New Partnerships: Helping Faculty Integrate Information Technologies in the Curriculum - The Learning Technologies Program |-------------------------------------| | Paper presented at CAUSE92 | | December 1-4, 1992, Dallas, Texas | |-------------------------------------| NEW PARTNERSHIPS: Helping Faculty Integrate Information Technologies in the Curriculum-- The Learning Technologies Program** Carrie E. Regenstein Cornell University Ithaca New York ABSTRACT The Learning Technologies Program (LTP)--sponsored by Cornell Information Technologies (CIT) and Apple Computer, Inc., during the 1991-1992 academic year--was a series of workshops designed to help faculty integrate information technologies into their curriculum. The underlying premise of the LTP was that technology must be presented in the context of faculty's instructional objectives. We are currently pursuing "Train the Trainer" activities to help others be able to offer the LTP curriculum themselves. This paper discusses issues related to the Learning Technologies Program: its goals, how its participants responded, what we learned, and implications for the management of resources. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Background The Learning Technologies Program (LTP) was a series of workshops developed and offered by Cornell Information Technologies as a pilot project sponsored by Apple Computer, Inc., during the 1991-1992 academic year. The goal of the workshops was to help faculty who are technical neophytes to learn to use information technologies to enhance their instructional activities. The underlying concept of the LTP was that the "instructional computing" support paradigm for faculty had to be modified. We agreed with the notion about faculty expressed recently by David Smallen (Director for Information Technology Services and Institutional Research at Hamilton College): "Making the transition from being a non-user, or an occasional user, to a user in the classroom is nearly impossible unless intermediary steps are taken."[1] The LTP was one such intermediary step. Since the Learning Technologies Program was driven by instructional goals rather than technical ones, we started by focusing on the specific objectives of each faculty participant. Faculty participants were encouraged to set their own objectives based on some pedagogical challenge they were struggling with, however small, for which technology might offer some solution. A variety of methods was used--with an emphasis on Macintosh hands-on sessions--to offer a palette of technological solutions that would help faculty find the technology more accessible, adaptable and meaningful. During the 1991-1992 academic year, the LTP served 224 participants from 18 states and two other countries (Canada and Turkey); they represented 43 schools, predominantly two- and four-year teaching institutions. Although the majority of participants came from the northeast, there was increased representation from elsewhere in the country as the year progressed and the LTP became more known. Half the participants were from New York State. Faculty Participants: what they did and what they said Faculty were encouraged to attend the workshop with a technical partner from the home institution. Sharing the workshop experience gave the faculty member a "private consultant," a sense of institutional support, and--perhaps most significantly--a greater chance of fulfilling his or her objectives upon the return home. The three-day event included a variety of activities. Five non- discipline-specific hands-on sessions comprised the core curriculum: Dynamic Lecture Tools, Introduction to HyperCard, Digitizing and Images, Visual Databases (Using Videodisks), and More About HyperCard. The sessions, created by a team of staff, were linked by workshop format and hand-out design; specific examples were also repeated in multiple sessions to offer reinforcement and the "comfort of recognition" for newcomers to technology. Registration brochures invited participants to "bring their stuff," i.e., to bring the slides, photos, and other classroom treasures they had stashed away over the years--to be integrated into the outline or template solution to be started at Cornell. We came to realize that the LTP's target audience was so new to the use of technology that readers did not understand what kinds of raw materials to bring; they could not imagine the kinds of technological integration we were describing. We therefore adapted this concept into a more defined, guided "project" experience. Once at Cornell, then, participants were offered suggestions for outlines and templates that could be created to solve the pedagogical problem they had defined in the pre-workshop questionnaire. Specified times were allotted for the partners to work together on these projects with significant consulting help available. The workshop's final session--a "show and tell" of these projects--became a favorite amongst participants. Although the projects were only "beginnings," the participants' enthusiasm and empowerment were clearly in evidence. To maintain the sense of community, and follow-up on the participants' progress at home, we established a newsletter, LTPnews, and an on-line mail-list, LTP-Link. Participant feedback stressed three areas of growth. Faculty indicated that they had many more ideas for the possibilities that technology could offer them in instruction. They were more ready to become advocates for technology on their campuses. And, in some cases, they were willing to pursue granting opportunities to continue the work they started at Cornell. Other participant feedback indicated that the gains were sometimes immediate and unexpected. One faculty member reported that she was able to evaluate a new software program with a far more knowledgeable (and critical) eye. Numerous participants commented on their loss of "technophobia." Many used the words "not intimidated any more," "shortened learning curve," and "empowered." They expressed plans to actually do their projects back at home--and sent their colleagues to the next LTP event. A systematic follow-up with all 1991-1992 participants is in progress at this writing. What have we learned? We have learned a great deal offering the Learning Technologies Program. First and foremost, we have a heightened appreciation for the help that faculty need to first start using technology, especially in instruction. When training faculty to use technology in instruction, the line between training and consulting becomes quite fuzzy. (Note, for instance, the tremendous value of the individual projects started by participants.) The process is labor intensive and expensive: if we begin with the assumption that faculty's role on campus does not necessarily include technology, then we recognize that helping faculty take this first step requires the dedication of quality resources. Each LTP session included exposure to "faculty exemplars:" faculty who had successfully integrated technology into their instructional activities. Not surprisingly, participants responded enthusiastically to their own peers' demonstrations and discussions. We found the lecture- demonstration mode of including these exemplars to be consistently effective, reliable, and cost effective. This session was often followed by spontaneous discussions and brainstorming about possible uses of information technologies in instruction as well as strategies for obtaining necessary resources. Participants reported being very inspired by this component of the program. The LTP made effective use of participants' feedback: there was an ongoing process of seeking--and responding to--the suggestions of a knowledgeable clientele. In addition, the use of professional evaluators immediately raised the quality of the LTP. Our follow-up with the first evaluators--inviting them back to offer our staff a "methods of teaching" workshop--significantly quickened the pace of the program's refinement. Where do we go from here? The LTP seemed to touch an important nerve for faculty. The workshops quickly became oversubscribed. Participants asked permission to reproduce materials to share at home. Numerous callers requested that we travel to their schools to offer the workshops there. At the same time, it seemed more cost effective to find ways to leverage the work we had done and help others be able to offer the LTP curriculum themselves. As a result, we are offering Train the Trainer workshops to our counterparts during the LTP's second year. The first Train the Trainer sessions are scheduled as a pre-EDUCOM Conference seminar in October, 1992, and at Cornell in January, 1993. Participants should be those who are charged with training faculty in the use of Macintosh technology--or those whose staff will be charged to do so. The program includes both pedagogical and technical issues. We are hoping that offering an entire suite of materials and methods for integrated hands-on sessions will provide our counterparts with a significant "kick-off" to their own programs at a manageable cost. Many schools can afford to put together one or two (two-hour) sessions; four or five become too expensive without help. All Train the Trainer participants will receive extensive materials (hard copy and electronic: course hand-outs, demonstration files, instructor guides)-- with an invitation to modify them for best use in their home institutions. We are also hoping to publish these materials for those who cannot attend any of the Train the Trainer sessions planned for the 1992-1993 academic year. We are considering TTT-Link: an on-line listserve that would help us share materials and methods with Train the Trainer participants. Teaching faculty to use technology to enhance their instructional activities is labor intensive. In the current economic climate, institutions in higher education must work together to leverage these activities most effectively. We continue to work with the EDUCOM consortium to seek ways of sharing the materials and experience we have to offer, and welcome readers to suggest other forums for dissemination. NOTE [1] David Smallen, "Planning for Information Technology Resources: The Issues," Computing Strategies in Liberal Arts Colleges, Martin D. Ringle, ed., 1992, pp. 3-28. ** A modified version of this paper appeared in the EDUCOM '92 Proceedings.