2. Assessment and Technology Research Maj Marie Revak Director of Academic Assessment Center for Educational Excellence US Air Force Academy

3. Context of the Project Project: USAFA Faculty Notebook Computer Study Nov 98 – Dec 99 85 faculty members turned in desktop computers for notebooks 100 faculty members received new desktop computers Groups equal demographically

4. Purpose of the Study Are notebooks suitable replacements for desktops? How do notebook computers affect teaching, research, and service? Which features and software packages are used? Should we conduct a similar study with cadets? Under what criteria? What relevant information can we provide to others: Air Force, DoD, and Higher Education

5. Multiple Uses for Assessment Data For identifying needs For evaluating programs For improvement For accountability

6. Methods and Measurements Goal was to collect data from multiple sources –6 surveys: 1 initial, 4 intermediate, 1 exit –Maintenance logs, network logs, training rosters –Anecdotal data Data –Quantitative and qualitative –Process and product

7. Findings and Results The Notebook computer group: –Reported higher satisfaction with their overall computer experience, computer speed, response time, and ergonomic design –Provided a higher proportion of positive comments on the surveys –Spent more time (per person) dialing in –Took their computers home an average of 2-3 times per week –Used their notebook computers 93% of the time –Reported more required repairs –Added more hardware and software –Suffered no losses due to theft or accidents

8. Findings and Results The Desktop Computer Group: –Used their desktop computers 80-85% of the time (they relied on other computers more) Both Groups: –Reported ergonomic problems –Used computers in class about one-third of the time

9. Findings and Results Biggest Positives for Notebooks: –Work ubiquity –Increased productivity Biggest Negatives for Notebooks: –Mouse –Keyboard Two computers not necessary

10. Decisions For faculty, notebook computers are a valuable addition to the computing “mix” at USAFA Proceed with a cadet study

11. Lessons Learned Use rewards (or hammers) to encourage participation Don’t rely too much on technology (to assess technology use) Think about data analysis and reporting from the start Don’t collect more data than you can use Report results quickly Must be willing to provide support while collecting data Anecdotal data is powerful!

12. Assessment of the Impact of Ubiquitous Computing on Learning Ross A. Griffith Wake Forest University Ubiquitous Computing Conference Seton Hall University South Orange, NJ January 4-6, 2001

14. Wake Forest University Fall 2000

15. Overview of Presentation Major Elements of the Strategic Plan Assessment Structure The Computing Initiative Changes by Students and Faculty Academic Outcomes Summary

16. Major Elements of the Strategic Plan IBM laptop computers provided to all entering freshmen and faculty effective with the fall semester 1996 A new first-year seminar, ensuring each freshman an in-depth intellectual encounter effective with the fall semester 1996

17. 40 new tenure-track faculty members representing a 15 percent increase Scholarships for 175 students to study abroad Fellowships for 150 students to perform joint research with faculty members Major Elements of the Strategic Plan (continued)

18. Assessment Structure Evaluation Committee consisting of faculty and administration formed to evaluate effectiveness of the strategic plan. Evaluation Committee sanctioned: College Student Experiences Questionnaire (CSEQ) Cooperative Institutional Research Program (CIRP) Freshman Survey Freshman Essay

19. Evaluation Committee sanctioned: (continued) Higher Education Data Sharing (HEDS) Consortium Alumni/ae Survey HEDS Senior Survey Higher Education Research Institute (HERI) Faculty Survey In-house Faculty Computer Survey In-house Faculty Survey

20. In-house Student Computer Survey Wake Forest Fact Book Wake Forest Key Measures of Quality Evaluation Committee Reviews Fact Book and Key Measures Analyzes survey data Communicates results Conducts follow-up Evaluation Committee sanctioned: (continued)

21. The Computing Initiative IBM laptop computers provided to all entering freshmen and faculty Standing Faculty Committee on Information Technology formed Entire campus wired Created new position of Academic Computing Specialist (ACS)

22. The Computing Initiative (continued) Information Systems Support Center (ISSC) revamped Student and faculty training provided by library Computer-Enhanced Learning Initiative (CELI) formed by faculty Student Technology AdvisoRS (STARS) created

23. Changes by Students and Faculty College Student Experiences Questionnaire (CSEQ) The survey directed by George Kuh of the University of Indiana was administered to a random sample of one-half of the freshmen, sophomores and juniors in March of 1996, 1997 and 1998 and all freshmen, sophomores and juniors on the web in spring 2000. The main purpose of the survey is to determine the activities of students with respect to how they spend their time.

24. Items for 2000 CSEQ with Significantly Higher Mean Scores than 1998 CSEQ Time spent: Used computer to prepare reports or papers Used e-mail to communicate with instructor/other students Used computer tutorial to learn material for a course Searched the WWW or Internet for course material Used computer to retrieve material from outside library Used computer to produce visual displays Used computer to analyze data Developed a Web page/multimedia presentation

25. Items for 2000 CSEQ with Significantly Higher Mean Scores than 1998 CSEQ (continued) Institutional Emphasis: Information literacy skills (using computers) Made gains: Use Computers and other information technology 28 other “intellectually developing” items

26. Items for 2000 CSEQ with Significantly Lower Mean Scores than 1998 CSEQ Time spent: Participate in class discussion via electronic medium Use dictionary or thesaurus Use campus learning lab to improve study skills Use campus recreational facilities Had discussions w/students of different values Opinion: Overall opinion of college Attend same institutional again

27. CSEQ - Quality of Effort: Computer and Information Technology Scale

28. HEDS Senior Survey The HEDS Senior Survey was administered to the Classes of 1993 through 1998 and the Class of 2000 in the spring of their senior year. The HEDS Senior Survey is an excellent survey for indicating the degree of educational enhancement and satisfaction in a number of areas. The Class of 2000 is the first class to graduate under the Plan for the Class of 2000 while the Senior Survey results are compared to the Class of 1998 as well as a College Group and a University Group of peer institutions.

29. HEDS Senior Survey Use of Quantitative Tools - Enhancement

30. HEDS Senior Survey Use of Technology – Enhancement

31. HEDS Senior Survey - 2000 Wake Forest Items Significantly Above & Below 1998 Wake Forest, 2000 College and 2000 University Above Enhancement: Use Quantitative Tools Read or Speak Foreign Language Below Satisfaction: Relive college experience at same institution Social life on campus Ethnic/Racial diversity Climate for minority students on campus

32. In-house Faculty Survey The Faculty Survey was developed by the evaluation committee to assess the effectiveness of all portions of the Wake Forest strategic plan. The survey was administered to the undergraduate faculty in December 1995 and February 1998.

33. In-house Faculty Survey Results Mean Scores Significantly Higher: 1998 vs. 1995 Computers in teaching Computers in communication Computers in individual instruction Computers for presentations Computers with information gathering Computers for modeling/simulation Computer skill Computer training & assistance

34. In-house Faculty Survey Results Mean Scores Significantly Higher 1998 vs. 1995 (continued) Students proficient with computers Technology changed effectiveness of teaching Effect of computers on communication Effect of computers on resource material Effect of computers on presentations Use of technology in teaching

35. Intellectual climate among students Religious development of students Prepare students for graduate/advanced education In-house Faculty Survey Results Mean Scores Significantly Higher: 1998 vs. 1995 (continued) Prepare students for employment after college End of course student evaluations Enroll more graduate students

36. In-house Faculty Survey Results Mean Scores Significantly Lower: 1998 vs. 1995 Number of papers or compositions published since previous fall Number of professional meetings attended since previous fall

37. 1998 HERI Faculty Survey Administered by UCLA in Fall 1998 to faculty nationally Several questions contained items regarding computer use and opinions Wake Forest full-time undergraduate faculty results compared with peer group of nine private institutions

38. Use of Computers 1998 HERI Faculty Survey

39. Sources of Stress 1998 HERI Faculty Survey

40. Opinion in General 1998 HERI Faculty Survey

41. Academic Outcomes First-time Freshmen Retention Following Year Year Entered

42. Average GPA End of Freshman Year

43. Summary Student & faculty computer usage has increased significantly since implementation of ubiquitous computing at Wake Forest Student & faculty computer usage is higher than peer group institutions Students are more engaged intellectually but are less satisfied with their overall college experience Freshmen retention rate and average GPA have increased slightly overall

44. Evaluating (and planning and implementing) Ubiquitous Computing: Hypothetical Example of Flashlight Methods Stephen C. Ehrmann, Ph.D.

45. Thanks 150+ institutional subscribers to TLT Group services TLT Group Founding Sponsors –Blackboard, Compaq, Microsoft, SCT, WebCT TLT Group Program Funders –FIPSE, Mellon Foundation, National Science Foundation

46. Apology For past examples of real studies, see http://www.tltgroup.org http://www.tltgroup.org Click on "resources" Click on Flashlight Case Studies Or subscribe to F-LIGHT (free) (directions on the Web site)

47. The Challenge Your institution is about to make an expensive upgrade in computers, connectivity Goals of the study: –Document whether the IT helps improve educational outcomes –Increase those educational gains –Control costs, reduce stress

48. An Important Digression Three ways of thinking about technology, two of which are usually wrong

49. Monadic Thinking Monad = one thing: just think about technology “Computers for all” = GREAT (or AWFUL). It’s obvious. Don’t waste money on evaluation. Technology!

50. Dyadic Thinking “Computers for all: kids will learn calculus 20% better!” Technology!Outcome u For example, if we invest in ubiquitous computing but our study shows calculus scores did not improve, u Then either we need better machines or the investment was a mistake.

51. Triads Triad: an activity using a technology to help produce an outcome You need to consider at least these three elements in order to predict or evaluate whether technology can foster a learning outcome Technology! Outcome Activity

52. Explaining the Picture Activity: what users do with technology – using computers to study together (e-mail; chat; file transfer…) Outcome: mastery of calculus. Dotted yellow arrows: choices about how to use the computers. Technology! Outcome Activity

53. The Red Arrow Factors (other than technology availability) influence the activity (studying together) and thereby influence benefits and costs of technology use. Technology! Outcome Activity

54. Yeast and Bread Bread = Better learning outcomes Yeast = computers Doubling the yeast doesn't double the bread if you don't supply the other parts of the recipe, too.

55. The Crux of the Gist Which educational activities are going to be improved in the most important ways (you hope) by this injection of IT? Other than computers, what are the other missing ingredients for those activities? Boost the other ingredients first (computers depreciate fastest so get them last)

56. Step 1. Identify Activities Which educational activities at your institution are: –Crucial for important outcomes (who graduates, what they can do) –Important for most or all courses –Likely to benefit most from use of the new technology –Time consuming, expensive –Somewhat out of sight (no one really knows for sure what's going on)

57. Examples of Activities Collaboration & community Information literacy (paper, electronic) Learning by designing, composing, creative work Activities that bridge cultural divides and take advantage of learner diversity

58. 2. Baseline Study Study 1-3 such activities that represent the heart of your hopes: –Current levels of the activities? –Current barriers? –Current incentives? –When computers are available today, are they used to do this better/differently? Why/not? –Baseline level of most important outcomes of those activities?

59. 3. Lower Barriers… Lower barriers and, if possible, increase the incentives for these activities Study other institutions to see what unexpected things happen when more computing made available for these activities

60. Examples of Barriers Some students believe that studying together is a waste of time? Some faculty worried about cheating? Some faculty aren't sure how to grade work when students work in teams? Computer screens are difficult for a group to see? Most people don't use threaded conferencing very well?

61. 4. Startup After creating a better environment for the activities, take the big step in ubiquitous computing $$

62. 5. Track After 6-12 months, repeat initial study of the activities, paying attention to IT use: –Is each activity improving? Thanks to computer availability? –Unexpected barriers? –Use data on early successes, failures help guide next steps of improving the activity (and implementing ubiquitous computing)

63. 6. Study "Costs" Which elements of the activity are so costly/exhausting that (once early enthusiasm wanes) they could cause burnout, cost over-runs? With that insight, can you discover alternative ways to do those tasks that are less stressful on time, budgets, good humor?

64. 7. Outcomes Improved? Repeat the study annually: –Are the learning outcomes improving (might take 2-3 years after the implementation) –Costs and other stresses under control? –Unanticipated problems, opportunities for improving or transforming the activities? Technology! Outcome Activity

65. The Point If you spend all your money and attention on "yeast," don't expect much bread! (Rapture of the technology) Use your studies to focus everyone's attention on the whole recipe and to make sure all the ingredients are there.

66. How Flashlight Can Help Evaluation tool kits and methods Training in how to do studies Do studies with or for you Help link you with others doing similar studies Free resources For all that see www.tltgroup.orgwww.tltgroup.org

67. Free Resources; Info Information about Flashlight at http://www.tltgroup.org –You can find the article on which this talk is based; –Article was published in AAHE Bulletin November 2000.

68. What Do You Think? When you go home, will you recommend consideration of this sequence of study and action? Why/not?