|
|
 | ||
PCAC Open Forum February 7, 2006 9:30 AM Olin 106 Agenda: 1. Introduction of PCAC Why we were formed: Oliver and Michael met informally on a regular basis for two years prior to the official formation of PCAC, and actively lobbied PSEC for the creation of the group. To us there was a clear need for such a committee to act as a bridge between PS and IT departments throughout CUL to improve communication, improve consistency of services, improve response time to technical and legal crises, and improve our knowledge & awareness of the computing environments, needs and best practices in different units – not only within CUL but also in CIT & CALS labs. Excellent service to users with minimum duplication of effort was always one of our chief goals. Who are and who we represent: Public services staff representation
Public computing support representation
Formal liaison to PSEC
Who we report to:
2. PCAC’s purpose Our charge: “Provide direction
regarding the design and implementation of public computing throughout
CUL. Advise on services being supported for users and the consistent
presentation of those services library-wide. Monitor security measures
to be employed on public workstations, balancing them against privacy
and access considerations. Serve as a communications link for feedback
and announcements between technical staff supporting public computing
and library public services staff. Contribute to overall public services
priorities through specific tasks as assigned by PSEC.” How we fit in with PSEC:
3. Our accomplishments in
the past year include:
4. Topics we are currently
focusing on include:
5.
In monitoring trends among our users, some perceived expectations related
to library public computing include:
Minutes: Public Services/Public Computing Advisory Committee (PCAC) Forum February 7, 2006, 9:30-11am Approximately 30 people attended the event, including three members of Cornell Information Technologies (CIT). PCAC's Purpose Michael introduced the discussion by providing PCAC history, membership, reporting relationships, purpose, past accomplishments, and web location<http://publicservices.library There was a question about the meaning of “ERC”. ERC is the Electronic Resources Committee, which meets to address issues related to CUL access to networked electronic resources. The committee was asked how they plan to market the draft CUL Public Computing Policy. This may depend on the reception from PSEC and ITEC, and because it is meant as a baseline document, each unit may choose to add to the document and provide marketing in different way. The Policy addresses computer use priorities, user behavior, staff support, and campus policies. The following topics/threads/questions were discussed: Net-Print: Has CIT considered the question of “scrap” printing (i.e. using scrap paper in Net-Print printers)? Answer: using a piece of paper that has gone through a printer fuser curls the page and results in frequent paper jams. Using unused scrap paper (e.g. unused paper with the old Cornell logo on it) would probably be fine, technically. However, it might present a service challenge, particularly since it is a paid service. Need to ensure that staff are given Net-Print Operator status if having to answer Net-Print questions. Suggested that organizing a training session for Net-Print Operators could be useful. Also, suggestion of collecting staff-focused Net-Print related documentation in one location, perhaps under the PCAC web site. Duplex (double-sided printing) Why do users get charged for two pages when using duplex, even though it only prints on one sheet of paper? Answer: paper costs are a very small percentage of total printing costs. Paper costs are managed and paid for by the Library for Library-owned Net-Print printers. Also, taken to the extreme, CIT's Net-Print service could lose half of its revenue if it charge by sheet of paper and not by side, even though it will cost them about the same to provide the service's infrastructure since their revenues are not used to pay for consumables such as paper. Note that a designated "duplex only" printer could always be used by a patron as a simplex printer, which would occur if such a printer had a lower price per side printed. Therefore, as currently structured, charging less for duplex is not cost-effective. Use of duplex is rapidly increasing. There was a question about how libraries have marketed the availability of duplex printing. This has been left up to each unit to decide. Someone asked about making duplex as the default for the printing, but others felt that students wouldn't be prepared for this. Olin, Uris have addressed this issue by forcing users to choose a printer (instead of having a default), letting the user decide how they want to print. High-end printer? Rick Cochran asked if the libraries ever discussed having a high-end production printer available for users. It was suggested that Rick could talk to the Library Copy Center, and people suggested commercial operations that could handle this function. Wireless One unit has a staff “test laptop”, so that they can diagnose whether it’s a laptop-specific problem or a Red Rover network problem. There was a request for more detailed maps of coverage (i.e. where are the “dead spots” in a particular building). Training issues are two-fold: 1. diagnosing an outage 2. how to configure personal laptops. All agreed that having documentation available to hand out to users has been helpful. Q: Why is most of this written by the Library and not CIT, the provider of the service? For problem reporting by CUL staff to CIT, Oliver stated that these had been documented <http://www.library.cornell.edu Scanning Someone suggested that the libraries wait until scanning gets much easier (one-touch buttons) before trying to provide scanners. One unit has a scanner but does not set high expectations for staff to be able to support users in the use of the scanner. Foreign Language Fonts It was noted that Noyes Language Lab has computing capabilities for use of foreign languages <http://lrc.cornell.edu/>. People felt that documentation needed to be more widely available about the issues surrounding foreign language fonts. Computer Crunch A study in the Hotel library revealed that adding more computers alone would not solve the problem, but that having available "stand-up" workstations would result in faster turnover and availability. A study of computer use in Olin and Uris Reference was also conducted (perhaps these studies could be made available though the PCAC site?). The question of "productivity" or "full-functionality" machines versus kiosks was raised – are these separate images necessary? This differs by unit. Someone asked about CIT's growth plans – space is the main issue in CIT opening new labs. There is a new one in Philips 318 and there will be one in the renovated Mann Library. Should the library be investing dollars into hard-wired machines as more students have laptops? Should we be doing more to encourage students to bring their laptops on campus? Many students still do not have laptops. It was also noted that there is a demand for more Macs on campus. Users losing work on library machines How to help users avoid losing their work. Is there anything else we can do? Signs and desktop messages are one strategy. How much is personal responsibility? This issue is addressed somewhat in the draft Public Computing Policy. This discussion resulted in an explanation of DeepFreeze, which is an application that prevents permanent changes to a computer's hard drive. Any changes can be made to the drive while the user is logged in, but all changes are undone when the computer reboots. Is CIT considering an enhanced central file service? Question: What impact will CIT's possible move to East Hill have on computer services? How should CUL be preparing for this? What kind of partnerships could be possible? Some themes emerged from the discussions:
| ||
