university of hawaii strategic plan for information technology (162321182)

7/27/2019 University of Hawaii Strategic Plan for Information Technology (162321182)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/university-of-hawaii-strategic-plan-for-information-technology-162321182 1/29



I requested the preparation of this Strategic Plan for InformationTechnology for the University of Hawaii in order to help ourinstitution meet the challenges of the 1990s and beyond. Ibelieved then, as I believe now, that information technologies area crucial aspect of the core infrastructure of a modernuniversity. In the face of changing student demographics,stabilizing budgets and rapidly advancing technologies it wasclear to me that this institution needed a vision and a plan tohelp us move forward to harness information technology in order toexpand our boundaries and maximize our effectiveness andefficiency.

I am delighted with the collegial spirit displayed by allparticipants in this strategic planning process and with theconsensus achieved on what are highly contentious and divisiveissues in many universities. I thank the Council of Directors ofInformation Technology and all the faculty, staff and students whogave so generously of their time and effort for this project.

This Strategic Plan for Information Technology was adopted by theBoard of Regents on February 21, 1992. In so doing the Board hasendorsed the principles set forth in this plan. I am pleased toshare this plan with the University community as the blueprint forwhat lies ahead in the area of information technology.

/s/ Albert J. SimonePresident, University of HawaiiChancellor, University of Hawaii at Manoa

University of Hawaii Strategic Plan for Information Technology

.c.EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The mission of the University is the preservation, creation andtransmission of knowledge within society through teaching,research, and service. As society enters a new information age,information technologies pose opportunities to transform andimprove the basic ways in which these activities are performed.Through appropriate use of information technology, the Universityof Hawaii can deliver high quality instruction more flexiblythroughout the State, and faculty and staff can be empowered toperform research, support, and service more effectively. Thisstrategic plan for information technology has been developed toenable the University to realize these benefits.

The information technology environment today is dominated by thetrends of decentralization, networking, and integration. The netresult of these trends is that smaller, more powerful devices areproliferating on individual desktops. These desktop systems may betied together in networks which can deliver a much wider range ofcomputing, data, voice, and video services in a more flexible andfriendly manner than ever before. The increasing availability andcapability of information technology spurs demand, so even asindividual components get cheaper, the overall costs are rising.As information technology systems expand throughout institutions,



the costs in human resources to make effective use of thetechnology also increase. The human resource needs areparticularly dramatic in organizations that are not yet usingtechnology extensively.

The State of Hawaii has recognized the value of investment intechnology infrastructure as an important aspect of economicdevelopment and diversification by creating and funding a numberof quasi-governmental agencies and facilities in support ofcommercial technology activities. To bind together communitiesseparated by the ocean and other geographic barriers, Hawaii hasalso built its own interisland telecommunications networks toserve state government as well as educational needs.

The University of Hawaii has made outstanding progress in severalimportant technology areas. All too often, however, this progresshas been the provision of hardware and facilities alone. TheUniversity has seldom provided the ongoing support, particularlyin human resources, required to maximize the benefits of itsinvestments in hardware and facilities. This has often preventedthe benefits of progress from permeating the University. In manycases, important new initiatives are precariously balanced betweenlong-term success and failure because of the lack of ongoingsupport. The University's overall situation can best be

characterized as lack of infrastructure: organization, space,personnel, ongoing maintenance, and support.

In developing this strategic plan a number of key themes emergedas the guiding philosophy:

* Information technology is a powerful tool to be used inserving the institutional mission of teaching, research, andservice. Development must take place in accordance with user needsand with user involvement.

* The University must nurture individual creativity. Progresswill be made by providing the University community with training,

facilities, and support, and then by rewarding and supportingsuccess.

* The universal trend toward decentralization must be encouragedand supported where appropriate; both large and small systems willbe used together to address user needs.

* Telecommunications networks are a crucial part of theUniversity infrastructure; network access must be ubiquitous andreliable.

In order to position the University of Hawaii as a competitiveinstitution serving the State of Hawaii well in the 1990s and

beyond, a number of specific priority actions must now be taken todevelop the University's neglected information technologyinfrastructure.

The key recommended actions of this plan are:

* Merge and integrate key information technology support unitsunder the leadership of a Chief Information Officer withresponsibility and authority for systemwide telecommunications,academic computing, and administrative computing.



* Support planning at all levels that involves the entireUniversity community in technology decision-making.

* Implement and support campus telecommunications systems and asystemwide network that ties them together.

* Build or renovate facilities throughout the institution whichsupport and encourage usage of technology, and reliably andefficiently house information technology resources.

* Provide sufficient support personnel commensurate with theincreasing demand for and use of information technology. Revisehuman resources practices to improve the University's ability torecruit and retain top-notch professionals.

* Provide access to computer and information resources throughmodern networked computer labs for students, easy-to-useelectronic directories and information services, and improvedinstitutional procurement support.

* Provide facilities and incentives to support the use oftechnology to extend and improve instructional delivery andeffectiveness.

* Provide university researchers with access to state-of-the-arttools as well as training and support in their use.

* Develop and support information systems that provideconvenient and timely access to accurate information andstreamlined administrative processing.

TABLE OF CONTENTSPREFACE iEXECUTIVE SUMMARY iiINTRODUCTION 1FOCUS ON THE USER -- WHY INVEST IN TECHNOLOGY 2

Serving Students 2Serving Faculty 3Managing the Institution 4Service to the State 4TECHNOLOGICAL TRENDS AND THEMES 5Decentralization 5Networking 6Integration 6TECHNOLOGY AND THE STATE OF HAWAII 7CONTEXT, INSTITUTIONAL VALUES, AND ASSUMPTIONS 8STATUS OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 10Organization, Policy, and Planning 10Telecommunications 13

Space and Facilities 16Human Resources 16Access to Computer and Information Resources 17Instruction 18Research 18Administrative Computing 19Public Service 20STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES AND 21Organization, Policy, and Planning 21Telecommunications 23



Space and Facilities 24Human Resources 24Access to Computer and Information Resources 25Instructional Support 27Research Support 28Administrative Computing 28Public Service 29APPENDIX 30

.c.INTRODUCTION

In 1990 the President of the University of Hawaii charged the newCouncil of Directors of Information with the development of aStrategic Plan for Information Technology. This plan is theproduct of extended discussions, meetings, and forums involvingfaculty, students, and staff from all campuses of the Universitysystem. The process and participants are detailed in the Appendix.

Following this introduction, the next three sections assess theexternal environment. These sections describe the benefits ofeffectively applied information technology in higher education,current technological trends and themes, and important activitieswithin the State of Hawaii that affect the environment in whichthe University operates.

The next two sections constitute an internal assessment. First thecontext and institutional values of the University of Hawaii areconsidered. Then there is a frank assessment of the University'sprogress and internal capacity in a number of key areas ofinformation technology.

The plan concludes with a set of nine fundamental strategicobjectives, and a small number of priority actions recommended toachieve each objective. Given the internal capacity, institutionalvalues, and external environment, these objectives and priorityactions are designed to bring the benefits of informationtechnology to all members of the University of Hawaii community

and in so doing, improve the quality, effectiveness, andefficiency of the University's work and its service to the State.

.c.FOCUS ON THE USER -- WHY INVEST IN TECHNOLOGY

The mission of the University is the preservation, creation andtransmission of knowledge within society through teaching,research, and service. As society enters a new information age,information technologies offer opportunities to transform andimprove the basic ways in which these activities are performed.Through appropriate use of information technology, the Universityof Hawaii can deliver high quality instruction more flexiblythroughout the State, and faculty and staff can be empowered to

perform their research and support activities more effectively.This strategic plan for information technology has been developedto enable the University to realize these benefits.

This section briefly summarizes the key benefits to be derivedfrom the effective application of information technology.Achieving these benefits is the purpose of this plan, theremainder of which focuses on the actions necessary to provide theinfrastructure and services to make the benefits a reality.



.c2.Serving Students

One important role of information technology is broaden access tohigher education. Universities are increasingly being called on toserve non-traditional students, students who have in the past beenexcluded from the university because of time and placeconstraints. These are people who require instructional programsthat have not been delivered in person in their area, people whowork and are unable to attend classes during the normal schoolday, and parents who must also attend to child-care and familyneeds. The University of Hawaii must rise to the challenge ofserving these non-traditional students by offering moreevening/weekend classes, distance education, and individualizedinstruction.

Interactive telecommunications can be used to provide educationalprograms throughout the islands. Students can be in contact withother students and faculty throughout the day and throughout theworld through technologies such as electronic office hours,electronic mail, and computer conferences. Information andtelecommunications technologies can make the excellent informationresources of the University of Hawaii Library collections, as wellas national and international libraries, accessible to students

anywhere on campus or at home throughout the state.

These same technologies can benefit campus-based instruction inHawaii. Students who are too shy to speak up in class will oftenwrite messages in public conferences, and their fellow studentshave an opportunity to learn from and comment on these remarks aswell as subsequent feedback from their peers. Andtelecommunications permits students to interact electronicallywith others throughout the world. This will be an increasinglyimportant way for University of Hawaii students to learn about andaccept other peoples and cultures, and to understand the uniquerole of Hawaii in the international community.

Properly applied, instructional technologies such as multi-mediaand computer assisted instruction have been widely demonstrated toimprove the instructional process. Students can explore real-worldsituations using real data and imagery. They can develop criticalthinking and problem solving skills through the use of educationalsimulations. With full access to information technology in theclassroom, faculty have the capability to utilize a wide range ofmedia and information resources in integrated classroompresentations. Through this integration of information technologyinto classroom teaching, students can participate in a much richerand more engaging educational experience than ever before.

Altogether these techniques broaden education to be more

interactive than traditional one-way lectures and demonstrations.Their benefit is that students can be more individually andinteractively engaged in the learning process, an effect which hasbeen shown to improve instructional outcomes.

Technology can also support the educational process indirectly byallowing students and advisors to monitor student progress towarddegrees or certificates and make timely, informed academicdecisions. And the use of technology in the instructional processhas important indirect benefits, i.e., when students leave the



University they will be familiar with current technology,understand the implications of the information age, and beequipped and ready to contribute to their workplace and society.

.c2.Serving Faculty

Faculty must have access to a wide range of technologies andinformation resources to facilitate their teaching and researchactivities. Computer and multimedia equipment, support, andincentives are necessary to encourage the development andintegration of individualized interactive instructional modulesinto the university curriculum. This will also allow new researchon teaching and instruction to improve the quality of instructiondelivered to students.

Researchers must have access to the computing tools required toperform contemporary research in their fields. The level ofcomputing technology required varies from discipline todiscipline, but high performance computing and data visualizationare becoming increasingly important in the natural and socialsciences. Faculty must have convenient access to librarycollections and information resources at their home institutions,as well as in databases located elsewhere in the world. And

increasingly, they must participate in the development andevolution of ideas over the worldwide network, which encouragesresearchers and collaborators to exchange informationelectronically much faster than the traditional paper/publicationprocess allows. In some fields the network has provided thedominant forum for scholarly communication.

Faculty members do more than just teach and perform research inthe university, and information systems must support theseancillary activities as well. For example, faculty who also advisestudents must have access to student information systems whichsupport the advising process. And faculty who serve as principalinvestigators on research or training grants must have access to

financial information systems that help them manage the resourcesthey bring into the University.

.c2.Managing the Institution

Administrators and staff must have the tools and training theyrequire to do their jobs more effectively in support of teaching,research, and public service. Rather than laboriously moving paperbetween campuses and offices in support of every action, more andmore transactions will be processed electronically. Senioradministrators must have access to critical planning informationthrough user-friendly information systems so that informed

decisions can be made based on current and accurate information.Well-designed information systems offer the best way to allowtimely and accurate response to the ever-increasing requirementsfor formal reporting and response to inquiries from state,federal, and other agencies.

.c2.Service to the State

In addition to offering formal curricula, the University must



share its knowledge and expertise in information technology withthe public through non-credit and community service activities.Information technology can also provide an important medium forthe interchange of information and ideas with the community, e.g.by providing access to extension service databases, libraryinformation resources, and hotline services.

The University provides a rich source of social activities for thepublic, including cultural enrichment, entertainment, and athleticevents. And as a major institution within the State of Hawaii, theUniversity offers significant employment opportunities forresidents. Information technology can provide a convenient andtimely method for informing the public about all that goes onwithin the University and for providing them with the opportunityto share in the benefits the University makes available within thecommunity.

.c.TECHNOLOGICAL TRENDS AND THEMES

The key trends that will directly affect the university'stechnology development in the next five years are largely theresult of advancing microelectronics technology, evolvingcomprehensive communications standards, and improvements insoftware technology. Advances in computing and storage technology

have made greater capacity available in smaller packages at lessexpense than ever before. Telecommunications standards are nowbeing developed to allow virtually any system to be interconnectedwith any other system. Improvements in software technology such asgraphical user interfaces, more natural input/output devices, andartificial intelligence are resulting in many new kinds of systemswhich are much easier to use.

These advances allow information technology to improve personalefficiency and effectiveness more than ever before. Thereforedemand is growing throughout the institution. The overall resultis that information technology expenditures can not be expected todecrease as unit costs decrease. Furthermore, the rapid rate of

technological change makes early obsolescence a serious problem.It is no longer feasible to make one-time major purchases ofinformation technology. Instead, each investment in technologymust be made with an eye to migration paths and patterns; how itwill be upgraded or replaced when it reaches its inevitabletechnical or financial obsolescence. Technology acquisition mustalso include provisions for the ongoing training and support endusers will need. Overall expenditures are therefore stillincreasing, particularly in institutions that have not yet fullyintegrated technology into their organization.

.c2.Decentralization

Computing power is moving to the desktop. Large mainframes nolonger provide general computing power more cheaply than smallsystems and, in general, smaller systems are now easier to use.Particularly when desktop systems are networked, much of whatformerly required an institutional mainframe can now be done atthe departmental or workgroup level. However, as demand for smallsystems explodes, the need for more specialized and advancedservices on large systems also continues to grow.



As distributed computing becomes more important, centralizedcomputing organizations are increasingly viewed as a source ofspecialized services, provider of high-end technologies and uniquesoftware, as a safety net for the have-nots, and perhaps mostimportantly, as a repository for the institutional databases. Therole of central support organizations must shift from being simplyproviders of computing power to providers of services and managersof networks. These organizations must provide training, support,maintenance, information center services, central and departmentalnetwork management, departmental system management, databasemaintenance, information system development, site license andvolume purchase negotiation, maintenance contracts, computer labmanagement, and technology research and development.

.c2.Networking

Communications standards have enabled nearly universal computer-to-computer communications. From a single device on a user'sdesktop, this connectivity can allow end-users access to a widerange of information resources that are housed on different typesof systems and located in different places. Just as importantly,it enables a dramatically higher level of interpersonalcommunication mediated by computer technology. Electronic mail and

computer conferencing systems now span the globe and are widelyused for instruction, research, public service, and administrativeapplications in higher education. As technological advances areproviding more and more capacity on telecommunications networks,creative applications and advances are, just as quickly,saturating whatever capacity can be provided. Emerging multimediaapplications will drive the requirement for increased networkcapacities even farther. And with the proliferation of distributedinformation technologies, greater bandwidth will be required notjust on network backbones but all the way to the desktop.

.c2.Integration

Voice, data, image, and video technologies are converging withcomputing through advances in digitization and digital switchingtechnologies. In any modern telephone system, voice communicationsare already treated as data. The latest fax and CD-ROMapplications treat images as data. Although most "broadcastquality" video is still provided with traditional analogtechnology, compressed/digital video is widely used forinstruction and conferencing and is gaining increasing usage inmany other areas. Most organizations are moving to new integratedorganizational structures to manage these converging technologiesmore effectively.

.c.TECHNOLOGY AND THE STATE OF HAWAII

In Hawaii, the State Government has recognized the value ofinvestment in its technology infrastructure as an important aspectof economic development and diversification. The State has createdthe High Technology Development Corporation to spur economicdevelopment in high technology, the Pacific International Centerfor High Technology Research to foster research activities, theHawaii Information Network Corporation to encourage thedevelopment of an information industry, and a Software Support



Center to support commercial software development in the state.Through the High Technology Development Corporation the state hasinvested in several technology parks and incubators to providephysical facilities for technology-related businesses. A publicand private sector partnership created a Telework Center in orderto demonstrate the effectiveness of telecommuting throughinformation technology as an alternative solution totransportation congestion.

The Governor of Hawaii declared 1988 as the Year ofTelecommunications in Hawaii. The State had already begunconstruction of an interactive interisland television system fordistance education, and in 1988 began building its own interislanddigital microwave telecommunications network.

Members of the University community have been key participants inmany of these projects and initiatives.

The State has moved toward organizational consolidation in orderto effectively manage the converging technologies of computing andtelecommunications. In 1989, the State's Telecommunications andElectronic Data Processing Divisions were merged to form the newInformation and Communication Services Division in the Departmentof Budget and Finance. In 1990, Hawaii's Judiciary established and

filled a new Chief Information Officer position. And in 1991, theDepartment of Education filled a new Assistant Superintendentposition for Information and Technology Services, pulling togethervarious computing and telecommunications programs from differentparts of the department.

A number of key state planning documents chart the course oftechnology and telecommunications for State agencies, includingthe Master Plan for Distributed Information Processing andInformation Resource Management (DIPIRM) and the Strategic ProgramInitiative for Telecommunications (SPI).

.c.CONTEXT, INSTITUTIONAL VALUES, AND ASSUMPTIONS

The University of Hawaii utilizes an integrated planning systemthat includes a number of external and internal reviews anddocuments. Key components of the planning environment are theUniversity mission statement, its Master Plan, the State HigherEducation Functional Plan, program reviews and accreditationrecommendations, the University Strategic Plan, biennialUniversity Agendas for Action, campus Academic Development Plans,facilities plans, and a number of specialized program plans. ThisStrategic Plan for Information Technology is a specialized programplan that has been conceived as a blueprint for the development ofan information technology environment that will allow theachievement of the goals and aspirations articulated in the

academic planning documents cited above. At the same time thisplan is consistent with the recommendations of external reviewers.

The following statements of values and assumptions are the basison which information technology development will take place withinthe University of Hawaii:

* The University of Hawaii shall provide high-qualityinformation and telecommunications systems to support theUniversity's mission of instruction, research, and public service.



* Information technology development shall take place inaccordance with the needs of the University community and withactive user involvement.

* The University must nurture individual creativity. Progresswill be made by providing the University community with training,facilities, and support, and then by rewarding and supportingsuccess.

* The universal trend toward decentralization must be encouragedand supported as appropriate; both large and small systems will beused together to address user requirements.

* In keeping with the generally decentralized structure of theUniversity system, information technology functions and supportwill be both decentralized and centralized. Much of the end-userequipment, support, decision-making, and budgeting must occur atthe college or unit level. There must be central responsibilityfor activities that require overall consistency or for which thereare significant economies of scale, such as planning and overallprioritization of needs, training, system management, specializedassistance, systemwide information systems, specialized systems,and the design, implementation, and management of the systemwide

telecommunications network.

* Telecommunications networks are a crucial part of theUniversity infrastructure, particularly in Hawaii where the islandgeography separates campuses within the statewide system from eachother, and where thousands of miles and hours of time differenceseparate individuals from colleagues and peers at otherinstitutions. Network access must be ubiquitous and reliable.

* The University's information technology environment will betechnically heterogeneous. The end-user should access allinformation resources through a uniform interface, as though all

resources emanated from a single integrated system. Access to thissystem of resources shall be available from a wide range of end-user equipment.

* The development of information and technology resources andservices will be accompanied by directories, user-friendly front-ends, training, and support for the university community toencourage and facilitate the adoption and ongoing use oftechnology.

* The inevitable obsolescence of computer equipment will beplanned for; students will have access to technology at leastcomparable to that used in the outside community.

* The University shall continue to be part of national andinternational telecommunications networks to enable access to andsharing of information, computing, communications, andinstructional resources. Furthermore, the University shallcontinue to develop as a focal point of telecommunications insupport of its mission as the academic hub of the Pacific.

* Access to local, statewide, national or internationalinformation resources will be available from offices, classrooms,



laboratories, libraries, and dormitories on all campuses, and fromhomes throughout the State of Hawaii.

* To the extent that other entities serve as network carriers,the University shall ensure that its infrastructure is developedso as to allow utilization of the widest possible range of non-commercial, commercial, or internal carrier services. TheUniversity logical network will be autonomously managed by theUniversity.

.c.STATUS OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGYAT THE UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII

What follows is a straightforward assessment of the University'scurrent internal capacity in key areas of information technology.Such an assessment is an essential component of any strategicplan. There are many successes described in this assessment. Thesesuccesses have tended to be the acquisition of hardware however,and the hardware has seldom been adequately supported to allowdelivery of the excellent services that the technology makespossible. These successes have often been the result ofoutstanding leadership and hard work by individual members of theUniversity community. This is a healthy and desirable sign ofinnovation within the University community, but the lack of

support of proven successes does not permit them to permeate theinstitution to distribute the benefits. In some cases theseinitiatives are now precariously balanced between long-termsuccess and failure because of inadequate ongoing support. TheUniversity must have a solid plan for moving forward in thecritical area of information technology. The frank assessment thatfollows is the foundation on which the University can buildstrategic objectives and priority actions. The specific objectivesand actions are contained in the last section of this plan.

Information technology at the University of Hawaii can becharacterized as lacking adequate infrastructure: organization,space, personnel, ongoing maintenance, and support.

.c2.Organization, Policy, and Planning

The information technology organization at the University ofHawaii can be characterized as highly fragmented (see followingfigure). There is no senior executive other than the Presidentwith responsibility for even the majority of the key informationtechnology support units. Several organizational initiativesduring 1990 have improved communication and cooperation among thesupport units and the user communities, but there is much progressstill to be made. There are two major problems with the currentorganization: (1) lack of operational integration and management

of intimately related technologies; and (2) lack of strong andeffective executive leadership regarding information technology.

The lack of operational integration is a barrier toward making thebest use of scarce existing resources. This has particularly beenthe case in the areas of telecommunications, administrativecomputing, and user support services, in which multiple units havefragmented and overlapping responsibilities. For example, threeseparate offices are actively involved in planning use of andpaying for the new Manoa telecommunications system. One additional



office assists with data wiring as necessary; thus there are threeseparate technical/wiring staffs in addition to the contractedservice provider. Different systemwide networking technologies and

Figure: Information Technology Organization at the University ofHawaii

protocols have evolved for administrative and academic computing,and only now are being brought together. Each systemwideadministrative application relies on three completely differentorganizations for effective operation. An application areaexecutive provides leadership and determines the requiredfunctionality of each application. The Management Systems Officeperforms software maintenance, programming, and technical supportof the application. And the Computing Center is responsible forproviding the underlying central hardware and for operating theapplication. Two systemwide organizations, in addition to variouscollege and campus support groups, assist units in the developmentof departmental computing and networking and do not always givethe same advice. And many other critical services such as hot-linesupport, product evaluation, user training, and informationdissemination are duplicated, yet in each unit they are

understaffed. End-users pay the real price of this fragmentation,since it is difficult for them to know who to rely on for whatkind of services; in areas of overlapping responsibility they mayget different answers to the same questions or requests dependingon whom they call, and they may need to make multiple contacts toassure the success of a particular project. Users are also subjectto independent procedures established by each unit in theirspecific areas of responsibility.

With the key technology support units reporting to differentexecutives, each of whom has major responsibilities besidesinformation technology, there has been no executive-level advocacyfor the whole area. This lack has inhibited effective resource

acquisition, particularly for basic infrastructure needs. There isno executive other than the President with responsibility orauthority to advocate for or prioritize the institution's overallinformation technology requirements.

The University's overall executive organization has continued toevolve and change regularly to improve its ability to fulfill itsmission. But even in the face of technological evolution andconvergence, the organizational structures for informationtechnology have remained largely unchanged for the last 20 years,and they are no longer serving the University well.

The University of Hawaii has almost no body of policy that

addresses important issues in technology today such as networkusage, privacy of information, ethical use of data and computing,free expression and censorship, copyright issues, software piracy.Nor is there coherent policy regarding general computing andinformation resource management.

Some campuses have computing plans and some havetelecommunications plans. In 1990 the Management Systems Officeprepared VIM, a master plan for administrative computing, howevera lack of funding and space has prevented them from moving forward



with the plan. There is no current systemwide academic computingplan. Only recently has there been major activity in integratedtelecommunications planning systemwide with a new executive policyon telecommunications management, an external needs assessmentcontracted by the Vice President for Finance and Operations, andan internal plan for utilization of the State's microwavebackbone. There have been several ad-hoc reports done in themiddle and late 1980s. However, the University's key action-oriented planning document, the 1985-95 "A Strategy for AcademicQuality," has not been updated with respect to informationtechnology since it was written in 1984. This Strategic Plan forInformation Technology provides that needed update.

.c2.Telecommunications

It is in this area that the University's plans have been mostambitious, its successes most dramatic, but where its future ismost precarious.

* Intercampus Data NetworkThis year the University expects to make the most dramaticexpansion of its intercampus data network since the originalvoice-grade circuits brought connectivity between campuses in the

1970s. Leveraging a number of State initiatives, the Universitywill have high-speed data connectivity among the CommunityColleges for the first time. However, the funding for thisinitiative is largely through a special one-time legislativeappropriation for public access and there will be greater need fornetwork support at both the campus and system levels.

* Data Network ServicesElectronic mail is the most widely utilized network service. Atthe University of Hawaii, as at many other institutions, it hastransformed the way many people work, study, and do research. Theelectronic mail systems currently in use, however, are not allwell connected with all the important external networks. Further,

while nearly all faculty and staff have access to electronic mail,student access is often limited. The situation with computerconferencing (electronic bulletin boards) is even less developedthan electronic mail. There is relatively limited systemwidecoherence and connectivity, and less access for students thanfaculty/staff. There are few systemwide networked administrativeservices generally available, and no specific plans for advancedapplications such as forms processing or electronic datainterchange (EDI).

* Library NetworksLibrary networks in support of teaching and research are rapidlydeveloping at the local, national, and international levels. With

the implementation of the UHCARL library information system inJanuary 1991, the University of Hawaii community has access to thebibliographic and limited text databases of libraries in some 80institutions. With the expansion of access through the Internet,the holdings and services of the University of Hawaii areaccessible from Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Korea, and NorthAmerica. And with the reemergence of PEACESAT, Pacific islandterritories and nations will also have access. Increasingly, thecapabilities of these networks will be utilized for the exchangeof digitized and/or facsimile images and database services in



support of distance education, local instruction, research, andservice to the community.

* External Data NetworkThe PACCOM project, based in the Information and Computer ScienceDepartment at Manoa, has made Hawaii the hub of high-speedacademic data networking in the Pacific Basin and has linked theState's huge scientific resources and research community with theworld. The federal funds for this project have helped provide thedata link to the U.S. mainland which is widely used by faculty inall disciplines for communications with their colleagues worldwideand is increasingly used to link students with their peers inother places. However, the University's share of this mainlandlink (currently about 50%) is partially collected through an ad-hoc plea to users for contributions. The high-speed data link tothe mainland can no longer be considered a research project; themanagement and support of this link must be provided for,organizationally and fiscally, as part of the cost of being amajor university in the 1990s.

* Voice SystemsUH-Manoa is just completing a major telecommunications upgradethat provides new and advanced voice services as well as data andvideo capability throughout the Manoa campus. While the physical

infrastructure provided is superb, the campus capability tomanage, fund, and support the use of the facilities is marginal atbest. With three different organizations managing the voice, data,and video networks; with as yet undetermined levels of user feesto subsidize the cost of the system; and with no new staff addedto install new connections, maintain the system, or support users,the University will be unable to make the best use of theinvestment already made in the system itself.

Honolulu, Kapiolani, and Leeward Community Colleges already havethe same type of telephone system as UH-Manoa, and both Maui andKauai Community Colleges are desperately in need of and are nowprocuring new telephone systems. The University has the real

opportunity to build a systemwide voice network that allows suchfeatures as toll-free calling between campuses, toll-free calls tostudent and public services offices on any island by members ofthe community on any other island, voice-mail, 5-digit extensiondialing among campuses, and integrated voice/data applications andservices. Furthermore, it is most cost-effective to provide fordata and video telecommunications requirements during theconstruction and installation of new voice systems. Continuingsystemwide leadership, support, and additional funding arerequired to help bring the telecommunications infrastructure ofevery campus up to the level of the more advanced campuses. Andadditional support personnel are needed both at the campus andsystem levels to encourage and facilitate the use of these

systems.

* Video NetworksMaui Community College pioneered the use of interactive videowithin the University by building the Skybridge system to bringhigher education to the isolated populations of Molokai, Lanai,and Hana. As a 2-way, full-motion video system, Skybridge set ahigh standard for interactive distance education. However,Skybridge is limited by its single channel capacity, and fundingis required to upgrade the system to bring more educational



offerings to the remote residents it serves.

The Hawaii Interactive Television System (HITS) is an interislandtelevision system managed by the Hawaii Public Broadcast Authority(HPBA, which operates Hawaii Public Television). After less than afull year of operation to all islands, HITS is already bringinghigh-demand instructional programs to the neighbor islands.Programs and courses are being offered in Nursing, EducationalAdministration, Counseling and Guidance, Public Health, Libraryand Information Science, and Allied Health. HITS also bringsinstruction from UH-Hilo to West Hawaii and helps provide a widerange of teleconferences, seminars, workshops and non-creditprograms to campuses and communities throughout the state.

HITS is currently limited to 4 channels and has limited capabilityfor 2-way video interaction. Furthermore, HITS was built to serveneeds of the Department of Education and other state agencies aswell as the University, and HPBA actively markets the system tothose agencies. Yet the biggest problem with the systematic use ofHITS for distance education in the University is not thesetechnical and capacity limitations, but the lack of an adequatesupport infrastructure. Only limited support has been availablefor development of distance education classrooms on most campuses.No new permanent staff positions were allocated to operate the new

distance education classrooms, for advising and counseling, forremote registration, for extended campus and library hours, or foraccess to library materials required to support the new programsand courses. Whatever success has been enjoyed has been at theexpense of other critical instructional support activities on eachcampus. Continued successful expansion to meet state needs in theface of these problems is questionable.

The Language Telecommunications, Resource and Learning Center atManoa is developing a Ku-band satellite uplink facility, but thereis currently no C-band satellite uplink within the University orState Government that can provide the capability to deliverinstruction or training to the Pacific Basin or U.S. mainland.

* PEACESATFor more than 20 years the University's PEACESAT program hasprovided medical and environmental emergency support as well asdistance education throughout the Pacific Rim and Basin. Over thelast three years the Federal Government has invested $2.7 millionthrough the University of Hawaii for the expansion and reemergenceof the program using newer technology. This will allow improvedvoice and data capability for the provision of distance education,connection to the University of Hawaii network for access tolibrary systems and the Internet, and other services fordeveloping countries in the Pacific. Although the networkheadquarters have always been at the University of Hawaii, the

University of Hawaii has not actively provided credit courses tothe Pacific over PEACESAT. A lack of programmatic leadership fromthe University and the lack of adequate funding for ongoingoperation of the University's PEACESAT office, if not remedied,may result in the relocation of the project headquarters toanother Pacific institution.

.c2.Space and Facilities



The two major systemwide computing support units, the ComputingCenter and Management Systems Office, are located on the Manoacampus and are completely out of space for machines, publiccomputer labs, user service areas, training facilities, staffoffices, training rooms, work laboratories, or anything else. Theyare at opposite ends of campus, both located in facilities builtfor other purposes and converted to their current uses as well aspossible within the building constraints. They operate and staffthree separate machine rooms, none of which has adequate securityor protection against natural disaster.

The situation on most other campuses and in most colleges andinstitutes at Manoa is not much better. On some campuses criticaltelecommunications and computer systems are literally housed inconverted closets. These facilities is not always air-conditioned,and backup power provisions for critical administrative systems ispractically nonexistent.

.c2.Human Resources

There are some excellent information technology support staff atall levels; however, three factors lower the overall quality ofservice provided to end-users in the University community:

1) Not enough staff, at any level, to provide adequate trainingand support. While technology use in the university has exploded,the personnel infrastructure to support that use has increased, atbest, only slightly. The effect of this has been to divert theenergies of many faculty and program staff into technology supportand away from their principal responsibilities.

2) Lack of inter-organizational agreements on a family of basichardware, software, and communications standards. This means thateach technology support organization may recommend and supportdifferent products that do the same thing -- preventing the mostefficient use of scarce existing support resources and confusing

many end-users who deal with multiple support organizations.

3) In spite of ongoing efforts by the Personnel Management Officeand others, position descriptions, personnel practices, and salaryscales still make it difficult to recruit and even more difficultto retain top-notch individuals to support technology use in theUniversity. Many of the jobs in technology and network managementand support are not adequately described by the few personnelclasses available. There is no advanced technical track forinformation technology professionals so they must either move intomanagement or leave the University to get salary increases abovethe collective bargaining norm.

.c2.Access to Computer and Information Resources

Access to computers has improved dramatically over the lastseveral years. Through a combination of legislative funding,federal funding, and reallocation, all campuses have developed atleast one major student computer lab and many have multiple labs.However, in some cases the computers originally placed in the labsare inadequate for the kinds of computing requirements now facedby students. Ongoing funding is not always available for the



upgrading required in today's fast-moving world of computing. Andon most campuses the need for new labs for student access faroutstrips the available space and staffing resources, even if thecomputers are made available.

An aggressive resale program through the University Bookstores hashelped make several types of personal computers far moreaffordable to students and faculty, and thousands of individualshave taken advantage of this opportunity. The provision offaculty/researcher desktop devices has primarily been left up tothe colleges. Several colleges within the University have alreadyimplemented "computer on every desktop" programs, but others havemoved more slowly. In research institutes individual researchersare usually left to find funding for their own desktop devices.Even so, procurement procedures are widely considered to beobstructions to effective acquisition of technology. Problemscited include lack of knowledgeable advice on equipment andprocess, lack of ability to see technology before buying, delaysand paperwork imposed by various approval processes, and delaysand paperwork associated with the bid process required by statelaw.

Although some campuses have made substantial progress in providingpublic labs and/or networking, at this point only a fraction of

all the desktop and public lab computers in the University areeffectively connected to networks to allow access to otherinformation resources and computing services. Numerous departmentshave developed valuable public and quasi-public databases that arenot currently available to members of the university or publicoutside the department of origin. Several campuses have on-lineinformation services that provide directories, schedules,policies, and other kinds of useful information. With theexception of the library systems, however, these services are notwidespread and no such systemwide information is available on-line. There is no clearinghouse for information about theseservices, consistency among them, or "friendly" user interface toall of what is available.

.c2.Instruction

There have been a number of highly innovative and successfulapplications of information technology for instruction throughoutthe University system, including the development and use ofcomputer-based education, interactive video, and instructionaltelecommunications. Active work in hypermedia is taking place in anumber of colleges. However, information technology resources forinstruction are unevenly distributed throughout the Universitysystem. The result is that some faculty have access toconsiderable resources but many have little or no access. This

applies to production facilities and delivery systems both in andout of the classroom. For example, Manoa has no campuswide videostudio or production facilities, seriously limiting its ability tosupport video production for direct classroom use or toincorporate video into locally-produced hypermedia and distanceeducation programs. To some extent this is a natural reflection ofcollege priorities, however, standards need to be developed andimplemented for classroom facilities and support. Otherwise theUniversity cannot expect its successes to be institutionalized,nor will they spur further instructional innovation.



Even if there were adequate facilities and resources, given thefocus on research of the Manoa tenure and promotion system thereis little incentive for most junior faculty to become activelyinvolved in the use of instructional technology unless theyconsider it as their area of research. In fact, it is usuallyconsidered unwise for untenured faculty to even get involved inthis area.

.c2.Research

Research computing is flourishing at the University of Hawaii.There are now some 300 Unix workstations on the Manoa campus,mostly in research units. The overall computing capacity thisrepresents dwarfs the total power of centralized systems availablein the University. The Computing Center has recognized thisactivity and has moved to support Unix workstations through a newpublic lab, software licenses and servers, management of thenetwork integral to the Unix workstation philosophy andeffectiveness, and limited assistance with system management.However, this initiative has been undertaken without addition ofstaff, and therefore at the expense of other important supportactivities. Even at that, the combined level of support available

through departmental and central resources is already inadequateand growing more so as workstation use burgeons throughout theUniversity.

The University of Hawaii was the first institution to formallyjoin the San Diego Supercomputer Consortium when it was created.However, the amount of supercomputer time used by the Universityhas not grown substantially. The San Diego facility is so heavilyused that competition for that resource is severe. Also, networkbandwidth between Hawaii and the mainland limits researchers'ability to use that Center to take advantage of supercomputing andvisualization technologies in a modern fashion. Other than thatfirst step, the University has made little progress in moving

seriously into the computing areas attracting most attention inresearch today: high performance parallel processing andvisualization of data.

.c2.Administrative Computing

The University's systemwide administrative computing needs havebeen the most neglected area of information technology in the pastyears. In part, this has been the result of a fuzzy and poorlyunderstood locus of responsibility and, in part, the result of anoverall inattention to infrastructure needs. The systemwide fiscalinformation system is a 20-year old batch system that effectively

meets audit requirements but does not begin to address end-userneeds for timely information. As a result, nearly everyoperational unit has implemented its own limited fiscal system andlaboriously updates its own system from the central system's batchprintouts. Although the majority of the University budget is spenton personnel, there is no modern comprehensive systemwide humanresources information system; the University relies on 20-year oldbatch programs with limited functionality. This makes itdifficult-to-impossible to answer routine queries, assess theimpact of new policies and practices, or react to changes mandated



by the State. There are now four different student informationsystems in use, and on many campuses they do not provide facultyand advisers with access to needed student information, much lessgive students access to information about themselves.

Studies indicate that the overall budget, hardware capacity, floorspace, and staffing levels for administrative computing at theUniversity of Hawaii are far below those of comparableinstitutions. The result of all this is that there is limited,generally inconvenient access to data -- data that is required tosupport both the academic and administrative work of theinstitution. Activities such as student advising, program planningand evaluation, routine reporting, budgeting, institutionalresearch, and assessment are made much more difficult and time-consuming than if reasonable on-line access to data was available.

In spite of these problems, there has been progress. TheManagement Systems Office has moved aggressively to assistsystemwide and administrative offices in the move from typewritersand centralized word-processing to microcomputers and local areanetworks. They implemented the first systemwide electronic mailnetwork for administrators and have now brought that network intothe mainstream of academic electronic mail.

.c2.Public Service

Community Services units on each campus have been providingcomputer and technology training for a number of years. Some ofthese units have been extremely successful and are viewed as thepremier providers of computer training in the community. And theCommunity Colleges have aggressively moved to update or addvocational curricula in response to the changing use of technologyin the workplace.

Many units also provide media and technology-related services tothe public, but there is little uniformity among the units

regarding the types of services that are appropriately provided tothe community and what kinds of chargeback mechanisms or fees areapplied.

The University has established an Office of Technology Transferand Economic Development (OTTED), which has service to the Stateas a principal aspect of its mission. OTTED works with unitsthroughout the University to make their specialized skills andresources available to the general public and business community.A new external services program based in the Library will providemany specialized services such as customized research and databaseaccess.

With the exception of the Computing Center's modem bank thatserves Oahu, there is no general provision or funding for publicaccess to the University's electronic information resources. Evenwith that modem bank, many key information resources such asdatabases and bulletin boards at Tropical Agriculture and HumanResources are not internally networked so as to be widelyavailable through the university network to the entire generalpublic that could benefit from them.

.c.STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES AND



RECOMMENDED PRIORITY ACTIONS

Following is a set of strategic objectives, and priority actionsintended to achieve each of the objectives. These actionsrepresent a "back-to-basics" approach to strengthening theUniversity's overall information technology infrastructure.Although the priority actions may appear to be largelytechnological and administrative, they are the specific means toprovide the benefits to the University described in the firstsection of this plan.

The first recommendation, A1, is to merge and integrate keytechnology support units and establish a Chief Information Officer(CIO) at the University. In the absence of such an individual, theCouncil of Directors of Information Technology (CODIT) currentlyserves the President as a de facto CIO in many ways. If therecommended organizational change describe in A1 is rejected,CODIT and the organizations it represents must assume theresponsibilities delegated here to the CIO and other means must befound to provide executive leadership for information technology.Bringing key technology support units together would be a giantstep toward effective management of the University's resources andimplementation of this plan. The remainder of the recommendedpriority actions should be undertaken through whatever

organizational structure is in place.

.c2.Organization, Policy, and Planning

StrategicObjective A Effectively manage the converging voice, data, andvideo technologies along with academic and administrativecomputing.

Action A1 Merge and integrate key operational units to establish asingle information technology support unit headed by a ChiefInformation Officer (CIO) with responsibility and authority for

systemwide telecommunications, academic computing, andadministrative computing. This unit should be represented on theUniversity Executive Council.A1 Responsibility President, University Executives.A1 Timeframe 1991

Action A2 Review and if necessary modify the existing technologyadvisory committee structures to assure that there are appropriatelevels of faculty, student, executive, and staff input intodecision-making that affects academic computing, administrativecomputing, and telecommunications.

A2 Responsibility CIO/CODIT, Advisory Committees, Faculty,Students, University Executives.A2 Timeframe 1992

Action A3 Add an information technology review to the Universitybudget process to provide coordination, prioritization, andtechnical review.A3 Responsibility Budget Office, CIO/CODIT.A3 Timeframe Beginning with the 1992-93 Supplemental BudgetProcess



Action A4 Develop or review policies regarding: network usage;privacy of information; ethical use of data and computing; freeexpression and censorship; copyright issues; software piracy;internal and external networking and service agreements; networkand computing resource management; disaster recovery; principlesand policies on cost-sharing, cost-recovery, and charging; andpolicies on intellectual property ownership, marketing, andtechnology transfer.A4 Responsibility CIO/CODIT, Advisory Committees, Faculty,Students, Legal Counsel.A4 Timeframe 1991-1993

Action A5 Develop specific college, campus, institute, and supportunit plans for information technology to meet user needs,including areas such as computing equipment, networking, support,instruction, and research as appropriate. Monitor and evaluateperformance vis a vis those plans.A5 Responsibility Vice Presidents/Chancellors, CIO/CODIT,Provosts, Deans, Directors.A5 Timeframe 1992-95

Action A6 Develop and implement plans for disaster recovery andbackup of critical information systems.

A6 Responsibility CIO/CODIT.A6 Timeframe 1992-94

.c2.Telecommunications

Strategic Objective B Provide reliable, standardized, high-quality, high-capacity telecommunications systems to support theUniversity's mission of instruction, research, and public service.

Action B1 Complete implementation of the emerging systemwidetelecommunications network and provide for redundancy and disasterrecovery plans.

B1 Responsibility CIO/CODIT, Campuses.B1 Timeframe 1991-94

Action B2 Develop and staff a systemwide network support center.B2 Responsibility CIO/CODIT.B2 Timeframe 1991-93

Action B3 Plan and implement telecommunications networks on eachcampus and island to provide end user access to systemwide andnational/international resources; develop campus network supportservices.B3 Responsibility Campuses, CIO/CODIT.B3 Timeframe 1991-95

Action B4 Provide full systemwide electronic mail and conferencingcapability, including connectivity with external networks; providefull access to all students.B4 Responsibility Campuses, CIO/CODIT.B4 Timeframe 1992-93

Action B5 Provide and support appropriate external data and videoconnectivity to link the University of Hawaii with colleagues andconstituents in Asia, the Pacific, the U.S. mainland, and beyond.



B5 Responsibility CIO/CODIT, Support Units.B5 Timeframe 1992-94

.c2.Space and Facilities

Strategic Objective C To provide adequate space and properlyequipped facilities to allow the integration of appropriatetechnology throughout University activities.

Action C1 Review campus master plans with attention specificallydirected toward information technology impacts on buildings andfacilities. On some campuses, such as Manoa, give priority to thedevelopment of a facility designed specifically for technologysupport that provides adequate and congenial space for student andfaculty access to technology, appropriate levels of security(physical and from natural phenomena) for critical systems, andstaff support.C1 Responsibility Campuses, Support Units, CIO/CODIT.C1 Timeframe 1992-97

Action C2 Develop minimum classroom standards to support the useof technology, and systematically apply these standards in allrenovation and new construction projects.

C2 Responsibility Campuses, Campus Support Units, Faculty,Students, CIO/CODIT.C2 Timeframe 1992-97

.c2.Human Resources

StrategicObjective D Develop and support a University community that usestechnology appropriately, effectively, and efficiently.

Action D1 Hire more support personnel, at both the college andsystem levels, to help the university community make effective use

of technology in their jobs. These staff must provide training,support, maintenance, and development assistance to students,faculty, and staff. The support staff themselves must be supportedwith training opportunities to ensure their ability to aid in theuse of emerging and state-of-the-art technologies.D1 Responsibility Campuses, CIO/CODIT, Deans, Directors,Executives.D1 Timeframe 1992-97

Action D2 Continue to review technology-related positiondescriptions and salaries with a commitment to establishing new

classifications as necessary to describe the kinds of work done bytechnology professionals today, to provide flexibility forindividuals with varied responsibilities, to establish dual-trackclassifications that allow advancement in both the technical andmanagement directions, and to assure that the salaries paid at theUniversity are adequate.D2 Responsibility Personnel Management Office, CIO/CODIT,Administration.D2 Timeframe 1992-94



Action D3 Review clerical and other staff position descriptionsand pay scales to recognize the increasingly important role thatclerical and other staff must play in using and promotingtechnology at the departmental level.D3 Responsibility Personnel Management Office, CIO/CODIT,Administration.D3 Timeframe 1993-95

Action D4 Implement a full range of training and human resourcedevelopment programs for faculty, students, and staff, includingtechnology professionals, to allow all members of the universitycommunity to plan for and utilize information technologyappropriately.D4 Responsibility CIO/CODIT, Personnel Management Office.D4 Timeframe 1992-94

.c2.Access to Computer and Information Resources

StrategicObjective E Provide the University community with appropriateaccess to computing and telecommunications technology.

Action E1 Provide space, support, and ongoing funding to support

public access labs at the campus, college, and even departmentlevel, with modern equipment suitable for supporting students'academic requirements.E1 Responsibility Campuses, CIO/CODIT.E1 Timeframe 1992-97

Action E2 Develop a systemwide information system that provides awide range of University information online, such as job openings,University calendars, course schedules, current events, athleticschedules and ticket information, campus bulletins, and studentand staff directories. Access to this information must be

integrated with functions such as library information systems,electronic mail, bulletin boards, access to administrativeinformation about oneself, full-text databases, departmentalinformation resources, image and multi-media databases, numericdatabases, national information directories, remote documentrequest and delivery services, and knowledge management tools.E2 Responsibility CIO/CODIT, Libraries, University InformationProviders.E2 Timeframe 1992-94

Action E3 Identify key hardware and software platforms and developstandards for providing the necessary support throughout theUniversity, such as negotiating site licenses, entering into

volume purchase agreements, providing maintenance, and offeringspecialized training.E3 Responsibility CIO/CODIT, Advisory Committees, Faculty,Students, Administration.E3 Timeframe 1992-93

Action E4 Develop ways to streamline and improve the institutionalpurchase and maintenance of computers and telecommunicationstechnology. Full-service support should be available todepartments to help them select, configure, and purchase equipment



at the best possible prices on a timely basis.E4 Responsibility CIO/CODIT, Procurement and Property ManagementOfficeE4 Timeframe 1992-94

Action E5 Develop and maintain a database of who owns, uses, hassite licenses for, and is responsible for different varieties oftechnologies.E5 Responsibility CIO/CODIT, Advisory Committees.E5 Timeframe 1992-93

.c2.Instructional Support

StrategicObjective F Use technology to extend the University'sinstructional activities throughout the State and improve thequality of instruction and advising delivered to students both onand off campus.

Action F1 Develop facilities, technical, and professional supporton all campuses to facilitate the use of media in instruction,including traditional audio-visual, video, computer,

telecommunications, and multimedia services.F1 Responsibility Campuses, CIO/CODIT.F1 Timeframe 1993-97

Action F2 Include in the promotion and tenure process recognitionand rewards for faculty efforts to improve the quality and rangeof instruction through the use of information technologies.F2 Responsibility Council of Senior Executives, Faculty.F2 Timeframe 1992-94

Action F3 Develop demonstration centers on University campuses toshow faculty the range of applications of technology ininstruction and to facilitate the systemwide sharing of

developments, discoveries, and experience. These centers should besupported by donations from manufacturers and vendors to thegreatest extent possible.F3 Responsibility Campuses, CIO/CODIT.F3 Timeframe 1992-94

Action F4 Develop policies that address crucial issues relating toinstructional technology and distance education, such as:ownership of instructional materials developed; workload andcompensation; responsibility for funding and providing academicsupport services; responsibility for funding technical support;determination of which instructional programs are to be deliveredat which locations through which techniques; and accreditation of

self-paced, individualized learning.F4 Responsibility Council of Senior Executives, Office of Planningand Policy, Campuses, Extension and Outreach Offices, Faculty,Unions.F4 Timeframe 1992-94

.c2.Research Support



StrategicObjective G Provide University researchers with access to state-of-the-art technology tools and support their use.

Action G1 Provide access to supercomputing and visualizationresources at low costs to facilitate the adoption of thesetechnologies as a routine tool in research.G1 Responsibility CIO/CODIT, VP for Research and GraduateEducation, Advisory Committees, Faculty.G1 Timeframe 1992-93

Action G2 Develop technical support resources to aid researchersin the use of workstation, supercomputing, visualization,parallelization, and emerging research technologies.G2 Responsibility CIO/CODIT, VP for Research and GraduateEducation.G2 Timeframe 1993-97

.c2.Administrative Computing

StrategicObjective H Provide the university community with timely,integrated access to accurate administrative information and

streamlined processing.

Action H1 Develop policies that clearly delineate responsibilityfor administrative computing and ownership of, management of,custodianship of, and access to institutional data.H1 Responsibility CIO/CODIT, University Executive Council, Officeof Planning and Policy, Advisory Committees.H1 Timeframe 1991-92

Action H2 Develop accessible, accurate, and secure systemwidedatabases with systemwide data dictionaries for major applicationswhile preserving the autonomy of campus-unique applications.H2 Responsibility CIO/CODIT, Institutional Research Office,

Campuses.H2 Timeframe 1992-95

Action H3 Deliver student, fiscal, human resources, and budgetinformation systems that provide the University community withdistributed, timely, convenient access to required information.H3 Responsibility University Executives, CIO/CODIT, Campuses.H3 Timeframe 1992-96

Action H4 Integrate administrative information systems with on-line forms processing (Purchase Orders, Requisitions, Personnel 5-B) for more correct and responsive transaction processing.

H4 Responsibility University Executive Council, CIO/CODIT,Campuses.H4 Timeframe 1993-97

.c2.Public Service

StrategicObjective I Utilize information technology as a means to serve thecitizenry of Hawaii.



Action I1 Develop policies and guidelines regarding appropriateservices to be provided by the University and any necessarychargeback and fee structures.I1 Responsibility Office of Technology Transfer and EconomicDevelopment, Library, CIO/CODIT, University Relations, ExtensionOffices.I1 Timeframe 1991-95

Action I2 Make existing University information resources availableto the public as appropriate, according to established policiesand guidelines.I2 Responsibility Office of Technology Transfer and EconomicDevelopment, Library, CIO/CODIT, University Relations, ExtensionOffices.I2 Timeframe 1991-95

Action I3 Develop appropriate information services for the publicand private sector and support the State's efforts in economicdevelopment and diversification.I3 Responsibility Office of Technology Transfer and EconomicDevelopment, Library, CIO/CODIT, University Relations, ExtensionOffices.I3 Timeframe 1991-95

.c.APPENDIXDEVELOPING THE PLAN

In March, 1990 University of Hawaii President Albert J. Simonecreated a new systemwide Council of Directors of InformationTechnology and, within its charge, asked that group to develop astrategic plan for information technology for the University. TheCouncil solicited input from Executives, Deans, Directors, andProvosts throughout the system on issues and process, and alsoworked with the Information Technology Advisory Committee.

At an early stage it was clear that a) the work would have to be

divided up into subcommittees with a broad range of participation;and b) a draft would have to be submitted for review by the entireuniversity community. Seven subcommittees were established, withrepresentation from all campuses including members of the student,faculty, and staff communities. Each subcommittee developed abrief report highlighting the key issues and recommendations inits area. The chairs of the seven subcommittees then met as asteering committee to synthesize the written and unwritten work ofthe subcommittees into this draft plan.

The draft plan was submitted for review and comment to theUniversity Executive Council, Dean, Directors, Provosts, facultysenates, and student governments on all campuses. On the Manoa

campus the availability of the draft was widely advertised throughthe University Bulletin and student newspaper. The InformationTechnology Advisory Committee conducted an open forum to discussthe issues and recommendations.

The draft plan was then modified to incorporate the comments,suggestions, and concerns raised by the University community inresponse to the early draft. On relatively few issues was thereserious difference of opinion with individual people who submittedcomments. In those cases this plan reflects the strong beliefs of



the Steering Committee and the Council of Directors of InformationTechnology.

The seven subcommittees and their members were:

Access

Issues relating to providing appropriate access to equipment,networks, and information; e.g. library resources, universalelectronic mail for students; bulletin boards; access to databasesand documents; student and faculty access to administrativeinformation about themselves; access to institutional informationsuch as directories, calendars, program information, schedules,job openings; access to some level of equipment such as computersand printers in public labs.

Access Chair John Haak, Charles Aoki, Ken Herrick, Stephen Itoga,Stephen Odo, Rod Reynolds, Gary Shibuya, Carol Tenopir, DanWedemeyer, Keith Workman.

Research

Providing supercomputer capability; hardware and software for

visualization; graphic/publication output support; specializedconsulting for vectorization, etc.

Research Chair Gerard Fryer, Dick Chadwick, John Head, KenHensarling, John Starkus, Tjet Sun, George Wilkens.

Instruction

Equipment, support and incentives for faculty to integratetechnology into the curriculum; relation to tenure and promotionprocess; technology required in classrooms; video productioncapabilities; distance education and technology.

Instruction Chair Mike Pecsok, Mike Albright, Geoff Ashton,Walter Creed, Curtis Ho, Bert Kimura, Shirley Metcalf, PaulaMochida, Hae Okimoto, Mark Slattery, Tom Speitel, Herb Ziegler.

Networking

Inter- and intra-campus architectures; cost allocation and/orrecovery; network management; access toregional/national/international networks; intrastate and externalvideo connectivity.

Networking Chair Walter Yee, Wyatt Barbee, Jeff Blomberg,Eric Flower, Ralph Freese, Bob Hirata, Dan Ishii, Henry Ito, DavidLassner, Steven Ledward, Scott Masuno, Torben Nielsen, Amr Oloufa.

Support

Establishment of "standards" for hardware, software, networkingand provision of support in selection, procurement, installation,maintenance, upgrading, training, usage, and integration with



centralized facilities/databases.

Support Chair Judy Kautz, Milton Cha, Gary MacMillan, HarryPartika, Dennis Taga, Richard Weiss, Rich Yamane, Russell Yost,Jonathan Yuen.

Infrastructure

Optimal organizational structure for information technology; howcentralized should funding/support be; what facilities are needed;policy development; human resources problems in informationtechnology support in the university.

Infrastructure Chair David Lassner, Jean Ehrhorn, MitchelGomes, Milton Higa, Dan Ishii, Judy Kautz, Gayle Komata, MikeUnebesami, Walter Yee.

Administrative Computing

Single-image access to information; decentralized access tocentralized databases; strategic systems; electronic formsprocessing.

Administrative Computing Chair Drue McGinnes, Sylvia Higashi,Henry Ito, Jan Joyer, Ken Nakahara, Gary Shibuya, Dennis Taga.

university of hawaii strategic plan for information technology (162321182)

Documents