April 20, 2006
Access to technology uneven
Many faculty members say that they’d like to use instructional technology more in their classrooms. The trouble is, not all classrooms are equipped adequately to meet their needs, according to a recent study.
Six units cooperated on a survey on the role of educational technology at the UW. Surveys were sent to faculty, graduate students (both those who hold teaching assistantships and those who don’t) and undergraduates. The results will be presented in a Catalyst Spark Session 2:30 to 4 p.m. Thursday, April 27 in 220 Odegaard Undergraduate Library.
One of the more significant findings was that faculty members identified consistent access to technology as one of the important barriers to using it in the classroom.
“Basic equipment, such as a data projector (for connecting to a computer) and Internet access is still not available in some classrooms,” says Cara Lane, a research scientist with Catalyst and one of the authors of the study. “Faculty members told us that if they don’t know from year to year whether their classroom will have the equipment they want, then they would have to prepare two versions of their presentation, one with technology and one without, so they are inhibited from developing a lesson plan based on technology.”
The UW does have a plan for moving technology into classrooms, but its timeline has been affected by the availability of state funding. The University developed a technology plan about eight years ago, says Roberta Hopkins, director of Classroom Support Services, but there is no secure funding source for this plan. “Our initial goal was to have basic technology available in all classrooms with 50 or more seats,” she said. “Thus far, we have essentially achieved that goal in classrooms with 70 or more seats. In cases where retrofitting rooms has proven expensive, we’ve provided equipment carts, which are a little more cumbersome but still workable.
“For the smaller rooms, our initial goal was to equip 25 percent of them, but it’s clear that the demand is much greater than our original projections — probably 50 to 75 percent of these rooms should be equipped. We’ve been working with the Academic Technology Advisory Committee (ATAC), which recognizes the need for a funding source to keep equipment up to date and to expand its availability.”
Generally, faculty and students favor greater use of educational technology — with the exception of teaching assistants, who, while favorable to most instructional technologies, tend to think that the presence of laptop computers and Internet access can actually detract from the educational experience of a seminar.
One of the sharpest divisions in the survey was between faculty and undergraduates regarding what course material should be available online. About 80 percent of students thought that all courses should have material available online, but about half the faculty opposed this idea.
“There was a real difference of opinion on whose responsibility this is,” says Lane. “Students obviously see a great benefit for themselves in having material such as a syllabus and class notes online. But faculty have a different perspective.” In focus groups, some expressed the concern that students would be less likely to attend class if more information were available online. Others felt that a detailed, day-by-day syllabus would inhibit the spontaneity that should occur in a classroom driven by lively discussion.
Both students and faculty acknowledged that technology, in and of itself, does not make for better instruction. Students recognized that, to be of value, implementation of technology must not rob important time from instruction. Faculty members see technology as a tool, but they recognize that today’s students, brought up in a digital world, have come to expect those kinds of tools as part of the educational experience.
Overall, students are very satisfied with the availability of computer laboratories and other general-access technology facilities. They like the convenient locations and the fact that some facilities are open 24 hours. Faculty, too, praised the access to facilities and the kinds of instructional tools provided by Catalyst.
Some technologies, such as word processing, spreadsheet software, and presentation software, are ubiquitous. The survey shows that, among the emerging technologies, Web-based tools are of great interest, especially electronic portfolios, Web-based tools for collaboration and discussion. More than 60 percent of undergraduates, and nearly 80 percent of faculty, now own laptop computers, but most of them do not bring their computers to class, perceiving that wireless access on campus is still spotty. But as wireless access increases, the presence of laptops will rise: 35 percent more undergraduates, and 17 percent more faculty, would bring their computers to class if they knew that wireless access would be available.
“In our focus groups,” Lane says, “some faculty and students were skeptical about the advantages of wireless. They think the computers will distract students. But more believe that wireless access in the classroom will permit instructors to teach in different, more interactive ways.”
The UW Wireless Initiative, begun last year, will extend wireless access throughout the UW Seattle campus by 2008. Early deployment is occurring in shared spaces that are used heavily, major libraries, technology-enabled classrooms and major shared meeting rooms. ATAC has approved a list of recommended site for first phase deployment. See www.washington.edu/computing/wireless/initiative.html.
The six organizations which banded together for the technology survey include: Office of Learning Technologies, Computing & Communications, Office of Undergraduate Education, UW Libraries, UW Educational Outreach and the Student Technology Fee Committee.
The full results of the survey are available at: http://catalyst.washington.edu/projects/edtech_2005report.html
