integrating information technology into student affairs graduate programs

12
Information technology can be integrated into the classroom, advising, and research activities of graduate preparation programs in student affairs to enhance student learning. Integrating Information Technology into Student Affairs Graduate Programs Catherine McHugh Engstrom Increasingly, undergraduate college students are using sophisticated applica- tions of technology to enhance the quality of their educational experiences. As a result, incoming graduate students will demand that technology be fully inte- grated across the college student affairs graduate preparation curriculum. Stu- dents will expect to leave their graduate programs with the knowledge, skills, and competencies required to use technology in developing and improving the quality of student affairs programs and services. Students may also choose the graduate program they wish to attend based on the quality of the program’s information technology, resources, and training support. Are students in college student affairs graduate preparation programs increasingly becoming tantalized by technology? Do they attend some of their classes in cyberspace? Are they captivated by color, motion, and sound? How can faculty use information technology to get students to think, feel, and learn in more complex ways? The emerging literature argues that technology can offer exciting, innovative tools to supplement, enhance, and extend the learn- ing environments for students, and significantly change how students learn (Benedict, 1996; Green, 1996; Kozma and Johnston, 1991). Because the stu- dent affairs profession is dedicated to promoting student learning and devel- opment (American College Personnel Association, 1994), it is critical that graduate students experience creative, innovative, and cutting-edge applica- tions of technology that respond to the learning needs and preferences of an increasingly diverse group of students. Programs should be dedicated to exposing students to teaching and learning processes that use technology to NEW DIRECTIONS FOR STUDENT SERVICES, no. 78, Summer 1997 © Jossey-Bass Publishers 59

Upload: catherine-mchugh-engstrom

Post on 06-Jul-2016

213 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Information technology can be integrated into the classroom, advising,and research activities of graduate preparation programs in studentaffairs to enhance student learning.

Integrating Information Technology into Student AffairsGraduate Programs

Catherine McHugh Engstrom

Increasingly, undergraduate college students are using sophisticated applica-tions of technology to enhance the quality of their educational experiences. Asa result, incoming graduate students will demand that technology be fully inte-grated across the college student affairs graduate preparation curriculum. Stu-dents will expect to leave their graduate programs with the knowledge, skills,and competencies required to use technology in developing and improving thequality of student affairs programs and services. Students may also choose thegraduate program they wish to attend based on the quality of the program’sinformation technology, resources, and training support.

Are students in college student affairs graduate preparation programsincreasingly becoming tantalized by technology? Do they attend some of theirclasses in cyberspace? Are they captivated by color, motion, and sound? Howcan faculty use information technology to get students to think, feel, and learnin more complex ways? The emerging literature argues that technology canoffer exciting, innovative tools to supplement, enhance, and extend the learn-ing environments for students, and significantly change how students learn(Benedict, 1996; Green, 1996; Kozma and Johnston, 1991). Because the stu-dent affairs profession is dedicated to promoting student learning and devel-opment (American College Personnel Association, 1994), it is critical thatgraduate students experience creative, innovative, and cutting-edge applica-tions of technology that respond to the learning needs and preferences of an increasingly diverse group of students. Programs should be dedicated toexposing students to teaching and learning processes that use technology to

NEW DIRECTIONS FOR STUDENT SERVICES, no. 78, Summer 1997 © Jossey-Bass Publishers 59

60 USING TECHNOLOGY TO PROMOTE STUDENT LEARNING

encourage active learning strategies, cooperative and collaborative learning,and student-centered classrooms. These processes enable authority and theconstruction of knowledge to become responsibilities shared between students and faculty. Ideas for incorporating these pedagogical strategiesshould also be incorporated systematically into the graduate preparation cur-riculum.

This chapter examines three main topics related to graduate preparationprograms and technology. First, we examine concrete ways in which technol-ogy can enhance teaching, advising, and research activities to promote studentlearning. Second, we review the specific knowledge, skills, and competenciesrelated to information technology that graduate students should acquire ingraduate school. Finally, we discuss the implications for practice of introduc-ing a systematic integration of technology into the graduate preparation expe-rience.

Using Technology to Promote Student Learning

Kozma and Johnston (1991) argue that technology can result in powerfulchanges in how and what students learn. Green and Gilbert (1995b) indicatethat the academic use of information technology can have a significant impactin the areas of pedagogy, content, and curriculum. Through the use of tech-nology, students can become actively engaged in the construction of knowl-edge and can assume more responsibility for their own learning (Gilbert,1996b). In addition, the walls between the classroom and the real world canbecome easily blurred; multiple vehicles to express, understand, and manipu-late ideas can be introduced; and learning can move from being an isolatedactivity to one in which students collaborate with peers (Kozma and Johnston,1991). Ehrmann (1995) adds that technology creates opportunities for stu-dents to learn at their own pace and at the times they choose. Students learnthrough the continuous reworking of assignments and ideas; they also learnfrom feedback from students and faculty. Throughout these activities, the rolesof faculty and students are renegotiated constantly.

However, a preliminary study conducted by Cuyjet and Bowman (1996)with graduate preparation faculty suggests that only rudimentary uses of tech-nology exist in the classroom. Cuyjet and Bowman report that only 38 percentof the faculty required electronic mail (e-mail) in their courses. Only 31 per-cent of the student affairs faculty surveyed indicated that their students knewhow to use the World Wide Web. Only a handful of faculty stated that theyinformed students about the existence of college student affairs listservs or listsof listservs (for example, the University of Connecticut list, the Southern Illi-nois University list). However, just in the past year, more frequent exampleshave been noted of college student affairs graduate preparation faculty intro-ducing e-mail, videoconferencing, the World Wide Web, and multimediaapplications to enhance the teaching-learning process.

61INTEGRATING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY INTO GRADUATE PROGRAMS

Pedagogical Strategies Incorporating Technology

The teacher education and (more recently) higher education literature reportsmany examples of pedagogical strategies using information technology thataddress diverse learning styles and encourage active involvement and collab-oration. Student affairs professionals assert that learning can thrive within intri-cate and lively networks and communities whose members are activelyengaged in the processes involved in constructing knowledge (American Col-lege Personnel Association, 1994). Clearly, use of the Internet can change theway faculty and students learn, as they move from a paradigm of informationdelivery to one of rich interaction among students and faculty who are teach-ing and learning together.

Greater numbers of faculty are posting syllabi on the World Wide Web;holding office hours on-line; putting articles, class notes, old exams, announce-ments, and discussion group questions on the World Wide Web; and receiv-ing and responding to homework assignments using e-mail (for example,practicum journals). Although these activities are useful for familiarizing stu-dents with key tools on the Internet, and may increase efficiency, Benedict(1996) argues that these activities alone do not require significant reconcep-tualization of the teaching and learning process. However, creative structuringof Internet discussion groups or electronically mediated group project workcan result in new roles for students and faculty. These activities can provideopportunities for collaborative and cooperative learning (Yakimovicz and Mur-phy, 1995), timely feedback, and shared authority (Sproull and Kiesler, 1995).Communication on the Internet can range from immediate, real-time conver-sations to more substantive, detailed written exchanges (Brown and Duguid,1996). For example, at Gettysburg College a group of new students livingtogether in a residential college participate in a group research project thatrequires them to link their personal research and writing with those of otherclassmates into a final group research paper placed on the World Wide Web(Wagner and Wilson, 1995). Having students share drafts of papers and receivefeedback over the Internet with peers helps students understand that learningcan come from others besides the instructor.

Fey and Sisson’s application of e-mail discussion groups (1996) could eas-ily be used with graduate students participating in practicum experiences. Eachweek, their student teachers were required to describe a classroom vignette thatraised important issues for practice, and to solicit feedback and dialogue fromfellow student teachers about these issues. In addition, the student teachers hadto respond weekly to items posted by their peers. The student teachers identi-fied the reduced sense of isolation, the importance of peers in helping themproblem-solve, and the development of critical thinking skills as key benefitsthey derived from this activity.

The use of Internet videoconferencing (using CU-SeeMe software by Cor-nell University) by the higher education programs at the University of Arizona

62 USING TECHNOLOGY TO PROMOTE STUDENT LEARNING

together with higher education institutions in Canada and Mexico allows fordiscussion, community building, teaching, and learning to occur among stu-dents and faculty from three different countries. Some other college studentaffairs graduate preparation faculty have invited their students to participatein weekly discussion sessions on-line or to attend a videoconference with agroup of identified researchers and student affairs practitioners. These types ofactivities challenge students to articulate their understanding of current issuesin the field, and create opportunities for students to discuss these issues withleading authorities in the profession. These emerging professionals learn thevalue of seeking ideas and feedback and of establishing relationships with pro-fessional colleagues within and outside their campuses.

These approaches also have the potential to encourage participation bythose students who might otherwise be wary of speaking up in a classroomsetting. Sproull and Kiesler (1995) researched the impact of the Internet onthe structure of organizations and individual work behavior; they found thatpeople tend to communicate more freely on the Internet than they do in per-son. Communication using the Internet exists independently of the physicallocation, status, or demographic differences of the sender and recipients. Forexample, Zuboff (cited in Sproull and Kiesler, 1995) reports that people whoconsidered themselves unattractive indicated they were more vocal and confi-dent when they communicated using the Internet. In addition, individuals whoconsidered themselves to have soft voices or small stature reported findingcommunicating over the network as a welcoming, effective vehicle that enabledthem to be taken seriously by their colleagues. On the other hand, on-line classdiscussions may encourage a lot of conversation, but that conversation maylack focus. Faculty need to be prepared to introduce structure and guidelinesto promote engaging, meaningful dialogues.

MOOS (Multiple Object Oriented Structures) may be another vehicle tobring more diverse voices into the classroom. MOOS are shared on-line envi-ronments; people can meet in a set of “rooms” for discussions and program-ming. For example, one room could be a “family room” open only to enrolledstudents to discuss an article assigned for class. Another room may be aresource room in which assignments and resources are posted and added.Other rooms may include a virtual classroom in which students and facultycome together for a class; a room dedicated to discussing an ethical dilemmaposted weekly by the faculty, open to both enrolled students and campus stu-dent affairs practitioners; and a virtual “Coke machine” where students cangather to chat about personal and academic issues.

All of these applications break down the four walls of the classroom andmake connections to a wider network of professionals in the field. These strate-gies also have the potential to change whom students learn from, how studentsdecide what knowledge is, whose voices are heard, and how students commu-nicate and work in groups (Green, 1996; Sproull and Kiesler, 1995). The useof information technology in courses can create richer opportunities for facultyand students to become critical partners and resources in the learning process.

63INTEGRATING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY INTO GRADUATE PROGRAMS

Facilitating Advising and Program Administration

Along with enhancing the pedagogical practices being used in various courses,technology also can increase faculty members’ effectiveness as advisers. Becauseof its speed, convenience, low cost, and increasing accessibility, e-mail isbecoming a popular, efficient tool for both students and faculty, particularlyfor students who may not have the time or inclination to take advantage of des-ignated office hours. Parties can communicate quickly and regularly, whetheror not the faculty member is on campus, at a conference, or consulting.

In addition, many administrative functions often assigned to advisers canbe handled over the Internet. Doctoral students working on dissertations, oftenat a distance from their advisers, can use e-mail as an efficient and cost-effec-tive way to maintain regular contact and obtain feedback on their work. Officehours can be held on-line, a service that is particularly attractive to full-timeprofessionals who are not working on campus. Web pages designed by facultyadvisers can direct students to program information, sample programs of study,critical deadlines, college and university procedures, program manuals, andoffice hours. Links also can be designed to relevant resource information onthe World Wide Web, such as national or regional conference information, pro-fessional associations, personal skills or career inventories, job information,and student affairs listservs. These applications allow students to access infor-mation at their leisure, as opposed to at an appointed orientation meeting oroffice visit. These strategies also free faculty members to use office hours toaddress more substantial academic, career, or developmental issues, allowingthem to balance high-tech responses with meaningful “high touch.”

Great potential also exists for faculty to use technology to complete criti-cal administrative functions. Some graduate programs have designed formalmechanisms on the Internet to maintain ongoing contact with prospective stu-dents throughout the admissions process. Other faculty have used the Inter-net as a community-building tool to build networks of students, faculty,alumni, and friends of their graduate program. Program newsletters can beplaced on the World Wide Web. Web pages are attractive vehicles to establishdata banks to receive updated alumni news and addresses. Brown and Duguid(1996) contend that conceptions of how institutions define and consider stu-dents and graduates will start to blur as academic programs extend their reachacross space and time. In the future, a graduate program may be able to rein-force its commitment to lifelong learning by providing graduates access todevelopments in their field through on-line access to campus seminars, collo-quia, and lectures.

Technology is also being used to develop ongoing discussion groups amongcurrent students, faculty, and graduates. Graduates can inform students aboutcareer opportunities, students can keep graduates abreast of their accomplish-ments and activities, and both groups can be encouraged to discuss critical issuesin the field. It is useful to note, however, that although Internet discussion groupscan be rich and meaningful, this open forum also allows for any type of dialogue

64 USING TECHNOLOGY TO PROMOTE STUDENT LEARNING

and conversation. At times, participants can derail, sidetrack, or monopolize theconversations, causing many members to leave the group.

Enhancing Research Activities

The Internet is emerging as a major resource for scholarly communication andwork. How academics define scholarly work will be a source of debate as moreon-line journals emerge, as innovative multimedia research projects capturingthe voices of their participants are presented on the Internet, and as studentsand faculty struggle with the sheer amount of material available. Faculty mem-bers and students are recognizing the power of the Internet to assist them inpursuing their research agendas. Green (1996) considers the spread of e-mailfrom 1994 to 1995 to reflect the development of an information-rich and net-worked world in which faculty are connected to one another and to resourcesthrough e-mail and the Web.

The technological skills required to access critical research informationsuch as published articles, on-line journals and newspapers, conference papers,grant and foundation information, data files, and abstracts are minimal butessential core competencies for any serious scholar (Green, 1996). What stu-dents and faculty investigate and with whom also have expanded due to theprofession’s increased interest in creating partnerships and bridges with inter-national colleagues. Videoconferencing and e-mail can bring these colleaguesinto faculty offices on a regular basis for consultation and collaborative activ-ities. Faculty must also assume the leadership in helping graduate studentsidentify and apply criteria to recognize refereed or empirically based researchworks as opposed to unsubstantiated commentaries.

The suggestions we have explored here to integrate technology in courses,advising, and research activities are grounded in a fundamental belief that tech-nology should be introduced into the curriculum primarily to enhance studentlearning and productivity. Clearly, it is incumbent upon college student affairsgraduate preparation faculty to provide the leadership in recognizing technol-ogy as a powerful motivator and tool to reconceptualize what is taught andlearned, and how. Green and Gilbert (1995a) conclude there is strong evidencethat when technology is used, qualitative improvements in teaching, advising,and research activities are experienced. They stress the critical role faculty playin providing guidance to students about how to tap and use information tech-nology and its resources effectively.

The activities shared in the previous discussion have enormous potentialto increase the importance of the role of peers, to encourage students toassume more responsibility for their learning, and to shift the role of facultymembers to being partners and facilitators of learning. These conditions mir-ror those outlined by Knefelkamp, Golec, and Wells (1985) as essential vari-ables to promote higher levels of intellectual development. The impact oftechnology as a vehicle to foster critical thinking and reflective judgmentshould be investigated.

65INTEGRATING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY INTO GRADUATE PROGRAMS

Information Technology Knowledge and Skills to Acquire

The knowledge and skills related to technology should be systematically inte-grated across the curriculum and not isolated to a class or two (Ehrmann,1995). Graduate programs must develop mechanisms to ensure that studentsacquire at least the following technical skills and abilities during their gradu-ate experience: using e-mail to communicate with colleagues, accessing searchengines to locate key professional resources on the World Wide Web (forexample, professional association information, student affairs documents, pro-fessional papers), using the Internet and CD-ROMs in research activities, join-ing and participating on listservs and newsgroups, designing Web pages,distributing and receiving files from colleagues through the network, anddeveloping multimedia presentations. In terms of mechanisms to teach theseskills, faculty should tap both current students and campus support servicesto offer class sessions in their courses and ancillary workshops for the program.Clearly, this is an area in which many current students are already much moreknowledgeable, skilled, and experienced in applications of information tech-nology than are current college student affairs graduate preparation faculty.

However, the basic technical skills just described should not be taught inisolation. Students also should learn about the specific applications of technol-ogy to promote student learning in residence life, counseling, academic advis-ing, career development, student activities and unions, and other student affairsfunctional areas, and about new approaches that respond to ever-changing,emerging technological advances. Students should be exposed to various cam-pus information systems and how to access information to make data-baseddecisions. Students also need to learn how to work and communicate effec-tively with campus technicians and other campus officials to improve studentservices and to develop student-centered policies that promote access, freedomof speech, civility, and community.

Numerous critical issues for practice emerge from the integration of tech-nology on college campuses that should be addressed in college student affairsgraduate preparation program courses. The impact of the Internet on freespeech, academic integrity, intellectual property rights, and privacy merits seri-ous discussion among students, faculty, and student affairs practitioners. Eth-ical dilemmas and standards of conduct for cyberspace also need to bediscussed. For example, how do institutions prevent a growing inequity of“haves” and “have nots” among students, particularly if technology initiativesrequire students to finance the costs of participation?

It is important to create structured forums for graduate students to criti-cally consider the impact of technology on community. How do we balancehigh tech with “high touch” in our educator, administrator, and counselor roles(Baier, 1993)? With more widespread use of distance courses, programs, andcampuses, how must we reconfigure the role and practices of student affairs tohelp students gain access to authentic communities of learning, support, and

66 USING TECHNOLOGY TO PROMOTE STUDENT LEARNING

connection? College student affairs graduate preparation programs may wantto require their students to enroll in a distance learning course (or, at least, incomponents of a course) so they may better appreciate the needs and chal-lenges facing a growing population of distance learners.

Students also should explore how the Internet can affect the nature oforganizations and of relationships between and among managers and employ-ees. It will be critical to discuss how networks can change the conventionalpatterns of who communicates to whom and who needs to know what infor-mation (Sproull and Kiesler, 1995). What is the impact on the organizationalculture and climate when employees interact mainly through telecommuting,teleconferencing, and electronic discussion groups? What are the rights andresponsibilities of participants in networked communities? Finally, it is impor-tant to heighten students’ sensitivities to not only what is being discussed onthe Net but also who is talking. For example, are these discussions inviting tonew voices in the student affairs profession, or are they only giving additionalforums to already visible populations?

Use of Technology in Graduate Preparation Programs:Implications for Future Practice

Numerous implications for practice arise that must be considered when inte-grating technology into college student affairs graduate preparation programs.It must be stressed that educational goals must drive all activities that includeinformation technology. Information technology should be considered a pow-erful pedagogical tool that has the potential to transform the teaching andlearning process. This transformational process can significantly change thefaculty role but cannot provide a substitute for faculty involvement. Facultymust remain central to the educational process and can now assume severalmentoring roles as they assist students in accomplishing the following: navi-gating, interpreting, and critiquing the information available with a keystrokeor a click of a mouse; connecting and negotiating their roles in a wide range ofconversations and communities on-line; and engaging in interactive, collabo-rative learning processes.

To encourage innovative applications of technology in teaching, advising,and research activities, faculty must also have infrastructure support, andaccess to training, financial resources, and institutional rewards—particularlybecause efforts to use information technology will increase faculty workloads(Gilbert, 1996a). Faculty require money and release time to develop andupgrade instructional programs. Faculty need access to multimedia classroomswhere computer, audio, and video equipment are integrated to allow for thedelivery of multimedia materials; they need workstations to develop thesematerials; and they require instruction in how to teach in multimedia class-rooms. Clearly it is both unlikely and unreasonable to expect that the intro-duction of information technology into the curriculum will result in reducedfaculty involvement or instructional costs (Green and Gilbert, 1995a).

67INTEGRATING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY INTO GRADUATE PROGRAMS

Increasingly, faculty are voicing concerns that their interest in using tech-nology outstrips available support services (Green, 1996). Typically, faculty havenot had the benefit of observing exemplary practices of technology-based teach-ing by their professors. It is also impossible for faculty members to know allabout the existing instructional materials now available for even a single course,such as all the books, articles, software, multimedia, on-line databases, or otherinformation resources accessible on the Internet. Therefore, it is imperative thatour professional associations and faculty colleagues establish ongoing forumsto share information, ideas, lessons learned, and encouragement to other fac-ulty and student affairs administrators. Professional associations should estab-lish grant awards to support graduate preparation faculty in informationtechnology–based curriculum initiatives.

In addition to encouraging new approaches that use technology, we needto assess the effectiveness of information technology in enhancing the qualityof student learning. For example, Gilbert (1995) emphasizes the importanceof investigating what combination of face-to-face meetings, independent work,and information technology is most effective. Research is needed to determineeffective strategies that incorporate multimedia, videoconferencing, e-mail, anddiscussion groups in order to best support cooperative and collaborative learn-ing approaches and encourage complex student problem solving and intellec-tual development. Students also should be asked about the degree to whichtheir graduate program prepared them with the skills, attitudes, and knowl-edge necessary to integrate information technology into their professional lives.

The potential of distance education as a viable vehicle to attract and pre-pare individuals from typically underrepresented groups into college studentaffairs preparation programs and our profession also should be explored. SteveGilbert on the AAHESGIT listserv reports that hundreds of institutions com-bine applications of audio, video, and the Internet to make education availableto students who do not have easy access to the main campus. However, headded that technology cannot simultaneously “improve the quality of educa-tion, make education more accessible, and reduce the cost of education” (per-sonal communication, AAHESGIT listserv, Oct. 3, 1996). Therefore, any effortsdesigned to develop “virtual” graduate preparation programs must identifyconcrete practices to connect these students into academic, campus, and pro-fessional communities. For Brown and Duguid (1996) stress that academicprograms must strive to offer wider access to communities, not just to informa-tion and degrees. Educating students about professional practices, roles, andresponsibilities, and students’ involvement in program and professional com-munities should never occur exclusively on-line. Brown and Duguid argue thatthe synergy of live classes and on-line exchanges creates an empowering cli-mate for learning that cannot happen with Internet communications alone.The Internet is not the vehicle to initiate and form communities but is effec-tive in keeping them alive and growing (1996).

Student affairs professionals also must advocate for equitable access to computers and information technology resources. Graduate preparation

68 USING TECHNOLOGY TO PROMOTE STUDENT LEARNING

faculty must recognize that students enter their programs at varying levels ofcomfort, skill, and experience. In addition, if most students live off-campusand have limited access to computers, faculty must be sensitive to the unduehardships placed on students just to complete assignments. Students shouldbe paired or assigned to groups for initial assignments requiring the use ofcomputers and the Internet to encourage peer teaching and learning. Novicesto the Internet often feel more comfortable sharing their ignorance with theirpeers. Enabling a student to spend hands-on time with the computer, guidedby the teaching of other students, creates a personalism and responsiveness to diverse learning style needs. The student “experts” also begin to recognizetheir responsibilities associated with creating a “community of scholars” in theclassroom.

Finally, Baier (1994) stresses the pivotal role of graduate preparation pro-grams in raising the technological competence of the profession. However,competency in technology or knowledge about how to integrate technologyinto student affairs programs is not acknowledged in either the standards orguidelines of the Council of the Advancement of Standards master’s level grad-uate preparation program standards. The profession needs to revisit these stan-dards to include the articulation of the attitudes, skills, and competenciesrequired of student affairs professionals, many of which were identified in thischapter.

Conclusion

In this chapter, we reviewed a small sample from the endless menu of oppor-tunities for integrating technology to enhance the learning experiences of grad-uate students. We also examined the implications of these practices and theareas deserving further exploration. Graduate preparation programs in collegestudent affairs must be intentional and systematic about ways in which theywill use information technology to enhance the teaching and learning processesand to prepare students in applying information technology to promote stu-dent development and community.

References

American College Personnel Association. The Student Learning Imperative: Implications forStudent Affairs. Washington, D.C.: American College Personnel Association, 1994.

Baier, J. L. “Technological Changes in Student Affairs Administration.” In M. J. Barr andAssociates, The Handbook of Student Affairs Administration. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass,1993.

Benedict, L. G. “Technology and Information Systems.” In S. R. Komives, D. B. Woodard, Jr.,and Associates. Student Services: A Handbook for the Profession. (3rd ed.) San Francisco:Jossey-Bass, 1996.

Brown, J. S., and Duguid, P. “Universities in the Digital Age.” Change, 1996, 28 (4), 10–19.Cuyjet, M., and Bowman, R. “Graduate Program Technological Training Versus Practitioner

Expectations: A Research Report.” Paper presented at the national conference of theAmerican College Personnel Association, Mar. 1996, Baltimore.

69INTEGRATING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY INTO GRADUATE PROGRAMS

Ehrmann, S. C. “Asking the Right Questions: What Does Research Tell Us About Technol-ogy and Higher Learning?” Change, 1995, 27 (2), 20–27.

Fey, M. H., and Sisson, M. J. “Approaching the Information Superhighway: Internet Col-laboration Among Future Writing Teachers.” Computer and Composition, 1996, 13, 37–47.

Gilbert, S. W. “The Technology Revolution: Important Questions About a Work inProgress.” Change, 1995, 27 (2), 6–7.

Gilbert, S. W. “Double Visions—Paradigms in Balance or Collision?” Change, 1996a, 28 (2),8–9.

Gilbert, S. W. “Making the Most of a Slow Revolution.” Change, 1996b, 28 (2), 10–23.Green, K. C. “The Coming Ubiquity of Information Technology.” Change, 1996, 28 (2),

24–29.Green, K. C., and Gilbert, S. W. “Academic Productivity and Technology: Myths, Realities,

and New Necessities.” Academe, 1995a, 81 (1), 19–25.Green, K. C., and Gilbert, S. W. “Great Expectations: Content, Communications, Produc-

tivity, and the Role of Information Technology in Higher Education.” Change, 1995b, 27,8–19.

Knefelkamp, L. L., Golec, R. R., and Wells, E. A. “The Practice-to-Theory-to-PracticeModel.” Unpublished manuscript, University of Maryland at College Park, 1985.

Kozma, R. B., and Johnston, J. “The Technological Revolution Comes to the Classroom.”Change, 1991, 23 (1), 10–23.

Sproull, L., and Kiesler, S. “Computers, Networks, and Work.” Scientific American, 1995, 6(1), 128–139.

Wagner, R., and Wilson, B. “Mosaic as a Vehicle for Collaborative Learning.” Paper pre-sented at the Association of Small Computer Users in Education Summer Conference,North Myrtle Beach, S.C., June 1995.

Yakimovicz, A. D., and Murphy, K. L. “Constructivism and Collaboration on the Internet:Case Study of a Graduate Class Experience.” Computers and Education, 1995, 24,203–209.

CATHERINE MCHUGH ENGSTROM is assistant professor of higher education at Syra-cuse University.