Institutional Readiness Questionnaire Bonnie Luterbach, Raymond Guy, Kathleen Matheos Funding for...

21
Institutional Readiness Questionnaire Bonnie Luterbach, Raymond Guy, Kathleen Matheos Funding for this study was provided by HRSDC and CNIE

Transcript of Institutional Readiness Questionnaire Bonnie Luterbach, Raymond Guy, Kathleen Matheos Funding for...

Page 1: Institutional Readiness Questionnaire Bonnie Luterbach, Raymond Guy, Kathleen Matheos Funding for this study was provided by HRSDC and CNIE.

Institutional Readiness Questionnaire

Bonnie Luterbach, Raymond Guy, Kathleen Matheos

Funding for this study was provided by HRSDC and CNIE

Page 2: Institutional Readiness Questionnaire Bonnie Luterbach, Raymond Guy, Kathleen Matheos Funding for this study was provided by HRSDC and CNIE.

CADE/AMTEC 2007

Presented Initial Stages of this Study Literature review and interview findings Indicators, Barriers Sought Feedback from participants Synthesized the findings and input Bilingual questionnaire Institutional Readiness Questionnaire

Page 3: Institutional Readiness Questionnaire Bonnie Luterbach, Raymond Guy, Kathleen Matheos Funding for this study was provided by HRSDC and CNIE.

Indicators of Organizational Readiness

1. Pervasive institutional adoption of technologies (online, interactive and user-based systems) for:

a. Administration (e.g., finance, human resources);

b. Student affairs (e.g., registration, student portals); and

c. Educational support services (e.g. library. LMS).

Page 4: Institutional Readiness Questionnaire Bonnie Luterbach, Raymond Guy, Kathleen Matheos Funding for this study was provided by HRSDC and CNIE.

Indicators of Organizational Readiness2. Educational technology is:

a. In place and financially supported and renewed;

b. Is part of strategic plan, mirrored in departmental plans;

c. Linked to student engagement in learning (e.g., qualities of a graduate) as a way to improve teaching and learning.

3. New ways of teaching and learning are part of the strategic academic plan (e.g., use of asynchronous technologies, blended learning).

Page 5: Institutional Readiness Questionnaire Bonnie Luterbach, Raymond Guy, Kathleen Matheos Funding for this study was provided by HRSDC and CNIE.

Indicators of Organizational Readiness

4. Appropriate leadership

5. New policies• Transfer credits• Residency• Tenure and promotion• Technology support

6. Project-based funding leading to sustained funding

Page 6: Institutional Readiness Questionnaire Bonnie Luterbach, Raymond Guy, Kathleen Matheos Funding for this study was provided by HRSDC and CNIE.

Questionnaire

Questions were built on the literature review and the interview findings with input from CNIE Board members

Online survey Pilot tested with 24 institutions (Anglophone

and Francophone) Complete responses received from 12

institutions (50% response rate)

Page 7: Institutional Readiness Questionnaire Bonnie Luterbach, Raymond Guy, Kathleen Matheos Funding for this study was provided by HRSDC and CNIE.

Demographics

Sample 7 medical doctoral 4 comprehensive 1 undergraduate 1 college/CEGEP included open, dual mode, traditional face-to-face

Student population 31% Greater than 30,000 23% 20,000 – 29,999 23% 15,000 – 19,999 23% Under 15,000

Page 8: Institutional Readiness Questionnaire Bonnie Luterbach, Raymond Guy, Kathleen Matheos Funding for this study was provided by HRSDC and CNIE.

Key Findings

Administrative Applications

100% Access forms, financial records, and employment opportunities

90% Allow submission of applications for employment online

90% Accept admission and registration payment online

Over 70%

Provide online bookstore services

Page 9: Institutional Readiness Questionnaire Bonnie Luterbach, Raymond Guy, Kathleen Matheos Funding for this study was provided by HRSDC and CNIE.

Key Findings Continued

Educational Technology

100% Support a LMS

Over 80%

Support a single commercial product

100% Allow faculty and staff to access class lists and enter grades online

Over 50%

Require faculty and staff to use of an institutional portal

Over 80%

Provide internet connectivity in at least 50% of the classrooms

Page 10: Institutional Readiness Questionnaire Bonnie Luterbach, Raymond Guy, Kathleen Matheos Funding for this study was provided by HRSDC and CNIE.

Key Findings Continued

Student Services

100% Provide students with an email address, virtual library services, and help desk support in the use of technology

80% Have a student portal

70% Require students to use the portal

90% Provide on-campus wireless services

50% Provide computing facilities 24/7

Page 11: Institutional Readiness Questionnaire Bonnie Luterbach, Raymond Guy, Kathleen Matheos Funding for this study was provided by HRSDC and CNIE.

Key Findings Continued

70% Students can access class lists on line

100% Students can access grades online

90% Students can submit assignments online

45% Provide computing facilities in campus residences

Student Services (continued)

Page 12: Institutional Readiness Questionnaire Bonnie Luterbach, Raymond Guy, Kathleen Matheos Funding for this study was provided by HRSDC and CNIE.

Anticipated Barriers

1. Rapid technology change

2. Lack of funding

Appears from the data that these barriers have been ameliorated.

Page 13: Institutional Readiness Questionnaire Bonnie Luterbach, Raymond Guy, Kathleen Matheos Funding for this study was provided by HRSDC and CNIE.

Key Findings

Strategic Planning and Leadership

40% Educational technology is a component of the strategic plan

60% Have an institution wide inventory of blended and online courses

67% Senior administration promotes the use of technology in teaching and learning

Page 14: Institutional Readiness Questionnaire Bonnie Luterbach, Raymond Guy, Kathleen Matheos Funding for this study was provided by HRSDC and CNIE.

Anticipated Barriers

1. Varied definitions, even within an institution – hard to get an inventory of what is really happening

2. Legal issues (e.g., copyright)3. Governance and cultures of universities (not

colleges)4. Changes in roles and responsibilities of

units5. Constant need to change administrative

structure

Page 15: Institutional Readiness Questionnaire Bonnie Luterbach, Raymond Guy, Kathleen Matheos Funding for this study was provided by HRSDC and CNIE.

Key Findings

Teaching and Learning

80% Have a teaching with technology centre

40% See teaching with technology as a major component of teaching services

70% Provide incentives for the development of online and technology-enhanced teaching

Page 16: Institutional Readiness Questionnaire Bonnie Luterbach, Raymond Guy, Kathleen Matheos Funding for this study was provided by HRSDC and CNIE.

Key Findings

Pedagogical Practice

70% Over half the courses have websites

90% Of respondents had interactive components in less than 60% of the courses across institutions

Less than

40% of courses

Have reduced face to face teaching time with the integration of technology

Page 17: Institutional Readiness Questionnaire Bonnie Luterbach, Raymond Guy, Kathleen Matheos Funding for this study was provided by HRSDC and CNIE.

Anticipated Barriers

1. Rapid technology change

2. Lack of appropriate monetary compensation

3. Lack of time

4. Tenure and promotion dilemma

5. Teaching as a public versus private activity

6. Student Assessment

7. Unfamiliarity with the pedagogy of the online learning environment (e.g., concerns about quality, preferred face-to-face, etc.)

8. Lack of technical expertise

Page 18: Institutional Readiness Questionnaire Bonnie Luterbach, Raymond Guy, Kathleen Matheos Funding for this study was provided by HRSDC and CNIE.

Overall Assessment

Administrative applications 3.64/5 Support for Teaching &

Learning with technology 2.75/5

Teaching and learning 2.64/5 Dedicated resources for Teaching

& Learning with technology 2.55/5 Strategic planning and

leadership 2.42/5

Page 19: Institutional Readiness Questionnaire Bonnie Luterbach, Raymond Guy, Kathleen Matheos Funding for this study was provided by HRSDC and CNIE.

Unintended Findings

Difficult to find one individual in an institution who had overall knowledge in order to answer the survey.

Nor did some of the respondents know where they could find the answers to the survey questions.

Technology is pervasive but extremely pocketed within institutions, no common ‘go to’ point for information.

We probably need to add questions in the survey that actually define what the barriers are.

Page 20: Institutional Readiness Questionnaire Bonnie Luterbach, Raymond Guy, Kathleen Matheos Funding for this study was provided by HRSDC and CNIE.

Thoughts

Is this data reflective of the reality of Canadian HE?

What areas do you think HE should pay attention to?

Are there areas that we have not addressed in this survey that should be included?

Page 21: Institutional Readiness Questionnaire Bonnie Luterbach, Raymond Guy, Kathleen Matheos Funding for this study was provided by HRSDC and CNIE.

Potential Next Steps

• Ethics approval to distribute survey to all CNIE institutions.

• Request completion by a group of individuals within the institution.

• Researchers compile and analyze the data and provide further feedback to CNIE.

• Develop and provide a comparison analysis online report so year by year institutions could determine how well they are doing compared to institutions across Canada.