Group items tagged

This article is written by a staff reporter for a higher education technology blog. She shares information from the results of an annual survey on higher-education computing, The Campus Computing Project survey. This survey asked Information Technology administrators at 543 colleges and universities questions about mobile applications and investments in campus technology. The main topics covered in this article are: how campus information-technology officials face fewer budget cuts in their departments, their opinions of the competition for college and university business from learning-management-system companies, and the uncertain views of massive open online courses (referred to as MOOCs). A majority of campus information-technology officers agreed that MOOC's offer a capable model for the "effective delivery" of instruction online. This article also reports that the study revealed that more than two-thirds of those surveyed indicated they were uncertain about whether MOOC's offer a solid business model for campuses to "realize new revenues". The author shares how survey results pointed to the increasing competition between MOOC providers like Udacity and Coursera and that the market for companies that sell learning-management systems (LMS) is becoming more competitive as well. The number of survey respondents that use Blackboard's learning-management system had dropped from 71 percent (in 2006) to 45 percent (as of 2012). Other LMS companies, such as Desire2Learn, Moodle, Sakai, and Instructure's Canvas have been more successful as a result. The author shared that although budget cuts in technology departments are going down, 27 percent of survey respondents reported budget cuts this year, compared with 50 percent in 2009. However the author shared that public institutions may still remain at-risk for budget cuts. This information would be useful for higher education technology professionals, particularly those who are making decisions related to technol

This case study breaks down IT costs into simple easy to read tables, and the author provides insight and background on the IT budget restructuring project he undertook at his university between 2007-2008. This case is important because it is centered during a financially difficult time in higher education, when IT costs were steadily increasing due to higher demand from all campus users and budget cuts were imminent due to the global financial crisis at the time. Perhaps not a definitive case study, it is worth a read to develop more familiarity with IT portfolio management.

This video archive presents a point/counterpoint debate of the challenges and opportunities afforded a campus CIO. Issues discussed include: the cost of and shrinking budgets for campus IT; service and support for students and faculty users; managing emerging technology, such as Second Life virtual worlds; and professional development for CIOs. Both panelists agree that a CIO needs to be both a strategist and a plumber, but this agreement is not reached until the conclusion. Value in this resource are the issues presented and frank and sometimes humorous discourse between the two CIOs. The debate occurred when campuses were battling increased use of technologies by all stakeholders and decreased budgets due to the global economic crisis. The viewpoints reflect that challenging time and serves as a basis for evaluation of CIO ability to manage effectively in a crisis when technology use cannot be curbed by budget cuts.

Ward's article touches on seven key points influencing the future of technology in higher education. Following the description of the seven points, Ward suggests where technology may be going in the future of higher education. The seven key areas listed by Ward include: - Technology is changing how we learn, college costs are ever increasing without necessarily justifying the increases - Online and hybrid courses are attracting students with convenience - Students are expecting faculty to connect with them digitally - More students than ever are able to access education online, including foreign and domestic students - For-profit colleges continue to compete with non-profit colleges for students and market share - Massive open online courses (MOOCs) are gaining in popularity and scaring college and universities into thinking about their own online programs - College budgets continue to decrease Ward believes these seven issues will be the most influential on the use of technology in higher education moving into the future. Online and hybrid classes will continue to grow, but Ward expresses a need for better programs and teaching aids to improve the quality and access to such courses.  The article focuses on technology, but credits the value of an on-campus educational experience within the final paragraph. After all of his points are made, Ward explains while online and hybrid courses continue to develop, many are still invested in the on-campus model of learning. The reader is left wondering, will the technological advances ever become fully adopted within the higher education world? Or will our antiquated model for learning continue to be used in most educational settings?

Steven Kolowich, a technology reporter for Inside Higher Education, describes the online support initiative supporting online programs at Northern Virginia Community College. The intended audience for the article is higher education officials, including institutions expanding into online education. Kolowich highlights NOVA's experience with online education and how the College turned a mediocre program into a successful one.   When NOVA began an online program in the mid-2000's, the vice president for instruction and information technology, Steven Sachs, dedicated a few IT employees to help online students with small, instructional issues. After some research, Sachs realized for-profit colleges were spending more than half of their budgets on support services for students, such as financial aid counseling, job placement assistance, and academic advising. Shortly after this realization, Sachs implemented the "Next Level Initiative," spending more than $2 million to offer support to online students. The Next Level Initiative was extremely effective on all six of NOVA's campuses. Over the next four years, online programs grew four times faster than on-campus programs. Additionally, the difference in completion between online and on-ground students fell from 16% to 8%. Kolowich uses NOVA as an example to express how imperative support services are for online students.

This article introduces the reader to the concept of collective bargaining for campus information technology by considering the 2011 announcement of a partnership between desktop computer giant Hewlett Packard (HP) and higher education consortium Internet2. Collective bargaining is not viewed as the norm for higher education where individual colleges prefer to act as individuals, each perceiving themselves as completely unique even among peer institutions, but it has taken root in recent years due to a need to regain control over campus IT services in the wake of a surge in consumer technology use among faculty, staff and students. The cost benefit of collective bargaining is aimed at campus IT consumers but clearly there is a significant benefit for the IT providers as well, in this case, for HP. At the time this article was written, many colleges and universities were struggling to rebalance campus budgets, including reigning in IT costs. Meanwhile, consumer electronics were booming as smartphone sales surpassed standard cell phone sales and laptops outpaced desktop sales, and the war in tablet computing raged between Apple iPads, Amazon's Kindle Fire, and Google's Nexus 7. Students, faculty and staff were walking onto campus with multiple web enabled devices, draining campus Internet services and changing the way campus hardware was used. With more mobile services being used and aging desktop clusters needing to be managed, campus IT had to start thinking about strategies to control its investments. Cloud technologies were gaining in popularity at the time, and this article outlines the ways in which campuses began moving to the cloud to cut costs and to meet evolving user needs. The partnerships described in the article between companies like HP and cloud hosting service Box and Internet2 schools show that there are benefits to the members, but the author also recognizes that faculty, students and staff will likely continue to utilize their own devices and

The author of this article is an interactive news designer for The Chronicle of Higher Education. He shares how Cal State had implemented one of higher education's most aggressive campaigns for accessible technology and some of the consequences that have come with it. The author shares how Cal State has adopted strict standards for both vendors and employees. Along with other groups, it has helped force Apple, Google, and Blackboard to improve their software or lose the ability to reach Cal State's 430,000 students. Officials at Cal State were dissatisfied¬ that the iTunes software was inaccessible for many disabled students to use. Some examples given by the author was that blind students and faculty were unable to use screen-reader programs with it and closed captioning for deaf users was not properly supported. Another challenge the author mentioned was that recent budget cuts have reduced the number of staff members who train employees and convert materials to accessible formats, which has a large impact on the large numbers of documents and Web pages may not be accessible. The author highlights how Cal State's dealings with Apple a few years ago show the positive effects that a large university can have on an outside service which many students and faculty use. In February 2008, still unhappy with iTunes and iTunes U, the system's chief information officer and others flew to Apple headquarters to press the company to make more significant changes. Cal State officials say they realize they were pushing too fast and faculty and accessible media specialists could not keep up with all of the changes. Instead of trying to require complete compliance, they are now focusing their efforts on encouraging continual improvement on each campus internally and helping campus officials share best practices. The author reported that the school's accessible-media official, stated that the school has learned when to handle things centrally and when to avoid "micromanaging th