SlideShare una empresa de Scribd logo
1 de 7
Descargar para leer sin conexión
July 19, 2006

MEMORANDUM

TO:             Linda P. Brady, Senior Vice President and Provost

FROM:           Greg Bothun, Professor of Physics
                Deborah A. Carver, Dean of Libraries
                Co-Chairs, Educational Technology Steering Committee

SUBJECT:        Summary of Educational Technology Support

A. Background

The Educational Technology Coordinating Committee was appointed in 1994 to advise the
university administration on matters related to educational technology at the University of Oregon.
Its charge was to “complete a vision statement that could be used to guide future decisions on the
application of educational technology and to provide implementation priorities for the first
biennium.” The coordinating committee evolved into a standing committee, and its charge included
“the allocation of funds to support campus instructional technology and facilities (including
classroom improvements, student labs, network infrastructure), faculty development or training in
the use of technology resources, and curriculum development.”

The OUS Board approved a student fee in 1994 “to develop and implement the technological
infrastructure and instructional materials to support the delivery of educational services via the
network.” It was stipulated that services would specifically benefit all students. Initially, the fee was
set at $50/student/term. It has increased gradually to the current $90/student/term. Over the last 13
years, the educational technology resource fee has provided approximately $40,000,000 in support
of educational technology at the University of Oregon.

Since its inception, ed tech revenues have focused on three main areas:

   •   Basic infrastructure related to educational technology, curriculum delivery and network
       access, for example, modem pools, Blackboard™ system and support, wireless access, user
       support, and student labs. These programs have been managed primarily by the Library and
       Central Computing.

   •   A deans’ allocation to address distributed technology needs at the departmental level. Each
       individual school and college received a formulaic allocation based on its percentage of total
       enrolled student credit hours. The Library also received an allocation to help address
       significant demands related to digital content and related infrastructure.

   •   A discretionary fund to support programs related to faculty and curriculum development.
Infrastructure




             Programs                                                Deans


                                          Figure 1

The intent of this approach was to create synergies by simultaneously investing in all three areas
(represented by the overlap regions in Figure 1). However, until recently the basic needs at the
infrastructure levels dominated expenditures.

Figure 2 shows the changes in fund distribution as a percentage of total tech revenue.

                                          Figure 2




                70%

                60%

                50%

                40%
                                                                     Infra
                                                                     Deans
                30%
                                                                     Programs
                20%

                10%

                 0%
                      1994-1996   1997-1999   2000-2002   2002-Now




Infrastructure Years (Fall 1994 – Spring 1997):
In the first three years, the fee generated approximately $2,200,000/yr. (half of current revenues),
and prices for equipment and infrastructure were considerably higher than now. In addition, a third
of the revenue was pre-allocated to the schools and colleges. The combination of basic
infrastructure needs and fewer dollars limited our capacity to achieve a balanced portfolio of
strategic investments. Nevertheless, substantial improvements in infrastructure and centralized
services were realized. Accomplishments during this period included the following:

   •   Homogenous student and faculty email services
   •   Initial foray of web services
   •   Emergence of several campus computing labs
   •   Expanded user support group within the Computing Center
   •   Establishment of the network apprentice program and other student employment
       opportunities
   •   Establishment of the faculty consultants’ network in the Library (precursor to the CET)
   •   Campus-wide Ethernet availability
   •   Expansion of the UO modem pool for off campus access

The heavy investment in basic network infrastructure, combined with the Library’s lead role in
establishing a statewide library network (Orbis) resulted in the University of Oregon receiving the
1996 CAUSE Award for Excellence in Campus Networking. The UO had clearly moved ahead of
the curve during this time.

The Status Quo Year (Fall 1997 – Fall 2000):

Continued progress was limited over the next three years, and revenues barely covered existing
obligations. Flat enrollments contributed to this situation, as did increases in labor costs. There were
also increased costs associated with current programs, e.g., more demand for modem pool access. In
1997/98, there was a deficit of $140,000. The fee was eventually raised to $75/student/term, and in
1999, the University was able to begin making new investments again, e.g., the Blackboard™
service. However, no significant support could be made for faculty and curriculum development
because of the continued infrastructure demands. The lack of other sources of funds sometimes
meant that ed tech money was used to support other needs related to technology, e.g., network
security.

The Emergence of Opportunity (2000 – 2004):

During this period student enrollment began to rise and the fee was raised to $90/student/term.
Recurring baseline costs remained reasonably fixed (approximately $3,200,000/year), and over time
the ed tech fee generated approximately $1,500,000/yr. in discretionary funds to invest in new
programs and opportunities related to curriculum and faculty development. Thus, the initial vision
and strategy that was expressed in 1994 could now be potentially realized starting in the year 2000.
Given these emerging opportunities, the makeup of the committee gradually changed with more
teaching faculty replacing technologists. Key improvements are summarized as follows:

   •   Campus build out of wireless (started in 2000 and completed in 2005).

   •   The initiation of an annual RFP, starting in 2001, for individual faculty to enhance teaching
       and learning. Between 10 and 20 awards have been given each year. Total annual
       investments ranged between $200,000 and $400,000.
•   The construction of the first wireless laptop classroom (Fall 2001).

   •   The initiation and expansion of the Center for Educational Technology in the Library.

   •   The merger of the New Media Center, which had been focused on external grant funded
       projects, with the Library’s Media Services to provide greater support for faculty in
       developing curriculum projects.

   •   An increase in dedicated FTE in network security, streaming video, and Blackboard™
       support.

   •   The opening of McKenzie Hall for additional computer services and computer labs.

   •   Significant increases in transit bandwidth and in overall connectivity to the global Internet
       through Abilene.

   •   Significant increases in presentation hardware installation in general pool classrooms.

   •   The installation of student response systems in most large lecture rooms.

In 2003, Lorraine Davis, Vice President for Academic Affairs, appointed the Technology Resources
Group (Tim Gleason, Chair) to work with the existing committee and to conduct a broad analysis of
the overall operation and direction for educational technology, and to report back to the Deans’
Council.

The Technology Resources Group conducted a survey of the deans and other key stakeholders.
Most of the deans indicated that the funding had resulted in significant improvements in core
programs, especially in the areas of central student labs, student employment in technology-related
positions, and equipment in the schools and colleges.

The deans also mentioned several areas that were either neglected or under funded: faculty support,
advanced training, classroom technology, and faculty equipment. Most respondents had a sense that
the UO was once a leader in technology, particularly in the area of infrastructure, but had fallen
behind the curve in recent years due to the lack of curriculum applications that leveraged our
investments in infrastructure. The overall process for distributing funds was criticized for its lack of
strategic vision and transparency. The deans suggested several improvements including a full
account of how funds have benefited the students/college/campus, multi-year plans, allocations to
encourage innovation, and a plan that recognizes the different missions of the units while
establishing university goals.

The Technology Resource Group and Educational Technology Steering Committee issued a report
along with a revised vision statement and list of principles (see
http://libweb.uoregon.edu/edtech/reports.html). That document and its recommendations provided
the basis for many of the changes that were implemented in 2005/06.

B. The Present

Over the summer of 2005, the Ed Tech Committee chairs worked with the Provost, the Vice-
President for Academic Affairs, and the Vice Provost for Academic Affairs to draft a strategic plan
for the use of ed tech funds. By that time, there was an accumulated surplus that could be redirected
to support key initiatives. The plan was discussed in the Deans’ Council, and implemented in the
fall of 2005. The plan centered on the following phases:

   •   Phase I: A revised deans’ allocation targeted at baseline needs. The deans’ allocations had
       remained the same since they were instituted. The revisions were an attempt to address
       identified needs and create some equity across the schools and colleges. In some cases,
       particularly in CAS, the allocation was reduced.

   •   Phase II: A dedicated amount to be used to improve both general pool and departmental
       instructional teaching spaces. Approximately $300,000 was allocated for this effort.
       Department heads, working with the Library’s Media Services, were able to specify
       appropriate equipment for various teaching spaces.

   •   Phase III: A large-scale opportunity for individual schools and colleges and support units
       to launch projects that normally would not be supportable under extant deans’ allocations.
       The intent was to support significant infrastructure enhancements and changes in the
       curriculum at the program level. Approximately $700,000 was set aside for this effort.

   •   Phase IV: A continuation of the individual faculty curriculum development proposal
       process that was initiated in Spring 2001.

In addition to these phases, Academic Affairs continued a program started two years before aimed
at faculty training and development, which also was funded with ed tech dollars.

C. Evaluation of the Current Approach

Phase I
The process of reviewing and revising the deans’ allocations represented some improvement in
accountability and allocation based on need, but there was a lack of an objective method to
adequately determine baseline costs. As part of this process, we were able to consolidate campus
wide site-licensed software into one central index, thus relieving the unintended cost share burdens
on individual units and departments. The schools and colleges submitted a wide range of requests,
some of which were more appropriately funded under another phase. Although the changes were
discussed in the summer, the indexes were not adjusted until late in the fiscal calendar year, which
created some budgeting problems and general confusion.

Phase II
Based on this committee’s comments and informal feedback, the classroom improvement project
has been seen as very positive. Departmental requests were reviewed and approved by the
Classroom Improvement Committee. Equipment is being ordered, and installation will take place
over the summer. It should be noted that many faculty are concerned about the overall condition of
classrooms and see the need for basic infrastructure such as blackboards, sufficient chalk,
whiteboards, and flexible lighting. There is some understandable frustration when the campus is
able to invest in higher-end technologies, while these basic needs still exist.

Phase III
The strategic restructuring of the ed tech budget was designed to encourage large-scale proposals,
which anchor instructional technology within the context of an academic program. Phase III
resulted in the funding of a number of important initiatives and generated a great deal of very good
discussion within the committee about IT on campus and ways to improve the process and the
support of faculty ideas. However, the committee received fewer requests than expected, and some
of the proposals were relatively modest in terms of impact. Some of the requests were for
equipment only, for example, large computer monitors or basic upgrades to computer lab
equipment. It appears that the lack of some basic technologies, e.g., newer computers in labs, is still
a problem and accentuates the tension between using the money strategically and addressing
ongoing and fundamental needs. The other concern is sustainability, such as the lack of adequate
and predictable replacement funds for existing equipment. This need is currently handled differently
across campus, e.g., various fees, technology endowments, and ed tech resources. Phase III
proposals were expected to address the sustainability issue, which remains a challenge in many
cases, and may have discouraged some submissions.

Phase IV
The availability of funds to support individual faculty in redesigning their courses has been greatly
appreciated. The time investment from faculty and support units such as CET and TEP is
considerable, and these funds have been essential. This process alone, however, cannot achieve any
large-scale impact, which is why Phase III was designed as part of the strategic restructuring. This
year, there were fewer requests submitted by individual faculty. Several reasons may explain the
decline. In 2004/05, multi-year awards were given to faculty who have tended to be the early
adopters of educational technology, so some of the usual applicants were not part of the process in
2006. Other faculty may have already received awards through Faculty IT Fellows program offered
through Academic Affairs. The decline could also have been the result of “RFP fatigue.”

D. Concluding Remarks and Observations

The University of Oregon has made a good faith effort to invest educational technology resources in
ways that achieve our strategic vision and desired goals. In the past three years, several changes
have been implemented to address the concerns expressed earlier. These changes include the
Faculty IT Fellows Program, the 2005 strategic restructuring, an increasing investment in classroom
technology, the inclusion of more teaching faculty on the committee, the development of the ed tech
website, and wider discussions in Deans’ Council about ed tech-related issues. Many of the
obstacles that preclude a wider use of more technologies are gradually being addressed, either in the
marketplace or on campus. More tools are available to faculty. There is better centralized support on
campus, for example, the Library’s CET and the Teaching Effectiveness Program have a very
effective partnership. There has been improved support for individual faculty through individual ed
tech awards and through the Academic Affairs workshops. Achieving a true transformation,
however, has been challenging, given available resources, needs, opportunities, and faculty support
and encouragement.

As documented in many articles in publications such as Educause Quarterly, most of higher
education has seen modest change in the teaching/learning process as a result of technology. While
Power Point presentations and courseware systems are prevalent, other technology-enhanced
methods such as hybrid courses, video-on-demand, podcasting, and collaborative online learning
have not been widely adopted. On this campus, progress continues to be scattered and often
involves the same faculty. There have been few strong institutional messages to promote and
encourage the use of a wider range of tools and approaches that can improve student learning and
student engagement. Without an institutional imprimatur, it is difficult to achieve significant
momentum. And while we have recently invested in classroom technology, many of our teaching
spaces remain cramped and inflexible. These physical limitations do not easily accommodate
different learning modalities. Based on a recent survey conducted through the committee, it is also
apparent that some faculty see technology as a distraction, if not a mechanism for the loss of
control, particularly in the classroom. On the other hand, with good design and preparation,
technology in the classroom can create new lines of professor-student communication and offer new
types of learning. Achieving the correct balance between these perspectives seems to be the key to
meaningful results.

In more recent years, the committee has tried to address all facets of its charge, rather than focusing
exclusively on the distribution of funds. The committee’s effectiveness, however, is tied closely to
the strategic priorities of the campus and how well those priorities are communicated to the campus.
There is still a need for greater transparency and predictability of funding. Despite all these issues
and the perennial challenge of adequate financial support, a great deal of progress has been made on
this campus. We look forward to being part of the larger conversation on goals and priorities and
how we can make continuous improvements in the effective use of educational technology at the
University of Oregon.

cc. Don Harris
    Terri Warpinski
    Educational Technology Steering Committee

Más contenido relacionado

La actualidad más candente

School management system
School management systemSchool management system
School management systemAmeha Gero
 
Top 10 training development officer interview questions and answers
Top 10 training development officer interview questions and answersTop 10 training development officer interview questions and answers
Top 10 training development officer interview questions and answershudsonevans96
 
Chapter 1 e learning concepts and techniques
Chapter 1 e learning concepts and techniquesChapter 1 e learning concepts and techniques
Chapter 1 e learning concepts and techniquesNima_saeidi
 
Learning management system
Learning management systemLearning management system
Learning management system*instinctools
 
School management system
School management systemSchool management system
School management systemSoumya Behera
 
Design of a prototype web based students’ record management system – webstrems
Design of a prototype web based students’ record management system – webstremsDesign of a prototype web based students’ record management system – webstrems
Design of a prototype web based students’ record management system – webstremsAlexander Decker
 
Feasibility study on an answer grading system based on keyword scanning
Feasibility study on an answer grading system based on keyword scanningFeasibility study on an answer grading system based on keyword scanning
Feasibility study on an answer grading system based on keyword scanningHossain Mohammad Samrat
 
Undertaking letter for_fee_payment (1) copy
Undertaking letter for_fee_payment (1) copyUndertaking letter for_fee_payment (1) copy
Undertaking letter for_fee_payment (1) copyMohammad Gouse
 
Learning Management System | ATUM-LMS
Learning Management System | ATUM-LMSLearning Management System | ATUM-LMS
Learning Management System | ATUM-LMSStratbeans
 
Attracting International Students to the UK Market - Andrea Rabe, Birkbeck, U...
Attracting International Students to the UK Market - Andrea Rabe, Birkbeck, U...Attracting International Students to the UK Market - Andrea Rabe, Birkbeck, U...
Attracting International Students to the UK Market - Andrea Rabe, Birkbeck, U...Association of University Administrators
 
Role of online learning in distance education
Role of online learning in distance educationRole of online learning in distance education
Role of online learning in distance educationLiaquat Rahoo
 
Academic Integrity in Online Courses
Academic Integrity in Online CoursesAcademic Integrity in Online Courses
Academic Integrity in Online CoursesFoothill College
 
Online Education Vs. Traditional Education
Online Education Vs. Traditional EducationOnline Education Vs. Traditional Education
Online Education Vs. Traditional EducationManfredKao
 

La actualidad más candente (20)

School management system
School management systemSchool management system
School management system
 
Top 10 training development officer interview questions and answers
Top 10 training development officer interview questions and answersTop 10 training development officer interview questions and answers
Top 10 training development officer interview questions and answers
 
Chapter 1 e learning concepts and techniques
Chapter 1 e learning concepts and techniquesChapter 1 e learning concepts and techniques
Chapter 1 e learning concepts and techniques
 
Learning management system
Learning management systemLearning management system
Learning management system
 
School management system
School management systemSchool management system
School management system
 
Learning Management System – A Modern Approach
Learning Management System – A Modern ApproachLearning Management System – A Modern Approach
Learning Management System – A Modern Approach
 
School management system
School management systemSchool management system
School management system
 
Design of a prototype web based students’ record management system – webstrems
Design of a prototype web based students’ record management system – webstremsDesign of a prototype web based students’ record management system – webstrems
Design of a prototype web based students’ record management system – webstrems
 
Learning Managment System
Learning Managment SystemLearning Managment System
Learning Managment System
 
Feasibility study on an answer grading system based on keyword scanning
Feasibility study on an answer grading system based on keyword scanningFeasibility study on an answer grading system based on keyword scanning
Feasibility study on an answer grading system based on keyword scanning
 
Undertaking letter for_fee_payment (1) copy
Undertaking letter for_fee_payment (1) copyUndertaking letter for_fee_payment (1) copy
Undertaking letter for_fee_payment (1) copy
 
Total School Cluster Grouping
Total School Cluster GroupingTotal School Cluster Grouping
Total School Cluster Grouping
 
Learning Management System | ATUM-LMS
Learning Management System | ATUM-LMSLearning Management System | ATUM-LMS
Learning Management System | ATUM-LMS
 
Attracting International Students to the UK Market - Andrea Rabe, Birkbeck, U...
Attracting International Students to the UK Market - Andrea Rabe, Birkbeck, U...Attracting International Students to the UK Market - Andrea Rabe, Birkbeck, U...
Attracting International Students to the UK Market - Andrea Rabe, Birkbeck, U...
 
Role of online learning in distance education
Role of online learning in distance educationRole of online learning in distance education
Role of online learning in distance education
 
student portal
student portal student portal
student portal
 
Academic Integrity in Online Courses
Academic Integrity in Online CoursesAcademic Integrity in Online Courses
Academic Integrity in Online Courses
 
Humeira Resume new
Humeira Resume newHumeira Resume new
Humeira Resume new
 
Online Education Vs. Traditional Education
Online Education Vs. Traditional EducationOnline Education Vs. Traditional Education
Online Education Vs. Traditional Education
 
Raza C.V
Raza C.VRaza C.V
Raza C.V
 

Destacado

Incepr 100226 Fairfax
Incepr 100226 FairfaxIncepr 100226 Fairfax
Incepr 100226 Fairfaxaadeportfolio
 
Donne Senza Velo. Progettazione di una campagna di comunicazione
Donne Senza Velo. Progettazione di una campagna di comunicazioneDonne Senza Velo. Progettazione di una campagna di comunicazione
Donne Senza Velo. Progettazione di una campagna di comunicazionediananappo
 
Quarter End Report Fall 2005
Quarter  End  Report  Fall 2005Quarter  End  Report  Fall 2005
Quarter End Report Fall 2005aadeportfolio
 
Diretores dnit curriculo
Diretores dnit curriculoDiretores dnit curriculo
Diretores dnit curriculoDaniel Guedes
 
Tocta report 2010_low_res
Tocta report 2010_low_resTocta report 2010_low_res
Tocta report 2010_low_resDaniel Guedes
 
ePortfolio Project Proposal
ePortfolio Project ProposalePortfolio Project Proposal
ePortfolio Project Proposalaadeportfolio
 
E Port Presentation 05 08
E Port Presentation 05 08E Port Presentation 05 08
E Port Presentation 05 08aadeportfolio
 
Pods Workshop (Design)
Pods Workshop (Design)Pods Workshop (Design)
Pods Workshop (Design)aadeportfolio
 
GráFicos Da Pesquisa Janeiro2010
GráFicos Da Pesquisa Janeiro2010GráFicos Da Pesquisa Janeiro2010
GráFicos Da Pesquisa Janeiro2010Daniel Guedes
 
Year End Ufolio 08 09
Year End Ufolio 08 09Year End Ufolio 08 09
Year End Ufolio 08 09aadeportfolio
 
UO ePortfolio 3rd year pilot proposal
UO ePortfolio 3rd year pilot proposalUO ePortfolio 3rd year pilot proposal
UO ePortfolio 3rd year pilot proposalaadeportfolio
 
Balanço carnaval multicultural recife 2012
Balanço carnaval multicultural recife 2012Balanço carnaval multicultural recife 2012
Balanço carnaval multicultural recife 2012Daniel Guedes
 
Recurso Eduardo Cunha
Recurso Eduardo CunhaRecurso Eduardo Cunha
Recurso Eduardo CunhaDaniel Guedes
 
Parecer ministério público de pernambuco
Parecer ministério público de pernambucoParecer ministério público de pernambuco
Parecer ministério público de pernambucoDaniel Guedes
 

Destacado (19)

Incepr 100226 Fairfax
Incepr 100226 FairfaxIncepr 100226 Fairfax
Incepr 100226 Fairfax
 
Donne Senza Velo. Progettazione di una campagna di comunicazione
Donne Senza Velo. Progettazione di una campagna di comunicazioneDonne Senza Velo. Progettazione di una campagna di comunicazione
Donne Senza Velo. Progettazione di una campagna di comunicazione
 
Ed Tech Year End 08
Ed Tech Year End 08Ed Tech Year End 08
Ed Tech Year End 08
 
Quarter End Report Fall 2005
Quarter  End  Report  Fall 2005Quarter  End  Report  Fall 2005
Quarter End Report Fall 2005
 
Diretores dnit curriculo
Diretores dnit curriculoDiretores dnit curriculo
Diretores dnit curriculo
 
Mid Year
Mid YearMid Year
Mid Year
 
Tocta report 2010_low_res
Tocta report 2010_low_resTocta report 2010_low_res
Tocta report 2010_low_res
 
ePortfolio Project Proposal
ePortfolio Project ProposalePortfolio Project Proposal
ePortfolio Project Proposal
 
E Port Presentation 05 08
E Port Presentation 05 08E Port Presentation 05 08
E Port Presentation 05 08
 
Pods Workshop (Design)
Pods Workshop (Design)Pods Workshop (Design)
Pods Workshop (Design)
 
Ed Tech Re App
Ed Tech Re AppEd Tech Re App
Ed Tech Re App
 
GráFicos Da Pesquisa Janeiro2010
GráFicos Da Pesquisa Janeiro2010GráFicos Da Pesquisa Janeiro2010
GráFicos Da Pesquisa Janeiro2010
 
Year End Ufolio 08 09
Year End Ufolio 08 09Year End Ufolio 08 09
Year End Ufolio 08 09
 
UO ePortfolio 3rd year pilot proposal
UO ePortfolio 3rd year pilot proposalUO ePortfolio 3rd year pilot proposal
UO ePortfolio 3rd year pilot proposal
 
5 Mb
5 Mb5 Mb
5 Mb
 
Balanço carnaval multicultural recife 2012
Balanço carnaval multicultural recife 2012Balanço carnaval multicultural recife 2012
Balanço carnaval multicultural recife 2012
 
Acp tim
Acp timAcp tim
Acp tim
 
Recurso Eduardo Cunha
Recurso Eduardo CunhaRecurso Eduardo Cunha
Recurso Eduardo Cunha
 
Parecer ministério público de pernambuco
Parecer ministério público de pernambucoParecer ministério público de pernambuco
Parecer ministério público de pernambuco
 

Similar a Ed Tech Proposal

CCS Technology Budget Presentation (1).pdf
CCS Technology Budget Presentation (1).pdfCCS Technology Budget Presentation (1).pdf
CCS Technology Budget Presentation (1).pdfKehindeEsther4
 
Busd 5 year_plan_2002-2006
Busd 5 year_plan_2002-2006Busd 5 year_plan_2002-2006
Busd 5 year_plan_2002-2006gibb0
 
Tech Plan
Tech PlanTech Plan
Tech PlanIngMu
 
E learning&engineering education -h. anis- session 7
E learning&engineering education -h. anis- session 7E learning&engineering education -h. anis- session 7
E learning&engineering education -h. anis- session 7husanis
 
E learning&engineering education -h. anis- session 7
E learning&engineering education -h. anis- session 7E learning&engineering education -h. anis- session 7
E learning&engineering education -h. anis- session 7husanis
 
The houston independent school district long range strategic
The houston independent school district long range strategicThe houston independent school district long range strategic
The houston independent school district long range strategicsafirah1
 
Cypress fairbanks isd
Cypress fairbanks isdCypress fairbanks isd
Cypress fairbanks isdPeckmc1
 
Tech plan and erate 2011 edld 5306
Tech plan and erate 2011 edld 5306Tech plan and erate 2011 edld 5306
Tech plan and erate 2011 edld 5306ecswantner
 
Erate for schools
Erate for schoolsErate for schools
Erate for schoolsdwatley
 
Assignmentpowerpoint
AssignmentpowerpointAssignmentpowerpoint
Assignmentpowerpointdwatley
 
Assignmentpowerpoint
AssignmentpowerpointAssignmentpowerpoint
Assignmentpowerpointdwatley
 
Dalhart high school
Dalhart high schoolDalhart high school
Dalhart high schoolrjbarrow
 
E-rate in General
E-rate in GeneralE-rate in General
E-rate in Generalbkmoore
 
E rate and tech plan
E rate and tech planE rate and tech plan
E rate and tech planhwiley07
 
Technology integration in the 21st century classroom
Technology integration in the 21st century classroomTechnology integration in the 21st century classroom
Technology integration in the 21st century classroommsmaica
 
Broadening access to stem programs through technical college articulation pro...
Broadening access to stem programs through technical college articulation pro...Broadening access to stem programs through technical college articulation pro...
Broadening access to stem programs through technical college articulation pro...David Stone
 
Beaumont isd final copy
Beaumont isd final copyBeaumont isd final copy
Beaumont isd final copyPrairie View
 
2014 e learning innovations conference awoyemi access and use of ict for elea...
2014 e learning innovations conference awoyemi access and use of ict for elea...2014 e learning innovations conference awoyemi access and use of ict for elea...
2014 e learning innovations conference awoyemi access and use of ict for elea...eLearning Innovations Conference
 

Similar a Ed Tech Proposal (20)

CCS Technology Budget Presentation (1).pdf
CCS Technology Budget Presentation (1).pdfCCS Technology Budget Presentation (1).pdf
CCS Technology Budget Presentation (1).pdf
 
Busd 5 year_plan_2002-2006
Busd 5 year_plan_2002-2006Busd 5 year_plan_2002-2006
Busd 5 year_plan_2002-2006
 
Tech Plan
Tech PlanTech Plan
Tech Plan
 
E learning&engineering education -h. anis- session 7
E learning&engineering education -h. anis- session 7E learning&engineering education -h. anis- session 7
E learning&engineering education -h. anis- session 7
 
E learning&engineering education -h. anis- session 7
E learning&engineering education -h. anis- session 7E learning&engineering education -h. anis- session 7
E learning&engineering education -h. anis- session 7
 
The houston independent school district long range strategic
The houston independent school district long range strategicThe houston independent school district long range strategic
The houston independent school district long range strategic
 
Cypress fairbanks isd
Cypress fairbanks isdCypress fairbanks isd
Cypress fairbanks isd
 
Tech plan and erate 2011 edld 5306
Tech plan and erate 2011 edld 5306Tech plan and erate 2011 edld 5306
Tech plan and erate 2011 edld 5306
 
Erate for schools
Erate for schoolsErate for schools
Erate for schools
 
Assignmentpowerpoint
AssignmentpowerpointAssignmentpowerpoint
Assignmentpowerpoint
 
Assignmentpowerpoint
AssignmentpowerpointAssignmentpowerpoint
Assignmentpowerpoint
 
Dalhart high school
Dalhart high schoolDalhart high school
Dalhart high school
 
EDLD 5311
EDLD 5311 EDLD 5311
EDLD 5311
 
E-rate in General
E-rate in GeneralE-rate in General
E-rate in General
 
E-rate
E-rateE-rate
E-rate
 
E rate and tech plan
E rate and tech planE rate and tech plan
E rate and tech plan
 
Technology integration in the 21st century classroom
Technology integration in the 21st century classroomTechnology integration in the 21st century classroom
Technology integration in the 21st century classroom
 
Broadening access to stem programs through technical college articulation pro...
Broadening access to stem programs through technical college articulation pro...Broadening access to stem programs through technical college articulation pro...
Broadening access to stem programs through technical college articulation pro...
 
Beaumont isd final copy
Beaumont isd final copyBeaumont isd final copy
Beaumont isd final copy
 
2014 e learning innovations conference awoyemi access and use of ict for elea...
2014 e learning innovations conference awoyemi access and use of ict for elea...2014 e learning innovations conference awoyemi access and use of ict for elea...
2014 e learning innovations conference awoyemi access and use of ict for elea...
 

Más de aadeportfolio

Archiving and Migrating your ePortfolio
Archiving and Migrating your ePortfolioArchiving and Migrating your ePortfolio
Archiving and Migrating your ePortfolioaadeportfolio
 
INCEPR Research Summary 08 09
INCEPR Research Summary 08 09INCEPR Research Summary 08 09
INCEPR Research Summary 08 09aadeportfolio
 
E Portolio Presentation 08 09*
E Portolio Presentation 08 09*E Portolio Presentation 08 09*
E Portolio Presentation 08 09*aadeportfolio
 
Inter Disciplinary Proposal
Inter Disciplinary ProposalInter Disciplinary Proposal
Inter Disciplinary Proposalaadeportfolio
 
Williams Council Proposal
Williams Council ProposalWilliams Council Proposal
Williams Council Proposalaadeportfolio
 
UO INCEPR Year 2 summary
UO INCEPR Year 2 summaryUO INCEPR Year 2 summary
UO INCEPR Year 2 summaryaadeportfolio
 
Pods Workshop (Project)
Pods Workshop (Project)Pods Workshop (Project)
Pods Workshop (Project)aadeportfolio
 
E Portfolio Project Timeline Year 1
E Portfolio  Project  Timeline  Year 1E Portfolio  Project  Timeline  Year 1
E Portfolio Project Timeline Year 1aadeportfolio
 
Pods Workshop (Design)
Pods Workshop (Design)Pods Workshop (Design)
Pods Workshop (Design)aadeportfolio
 
Pods Workshop (Project)
Pods Workshop (Project)Pods Workshop (Project)
Pods Workshop (Project)aadeportfolio
 

Más de aadeportfolio (13)

Archiving and Migrating your ePortfolio
Archiving and Migrating your ePortfolioArchiving and Migrating your ePortfolio
Archiving and Migrating your ePortfolio
 
INCEPR Research Summary 08 09
INCEPR Research Summary 08 09INCEPR Research Summary 08 09
INCEPR Research Summary 08 09
 
E Portolio Presentation 08 09*
E Portolio Presentation 08 09*E Portolio Presentation 08 09*
E Portolio Presentation 08 09*
 
Inter Disciplinary Proposal
Inter Disciplinary ProposalInter Disciplinary Proposal
Inter Disciplinary Proposal
 
Williams Council Proposal
Williams Council ProposalWilliams Council Proposal
Williams Council Proposal
 
UO INCEPR Year 2 summary
UO INCEPR Year 2 summaryUO INCEPR Year 2 summary
UO INCEPR Year 2 summary
 
Pods Workshop (Project)
Pods Workshop (Project)Pods Workshop (Project)
Pods Workshop (Project)
 
Year 2 Final Report
Year 2 Final ReportYear 2 Final Report
Year 2 Final Report
 
Ed Tech Year End
Ed  Tech  Year  EndEd  Tech  Year  End
Ed Tech Year End
 
G T F Fall Report
G T F  Fall  ReportG T F  Fall  Report
G T F Fall Report
 
E Portfolio Project Timeline Year 1
E Portfolio  Project  Timeline  Year 1E Portfolio  Project  Timeline  Year 1
E Portfolio Project Timeline Year 1
 
Pods Workshop (Design)
Pods Workshop (Design)Pods Workshop (Design)
Pods Workshop (Design)
 
Pods Workshop (Project)
Pods Workshop (Project)Pods Workshop (Project)
Pods Workshop (Project)
 

Último

Clinical Pharmacy Introduction to Clinical Pharmacy, Concept of clinical pptx
Clinical Pharmacy  Introduction to Clinical Pharmacy, Concept of clinical pptxClinical Pharmacy  Introduction to Clinical Pharmacy, Concept of clinical pptx
Clinical Pharmacy Introduction to Clinical Pharmacy, Concept of clinical pptxraviapr7
 
Protein Structure - threading Protein modelling pptx
Protein Structure - threading Protein modelling pptxProtein Structure - threading Protein modelling pptx
Protein Structure - threading Protein modelling pptxvidhisharma994099
 
5 charts on South Africa as a source country for international student recrui...
5 charts on South Africa as a source country for international student recrui...5 charts on South Africa as a source country for international student recrui...
5 charts on South Africa as a source country for international student recrui...CaraSkikne1
 
SOLIDE WASTE in Cameroon,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.pptx
SOLIDE WASTE in Cameroon,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.pptxSOLIDE WASTE in Cameroon,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.pptx
SOLIDE WASTE in Cameroon,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.pptxSyedNadeemGillANi
 
Department of Health Compounder Question ‍Solution 2022.pdf
Department of Health Compounder Question ‍Solution 2022.pdfDepartment of Health Compounder Question ‍Solution 2022.pdf
Department of Health Compounder Question ‍Solution 2022.pdfMohonDas
 
Work Experience for psp3 portfolio sasha
Work Experience for psp3 portfolio sashaWork Experience for psp3 portfolio sasha
Work Experience for psp3 portfolio sashasashalaycock03
 
Patient Counselling. Definition of patient counseling; steps involved in pati...
Patient Counselling. Definition of patient counseling; steps involved in pati...Patient Counselling. Definition of patient counseling; steps involved in pati...
Patient Counselling. Definition of patient counseling; steps involved in pati...raviapr7
 
3.21.24 The Origins of Black Power.pptx
3.21.24  The Origins of Black Power.pptx3.21.24  The Origins of Black Power.pptx
3.21.24 The Origins of Black Power.pptxmary850239
 
Diploma in Nursing Admission Test Question Solution 2023.pdf
Diploma in Nursing Admission Test Question Solution 2023.pdfDiploma in Nursing Admission Test Question Solution 2023.pdf
Diploma in Nursing Admission Test Question Solution 2023.pdfMohonDas
 
3.26.24 Race, the Draft, and the Vietnam War.pptx
3.26.24 Race, the Draft, and the Vietnam War.pptx3.26.24 Race, the Draft, and the Vietnam War.pptx
3.26.24 Race, the Draft, and the Vietnam War.pptxmary850239
 
How to Send Emails From Odoo 17 Using Code
How to Send Emails From Odoo 17 Using CodeHow to Send Emails From Odoo 17 Using Code
How to Send Emails From Odoo 17 Using CodeCeline George
 
Riddhi Kevadiya. WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE....
Riddhi Kevadiya. WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE....Riddhi Kevadiya. WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE....
Riddhi Kevadiya. WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE....Riddhi Kevadiya
 
A gentle introduction to Artificial Intelligence
A gentle introduction to Artificial IntelligenceA gentle introduction to Artificial Intelligence
A gentle introduction to Artificial IntelligenceApostolos Syropoulos
 
How to Manage Cross-Selling in Odoo 17 Sales
How to Manage Cross-Selling in Odoo 17 SalesHow to Manage Cross-Selling in Odoo 17 Sales
How to Manage Cross-Selling in Odoo 17 SalesCeline George
 
How to Add Existing Field in One2Many Tree View in Odoo 17
How to Add Existing Field in One2Many Tree View in Odoo 17How to Add Existing Field in One2Many Tree View in Odoo 17
How to Add Existing Field in One2Many Tree View in Odoo 17Celine George
 
Unveiling the Intricacies of Leishmania donovani: Structure, Life Cycle, Path...
Unveiling the Intricacies of Leishmania donovani: Structure, Life Cycle, Path...Unveiling the Intricacies of Leishmania donovani: Structure, Life Cycle, Path...
Unveiling the Intricacies of Leishmania donovani: Structure, Life Cycle, Path...Dr. Asif Anas
 
Easter in the USA presentation by Chloe.
Easter in the USA presentation by Chloe.Easter in the USA presentation by Chloe.
Easter in the USA presentation by Chloe.EnglishCEIPdeSigeiro
 
Slides CapTechTalks Webinar March 2024 Joshua Sinai.pptx
Slides CapTechTalks Webinar March 2024 Joshua Sinai.pptxSlides CapTechTalks Webinar March 2024 Joshua Sinai.pptx
Slides CapTechTalks Webinar March 2024 Joshua Sinai.pptxCapitolTechU
 
Vani Magazine - Quarterly Magazine of Seshadripuram Educational Trust
Vani Magazine - Quarterly Magazine of Seshadripuram Educational TrustVani Magazine - Quarterly Magazine of Seshadripuram Educational Trust
Vani Magazine - Quarterly Magazine of Seshadripuram Educational TrustSavipriya Raghavendra
 

Último (20)

Clinical Pharmacy Introduction to Clinical Pharmacy, Concept of clinical pptx
Clinical Pharmacy  Introduction to Clinical Pharmacy, Concept of clinical pptxClinical Pharmacy  Introduction to Clinical Pharmacy, Concept of clinical pptx
Clinical Pharmacy Introduction to Clinical Pharmacy, Concept of clinical pptx
 
Protein Structure - threading Protein modelling pptx
Protein Structure - threading Protein modelling pptxProtein Structure - threading Protein modelling pptx
Protein Structure - threading Protein modelling pptx
 
5 charts on South Africa as a source country for international student recrui...
5 charts on South Africa as a source country for international student recrui...5 charts on South Africa as a source country for international student recrui...
5 charts on South Africa as a source country for international student recrui...
 
SOLIDE WASTE in Cameroon,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.pptx
SOLIDE WASTE in Cameroon,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.pptxSOLIDE WASTE in Cameroon,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.pptx
SOLIDE WASTE in Cameroon,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.pptx
 
Department of Health Compounder Question ‍Solution 2022.pdf
Department of Health Compounder Question ‍Solution 2022.pdfDepartment of Health Compounder Question ‍Solution 2022.pdf
Department of Health Compounder Question ‍Solution 2022.pdf
 
Work Experience for psp3 portfolio sasha
Work Experience for psp3 portfolio sashaWork Experience for psp3 portfolio sasha
Work Experience for psp3 portfolio sasha
 
Patient Counselling. Definition of patient counseling; steps involved in pati...
Patient Counselling. Definition of patient counseling; steps involved in pati...Patient Counselling. Definition of patient counseling; steps involved in pati...
Patient Counselling. Definition of patient counseling; steps involved in pati...
 
3.21.24 The Origins of Black Power.pptx
3.21.24  The Origins of Black Power.pptx3.21.24  The Origins of Black Power.pptx
3.21.24 The Origins of Black Power.pptx
 
Diploma in Nursing Admission Test Question Solution 2023.pdf
Diploma in Nursing Admission Test Question Solution 2023.pdfDiploma in Nursing Admission Test Question Solution 2023.pdf
Diploma in Nursing Admission Test Question Solution 2023.pdf
 
3.26.24 Race, the Draft, and the Vietnam War.pptx
3.26.24 Race, the Draft, and the Vietnam War.pptx3.26.24 Race, the Draft, and the Vietnam War.pptx
3.26.24 Race, the Draft, and the Vietnam War.pptx
 
How to Send Emails From Odoo 17 Using Code
How to Send Emails From Odoo 17 Using CodeHow to Send Emails From Odoo 17 Using Code
How to Send Emails From Odoo 17 Using Code
 
Riddhi Kevadiya. WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE....
Riddhi Kevadiya. WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE....Riddhi Kevadiya. WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE....
Riddhi Kevadiya. WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE....
 
A gentle introduction to Artificial Intelligence
A gentle introduction to Artificial IntelligenceA gentle introduction to Artificial Intelligence
A gentle introduction to Artificial Intelligence
 
How to Manage Cross-Selling in Odoo 17 Sales
How to Manage Cross-Selling in Odoo 17 SalesHow to Manage Cross-Selling in Odoo 17 Sales
How to Manage Cross-Selling in Odoo 17 Sales
 
How to Add Existing Field in One2Many Tree View in Odoo 17
How to Add Existing Field in One2Many Tree View in Odoo 17How to Add Existing Field in One2Many Tree View in Odoo 17
How to Add Existing Field in One2Many Tree View in Odoo 17
 
March 2024 Directors Meeting, Division of Student Affairs and Academic Support
March 2024 Directors Meeting, Division of Student Affairs and Academic SupportMarch 2024 Directors Meeting, Division of Student Affairs and Academic Support
March 2024 Directors Meeting, Division of Student Affairs and Academic Support
 
Unveiling the Intricacies of Leishmania donovani: Structure, Life Cycle, Path...
Unveiling the Intricacies of Leishmania donovani: Structure, Life Cycle, Path...Unveiling the Intricacies of Leishmania donovani: Structure, Life Cycle, Path...
Unveiling the Intricacies of Leishmania donovani: Structure, Life Cycle, Path...
 
Easter in the USA presentation by Chloe.
Easter in the USA presentation by Chloe.Easter in the USA presentation by Chloe.
Easter in the USA presentation by Chloe.
 
Slides CapTechTalks Webinar March 2024 Joshua Sinai.pptx
Slides CapTechTalks Webinar March 2024 Joshua Sinai.pptxSlides CapTechTalks Webinar March 2024 Joshua Sinai.pptx
Slides CapTechTalks Webinar March 2024 Joshua Sinai.pptx
 
Vani Magazine - Quarterly Magazine of Seshadripuram Educational Trust
Vani Magazine - Quarterly Magazine of Seshadripuram Educational TrustVani Magazine - Quarterly Magazine of Seshadripuram Educational Trust
Vani Magazine - Quarterly Magazine of Seshadripuram Educational Trust
 

Ed Tech Proposal

  • 1. July 19, 2006 MEMORANDUM TO: Linda P. Brady, Senior Vice President and Provost FROM: Greg Bothun, Professor of Physics Deborah A. Carver, Dean of Libraries Co-Chairs, Educational Technology Steering Committee SUBJECT: Summary of Educational Technology Support A. Background The Educational Technology Coordinating Committee was appointed in 1994 to advise the university administration on matters related to educational technology at the University of Oregon. Its charge was to “complete a vision statement that could be used to guide future decisions on the application of educational technology and to provide implementation priorities for the first biennium.” The coordinating committee evolved into a standing committee, and its charge included “the allocation of funds to support campus instructional technology and facilities (including classroom improvements, student labs, network infrastructure), faculty development or training in the use of technology resources, and curriculum development.” The OUS Board approved a student fee in 1994 “to develop and implement the technological infrastructure and instructional materials to support the delivery of educational services via the network.” It was stipulated that services would specifically benefit all students. Initially, the fee was set at $50/student/term. It has increased gradually to the current $90/student/term. Over the last 13 years, the educational technology resource fee has provided approximately $40,000,000 in support of educational technology at the University of Oregon. Since its inception, ed tech revenues have focused on three main areas: • Basic infrastructure related to educational technology, curriculum delivery and network access, for example, modem pools, Blackboard™ system and support, wireless access, user support, and student labs. These programs have been managed primarily by the Library and Central Computing. • A deans’ allocation to address distributed technology needs at the departmental level. Each individual school and college received a formulaic allocation based on its percentage of total enrolled student credit hours. The Library also received an allocation to help address significant demands related to digital content and related infrastructure. • A discretionary fund to support programs related to faculty and curriculum development.
  • 2. Infrastructure Programs Deans Figure 1 The intent of this approach was to create synergies by simultaneously investing in all three areas (represented by the overlap regions in Figure 1). However, until recently the basic needs at the infrastructure levels dominated expenditures. Figure 2 shows the changes in fund distribution as a percentage of total tech revenue. Figure 2 70% 60% 50% 40% Infra Deans 30% Programs 20% 10% 0% 1994-1996 1997-1999 2000-2002 2002-Now Infrastructure Years (Fall 1994 – Spring 1997):
  • 3. In the first three years, the fee generated approximately $2,200,000/yr. (half of current revenues), and prices for equipment and infrastructure were considerably higher than now. In addition, a third of the revenue was pre-allocated to the schools and colleges. The combination of basic infrastructure needs and fewer dollars limited our capacity to achieve a balanced portfolio of strategic investments. Nevertheless, substantial improvements in infrastructure and centralized services were realized. Accomplishments during this period included the following: • Homogenous student and faculty email services • Initial foray of web services • Emergence of several campus computing labs • Expanded user support group within the Computing Center • Establishment of the network apprentice program and other student employment opportunities • Establishment of the faculty consultants’ network in the Library (precursor to the CET) • Campus-wide Ethernet availability • Expansion of the UO modem pool for off campus access The heavy investment in basic network infrastructure, combined with the Library’s lead role in establishing a statewide library network (Orbis) resulted in the University of Oregon receiving the 1996 CAUSE Award for Excellence in Campus Networking. The UO had clearly moved ahead of the curve during this time. The Status Quo Year (Fall 1997 – Fall 2000): Continued progress was limited over the next three years, and revenues barely covered existing obligations. Flat enrollments contributed to this situation, as did increases in labor costs. There were also increased costs associated with current programs, e.g., more demand for modem pool access. In 1997/98, there was a deficit of $140,000. The fee was eventually raised to $75/student/term, and in 1999, the University was able to begin making new investments again, e.g., the Blackboard™ service. However, no significant support could be made for faculty and curriculum development because of the continued infrastructure demands. The lack of other sources of funds sometimes meant that ed tech money was used to support other needs related to technology, e.g., network security. The Emergence of Opportunity (2000 – 2004): During this period student enrollment began to rise and the fee was raised to $90/student/term. Recurring baseline costs remained reasonably fixed (approximately $3,200,000/year), and over time the ed tech fee generated approximately $1,500,000/yr. in discretionary funds to invest in new programs and opportunities related to curriculum and faculty development. Thus, the initial vision and strategy that was expressed in 1994 could now be potentially realized starting in the year 2000. Given these emerging opportunities, the makeup of the committee gradually changed with more teaching faculty replacing technologists. Key improvements are summarized as follows: • Campus build out of wireless (started in 2000 and completed in 2005). • The initiation of an annual RFP, starting in 2001, for individual faculty to enhance teaching and learning. Between 10 and 20 awards have been given each year. Total annual investments ranged between $200,000 and $400,000.
  • 4. The construction of the first wireless laptop classroom (Fall 2001). • The initiation and expansion of the Center for Educational Technology in the Library. • The merger of the New Media Center, which had been focused on external grant funded projects, with the Library’s Media Services to provide greater support for faculty in developing curriculum projects. • An increase in dedicated FTE in network security, streaming video, and Blackboard™ support. • The opening of McKenzie Hall for additional computer services and computer labs. • Significant increases in transit bandwidth and in overall connectivity to the global Internet through Abilene. • Significant increases in presentation hardware installation in general pool classrooms. • The installation of student response systems in most large lecture rooms. In 2003, Lorraine Davis, Vice President for Academic Affairs, appointed the Technology Resources Group (Tim Gleason, Chair) to work with the existing committee and to conduct a broad analysis of the overall operation and direction for educational technology, and to report back to the Deans’ Council. The Technology Resources Group conducted a survey of the deans and other key stakeholders. Most of the deans indicated that the funding had resulted in significant improvements in core programs, especially in the areas of central student labs, student employment in technology-related positions, and equipment in the schools and colleges. The deans also mentioned several areas that were either neglected or under funded: faculty support, advanced training, classroom technology, and faculty equipment. Most respondents had a sense that the UO was once a leader in technology, particularly in the area of infrastructure, but had fallen behind the curve in recent years due to the lack of curriculum applications that leveraged our investments in infrastructure. The overall process for distributing funds was criticized for its lack of strategic vision and transparency. The deans suggested several improvements including a full account of how funds have benefited the students/college/campus, multi-year plans, allocations to encourage innovation, and a plan that recognizes the different missions of the units while establishing university goals. The Technology Resource Group and Educational Technology Steering Committee issued a report along with a revised vision statement and list of principles (see http://libweb.uoregon.edu/edtech/reports.html). That document and its recommendations provided the basis for many of the changes that were implemented in 2005/06. B. The Present Over the summer of 2005, the Ed Tech Committee chairs worked with the Provost, the Vice- President for Academic Affairs, and the Vice Provost for Academic Affairs to draft a strategic plan for the use of ed tech funds. By that time, there was an accumulated surplus that could be redirected
  • 5. to support key initiatives. The plan was discussed in the Deans’ Council, and implemented in the fall of 2005. The plan centered on the following phases: • Phase I: A revised deans’ allocation targeted at baseline needs. The deans’ allocations had remained the same since they were instituted. The revisions were an attempt to address identified needs and create some equity across the schools and colleges. In some cases, particularly in CAS, the allocation was reduced. • Phase II: A dedicated amount to be used to improve both general pool and departmental instructional teaching spaces. Approximately $300,000 was allocated for this effort. Department heads, working with the Library’s Media Services, were able to specify appropriate equipment for various teaching spaces. • Phase III: A large-scale opportunity for individual schools and colleges and support units to launch projects that normally would not be supportable under extant deans’ allocations. The intent was to support significant infrastructure enhancements and changes in the curriculum at the program level. Approximately $700,000 was set aside for this effort. • Phase IV: A continuation of the individual faculty curriculum development proposal process that was initiated in Spring 2001. In addition to these phases, Academic Affairs continued a program started two years before aimed at faculty training and development, which also was funded with ed tech dollars. C. Evaluation of the Current Approach Phase I The process of reviewing and revising the deans’ allocations represented some improvement in accountability and allocation based on need, but there was a lack of an objective method to adequately determine baseline costs. As part of this process, we were able to consolidate campus wide site-licensed software into one central index, thus relieving the unintended cost share burdens on individual units and departments. The schools and colleges submitted a wide range of requests, some of which were more appropriately funded under another phase. Although the changes were discussed in the summer, the indexes were not adjusted until late in the fiscal calendar year, which created some budgeting problems and general confusion. Phase II Based on this committee’s comments and informal feedback, the classroom improvement project has been seen as very positive. Departmental requests were reviewed and approved by the Classroom Improvement Committee. Equipment is being ordered, and installation will take place over the summer. It should be noted that many faculty are concerned about the overall condition of classrooms and see the need for basic infrastructure such as blackboards, sufficient chalk, whiteboards, and flexible lighting. There is some understandable frustration when the campus is able to invest in higher-end technologies, while these basic needs still exist. Phase III The strategic restructuring of the ed tech budget was designed to encourage large-scale proposals, which anchor instructional technology within the context of an academic program. Phase III resulted in the funding of a number of important initiatives and generated a great deal of very good discussion within the committee about IT on campus and ways to improve the process and the
  • 6. support of faculty ideas. However, the committee received fewer requests than expected, and some of the proposals were relatively modest in terms of impact. Some of the requests were for equipment only, for example, large computer monitors or basic upgrades to computer lab equipment. It appears that the lack of some basic technologies, e.g., newer computers in labs, is still a problem and accentuates the tension between using the money strategically and addressing ongoing and fundamental needs. The other concern is sustainability, such as the lack of adequate and predictable replacement funds for existing equipment. This need is currently handled differently across campus, e.g., various fees, technology endowments, and ed tech resources. Phase III proposals were expected to address the sustainability issue, which remains a challenge in many cases, and may have discouraged some submissions. Phase IV The availability of funds to support individual faculty in redesigning their courses has been greatly appreciated. The time investment from faculty and support units such as CET and TEP is considerable, and these funds have been essential. This process alone, however, cannot achieve any large-scale impact, which is why Phase III was designed as part of the strategic restructuring. This year, there were fewer requests submitted by individual faculty. Several reasons may explain the decline. In 2004/05, multi-year awards were given to faculty who have tended to be the early adopters of educational technology, so some of the usual applicants were not part of the process in 2006. Other faculty may have already received awards through Faculty IT Fellows program offered through Academic Affairs. The decline could also have been the result of “RFP fatigue.” D. Concluding Remarks and Observations The University of Oregon has made a good faith effort to invest educational technology resources in ways that achieve our strategic vision and desired goals. In the past three years, several changes have been implemented to address the concerns expressed earlier. These changes include the Faculty IT Fellows Program, the 2005 strategic restructuring, an increasing investment in classroom technology, the inclusion of more teaching faculty on the committee, the development of the ed tech website, and wider discussions in Deans’ Council about ed tech-related issues. Many of the obstacles that preclude a wider use of more technologies are gradually being addressed, either in the marketplace or on campus. More tools are available to faculty. There is better centralized support on campus, for example, the Library’s CET and the Teaching Effectiveness Program have a very effective partnership. There has been improved support for individual faculty through individual ed tech awards and through the Academic Affairs workshops. Achieving a true transformation, however, has been challenging, given available resources, needs, opportunities, and faculty support and encouragement. As documented in many articles in publications such as Educause Quarterly, most of higher education has seen modest change in the teaching/learning process as a result of technology. While Power Point presentations and courseware systems are prevalent, other technology-enhanced methods such as hybrid courses, video-on-demand, podcasting, and collaborative online learning have not been widely adopted. On this campus, progress continues to be scattered and often involves the same faculty. There have been few strong institutional messages to promote and encourage the use of a wider range of tools and approaches that can improve student learning and student engagement. Without an institutional imprimatur, it is difficult to achieve significant momentum. And while we have recently invested in classroom technology, many of our teaching spaces remain cramped and inflexible. These physical limitations do not easily accommodate different learning modalities. Based on a recent survey conducted through the committee, it is also apparent that some faculty see technology as a distraction, if not a mechanism for the loss of control, particularly in the classroom. On the other hand, with good design and preparation,
  • 7. technology in the classroom can create new lines of professor-student communication and offer new types of learning. Achieving the correct balance between these perspectives seems to be the key to meaningful results. In more recent years, the committee has tried to address all facets of its charge, rather than focusing exclusively on the distribution of funds. The committee’s effectiveness, however, is tied closely to the strategic priorities of the campus and how well those priorities are communicated to the campus. There is still a need for greater transparency and predictability of funding. Despite all these issues and the perennial challenge of adequate financial support, a great deal of progress has been made on this campus. We look forward to being part of the larger conversation on goals and priorities and how we can make continuous improvements in the effective use of educational technology at the University of Oregon. cc. Don Harris Terri Warpinski Educational Technology Steering Committee