FACULTY SENATE MINUTES
FOR FEBRUARY 22, 2000
(Vol. xxix, No. 20)

The Faculty Senate agenda is posted weekly on the Web, at 2504 Buzzard, and at 315K Coleman.

  1. Call to order by Bonnie Irwin at 2:05 p.m. (2504 Buzzard Building)
  2. Present: J. Allison, R. Benedict, J. Best, G. Canivez, J. Coons, C. Eberly, P. Fewell, B. Fischer, G. Foster, B. Irwin, G. Lockart, N. Marlow, J. Tidwell, M. Toosi, B. Young, G. Kelly. Guests: B. Augustine, G. Aylesworth, M. Beurskens, J. Cech, W. Clark, M. Cook-Bey, S. Figiel, Y. Guan, K. Hastings, M. Heidel, B. Kabat, M. Layette, J. Moroney, E. Sanders, C. Shaeager, L. Simpson, R. Turning, T. Williams, C. Wodrich.

  3. Approval of the minutes of February 15, 2000
  4. Motion (Foster/Canivez) to approve the minutes of February 15, 2000.

    Corrections: In the motion under IV.C. the word "conscientious" is misspelled.

    Yes: Allison, Benedict, Best, Canivez, Coons, Eberly, Fewell, Fischer, Foster, Irwin, Tidwell, Toosi. Abstentions: Lockart, Marlow.

  5. Communications (only those pertaining to TRS motion; others postponed until next week)
    1. Phone call from John Pommier, Leisure Studies, 16 February 2000. Senate should consider including seniors in the motion. They do not even have the options that graduate students now have and many need their books. In leisure studies, students find themselves tracking down books after they have graduated in order to prepare for a national exam.
    2. Memo from Denise Love, Graduate Student, 16 February 2000. Students already have opportunity to buy books, if they choose. Only 4% chose to buy in Fall 1999. Will books for undergraduate courses have to be purchased? Will graduate students still have access to other benefits TRS provides? What will happen to courses that are using texts currently out of print? Will graduate students be able to obtain books from previous courses? Graduate students should decide this issue.
    3. E-mail from Michele Heidel, GSAC President, 16 February 2000. Jennifer, Cech, Greg Landry, and Carl Wodrich are on the GSAC subcommittee preparing recommendations. Several members of GSAC will attend 2/22 meeting.
    4. E-mail from Robert Augustine, Graduate Dean, 16 February 2000. Will attend the 2/22 meeting, appreciates that senate has opened discussion to include CGS and GSAC. GSAC is working on proposal that will represent student views. TRS cannot be eliminated until another system is in place, and there is a plan of transition.
    5. E-mail from Doug Howell, Graduate Student, 22 February 2000. EIU known for being affordable TRS is part of that. We should not increase students’ debt load. Faculty are putting their interests ahead of students on this issue. Students can purchase and read books on their own; they come to graduate school to hear from faculty. Faculty should concentrate on teaching and not on getting the most up-to-date books. If faculty want to eliminate TRS, they need to participate inputting together a credible plan to replace it. TRS is "a gem on Eastern’s campus to be enjoyed and protected."
    6. E-mail from Robert Turning, Graduate Student, 22 February 2000. EIU mission statement states that the University "offers superior yet accessible undergraduate education." Graduates do not need faculty telling them which books to buy for their professional libraries. EIU prides itself on its uniqueness; TRS is part of that. Please focus on restructuring current purchase options rather than total elimination.
    7. E-mail from Dave Figgins, Graduate Student, 22 February 2000. Textbooks are always changing and become out of date. This disputes the argument for graduate students amassing personal libraries. Books that are useless to the students would probably not be resalable.
    8. Memo from Marilyn Lisowski, 22 February 2000. Raises the question about charging for textbooks in workshops, special courses, international programs, when no textbooks are used.
  1. Old Business
    1. Motion regarding Graduate Student Textbook Rental

Motion (Canivez/Allison): After careful consideration of the advantages and disadvantages of the Textbook Rental system, the Faculty Senate recommends a textbook purchase and resale system for graduate students.

Representatives from CGS and GSAC were in the audience and were asked to speak to the issue:

Senator Fischer called the question.

Yes: Allison, Canivez, Foster, Irwin. No: Benedict, Coons, Eberly, Fewell, Fischer, Lockart, Marlow, Tidwell, Toosi, Young. Abstentions: Best. The motion failed.

    1. LANDesk Presentation. The Senators went to Ninth Street Hall for this presentation. Ron Phillips gave the presentation with Cheryl Crowdson giving the demonstrations. Other guests included Dave Henard and Bill Witsman. Prompt and accurate software support includes installation and assistance in using the software, including training and problem resolution. The goal is to provide optimal use of resources; however, we are not meeting our goal. There needs to be a faster response time. In 1990 there was one technician and 91 microcomputers on campus. In 1999 there were two technicians and 2500 microcomputers. This year there are three technicians; however, they also took on many new tasks, which amounted to a full time person. The budget will not allow us to provide the services we need. LANDesk Management Suite offers the tools we need to deal with this problem. It provides current and accurate hardware inventory, current and accurate inventory of specific software, the capability of distributing software across the network, and the improvement of customer support. The software inventory includes the software we support and that which may cause a conflict with the software we support. That is all we are interested in. The software inventory is taken any time the customer is logged on but only of that software listed on the table (demonstrated). The distribution allows distribution to occur during nonworking hours without disrupting the customer. There is no other access to the machine in software deployment. The hardware inventory information will be shared with selected hardware technicians on a need to know basis. If LANDesk had been on all machines on campus, we could have easily done a Y2K compliance check. It could have saved the customer and us many hours of time. The improvement of customer service is available through the remote control real time analysis. This is the feature that will benefit the customer more than anything else. It reduces the time required to solve problems and eliminates the need for the customer to explain the type of problem he or she is experiencing. The technicians can see exactly what the customer is seeing on the monitor and, in most cases, go ahead and fix it. All micros are set up so that they cannot be remote controlled unless the customer gives express permission to do so. In addition the customer will know if his or her micro is being remote controlled, and they can cancel it at any time. The customer is in complete control of this at all times. With LANDesk technicians can handle 10-12 problem calls where they could handle one before. The remote control capability is limited to only seven people in ITS. They are all very trusted high-level people. It will never be used by students or lower level staff. When the customer is asked to allow his machine to be remote controlled, he should be on the phone with the technician. LANDesk will not be installed on any faculty member’s machine at this time unless they request it. It does work for Macs in a limited way; we can do the inventory and the remote control but cannot distribute software. There are separate products that work on the Mac side. Remote control provides immediate and accurate customer problem analysis. Since FY95 software support technicians have averaged over 1000 on-site customer service visits per year. Most of these could have been solved without the technicians leaving their offices in a matter of minutes with remote control. Service calls now average 65 minutes to resolve the problem as compared to the 29-minute average in FY 96. Problems are more complex because the customer has more sophistication. This allows technicians to solve the problems without leaving the office in minimal time with little disruption to the customer. Additional features of LANDesk include remote execution of programs, file transfer, chat, forms, and reminder. The first three require customer permission; the latter two are indicated by either a data request box or an information box. The only thing that can be done without express permission is software deployment, but for that the customer must leave his or her machine on. Every machine with LANDesk can be automatically updated for Norton Antivirus. This program was selected after significant research. Cheryl Crowdson demonstrated remote control and chat.
  1. Adjourn at 4:25 p.m. for lack of quorum

Respectfully submitted,

Nancy D. Marlow, Recorder

Future Agenda Items: