Labyrinth-Forum | index | back | next |

AAHE Teaching, Learning, and Technology Roundtable (TLTR) Program:

"Improve Education, Use Technology Selectively, Control Costs"

Note: this article quotes liberally from information provided by Steven W. Gilbert, Director of Technology Projects for AAHE, that will appear in an upcoming issue of Change magazine.

"Education can provide the excuse and the means for changing society...for better or worse. Information technology can provide the excuse and the means for transforming education... for better or worse."

Technology seems to appear everywhere. Many institutions have invested in technical infrastructure (network + hardware). Computer software has diffused into the areas of research and personal productivity -- witness the wide use of word processing software and email for communication. Despite our intuition, however, we have scant data that measures the impact of technology on learning.

While most colleges have some sort of information technology planning committee, Gilbert notes that most lack a conceptual framework, focus too much on technology itself and not learning, and generally involve only those already using technology. He adroitly identifies the typical institutional approach to integrating information technology:

The most recent Campus Computer Survey by Kenneth Green reports that on the average, 33% of the students and more than 50% of the faculty at US. colleges have direct access to a personal computer. Yet in Gilbert's extensive travel to colleges and universities, he observes that about 75% of undergraduate education is delivered in the form of "traditional" faculty-led lecture.

Obstacles to improving teaching and learning with technology

• Limited and uneven access to equipment, software, and support services that work against part-time faculty, part-time students, and institutions that serve disadvantaged populations.

• Fragmented institutional planning that focuses on technology instead of teaching and learning. "Most often," writes Gilbert, "there is no single forum for bringing together all those who are needed to understand overall trends and support major advances."

• Fragmented support services "It is rare that librarians, technologists, faculty developers, etc. meet and discuss how best to collaborate to help faculty and students."

• Distrust and poor communication between administrators and faculty that fuel rumors that technology will displace human instructors.

• "Anybody, anytime, anywhere" is a misleading educational banner. While the Internet makes such a concept more plausible, Gilbert states "that accessibility is a necessary but NOT sufficient condition for education."

• Underestimating the difficulty of faculty adoption of new teaching approaches. "Most faculty," acknowledges Gilbert, "are busy people that have never observed someone else teaching effectively using information technology."

• Lack of easily available information about best practices. According to Gilbert, "For most academic disciplines there is no comprehensive, easy-to-find source of information about relevant instructional applications of information technology that also includes reliable evaluative information."

• Difficulty of understanding and obtaining legal use of intellectual property.

• Faculty reward systems pay little attention to information technology.

• Expectations of "products" that are too high and too soon. Gilbert notes that "publicity and marketing efforts make unreachable claims for the quality of new educational media."

• "If everybody is behind, who's ahead?" Today's lesson from the Internet is that there are no experts.

The goal of the TLTR program is to provide institutions with a "compellingly simple and common-sensical approach and coherent framework" to overcome these obstacles. This program includes guidelines, planning materials, and an information network of peer institutions. Gilbert coordinates a series of national and regional TLTR "Start-Up" workshops, that included the 1995 Summer Institute in Phoenix, that included representatives from Chandler-Gilbert Community College, Mesa Community College, and Phoenix College (see next page for a report from PC President Marie Pepicello).

TLTR Recommendations

• Keep asking the fundamental questions. This will keep decision-making in the realm of what will impact the most on teaching and learning.

• Observe the trends, shape the future, and build a vision.

• Adjust to the new pace and depth of change. Support flexible, open technologies. A wave of students entering college now have greater experience with and higher expectations for the use of computer technology likely to be used in their careers.

• Use judgment, resist reductionism, trust faculty and students.

• Reject dichotomies and find good combinations. Often technology is promoted as clear-cut choices such as "new" vs. "old" or "distance learning" vs. "classroom education." Gilbert underscores the need for effective combinations of "teaching approaches and support material" including but not limited to applications of information technology... pushing faculty toward applications of technology that are not clearly embedded within a significant instructional task can generate more resistance than enthusiasm." One of Gilbert's favorite examples is the combination of collaborative learning and groupware.

• Understand intellectual property and practice fair use. While the legal issues are long to solve, institutions must set guidelines for respectful use of media and dispel the "free for educators" assumptions.

• Develop new guidelines quickly and develop new policies slowly.

• Provide flexible structure for technology use while the more complex issues such as copyright and information access are addressed.

• Prepare for your support service crisis. With the gold rush to the World Wide Web, we are seeing the diffusion of technology use described by William Geoghagen from the 10-15% of early innovator faculty to the 70% that make up the mainstream faculty. Gilbert notes that "the level and quality of support that was probably adequate for the first 5% of faculty is probably strained dealing with 14%, and will not 'scale up' for the next 70%. Proportionally more support will be required and those providing it will need better and more varied skills -- including the ability to deal with the more easily-bruised egos of faculty who have no special propensity for technology."

• Extend student roles as assistants and learning colleagues. The TLTR program provides suggestions for forming Faculty Student Support Service Teams (FSSSTs). Institutions developing FSSSTs such as William Paterson College in New Jersey, report faculty recognition of student expertise, excellent career experience for students, and a cost-effective method for support staff.

• Develop a portfolio of change strategies. Gilbert outlines a grid of strategies that may be wide vs. narrow in terms of the proportion of affected students and faculty. They also may be shallow vs. deep in terms of impact on teaching and learning. Strategies that are narrow and deep will have a profound impact on pedagogy, but are also often very expensive. Shallow and wide strategies are effective in making technology more accessible and familiar. The TLTR program suggests a combination of strategies.

• Invest more time and money. Many institutions are addressing the issue through technology user fees.

More Information

• AAHE Bulletin and Change magazine - available from MCLI or your college library.

• 1996 TLTR Summer Institute - will again be held in Phoenix. Contact Ellen Shortill at AAHE (shortill@clark.net) for more information.

• AAHE Web site: http://www.ido.gmu.edu/aahe/Welcome.html

• AAHESGIT Listserv - A moderated online discussion. To join, send an email message to:

    listproc@list.cren.net

  and in that message write:

    subscribe aahesgit your_first_name your_ last_name

URL: http://www.mcli.dist.maricopa.edu/labyforum/win96/win96L2.html