1. CLASSROOM REVIEW BOARD Proposal Presentation to the UTFAB Tuesday, March 1, 2005, 5 PM, Library Tom Maher, Dir. of OIS, Thomas.Maher@Colostate.edu, 1-1325.Maher@Colostate.edu Andre’ Smith, Manager, CSS-OIS, Andre.Smith@Colostate.edu, 1-1325Andre.Smith@Colostate.edu

2. UTFAB - 2004-02-16Classroom Technolopgy Proposal2 Outline Background Classrooms – status regarding technology Peer institutions Current project Status Budget Proposed project Scope – proposed rooms Budget projection 3-yr. plan Analysis – “fit” with UTFAB funding criteria Q&A

3. Background

4. UTFAB - 2004-02-16Classroom Technolopgy Proposal4 CSU GA Classrooms Status 154 total GA (General Assignment) classrooms at CSU All have Internet access 85 have technology (55% by May ‘05) Still insufficient number to meet a growing demand Need more mid to small-sized classrooms with computer projection systems Many have old, dim projectors and older optics New computer projector technology can avoid expensive lighting modifications

5. UTFAB - 2004-02-16Classroom Technolopgy Proposal5 Comparison to Peers – GA Classrooms with Technology CU Boulder has 160 GA classrooms – about the same number as CSU About 100 (63%) have computer projectors About 30 of these (20%) have “all the bells and whistles” AHEC in Denver has 100% of GA classrooms equipped with technology

6. Status of Current Project for FY 05 (this year)

7. UTFAB - 2004-02-16Classroom Technolopgy Proposal7 FY 05 Project Approved by UTFAB 1. Refresh technology in 5 smart classrooms where old technology exists New projectors are brighter and sharper, and function with modern laptop computers To avoid maintenance and repair problems Mixture of upgraded projectors, document cameras, podiums, control systems, etc. 2. Build 11 new smart classrooms by adding computer projection systems 3. Total – $117K

8. UTFAB - 2004-02-16Classroom Technolopgy Proposal8 Implementation Status New smart classrooms completed: Wagar 231 and 232 Engineering D102, E204 and E205 Clark A07, Gifford 332 Scheduled for completion by May ‘05: A/Z 112, Animal Science 110 and 112, and Forestry 107--All equipment on hand

9. UTFAB - 2004-02-16Classroom Technolopgy Proposal9 Implementation Status (cont’d) Refresh of technology completed in Eddy 113-117 Additional technology refresh completed in Aylesworth 111, Chemistry A101 and 103, Clark C248 and Education 7 from an UTFAB supplemental request Eddy 7, Pathology 101, Glover 130 and Engineering 120 will be completed by June

10. UTFAB - 2004-02-16Classroom Technolopgy Proposal10 QUESTIONS?

11. Proposed Project for FY 06

12. UTFAB - 2004-02-16Classroom Technolopgy Proposal12 Classroom Prioritization Physical Development Plan (PDP) Process Departments prioritize their PDP elements and forward to their Vice President (VP) Each VP reviews department submissions, establishes their priorities and forwards to the University PDP Committee The University PDP Committee reviews VP submissions, and establishes University priorities Classroom elements are forwarded to the Classroom Review Board (CRB) for their recommendations and actions

13. UTFAB - 2004-02-16Classroom Technolopgy Proposal13 Classroom Prioritization (cont’d) The CRB prioritizes and allocates resources to projects Due to budget cuts, all CRB resources are consumed by non-IT elements Chairs, lighting, carpeting, white boards, ADA, etc. CRB recommendations integrated into the University physical I&IT prioritization process Building rewires, classrooms, and wireless nets UTFAB Chair on CRB. Agenda/Minutes on Web www.ois.colostate.edu/CRB/index.html

14. UTFAB - 2004-02-16Classroom Technolopgy Proposal14 Proposed New Smart Rooms - Technology Upgrades Note: The Clark A rooms are “clicker” installs

15. UTFAB - 2004-02-16Classroom Technolopgy Proposal15 Proposed Smart Classrooms for Technology Refresh The technology refresh are new computer projectors in Clark A wing that replace projectors from 1998-2001

16. UTFAB - 2004-02-16Classroom Technolopgy Proposal16 FY 06 Technology Upgrades

17. UTFAB - 2004-02-16Classroom Technolopgy Proposal17 FY 06 Technology Refresh

18. UTFAB - 2004-02-16Classroom Technolopgy Proposal18 Summary of Proposal for FY 06 6 rooms for new technology 7 rooms for technology refresh 1182 student seats total, a mix of large and smaller classrooms The need continues to be great

19. UTFAB - 2004-02-16Classroom Technolopgy Proposal19 Additional Proposal for FY 06 2 New Smart Classrooms 1 Large Classroom Upgrade 5 Classrooms to replace button panels with touch screens Total = $39,964 Note: Original UTFAB Classroom Funding at ~ $175,000

20. UTFAB - 2004-02-16Classroom Technolopgy Proposal20 Proposed New Smart Rooms - Technology Upgrades

21. UTFAB - 2004-02-16Classroom Technolopgy Proposal21 Proposed Smart Classrooms for Technology Refresh Microbiology A101 would be a full replacement of the components, and the other rooms are touch panels

22. UTFAB - 2004-02-16Classroom Technolopgy Proposal22 University Cost Share Complete VTH$583,000 Physiology$135,000 Gen Svcs Bldg$109,000 Spruce Hall$51,000 Painter Center$51,000 Industrial Sc.$17,000 Total$946,000

23. Initial Ratings for Building Rewires * Substantially completed. ** Partially completed.

24. 3-Year Plan

25. UTFAB - 2004-02-16Classroom Technolopgy Proposal25 3-Year Plan or Process UTFAB consider continuing funding technology in classrooms for 3 additional years, for both some new rooms and some technology refresh 27 New rooms (7 annually plus 6 in FY06) 31 rooms for technology refresh (8 annually after 7 in FY06) 120 (78%) total smart rooms by Fall 2009

26. UTFAB - 2004-02-16Classroom Technolopgy Proposal26 UTFAB Funding Criteria 1. Benefit as many students as possible Est. 3,600+ students will pass through these classrooms in any single semester. Clark rooms add approx. 15,000/semester CSUIITE eventually will benefit all students, faculty and staff Current rewire proposal benefits campus: the network is bi-directional 2. Ability to effectively utilize the fee - judgment 3. Not funded by CFT - correct 4. Adherence to budget and accountability – quotations for classroom equipment 5. Potential for direct student use - judgment 6. Effort and thought reflected in the plan - judgment 7. Justification and clarity of the project plan - judgment

27. UTFAB - 2004-02-16Classroom Technolopgy Proposal27 Summary Thank you for your support. Discussion and questions are most welcome.