february 17, 2005 ©rich ranker – salt orlando 05 reflections and projections: twenty years of...

February 17, 2005February 17, 2005 ©Rich Ranker – SALT Orlando 05©Rich Ranker – SALT Orlando 05

Reflections and Projections:Reflections and Projections:Twenty Years of Requiring Computers – and Twenty Years of Requiring Computers – and

BeyondBeyond

Rich Ranker, EdDRich Ranker, EdDDirector of Instructional Technology ServicesDirector of Instructional Technology Services

Drew UniversityDrew UniversityMadison, NJMadison, NJ


OverviewOverview• About Drew and ITS• Computer Initiative (CI) History• Present• Effect on Learning at Drew

– 2004 Student Survey– 2003 Faculty Survey– 2005 faculty Survey (in progress)– Senior Faculty Reflections

• Future• Lessons Learned


About DrewAbout Drew

• Located in Madison, NJ• 2400 FTE Students• College of Liberal Arts, Graduate School,

Theological School• Top tier (U.S. News and World Report)• #12 Most Connected (Forbes/Princeton

Review)• EDUCAUSE Pioneer


Drew’s Early InvolvementDrew’s Early Involvement


About Instructional About Instructional Technology Services (ITS)Technology Services (ITS)

Organization + Staffing FT Stu• 1 0 Director• 3 5 Faculty Lab (Mgr, Instr Design, Comp Tech)

• 3 15 Media Res. Ctr (Mgr, Video + Event Coord, Media Tech)

• 1 5 Student Tech Ed Lab (Mgr/Tech)

• 1 5 Staff Lab (Mgr/Tech)

29 Mediated Classrooms


History - OverviewHistory - Overview

• Establishing the Program

• Institutional Identity

• “The Network”

• Laptops and Notebooks

• Evolving the Network

• Bringing Faculty Along


History - The BeginningsHistory - The Beginnings

• 1983– Faculty members suggest the idea of

computers for all incoming students– Brought to a vote of the College faculty– 64-2 vote in favor of program, labeled the

Computer Initiative (CI)– CI also provided desktop computers to all full-

time faculty


History - ImplementationHistory - Implementation

• Computer was mandatory for all students• Tuition increased to fund cost of computer• Computers purchased outright by University• Not broken out as a line item• Students take computer with them upon graduation• Students who leave before 4 years could either

return computer or pay balance of cost and take it with them


History - The First CI History - The First CI Computer (Fall 1984)Computer (Fall 1984)

• Epson QX-10– 128 KB RAM– Z80 CPU– 2 5.25” floppy drives (400K)– Software

• Valdocs• PeachCalc• CP/M

– Printers shared one per room


History - National AttentionHistory - National Attention

• Articles in the Chronicle, NY Times, etc.

• Question on “Jeopardy!”

• First liberal arts university to provide computers (Drexel, Stevens beat us by a year)

• Increased admissions during a demographic downturn


History - Access Is Not History - Access Is Not EnoughEnough

• It was assumed just providing computers would bring about their curricular use

• Faculty also supported projects to use technology in classes

• A few pilot projects started• Computers used primarily for word

processing, however• More work would be needed


History – 1988 - The History – 1988 - The Knowledge InitiativeKnowledge Initiative

• First Campus-Wide Information System

• Campus-wide voice/data telephone system (9600 bps serial data)

• Everyone had terminals (PCs with MS-Kermit) and email accounts

• Labeled at the time as “the network”

• By 1990, 2/3 faculty used email regularly


History - Further InnovationsHistory - Further Innovations

• 1988: First laptop (Zenith Z-181)

• 1992: First notebook (DEC 320p)

• 1995: First color screens (DEC HiNote)


History - Bringing Faculty History - Bringing Faculty AlongAlong

• Pilot projects for curricular software– Underfunded until early 90s

• 1993: First Faculty Development Workshops– 1 week sessions, guest speakers,

enabling multimedia

– Still occurring today, but…


History - Grants Fund History - Grants Fund InnovationInnovation

• 1993:First Faculty Development Workshops

• Over $500,000 in grants from Culpeper, Arthur Vining Davis, others fund continued faculty development in the mid-late 90s

• By late 90s most faculty had been in a workshop

• Faculty Lab takes off


History - The NetworkHistory - The Network

• 1993 -1996: Internet access is text-based, through Lynx on a VAX

• Convince faculty and staff that “the network” is not “a network”– Students already getting it at this point

– Academic Technology “guerilla networking”


History - The Network History - The Network (cont’d)(cont’d)

• 1996: all faculty and staff given access to a NetWare 4.1 file server, Netscape Navigator 3.0, Windows 3.1

• Windows 95 later

• 1997: begin networking students– Network cards included in computers for

first time


History - Leveraging the History - Leveraging the EnvironmentEnvironment

• 1998: all student rooms networked

• 2000: all configurations have network cards

• Everyone has personal drive space, departments have shared space

• Web publishing is simple matter of saving files to network drives


History - Beginnings of History - Beginnings of Course ManagementCourse Management

• 1998: Created shared folders for each course, rights assigned to group

• Automatic based on registration data

• Email, forums, Web interface

• Network drive for course materials still widely used


History - History - Drew, Late 1990sDrew, Late 1990s

• All faculty, staff, students networked• Email is ubiquitous• Information sharing through LAN

ubiquitous• Computers indelible part of University

culture– Completely integrated and pervasive


History - SummaryHistory - Summary

• Establishing the Program

• Institutional Identity

• “The Network”

• Laptops and Notebooks

• Evolving the Network

• Bringing Faculty Along


The PresentThe Present


Present - This Year’s ModelPresent - This Year’s Model

• IBM ThinkPad R51– 1.7 GHz Centrino– 512 MB RAM– 80GB HDD– 802.11 b/g wireless


Present - Campus NetworkPresent - Campus Network

• eDirectory and Active Directory trees– Synchronized with Novell Identity Manger

• Student laptops all in AD domain– “eXtreme Deployment”

• 1 port per pillow

• Wireless ~50% of campus and growing


Present - Laptops as Present - Laptops as Institutional ComputersInstitutional Computers

• Only 92 public computers for whole campus (25 tng, 14 lab, 13 MM lab, 15 lang lab, 25 library)

• No labs in residence halls, student center– Student laptops serve that purpose

• Student computers used in class

• Fewer staff needed (economies of scale)

• Space concerns (32.5 sq. ft/lab computer)


Present - Shared IssuesPresent - Shared Issues

• Problems discovered affect hundreds of people

• Solutions fix for hundreds of people

• Systematic problems cause headaches, also thorough resolutions (2002)


Present - Cost SavingsPresent - Cost Savings25% 50% 75% Drew Deficit

People/IT staff incl. media

60.6 72.3 94.7 92.1 9.1 FTE

People/IT staff excl. media

60.6 72.3 94.7 98.0 11.1 FTE

$ IT /person (excl. CI)

$927 $1249 $1547 $813 $1.3M

$ IT/person (incl. CI)

$927 $1249 $1547 $1146 $317K

Source: COSTS project data, 2003


Present - Why Cost Effective?Present - Why Cost Effective?

• Less lab management

• Efficiencies of standardization

• Customer responsibility for management

• Other reasons for low IT spending


Present - Trends in Higher Present - Trends in Higher EducationEducation

• 2003: 6% of all BA institutions provide a computer to students, 1.2% require computer

• 79% of all students at BA institutions are using their own computers

• Computer ownership among incoming Drew students approaching 100% – 1984: 5.1% of households had PCs (US Census)

(source: EDUCAUSE Core Data Service, 2003, http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/pub8001e.pdf)


The PresentThe Present

• Personal computers as Institutional Computers

• Instructional technology without student computer labs

• Ubiquitous networking

• Support perspectives

• Economies (and pitfalls) of scale


CI Effect on DrewCI Effect on Drew

• 2004 Student Survey

• 2004 Chair Survey

• 2005 Faculty Survey

• Senior Faculty Reflections



2004 Student Survey

• April 2004

• By ad hoc computer committee

• 460 respondents out of 2050 (22%)


CI Effect on Drew -CI Effect on Drew -2004 Student Survey2004 Student Survey

Courses requiring you to bring your laptop to class

Acad

Year0 1 2 3 or

MoreFreq %

Frosh 33 48 39 23 143 32

Soph 17 35 29 26 107 27

Jun 8 27 29 25 89 20

Sen 18 28 32 35 113 25

Total 76

17%

138

31 %

129

29%

109

24%

452 104


CI Effect on Drew -CI Effect on Drew -2004 Student Survey2004 Student Survey

• 83% of respondents use their Drew computers. A majority of those who do not are seniors.

• 89% of respondents do not have any other computer that they use on campus. A majority of those who do are seniors.

• 50% of respondents have had their computers repaired at the CNS help desk. 33% of respondents have had their computers reimaged at the CNS helpdesk.

• Full results of the survey are posted at: http://www.depts.drew.edu/univtech/computersurvey.html


CI Effect on Drew – CI Effect on Drew – 2004 Chair Survey2004 Chair Survey

• April thru August 2004

• Requested by Student Computer Program Committee

• Conducted by Academic Computing Advisory Council

• Survey of Department Chairs – all but one responded but…~2/3 of all courses


CI Effect on Drew – CI Effect on Drew – 2004 Chair Survey2004 Chair Survey

Number of Course Sections Reporting Use

Frequent Occasional Future

Laptops in Class 20 36 9

Software fr Network 40 44 15

Files on K: Drive 102 50 13

Class files fr Network 25 51 5

Course-wide email 131 44 4

Blackboard 26 7 30


CI Effect on Drew – CI Effect on Drew – 2005 Faculty Survey2005 Faculty Survey

• F2F survey of all faculty

• By Rich Ranker

• Spring 2005

• Purposes:– Assess use of instructional technology– Assess use of and satisfaction with ITS

facilities and services

• Not yet complete


CI Effect on Drew – CI Effect on Drew – 2005 Faculty Survey2005 Faculty Survey

Preliminary (small N) Observations:• ITS services and facilities well rated• Faculty feel students have no software, hardware or

network access problems• Time is faculty’s biggest impediment• CMS (Bb) growth, but…• Faculty using older office and ‘network’ tools• See http://depts.drew.edu/its/needs_survey_results.php


CI Effect on Drew – CI Effect on Drew – Senior Faculty ReflectionsSenior Faculty Reflections

• Dr. Alan Candiotti, Prof of Mathematics and VP for Univ Technology, 25 years at Drew

• Dr. Wendy Kolmar, Prof of English and Director of Women’s Studies, 22 years at Drew

• Dr. David Miyamoto, Professor of Biology, 18 years at Drew

• Full interviews will be at http://depts.drew.edu/its



• 2004 Student Survey

• 2004 Chair Survey

• 2005 Faculty Survey

• Senior Faculty Reflections


The FutureThe Future


Future - Presidential Future - Presidential Planning CommissionPlanning Commission

• Fall 2002: Reexamine CI and determine goals and effectiveness

• Surveys and work


Future – PPC GoalsFuture – PPC Goals

• “Develop a true computing community”• “Drew standard software package”• “24 hour access”• “Reasonably current machines for both students

and faculty”• “Equity for all students and faculty”• “Appropriate teaching spaces”• “Support”• “Create a computing system which allows for

facile expansion and future growth”


Future - Survey on Future - Survey on Ubiquitous ModelsUbiquitous Models

• 90% of College faculty endorsed required, standard computing package– Slightly more than half of those wanted no

changes– Slightly less than half endorsed a program

allowing students to bring a compatible computer of their own instead.


Future - President’s Strategic Future - President’s Strategic Plan, Spring 2004Plan, Spring 2004

• “. . . the University will no longer include the cost of a laptop in its tuition.

• “Incoming Drew University students will be able to either purchase a system-compatible laptop from the University or bring their own computer, as long as the computer meets Drew’s specifications. The tuition funds this makes available will be redirected to expanding the University’s academic programs and course offerings.”


Future - Implementing Future - Implementing the Changethe Change

• First year especially, allow few exceptions– Adhere to tight standard, and/or limit support

• Add ¼ FTE to help support non-standard computers– Create configuration process

• Purchase computers, resell them to students– Offer up-front purchase, 4 year financing, or 2 year

financing to buy new computer junior year


Future - Goals for NextFuture - Goals for Next 1-2 Years 1-2 Years

• Expect program to remain largely intact– RPI purchase program 96% compliance

• Use goals from PPC Technology report as guidance

• Emphasize advantages of purchasing Drew computer package over going it alone– Price, support, configuration

• Analyze effect of making students buy computing resources that other places provide


Future - Faculty/Staff ComputingFuture - Faculty/Staff Computing

• For now, continue centralized purchasing, desktop model– Laptops available as extra cost option– Non-standard (Mac) available to faculty after

first computer cycle• Very limited support


Future – Options?Future – Options?

• Change of administration• Consider what “ubiquitous computing” means• Pervasiveness of personal devices• Enabling technologies• Standardization of protocols• Can we provide goals of standard computing on

non-standard hardware/software?• Should we make investment in computer labs

and be “just like everyone else”?• Admissions advantages/disadvantages to our

new program?


The FutureThe Future

• “No Free Computers”

• Strategic Perspectives

• Sophisticated (?) Students

• Reaffirming the Program, With Caveats


Lessons LearnedLessons Learned

• Standardization diminishes costs

• IT needs to ‘sell’ its successes better

• Separate cost of CI components to decrease target size

• Need a different faculty development plan to continue growth of technology use

• Keep records of technology use


SummarySummary• About Drew and ITS• Computer Initiative (CI) History• Present• Effect on Learning at Drew

– 2004 Student Survey– 2003 Faculty Survey– 2005 faculty Survey (in progress)– Senior Faculty Reflections

• Future• Lessons Learned


CreditsCredits

Mike Richichi, “CI@20: The First Two Decades of Ubiquitous Computing at Drew University”, EDUCAUSE presentation, 2004

Computers of the Computer Initiative, at http://depts.drew.edu/cns/museum/

Shawn Spaventa, video editor


Questions?Questions?

february 17, 2005 ©rich ranker – salt orlando 05 reflections and projections: twenty years of...

Documents

rich ranker salt orlando

nj slide

time faculty slide

faculty survey

college faculty

ci computer

demographic downturn

mediated classrooms