LIVE@EDUCAUSE 2024 Exclusive Coverage

resnet-campus-IT

The state of campus Resnet in 2015


State of Resnet Report reveals all departments must work and communicate with IT to implement cost-effective, student-demanded services.

resnet-campus-ITA recent report reveals increases in funding, bandwidth, and outsourcing as universities race to meet students’ Wi-Fi and Resnet needs. However, it also highlights a deepening tension between the desire to serve students and the reality of demand outpacing network resources.

The finding are part of the Association for College & University Technology Advancement’s (ACUTA), in partnership with the National Association of College and University Business Officers (NACUBO) and the Association of College and University Housing Officers – International (ACUHO-I), comprehensive 2015 Fourth Annual ACUTA/NACUBO/ACUHO-I State of Resnet Report, a survey of 450 colleges and universities measuring variations in on-campus residential student network policy, as well as focusing on IT and business issues affecting Resnet now and into the future.

Funding up from previous years

Colleges and universities are giving their best shot at overcoming the Sisyphean task of meeting increasing IT costs, such as in wireless service and support, while stretching already tight budgets even further. Seventy percent of the institutions surveyed expect the cost of wireless network service to increase over the next two years with 13% of respondents expecting a decline in available funding. However, more institutions forecast an increases in Resnet funding from 38% in 2014 to 54% in 2015.

In general, annual budgets for Resnet expenditures reflect the size of the institution with the majority of surveyed institutions (41.5%) having a budget of $750,000 or less. Larger schools fall within the range of $750,000 and $2.5 Million annually.

(Next page: Cost, capacity, and reception)

Who pays for Resnet costs & how are costs recovered?

The report finds that small, predominantly private institutions follow a central funding model, while medium to large, predominantly public institutions, incorporate some form of technology fee/recharge system to recover some of the cost.

An increasing number of schools are funding the network as a core service from central university funds. This may be because institutions are recognizing that robust network capability and increased performance is central to business, academic functions, and research.

On the opposite side of the spectrum, the number of schools that receive some form of departmental assistance in addition to central funding is on a continuing downward trend.

Wireless coverage and capacity

As more and more institutions sign on to the “Bring Your Own Everything” movement, and as more students become mobile, administrators are responding to increasing expectations and demands for “anywhere, anytime” access.

Data captured from 2015 shows 65.4 percent of campuses providing robust wireless coverage (of four bars or more) throughout more than 80 percent of their campus, a 20 percent increase from 2013. More than half of all business officers say they support coverage for the entire campus, rather than restricting coverage to the most densely-populated areas due to limited funding.

While research shows an increase in the percentage of schools offering robust wireless coverage on their on-campus student areas, not all residential spaces enjoy seamless coverage. Mirroring 2014 results, the areas where students spend the most time—common areas, dining halls, and residential rooms—are still not getting as robust coverage as the academic and administrative areas. 2015 data show a very small decline in the percentage of institutions offering robust coverage in all areas.

Cellular reception

In areas where traditional connectivity is difficult to implement or sustain, 52 percent of institutions are considering an array of services to augment residential cellular reception on campus, a decline from 56 percent in 2014 and 76 percent in 2013. 31 percent of institutions plan to deploy in-building DAS [Distributed Antenna Systems], 15 percent outdoor DAS, and 23 percent outdoor cellular sites/towers. Other considerations are small cell technology, or Femtocells http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Femtocell (13 percent), and in-building cellular connection (9 percent).

48 percent of institutions have no plans for cellular augmentation because the cellular reception on the campus is satisfactory, it is cost-prohibitive to increase cellular infrastructure, or there is a perception that the responsibility for providing satisfactory cellular coverage rests on the carriers.

(Next page: Meeting bandwidth demands, outsourcing, future considerations)

More schools finding ways to meet ever-increasing bandwidth demands

As a wider array of devices, such as Smart TVs, game consoles, appliances, etc., are now Internet-aware, more schools than ever are making provisions for the influx of demand on residential networks. In fact, seven out of ten colleges and universities surveyed allow an unlimited number of devices to be connected to the residential network.

However, allowing for a multitude of devices on the network comes at a price, namely the consumption of limited bandwidth and an increase in institutional costs.

Universities and colleges are seeing, through increases to Resnet bandwidth, an opportunity to better serve their primary customers. This year’s data shows that, for the first time, over half of all institutions now offer 1 Gigabit throughput or more. However, as student demand on available bandwidth increases, four out five schools do not offer the option for students to pay for additional bandwidth.

While this year saw a decline in capping individual Internet bandwidth usage for campus residents, all other bandwidth-management practices, such as shaping and limiting bandwidth by protocol or blocking activities such as p2p sharing, music downloading, etc., are on the rise.

Other practices in place on campuses include:

  • Throttling Internet speeds on guest Wi-Fi connections so as to prevent heavy streaming of data
  • Dynamically sharing bandwidth equally amongst all users
  • Limiting upload rates at the campus border

Outsourcing

Since 2013, the number of institutions outsourcing or considering outsourcing some or all Resnet services has almost doubled from 22 percent to 38 percent, reflecting the growing trend toward a shared service model to address complex operational and funding issues that come with managing this critical campus service.

As in other arenas, outsourcing campus services is mainly seen as a cost-saving measure. However, many institutions are approaching the idea of outsourcing as a way to improve service quality as well.

In the case of Resnet, for example, a private specialist may be able to provide resources and technological expertise to operate the service more efficiently and effectively than the higher education institution.

While there is a small decrease in the percentage of schools outsourcing services to cable providers, there is a parallel decline in the number of schools that provide cable TV services to on-campus residents. Fewer institutions currently outsource, or are considering outsourcing, help-desk services compared to other Resnet services.

However, this year, more schools outsourced the help-desk than cable television and phone.

Planning for the future

To adequately meet rapidly evolving networking needs, 60 percent of schools now have strategic plans in place for the Resnet. Such a plan may include an approach for management, as well as cost and performance information for Wi-Fi, Internet bandwidth, cable TV, IPTV, VoIP and related services.

In order to create a clear, focused path for the future of Resnet, 20 percent update their strategic plan annually, while 39 percent update it every 2-5 years. In contrast, 12 percent of institutions are unsure whether they have a strategic plan and/or how often it is updated.

One of the major obstacles preventing building solid strategies for growth is the lack of communication between departments. One-fourth of business officers do not meet with their IT department, nearly 20 percent of housing officers do not meet with the IT department, and 22 percent of IT officers do not meet with the Housing/Residence Life department.

To ensure Resnet initiatives and goals align, the report stresses that officers from business, housing and IT need to communicate with their counterparts regarding the quality and performance of Resnet services.

Doug Walker is an editorial freelancer with eCampus News.

Sign up for our newsletter

Newsletter: Innovations in K12 Education
By submitting your information, you agree to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.