Information technology, Georgia. University System of Georgia. Board of Regents. Office of Information and Instructional Technology

News Bulletin Archive:

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

August - October 1995: Volume 7, Number 2
Contents
z From the Vice Chancellor z Faculty Development Workshop, Connecting Teachers and Technology z Banner Update z Copyright Concern z Institutions Pursuing Instructional Television Fixed Service z Information Technology Training Available Fall Quarter z Publishing Information
From the Vice Chancellor
*** The systemwide Business Systems Selection Committee has had the opportunity to comment on the first draft of the RFI (Request for Information) compiled by the consulting firm of KPMG Peat Marwick. The full committee has been divided into focus groups representing the following areas: General, Financial, Budget, Payroll, Human Resources, and Technical. The smaller focus groups with representatives from DeKalb College, Georgia Institute of Technology, Georgia State University, West Georgia College, Valdosta State University, Floyd College, Medical College of Georgia, Georgia Southern University, Kennesaw College, and the central office met September 28 to review comments on the draft. The second draft will be reviewed on October 13 at DeKalb.
*** Several products and services identified in the student initiative have been purchased: EPOS Voice Response System, FOCUS, BANNERQuest, EDI Smart, and Georgia Career Information System. The OIIT is working closely with each institution to provide equipment or equivalent funds to establish e-mail for students and faculty. Items which can be implemented more efficiently by individual institutions will be handled by direct grant. Training for FOCUS has begun, and other training is being planned. A University System committee is working on the implementation of electronic transcripting.
*** GALILEO (GeorgiA LIbrary LEarning Online) went live September 20 on University System campuses. Chancellor Portch and Governor Miller will introduce the system to the news media in early November. GALILEO provides access to electronic full-text databases, System library catalogs, Internet resources, and System resources (e.g., University System of Georgia Web).
*** The Division of Academic Services and Distance Learning has three new employees: Ms. Susan Pledger, Secretary; Ms. Kimberly Braxton, Instructional Technology Support Specialist; and Ms. Andrea Wilson, Conference Facilitator.
*** The Division of Administration announces personnel changes. Two new positions have been filled by Ms. Diedre Jenkins, Administrative Secretary and Ms. Deborah Starnes, Accounting Clerk. Ms. Lisa Ballard has been promoted to Accounting Assistant. Additionally, the Division of Administration has relocated to Suite 1204, West Tower, 200 Piedmont Avenue SW, Atlanta 30334; phone 404/657-1829, GIST 249-1829.
J.B. Mathews, Vice Chancellor

[Return to Contents]
Faculty Development Workshop, Connecting Teachers and Technology
by Ann H. Tallant, North Georgia College
This summer's Connecting Teachers and Technology faculty development workshop offered participants a valuable opportunity to share skills and ideas with colleagues in their own and other fields. Sixty-one faculty members from the University System spent upwards of twelve hours a day for two weeks in intensive training in what was, for many, unaccustomed territory. Many felt a surge of empathy for their students, as they themselves encountered the kind of confusion that often accompanies immersion in unfamiliar material.
The workshop offered participants a quick taste and tryout of a number of potentially powerful tools for redesigning teaching techniques. Bringing widely varying levels of expertise to the endeavor, participants assisted one another in a directed exploration of the Macintosh platform. That done, participants delved into e-mail, Internet usage including Netscape and newsgroups, presentation software, multimedia production, GSAMS, and copyright issues, among other topics.
Participants found many of the above features of the workshop particularly useful and successful. Of course, they also witnessed the down side of using technology-the equipment failures, bottlenecks, access difficulties-that are inevitable with sophisticated equipment. (The OIIT staff is to be commended for the relative smoothness with which the workshop progressed: for a temporary setup, the labs and GSAMS classroom were remarkably stable.)
Throughout the workshop, collegiality was the order of the day. Most remarkable was the collaboration demanded by the group projects in which participants were involved. Divided into small, subject-area groups, participants explored numerous possibilities for teaching material that is typically difficult for their students to master. They shared techniques they had tried, seen, read about, or just mulled over. Then they looked for the best ways to incorporate technology into the presentation and teaching of that material. What resulted was often chaostemporarily-but the exercise engaged participants in the technology, giving them practical, self-directed experience with the tools they will use in developing and revising their courses back home. And finally, groups shared their plans with one another, beginning a foundation for the "partnering" that participants are charged to do on their home campuses in the coming year.
When they do begin course development or revision, these professionals will have at their disposal a pool of knowledge to which they did not previously have access. Already some faculty are employing more technology-the World Wide Web, electronic presentations, e-mail-in the delivery of instruction and the structure of their courses.
As the workshop ended, many participants expressed a desire for ongoing training and follow-up sessions. Having begun to achieve a higher level of proficiency with skills in which they were particularly interested, the teachers recognized a need for more of this type of group learning. Expect to see these faculty members enthusiastically taking on their assigned role of partner with other teachers at their institutions and pressing for greater availability of training and equipment.
The workshop was admirably choreographed by Dr. Kris Biesinger and her staff at OIIT. Their patient, resourceful, and tireless efforts are deeply appreciated by the workshop participants.
[Return to Contents]
Banner Update
by Debora Exum, OIIT
Considerable progress has been made with implementing BANNER in the University System. Armstrong State College and Brunswick College both have two quarters of registration under their belts. With this success, Armstrong is moving ahead with plans to implement portions of the voice response system in January 1996. Other schools with BANNER modules in production include Georgia Institute of Technology, West Georgia College, Clayton State College, Valdosta State University, and Macon College.

BANNER Recruiting, Admissions, Catalog, Schedule, Housing, and Accounts Receivable are going into action this fall at institutions well into building and testing these modules for fall production. Within the next two months, fifteen University System institutions should have some part of the BANNER Student System in production on their campus. By February 1996, these fifteen schools will also be in production with BANNER Financial Aid.
Sixteen additional University System institutions are gearing up to begin implementation in January 1996. These schools plan to perform their first registration in May 1997 for the summer quarter.
The OIIT BANNER team's efforts have focused on providing functional support, developing documentation, and preparing to move into a GUI (graphical user interface) environment with the BANNER software.
[Return to Contents]
Copyright Concern
This article was originally printed in the Rochester Institute of Technology ISC News, September 1993, and has been made available electronically by CAUSE, the professional association for managing and using information technology in higher education, with permission of the publisher.
Top Ten Reasons for Illegally Copying Software (and why none of them are good enough) by Vince Incardona, Academic Computing and User Services, Rochester Institute of Technology
Okay, okay, we know you've heard it before: "Thou shalt not copy software illegally." So why are we reciting this litany again? Simple-it's because we occasionally encounter illegal software copies and we have a responsibility for reminding the RIT community that ownership of intellectual property such as software must be respected. Usually, when we confront people with the notion that maybe they shouldn't be doing this, they rationalize such copying with one or more of the following arguments. We feel compelled to point out why none of these "defenses" are likely to hold up if you are caught:
z I'm allowed to make a backup in case something happens to it, so it must be okay to use it on another machine.
Most software is sold with the stipulation that you can do this, but a backup copy is exactly that-a backup. Vendors recommend that the copy be used for installation. The original should be safely locked away. If you then do anything other than store the copy for safekeeping, it would be very reasonable to conclude that you made the copy simply to avoid paying for a second license.
z I didn't copy it-a friend gave it to me.
Technically, you're right. You would not be guilty of illegally copying software in this case, although your friend would. However, since illegally copied software is viewed as stolen property, you would be considered just as culpable for receiving illegally copied software as you would be for stealing it in the first place.
z My boss/department head/instructor told me to. It's her problem.
The defense "I was just following orders" is a weak one. It does not work for soldiers who commit atrocities, it does not work for crooked politicians, it would not work if your boss ordered you to embezzle funds or commit other illegal acts, and it will not work if your boss tells you to illegally copy software. Your boss would not be able to legitimately dismiss you for insubordination because you refused to commit a crime, but you could be fired for obeying an order to do so.
z I bought the software; shouldn't I be able to do what I want with it?
Software is seldom ever sold to individuals. What is sold is a license to use the software. The terms of that license are almost always spelled out on the outside of the package, and they tell you what you may and may not do with that software. When you break open the package, the law assumes that you have agreed to abide by those terms.

z It's not like I'm robbing somebody.
Many people do not view software as property because it is not a tangible thing that you can pick up and hold. However, not all property is tangible. Software is intellectual property, just like a song, a book, an article, a trademark, or an invention. All of these things are owned and can be bought, sold, and licensed. All of them are used to make money for the people who create them. In the case of most commercial programs, the people who have worked to create them do this work for a living. In most cases, software engineers are not millionaires; they are working people like you who have staked their livelihoods on the programs you are stealing. In a very real sense, you are taking bread from their table by making or using illegal copies.
z It's OK if you're using it for educational purposes.
If education were a justification for theft, driving instructors would be able to steal cars with impunity. While many software vendors are generous to educational institutions, this is their prerogative-not an intrinsic right granted to educators simply because they are educators. Furthermore, such generosity is firmly grounded in trust. Stealing intellectual property for educational purposes violates that trust and jeopardizes that generosity for all educators, innocent and guilty alike.
There is a doctrine known as "fair use," which allows some limited use of written materials in classrooms without permission from the copyright holders. Fair use generally applies only to sections of written works, and not the whole work. It generally does not apply to software that is copied in whole and distributed without compensation to the copyright holder. If this kind of distribution is allowed, the software license will clearly state it. Don't assume that it's allowed unless you have it in writing.
z I needed it, but the price was unreasonably high. If I had to actually pay for it, there is no way I could ever afford it.
Software prices are high for the same reason the price of houses is high: both require a lot of highly skilled labor to create. As a result, there are many in our society who need housing but cannot afford it, just as there are many who need software and cannot afford it. If a homeless person broke into your house and took up residence in your living room, you would want the police to evict that person, and they would have to do it. You might feel sorry for the person, but not to the point of abdicating your property rights. Similarly, if a software company wants to prosecute people who illegally steal their software, you can expect that they will press charges, and probably win, no matter how sorry they feel for you. Their survival may depend on it.
z I didn't know it was illegal.
Unauthorized duplication of software is a felony in New York State. State and federal laws provide for civil and criminal penalties if you are convicted. Copyrighted software carries a copyright notice on the package and displays a copyright notice when it begins execution. It would be difficult to convince a judge or jury that you had no idea that unauthorized copying was illegal unless you first convince them that you had never used the software and that you had no clue about the meaning of the word "copyright."
The mere fact that you read this far means that you can't honestly say that nobody told you that copying software without a license is illegal. And in most cases, all that has to be proven is that you should have known better, whether or not you actually did.
z It's only illegal if you get caught.
Okay, so what if you do get caught? What could you be facing? Fines, imprisonment, and civil penalties at both the federal and state level, for one thing. At the Institute level, disciplinary action may be taken up to and including suspension, in the case of students.
Software vendors have formed a group called the Software Publishers Association, and the SPA offers rewards for whistle blowers and conducts covert investigations of software piracy at large organizations. Most of the people who have been caught by an SPA audit never thought that it would happen to them. The SPA is not to be taken lightly. Since their livelihoods depend on successfully prosecuting software piracy, these people know what and whom to look for, they know how to build a case against them, they have lots of expensive lawyers to do it with, and they usually have the full cooperation of both law enforcement agencies and the organizations they are investigating. If they find out you've been stealing software, you generally don't stand a chance.
z Oh, come on, everyone is doing it.

This excuse has been used to justify everything from speeding to lynching. Yet it is by far the number one reason given for illegally copying software. The logic supposedly is that society tacitly approves of the action, even though there are laws against it. Therefore, it is morally defensible, even if it's illegal.
Think about this for a second. Approach this argument as you would if your son or daughter used it to justify something you considered wrong. This is tantamount to an assertion that you have no will of your own and that you define right and wrong simply in terms of what you see people around you doing. If you don't see yourself that way, why give everyone the impression that you do?
z The bottom line.
The bottom line is simply this: if you are copying software illegally, stop it. If you see someone else doing it, tell them to stop it. If they don't stop it, turn them in. The practice exposes you and/or the Institute to liability, jeopardizes your chances of receiving a good, legitimate deal from vendors, and compromises RIT's reputation in the business community.
[Return to Contents]
Institutions Pursuing Instructional Television Fixed Service
Instructional Television Fixed Service (ITFS), broadcasting signals from a tower to a range of approximately thirtyfive miles and another method of distance learning based upon microwave technology, has the potential to become an increasingly valuable asset to educational institutions. Typically, an educational institution will obtain an FCC license for ITFS channels and enter into an agreement with a business entity to operate the system in return for part-time use of the channels. Georgia Institute of Technology , DeKalb College, and Georgia State University have obtained FCC licenses and have jointly entered into an agreement with Wireless Cable of Atlanta to provide transmission services.
Georgia Tech plans to deliver the master's degrees it currently provides locally to business and industry sites via video-based instruction. DeKalb College offers a number of core curriculum courses over its cable channel in DeKalb County. ITFS will be used to extend the range and benefit of these courses to others in metropolitan Atlanta. Georgia State offers a variety of courses and programs in health sciences, business administration, and education via the statewide GSAMS interactive video network.
The Board of Regents recently approved a policy granting presidents of institutions authority to execute lease agreements for excess ITFS channel capacity, subject to the Chancellor's and the Attorney General's review and approval. Institutions may file for license applications during specified times; future filing periods have not yet been announced. The University of Georgia, Georgia College, and Armstrong State College have recently begun negotiating agreements and license applications.
[Return to Contents]
Information Technology Training Available Fall Quarter
Each quarter, the OIIT offers training based on the following fee scale: $25 for USG faculty and staff; $75 for nonUSG PeachNet customers; and $125 for other educational affiliation.
One-day classes offered this fall quarter include the following: INT 301: Creating World Wide Web (WWW) Pages with HTML-10/31/95; MM 401: Authorware Intermediate Training-12/4/95; NNW 201: Basics of IPX and TCP/IP in the DOS/Windows LAN Environment-12/5/95 (open only to USG faculty and staff and PeachNet customers); and NNW 401: Common Issues in Novell LAN Administration-12/6/95 (open only to USG faculty and staff and PeachNet customers).
An Oracle class sequence currently in progress is open to USG faculty and staff and follows a separate fee schedule. The fall sequence of Oracle classes began in August 1995 and will end on March 29, 1996.
For Oracle class descriptions, dates, appropriate audiences, and a class agenda, visit the System WWW (http://www.peachnet.edu.

For more information about OIIT fall quarter 1995 classes, registration, and accommodations, visit the OIIT WWW home page at http://www.peachnet.edu/oiit/ or contact Michele Oyster at 706-369-5678 (GIST prefix 285). [Return to Contents]
Publishing Information
Information Technology, The Office of Information and Instructional Technology (OIIT) News Bulletin, is published by the Board of Regents, Office of Information and Instructional Technology, 244 Washington St. SW, Atlanta, Georgia, 30334. Suggestions and contributions are solicited. Unless otherwise stated, permission to reprint articles in whole or in part is granted provided appropriate credit is given.
z Editor: Jayne Williams z Office: Georgia Southern University z E-mail: jayne_williams@oit.peachnet.edu
Top | 1989 | 1990 | 1991 | 1992 | 1993 | 1994 | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 | 1998 OIIT News Bulletin Archive | OIIT Publications Last modified: January 18, 2003