REPORT OF THE TASK FORCE ON ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS
June 10, 1997
OUR ASSIGNMENT
. . . [T]he charge to the Task Force on Electronic Communications is to identify and come to consensus on the various requirements in the University community for . . .communication [with large groups of people by e-mail, websites, and other information technologies] over the next three years, and to do so without reference to the technical capabilities of the University's current systems. The task force should focus primarily on internal University communications, although it is appropriate to explore issues involving both University and non-University senders and recipients, as time permits. The task force will suggest which of these requirements are best accomplished by techniques characterized as either "information push" or "information pull." These terms refer to technologies by which a sender can direct information to recipients (information push) or technologies by which the initiative to get information lies with the recipient rather than the sender (information pull). The task force will also identify other characteristics of the requirements, such as timeliness of notification, likely frequencies of communication, and the like, and it will prioritize the requirements.
INTRODUCTION
The importance of electronic communications to the University has grown exponentially over the past few years, as for the nation at large. The Task Force on Electronic Communications assumes that the trend toward information technology in addition to or in place of traditional means of communication can only grow in the next three years -- and, indeed, recommends substantial expansion in selected areas for reasons noted below. As a result, current uses of electronic communication will multiply, while new uses for readily available and emerging technologies will continue to challenge our resources.
That said, we must emphasize that expanding technology for communication should not be an end in itself. Rather, improved methods of communication are but new tools that help advance the University's fundamental missions of teaching, research and public service.
HOW WILL ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION BE USED TO DISTRIBUTE INFORMATION AT THE UNIVERSITY IN THE NEXT THREE YEARS?
Economic and efficiency considerations, combined with an institutional commitment to engage faculty, staff, and students more fully in the life of this community, will push the University into using electronic technologies as an essential means of internal communication. The increasing costs of traditional publications and of their labor-intensive delivery will lead the University to be more selective in their use, such as for external communications, University-wide publications, formal messages, and notifications that must reach all employees or students, regardless of their access to computers. A wide array of electronic choices -- electronic mail, mailing lists, newsgroups, World Wide Web (WWW), various types of "push" technologies, and audio and image technologies -- now allows the University to develop policies and procedures defining the most appropriate means of delivery for each type of communication.
Appended to this report is a matrix of the various ways the task force recommends that electronic communications be used over the next three years. While "consensus" on these issues seems an unattainable goal, we believe our conclusions about appropriate methods of delivery for various communications do reflect the prevailing view of the University community. The applications considered can be separated, with some inevitable overlap, into academic, administrative, and community uses.
Academic Uses
The University already depends greatly on electronic communication to serve its scholars, teachers, and students in on-Grounds and distance education programs. Local data documenting current academic usage or helpful for projecting future demand are nearly non-existent, largely because academic administration is decentralized and web-based work by individual faculty or students need not be linked to the University's central site. Nationally, about 10 percent of faculty are said to use the web for instruction; several U.Va. faculty specialists in instructional technology estimate that classroom usage here is considerably above that average. We do know that
• the number of Toolkit-created websites more than doubled this spring to 61, compared to 28 a year ago;
• 80 course-related sites -- generally regarded as just the tip of the iceberg -- are registered centrally at the University's main site (http://www.virginia.edu/web-courses.html);
• about 20 percent of last year's entering undergraduates set up web pages during their first semester; and that
• the Multimedia Resource Center served more than 400 teaching faculty and graduate students last year, providing support ranging from bulk scanning to individual instruction in advanced web projects. The University Libraries and ITC's training division also offer workshops and classes for computer users, with total attendance of more than 15,000 in 1995-96.
Students (and the institution's accrediting bodies) expect the University to prepare them to meet the technological requirements of today's job market. Faculty and students increasingly remain in contact with colleagues and fellow students by e-mail and web-based technologies. In the next few years, more faculty will communicate via the Internet and provide class resources on the WWW or via network-based video, in much the same way as they now routinely place paper files on reserve for their classes in the libraries. A small number may even convene discussions via the Internet. In lieu of traditional papers, growing numbers of students will use the web to present projects incorporating a wealth of digital media. As classrooms are retrofitted, more students and faculty will consult international as well as local library resources via the Internet during established class times. In sum, expanded use of image, sound, and video files for educational purposes will increase the "bandwidth" needs of the infrastructure.
Administrative Uses
With operating budget constraints, the increasing use of inter-departmental teams for process simplification and other restructuring projects, and an awareness of the environmental impacts of paper-based transactions, many administrative units of the University want to use electronic communications whenever feasible. The task force anticipates that computer users in the University community will soon expect, for example, e-mail delivery of registration or bursar's account notices to large groups of individual students, overdue and recall notices to library patrons, confirmation of direct deposits to employees, and similar "official" notifications.
Nevertheless, paper communications will continue to be the primary method of delivery for some members of the University community without ready or regular access to computers. Unit heads in those areas will bear a particular responsibility, as electronic communications become more widespread, to ensure that employees are kept informed on issues important to their employment and to their membership in the University community.
Community Uses
By "community uses" the task force refers to communication that is not strictly required for academic or administrative purposes, but which builds the University as a community. These include a wide range of announcements regarding events, both informal and formal, sponsored by the University and its constituent parts, as well as communications and discussions among individual students, faculty, and staff. Community uses may also include providing information with commercial content, but under tightly regulated conditions. It seems appropriate to allow certain commercial communications -- such as advertisements that provide revenues to support student electronic publications or "want ads" that facilitate transactions among members of the University community -- in clearly labeled locations in the University's electronic environment.
ISSUES/RECOMMENDATIONS
Information overload. A fundamental principle in our thinking about each type of electronic communication is that we want to encourage faculty, staff, and students to rely on it, rather than to abandon it as just another nuisance. University policy should therefore define quite carefully the kinds of information appropriate for more intrusive "push" methods of delivery, such as e-mail or voice mail, and communications that people should receive only on request or seek voluntarily. Many categories of information (e.g., announcements of events, job openings, news, and training opportunities) might be provided by a combination of mailing lists, newsgroups, closed-circuit television, and other forms of "pull" methods. Other voluntary methods such as PointCast or NetCast could be used for general information dissemination/reception by those with sufficient computer capacity.
We do encourage the delivery of information by multiple media, as appropriate, to maximize the chance that it will be read by the intended recipients. More than with hard-copy information, electronic communication is a living, easily modifiable medium. Methods of transmitting messages should be seen as complementary. For example, short-term, widely broadcast messages sent initially by e-mail can be converted to websites as people recognize the existence of a source of information. Sunset provisions can help control information that is becoming dated or should be placed in less immediate locations accessed by "pull" technology.
Recommendation 1. Adopt the draft Policy on Using Electronic Communication for Large-scale Notifications and Distribution of Information that is appended to this report. Distribute it widely within the University community, along with examples from the attached matrix of communication types and attributes.
Recommendation 2. Continue development and testing of a central and comprehensive list of individual e-mail addresses and other demographic data that would be readily available as authorized by that policy. Develop a maintenance plan to keep it current.
Recommendation 3. Appoint a process simplification or other implementation group to develop technical and procedural guidelines governing the use of more segmented mailing lists, whether centrally maintained or held by other "owners," and whether standing lists or groups created for an ad hoc or one-time purpose. These steps should maximize decentralization in the sending of most notices, so that targeted audiences can be defined as specifically as possible.
Recommendation 4. Take steps to make the oversight and managerial responsibilities of mailing list owners better understood. Provide a handbook that spells out relevant policies and procedures, as well as available ITC support services. Written and on-line materials for all users should stress the importance of preserving a valuable institutional resource through judicious use.
Recommendation 5. Encourage departments and organizations with information of general interest (e.g., Human Resources, Governmental and Community Relations, the University Libraries, the Office of Career Planning and Placement, Student Council) to develop, maintain, and publicize listservs, websites, and other "pull" delivery systems. Provide technical consultants to assist them, as needed.
Recommendation 6. Explore the means by which the University can further enrich, maintain, and publicize a central web-based repository including, but not limited to, University news, a master calendar, announcements, public mailing lists open to subscribers, and other information resources.
Network Access. Providing ready and "equal" access to the University's electronic network will continue to be a challenge during the next three years. Both on- and off-Grounds, several trends signal significant bottlenecks in the making. From the students' perspective, the completion of network wiring projects (especially in the residence halls), the growing number of academic assignments in all disciplines requiring network-based research or communication, and students' increased rates of computer ownership, whether on- or off-Grounds, have combined to produce greater demand for network access than ever before. In 1996, 82 percent of graduate students and 69 percent of undergraduates reported that they owned a personal computer. While the public computer labs may no longer be the main connection to network resources for most on-Grounds residents, the labs remain under pressure as training centers, as providers of higher-end computing technology, and as the primary access point for the majority of University students who live off-Grounds and may not be willing (or able) to pay for alternative connectivity.
Faculty members, administrators, and other employees working at home or traveling face similar dilemmas if they need network access to develop course materials, to collaborate on research or administrative projects, to telecommute, or to communicate with colleagues. In 1996, 78 percent of faculty and 54 percent of staff reported owning a personal computer, although not necessarily equipped for communication or network access. In an informal survey of one U.Va. department's staff about a pilot telecommuting project, one-third said they would not participate because of the added personal cost (about $20 per month) to assure dial-in access; another third said they did not have the appropriate computer equipment at home.
Finally, if the University makes an institutional commitment to encourage "computer literacy" among all members of the community (see Training/Education section below), staff seeking access to training programs may further increase the demand for electronic communication resources. Strategies to alleviate access bottlenecks must take into account both the on- and off-Grounds dimensions of these issues.
Recommendation 7. Continue advising students about the benefits of owning their own computers and equipping them for network connection, while making clear that computer ownership is not required for success at the University. In addition to the materials sent to entering students, encourage the Office of Admission to provide this information in contacts with prospective students. Accelerate the study of ways to minimize added costs of computer ownership and off-Grounds connection to students, perhaps through some combination of leasing, borrowing, and/or low-cost loan programs.
Recommendation 8. Continue support of the public lab system as an important part of the University's long-term electronic facilities plan. Expand the concept of varying electronic facilities, e.g. plugs for laptops; interactive information kiosks; and computer workstations reservable for either short- or longer-term use. Track and respond to usage patterns in dormitory and other public labs.
Recommendation 9. Expand the fee-for-premium-service opportunities for departments or individuals who require dedicated lines or reliably convenient network connections from remote locations. In departments where certain tasks are appropriate for telecommuting, explore the feasibility of subsidizing the costs of equipment and/or network access.
Training/education. The task force believes that most members of the University community are receptive to expanded electronic communication. The culture has already changed dramatically over the preceding three years, in part because of the "grassroots" nature of the WWW and the ease with which individual faculty, staff, and students can create information on it -- a development the task force applauds.
Recognizing the extent of that change, ITC has already shifted attention to support of department-based computing. For incoming students, a required session on using technology at the University is now part of their orientation. In 1995-96, registration for ITC's short courses and other training sessions increased 68 percent over the year before. However, to implement our recommendations for more regular and systematic use of electronic communication, we know that even more training of individuals will be required. A growing number of jobs at the University will demand proficiency with specific and changing applications. Even where computer literacy is not a job-related requirement, it increasingly defines a society of haves and have-nots. The institution therefore has some obligation to make entry-level computer training readily available, just as it does with adult reading literacy programs.
Recommendation 10. State computing skills necessary for satisfactory job performance in all applicable position descriptions.
Recommendation 11. Encourage supervisors to identify and fund, where necessary, opportunities for employees to upgrade computing skills in an environment where change is a constant.
Recommendation 12. Offer entry-level computing classes on a pilot basis at times and places convenient to second- and third-shift employees, and work with unit supervisors to identify employees most likely to benefit from such training.
Resources. Although the task force was charged to develop recommendations for the next three years without regard to available resources, we did keep that constraint in the backs of our minds to avoid being completely unrealistic. A common thread running through our discussions has been the need for adequate network resources and, in most cases, for updated desktop computer capability to support recommended communication applications.
Recommendation 13. Increase the carrying capacity of the electronic infrastructure of the University in anticipation of projected widespread use of resource-hungry applications.
Recommendation 14. Begin long-term financial planning and reallocation of significant resources, both centrally and at school and departmental levels, to support desktop computer upgrades on a regular basis.
Recommendation 15. Identify resources over the next three years to expand the use of relatively new and emerging communication technologies, such as PointCast or NetCast (for customized news and information), whiteboard video communication (for academic and administrative discussions), and closed-circuit television to more University buildings (to allow virtual town meetings and delivery of video for academic assignments).
Related policies/concerns. Federal and state laws and University regulations concerning privacy, intellectual property, security of systems, and proprietary information are among the larger issues raised by the task force. As these are broad concerns that extend beyond this group's specific charge, we have not addressed them in detail.
* * * *
Task Force members
Louise Dudley, director, University Relations; chair
Ann Antrobus, University registrar
Kira Attwood, SEAS student; chair, Student IT Advisory Committee
Jean Cooper, systems librarian, University Library
Mair de Voursney, director, special academic programs, School of Medicine
Rick Fore, director, information services, Division of Continuing Education
Marilyn Lockhart, process simplification analyst, office of the V. P. for Management and Budget
D.R. Odio, McIntire student; Student Council
Bryan Pfaffenberger, associate professor,Technology, Culture & Communication, SEAS
Dan Philippon, doctoral student, English department
Judy Thomas, technology adviser, Teaching + Technology Initiative
Lori Wright, executive secretary, School of Nursing
ex officio
Chip German, director, IT policy and planning
Jim Jokl, director of communications, ITC
Sam Miller, assistant to the Vice President for Student Affairs
Tim Sigmon, director of advanced technology, ITC
APPENDIX: DRAFT POLICY
Electronic mail, web technologies, and voice mail at the University of Virginia are important resources for academic, administrative, and extra-curricular communications; indeed, they have become essential elements in the University's day-to-day activities. A major reason for this in the case of e-mail, in addition to the obvious benefits of speed and increased accessibility, is the "targeted" and more private nature of individually addressed electronic messages. Those same attributes of this "push" technology, however, raise questions about the appropriateness of its use in various situations--questions that must be resolved before the University can develop a sound plan for electronic communications over the next three years and beyond.
The Task Force on Electronic Communications believes the following policy statement reflects the prevailing view of the University community about electronic "mass mailings" and recommends its adoption.
Draft Policy on
Using Electronic Communications for Large-scale Notifications and Distribution of Information
System-wide mailings, such as to all e-mail account holders or to the voice mail of all employees and students, should be reserved for truly urgent and rare emergency notices, as determined by the president or the executive vice president. The frequency, content, and other characteristics of most messages are inappropriate for such wholesale delivery (see attached matrix). University departments, organizations, and individuals should avoid regular mass-mailings by a method whose value can easily be undermined, especially if recipients are unwilling to cope with a large volume of unsolicited messages and abandon its use.
With that caveat, it should be possible, when appropriate, to direct messages to all e-mail account holders (or to customized segments of that group) without undue delay or cost. Authority to use the entire master list currently under construction by ITC should rest with the president, executive vice president, or their designees. Other vice presidents, deans, heads of major units, or their designees may approve the creation and use of subsets of that list within their areas in accord with this policy.
Segmented electronic mail distributions, whether to groups extracted from that central database or assembled manually, can be considered in three broad categories:
1. Communications to involuntary standing lists that comprise specific, identifiable groups, such as course members, committees, school or department staffs, and student organizations. Except in unusual circumstances, recipients may not remove their names from such lists.
2. Involuntary ad hoc communications of two sorts: (a) messages with personal content sent to a large number of recipients who do not form a continuing group, such as holders of overdue library books or parking tickets, recipients of direct payroll deposits, or returning students who have not registered; or (b) one-time-only unsolicited messages to wide categories of potential list members, such as all third-year students or all Health Care Professionals, usually to provide information on how to subscribe to future mailings. Recipients may choose to remove their e-mail addresses from (b), as they may do regarding hard-copy publication of directory information; they do not have that option with (a).
3. Communications to voluntary lists to which individuals subscribe and from which they may remove their address at any time. Interest groups, service providers to employees and students, extra-curricular organizations, and other groups that prefer to compile and maintain "client" lists beyond their own membership should do so on a voluntary subscription basis.
Owners of both involuntary and voluntary standing lists should be expected to develop, circulate, and monitor compliance with written operating procedures and guidelines for the use of their lists. (See, for example, attached guidelines developed as part of a pilot project in the School of Medicine.) List owners are encouraged to consider the benefits of controlling access to large lists, e.g., a school's faculty or students in on-Grounds housing. This applies whether the list has been created for one-time use or maintained as a standing list, whether compiled manually or from the central database, and whether involuntary or by subscription. Moderating a list allows judgments to be made about the appropriateness of messages sent to list members; it also saves system resources by permitting staggered delivery in off-hours and by preventing mass replies.
Messages presumably of interest to even broader audiences should be directed first to deans, department heads, or other list owners, who would then be responsible for the further notification of their constituents. That notification might occur either by a system of forwarding messages through an e-mail "tree" or, in some circumstances, by granting permission to send directly to persons within certain areas. A directory of moderated lists, including contact information and guidelines for their use established by the list owners, should be compiled (with the approval of each list owner) to assist with this process.
Requests for assistance with large-scale mailings--either as a prospective list owner or as an applicant to send a large-scale mailing--should be directed to postmaster@virginia.edu or to the office of the University's chief information officer, (804) 982-2249. In any case, if a proposed mailing is to more than 400 names, the timing of its delivery should be arranged with the U.Va. postmaster.
Members of the University community are strongly encouraged to use other electronic methods, such as interactive web sites, newsgroups, and closed-circuit television for sending and receiving notices of general interest, announcements of events, or similar information. University departments and organizations are encouraged to establish listservs or other targeted systems for delivering public information in specified categories such as job openings, academic symposiums, or employee benefits to those who choose to subscribe.
All electronic communications are expected to comply with relevant federal and state laws, as well as University regulations and policies, including those governing public computing resources, security considerations, and ethics in computing. The texts of these policies and handbooks for faculty and students outlining responsible computer usage at the University are available on-line at http://www.itc.virginia.edu/department/policies/. Revocation of one's network access is among the possible sanctions for violating the terms of these policies.
DRAFT E-MAIL GUIDELINES IN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE
With many groups seeking to send information to our faculty we run the risk of creating an information overload. If too much is sent out faculty will automatically ignore all mass mailings, which would be to nobody's advantage. The following guidelines have been developed with the goal of balancing the institutional needs of disseminating information with the needs for privacy of our faculty.
GUIDELINES:
All announcements must be of general, immediate interest to all faculty. The mailing lists may not be used to sell products or services. All messages should be no more than 100 words, which is about 10 lines. Mass-mailing requests should be limited to no more than one message perweek. You may include an optional reference to a web page or newsgroup for additional information at the bottom of your message. Below are examples of how to do that.
Examples
1. For more information about the Health Sciences Library see our web page at:
http://www.med.virginia.edu/hs-library/
2. To find out more about the neuroscience course see our newsgroup: news:uva.med.medneuro
3. Please see our article on the uva.med.general newsgroup: news:E8FJ3J.FAC@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
Note that the last example would take a reader straight to a specific article within a newsgroup if that URL is pasted into either Netscape or Internet Explorer. The above example may not work right now, for the article may have been deleted. To find out a specific article's URL, use
Internet Explorer as a newsreader and view the article on screen. An address of the article like the one above will be displayed in the address field at the top of the screen. To make a reference to that message, copy that address and paste it into your e-mail message.
Using the formats above will allow some readers to simply double-click on the URL to jump directly to your web page or newsgroup posting. If a reader does not have the latest generation of mail readers this will not work, but she or he can copy the address, then paste it into Netscape to jump to the web page or newsgroup.
One newsgroup has been set up specifically for general announcements to the Health Sciences Center - uva.med.general. This is an appropriate place to post your more lengthy messages if you do not want to go to the trouble of creating a web page. Be aware, however that messages are automatically deleted after two weeks on most newsgroups. For information that has a longer life a web page is a much better alternative, and you can also control formatting more accurately. ITC and the HSC library offer classes on publishing web pages. The schedule of classes can be found in the library's newsletter, Inside Information, which is available on the web at http://www.med.virginia.edu/hs-library/newsletter/
Thanks for your cooperation in working within these guidelines. Let me know if you have any questions.
John Jackson
Office of Medical Education, Box 555
(804)924-1528
jjackson@virginia.edu
fax(804)982-4030