RECOMMENDATIONS AND BENEFITS ... CONTINUED
back
32. Alternative Instruction. Research in the use of alternative instructional
delivery systems should be reviewed and augmented as a means of achieving the
mission of the University. Although few focus group and survey participants
raised the issue, distance education has enormous potential to transform higher
education. Both methods of delivery and areas of focus (within and beyond the
Kent system) need to be considered.
Many questions and issues pertaining to faculty and distance education
need to be addressed. These issues include socialization, sense of community,
social mentoring, credentialing, liberal arts education, consumerism, and
academic mentoring. There are many planning issues, including the role of
administration, faculty, students, and technical support staff; the potential impact
of both importing and exporting alternative education; and the need to ensure that
funding does not detract from existing programs of strength. Environmental
assessment and a needs study should be undertaken to identify Kent's niche and to
determine the level and extent of the resources the University should commit to
the development and support of alternative instructional delivery systems.
Quality issues include curricular oversight, personal interaction,
evaluation, availability of resource materials, teaching methods, and faculty
credentials. There are technical quality issues, including adequate technical
support staff and equipment, adequate staff at distant locations, and
interactiveness. Faculty incentives must also be considered, possibly in terms of
double workload credit, compensation, and development release time/workload
credit. Student needs include advising (course, career-related), technical support,
and administrative support. Curriculum issues need to be considered, including
types of courses to be offered (lab, lecture, seminar), type of technology that can
be used, size of class/participation, office hours, distancing of faculty from
students, and grading.
Responsibility for examining these and other issues should be assigned to
a person who would coordinate and foster the activity of those faculty and staff
interested in distance education and act as an advocate for it. In addition, a joint
subcommittee of the Teaching Council and ACT should be established to advise
and participate in planning and implementation. The majority of subcommittee
members should be faculty.
BENEFITS:
The University will build the expertise base needed to design, support, and
implement alternative instruction.
The University will be positioned to be a player in the distance education
environment.
33. Classrooms. In consultation with the ACT, academic units should define
minimum technological requirements for classroom computer equipment. These
minimum configurations should include consideration of: networked computers
with a control console and separate instructor's monitor, computer projection
monitor systems and access to multimedia devices and products. These standards
need to reflect the diversity of platforms used in the curriculum and numerous
ergonomic considerations. To better support existing and emerging technological
applications, the Space Committee should be apprised of classroom and labs with
substandard configured space. Selected space should be configured to serve as
both open computer labs for general student use and as classrooms for
computer-related instructional purposes. The first installation of a fully mediated
classroom should be promoted to enhance the reputation of the University and to
seek funding for additional classroom upgrades. In turn, these improved facilities
should be used as part of the University's out-reach and continuing education
program.
BENEFITS:
Current and emerging instructional techniques involving technology will
be better supported and encouraged.
There will be improved opportunities for occasional scheduling of class
meetings in a computer lab.
Use of technology will increase student learning and improve retention.
34. University Hardware and Software Standards. The academic technology
advocate should develop University-wide standards to ensure that all lab
equipment is able to run commonly used programs. Minimum standards for
computer lab services should be established and met. The University should
subsidize a portion of the cost to achieve and maintain minimum software
standards and the basic hardware needed to support this software.
BENEFITS:
There will be fewer brands of computers and related software to support.
Lab users will be able to rely on having consistent basic equipment,
software, and services in labs.
Occasions of disk and file format incompatibility will be reduced,
resulting in less re-entry of data.
Students will have greater incentives to use computers in course-related
activities.
Fewer software applications will result in less training time needed to
accommodate all versions.
The number of unnecessary exposures to license infringements will be
reduced.
Purchase decisions for new software versions will be better and more
timely.
35. Student Ownership. Business and Finance, in cooperation with academic
units, should support and enable students who want to purchase their own
computers for general computing applications. Students should be provided with
information regarding local and remote network connections so that they can
ensure that their computer is able to connect to the University network. Such
computers should be suitable for running general purpose software, (e.g., word
processors, spreadsheets, and data bases), but may also require capabilities related
to particular disciplines. Academic units should seek consensus regarding
hardware and software appropriate to the discipline so that prospective and current
students who seek to purchase their own equipment can be properly advised. Part
of this effort would include the publication of systems that would be maintained
by the University in terms of training, support, and purchase programs, and would
also include the wiring of residence hall rooms for network access. Business and
Finance, in cooperation with academic units, should coordinate student purchase
programs so as to reduce costs to students who choose to purchase their own
equipment and should investigate the feasibility of creating an on-campus
computer store.
BENEFITS:
Students will receive strong encouragement to purchase computers,
enhancing their own experiences and lessening demand for computer labs.
Students who own computers will be better able to take advantage of
training, learning tools, and increasingly available network resources.
36. Workplace Environment. Plans for computer acquisition should take into
account the need for proper ergonomics in order to avoid the possibility of
computer related health problems. The University should retrofit furniture and
work areas where computers are located, including classrooms and labs, so as to
enhance usability. The University should identify the technological and access
needs of students with disabilities and address the needs as identified.
BENEFITS:
Work spaces will be more conducive to productivity and efficiency.
The possibility of physical injury to students, faculty, and staff will be
reduced.
Equipment is less likely to be damaged.
Federally funded projects will be housed in more appropriate
environments.
The University will enhance its compliance with the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990.
Students with disabilities will have better opportunities to use computing
resources.
Recruitment and retention of students with disabilities will be improved.
37. Infrastructure. Plans for computer acquisition should take into account the
infrastructure necessary for the installation and use of equipment. This includes
issues of power, network connections, and security. University infrastructure
planning efforts should recognize that substantial deferred costs occur when
inadequate provisions are made for current and future instructional technology
needs (e.g., power, lighting controls, window covers, conduit, cooling, and
telecommunications). In order to ascertain current and future technological needs
of the academic community, the Office of Facilities Planning and Operations
should consult with the Director of Information Systems and Technology and the
academic computing advocate as well as the units affected as academic buildings
are being built or renovated.
BENEFITS:
Costly and time consuming post-construction modifications can be
avoided.
38. Position Descriptions. In view of the strategic importance of computing to
the future of the University, departmental handbooks should provide information
regarding workload equivalents for faculty who engage in management or support
of computing resources. The University should establish guidelines to ensure that
jobs in academic units are properly graded to reflect the technical roles that staff
are performing. Position descriptions, grading, and reward structures should
reflect and encourage the role of experts in mentoring other users.
BENEFITS:
Faculty with computing expertise will receive appropriate recognition for
time spent to support and maintain hardware and software within their
academic units.
Knowledgeable individuals from one unit who provide installation and
user support for other units would be more likely to receive formal recognition
or compensation.
39. Computer Services. Given the growing diversity of specialized hardware
and software, it will be necessary to identify a limited number of standard
configurations that will be supported by Computer Services. General purpose
University labs and the software available in those labs should be supported by
Computer Services. Software that has been designated as meeting
University-wide standards should be supported by Computer Services. Computer
Services needs to provide UNIX and Macintosh support to the University
community in addition to the present PC and mainframe support. Given the
current environment, there is a need to better manage/oversee increasingly
distributed computing resources and to increase the consulting role of Computer
Services. The developing role and function of Computer Services within the
academic environment should be articulated and communicated to the University.
BENEFITS:
Faculty and staff will develop a common understanding of the mission of
Computer Services and a more realistic view of the level of support available.
40. Copyright Concerns. The University should provide a copyright clearance
service to ensure that software users and producers are in compliance with the
appropriate laws. A review of University policies regarding copyright laws and
ownership of software and multimedia developed by faculty, staff, and students
needs to occur to ensure that they reflect technological advances. Faculty who use
the emerging technologies need to be kept informed of changing laws regarding
copyright.
BENEFITS:
The potential for copyright infringement and related legal actions will be
reduced.
There will be a clearer understanding by both faculty and the University of
the rights of software authors.
41. Fees. It is very difficult for the committee to endorse additional fees for
computing. Kent already has the second-highest fee structure in the state. The
current general fee structure includes a number of general fees (student
organizations-$12.00, publications-$0.56, student leader compensation-$0.27,
athletics-$97.00, intramurals-$15.00, student center-$68.75, health center-$40.00,
athletic facilities-$80.00, medical services-$2.00, bands-$1.50, bus-$41.50,
theatre-$0.50, and registration services-$7.50). In addition there are numerous
course fees and miscellaneous fees for which students are responsible.
Endorsement among survey respondents for a new fee to support computing was
limited. The survey item was, "How much need is there for the University to
institute a new instructional fee to support computer and hardware?" Among
students, the responses were "None" - 37 percent; "Little" - 30 percent;
"Moderate" - 23 percent; and "Extensive" - 10 percent. Faculty and staff
responses were more evenly divided--49 percent responded "Moderate" or
"Extensive." If a fee is instituted, it should be earmarked for support and
improvement of academic computing.
42. Facility Access. Present University building security policies that inhibit
access to scarce resources should be reviewed and revised as appropriate to
provide more cost effective utilization of computing resources. As new labs are
planned, consideration should be given to evening and weekend access and to
using the Kent Card recommended by the Network and Information Systems
Study to control building access.
BENEFITS:
Students and others who need or want to use labs will have increased
access.
43. Universal Student Accounts. A computer account should be established
for every student upon request, and this account should persist until the student is
no longer active. This account should enable all students to use e-mail and
Internet information resources through a UNIX-based system.
BENEFITS:
Students will learn to use resources they likely will use after graduation.
The University will gain an image as a place that provides state-of-the-art
Internet access.
44. Distributed Computing. The University should move toward a distributed
academic computing environment in which all classrooms, labs, residence hall
rooms, and faculty and administrative offices are connected to the campus
backbone. Academic Computer Services should migrate applications to an open
computing environment, such as UNIX in order to facilitate their ultimate transfer
to distributed platforms. Ultimately, the role of Academic Computer Services
would evolve from that of a hardware and software provider to that of a
centralized consulting and support service for computing systems distributed in
academic units. Academic units will be responsible for management and support
of local distributed systems.
BENEFITS:
Connectivity will increase and enhance access to remote information.
Distributed systems will provide a better access path from academic units
to centralized systems.
Intra-unit communication will be enhanced.