1

Assignment 2: Vice-President of Laurentian University for a Day Patricia Collins Lindsay Nol Grant Sorensen Eva Ziemsen ETEC 520 Planning and Managing Technologies in Higher Education

Vice-President of Laurentian University for a Day

The knowledge and abilities required by the workforce are evolving to reflect the increasing use of technology by contemporary employers (Bullen & Janes, 2007). Universities are progressively incorporating e-learning to meet the demand for 21st century skills and open and flexible learning (Bullen & Janes, 2007). Given the affordances of e-learning, this paper proposes a vision for technology use in higher education. The authors designed the vision for Laurentian University, which they would implement if they were Vice-President of the University. The vision objective is to develop a university without boundaries in northeastern Ontario, called the Ontario Open University (OOU), which transforms education for both faceto-face and online learning. For the purpose of this vision, e-learning involves the use of technology to remodel education and improve teaching and learning practices (Bates & Sangra, 2011; BCIT, 2012). It includes use of information and communications technology to enhance in-person instruction, and create blended learning environments and entirely online distance education programs (Bullen, 2006, 2013). This paper will begin by explaining the context for the vision. It will then describe the changes required for the vision and key strategies for its implementation, followed by limitations of the vision and institutional recommendations. Context This paper advises a vision for e-learning intended for Laurentian University, which has its primary campus in Sudbury, Ontario, Canada. Laurentian University is one of two Canadian universities to offer programs in both official languages (Laurentian University, 2013c). It has over 175 programs, including 33 graduate programs. There are 9,700 full-time students and the majority of undergraduate courses have fewer than 30 pupils (Laurentian University, 2013a, 2013c). Greater than 50% of students come from areas external to northeastern Ontario, including a high proportion of international learners, and only 24.8% of undergraduate students

live on campus (Laurentian University, 2013a, 2013c). The key motivators for students who enroll in the University include program variety, small class sizes, quality support services and bilingual programs (Laurentian University, 2013f). The University offers several fully online distance education programs, as well as blended programs with online and in-person courses (Laurentian University, 2013b). The Centre for Continuing Education, in conjunction with a subject matter expert, develops online courses that faculty employ (Anonymous Laurentian employee, personal communication, June 28, 2013). Some professors of face-to-face courses also use e-learning technology to enhance instruction, primarily by uploading course content to the Universitys Learning Management System (LMS), Desire2Learn (Anonymous Laurentian employee, personal communication, June 28, 2013). Although certain professors implement e-learning, the University does not require technology use in courses, nor does it currently have a vision for e-learning (Anonymous Laurentian employee, personal communication, June 28, 2013). Laurentian University has two governing organizations, specifically the Board of Governors, which is responsible for commercial and economic management, and the Senate, which controls academic matters (Laurentian University, 2013d). Furthermore, the University has a President, who is also the Vice-Chancellor (Laurentian University, 2013d). He manages academic and business matters and supervises faculty and students. The University also has a volunteer Chancellor, who advises the President and promotes the University (Laurentian University, 2013d). Laurentian University employs 424 full-time professors and 216 part-time faculty (2013a). Of the full-time staff, 61% are male and 85% have completed a doctoral degree (Laurentian University, 2013a). Professors reflect a Lone Ranger approach and collegial culture, and control their instruction methods and teaching tools (Bates & Sangra, 2011; Anonymous

Laurentian employee, personal communication, June 28, 2013). The University also employs graduate students, who assist faculty with various tasks, such as evaluating assignments. Laurentian University has a Multi-Year Accountability Agreement that states the Universitys primary objectives (Laurentian University, 2013e). These goals include increasing program accessibility and improving the quality of teaching and learning (Laurentian University, 2013e). This paper presents a vision for e-learning that reflects these objectives and that suggests strategies for achieving these goals. Changes In order to transform Laurentian University into a learning institution without boundaries, called the Ontario Open University, significant changes must take place, including a transformation in administration, curriculum, and infrastructure. The proposed innovations indicated here are broad and this paper will explore various strategic approaches in greater depth. In realizing the new vision of learning, Laurentian University requires administrative restructuring. The University will hire a new Vice President of E-Learning who would operate at the same level as the Vice President Academic. The existing Centre for Continuing Education should be renamed the Centre for E-Learning and will change in terms of staff, structure and function. This Centre for E-Learning will be managed by two directors: the Director of Elearning and the Director of Online Learning. E-Learning and Online Learning will be closely linked and overlap, however, each area will be responsible for specific development, management and monitoring. For example, e-learning will oversee the management of the University-wide LMS and developing an evolving e-learning strategy for the University with the VP E-Learning and VP Academic. Online Learning will focus on the development, implementation and management of all online courses, and it will develop and implement

Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs). Overall, it will ensure the highest quality of online education. In order to maintain quality and relevancy, the University should establish an international e-learning advisory committee. Since the Centre for E-Learning will work with faculty members to develop online versions of all courses offered, the faculty union and the administration would need to agree on the task changes for staff. This process could pose disputes; however, if administration negotiated fair compensation, in consultation with the outside committee, the result could be a progressive example of an online institution. To transform the existing Laurentian University into the Ontario Open University, the institution would require a significant amount of curriculum restructuring. In this vision for learning, the University needs to offer all courses online. There are a few courses that are the exception to this transformation, including select courses in the medical school, due to the nature of clinical face-to-face learning requirements. To ensure the quality of the e-learning implementation, all programs would undergo a review to determine the most appropriate approach depending on the unique needs of the subject area. Through this process, the University would implement e-learning according to the larger University vision but also respect the e-learning continuum (Bates and Sangra, 2011). The approach to the development of new online courses would be as Tony Bates describes, the project management approach, as it ensures quality and cost control (Bates & Sangra, 2011). It will require the collaboration of the Centre for E-Learning, faculty and administration. Most courses would be available to enrolled students, for-credit and online. Additionally, the University would develop MOOCs for select courses not-for-credit and open to anyone, to allow the OOU to market itself as an institution with open accessibility.

With a transformation of this magnitude, the Ontario Open University will also need to address changes related to infrastructure. In line with the strategic goals for Information and Communication Technology (ICTs) listed by Sangra, technology infrastructure, accessibility, internal administrative processes, communication and research needs to be addressed (Bates & Sangra, 2011). For example, the University will need to acquire a server space, explore the need for an open LMS and hire or re-train technical personnel to support the online community. With the goal of creating a learning institution without boundaries, this paper proposes transforming Laurentian University into the Ontario Open University. The University requires significant changes in administration, curriculum and infrastructure. The University will implement key strategies to ensure these changes provide continued quality and excellence in teaching and learning. Strategies Program Management The change from traditional education to e-learning requires a well-planned transition strategy (Sangra et al., 2007). This is certainly true of the complexity and scale inherent in development of the OOU. Therefore, a project management approach to course development, as outlined by Bates and Sangra (2011), is most effective in this situation. For example, the University will employ a project manager to oversee development of a pedagogically sound rationale for e-learning and adherence to realistic timelines and budgets. The University will control costs by allocating required resources prior to project implementation and setting deadlines for the conversion of initial courses. The project management team will include representatives from the academic disciplines to serve as subject matter experts, a learning specialist, an instructional designer from the Centre for E-Learning, and a media designer. The

project team will reimagine courses through innovative uses of technology, not merely transfer traditional face-to-face methods to online courses (Sangra et al., 2007). Although this approach is expensive, Bates and Sangra (2011) stress it is the best for managing and sustaining projects. In this context, Lone Rangers (Bates & Sangra, 2011) may serve well as faculty representatives, but these early innovators alone cannot accomplish a project of this magnitude. Similarly, the boutique method of course development is not viable as the number of professors requiring support would overwhelm available personnel. Therefore, in this context, a project management approach is the best option. Instructor Development Instructor training is vital for the development and continued success of the OOU. However, Sangra et al. (2007) caution that most training has been limited to developing technology skills, not pedagogically sound, innovative, learner-centered applications of technology. Therefore, OOU instructor training will focus on how students learn and how to exploit affordances of technology to stimulate these learning processes. The University will require all instructors to teach e-learning courses, so this training will be mandatory and sustained as the project evolves and technology changes. The University will use top-down and bottom-up approaches to maximize instructor participation. The President supports the project, so it will become a major initiative for all departments, overseen by the directors of online learning and e-learning and tied to yearly performance reviews. The University will use the Diffusion of Innovations Model developed by Everett M. Rogers (Hartman et al., 2007) to plan the required training. Initially, the University will harness the expertise and enthusiasm of innovators and early adopters through workshops showcasing successful implementation of e-learning. However, Bates states that this enthusiasm will not be

sufficient to sustain enthusiasm and progress long-term, and Chris Dede warns it leads to islands of innovation (Hartman et al., 2007). Therefore, the project management team will schedule long-term training plans that are sustainable, yet sufficiently fluid to allow for changes in technology and training needs. Curriculum Revision The conversion to the OOU requires decisions regarding timelines, curriculum delivery, assessment procedures, and an open-source LMS approved by the project team. Under the guidance of the project manager, the team will develop a timeline for transferring courses online and implementing greater technology integration in face-to-face offerings. Prior to conversion, each course will undergo a program review to determine how to best integrate technology to maximize meaningful learning and achievement of program outcomes. As part of this review, the instructional design team will meet with teachers in each of the academic disciplines to establish core learning outcomes. The team will design e-learning courses around this content, but integrate the technology required to improve instruction, learning, and assessment. To maintain consistency across the institution, the e-learning department will develop a template for converting course curriculum. However, each course will also be assessed for unique technology and pedagogical requirements. The University will evaluate current assessment procedures for depth, accuracy, and suitability for technology-mediated learning environments. For example, exams, which promote recall of content over application of knowledge, will be replaced by Learning 2.0 (Sinclair et al., 2006) assessment methods, such as simulations, wikis, multimedia presentations, and collaborative projects. The OOU will monitor courses regularly for effective, innovative uses of technology and revise as required to improve instruction and learning.

Workload Considerations Development of the OOU will necessitate changes to instructors function, schedule, and workload. Hartman et al. (2007, p. 64) state For the first time in their careers, faculty members are expected to teach in ways that differ from how they were taught when they were students. This will impact workload as instructors learn to apply technology to their unique contexts, transfer courses online, and learn new administrative and assessment practices. Linardopoulos (2012) reports that workload and compensation are major deterrents to developing and teaching online courses. These attitudes are reflected in the current Laurentian Collective Agreement stipulating online course development falls within instructors duties, but faculty must agree in writing (Laurentian University, 2013h). To mitigate faculty concerns, the project manager and upper administration will meet with the faculty union to draft workload and remuneration guidelines agreeable to all parties. Linardopoulos (2012) stresses such agreements are vital for successful e-learning implementation as they address critical factors such as fair compensation, class size, and work schedule. Accessibility Since one of OOUs primary goals is to increase accessibility, the project management team will investigate the advantages of replacing the current LMS, Desire2Learn, with an open source platform such as Moodle or Sakai. The University will need to determine whether this platform has the functionality and stability to support all OOU programs. MOOCs will also increase accessibility by reducing cost barriers and offering OOU courses to a mass audience. Since MOOCs have a high development cost, as noted by the former President of Laurentian University, Sir John Daniel, (2013) and their efficacy is highly controversial, these will be implemented strategically.

10

Funding The revision process outlined above will require stable, sustained funding and strict financial management. To keep within budget, the University will estimate total cost based on the time and expense of revising a representative sample of courses. This projected cost will be the maximum expenditure for the project, and several factors will help keep within budget. First, revision costs will decrease as learning objects are replicated between courses with similar outcomes and overhead decreases as more learners study from home (Laurillard, 2008). In addition, revenues from enrollments are likely to increase as courses become available online (Bates, 2007). Finally, the OOU will benefit from open content sources by adapting existing learning materials, instead of developing entirely original course content. According to their Consolidated Financial Statements, Laurentian University received 88 million dollars in government and research grants and contracts in 2012 (Laurentian University, 2013h). These are likely to continue as federal and provincial governments fund innovative uses of technology in education. However, these grants will not be sufficient to entirely fund the project, so the University must obtain additional revenue from the corporate sector. These funds will enable the OOU to develop e-learning programs that cultivate skill sets crucial in a knowledge-based, technology-driven workplace. Limitations Pre-emptive examination of factors that might derail the success of Laurentian Universitys transition into an online environment is indispensable. The limitations fall into three main categories: personnel, governance and logistical limitations. With attentive and insightful investigation the University can mitigate these effects. Laurentian faculty will have a compelling role in ensuring a successful transition to e-

11

learning. Management needs to approach staff in a manner that invites feedback. This engagement is paramount to fostering a willingness to embrace change. Postsecondary faculty do not become academics because they have a propensity for change or particular fondness for technology (Hartman et al., 2007). Significant imposition from management could disparage the needs and experiences of frontline staff. There are benefits to ensuring that employees see the logic in adopting managerial missions and goals that initially feel counter-intuitive. It is essential to have a process that is conducive to creating a fully integrated, cohesive unit. Without it, staff may feel resentful and unprepared (Bates & Sangra, 2011). A technological teaching environment extends the expectations of faculty and cultivates conversion from a teacher-centred to a student-centred learning environment (Hartman et al., 2007). The University is making demands to understand a genesis of learners who are a distinctly modern group, and there is resistance. Further to this, educators are challenged to accommodate the needs of this generation in a virtual environment due to the explosion in demand for online learning (Phipps et al., 2000). This introduces unfamiliar territory to older faculty where their traditional roles might need to be re-defined. The second category of impediments arises within governance issues. Foremost, there are complications that occur without an open and unbiased consultation that clearly identifies the intellectual and academic property rights for online content. This process must take place at the beginning of any virtual content progression. Juxtaposed with this is the need for adoption of a published institution-wide report on the transition to OOU (Phipps et al., 2000). This can moderate cost excesses and ensure the validity and quality control of any content offered in the virtual space. Additionally, because of the public nature of the approach, one individuals departure from the process will not harm the cultivation of developing institution-wide change

12

(Bates & Sangra, 2011). The final limitations concern the logistics of finance and infrastructure. These include distributing funds adequately to compensate individuals time and efforts and to retain a team of technology experts. There are also extensive costs for purchasing technology in the first five years when transitioning to e-learning (Bates, 2007). There will have to be budget reallocation within and potentially between departments to support the efforts of those initially adopting the change to online content. Recommendations The team for this paper developed recommendations to counter the three categories of issues identified in the limitations. Initially, efforts need to focus on ensuring that the right personnel with the appropriate skill sets are in place. An electronic development team with experts in web publishing, multimedia development, and ICT specialists must be selected and given time to solidify (Barker, 1999). Their availability as a resource will be effective in reassuring staff that change to an e-learning context will be supported. Another concern is the need to develop a process to ease staff apprehension about forthcoming change. Efforts must be made to prepare compensation for staff members who selfidentify to begin the process of developing electronic content. They will eventually become mentors for other staff members to participate in the process of change (Phipps et al., 2000). As a means of ensuring that the second generation of participants can be chosen in an unbiased manner, the University will develop a transparent application process that supports impartiality. Furthermore, departments will initiate strategic plans under the auspices of the OOU institutional plan and priorities. To resolve issues arising in governance limitations, Laurentian staff require a series of

13

online information sessions. Topics covered will include current developments in intellectual and academic property rights as well as formalization of the new OOU governance structure defining responsibilities. Confusion surrounding property rights needs alleviation so challenges from legalities do not lead to future issues. Additional sessions will detail the informative OOU Institutional Strategic Plan with clear five and ten year goals and immediate priorities. In essence, this will provide a focused statement for all stakeholders at the University to begin the transition, ensuring that themes and priorities resonate throughout all aspects of development. A final session will provide the staff with a vision for ascertaining success with determination of how evaluative data will be collected and assessed at the one year, two year and five year marks (Phipps et al., 2000). The importance of measuring the effectiveness of new strategies must be highlighted and shared with staff to ensure everyone envisions the impact of their efforts. The University needs to address the category of limitations surrounding finances and infrastructure. OOU can relieve problems accessing funds by ensuring that grants and government assistance converge before implementation occurs. Secondly, there is a need to have a faculty public-funds allocation plan in place to distribute financial resources in an unbiased and nonpartisan manner (Bullen & Gropen, 2000). OOU requires this to circumvent any department perceptions of unfairness. Initially, a standing committee will make decisions about the feasibility of providing fiscal grants for professors who are developing and spearheading innovative ideas. Conclusion To prepare learners adequately for the modern-day workforce, higher education institutions need to restructure teaching and learning. This paper suggests a vision for e-learning at Laurentian University that aims to achieve this objective. It proposes a transition to a

14

University without boundaries, which involves open and continuous education. This article presents the context of the current institution. It also discusses modifications and strategies suggested for implementing a vision for e-learning, their limitations and corresponding recommendations. In order for Laurentian University to implement this vision and transition to the Ontario Open University successfully, the University needs to conduct ongoing monitoring of student learning and the quality of e-learning education. This will establish whether professors are effectively using technology and ascertain changes that could improve teaching and learning. The strategies and suggestions this paper provides would enable the University to use e-learning successfully and support students in the development of knowledge and skills required by 21st century employers.

References Bates, A. (2007). Strategic planning for e-learning in a polytechnic. In M. Bullen & D. Janes (Eds.), Making the transition to e-learning: Strategies and issues (pp. 47-65). Hershey, PA: Information Science Publishing. Bates, A.W., & Sangra, A. (2011). Managing technology in higher education: Strategies for transforming teaching and learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Barker, K. (1999). Quality guidelines for technology-assisted distance education. FutureEd. Retrieved from http://www.futured.com/pdf/distance.pdf British Columbia Institute of Technology (BCIT). (2012). The BCIT e-learning strategy (Draft). Bullen, M. (2006). When worlds collide: Project management and the collegial culture. In B. Pasian & G. Woodill (Eds.), Plan to learn: Case studies in eLearning project

15

management (pp. 169-176). Canadian eLearning Enterprise Alliance. Bullen, M. (2013). Revisiting the need for strategic planning for eLearning in higher education (Draft). Bullen, M., & Gropen, B. (2000). Preparing distance education courses: A guide for course authors. Distance Education and Technology. The University of British Columbia: Vancouver, B.C. Bullen, M., & Janes, D.P. (2007). Preface. In M. Bullen & D.P. Janes (Eds.), Making the transition to e-learning: Strategies and issues (pp. vii-xvi). Hershey, PA: Information Science Publishing. Daniel, J. (2013). Four perspectives on MOOCs [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from http://linc.mit.edu/linc2013/presentations/LINC2013Daniel.pdf Hartman, J., Dziuban, C., & Brophy-Ellison, J. (2007). Faculty 2.0. Educause Review, 42(5), 62 - 77. Laurentian University. (2013a). Common University Data Ontario. Retrieved from http://www.laurentian.ca/Webfm_send/1230 Laurentian University (2013b). Distance education. Retrieved from http://www.laurentian.ca/distanceeducation Laurentian University. (2013c). Facts & figures. Retrieved from http://www.laurentian.ca/content/facts-figures-0 Laurentian University. (2013d). Governance & leadership. Retrieved from http://www.laurentian.ca/content/governance-leadership Laurentian University. (2013e). Multi-Year Accountability Agreement. Retrieved from http://www.laurentian.ca/content/multi-year-accountability-agreement

16

Laurentian University. (2013f). Top 10 reasons to choose Laurentian. Retrieved from http://www.laurentian.ca/content/top-10-reasons-choose-laurentian Laurentian University. (2013g). Collective agreement between the Laurentian university faculty association and the board of governors of laurentian university. Retrieved from http://www.laurentian.ca/webfm_send/71 Laurentian University. (2013h). Consolidated financial statements of Laurentian university of Sudbury. Retrieved from http://www.laurentian.ca/content/financial-statements# http://agb.org/trusteeship/2011/1/online-education-where-it-going-what-should-boardsknow Laurillard, D. (2008). Open teaching: The key to sustainable and effective open education. In T. Ioshi & M.S.V Kumar (Eds.), Opening up education: The collective advancement of education through open technology, open content, and open knowledge (pp. 319-335). The MIT Press. Linardopoulos, N. (2012). Faculty compensation for online courses: A revised approach. The University of the Fraser Valley Research Review, 4, 49-54. Retrieved from http://journals.ufv.ca/rr/RR42/article-PDFs/5-linardopoulos.pdf Phipps, R., Merisotis, J., & Harvey, M. (2000). Quality on the line: Benchmarks for success in internet-based distance education. The Institute for Higher Education Policy. Washington, D.C. Retrieved from http://www.ihep.org/assets/files/publications/m-r/QualityOnTheLine.pdf Sangra, A., Guardia, L., & Gonzlez-Sanmamed, M. (2007). Educational design as a key issue in planning for quality improvement. In M. Bullen & D.P. Janes (Eds.), Making the transition to e-learning: Strategies and issues (pp. 284-299). Hershey, PA: Information

17

Science Publishing. Sinclair, G., McClaren, M., & Griffin, M.J. (2006). E-learning and beyond: A discussion paper prepared as part of the campus 2020 process for the British Columbia ministry of advanced education. Retrieved from http://www.canadianopenlibrary.ca/SwfDocs/206/206085.pdf