There are many aspects to planning for the use of information technology in the university. Planning must take place at a university-wide level, as well as at the program or individual course level.
Sonya Symons from Acadia University, Richard Bochonko from the University of Manitoba, and Darren Meister from Queen's University, gave their perspectives on appropriate planning for instructional technology.
Richard Bochonko introduced the idea of the Teaching, Learning and Technology Roundtable to guide the university in planning any introduction of information technology. The model proposed by Steven Gilbert of the American Association for Higher Education1 involves a broad forum with active participation by faculty, academic support service groups, the chief academic officer, and students among others. Although the role of the Roundtable will vary from one university to the next, in general this advisory group exchanges information, initiates proposals, and may develop strategic plans for information technology. Implementation is the responsibility of the university senate or is negotiated between the administration and academic staff through joint agreements.2
For some faculty, the current debate about the use of instructional technology in the university has fostered valuable discussion about teaching methods and learning styles. Seminars and informal talks about effective teaching practices are more in evidence. According to Sonya Symons, this is one of the positive outcomes of the interest in instructional technology.
The three speakers stressed that the use of instructional technology should focus on teaching and learning. In deciding whether or not to use any particular type of technology, teachers must ask themselves whether using the tool will make a difference or will actually aid the teaching and learning experience. Emphasis needs to be placed on critical thinking, organizing and discriminating between vast amounts of data, rather than learning facts or storing information. Judicious use of instructional tools can help students learn how to integrate, assimilate and analyse information, under the guidance of faculty. As Sonya Symons noted, effective integration is more than making information available.
Richard Bochonko suggested that faculty using instructional technology should seek expertise in learning styles and teaching strategies, as well as in approaches for incorporating technology. Teaching expertise needs to be coupled with knowledge of the subject to be taught to determine the best use of technology. Thus focus is placed on the needs of the discipline rather than on using the latest available technology.
As Darren Meister underlined, the learning environment is only enhanced when the goals drive the technology.
According to Richard Bochonko, acquiring expertise in available technology should be done through faculty development programs, and academic staff need to be given adequate release time to learn how to use, develop and produce instructional material.
Sonya Symons suggested that in-depth faculty training is needed, rather than one-shot sessions.
Darren Meister, on the other hand, suggested that faculty delegate the high tech preparation of materials to technologists. Course development and content, however, remain the responsibility of faculty. This route requires an adequate level of support personnel and resources.
Lack of proper infrastructure is a major obstacle to implementing instructional technology in the university. For faculty, reliable network connections are needed in offices as well as in classrooms. Students need access both on campus and at home. There are concerns about differential access to the network and to a university education itself. Students living in residences with built-in connections have easier access to the university network and Internet than students living off-campus.
At Acadia University, where all students were required to lease IBM laptops at a cost of $1200 above the regular tuition of $3800, it was noticed that enrolment for local area students and mature students had declined. Presumably these prospective students could not afford the increase in the cost of attending the university.
There are other budgetary concerns about the implications of the trend towards the mandatory lease or purchase of computers as students enter the university.
In the United States, the additional revenues collected from students are used to pay for infrastructure improvements needed to support the new technology. Shared computer labs are closed, and the technical support staff that ran those labs are laid off. At the same time, the increased proportion of university budgets devoted to purchase and maintenance of computer technology means that funding is shifted away from staff salaries and benefits. Full-time staff are replaced by part-time staff, and term contracts are shortened.
To date, there has not been much research into the actual effects of instructional technology on learning. At best there is only anecdotal evidence to show whether or not using information technology in the classroom works, leads to a deeper understanding of a subject, or simply results in better exam marks.
Some faculty have noticed that using electronic discussion groups has generally improved student writing skills, although comparisons have not been made between courses which normally involve different quantities or degrees of written work.
After the first year of the Acadia Advantage experience, the mid-term and final examination marks for Advantage students and regular students were compared. Advantage students had achieved higher marks, but it was unclear if the higher tuition they paid to obtain required computer equipment provided an additional incentive.
Information technology is affecting what students expect from faculty, be it instantaneous response to email correspondence or advanced multimedia presentations accessible on the World Wide Web. At the same time, faculty are concerned about how these pressures affect their workload, whether their efforts will be adequately recognized and rewarded, and whether courses they put on-line could be misappropriated for profit by other groups.
The various expectations and concerns expressed here indicate the need for in-depth examination of the implications of information technology and a planning process that involves input from all groups in the university community.
1 See the article on the Teaching, Learning and Technology Roundtable in Change, Volume 28, number 2, April 1996 for a discussion of this model.
2 For further information about Teaching, Learning and Technology Roundtables (TLTR) see, for example: http://www.umuc.edu/~kelley/tltr/.