technology adoption: faculty perceptions of administrative support innovations 2000 february...

Technology Adoption:Faculty Perceptions of Administrative Support

Innovations 2000

February 27-March 1, 2000

Orlando, Florida

Slides on Innovations Conference page at www/league.org

Technology Adoption:Faculty Perceptions of Administrative Support

Child of………..

1998 League conference presentation using the same survey and (almost the) same responders

Presenters

• Dr. Alice Villadsen, PresidentBrookhaven CollegeDallas County Community College DistrictDallas, Texas

• Dr. Sunil Chand, Executive Vice PresidentAcademic and Student Affairs Cuyahoga Community CollegeCleveland, Ohio

So, What’s it all About?

Topics for Today

Sources of Funding

Encouragement of Faculty

Institutionalization

Awards and Rewards

Organization

Current Status

Lessons

Insights

Sources of Funding

1998

• Release Time

• Internal grants

• State Funding

• Industry Partnerships (e.g. IBM, Apple Kodak - hardware)

• College Foundation

• Volunteers

Seed and start-up

2000• Tax levy• Federal grants - Title

III; FIPSE• Gifts

Systemic change

Encouragement of Faculty

Encouragement of Faculty

1998•Internal financial and workload procedures (RT, seed grants & stipends, overload)•Travel•Training•Smart facilities (offices, classrooms)•Technology Development Labs

Encouragement of Faculty1998

• Internal financial and workload procedures (RT, seed grants & stipends, overload)

• Travel

• Training

• Smart facilities (offices, classrooms)

• Technology Development Labs

2000• Help Desk

• Academic Technology Plans

• Challenge Grants

• WWW access

• Consortia with other colleges

• Promotion & advancement

Encouragement of Faculty (contd)

1998

Focus on initiation and experimentation

2000

Focus on development and growth; institutionalization

Initiation to Institutionalization: Evidence from the Toys

1998• Desk top PC’s• Smart facilities• Smarter facilities• Connectivity (hard:

internal and to web)

Hard

2000• “A big DL Office and

computer support - VCR’s, PC’s, Proximas, Zip drives, control panels”

• Elmos, Pentium II and III, LCD panels

• “Pervasive network facilities”

Initiation to Institutionalization: Evidence from the Toys (contd)

1998• Desk top PC’s• Smart facilities• Smarter facilities• Connectivity (hard:

internal and to web)

Hard

2000• “We now have four

TV studios”• Blackboard &

CourseInfo 4.0• WEB-CT Ver. 2• Etudes• MS Frontpage 2000• Asymetrix Toolbox

Initiation to Institutionalization: Evidence from the Toys (contd 2)

1998• Desk top PC’s• Smart facilities• Smarter facilities• Connectivity (hard:

internal and to web)

Hard

2000• Compel• Perception (!)• JavaScript• Perl (of wisdom)• Connectivity (soft:

WWW, consortia, listservs, students)

Soft

From Platforms to People

1998

• From systems, to... • ….Teaching and Learning

2000

Awards and Rewards1998

• Innovation of the Year

• Showcasing individuals

• Conference, stipend, grant support

• RT

• Latest technologies

• More work

• None

Individual

2000• Promotional growth

units• Advanced courses• Camaraderie

Group and workplace

Organization: Classroom Technology

and Distance Learning Initiatives 1998

• Don’t know

• Instructional Tech under academic officer or (s)he holds all Tech responsibility

• Joint reporting

• Team management

• CIO

Titles, titles, titles...

2000• “Distance learning tries to

coordinate with … Also have a Director of Instructional Tech...”

• “College Without Walls reports to Associate Dean of Instructional Development. Title III reports to… There is a Director of CWW and a Director of DL”

Organization…. (contd)1998

• Don’t know

• Instructional Tech under academic officer or (s)he holds all Tech responsibility

• Joint reporting

• Team management

• CIO

Titles, titles, titles...

2000• Separate

• Learning Technology and DL work closely together

• ‘That’s a real good question. At the moment I’m not sure anyone is...”

• Alternative Learning Division

Where are the titles? What’s going on?

Constancy (in the Changing World)

1998 2000Cost-benefitanalyses?

Yes: 11%No: 22%Huh?: the rest

Constant; noresultsreported yet

New JobDescriptions?

Yes: 25%No: 75%

Constant, butare JD’s inoperationnow?

So, Where are We Now?

• On-line courses: YES 100%

• Range from 20 to 60+ sections each year

• Credit and non-credit (just now beginning)

• Average enrollment per section: 25 - 30

• Overall annual enrollments: 400 - 1800

• Growth: YES 100%

So, Where are We Now?

• Universal E-Mail To:

Full-Time Faculty YES 100%

Part-Time Faculty YES 50%; Soon 100%

Students YES 40%; Soon 100%

Dreaming…… but not Snoozing

• Wireless

• Netmeeting & Videoconferencing

• Desktop video; desktop ATM

• Portals

• Virtual reality

• Voice recognition

• Academic applications software

Reality: Lessons on What Works1998

• Training on technology

• Resources - funds; equipment for students and faculty

• RT

• Technical support for hardware, software, course and Web applications

2000• Training on teaching &

learning strategies and their integration with technology; course design & management; “sustained faculty development”

• Resources

• RT

• Technical support: “stable servers”

Reality: Lessons (contd)1998

• Allow time

• Engage faculty in technology decision making and leadership

• Deal with workload early on

• Don’t jam technology down

• Keep current

2000• Don’t let IT dictate the

environment

• Allow time for experimentation, learning and implementation - up to 3 years to fully implement in a course

• Always have a backup plan; technology does not always work

• Connect students to students; create on-line, interactive communities

Reality: Lessons (contd 2)

1998• Focus on learning, not on

technology; bad teaching will create bad technology applications

2000• Focus on the education:

identify learning goals and find technology to help achieve them; “these are art courses, not technological courses”

Reality: Lessons (contd 3)1998

• Ensure planned and public commitment by the college

• Keep Board informed

2000• Tech courses “struggle to

reproduce the interactions and chemistry of a traditional classroom. I’m concerned that I see signs of burnout in some of our technology innovators - we need to acknowledge and address this issue”

• I have no understanding of the thinking of District.

So, What’s Up, Docs?

What’s Up

1998

• Leadership must understand the innovations they promote

• There are many unresolved issues

What’s Up2000?

Clear shift to Faculty- led Initiatives and Faculty

Leadership

What’s up, Docs? (contd)

2000

• More technology could be used

• I have had mixed experiences using technology, both on the human and technical levels

• Make (technology deployment) a concerted not sporadic effort; have course design/management in place before mounting a course

What’s up, Docs? (contd 2)

2000

• Dramatically shorten the time to learn and infuse technology into the curriculum

• Temper the rush with quality control

• Plan and implement (not vice versa)

• “Our focus regarding technology adoption is in the physical, not virtual, classroom”

• Technology is better used to supplement rather than to replace traditional instruction

So, What is up, Docs?

“I am very proud to be a part of such a fine effort.”