Each academic department selects a faculty Tech Rep as its liaison to the Academic IT program. Their names, along with those of the Library Representatives, appear below in Section III, Becoming a Model Citizen in the Borough of Brooklyn, The Library Representatives & Technology Representatives.
In 2002-2003, ACAC (AIT's faculty advisory committee) took an exciting new turn: now, all the department Technology Representatives are also ACAC members. Below, a chart showing ACAC's executive committee, followed by the annual report of ACAC chair, the able and affable David Bloomfield.
| Annual Report of the Advisory Committee on Academic Computing |
June 22, 2004
Dear Prof. Higginbotham:
Thank you for again permitting me to chair the Advisory Committee on Academic Computing (ACAC) during 2003-2004. ACAC continues to significantly increase faculty engagement in academic computing activities on campus and for that we are grateful for your continued support.
During 2003-04, participation by Departmental Technology Representatives on ACAC averaged approximately 12 members per meeting. While this was a relatively good showing (you may remember that as recently as two years ago, meetings averaged approximately 4 members), attendance was hampered by a number of extrinsic factors, most notably the new Club Hours schedule which created numerous conflicts with other campus activities, notably Department Meetings. The Technology Representative system of ACAC membership instituted in 2002-03 seems to have taken hold so that there appears to be an assumption that Tech Reps will attend ACAC meetings and, more importantly, take an active role in communicating departmental technology concerns through our Committee and, in a new approach, communicating AIT and ITS matters back to their departments. Examples of this innovation were three excellent presentations, two by Sylvie Richards on copyright in Web site authoring and Web site accessibility, respectively, and one by Mark Gold on ITS matters, that greatly enhanced faculty understanding of these issues. Supporting materials, including a CD version of Mark's presentation, enabled ACAC members and others not in attendance to share this crucial information.
Our subcommittee work continues to be a forceful vehicle for faculty reflection and advocacy in College technology issues. In 2003-04 we had four subcommittees, with the following faculty participating:
| Executive Committee | Technology Planning for New Science Building | AIT Liaison | Promotion of Student & Faculty Use of Technology |
| David Bloomfield Robert Scott Barbara Rosenfeld Alfred Rosenberger Todd Holden Vinit Parmar Yehuda Klein George Brunner | Lori Scarlatos, Chair Alfred Rosenberger Michael Bergen | Yehuda Klein, Chair Todd Holden | George Brunner, Chair Robert Scott Michael Bergen |
The Executive Committee provided guidance for ACAC agenda items and participated in other campus technology initiatives, including the Teaching and Learning Technology Roundtable. Our Technology Planning for the New Science Building group initiated ACAC dialog with the planning committee concerned with the Roosevelt Hall renovation. AIT Liaison and Promotion of Student & Faculty Use of Technology initiated surveys of all departments concerning priorities in technology training, technical assistance, and hardware/software needs. The survey results will be available in September, 2004.
Of equal importance is the regular dialog that ACAC has established with both AIT and ITS. I believe that ACAC meetings have become a key forum for alerting personnel in each area of faculty concerns and for AIT/ITS to communicate issues back to the departments. More regular and early alerts to the campus community of network issues are an example of how this forum has provided a welcome outcome. A problem with laptop carts was also identified and corrected through this process.
In summary, ACAC continues to play an important role in helping Brooklyn College to be a hospitable environment for instructional technology use and innovation. By serving as an important medium for communication between faculty and the rest of the campus engaged in this undertaking, we have created a strong infrastructure for continued growth in this area. Thank you again for your support of our activities. I am also grateful to Sandra Stumbo for her assistance, as well as the wise counsel and engagement of Howard Spivak and Nicholas Irons in ACAC matters. Finally, ACAC is its faculty membership and so I end this Annual Report by acknowledging the hours of time and effort that the Department Technology Representatives have given to this cause.
Respectfully submitted, Prof. David C. Bloomfield, Chair Advisory Committee on Academic Computing
This year's Faculty Fellow was David Bloomfield (Education; chairing ACAC)