Committee Reports
SATNET Meeting
October 18, 1997

Higher Education Group
Medical Group
Government Group
Business Group
K-12 Group

HIGHER EDUCATION GROUP

What are some of the benefits of implementing SATNET for the groups we represent?

Teacher preparation avenues important (learning outcomes)
Ongoing professional education
Faculty development
Supporting life-long learning
Demonstrate needs/usefulness/new learnings
Information
Collaborative efforts/communication
Increased speed of access
Staff infrastructure
Location not an issue
Build educated work force
Extends learning dynamics
Research avenues
Communication pathways, etc.
Potential for improved education level of secondary level students
San Antonio perceived as a source/hub
Boundaries (for learning) extended

What do we see as barriers/challenges/issues to making SATNET a reality?

Achieve level of confidence/competence as users (outcome user issues)
Time/energy
Establishing priority
Sustainability/turnover
Staffing (needs and shortages)
Providing training needed
Funding to stay current (private and public)
Copyright issues (costs)
Promotion/tenure issues attached to on-line publications (negative overtones)
Research references (on-line) long/short term availability
Vision
Privacy issues
Metering info acquired
Competition concerns
Boundaries unlimited

Group Summary

Benefits

Delivery of Services

Sharing and efficient use of resources

Professional education

Collaboration/communication

Enhanced bus/ed environment

Barriers

Work force

Funding

Community

Knowledge level

Outside accredit agencies

Privacy/security

Lack of recognition/reward

Steering Committee Volunteers: Dr. Charles Burmeister, Jeffrey W. Noyes

MEDICAL GROUP

What are some of the benefits of implementing SATNET for the groups we represent?

Sharing assets/resources

Training efforts

Access to expertise

Implementing medical care within schools (diagnostic assistance, etc.)

Cost sharing

Physician extenders (expertise shared across type of medical facility)

Meeting needs of military personnel in light of down-sizing

Local doctors become better able to deal with tele-medicine issues

Patient records/data accessible by multiple doctors/facilities

Shared research projects

Collaborative efforts with ease of access to information

Linking patient records for timely treatment program

Standard way to query patient records

Access to existing technology

Possibility of establishing some standards for access

Sharing information resources

Could involve surrounding communities

Psych. consult to rural areas

Patient can access from home

(Daily access) home health

Access to technical support

Remote professional development activities (to meet current and future staff needs.)

Just-in-time creation of professional education programs (certification of informatics)

Allows transplanted physicians to link back to home communities

Enhances physician recruitment programs

Family practitioners can access information that traditionally belonged to specialists

Facilities progress in managed care programs (non-traditional)

Patient follow-up made easier (link to pharmacies, etc.)

Transportation costs can be cut

Efficient patient screening (via EMS, video conference)

S.A. Medical System - enhanced, efficient, accessible, user-friendly benefits S.A. & surrounding community and benefits greater medical community

Ability to compete with other Texas Medical Centers

Bring medical consumers to San Antonio What do we see as barriers/challenges/issues to making SATNET a reality?

Confidentiality of patient records
Limited insurance plans
Reimbursement limits (w/network access/visits)
Patient reluctance to broadcast medical exam (could be addressed with local network)
Network security
Political issues
Need standards for patient data
Technology in surrounding counties may not be in place.

TASK FORCE VOLUNTEERS: John Nicholas, Bill Winscott, Michael Flahie, Greg Quintana

SATNET Notes October 18,1997

GOVERNMENT GROUP

What are some of the benefits of implementing SATNET for the groups we represent?

Citizen of San Antonio - service, information, access, kiosks/community link (3 employed with expansion capability to include INTERNET citywide)
Capabilities - Both increase and decrease
Eliminate duplication
Cost - cost sharing/driving costs down/eliminating additional costs for licensing
CPS/Military/Paragon - backbone systems/fiber optics
Schools as a center for citizen access
Multicasting - e.g. city council meeting
Solving community problems:
- Education - improve quality and interaction
- Medicine
- Social Issues
- Environmental
- Economics
Voice data video allows some additional functions you currently are paying for to be turned off (cost savings)
Eliminates need for sophistication in knowing delivery server
Removes layers of government for citizens to deal with and through

What do we see as barriers/challenges/issues to making SATNET a reality?

May threaten current system
Resistance to change
Backbones already being established - Need for an over all mother/father to tie all networks together
Competing interests
Rules/regulations/establish ÒsubÓ communities
Standards - technology, common reference platform, software, data
Equal access
Need for high speed/high band
Cost for high quality - initial start up costs, site equipment, hidden costs (power constraints, existing structure capabilities) (NOTE: Current CPS backbone = $30 million for substation set up only)
Training/User levels
Some systems already built (organization) - need integration of existing projects. Some systems can or can not talk to each other
Security/Privacy to the customer
Need for reliability/flexibility
What is the goal - level of expectation, requirements from the user(s), need for inventory of networks, physical location
Overlay map of current systems needed - physical location, bandwidth/physical requirements, networks, use
Proprietary issues - Nondisclosure and competition among providers
Collection and dissemination of information - Use of private providers, support for this type of networking
Use: Public, private sector, government
EDUCATION: training for all segments/population of the city, reading level of San Antonio is a third grade - Need for equal access
Who is going to pay - Who gets the service first - Large amount of federal employees to include Alamo Federal Executive Board, military. Also funding share from county and private enterprise

Steering Committee Volunteers: Mr. Octavio Pena - San Antonio City Staff, Mr. Gary Moeller- San Antonio City Staff, Commander (USN) Mike Chapline - Kelly AFB

BUSINESS GROUP

What are some of the benefits of implementing SATNET for the groups we represent?

customer service (enhance)
leverage existing resources (sharing) i.e. law libraries, school libraries, medical libraries (equity)
economic development
attract corporations
enhance perceptions of San Antonio
benefits to business
increase competitiveness
connectivity available commercially
breaks down economic/political barriers
distance learning opportunities
business benefits by educated workforce
shared research
build a strong base of support
for knowledge business needs infrastructure
quality of data transmission
more direct communications among sharing institutions
quality as a function of pipe (bits per second)
peer network benefits
assist government service (enhance quality of life in SA for citizens and tourists)
speed up process, i.e. park information, passports
submit applications: saves time, money, stress
enhance tourist by connecting to hotel rooms, conference info
build vision for local business
adult education - childrenÕs education
home computers: access to on-line resources benefits student knowledge base (local on-line providers)
very young learners are more adept at technology
telecommuting: home-bound, opens new businesses
technology is there - question is COST!!!
- cost for individual user may be decreased if partners pool
- campuses in districts
- societal changes
- cost sharing
- process is already in motion-consortium of rural counties
- sharing curricula resources
- operating costs (cost of bus, teacher) is sometimes prohibitive
education as barrier!

What do we see as barriers/challenges/issues to making SATNET a reality?

challenges/opportunities--highlight benefits for children

change occurs at level of values, beliefs, etc.

improve quality of education and improve cost effectiveness in providing the education: technology must meet these 2 objectives (government waste)

educate public on benefits of connectivity

build bridge between people who understand benefits and people who do NOT

consider different configuration: non-profit tax dollars or a non-profit entity to coordinate

cost of it:

school districts cannot afford quality connectivity
partner with providers enhance access to all

demographic/population change:

shortage in teachers of math, science, bilingual
(value-added) access to government services on the lines that they pay for

reducing cost of business development is encouraged HIDDEN COSTS!

professional development for teachers in effectively using educational technology

process has begun in some districts
business informs educational process

we need to influence those above us - equity; legislators (inform)

political realities: resistance factions

the need to garner support - the role of the media

challenge to educators:

show benefits to schools and communities
TURF BATTLES
open access to Ronald Reagan HS library (open all school libraries to increased community access)
a few examples already happening but we must promote
get departments of city government to facilitate business participation

more effective if we can influence public opinion of connectivity

sell it as an advantage to tax payers
example: parent/teacher conferences through connectivity; government services

benefits to children, self, community, and then propose a PLAN

Thomas Rivera Center-study Hispanic community in slower to adopt technology change: ways to promote it

ORGANIZED

COHESIVE STEERING COMMITTEE VOLUNTEERS: Bruce Bennett, Brad Parrott, John Leyendecker, Mary Rhodes and Wess Robinson

SATNET Notes October 18,1997 Page 10 of 12

K-12 GROUP

What are some of the benefits of implementing SATNET for the groups we represent?

Collaborative learning for students
Collaborative staff development
Ease of communication
Elimination of distance
Building a community of learners
Access to resources and non-traditional resources
Cost avoidance maximizing resources
Access to expertise
Equalize the playing field
Encourage inter-district and intra-district sharing
Access to non-traditional resources, public libraries, primary resources
Home access-bridge home and services (homebound)
Concept of "school" broadens
Restructuring
Lifelong learning
Just-in-time learning
Promotes retraining, new training, sharing resources
Collaboration with resources
Promotes student achievement
Expanding access to higher education
Total>sum of parts
Access to CURRENT info
Access to PRIMARY info
Publishing, leads to improved student work
Connect efficiently to other media delivery
Environmental!
Search tools filter and expedite
Encourages expansion of communication via multiple avenues
Interactive capabilities
Integration of many media through one
Allow public access to public info more economically
Helps public perception of use of resources
Education can offer up-to-date experiences, on par with entities
New collaborations with business and higher ed
Extending education to continuing ed clients and others
A way to attract businesses to San Antonio
Attracts educators to San Antonio
Maximize use of experts to support classroom expertise
Volunteer expertise - a time sharing
World-wide learning opportunities
Provides real information to support problem solving

What do we see as barriers/challenges/issues to making SATNET a reality?

Teaching teachers the different technology
Cost
Find a profit margin for the provider
Ecumenical-avoid religious issues (platforms)
Existing infrastructures - how they would work together
Differences in capacity (the infrastructure differs)
School boards would need to be willing to make the investment
Communicating the value (cost of NOT doing this)
Measuring effect - a challenge to current measures (how do we know it makes a difference?)
Grant $ will need to be generated and collaboratively sought
Maximize the things that bring us together and minimize the things that separate us
Change the way we think about staffing for technology, plan for this
Changes the way we value (staffing)
Political implications for districts
Educating the public, including parents, etc.
2070 - hard to envision in today's reality
PEIMS
Prepare quickly now, to be able to use technology when it happens - no lag time
Expectation that ALL have training and capacity
Find the driver application that will make this GO and cause buy-in
Overcome fear that parents have no loss of control
Link with teacher certification
Evaluate the resources available to students
Managing information overload
Security of information
Keeping up with the electronic revolution
Legal issues - protecting copyright
Change back to inquiry and learning for the sake of learning - a shift
Management of infrastructure GROWS
May require a change in city government - infrastructure support
Standards
Design the business plan that identifies standards, connectivity
Having businesses work together (those with federal mandates) toward the common goal/path
Issues and barriers with entities such as libraries and hospitals - related to access
Maintaining the system
TIME

STEERING COMMITTEE VOLUNTEERS: Rudy Reyna, Linda Paschal, Wess Robinson, Jim Parlett, Ernest Domel, Maricela Garcia, Ahmed Halim, Jo McCollum
Home | Technology Implemetation Task Force | SATNET | Common Files
Send comments to the Webmaster Last Updated: Sunday, December 21, 1997 7:45:21 PM