Updated Technology Plan For FRIT 8132

Updated Technology Plan Evaluation
Updated Technology Plan Evaluation Louise Fechter, Angela Kennedy, and Lacey Phillips Georgia Southern University Dr. Hodges 11/30/2012
Louise Fechter, Angela Kennedy, and Lacey Phillips
Table of Contents Table of Contents...........................................................................................................................2 Part 1: Narrative............................................................................................................................4

Introduction...........................................................................................................................................4
INCLUDEPICTURE !!!!local"ost!!#olu$es!!%&D'%!!:..:..:!!Users!!'n(ela!!Do)nloads!!I$a(e*1 !+ ,ER-E.&R,'TINET ............................................................................................................../

0tren(t"s and 1ea2nesses....................................................................................................................3 &utline of Tec"nolo(4 Plan C"an(es.................................................................................................15 I$6rove$ents......................................................................................................................................13
Part II: U6dated Tec"nolo(4 Plan.............................................................................................13

7road87ased 0u66ort..........................................................................................................................13 Needs 'ssess$ent 9based on 6ersonal co$$unication )it" Robbie '$bler on Nove$ber 2:; 2512<......................................................................................................................................................25 ,ission..................................................................................................................................................25 #ision 0tate$ent 9borro)ed and ada6ted fro$ -0U Tec"nolo(4 and Infor$ation Resources 0trate(ic Plan<......................................................................................................................................21 -oals; &b=ectives; and 0trate(ies 9borro)ed and fro$ -0U Tec"nolo(4 and Infor$ation Resources 0trate(ic Plan<....................................................................................................................21 'ction Plan>,ulti84ear Plannin( 9borro)ed fro$ -0U Tec"nolo(4 and Infor$ation Resources 0trate(ic Plan <.....................................................................................................................................23 Pro(ra$ Inte(ration............................................................................................................................?5 Curriculu$ Inte(ration 9borro)ed fro$: "tt6:>>))).ala.or(>acrl>standards>infor$ationliterac4co$6etenc4@il"ed and $odeled after "tt6:>>))).n"asc"ools.co$>sc"ools>6ara(on>0c"oolA25&6erationsA25Docu$ents>Tec"nolo(4 A25Plan.6df<.......................................................................................................................................?1 &n(oin( Evaluation 9borro)ed fro$ -0U Tec"nolo(4 and Infor$ation Resources 0trate(ic Plan and 6ersonal co$$unication fro$ Robbie '$bler<.........................................................................?? 0tandards 9borro)ed fro$ "tt6:>>services.(eor(iasout"ern.edu>its>su66ortedsoft)are86c.6"6 and "tt6:>>services.(eor(iasout"ern.edu>its>su66ortedsoft)are8$ac.6"6<.............................................?4 7ud(et Resources 9borro)ed fro$ "tt6:>>))).u)sa.edu>olit>cio>IT6lans>U18-reenA257a4 A25ITA25Plan.6df<...........................................................................................................................?4 0c"ool Pilot Pro=ect..............................................................................................................................?/ ,odel Classroo$ Confi(uration........................................................................................................?B .acilities 9$odeled after C'T0 at Classroo$ .acilities<..................................................................45
,aintenance>0u66ort 9borro)ed fro$ "tt6:>>services.(eor(iasout"ern.edu>its>about.6"6<..........41 0oft)are '(ree$ents 9borro)ed fro$ "tt6:>>services.(eor(iasout"ern.edu>its>soft)are.6"6<.....42 'cce6table Use Polic4 9borro)ed fro$ t"e -0U Co$6uter Use Polic4<........................................4? 0taff Develo6$ent................................................................................................................................44 Conclusion and Reco$$endations 9ada6ted fro$ "tt6:>>tec"nolo(4.6itt.edu>about>it8 6lan>conclusion."t$l<..........................................................................................................................4:
References.....................................................................................................................................43
'$erican Librar4 'ssociation. 92512<. 'L' standards. Retrieved fro$ "tt6:>>))).ala.or(>acrl>standards>infor$ationliterac4co$6etenc4@il"ed......................................43
'66endiC8 Tec"nolo(4 Plan Evaluation Rubric.......................................................................D?
Part 1: Narrative
Introduction Georgia Southern University (GSU) reached a record enrollment of 20,574 students during Fall, 2012. Currently, there are 17,993 undergraduate students and 2,581 graduate students with students from 49 U.S. states and over a 100 countries. Georgia Southern University adopted the University System of Georgia, Board of Regents (USG-BOR) initiative to increase student success. To achieve this initiative, one of Georgia Southerns goals is to boost retention, progression and graduation (RPG) rates in the University System of Georgia. The table below provides details about Georgia Southerns growth over the past 10 years. Table 1
Updated Technology Plan Evaluation Louise Fechter, Angela Kennedy, and Lacey Phillips
INCLUDEPICTURE "\\\\localhost\\Volumes\\KODAK\\:..:..:\\Users\\Angela\\Downloads\\Image_0" \* MERGEFORMATINET
Georgia Southern has nationally accredited academic programs in the liberal arts, sciences, and professional studies. The faculty, staff, and students embrace many of the core values of the University through their integrity, civility, kindness, collaboration, and a commitment to lifelong learning, wellness, and social responsibility. (Georgia Southern University, 2012a)
Table 2 Fall Semesters Enrollment Summary (borrowed from GSUs Strategic Research and Analysis) INCLUDEPICTURE "\\\\localhost\\Volumes\\KODAK\\:..:..:\\Users\\Angela\\Downloads\\Image_1" \*
"
MERGEFORMATINET
The Fall Semesters Enrollment Summary for Fall of 2003 through Fall of 2012 yielded some interesting results. The overall number of Full Time Enrolled (FTE) students increased by 1.5%. This increase does not include the number of part-time enrolled students. There were decreases in both the undergraduate (2.0%) and graduate (3.5%) student populations. The classifications also indicated a steady increase for undergraduate students, and a small decrease in the number of graduate and doctorate students. In addition to the small decrease among enrolled graduate and doctorate students, the unknown or undeclared student population under the Ethnicities category showed a significant decrease of 71% between Fall 2007 and Fall 2012. These statistics do not indicate the reason for the steep enrollment decline among students in this category. Finally, in the State of Current Residence category there was also a substantial increase of 23% for instate student enrollment from 14,689 students in Fall 2003 to 19,228 students in Fall 2012. Strengths and Weaknesses One of the major strengths found in Georgia Southerns technology plan is its adequacy in describing most of the goals, objectives, strategies and tactics for achieving the technology needs and wants of teachers, students, administration, faculty, and others at the school. With the exceptions of budget requirements and conclusion and recommendations, all of the requirements outlined in the rubric created with part 1 of the Technology Plan Evaluation assignment are located in the document. While the plan does not frequently describe why a technology is suggested, there are a number of proposals for several types of technology in this plan, indicating
that input and feedback from multiple colleges and/or departments throughout the institution were obtained prior to the creation of this plan. Additionally, the plan also provides timelines and responsible areas for most tasks listed within the document, which is critical for accountability and insurance of completion. One of the major weaknesses of this plan is the lack of synthesis of the plans contents. The plan is more like a multi-department wish list rather than a well-designed document, where its authors not only created a department needs list but also determined the impacts and feasibility for each items implementation. Because of this, the document is very disjointed, making it difficult for the reader to identify immediately why an item is listed and how the said item actually meets one of the institutions stated goals. Additionally, the plan is not current. Most of the objectives outlined in the technology plan have already been met or have shifted as consequence of the institutions changing needs. Outline of Technology Plan Changes Technology plan analysis rubric. The technology plan rubric created with part
1 of the Technology Plan Evaluation is located in the Appendix of this document. It combines
aspects from both Allens technology plan rubric and Sibley and Kimballs. It is comprised of nine categories worth a maximum of three points per category. The maximum score an institution could receive for this rubric is 27 points. Georgia Southerns Technology and Information Resources Strategic Plan was evaluated and given 16/27 points. Individual scores for each category along with a rationale for the scores were included in the evaluation. This report will introduce ways to improve the existing technology plan by addressing areas of
1%
weakness identified in part 1 of the Technology Plan Evaluation, along with adding new categories suggested for this assignment, that were excluded from part 1. Broad-based support. The Broad-Based Support information is not in the
original technology plan. Incorporating this section into the updated technology plan provides
additional information about Georgia Southern to the reader. Specifically, the demographics at GSU and an enrollment summary provide information about the steady growth of the student population over the past 10 years, which will better enable the reader to understand this aspect of the institution. Needs assessment. While the plan provides a good bit of detail concerning plans for telecommunications, hardware, software, and physical security needs, it is unclear how these needs were determined. For instance, there is no discussion concerning needs assessments, surveys, how current/future technology was/will be chosen, how the equipment is /will be used by students and staff, nor the availability of necessary training. Clearly, some of the elements defined in this category, such as the completion of fiber optic paths may not require input from any area except IT, but even in those cases, there should be a documented process cited that justifies the need for the stated updates. For technology, that is department or college-specific, staff and faculty needs assessments and surveys should be referenced. Again, this lends credibility and clarity to the underlying rationale for including the tactic in this plan. After an interview with Mr. Robby Ambler from Georgia Southern University, it was discovered that the technology committee does in fact conduct administration, faculty, and
11
student surveys in order to determine the technological needs for each group. The surveys, and the feedback gleaned should be noted in the technology plan, so all stakeholders are aware that the impacted parties had input in the recommendations submitted. This information would benefit the plan, because the reader would understand why the technology committee recommends purchasing the technology. Mission. The original technology plan did not identify the mission statement
of the university. By adding the mission statement as an update to the technology plan, the
reader can see how the universitys mission is tied to the technology plan. Vision statement. A vision statement that describes expected outcomes is
included in the Technology and Information Resources Strategic Plan. The Achieving the
Technology Vision section on page 3 describes Georgia Southerns definition of technology along with how technology might address students learning and facultys teaching needs. The vision statement is linked directly to the Academic Distinction theme associated with Georgia Southern Universitys strategic plan and identifies ways to utilize technologies and services for students, faculty, administration, alumni and other supporters. However, there is not a clear delineation between the outcomes outlined in the vision statement and how technology will facilitate those outcomes under the Achieving the Technology Vision paragraph. To improve the vision statement, a description of the technology that will affect the outcomes is added. This adds cohesion to this area of the plan and better enables the reader to understand how the subsequent sections link to each other.
12
Goals, objectives, and strategies. Although some of the goals are broad and comprehensive, some are also general, as though intended to capture the overarching themes of what the university system wants to cover in the technology plan. Because of this, some of the goals corresponding objectives and strategies are not easily measurable, making it difficult to determine how progress is achieved. To address this deficiency, the objectives and/or strategies associated with these goals are updated to incorporate assessments that measure current and future states, along with the addition of nineteen new strategies. By adding and updating these elements, evidence of success or failure is provided, enabling key decision makers to make informed decisions concerning whether the use of a program, software, or hardware should be continued or discontinued. As described in the Strengths and Weaknesses section of this document, there is a lack of organization and clarity around how goals, objectives, and strategies are related, and how they support one another. Outlining the goals, associating each goal with its objectives, and associating each objective with its strategies will better organize this information. By defining and clarifying these relationships, key stakeholders will understand the overall vision for the technology plan and can more readily determine whether goals and objectives are appropriate and achievable and identify if each has been successfully met at the end of the plans timeline. Action plan/multi-year planning. While a timeline was attached to specific
strategies in the original technology plan, adding the action plan and multi-year planning
allowed us to set more specific timelines for each of the goals in this plan.
13
Program integration. Program integration is not included in
S!"s
Technology and Information Resources Strategic Plan, so it was added to the updated plan.
After reviewing online documentation, it was determined that the integration of Folio is a critical component to the success of GSUs long-term online program. Because of this, GSUs Technology and Information Resources Strategic Plan should be directly linked to this documentation. By linking these documents, there is an additional level of oversight for this critical project, since the technology plan is updated annually and a directive is in place for the VPIT to periodically provide progress reports. Curriculum integration. This portion of the technology plan was completely
left out of Georgia Southerns plan. Because integrating technology into the curriculum is one
of the core reasons for using technology in educational settings, this section was added to the technology plan. It is very important to understand how a particular technology will enhance curriculum, and facilitate student learning. This section was added to the plan, to illustrate how the Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education may be integrated into the curriculum. These standards better align with the technology and curriculum found in a higher education environment. Ongoing evaluation. There is an ongoing evaluation process described in
the Plan Assessment section on page 1. The plan is subject to annual assessments and
modifications, and the University Strategic Planning Committee might periodically request progress reports from the Vice President of Information Technology. Within the plan, each
14
tactic has a field for Responsible for Implementation, Timeline, Measure of Progress, and Results Obtained, so there is a plan in place to document the success or failure of a particular tactic. Finally, Strategy 21 states that there will be a planning strategy that continuously assesses progress, clarifies tactics and implements new initiatives in support of the University Strategic Plan. This strategy has a timeline of 04/01/2010 with measures of progress being documented Level III plans and report of assessment. To enhance the process described, a section will be added to help identify the factors involved in making decisions about whether technology is incorporated or retired. This is based on surveys, and interactions with impacted users, and through usage reports. After receiving a personal communication from Robbie Ambler on November 27, 2012, it became apparent that usage is a critical factor in determining whether a technology on campus will be continued or retired, so it is noted in the updated Evaluation section of technology plan. In this communication, Ambler stated the following: Well obviously, when even the company anymore it is time to move on does not support a product like GaVIEW. Unfortunately, the vendors and developers in a free market economy slightly control that too. Technological standards change too, so we are at that mercy sometimes too. Usage definitely plays a part because sometimes needs change and products don't adopt -- remember MySpace vs. Facebook days? Other times, it is fiscal. We just cannot afford to keep something when a cheaper alternative comes along, i.e. Google Apps vs. Novell Groupwise. Standards.
eorgia Southern !niversity"s technology plan also had no
e#uipment standards listed. Equipment standards for Macs and PCs are located on GSUs
website and are included in the updated plan. It is important that recommended and purchased technology follow these standards. The tables found on the website also include training opportunities for using the listed software. Budget resources. $o funding alternatives are included in
S!"s Technology
and Information Resources Strategic Plan, so these are added to the updated plan. After
extensive research, it has been determined that this information is not publicly accessible. Therefore, several technology plans from other universities were reviewed, and the University of Wisconsins contained a funding sources section in its document. Because other sections of this plan are so similar to GSUs technology plan, the decision was made to copy this section from the University of Wisconsins plan into GSUs updated technology plan. By doing so, key decision makers can quickly identify funding opportunities and/or constraints. Obviously, the ideal situation would be to have access to true funding sources, so the technology plan can more fully address funding items/programs described in the plan. School pilot project. $o school pilot pro%ect recommendations were included
in
S!"s original technology plan, so a suggested school pilot program was added to the
updated plan. Because there is a growing movement toward learner-centered strategies in the classroom, it was decided that this would be an excellent idea for a school pilot project. The project describes a scenario where faculty from multiple disciplines share/create lesson plans that incorporate technology and learner-centered activities in the classroom. These ideas could then be reviewed and compiled into a resource for faculty members to reference and incorporate into their own classrooms. Multiple resources describing the benefits of learner-centered classrooms
1!
were used for the development of this idea. This type of project would be beneficial in providing faculty members new ideas for incorporating this paradigm into their classrooms and providing both faculty and students with more meaningful learning experiences. Model classroom configurations. &odel classroom configurations are not
included in GSUs technology plan. However, GSU is using the Smart Classroom
configurations on campus to assist faculty in teaching. These classrooms are already configured with at least a projector and a computer. The pricing for each Smart Classroom along with a description of what each level of Smart Classroom costs is provided in the updated technology plan. A schematic of a Smart Classroom has also been included to provide a visual representation of a Smart Classroom. Facilities. As stated under the &odel classroom configurations section'
S! has Smart Classrooms on campus. These classrooms are available to faculty but must
be scheduled ahead of time with the Center for Academic Technology Support. In addition to providing a projector and computer, these classrooms also provide a list of other technologies available in that space. Having information about these technologies present in the classroom lessens the fear of walking into an unfamiliar classroom. Maintenance/support. There is a general description of the technical
re#uirements needed to meet the stated goals in this report. In some instances, hardware
and/or software requirements are stated. Technical support is generally discussed throughout this document, and there are a few instances where specific technical support requirements are
1"
addressed. In order to better to clarify this section, hardware and software requirements are updated in the Software Agreements section. Information about the department responsible for technology maintenance, its duties, and contact information were provided, so the reader has a starting point for resolving a technology issue. Software agreements. This section was not originally in
S!"s technology
plan' so Georgia Southerns software agreements are added to the updated plan. This
information was gathered from the GSU website. The tables show what software agreements Georgia Southern currently have for both PC and a Mac computers. This section is very valuable because it also includes department contacts for specific software training opportunities. Acceptable use policy. The Acceptable !se Policy (A!P) was originally
lin*ed to the technology plan, but was not specifically identified. In the updated technology
plan, the AUP has been pulled out to provide a brief definition for the standards of appropriate use and ethical use of technologies on campus for faculty and students. Staff development. The Staff +evelopment section was not fully covered in
the original technology plan. Several suggestions and recommendations about how to conduct
the staff development workshops have been identified. Some of these recommendations included: designated facilities for faculty staff development, faculty buy-in regarding the workshop topics, and conducting a technology needs assessment before developing and presenting workshops. Workshops should include a mix of pedagogy and technology content so that faculty can make a connection between the technology and the curriculum. Faculty staff
1#
development is an important area to cover, because faculty needs to learn the technology skills well enough to successfully incorporate them into the classroom. Faculty incentives for using technology in the classroom will also be addressed in this section of the technology plan. Conclusion and recommendations. $o ,onclusion and -ecommendations section is
included within GSUs technology plan. As with an introduction, every plan or report should
also conclusions. Here, the reader will be presented with a summary of the overall themes presented throughout the technology plan. This will provide the reader with a summary and recommendations about key components of the plan. With the additions made to the technology plan, the reader will have a clearer understanding of how the goals and objectives relate, so the conclusion will highlight these relationships. Improvements By making the proposed changes, Georgia Southern Universitys updated technology plan will better highlight how these objectives and goals can support the achievement of the strategic themes outlined in the original technology plan. For example, some of the themes are Academic Distinction, Student-Centered University, and Technology Advancement. The goals, objectives, and strategies will be clarified, so those responsible for executing the plan will better understand the vision and will fulfill the strategies and tactics of the plan more efficiently and effectively. By making the technology plan more organized and readable, the technology staff can make better decisions about how to execute the plan. Ultimately, this will improve the technology support given to faculty and students.
1$
Part II: Updated Technology Plan

Broad-Based Support The responsible team for this support is the Technology Advisory Committee. Georgia Southern University formed the Information Technology Advisory Committee in 2008. This committee was formed by the Vice President of Information of Technology and given the task of creating an information technology strategic plan. Input was received from ITAC, VPIT Council, Deans, Presidents Cabinet, student organizations and other sources. This input was then considered during the development of the strategic plan. Other areas that might be solicited for support would include the Center for Academic Technology Support, the Center for Teaching, Learning & Scholarship, and the Center for Online Learning. Needs Assessment (based on personal communication with Robbie Ambler on November 27, 2012) IT regularly conducts needs assessments for current and future technologies via usage reports, user surveys, and feedback from administration, faculty, and students. Additionally, the technology committee conducts further surveys to determine stakeholders satisfaction with the technology. These steps are taken to ensure the right technologies are in place for every users needs. Mission The University's mission is to develop a rich learning environment with a free exchange of ideas, high academic expectations, and individual responsibility for academic achievement. The
2%
faculty and students dedication toward this mission are a key component to its success. Some of the universitys strategic themes include:
. . . .
Promoting Academic Excellence Enhancing Student Success Increasing Research, Scholarship, and Creative Achievement Maintaining Fiscal Sustainability
GSU Technology and Information Resources Strategic Plan (Georgia Southern, 2008). Vision Statement (borrowed and adapted from GSU Technology and Information Resources Strategic Plan). Georgia Southern University uses technology to enhance the mission of the university through innovative applications and excellence in service to the university community. The vision of the technology and information resources at Georgia Southern University is to utilize appropriate technologies and services to:
.
enthuse faculty to innovate in their teaching and scholarship by increasing overall understanding and use of technology for collaboration, assessment, and differentiated learning;
inspire students to learn and grow as 21st century world citizens through increased online learning opportunities and other technological resources and support services that enrich learning and promote personal development;
21
enable excellence, effectiveness, and efficiency among staff and administrators serving our community by exposing them to available technologies and new training opportunities;
excite our alumni with innovative online technology that engages them as stakeholders in the continued success of the university;
moreover, seek new opportunities to facilitate the prosperity and well-being of the citizens of the state of Georgia through collaboration with other state agencies.
Goals, Objectives, and Strategies (borrowed and from GSU Technology and Information Resources Strategic Plan) Based on our vision for technology, supported by guiding principles of the University Systems of Georgia, and aligned with our mission statement, Georgia Southern University has identified the following goals and objectives. Goal #1: Increase student engagement through learning experiences using digital technologies and resources to achieve content standards and meet undergraduate students of the 21st century. & Associated Objective: Provide technology, information resources and support services for students that enrich learning, encourage collaboration, facilitate communication, expand access and promote personal development as 21st century digital world citizens. ' Strategy 22: Determine current levels of student engagement and technological interests through student and faculty surveys.
22
' Strategy 5: Enhance learning, improve access, expand collaboration opportunities, and build information literacy. ' Strategy 6: Promote technology that creates opportunity for transcultural learning among American and international students. ' Strategy 23: Conduct post-surveys to measure success of technology implementation. ' Strategy 30: Continue to work with known publishers of digital content like McGraw Hill, Pearsons, Math Lab, and Vista to make digital content available for faculty and students and decrease the dependency on printed text. ' Strategy 31: Continue to advertise available Smart Classroom facilities on campus. ' Strategy 32: Increase authentic learning opportunities by inviting Library Media Specialists to assist faculty in the classroom. These experiences will help students develop their communication skills in the classroom and technology literacy. ' Strategy 33: Establish standards to accommodate students with diverse learning needs and disabilities. ' Strategy 34: Provide students with information regarding necessary 504 and 508 education plans. ' Strategy 39: Establish standards to accommodate students with diverse learning needs and disabilities.
23
' Strategy 40: Provide user-friendly A/V technologies to improve communications, and provide the necessary training for using these technologies to faculty and students. Goal #2: Create enrollment capacity to meet the needs of 4,500 additional students by 2020. & Associated Objective #1: Integrate technology systems, equipment and services that enable faculty to enhance teaching and learning, facilitate academic advisement, and extend the global reach of the university. ' Strategy 1: Utilize instructional technologies that foster academic distinction through enhancement of teaching and learning, improving access and engagement, and building information literacy. ' Strategy 3: Improve academic advisement through the use of information technology. ' Strategy 4: Use technology to extend the global reach of the University to provide opportunities for faculty and students to access the University and collaborate through regional, national, and international channels. ' Strategy 38: Institute a common structure and best teaching practices for faculty developing and teaching online instruction. & Associated Objective #2: Increase online learning opportunities at GSU and specifically, grow the Bachelor of General Studies programs and the WebMBA programs available online. ' Strategy 1: Utilize instructional technologies that foster academic distinction through enhancement of teaching and learning, improving access and
24
engagement, and building information literacy. ' Strategy 35: Consult with faculty to develop more online courses for GSU, Georgia View, and WebMBA programs to increase student enrollment. Goal #3: Increase GSUs participation in educational research and economic development. & Associated Objective Integrate technology systems, equipment and services that enable faculty to conduct research and perform service that extend the global reach of the university. ' Strategy 24: Survey appropriate areas to identify current levels of participation and determine ways that technology may improve participation. ' Strategy 2: Provide technology resources that support faculty in scholarship and research. ' Strategy 25: Conduct appropriate follow-up surveys to determine post-levels of participation. Goal #4: Strengthen partnerships with other state education agencies. & Associated Objective: Incorporate technology and services that facilitate the exchange of information, foster partnerships with state and private enterprise, support philanthropic endeavors, and build relationships that encourage participation within the university community, including alumni. ' Strategy 26: Identify key agencies and contacts to determine current satisfaction levels with relationships, important aspects of these relationships, and identify areas for improvement through qualitative surveys. ' Strategy 7: Develop and implement a web information services strategy.
(Technology advancement) ' Strategy 8: Collaborate with University system, state, local, and private entities to bring about new technological capabilities and efficiencies of service. (Private and Public Partnerships) ' Strategy 27: Conduct appropriate follow-up surveys to determine post-levels of satisfaction. Goal #5: Maintain affordability so that cost is not a barrier for students participating in higher education. & Associated Objective #1: Set up a GSU task force or committee to oversee the costs of face-to-face and online courses. ' Strategy 28: Conduct research to determine a baseline for "affordability, and the impact IT has on institutional costs. ' Strategy 29: Advertise funding opportunities and scholarships to students. ' Strategy 36: Determine budget impacts/reductions after implementing other strategies associated with this goal. & Associated Objective #2: Uphold a technology infrastructure that supports the university's master plan, is technically current, highly reliable, resilient to loss, flexible to changing needs, and fully maintained. ' Strategy 16: Develop and maintain technology infrastructure that is resilient, reliable, and flexible. (Physical Environment) ' Strategy 17: Utilize technology that contributes to conservation of energy resources and reduce the institutions greenhouse gas emissions.
2!
(Technology Advancement) & Associated Objective #2: Build systems and processes that utilize appropriate technologies to securely, efficiently and effectively deliver the highest level of service at the most affordable cost. ' Strategy 9: Build and manage a technical services and training plan that supports the effective use of current technology applications and new initiatives. (Technology Advancement) ' Strategy 10: Improve business process through application of technology and process improvement methodologies. (Technology Advancement) ' Strategy 11: Security and risk management policies, and systems that guide the University community, minimize risks and protect the Universitys assets from threats and loss. (Technology Advancement) ' Strategy 12: Standardize and integrate IT systems that serve similar functions across academic and administrative units. (Technology Advancement) Goal #6: Improve the overall efficiency of GSU systems. & Associated Objective #1: Uphold a technology infrastructure that supports the university's master plan, is technically current, highly reliable, resilient to loss, flexible to changing needs, and fully maintained. ' Strategy 15: Develop an asset stewardship strategy for tracking and maintaining the technical currency of the Universitys technology assets. (Technology Advancement) ' Strategy 16: Develop and maintain technology infrastructure that is resilient,
2"
reliable, and flexible. (Physical Environment) ' Strategy 17: Utilize technology that contributes to conservation of energy resources and reduce the institutions greenhouse gas emissions. (Technology Advancement) ' Strategy 18: Develop and implement an enhanced database reporting strategy. (Technology Advancement) & Associated Objective #2: Maintain ongoing technology planning at all levels that foster continuous improvement by creating transparent processes, establishing clear priorities, creating measurable objectives, assessing outcomes and informing the university community. ' Strategy 19: Promulgate the established project methodology, tools, and training throughout the university to foster a culture of effective technology project planning and management. (Technology Advancement) ' Strategy 20: Develop and maintain IT policies that serve to educate and guide the University community on new problems and issues created by technology. (Technology Advancement)
' Strategy 21: Exercise a technology planning strategy that continuously assesses progress, clarifies tactics, and implements new initiatives in support of the University Strategic Plan. (Technology Advancement) & Associated Objective #3: Increase administrative staff's competencies and awareness of available technologies on campus. ' Strategy 19: Promulgate the established project methodology, tools, and
2#
training throughout the university to foster a culture of effective technology project planning and management. (Technology Advancement) ' Strategy 20: Develop and maintain IT policies that serve to educate and guide the University community on new problems and issues created by technology. (Technology Advancement)
' Strategy 21: Exercise a technology planning strategy that continuously assesses progress, clarifies tactics, and implements new initiatives in support of the University Strategic Plan. (Technology Advancement) Goal #7: Increase faculty and staff knowledge of available technologies to increase overall understanding and use of technologies, promote collaborative opportunities, stimulate ongoing and summative assessment of technologies, and differentiate learning in the face-toface and online classroom environments. & Associated Objective #1: Increase web-based and face-to-face training opportunities for faculty and staff. ' Strategy 19: Promulgate the established project methodology, tools, and training throughout the university to foster a culture of effective technology project planning and management. (Technology Advancement) ' Strategy 20: Develop and maintain courses that serve to educate and guide the university community on new software, strategies, and issues. ' Strategy 37: Provide multiple online and on-campus training opportunities for faculty and students to learn how to use the new learning management system software.
2$
& Associated Objective #2: Develop detailed technical support resources. ' Strategy 19: Promulgate the established project methodology, tools, and training throughout the university to foster a culture of effective technology project planning and management. (Technology Advancement) ' Strategy 20: Develop and maintain IT policies that serve to educate and guide the University community on new problems and issues created by technology. (Technology Advancement) Action Plan/Multi-year Planning (borrowed from GSU Technology and Information Resources Strategic Plan ) Three-Year Technology Plan July 1, 2012 June 30, 2015 Specific information regarding goals, evaluation methods of goals, and funding to reach goals is located in the goal section of this technology plan. In July 2012, the Technology Planning Team will meet to update the existing plan. Table 3 Goal Implement By Goal #1: Increase student engagement through learning experiences using digital July 1, 2012 technologies and resources to achieve content standards and meet undergraduate students of the 21st century. Goal #2: Create enrollment capacity to meet the needs of 4,500 more students by 2020. Goal #3: Increase faculty and students knowledge of available technologies to increase overall understanding and use of technologies, promote collaborative July 1, 2015 July 1, 2012
3%
opportunities, stimulate ongoing and summative assessment of technologies, and differentiate learning in the face-to-face and online classroom environments. Goal #4: Increase GSUs participation in educational research and economic development. July 1, 2013
Goal #5: Increase online learning opportunities at GSU. Specifically, grow the July 1, 2013 Bachelor of General Studies programs and the WebMBA programs available online. Goal #6: Strengthen partnerships with other state education agencies. Goal #7: Maintain affordability so that money is not a barrier for students participating in higher education. Program Integration The implementation of Folio, Georgia Views replacement is critical to the success of GSUs online classes. Information concerning its implementation and timelines may be found at Folio Implementation Taskforce and Implementation of Folio Timeline. These documents are closely related to Strategy 4, which states, Use technology to extend the global reach of the University to provide opportunities for faculty and students to access the University and collaborate through regional, national, and international channels. Strategy 4s tactics include addressing best online practices, internationalization of web services, and additional support for Georgia View. Because Georgia View plays a critical role in addressing the plans tactic to increase the quality and delivery of online courses, the implementation of Folio will also directly influence the attainment of Strategy 4. Curriculum Integration (borrowed from: http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/informationliteracycompetency#ilhed and modeled July 1, 2014 July 1, 2014
31
after http://www.nhaschools.com/schools/paragon/School%20Operations %20Documents/Technology%20Plan.pdf) The curriculum goals of the university should be linked to standards, such as the ones found at Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education and fully integrate technology into the curriculum as reflected in the following table.
32
Table 4 Standards Standard 1: The information literate student determines the nature and extent of the information needed. Curricula Integration
.
Resources LCD Projectors Smart Boards Internet Connectivity Smart Classrooms Regularly scheduled student access to computers required in either a shared space (lab/media center) or in the classroom Getting Started on Using Library Resources (electronic and hard copy)
Students employ datacollection technologies to gather, view, and analyze the results for a contentrelated problem. . Students identify and recognize the value and differences of potential resources in a variety of formats (e.g., multimedia, database, website, data set, audio/visual, book).
Standard 2: The information literate student accesses needed information effectively and efficiently.
Standard 3: The information literate student evaluates information and its sources critically and incorporates selected information into his or her knowledge base and value system.
Students use a variety of digital resources to locate information. . Students use a variety of technology tools to maximize the accuracy of technology produced. . Students evaluate information from online resources for accuracy and bias. . Students understand that using information from a single internet source might result in the reporting of erroneous facts and that multiple sources should always be researched.
Eagle Source Evaluating Information
33
Standard 5: The information literate student understands many of the economic, legal, and social issues surrounding the use of information and accesses and uses information ethically and legally.
Students evaluate available digital resources and select the most appropriate ones. . Students understand and describe issues related to acceptable and responsible use of technology. . Students understand and describe issues related to unethical use of information and communication technologies and possible security issues related to e-commerce. . Students understand, describe, and communicate possible societal impacts of future technologies.
GSU Computer Use Policy
Copyright and FairUse
Ongoing Evaluation (borrowed from GSU Technology and Information Resources Strategic Plan and personal communication from Robbie Ambler) Making decisions concerning the purchase, continuance, or retirement of technologies is an ongoing process at GSU. There are multiple factors involved in making these decisions. Departments may submit their needs to the Center for Academic Technology Support (CATS) for review. Information from usage reports and data collected anonymously from technology surveys are also used. Some of these are off-campus national surveys involving both students and faculty. By conducting these surveys offsite through third parties, CATS is better able to
34
approach its evaluation process more objectively. In addition to usage reports and user surveys, Student Tech Fees (STF) is another primary factor involved in assessing faculty and student needs. This process involves faculty requesting items through the STF plan, and students then approving or disapproving the requests. By incorporating all of these factors, assessing market trends, and evaluating users attitudes and needs, the evaluation process can be conducted effectively and without bias. This ensures that the integrity of the decision-making process remains intact. In addition to the ongoing evaluation of technologies by GSU, the Technology Advancement plan will be subject to annual assessments and changes by the Vice President of Information Technology and the Chief Information Officer in conjunction with the Presidents Cabinet with input from the Information Technology Advisory Committee among many other sources. It is also within the purview of the University Strategic Planning Committee to request periodically the Vice President of Information Technology to report on the progress of this plan. Standards (borrowed from http://services.georgiasouthern.edu/its/supportedsoftware-pc.php and http://services.georgiasouthern.edu/its/supportedsoftware-mac.php) Georgia Southern University has a plethora of installed software available, and the majority of the software is licensed. Updates concerning software standards were last made in September 2012. Some resources also include training opportunities and training sites listed on the Georgia Southern University website. Budget Resources (borrowed from http://www.uwsa.edu/olit/cio/ITplans/UW-Green%20Bay %20IT%20Plan.pdf)
There are several sources of funding for technology: general program revenue, program revenue, charge-backs, student fees, grants and grant overhead, contracts, and gifts. General program revenue (GPR) is by far the largest source of funding for the campus and is used to fund the campus infrastructure including network backbone, firewall, servers, faculty/staff desktops and instructor workstations in classrooms. Campus-wide applications such as email, office applications, SIS, and library systems are included as part of basic IT services. The campus administration allocates funds to the Information Services Division to support these basic IT services for GPR-based units. Program revenue units must pay for their hardware, software and network services through a charge-back from CIT. The annual charge-back per workstation covers costs of software licenses, central server space, security protection, Help Desk services, and training. CIT orders replacement workstations for PR units every three years and charges the units at the time of purchase. Peripheral equipment, such as printers, scanners, editing equipment, is purchased with unit funds and ordered through CIT. The campus receives earmarked funds from USG System to support special technology initiatives. These funds were acquired through special legislation and will be monitored.
. .
General Access Funds for student general access computing lab. Lab/Classroom Modernization Funds for equipment used by students in classroom/lab settings, about 50% is allocated annually for special instructional computer labs.
Student Technology Fee is about 2% of tuition and must be used for student technology that benefits all students Grants, grant overhead dollars, contracts and gifts have all been used by individuals and departments to purchase hardware and software. This source of
3!
funding is not ideal because most grants and gifts are one-time revenue sources and computer technology is not a one-time purchase. School Pilot Project Most students and teachers prefer traditional teaching or teacher-centered methods. While these styles still dominate higher education, many educators are beginning to employee more student-centered methods. With traditional teaching and assessment methods, students focus on lecture notes and readings, from which they are assessed. Since the accompanying assessments generally focus on these notes and readings, students responses are based on those readings. Therefore, it is unclear whether the student has truly learned anything (Peters & Beeson, 2010, p. 773) This is one of the primary reasons that many educators are now opting to create a classroom environment that invites student-centered learning and one where active participation is required. With a learner-centered classroom, the focus shifts from teaching to learning. While instruction quality is important, it is not the primary goal in these classrooms. Instead, the focus is to continuously improve the quality of learning for all students, thereby shifting what the institution takes responsibility for: from quality instruction (lecturing, talking) to student learning. Students, the co-producers of learning, can and must take responsibility for their own learning. (Saulnier, Landry, Longenecker, & Wagner, 2008, p. 170) This benefits both faculty and students. Faculty benefits because students become responsible for their own learning, which changes the role of faculty to that of a learning facilitator or coach. Students benefit because they learn more thoroughly and quickly and retain and use knowledge and skills more
3"
ably, and transfer both knowledge and skills gained to their work environments but also alter their own instructional expectations and practices. (Brown-Ferrigno & Muth, 2012, p. 2) Because of benefits to both educators and students, a school pilot will be formed to incorporate learner-centered instructional methods into the Smart Classrooms discussed in the next section of this document. There are numerous ways these features can be utilized to create a more learner-centered environment. For instance, in a bring your own device classroom, one possibility is to have students grouped together to research different aspects of a module and create a PowerPoint presentation that demonstrates their findings and conclusions about key concepts. After designing the PowerPoint, students could choose a representative to display their presentation on the Smart Board for the entire class to view. To enhance student-centered active learning, the audience might also participate in instant polling, using a device like Prometheans ActivExpression. Faculty is encouraged to be creative when developing these learner-centered activities. To make the most of this pilot, faculty members will submit their best ideas/lesson plans with the most universal applicability for inclusion into a collection of best practices. After review, this collection will be shared with all faculty members. This pilot not only provides a great opportunity for faculty to learn from each other but to also be creative with technology and showcase their best ideas. Additionally, this collection will be particularly helpful in providing ideas to new faculty members and those who might otherwise be resistant to incorporating student-centered learning into their own classrooms. Creating and sharing this documentation addresses several of the primary reasons for faculty resistance to this method. These reasons include the powerful influence of traditional teaching methods, lack of familiarity with using
3#
these methods, and student and faculty discomfort with embracing new changes (Johnson, et al., 2009, p. 148). Model Classroom Configuration Smart Classrooms (Borrowed from CATS at: http://academics.georgiasouthern.edu/etc/products/classroom Below are several categorized levels of Smart Classroom installation to assist departments when purchasing new Smart Classrooms. Smart Classroom Levels and Pricing Level 1 - Basic Smart Room A Basic Smart Classroom includes a projector, projector mount, speakers with an amplifier, manual screen, and installation with AV cabling and wall plate. A Basic Smart Classroom installation also includes power and two data ports. Total Cost: $7,050 Level 2 - Complete Smart Room A Complete Smart Classroom includes a Crestron room controller, instructor station, projector, projector mount, speakers with an amplifier, manual screen, computer, DVD/VHS player, document camera, and full installation with AV cabling and wall plate. A Complete Smart Classroom installation also includes power and four data ports. Total Cost: $24,500 Level 3 - Advanced Smart Room
3$
An Advanced Smart Classroom includes all of the equipment found in a Level 2 Smart Classroom plus other requirements such as Sympodiums, black out drapes, multiple projectors, and/or enhanced audio. Total Cost: $35,000 CATS also provides information and assistance with Smart carts, portable units that can turn any classroom into a Smart Classroom. Smart Cart 1: Includes a projector, cart, computer, DVD/VHS player, and security. Total Cost: $3,500 Smart Cart 2: Includes a projector, cart, computer, DVD/VHS player, document camera, and security. Total Cost: $5,500 Figure 1 Rm. 3167, CIT Building Schematic of a Smart Classroom (R. Ambler, personal communication, November 27, 2012.)
4%
http://academics.georgiasouthern.edu/etc/products/classroom Facilities (modeled after CATS at Classroom Facilities) The Center for Academic Technology Support provides Smart Classrooms on campus. These classrooms are set up with a projector and computer. Many of these classrooms also come with iClickers and Echo 360 screen lecture capture software. The Smart Classroom Display provides an online inventory of all classrooms on campus. This display can help determine which technologies are available in a particular classroom and
41
alleviate concerns about being assigned to an unfamiliar classroom. Lesson plans are available with designated Smart Classrooms. Smart Facilities Training and Smart Facilities Planning contain more information about the facilities available on campus. Maintenance/Support (borrowed from http://services.georgiasouthern.edu/its/about.php) Information Technology Services reports to the office of the Vice President for Information Technology and Chief Information Officer. This department is responsible for the following:
.
Support and assistance for desktop computing in both administrative and academic environments, including equipment acquisition and repair;
Operating system and database administration for the central campus computing environment;
. . . . . . .
Data and voice communications; Support for Banner, PeopleSoft, and related applications; Software support and distribution; Web Assistance; Maintenance of campus network infrastructure; Network and email account setup and management; and Management of student computing labs.
Information Technology may be contacted by phone at (912) 478-5429, by email at HelpDesk@georgiasouthern.edu, or in person on the second floor of the Henderson Library.
42
Software Agreements (borrowed from http://services.georgiasouthern.edu/its/software.php) The software agreements Georgia Southern University currently have installed on PC and Mac Software are listed on the GSU Website. Tables are included, showing software the university has available. There is also training support for most of the software offered. This information is updated on a regular basis. The PC Software Agreements were updated in September 2012, and the Mac Software Agreements were updated in April 2012. The tables can be found at http://services.georgiasouthern.edu/its/software.php. Figure 2
43
Non-standard software may be purchased by GSU under the USG agreement with SRS Software located at: http://www.srs.usg.edu/ Acceptable Use Policy (borrowed from the GSU Computer Use Policy) The Board of Regents, Appropriate Use Policy (2009-014) which charges each University System of Georgia institution to develop policy that, at minimum, includes the Board policy guidelines, authorizes this Information Technology Appropriate Use Policy. These guidelines establish that the institution and its users have an obligation to abide by the following standards of appropriate and ethical use:
. . .
Use only those IT resources for which you have authorization Protect the access and integrity of IT resources Abide by applicable local, state, federal laws, university policies and respect the copyrights and intellectual property rights of others, including the legal use of copyrighted material
. . .
Use IT resources only for their intended purpose Respect the privacy and personal rights of others Do no harm
Therefore, the following Information Technology (IT) Appropriate Use Policy (AUP) statement defines acceptable technology and information use practices, promotes an understanding of responsible use of university IT resources, seeks to protect the Universitys IT resources, and preserves the relevant policies, regulations and laws. The policy is not intended to
44
be exhaustive, and Georgia Southern University reserves the right to limit, restrict, or extend privileges and access to its information technology resources. Staff Development The primary goals of effective staff development include increasing faculty and staff knowledge of available technologies to increase overall understanding and use of technologies, promote collaborative opportunities, stimulate ongoing and summative assessment of technologies, and differentiate learning in the face-to-face and online classroom environments. Currently, there are three departments on campus that offer technology and pedagogy workshops. These departments include the Center for Academic Technology Support, the Center for Teaching, Learning, & Scholarship, and the Center for Online Learning. It would be beneficial to have these entities merged as a single unit where all technology and pedagogy workshops would be offered to eliminate duplication of efforts on campus and to eliminate confusion concerning where faculty meet for staff development purposes. One of the most important steps for improving professional development is to engage faculty and staff throughout the design process. Initially, this includes incorporating their input about workshop topics and content delivered. Feedback should be obtained by conducting needs assessment surveys, where teachers identify the technologies for which they believe they need the most assistance, followed by a readiness assessment of faculty and staffs technology skills prior to the commencement of workshops. This is not only vital for ensuring the workshop meets its target audiences needs, but for identifying teachers and staff with strong technology skills, who can then be paired as mentors with those who may need more assistance. Of course,
this should be a continuous process where technology workshops are evaluated, participant feedback is sought, and feedback is then incorporated into future workshops. Once workshops are developed and ready for delivery, the focus should be on how the content is conveyed, again ensuring that it is appropriately geared toward its target audience. Regardless of skill sets, the training environment should be free from outside distractions and other administrative needs. Facilities should be designated specifically for technology and pedagogy training purposes with multiple, qualified trainers assigned to this task. It is also important that faculty and staff understand the rationale for adding a new software tool to their repertoire. This may entail the workshop instructor explaining how the pedagogy might be considered when utilizing the technologies discussed in the workshop. For example, when writing student learning objectives (SLOs) and using learning management software, the benefits of using Blooms taxonomy could be discussed. By addressing the basis for using the new software at the beginning of the workshop, faculty and staff immediately understand why they should use the technology in the curriculum. This understanding is critical for full participation and engagement throughout the workshop. This should also facilitate the cultivation of a teaching environment where teachers are free to ask questions and experiment with technologies. After faculty and staff understand why the technology is being incorporated into the curriculum, the next step is to concentrate on teaching participants how to use the technology. Again, it is vital that faculty and staff know how to use the technology prior to discussions about its potential uses for enhancing in-class teaching and learning experiences. For this reason, it is essential that faculty and staff be given hands-on training during the workshop. By reinforcing the purposes for the technology in the curriculum and encouraging faculty to practice the steps as
4!
the workshop when the instructor demonstrates, faculty and staff are much more likely to utilize the technology after leaving the workshop. Once faculty and staff have had the opportunity to use the software, workshop instructors should then begin introducing ways the tools might enhance in-class teaching and learning. To best address this, real-life examples should be presented. This is also a good opportunity to encourage peer collaboration. For example, invite technically savvy faculty to share or demonstrate some of their best practices during training. This not only adds an element of realistic classroom use, it also adds credibility to the importance and practicality of incorporating the technology into the classroom. Consequently, this should further encourage technologyresistant participants to reconsider the importance of integrating these tools into the curriculum. To ensure the most technologically savvy faculty continue to act as mentors and advance the use of new technology in the classroom, these faculty should be recognized and commended for their efforts in successfully delivering online courses within a learning management system software and sharing those successes with their peers. These faculty members should also continue to receive stipends. Presently, the Center for Online Learning compensates faculty members who are nominated by their Department Chairs or Deans to develop an online course. Faculty members sign a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) or contract. This contract states that faculty will attend and participate in a three-week online course to learn how to develop a course online and attend four technical training workshops by the established due dates in the MOA. Another way to incentivize faculty would be to develop a program series of technology workshops that allow teachers to earn Continuing Education Units (CEUs).
4"
Finally, it is critical to provide follow-up support for faculty and staff. Workshop instructors should discuss the best ways to troubleshoot potential technology problems that might arise in the classroom. Written and video materials describing pedagogical strategies and technology tools should be shared with workshop participants. Links to these materials and Helpdesk support numbers should be provided on all academic technology sites. These website resources should be periodically reviewed, updated, and kept current. Presently, instructional designers are available only to the faculty entering the Center for Online Learning (COL) Cohorts each term. To enhance faculty and staff support, make instructional technologists and instructional designers available for consultation with all faculty on campus. However, additional instructional support staff would be required to facilitate this action. Conclusion and Recommendations (adapted from http://technology.pitt.edu/about/itplan/conclusion.html) The accomplishments already achieved through the implementation of the technology plan have been considerable and their impact dramatic. They have laid a sound foundation for the systematic evolution of information technology services at GSU. The university's efforts for reducing security risks, implementation of e-collaboration software, and the upcoming conversion to Folio support the strategic direction that has been set and have been recognized formally as representing best practices. The structure and standard practices that have been implemented ensure the continued stability of the network. They will also enable future efforts to stay on course and develop appropriate ways to support the mission of the University. By implementing other strategies presented throughout this document, such as the learner-centered
4#
pilot project, faculty will experience enormous professional growth. GSU Faculty will also be better equipped to accomplish its goal of increasing student engagement through learning experiences with digital technologies and providing resources to achieve content standards that meet undergraduate students of the 21st century. (Georgia Southern, 2008a)
4$
References
American Library Association. (2012). ALA standards. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/informationliteracycompetency#ilhed Archibald, S., Coggshall, J.G., Croft, A. and Goe, L. (2011). High-quality professional development for all teachers: Effectively allocating resources. National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality: Research and Quality Brief, 1-23. Retrieved from http://www.tqsource.org/publications/HighQualityProfessionalDevelopment.pdf Brown-Ferrigno, T., & Muth, R. (2012). Use of learner-centered instructional strategies in higher education: Doctoral student assessments. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 6(2), 1-21. Retrieved from http://academics.georgiasouthern.edu/ijsotl/v6n2/articles/PDFs/Acc%20Art_BrowneFerrigno%20&%20Muth.pdf Garet, M.S., Porter, A.C., Desimone, L., Birman, B.F., and Yoon, K.S. (2001) What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915-945. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3202507 Georgia Southern University. (2012j). About IT services. Retrieved from http://services.georgiasouthern.edu/its/about.php http://www.jstor.org/stable/3202507 Georgia Southern University. (n.d.d). Academic technology tools for collaborative communications. Retrieved from http://academics.georgiasouthern.edu/etc/products/tools
Georgia Southern University. (2010a). Computer use policy. Retrieved from http://jobs.georgiasouthern.edu/pdf/2050%20Information%20Technology%20and %20Computer%20Use.pdf Georgia Southern University. (2008b). Eagle source: Evaluating information. Retrieved from http://library.georgiasouthern.edu/eaglesource/EvaluatingInformation Georgia Southern University. (2012a). Enrollment data. Retrieved from https://www.sta.georgiasouthern.edu/sra/Enrollment/index.cfm Georgia Southern University. (2012b). Folio taskforce. Retrieved from http://academics.georgiasouthern.edu/etc/d2l/taskforce Georgia Southern University. (2012c). Folio timeline. Retrieved from http://academics.georgiasouthern.edu/etc/d2l/timeline Georgia Southern University. (2012i). Getting Started: How to use the library. Retrieved from http://library.georgiasouthern.edu/libref/using.html Georgia Southern University. (n.d.d). GoogleApps resources. Retrieved from https://sites.google.com/a/georgiasouthern.edu/google-apps-fac-staff/ Georgia Southern University. (2010b). Human resources policies and procedures. Retrieved from http://jobs.georgiasouthern.edu/pdf/2050%20Information%20Technology%20and %20Computer%20Use.pdf Georgia Southern University (2012d). Mac software - standard installed software. Retrieved from http://services.georgiasouthern.edu/its/supportedsoftware-mac.php Georgia Southern University. (2012e). PC software - standard installed software.
Retrieved from http://services.georgiasouthern.edu/its/supportedsoftware-pc.php Georgia Southern University. (2012f). Software. Retrieved from http://services.georgiasouthern.edu/its/software.php Georgia Southern University.(2012g). Strategic research and analysis: Fall semesters enrollment summary. Retrieved from http://services.georgiasouthern.edu/osra/student/fallsum.htm Georgia Southern University. (n.d.a). ORSSP policies and procedures. Retrieved from http://www.georgiasouthern.edu/research/orssp/policies_gifts_grants.htm Georgia Southern University. (n.d.b). Policies and procedures. Retrieved from http://services.georgiasouthern.edu/procurement/webpg6.htm Georgia Southern University. (n.d.c). Smart Classsrooms. Retrieved from http://academics.georgiasouthern.edu/etc/products/classroom Georgia Southern University. (2012h). Technology copyright, and fair use. Retrieved from http://academics.georgiasouthern.edu/etc/products/copyright Georgia Southern University. (2008a). Technology and information resources strategic plan. (Rep.). Retrieved from https://docs.google.com/a/georgiasouthern.edu/file/d/0BwLLctNDSnVmSjI2THdXRlhW aWc/edit?pli=1 Johnson, A., Kimball, R., Melendez, B., Myers, L., Rhea, K., & Travis, B. (2009). Breaking with tradition: Preparing faculty to teach in a student-centered or problemsolving environment. Problems, Resources, and Issues in Mathematics Undergraduate Studies, 19(2), 146-160.
Meill, L. and Seeskin (2011, September 29). Teachers suggest five steps to better professional development. Chicago Catalyst News. Retrieved from http://www.catalystchicago.org/news/2011/09/29/teachers-suggest-five-steps-better-professionaldevelopment Paragon Charter Academy. (2011). Technology plan. Retrieved from http://www.nhaschools.com/schools/paragon/School%20Operations %20Documents/Technology% Peters, R., & Beeson, M. (2010). Reducing the gap between skills sought by employers and developed by education. Political Science & Politics, 43(4), 773-777. Saulnier, B. M., Landry Longenecker, H.E., & Wagner, T.A. (2008). From teaching to learning: Learner centered teaching and assessment in information systems education. Journal of Information Systems Education, 19(2), 169-174. University of Pittsburg. (2008). Information Technology Plan. Retrieved from https://docs.google.com/a/georgiasouthern.edu/file/d/0BwLLctNDSnVmSjI2THdXRlhW aWc/edit?pli=1 University of Wisconsin-Green Bay. (n.d.). University of Wisconsin-Green Bay technology plan 2010 (Rep.). Retrieved from http://www.uwsa.edu/olit/cio/ITplans/UWGreen%20Bay%20IT%20Plan.pdf
Appendix- Technology Plan Evaluation Rubric

(o)ponents .ision -tate)ent 3* E+ceptional The vision statement is included. A description of how the technology will improve learning and how the outcomes will be achieved are included. 2* Accepta,le The vision statement is included. A description of how the technology will improve learning is included, but the outcomes are not addressed. 1* Unaccepta,le -core
The vision statement is excluded or it is incomplete. A description of how the technology will improve learning is not included. The learning outcomes of technologies implemented are excluded. Goals are absent or seem to be only equipment based. They are not measurable. They are incomplete and difficult to understand. Timelines are excluded. Strategies are absent or seem to be only equipment based. They are not measurable, are incomplete, and difficult to understand. $rofessional %evelopment is absent or provides only minimal information on needed technology competencies or how the plan will help staff achieve
/oals and -trategies
Goals are broad, comprehensive, and address equipment, teaching and learning needs. The goals are clear, attainable, and measurable. Specific timelines are included. Strategies are measurable and delineated from goals. There are clearly defined steps to be taken to achieve goals, and they are clear and realistic.
Goals are broad, comprehensive, and address equipment, teaching and learning needs. Timelines are included. ost strategies are provided. Some strategies may not be readily attainable or measurable.
Pro0essional 1evelop)ent -trategy
!learly describes staff"s current and needed technology competencies. #t describes how teachers and staff move from present level of competency and knowledge to the skill level required in the plan. #t describes development
$rovides a general overview of needed technology competencies. %escribes a few strategies and recommendations.
strategies and recommendations for incentives and professional development resources. 2eeds Assess)ent Assessment is comprehensive and contains detailed information from hardware resources, technology needs assessment, surveys. #t identifies use by students and staff, and training received and desired. (udget estimates and expenses are identified. $ro)ect, budgets and times are listed for each item. Specific funding resources are described including current and future funding sources. #ncludes the reallocation and employment of resources and attached budget figures. This technology plan includes a comprehensive description of the technical requirements, including minimum standards for computer hardware, software, and connectivity, and all other services*facilities needed to execute successfully the stated goals and strategies. Support for the technology is also included in this plan.
the needed competencies.
Technology has been assessed and analy&ed, but may not include summaries of information from all elements in the technology surveys.
'eeds assessment is absent or incomplete.
3udget 4esources
(udget estimates and expenses are identified. Specific funding sources are described but are limited to traditional sources without specific budget figures.
(udget estimates, expenses, and*or funding resources are absent from this technology plan, or are incomplete and does not address other incoming funding required to implement the plan. This technology plan does not include the technical requirements needed to execute successfully the stated goals and strategies.
Technical -upport
This technology plan includes a general description of the technical requirements needed to execute successfully the stated goals and strategies. Technology support is not addressed.
Updated Technology Plan Evaluation Louise Fechter, Angela Kennedy, and Lacey Phillips
Technology -tandards and 5odels 0or Technology and Learning
$rovides clear and comprehensive description of the capabilities of hardware and learning environments. #t identifies technology standards that the computer hardware, software, and*or connectivity will meet. #t describes the types of learning environments that currently exist and those to be created by the plan. An evaluation process and instrument are described in detail, and is comprehensive in nature. Assessment is timely and tied to the goals and strategies. !onclusion and recommendations are thorough and complete. Total -core7
$rovides a general description of the capabilities of hardware and learning environments. #t identifies some technology standards that the computer hardware, software, and*or connectivity will meet. #t describes some types of learning environments that currently exist and those to be created by the plan. An evaluation process is described but lacks complete detail and comprehensiveness. The link to goals and strategies is not apparent.
Technology standards and models for technology learning are absent or incomplete.
6ngoing Evaluation Process
'o formal evaluation process is described.
(onclusion and 4eco))endations
!onclusion and recommendations are present but not thorough or complete.
!onclusion and*or recommendations are missing.
*+,

Updated Technology Plan For FRIT 8132

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Updated Technology Plan For FRIT 8132

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Updated Technology Plan Evaluation

Updated Technology Plan Evaluation

Louise Fechter, Angela Kennedy, and Lacey Phillips

INCLUDEPICTURE !!!!local"ost!!#olu$es!!%&D'%!!:..:..:!!Users!!'n(ela!!Do)nloads!!I$a(e*1 !+ ,ER-E.&R,'TINET ............................................................................................................../

Part II: U6dated Tec"nolo(4 Plan.............................................................................................13

Updated Technology Plan Evaluation

Louise Fechter, Angela Kennedy, and Lacey Phillips

'66endiC8 Tec"nolo(4 Plan Evaluation Rubric.......................................................................D?

Updated Technology Plan Evaluation

Louise Fechter, Angela Kennedy, and Lacey Phillips

INCLUDEPICTURE "\\\\localhost\\Volumes\\KODAK\\:..:..:\\Users\\Angela\\Downloads\\Image_0" \* MERGEFORMATINET

Updated Technology Plan Evaluation

Louise Fechter, Angela Kennedy, and Lacey Phillips

Updated Technology Plan Evaluation

Louise Fechter, Angela Kennedy, and Lacey Phillips

Updated Technology Plan Evaluation

Louise Fechter, Angela Kennedy, and Lacey Phillips

Updated Technology Plan Evaluation

Louise Fechter, Angela Kennedy, and Lacey Phillips

Updated Technology Plan Evaluation

Louise Fechter, Angela Kennedy, and Lacey Phillips

Updated Technology Plan Evaluation

Louise Fechter, Angela Kennedy, and Lacey Phillips

Updated Technology Plan Evaluation

Louise Fechter, Angela Kennedy, and Lacey Phillips

Updated Technology Plan Evaluation

Louise Fechter, Angela Kennedy, and Lacey Phillips

Program integration. Program integration is not included in

Updated Technology Plan Evaluation

Louise Fechter, Angela Kennedy, and Lacey Phillips

eorgia Southern !niversity"s technology plan also had no

Updated Technology Plan Evaluation

Louise Fechter, Angela Kennedy, and Lacey Phillips

Updated Technology Plan Evaluation

Louise Fechter, Angela Kennedy, and Lacey Phillips

Updated Technology Plan Evaluation

Louise Fechter, Angela Kennedy, and Lacey Phillips

Updated Technology Plan Evaluation

Louise Fechter, Angela Kennedy, and Lacey Phillips

Updated Technology Plan Evaluation

Louise Fechter, Angela Kennedy, and Lacey Phillips

Part II: Updated Technology Plan

Updated Technology Plan Evaluation

Louise Fechter, Angela Kennedy, and Lacey Phillips

Updated Technology Plan Evaluation

Louise Fechter, Angela Kennedy, and Lacey Phillips

Updated Technology Plan Evaluation

Louise Fechter, Angela Kennedy, and Lacey Phillips

Updated Technology Plan Evaluation

Louise Fechter, Angela Kennedy, and Lacey Phillips

Updated Technology Plan Evaluation

Louise Fechter, Angela Kennedy, and Lacey Phillips

Updated Technology Plan Evaluation

Louise Fechter, Angela Kennedy, and Lacey Phillips

Updated Technology Plan Evaluation

Louise Fechter, Angela Kennedy, and Lacey Phillips

Updated Technology Plan Evaluation

Louise Fechter, Angela Kennedy, and Lacey Phillips

Updated Technology Plan Evaluation

Louise Fechter, Angela Kennedy, and Lacey Phillips

Updated Technology Plan Evaluation

Louise Fechter, Angela Kennedy, and Lacey Phillips

Updated Technology Plan Evaluation