2007 Campus Technology Innovators Entry Form
NOMINATION SUBMITTED BY
Name:
Title:
Institution:
E-Mail:
Phone:
NOMINEE INFORMATION
Project Lead Name:
Department:
Other Primary Team Contributors (if applicable):
Name of Project/Initiative:
URL of Project (if applicable):
Vendor Partners Involved (please list companies and contact information):
PROJECT DETAILS
The Challenge or Inspiration
Key Beneficiaries Who on campus or elsewhere benefits from the technology implementation? (e.g., faculty, entering freshman class, administrators) In what way? [Please answer in 75 words or less]:
Results What has been or will be the impact of the technology? Include direct impact and trickle-down impact, such as greater student yield/retention, competitive edge for institution, etc. [Please answer in 75 words or less]:
Suprises and 'Ah Hah!' Moments What were the surprises? What were the unforeseen stumbling blocks? Please share the obstacles or unintended consequences those tackling similar implementations might not anticipate. Include anecdotal information, proudest moments, etc. [Please answer in 75 words or less]:
TECHNOLOGY CHOICES
Short List List top five products considered for the project.
Additional Technologies List three to five final product choices/vendors.
Reasons for Technology Choices Why did you choose the products you did? Include differentiating factors (reasons why you chose one product over another), primary and secondary reasons, and include any campus models or mentors that helped you make the decision. Did this product replace any other technology/product? If so, what? (Include “rip and replace” and/or “phase-in” information) [Please answer in 100 words or less]:
Next Steps What are your next steps (if applicable)? Now that your initial implementation is successful, what will you do next? Why? [Please answer in 75 words or less]:
Advice What advice would you give to others facing similar challenges to those you originally identified, or to those looking at the same type of technology implementation? [Please answer in 75 words or less]:
Additional Information Please include any additional supporting information, including additional supporting URLs. [Please answer in 75 words or less]:
E-Mail this page
Printable Format
Two of the bigger authentication announcements to come out of the recent RSA Conference both point in the same direction: Organizations need a more flexible, unified approach to identity security, especially as AI agents start acting alongside human workers.
The White House has released a four-page AI policy framework aimed at setting a national approach to AI, with priorities including child safety, intellectual property protections, truth and accuracy guardrails, and worker training for an AI-driven economy.
Higher education IT leaders are navigating a quiet but consequential transition: Experienced team members are retiring or leaving for private-sector roles, and the teams replacing them are smaller, newer, and often stretched thin. The result is a structural shift in how technology decisions are made, executed, and sustained.
Microsoft released RAMPART and Clarity as open-source projects intended to help developers test AI agents earlier in the software lifecycle and turn red-team findings into repeatable engineering checks.
More
More Portals
More Webcasts
More White Papers