A meeting took place between the Provost Myron Henry, Interim Vice-President for Business and Finance Ilee Rhimes, Director of Academic Computing and Technology Dewitt Latimer, Director of University Information Systems Bruce Petryshak and the Chair of the University Council on Technology Paul Farrell.

The meeting was requested by Dewitt Latimer to clarify issues of concern to the Provost. These issues related to operation of the UCT in regard to the structure of recently created standing subcommittees and ad-hoc subcommittees.

At the meeting, the Provost expressed the view that the membership of UCT subcommittees should be limited to members of UCT. Paul Farrell agreed to convey to UCT that the Provost and Interim Vice-President for Business and Finance interpreted the term sub-committee to be a sub-committee whose membership was drawn from the UCT membership rather than from the broader University community.

During the meeting, discussions took place on the role of UCT and the tasks it should undertake. One substantive conclusion was that UCT should undertake a review of the strategic direction of technology at Kent State University. The aim of this would be to produce one integrated technology plan as an update on the NISS and ACS studies. This plan should review the recommendations in the NISS and ACS studies to determine which had been achieved, and which of the remaining ones were still appropriate. It should also make recommendations on how to move the technology usage on campus forward to a new level. This plan would be presented to the Provost and Interim Vice-President for Business and Finance and forwarded to UPBAC as part of the information available to them in determining budgetary priorities. Before embarking on this planning process UCT should, however, produce a strategy for updating the plans and discuss this strategy with the Provost and Interim Vice-President for Business and Finance.

Paul Farrell also raised the issue of whether the ex-officio members of UCT should be voting members. The Provost and Interim Vice-President for Business and Finance decided to leave that matter to UCT itself.

Some discussion also took place of the evolution of the distance learning area and its relationship with classroom technologies and other issues. It was agreed that UCT could combine responsibilities in the related subcommittee as it deemed appropriate.

Paul Farrell also raised the issue of how UCT should begin its process of rotating members off so that 1/3 were elected in each year. He suggested that perhaps it would be useful to continue all the members for another year and to start the rotation at that stage. The selection of members for rotation in each of the subsequent years (in order to establish a rotation schedule) would be accomplished by drawing lots. The Provost indicated that Faculty Senate would need to be informed on procedures affecting Committee membership.