computer labs also received substantial attention. A new thirty seat lab was created on the AIRC third floor and a classroom/lab previously used by Nursing in the AIRC ground level was completely renovated into the largest computer teaching lab on campus (AIRC 1016). Both a new 100 seat computer lab (divisible in two) and a 40 seat computer lab will also open in Folsom Hall beginning in spring, In response to rapidly growing faculty demand for use of computer labs for teaching, the amount of space available for such use was doubled, while substantial improvements were also made in the teaching lab scheduling process. Finally, IRT received a $150,000 corporate grant to pilot test the development of a virtual computer lab, with the first pilot to occur this spring. Informal learning spaces also received concerted attention. All AIRC public study spaces were opened 24/7 during the school year, while seating and wireless were markedly expanded to facilitate enhanced student study. Finally, a wireless laptop loan program was introduced to students in AIRC, the Union, and the Library providing 150 portable computer lab stations for our students. Despite significant progress made in improving Sacramento State s learning spaces, much more remains to be done. Sacramento State still lags significantly behind both other CSU campuses and peer institutions in the percentage of classrooms and labs that are smart learning spaces. We also lag others in not having a dedicated campus wide fund to maintain the quality of those smart classrooms we now have. 4) A distributed and connected system of instructional technology support shall be created, based on recognized best practices, with coordination of services both centrally and with all campus units Support of faculty use of technology was enhanced through cooperative development of training programs offered through the Faculty/Staff Resource Center in the AIRC building (FSRC). As part of this expansion of service, a computer lab next to the FSRC was assigned a priority for faculty training. Although progress has been made in faculty training, the Steering Committee recognizes that much more is yet to be done. Careful attention will be paid to the assessment of faculty training needs during the aforementioned survey of faculty in spring, 2011 with subsequent development of specific plans for enhanced training of faculty occurring over the next year. As noted in the Gap Analysis progress report, substantial advances were made in improving student use of technology for learning. In particular, a new Student Technology Center (STC) opened in 2009, with a focus on assisting students and faculty with the use of technology for student learning. The full benefits of the STC were on the other hand delayed, due to the budget crisis causing suspension of the search for a dedicated STC manager. Plans call for a new manager of the Student Technology Center to be in place by April, Despite that

11 delay, a technology training lab for students was identified in AIRC and the IRT Service Desk provided leadership in developing technology training programs for students. The Committee expects that the upcoming assessments of both faculty and student IT needs will provide a wealth of information on further gaps in support. It is critical that planning take place based on those needs assessment that will promise to further close gaps in instructional technology support. Quality of the Student Experience 5) An ongoing process will be implemented to identify, prioritize, and address student technology needs at all levels Sacramento State participated in a comprehensive national survey of student technology use and needs in both 2009 and These surveys provided detailed information on student technology ownership and use, including information on use of campus technology for learning. The IT Steering Committee is developing a brief 2011 follow up survey for our students, to provide more detailed data on student technology needs specific to our campus. New outcomes and metrics for student technology training and support will be developed based on the survey data. The results from both the national and local surveys will be provided to all students this spring. 6) We will provide technology services to students that support student preparedness in learning skills and study skills Student needs for use of technology for learning skills closely mirror the faculty learning resource issues addressed above under goal #1. Recent survey data revealed that more than 90% of our students use our Learning Management System each semester and that most students express a high degree of satisfaction with their use of our LMS. Despite this promising data, we do not yet have good data on the effectiveness of LMS use on student learning. Students have made heavy use of the computer labs and informal study spaces outlined under goal #3, while evidence also exists for increased student use of smart classrooms for presentations. In addition, student use of Student Technology Center services (goal #4) has increased substantially each semester since its inception. Although the availability of software for student academic use has increased (e.g. expanded access to Adobe and GIS software), commercial limits on open licensing of software for at home use continues to be an impediment. A nascent pilot project for testing out virtual computer lab concepts promises to provide alternatives that may allow significant expansion of student access to instructional software. Through the joint Accessible Technology Initiative (ATI) of IRT and Academic Affairs, significant progress was made in increasing the accessibility of learning resources for students. IRT,

12 Services for Students With Disabilities (SSWD) and others worked diligently to both identify students in need of accessibility assistance and to assist faculty in providing needed learning resources. In addition, substantial progress was made with faculty in improving the accessibility of both course materials and textbooks. In particular, the ATI worked with Academic Affairs to bring about a 10% increase in timely textbook adoption, allowing more timely preparation of accessible materials for students. The Universal Design for Learning (UDL) Faculty Learning Community, sponsored by a federal grant in partnership with Sonoma State, plus a special Teaching Using Technology Summer Institute (a collaboration with ATCS, Center for Teaching & Learning, SSWD, & IRT) also assisted faculty in incorporating universal design and accessibility technology into their courses. 7) Improve communications and collaboration between faculty, staff and students and between students and other students both within and beyond the classroom Much emphasis was given to enhancement of tools to facilitate academic communications between faculty and students. A comprehensive targeted messaging system was introduced to all faculty members in 2010 that greatly facilitated and automated the process of communicating with students in classes. In addition, the targeted messaging system was made available campus wide, with development of specific messaging services for colleges, departments, student resources and many other services used by students and faculty. A comprehensive MySacState web portal was developed for students, with the latest data showing that more than 85% of our students use that campus portal daily. The portal provides easy and individualized student access to a messaging center, , SacCT, the CMS Student Center, campus calendars, library services and many other personalized services. The survey of student technology use noted above confirmed the conventional wisdom that our students are already heavy users of interactive, group oriented technology services (e.g. mobile phones, social networking). Although much more remains to be done, planning began to provide key university services to students and faculty through smart phones as well as to integrate social learning tools into our campus web portal and LMS. A significant remaining gap in communications and collaboration services is found in use of information technology for co curricular activity (e.g. students groups, clubs, etc.). The MySacState portal has been used to some extent to enhance student non academic activity, but progress in this area has been slight. Our ongoing assessment of student technology needs will include review of non academic uses of technology, in order to help us identify discrete applications of technology that can most benefit students co curricular lives. 8) Provide increased access to technology resources for all students anytime and anyplace Tremendous emphasis was placed on ensuring that resources for students were increasingly available over the World Wide Web, to allow student access to campus resources from anyplace at anytime. The primary mechanisms to accomplish this were a) increased

13 development of student services for MySacState (e.g. personalized messaging, library services); b) enhancement of student web services; c) easy access to SacCT over the web; and d) access to student network files over the web through SacFiles. Although efforts have begun to move critical student technologies into the mobile environment (e.g. SacCT and MySacState), it has been exceedingly difficult to keep pace with the extremely rapid growth in student use of mobile technologies such as smart phones and ipads. It has also been difficult to discern where the line should be drawn between students social use of technologies (e.g. Facebook) and the use of those same technologies for learning. Much more work is needed on both mobile learning and social networking to figure out the proper role for campus based student technologies. II. Ensure Further Alignment With Our Campus wide Strategic Goals 9) Data warehousing and analysis resources will be effectively deployed to support enhancement of recruitment, retention, and graduation rates Substantial and substantive progress was made in this area. IRT reallocated six existing positions into a new Administrative Computing Services Data Services group, with the primary mission of supporting the use of information for improved recruitment and retention. A new manager was hired for this group from Chico State, bringing substantial experience in the use of data for CSU academic planning. IRT used existing funds to also invest heavily in both a comprehensive academic Data Warehouse and in state of the art tools for data analysis. This new Data Services group engaged heavily with academic and student services planners campus wide, as well as with faculty, to identify key areas where campus information could enhance academic planning. Among many subsequent advances made in the use of academic data were: a) work with Academic Affairs and department chairs to identify course and enrollment planning issues requiring data support; b) implementation of automated class lists for all faculty; c) major enhancements in reports and analysis used by Student Affairs for enrollment planning; d) work with Institutional Research to enhance many academic reports and analyses used for academic planning at both the campus and CSU levels; and e) work with vice presidents, deans, and other program center heads to identify additional uses of data for strategic decision making for retention and graduation. One specific result of this progress was development in late 2010 of a Gates Foundation grant proposal targeted entirely at the strategic use of data to enhance retention and graduation. Another measure of the success of Sacramento State s data warehouse was the sheer number of reports run from the data warehouse, with over 2000 individual reports run per month. The major gap that exists in the area of data analysis and warehousing is a relatively happy one of having demand for services that far exceeds even our expanded capacity. In addition, greater use of data for decision making has exposed significant problems with the accuracy, completeness and integrity of the data now available for enrollment and retention planning. Finally, much of our use of data has been at the descriptive level of data reporting. We are just

14 getting started with use of data analytic tools that will improve the depth and quality of our decision making. 10) Information technology resources will be effectively aligned with campus wide strategic goals for evidence based decision making One of the key tenets of our campus wide Strategic Plan is promotion of the concerted use of information to inform the university s strategic decision making. The above section has already highlighted the primary use of data for decision making related to retention and graduation. As the campus became more aware of the tremendous potential of our new Data Warehouse and related analytical tools, many decision makers came forward with additional requests for use of the new capabilities. Although the entirety of the progress made in the use of data is too broad to enumerate here, highlights outside of the retention/graduation area include: a) a Budget and Planning data analysis module was acquired that significantly enhances our ability to both self generate fiscal reports and perform analysis of budget data; b) most Institutional Research data was ported to the Data Warehouse, while warehouse tools were made available to IR for enhanced preparation of institutional reports; c) many significant enhancements were made in the use of the Data Warehouse to support faculty/student use of both SacCT and MySacState; and d) a comprehensive Data Warehouse was established for University Advancement and a position was created within Data Services to enhance the use of data for alumni relations and fundraising. Much of our expanded use of data has been for the purpose of enhancing the speed and efficiency of ongoing decision making using existing data. We need to move beyond this routine use of data to identification of key strategic problems that would benefit from the collection and advanced analysis of additional data. 11) Sacramento State s information technology resources will be used to improve campus wide communication and engagement Progress on this goal for students and faculty was substantially covered above in section 7. In addition to the many improvements outlined there, other enhancements of campus information technology for communications included: a) development of a comprehensive broadcast messaging system that enhanced messaging to all constituents (e.g. President s updates); b) addition of comprehensive Emergency Notification System (ENS) capability, including , text, telephone, and audio alerts; c) installation of seven large digital display signs for campus wide messaging; d) development of an opt in online service for offering messages in multiple categories of campus service; and e) use of the Data Warehouse to automatically populate targeted messaging lists selected by constituencies campus wide. A continued problem is lack of campus awareness of the expanded communications capabilities noted above. There is simply no one communications mechanism that will be reliably seen by everyone on campus. We need to increase awareness of our expanded ability

15 to communicate and also inform the campus that use of a multiplicity of means of communication will be required to maximize campus communications. III. Efficient and Effective Use of IT Resources 12. Implement a sustainable, campus wide budget and funding model for information technology. A particularly significant advancement in campus wide budgeting for information technology was the expansion of university funding for maintenance and replacement of campus wide IT infrastructure, including enhanced campus wide funding for data storage, server management and critical software. This funding assured the continued reliability of our campus Data Center and also allowed for continued provision of free storage and server services to the entire campus. Funding had also been provided in 2008 for maintenance and replacement of essential classroom and computer lab technologies, but this funding was rescinded in During the current funding, one time campus funding for this purpose was provided as a stopgap. The CIO will make a concerted effort to have this critical learning space funding permanently restored for , to prevent further deterioration of academic facilities used daily by both faculty and students. The IT Steering Committee reviewed a comprehensive list of potential cost saving measures for campus information technology and recommended implementation of those measures that had the greatest potential for short term returns. Among the resulting changes in were elimination of our expensive but little used phone modem pool, improved management of customizations to CMS, consolidation to a single campus LMS, implementation of a campus wide web content management system, planning for virtual computer labs, increased coordination of software/hardware purchases, collection of reimbursement for state supported IT services for auxiliaries, and progress towards consolidation of campus systems. Finally, the Vice President and CIO prepared a comprehensive IT Cost Map that delineated how campus wide information technology expenses were spread between central and decentralized IT organizations. This cost map was helpful in assisting decision makers in planning for the best means to respond to our current budget crisis, without unduly affected the level of IT services available to faculty, staff, and students. A long standing gap in campus IT planning has been the lack of a comprehensive plan to refresh campus computers. The Vice President/CIO and the provost are working closely together to first develop a plan for replacement of classroom and lab computers. In addition, IRT is developing a recommendation for a comprehensive four year replacement cycle for all desktop computers.

16 13) Implement sustainable assessment processes for monitoring and evaluation of business processes to ensure effective IT based customer services and provide mechanisms for using feedback to improve those processes and services. IRT worked with each campus division to identify key business processes that had the most potential for use of IT to improve efficiency and reduce costs. Among the many improvements made were: a) enhancement to faculty advising systems; b) implementation of online personnel recruitment; c) marked improvements in financial aid processing; d) marked enhancement to student graduation processes; e) improved efficiency of cash and credit card transactions; f) on line delivery of student tax documents; g) enhancement of management and reporting of freshman and transfer student orientation; h) support of student residential scheduling; and i) enhancement of student registration and faculty textbook ordering processes. Perhaps more importantly, analysis of business processes became an ongoing activity for all divisions as they conducted annual planning for IT projects. Nearly every division has identified business process improvements as a part of their priority IT projects for There is a long list of additional business process improvements that are needed on campus. Prominent on that list are provisioning of accounts for new faculty/staff, improvements in management of campus printing/copying, replacement of document imaging and work flow technologies, improvement in shared use and self service for the Service Desk; and improving the accuracy and timeliness of online directory data. 14) Clearly communicate through ITAC the impact of CSU mandates that affect campus information technology and plan proactively for resources needed to address those mandates. Resources were provided to campus non IT divisions in both 2009 and 2010 to allow for support of implementation and testing of CMS upgrades. More importantly, the Vice President and CIO worked with colleagues on the CSU Information Technology Advisory Council (ITAC) to markedly enhance influence over CSU planning for both CMS initiatives and system audits. In particular, significant progress was made in moving the Chancellor s Office towards proactively addressing campus costs and concerns related to a variety of CSU mandates. An example of progress made in this area was the substantial revisions made in requirements for meeting future Accessible Technology Initiative mandates. Another major advance in this area was the decision to move toward a Common Financial System (CFS) for CMS, rather than the twenty three disparate approaches to finance previously in use across the CSU. Staff from Sacramento State s ABA division played a crucial role in planning for CFS. Implementation is scheduled for 2011, bringing substantial efficiencies in financial information handling on campus.

17 Plans are already underway to complete a major upgrade of the CMS HR and student systems used by all CSU campuses. Following this upgrade, plans call for splitting out HR functions so that an application consolidation can occur for HR, similar to the consolidation already undertaken for our financial system. The Chancellor s Office is now working closely with campus CIOs to also plan for a comprehensive re design of the CMS central Data Center (now run by Unisys in Salt Lake City). Unlike previous CMS Data Center planning, this project has involved consistent and strong input from the campuses, with careful consideration of impacts on campus resources. The campus has continued to face major issues of compliance with CSU audit mandates with fiscal, information security, auxiliary and disaster recovery audits having a particular impact on IT planning and resources. We have no reason to expect any abatement of these compliance demands, although we have experienced greater consideration of campus specific resource issues during those audits. 15) Create a seamless experience for users of our campus information technology by providing network, web, and account processes that are ubiquitous, based on accepted best practices, and not limited by organizational boundaries. Substantial progress was made in creating a more seamless IT environment for our students, faculty, and staff. In particular, we acquired a campus wide identity management system that facilitates management of all computer accounts on campus within a single standardized system. This allowed for greatly increased use of so called single sign on that allows campus IT users to use a single campus ID (SacLink) for access to most IT resources. In addition, IRT invested in standardized virtualization software that allowed for reduction in server management costs by as much as 80%. Managers of approximately one third of decentralized servers on campus voluntarily moved previously separate servers into the campus Data Center, both greatly improving efficiency and greatly reducing program center costs. Finally, development of campus wide information security policies and procedures has allowed us to take a single integrated approach to campus wide information security. An ongoing issue with creating seamlessness in IT support has been the continued difficulty in provisioning temporary and part time faculty computer accounts. This issue will eventually be addressed on a CSU wide basis through enhancement of our CMS HR system, but major improvements are not expected until at least In the meantime, IRT has worked with Human Resources and faculty to develop numerous improvements to account provisioning for part time and temporary faculty. 16) Provide shared institutional IT resources that will take advantage of best practices, economies of scale and standardization, while also providing tools for differentiated local management of IT service components. Although there are many initiatives that are responsive to this goal, the core of the goal is to provide balance between campus wide IT needs and the more localized needs of specific

18 program centers. In 2010, IRT developed comprehensive service agreements with all campus auxiliaries and self support agencies, clearly delineating the IT activity to be undertaken centrally and the activity to be supported by the individual program centers. Discussions and planning are taking place at this time to reach similar understandings with colleges. The heart of meeting this goal is to ensure that information technology planning is consistently aware of local needs, at the same time planning advances for campus wide needs. The needs assessments noted above in sections 1 through 8, as well as the campuswide planning of IT projects noted above, are all critical to staying in touch with those local needs. In addition, the faculty and student needs assessments discussed will be very helpful in identifying the range of localized technology needs that exist on campus. As always, comments on this report or any other aspect of campus information technology services are always welcome at itfeedback@csus.edu. January 31, 2011 i Gap Analysis for Information Technology At Sacramento State: A Self-Study, February, 2008: ii Strategic Plan for Information Technology: California State University, Sacramento, April, 2009: