The meeting took place in the PSC in Room 411. In attendance were Gene Hastings, Wendy Huntoon, Myron Lentz, Mike McCafferty, Rick Wertheimer, and Gail Futoran as observer.
Rick started the meeting by asking if the members had received the email version of the minutes from the last meeting. He also handed out hard copies. The agenda items for the meeting were: Minutes from last meeting, nature of the DEC/TCI agreement, choice of sites - hub and spoke architecture, and scheduling the next meeting. The minutes were read and no changes were made.
Gene detailed the history of the DEC/TCI connection and Wendy added information about the current agreement, which includes a one year trial at four sites. Part of the agreement is that new equipment purchases for the four sites will be DEC equipment (PCs). However, DEC apparently has no problem working with existing equipment at the sites. Wendy stated that one of the four sites had to be the central site (PSC), leaving a decision to be made about three schools. In addition, the DEC PCs will have to support curriculum activities, and the technical staff will test that. A DEC PC will be provided to Mike and Myron for the purpose of their inspection.
Discussion of the DEC/TCI agreement included the problem of inter-operability and Myron was concerned that ChannelWorks cannot speak directly with other systems. Gene pointed out that different systems can communicate at certain levels, e.g., at the TCP/IP level. The only other system comparable to ChannelWorks is Zenith, but the Zenith system is much slower. Other elements of the discussion included how the channels would work out (i.e., ChannelWorks requires 80 channels in one direction, and 10 back) and which model DEC/TCI would use: the Òvideo-on-demandÓ model or the Òinformation kioskÓ model.
Wendy described some of the tech staffÕs conversations with BellAtlantic and considerations of that option for connectivity. Right now the main drawback is expense, whereas with the DEC/TCI agreement, equipment and connections are free. The group agreed that the research will force competition between service providers.
The next agenda item, the three schools to connect via DEC/TCI, was discussed. Rick stated that his original plan was to make the choices on a curriculum basis. For example, the four International Studies schools could be connected, allowing teachers and students to communicate with each other. But because of the terms of the agreement (the requirement to buy DEC equipment), and partly due to location of the schools, that plan had to be dropped. The three schools chosen were East Hills, Carrick and Fulton. East Hills was chosen because it is too remote for a telephone connection to work well, and because it is easier to put an aerial drop there. Carrick was chosen for similar reasons, but also for curriculum reasons. The PUMP project will be using 30 computers, with CK providing an additional 16. High speed access is desired due to expected usage needs. In addition, Gene and Bob Carlitz developed a hub and spoke architecture that should increase bandwidth while keeping costs down. The technical staff have recently been discussing the possibility of using the high schools as the hubs in this architecture, which is another reason for choosing Carrick.
The third site is Fulton. Myron asked how the two campuses would be handled. Gene suggested that the Hampton and Jancey campuses, and possibly Westinghouse, could share ChannelWorks using LADS service. Wendy emphasized that the technical staff will be looking at several different site architecture models to provide information to the school district as it plans its Metropolitan Area Network (MAN). Wendy also mentioned that with a hub and spoke model there is increased opportunities for remote management at the spoke sites.
Myron asked about the instructional evaluation component so that when the School Board needs to decide whether to continue with this technology, it will have the information it needs. There was a discussion of this involving what should be evaluated and who should do the evaluation. Gail stated that part of the evaluation falls under Janet SchofieldÕs responsibilities, and she also mentioned that the second year site proposals contain evaluation plans that will need to be clarified. The participants agreed that School Support Services should be involved, and Rick recommended that Mike invite school support specialists who are involved with evalution to the end of June workshops when the second year sites work on their curriculum projects. There also was a suggestion that CK people meet with School Support people on this question. Rick said he would follow up on this, once he talks with Janet.
Mike asked the group what they foresaw in the future for the Internet, in that much is currently free, but what are the chances it will remain that way? Rick, Wendy and Gene all felt that a number of resources would continue to be offered for free - such as NASA and DOE data - and some vendors are committed to keeping some software free. On the other hand, the day of the completely free Internet is gone, and there will be some fees to contend with.
The next meeting was set for Monday, June 27, at 10:00 am. Wendy will check on a room in the PSC. Rick will contact people. The agenda will include the migration issue brought up in the first meeting.