Learning Technologies Advisory Committee - PCC Canvas

Pasadena City College

Learning Technologies Advisory Committee

Final Report on Smart 18: Smart Classrooms and Laptop Program

June 22, 2012

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter 1: Smart Classroom Survey Summary of Findings

Chapter 2: Faculty Technology Survey Summary of Findings

Chapter 3: Summary of Comments from both Surveys regarding Technology

Chapter 4: Recommendation for Prioritization of Classrooms and Technology Equipment

Chapter 5: Laptop Replacement Program: Issues, Considerations, and Priorities and

Recommendations

Chapter 6: LTAC Staff Development Issues and Recommendations

Chapter 7: Summary Remarks and Recommendations

Appedix

Introduction

The Learning Technology Advisory Committee (LTAC) was formed in March 2012 at the

request of Dwayne Cable, Vice President of Information Technology Services. Mr. Cable

presented the overall goals of a new initiative to dramatically enhance instructional

technologies on campus. The charge of the LTAC (Appendix 1) as presented to the Board of

Trustees at the February 1, 2012 meeting included the following:

Develop Recommendations for Continuous Improvement of Smart Classroom

Standards;

Recommend Priorities for Teaching/Learning Technology Initiatives;

Recommend Technology Support Services for addressing Student & Faculty Needs;

Craft Recommendations for Faculty Computing and Networked Resources including

Desktops, Laptops, Software, Mobility, Infrastructure & non-computing technologies;

Develop and Recommend technology standards to be used by students;

Develop and Recommend Appropriate Technology Policies &/or Procedures;

Identify and Recommend Technology Training Needs - Including Recommendations

for Improving Technology Labs and Lab Services;

Research, Evaluate & Recommend New Instructional Technologies.

Committee members were appointed by the Deans and were chosen as representatives of

contemporary technology users:

Business & Computer Technology: Jamal Ashraf, Dave Evans*

Counseling: Cecile Davis Anderson

English: Elsie Rivas-Gomez, Kathy Kottaras*

Engineering and Technology: Coleman Griffiths, John Carrie*

Health Sciences: *

Languages: Carol Curtis, Bárbara Padrón-León

Library: Pearl Ly, Krista Goguen

Math: Jude Socrates, Carrie Starbird

Natural Sciences: Valerie Foster, Rhea Presiado

Performing and Communication Arts: Sarah Barker, Zac Matthews

Social Sciences: Eloy Zarate*

Visual Arts/Media Studies: Silvia Rigon, Laurie Burrus

The committee was co-chaired by Mary Ann Laun (Dean, Library Services and Sandra C.

Haynes (Professor, VAMS). Resource people were added as advisory to the committee:

Dwayne Cable (Vice President, Information Technology Services), Maureen Davidson

(Educational Technology Specialist), Craig Harris (Audiovisual Specialist), Mat Camara

(Digital AV Production Technician), Mark Sakata (Teacher Specialist, Physical Disabilities,

DSPS), Leslie Tirapelle (Interim Director, Distance Education), Gloria Wong (Media Services

Technician), and Diana Lopez (Librarian). The committee first met on March 13th

and then

on every other Tuesday throughout the Spring semester. Two of the Smart 18 goals were

selected for discussion, exploration and recommendation for the Spring semester 2012:

1) What should PCC’s smart classrooms look like for 2012/13?

2) What should be the faculty laptop/desktop replacement plan? What are the issues,

considerations, and priorities that need to be addressed?

The Committee also reviewed the timeline and budget as presented to the Board of Trustees in

February.

Smart Classroom Conversions/Upgrades

Estimated budget $2 million

a) Learning Technology Advisory Committee (LTAC) Created & Organized (January)

b) LTAC Recommends Updated Smart Classroom Standard (April)

c) Implementation Planning Completed (April)

d) Purchasing Process Started (RFP/State Contract) (May/June)

e) Complete Implementation (June 2013)

Faculty Desktop/Laptop Replacement Program

Estimated budget $1 million

a) LTAC Recommends Laptop Configuration Standard (April)

b) Rollout Plan Developed for Full-time Faculty Docking Stations (April)

c) Loaner Program Designed for Adjunct Faculty Laptops (April)

d) Faculty Identify Windows versus Apple Platform (May)

e) Purchasing Process Started (RFP/State Contract) (May)

f) Part-time Faculty Laptop Loaner Program Rollout (August)

g) Equipment Installations (June-December)

After initial discussion of the goals, the LTAC reviewed the 2009 Faculty Technology Survey

(Appendix 2) and the current list of smart classrooms, and the Deans’ recommendations for

classroom conversion. Additionally, the committee was made aware of the considerable

work to deliver technology to the classrooms where none is available and reviewed the

statistics on media services deliveries to classrooms (Appendix 3). Last year alone, over

6,000 deliveries were made to classrooms. For many items, faculty had to come to the

Library/Media Services to checkout equipment and return it. Additionally, much of the

equipment being delivered is out of date, and there is no standard when it comes to projectors

or computers.

The committee decided to develop two surveys to address the technology issues in the

campus’ 264 classrooms. The first faculty survey called the “Smart Classroom Survey”

(Appendix 4) focused on existing configurations of smart classrooms. Faculty were asked to

evaluate their use of equipment in these classrooms in an effort to help the committee assess

satisfaction, areas for improvement and to assist in the prioritization of technology upgrades.

The second Faculty Technology Survey (Appendix 5) was designed to address additional

concerns including faculty needs for technology to support various pedagogies as well as

technical support. Other areas surveyed included actual experiences as well as perceived

technology obstacles for their instruction. The committee looked again to faculty to voice

their opinions as well as assist in developing priorities. This survey was adapted for a

http://pccltac.pbworks.com/w/file/51854798/SurveySummary_02292012.pdf

community college environment from the University of Washington’s Surveys on Teaching

Learning and Research Technologies (Appendix 6). Both surveys were administered through

an online Surveymonkey link in the Spring of 2012. (Note: whenever possible, numbers

have been rounded for readability.)

http://www.washington.edu/lst/research/research_projects/2011techsurveys

http://www.washington.edu/lst/research/research_projects/2011techsurveys

Chapter 1: Smart Classroom Survey and Summary of Findings The “smart classroom survey” presented the six configurations of “smart rooms” used on

campus:

1) Smart boards: An interactive board with projection. (15)

2) Smart lecterns: Smart lecterns have LCD Projector, installed computer, laptop hook-up,

and DVD, Blue-Ray, and/or VHS player) (73)

3) Smart lecterns with smart boards: LCD projector, installed computer, laptop hook-up,

DVD and VCR player, and a Smartboard (5)

4) Smart cabinets: LCD projector, installed computer, laptop hook-up, DVD and VCR

player, and a Smartboard (20)

5) Smart boxes: No computer, LCD projector, laptop hook-up, DVD/VCR Player. (9)

6) Portable computer and projection systems on carts. (Not evaluated)

Faculty were asked to evaluate their experiences regarding the appropriateness of their

classroom for their current and future needs, Internet connection reliability and speed, and

performance of the computer. In addition, the survey queried how often they used the

technology and what features they used. An open ended question asked respondents to

comment on other technologies and/or equipment that would enhance or support their

instruction and instructional activities in that room.

The detailed report of the Smart Classroom survey responses is in Appendix 7), but highlights

include the following:

78% of respondents were teaching in some configuration of a “smart classroom.”

Projection (web files, Powerpoint, etc) is the predominant use of smart boards (100%),

followed by 41% of respondents citing interactivity (draw something, screen capture)

as well as touch-screen capabilities (41%).

The frequency of those who use their “smart” technology every class or every other

class is significant.

Faculty were asked to rate their experiences with the different configurations of rooms in

which they taught.

Faculty Evaluations Of Their Use Of Technologies In Their Classrooms

(percentages of responses)

Smart board

(41 responses)

Smart lecterns

(83 responses)

Smart lecterns/

Smartboard

(22 responses)

Smart cabinets

(38 responses)

Smart drop

down box; no

computer

(7 responses)

Technology

appropriate to

my current

needs

29 excellent

50 adequate

21 poor

42 excellent

51 adequate

6 poor

41 excellent

59 adequate

0 poor

40 excellent

43 adequate

17 poor

29 excellent

29 adequate

43 poor

Technology

appropriate to

my future

needs 3-5

years

35 excellent

35 adequate

30 poor

33 excellent

41 adequate

25 poor

31 excellent

37 adequate

31 poor

26 excellent

35 adequate

38 poor

29 excellent

14 adequate

57 poor

Internet

connection is

reliable

33 excellent

50 adequate

17 poor

35 excellent

51 adequate

14 poor

35 excellent

53 adequate

12 poor

26 excellent

44 adequate

29 poor

0 excellent

14 adequate

86 poor

Internet

connection is

fast enough

12 excellent

62 adequate

25 poor

28 excellent

49 adequate

24 poor

23 excellent

53 adequate

23 poor

21 excellent

35 adequate

44 poor

0 excellent

14 adequate

100 poor (no

computer)

Performance

of computer

9 excellent

52 adequate

39 poor

21 excellent

55 adequate

24 poor

23 excellent

35 adequate

41 poor

17 excellent

51 adequate

31 poor

N/A

Faculty were also asked “In a typical semester, how often do you use the smart board or other

classroom technology?” The frequency of use of technology in these rooms was notable with

a high percentage of faculty using it for every class or every other class. Of those that don’t

teach with smart technology, 88% of respondents said that they would use it if it was

available to them.

Frequency of Use for Faculty Who Are Using Smart Classrooms

(percentages of responses)

I use it every

class

I use it every

other class

I use it

occasionally

I use it once

a month

Smart board 68 14 9 9

Smart lectern 71 17 11 1

Smart lectern

with Smart board

87 12 0 0

Smart cabinet 86 9 3 3

Smart fold down

box (no computer,

e.g. Creveling)

57 14 29 0

Faculty felt the following technologies would enhance their instruction and instructional

activities (whether they taught in a smart room or not):

85% Projector for instructional materials (the web, Powerpoint, etc.)

73% Web access

67% Support for my laptop (docking station)

48% Audience feedback (Clickers, etc)

48% Document camera (for projection of objects)

45% DVD access

Chapter 2: Faculty Technology Survey Summary of Findings

The LTAC used a model survey from the University of Washington and then modified it to

meet the needs of a community college. The intent was to capture how PCC faculty were

currently using and would potentially use technology to support their various pedagogical

approaches. Two hundred and forty one (241) full-time and adjunct faculty participated in

this survey. While the purpose of this analysis is to explore needs and configurations for

smart classrooms and laptops, there is a lot of information to be analyzed by the Learning

Technologies Advisory Committee for other needs. (Appendix 8)

Faculty were asked to categorize their digital and media literacy using the following four

categories:

Novice (Feel comfortable searching the web but do not use computers beyond that)

Consumer (Find and read articles and/or blogs online; purchase items online and/or

view quality ratings of products or services; find and view videos or photos) and

Content creators (Actively contribute to a blog or forum conversation; search and

contribute reviews for products or services; upload and tag photos or video for sharing

online).

Technologist (Create or maintain a Web site, wiki, blog or discussion forum for people

with shared interests or concerns; produce and edit videos and audio for presentation

online.)

Two hundred and thirty-nine (239) faculty answered the question on their perceived level of

technology expertise. Half defined themselves as Consumers (50%), followed by Content

Creators (27%) and a smaller but relevant portion as Technologists (16%). Only a rather

small fraction (7%) defined themselves as Novices.

When asked about how quickly they adopt new technology, the majority of respondents

(41%) adopts new technology when it becomes mainstream. Nevertheless, about 1 in 3 faculty

adopts it before many colleagues and a significant number (16%) adopts it before

anybody else. Combining the last two categories indicates that over half of the PCC faculty

can be considered “early adopters.” A smaller portion (9%) adopts it after most of their

colleague and only 1% of faculty never adopt it. Reasons for postponing adoption are:

1. The lack of resources (technology is not available to them)

2. The need to educate oneself on actual benefits of the innovation upon established

pedagogy. One respondent expressed it this way: “I don’t want to “beta test” a course. I

can’t experiment when I have 200 students.”

3. Technology that is not easy to use (user-friendly).

Faculty were asked to rate the extent to which various items met their instructional needs.

Respondents found presentation technology and lighting met most or all their instructional

needs, but technical support and wireless connections, as well as furniture and outlets (22-

27% ) were ranked lower and did not meet their needs.

When faculty were asked to rank the technological tools or resources they use for instruction

in their primary class type, presentation and streaming media were the most predominant.

Other technology tools used by faculty were mentioned in the extensive comments section.

These tools included Jing Pro, Camtasia, Google Images, Internet activities, videos, Web-

based quizzing and language practice and games, Computer lab ESL software, Tegrity, online

audio, multimedia, DVD, Skype, the faculty portal, Turnitin, and LibGuides.

Faculty were asked to comment on how technology serves them now, but also to predict how

it would in the next three to five years. Overall responses indicated that current technology

serves them by

1. saving time and increases their efficiency.

2. ensuring student access to course info.

3. providing lecture and study materials.

4. facilitating distribution and collection of assignments.

As for the comments regarding this question, a few respondents seem to think that technology

has its limitations. For example, one stated, "Technology saves me some time when it's easy

to work with, but too often it causes me trouble and takes up too much of my time." Another

one pointed out, "Digital technology can diminish critical thought. I discourage excessive use

of all technology because it too easily becomes a substitute for literacy. Another person

commented that “New Technology should allow the class to be more efficient and give the

class what they need to enhance learning.”

Question 8 asked faculty to reflect on what web tools and/or technology that students were

using or talking about. Many faculty commented they were not in a position to answer for

students. While the committee acknowledges that the best responses would be from students

themselves, the following responses reflected the laptops, tablets and smart phones are used

with the top applications being Youtube, Facebook, Google Docs, Twitter and Skype.

When faculty were asked about “times when they needed to learn to do something new with a

technology to support their teaching,” they were asked to rate a variety of support options.

More than half of the respondents felt that webinars, online courses, tech support and

classroom support services (helpdesk) were rarely helpful. Respondents indicated a diverse

and wide range of sources as being moderately to very helpful. This included online tutorials,

workshops, friends, colleagues, family and even their students. The top ranked support

services were themselves, students and colleagues. It appears that the faculty respondents

were divided regarding the PCC technical and user support services. Comments ranged from

accolades for particular staff to an unawareness of what services were available.

Support Source Never Not

helpful

Moderately

helpful

Very

helpful

Response

Count

Self (on my own) 1.8 6.9 47.9 43.3 217

Online tutorial/help 5.1 11.5 56.7 26.7 217

Webinars 37.7 12.5 37 12.1 207

Online Courses 38 11.3 29.6 21.1 213

Campus Tech

Workshops

26.7 11.9 41.9 19.5 210

Your students 21.9 11.6 46.5 20 215

Colleagues 9.7 12.9 48.4 29 217

Friends 16.4 9.8 49.1 24.8 214

Family 23.3 19.5 37.2 20 215

Tech Support (division) 22.9 17.3 42.5 17.3 214

Classroom Support

Services (helpdesk)

25.1 16.6 38.9 19.4 211

Other 19

Skipped 17

When faculty reflected on the time, support, knowledge and availability of technology to

support their teaching, the majority of faculty respondents agreed:

They have personal motivation to pursue the use of technology (86%). They know about

available types of teaching technologies available at PCC (57%), how to use them to

achieve their goals (60%), where to go learn about this technology (55%), and feel

they have incentives to use technology in teaching (50%). However, 22-27% are not sure

about this availability. The majority (54%) agree they do not have time to learn the use

the technology (A,C,D,F, H, M)

There are problems with use of technology for teaching: 52% have concerns about

technical problems that affect their teaching and 61% have poorly functioning or

inadequate technology in the teaching environment. (I, L)

A large majority (66%) say they know about the technologies used by their students,

with 21% not sure. 65% have concerns about students’ ability to access needed software

or equipment. Most respondents (43%) agree they do not have time to teach the use of

technology to their students (B,J, K)

There are split responses on "timely support" (35% agree, 38% disagree) as well as

maintaining or monitoring the technology once implemented (44% agree, 42% disagree) (E, G).

Agree Disagree Not sure

A) I know about the types of teaching technologies

available for use at PCC 57% (124) 16% (34) 27% (58)

B) I know about the types of technologies student are

using and/or need. 66% (143) 13% (27) 20% (45)

C) I know where to go to learn the technology I need to

support my teaching. 55% (119) 23% (51) 22% (47)

D) I have time to learn how to use these technology and

applications. 33% (70) 54% (117) 13% (28)

E) I have time to maintain or monitor technology once

implemented. 44% (96) 41% (90) 14% (31)

F) I know how to use the technology to achieve my

goals. 60% (130) 19% (42) 20% (43)

G) I get timely technical support. 35% (74) 38.2%(81) 27% (57)

H) I have personal motivation to pursue the use of

technology. 86% (185) 6.0%(13) 8% (17)

I) I have concern about a technical problem(s) affecting

my teaching. 52% (111) 37% (79) 12% (25)

J) I have time to teach students to use the technology 39% (85) 43% (94) 17% (37)

K) I have concern about students’ ability to access

needed software or equipment 65% (140) 22% (48) 13% (28)

L) I have poorly functioning or inadequate technology in

my teaching environment 60% (130) 32% (69) 7% (16)

M) I have incentives to use technology in teaching 50% (107) 38% (81) 13% (27)

When asked about the technology-related changes that PCC could pursue over the next three

years, the following responses were significant:

1. Improve wireless infrastructure across campus (74%)

2. Expand the technical support available for instruction (73%)

3. Provide a range of professional activities and forums for selecting and using technologies

(63%)

4. Improve responses to classroom technical problems (e.g. funding to hire more staff)

(62%)

5. Make campus more friendly for mobile devices and laptops (outlets, etc.) (60%)

6. Support and integrate a variety of online tools that instructors and students can select

from for use in courses (59%)

7. Make campus spaces and classrooms more friendly for collaboration (e.g. add open

spaces, flexible furniture, etc.) (55%)

The lowest rated items were the following:

Create a demonstration classroom to showcase new technologies (43%)

Increase Green IT efforts (reducing use of paper, networked printing, etc…) (43%).

Chapter 3: Summary of Technology Comments from both Surveys

Faculty on the Learning Technology Advisory Committee reviewed the extensive comments

from both surveys and categorized them for review. The following overall observations

highlight key suggestions, issues and concerns regarding technology to support teaching.

The essence of many of the questions was not only to assess current technological needs but

also to anticipate future needs. Ideas of innovation and effective instruction were given,

many of which focused on the flexibility of the technology and space planning. There was a

strong desire for technology to enhance innovative teaching rather than supplant face-to-face

instruction or mask poor instruction. Training was identified as an essential component.

The highest concern was that of training and support. Faculty want innovative technology

in the classroom, but not without the training and ongoing support required to make it

effective and reliable.

The requirement of reliable, fast campus Internet, both wired and wireless, was also often

mentioned. In addition there was a strong interest in consistent implementation of smart

room technology. Keeping software and hardware up-to-date on a regular basis was also

considered important.

There was concern about campus systems being consistent and robust (LMS, AIS, MIS).

Having access to campus systems 24/7 was requested.

Many respondents pointed out that student access to technology should be of paramount

concern. More availability of campus labs or loaner computers for students as well as

pay-to-print stations throughout the campus were mentioned.

There were numerous suggestions for classroom technology:

SmartBoards

updated computers

smart TVs

digital projectors, short range projector, wireless projector, multiple projectors for large

rooms

wireless keyboard

iPads or tablets

document camera/document scanner/visualizer

clickers

iPod docking station (for music)

faster Internet connection

more whiteboard space

lecture capture

DVD/Blueray players

Mac connection cables

laptop docking for PC and Mac

Apple TV capability

Faculty computers open to web based applications.

In light of these findings and the fact that 52% of the faculty respondents have concerns

about technical problems affecting their teaching and that 61% have poorly functioning or

inadequate technology in the teaching environment, the LTAC makes the following

recommendation:

LTAC Recommendation 1: Improve wireless and network infrastructure across

campus

LTAC Recommendation 2: Expand the technical support for instruction

LTAC Recommendation 3: Support and integrate a variety of online tools that

instructors and students can select from for use in courses

(See chapter 6 for staff development discussion and recommendation).

Chapter 4: Recommendation for Technology Equipment and Prioritization of Classrooms

During the LTAC review of the survey responses it was clear that PCC’s classrooms are in

great need of a technology update. Based on the comments from the 174 faculty who

participated in the Smart Classroom Survey and the 241 faculty who participated in the

Faculty Technology Survey, many instructors rely on a variety of technologies to enhance

instruction in the classroom and are frustrated by many factors. In addition to those who had

smart classrooms, eighty-nine percent of respondents who do not currently have technology-

enhanced classrooms indicated they would use it if it was available to them.

These surveys also indicated the strong support for upgrades of projectors, interactive white

boards, computers and tablet/mobile devices. Many of the comment responses on the survey

stated that equipment was very out of date, in disrepair, or in many cases, was inexistent.

The LTAC relied on input from the ITS Media Specialists Craig Harris and Mat Camara

throughout their meetings and in the process of this review. They support the existing

classrooms and are well versed in various options for education based on their areas of

expertise and their involvement in educational media conferences. With the background of

the survey data, input from the faculty from each division, and the hands-on equipment

demonstrations, they presented the following options for adoption as a campus standard:

Spectrum Media Manager lectern

Extron TLP700MV Touch Panel

Extron Flat Field Speakers

Epson 485W Ultra Short Throw Projector

This configuration also includes a with a short throw projector Polyvision ENO Interactive

White Board. The demonstration on campus was advertised on The Pulse and

numerous faculty from across the divisions attended. The ENO was very well received and

comments were recorded on the LTAC wiki (http://pccltac.pgworks.com). This innovative

white board is very easy to use and doubles as a standard dry erase board. The use of short

throw projectors will eliminate the blinding light and shadows from standard projectors as

well as provide a useable option for ceilings that have asbestos issues. A standard touch

control panel will be in each room. These will have intuitive touch controls that will allow

the user to turn on/off equipment, select inputs, and control DVD players. All classrooms will

be connected to our network and will be able to be remotely monitored and controlled.

The prioritization of the classrooms needing renovation was developed simultaneously. The

Deans had already identified critical needs in previous years, and the analysis of deliveries to

classrooms formed the foundation of the list. Additional data was drawn from the survey

which asked faculty to suggest classrooms critically needing technology equipment or

upgrades.

The implementation of the Smart 18 classroom project was proposed with a phased in

approach:

http://www.polyvision.com/solutions/interactive-whiteboards/eno-family/eno-classic

http://www.polyvision.com/solutions/interactive-whiteboards/eno-family/eno-classic

http://pccltac.pbworks.com/w/page/52488344/Digital%20Networks%20Group%20Demonstration

http://pccltac.pbworks.com/

Phase 1 – Classrooms with little or no technology at all are rooms that are considered high

priority. There are approximately 131 of these rooms.

Phase 2 – Classrooms with very old and outdated equipment are next. The old equipment will

have to be completely removed and new equipment installed. There are approximately 43 of

these rooms.

Phase 3 – Classrooms that have smart lecterns come next. These rooms will only need a few

upgrades to bring them in line with the other rooms. There are approximately 76 of these.

Cost summaries and implementation phase details are provided in the following documents in

the Appendixes:

Smart Classrooms.accdb This is an Access database containing information for all

classrooms on campus. ( Appendix 9)

Current Smart Lecturn's.pdf Rooms that contain A/V lecterns. These rooms only

need to be upgraded to bring them in line with our new standard. (Appendix 10)

Old Smart.pdf Rooms that are severely out of date. These rooms will need all the

equipment replaced. (Appendix 11)

All Rooms Not Smart.pdf Rooms that have little to no technology. (Appendix 12)

Overall Summary.xlsx This document provides a summary and outline for each

building and room. (Appendix 13)

LTAC Recommendation 4: Considering the data that supports the critical need for

upgrading classroom technology, yet sensitive to the budget realities facing community

colleges, the committee supports the Smart 18 project and agrees with the proposal that it be

done in phases as outlined. The LTAC further recommends that the ITS contact work directly

with the division dean and the LTAC representative (if possible) to discuss the specific details

for each room.

http://pccltac.pbworks.com/w/file/54443252/Smart%20Classrooms.accdb

http://pccltac.pbworks.com/w/file/54443249/Current%20Smart%20Lecturn's.pdf

http://pccltac.pbworks.com/w/file/54443247/Old%20Smart.pdf

http://pccltac.pbworks.com/w/file/54443246/All%20Rooms%20Not%20Smart.pdf

http://pccltac.pbworks.com/w/file/54443243/Overall%20Summary.xlsx

Chapter 5: Laptop Replacement Program: Issues, Considerations, and Priorities

The second initiative addressed by the LTAC in Spring 2012 was the Smart 18-Desktop to

Laptop replacement program. This initiative proposed changing faculty desktops to laptop

docking stations in their offices and in the classrooms. Faculty could take them to the

classroom or home, using resources that are cloud-based with security log-ins.

This initiative was also presented in the Faculty Technology Survey (Questions 12-16) for

review. There was strong interest in this program with 99 faculty (52.9%) wanting to be

considered for the first group to receive one.

53% (99) of respondents “I would like to be in the first group to receive one.

15% (28) said they could wait for the second phase;

23% (43) I don't have a preference

10% (18) said they prefer to have a desktop computer only

Forty-seven faculty took the time to comment and the following two themes and issues

emerged:

Adjunct needs must be addressed. Many of them do not have access to any

computers. (12 comments)

Dissatisfaction with the adequacy of their current computer. (13 comments)

The preference for the type of laptop/portable device revealed that it was almost evenly split

between Macs (38%, 80 faculty) and PC laptops (36%, 75 faculty). Additionally, 15% (32

faculty) preferred IPADS, while 7% (15 faulty) preferred PC tablets. Twenty comments from

faculty indicated that some faculty did not have a preference. Note: this shift to the Mac

environment is significant since the college has only one certified Mac technician.

Over 200 faculty responded to the question on the characteristics they needed in a laptop. The

“lots of memory” response scored the highest (74% highest priority with 24% medium

priority) and “lightweight for portability” scored next with a combined high and medium

score of 97%. Other desirable factors included (in order): large hard drive, variety of input

ports, docking station, large screen, webcam with integrated microphone. Comments

included: fast processor, ergonomic keyboards, carrying cases, and external monitors.

When asked about their software needs, faculty indicated MS Office Suite with 98%.

Following closely behind Office, were presentation software and Adobe Acrobat. Each of

these had an 87% rating. Next was the editing software for photos, video and audio, screen

capture software and statistical packages. Based on the comments, there were more requests

for specialized software and a call for more consistent updates to the software. One theme that

emerged was the desire to have other Internet browsers loaded on the computers so that IE is

not the default browser. There was also a call for the MAC software that is used in industry to

be available for faculty and students.

Faculty had many concerns about the laptop program and the overwhelming response was for

concerns about theft. Considerations need to be made to be able to track the machines and a

Chapter 6: LTAC Staff Development Issues and Recommendations

During the LTAC review of the survey responses as well as comments from the 174 faculty

who participated in the Smart Classroom Survey and the 241 faculty who participated in the

Faculty Technology Survey, it was clear that PCC faculty (both full-time and adjunct) are

concerned about “faculty training” opportunities and have identified a strong need for this

training in order to ensure the viability of the SMART18 program. Faculty members of this

committee also agreed that launching a program of this nature, without including budgetary

allowances for proper training on the equipment and software could have an adverse effect on

faculty who would like to incorporate it into pedagogical practices.

As noted earlier, the technology presently reviewed for adoption is as follows:

Spectrum Media Manager lectern

Extron TLP700MV Touch Panel

Extron Flat Field Speakers

Epson 485W Ultra Short Throw Projector

Polyvision ENO Interactive White Board

The recommended technology for implementation is highly “intuitive,” according to those

faculty members present for the on-site demo. However, there are several pieces of data

culled by the surveys that suggest a need for training on this technology, despite its “user-

friendly” interface. According to our survey of approximately 280 combined full-time and

part-time faculty, 21% of respondents indicated that they not teach in a room with “smart”

technologies. Eighty-eight percent of survey respondents indicated that they would use if it

was available. Of the faculty who currently use the technology, 14% are dissatisfied with the

technology, due to a lack of campus-provided training. This data suggests the following:

Faculty are not using the technology because it is unavailable

faculty are not using the technology because they do not know how to operate a

“smart” landscape.

In addition to the survey results, as reflected in meetings throughout the course of the Spring

2012 semester, the faculty representatives of the LTAC believe that it is paramount to the

success of this Smart18 initiative that training opportunities as reported in this survey are

addressed during the implementation.

LTAC Recommendation 7: The LTAC recommends that a portion of the SMART18

Budget be allocated to faculty training and support in the use of these technologies.

Further, it is recommended that this training be ongoing and in “Flex Day” activities. It

is also recommended that if ITS Support or its trainers are overly taxed due to the

rigors of this installation process, interested faculty be provided with release time to

provided faculty training and training workshops.

procedure should be developed for what happens if they are damaged, lost or stolen. The

second greatest concern was for the cost of the program. Many faculty voices their concern

that in light of the current budgetary constraints, it is not wise to be spending money for this

program at this time. A number of respondents are concerned with staffing for updating and

servicing the computers. Virus and spyware removal was also mentioned as a concern. Also

noted was that despite these concerns, many people stated they have been waiting to get a

laptop for quite some time and are looking forward to this program.

After much analysis of the survey results and the comments, the LTAC makes the following

recommendations:

LTAC Recommendation 5: Fully explore a stipend where as needed, faculty are given

an allowance to choose their own device and software with a requirement of a third

party service contract. (This will allow ITS to focus on services rather than maintaining

and servicing equipment.) Cost: to be determined.

If this recommendation is not feasible,

LTAC Recommendation 6: Launch a Desktop to laptop pilot program with the 99 full

time and adjunct faculty who identified themselves in the survey as having a critical

need.

Identify one robust PC and one robust MAC system.

Additionally, offer tablet options as needed to meet faculty need.

After six months, evaluate the pilot program regarding faculty concerns about the

appropriate technology, theft, security, lease vs. buy, negotiated stipend options, technical

support and staff development.

Advise participants that they are in a pilot program and they have an obligation to help

with the evaluation of the program. Record all helpdesk incidents and walk in incidents

and survey each faculty member at the end of the pilot.

Report back to LTAC.

Approximate Cost: $150,000

Chapter 7: Summary Remarks and Recommendations

The work of this committee has been intense from its initial meeting in March 2012 to the

analysis of the data through the month of June. It has been a collaborative process at many

levels among colleagues who are strong technology leaders in their divisions as well as with

support services. Additionally, the use of the open wiki http://pccltac.pbworks.com to foster

participation and cooperative analysis of data provided a fast track to the recommendations

that support the needs of the campus.

The committee looks forward to the continued use of the survey data to assist in the

recommending of priorities for teaching and learning technologies as well as policies and

procedures.

Finally, this summary of recommendations provides an implementation framework for

Information Technology Services.

LTAC Recommendation 1: Improve wireless and network infrastructure across campus

LTAC Recommendation 2: Expand the technical support for instruction

LTAC Recommendation 3: Support and integrate a variety of online tools that instructors

and students can select from for use in courses

LTAC Recommendation 4: Considering the data that supports the critical need for

upgrading classroom technology, yet sensitive to the budget realities facing community

colleges, the committee supports the Smart 18 project and agrees with the proposal that it be

done in phases as outlined. The LTAC further recommends that the ITS contact work directly

with the division dean and the LTAC representative (if possible) to discuss the specific details

for each room.

LTAC Recommendation 5: Fully explore a stipend where as needed, faculty are given an

allowance to choose their own device and software with a requirement of a third party service

contract. (This will allow ITS to focus on services rather than maintaining and servicing

equipment.) Cost: to be determined.

If this recommendation is not feasible,

LTAC Recommendation 6: Launch a Desktop to laptop pilot program with the 99 full time

and adjunct faculty who identified themselves in the survey as having a critical need.

Identify one robust PC and one robust MAC system.

Additionally, offer tablet options as needed to meet faculty need.

After six months, evaluate the pilot program regarding faculty concerns about the

appropriate technology, theft, security, lease vs. buy, negotiated stipend options, technical

support and staff development.

http://pccltac.pbworks.com/

Advise participants that they are in a pilot program and they have an obligation to help

with the evaluation of the program. Record all helpdesk incidents and walk in incidents

and survey each faculty member at the end of the pilot.

Report back to LTAC.

Approximate Cost: $150,000

LTAC Recommendation 7: The LTAC recommends that a portion of the SMART18

Budget be allocated to faculty training and support in the use of these technologies. Further,

it is recommended that this training be included in “Flex Day” activities, as a recommended

break-out session for those who are teaching in a SMART classroom. It is also recommended

that if ITS Support is overly taxed due to the rigors of this installation process, interested

faculty be provided with release time to provided faculty training and training workshops.

Executive Leadership Team

Robert Bell Dwayne Cable

Interim VP, Instruction VP, Information Technology

MEMBERSHIP

Two Faculty Representatives from Each Academic Division

Ø Business & Computer Technology Ø Engineering & Technology

Ø English Ø Health Sciences

Ø Kinesiology, Health, & Athletics Ø Languages

Ø Library Ø Mathematics

Ø Natural Sciences Ø Social Sciences

Ø Performing & Communications Arts Ø Visual Arts & Media Studies

Ø Community Education Center

Distance/Online Learning Dean/Director

Community & Contract Education Dean/Director

Student Representatives (2)

ITS Technical Services Staff (2-3) (Labs & Classrooms)

LEARNING TECHNOLOGY ADVISORY COMMITTEE

RESPONSIBILITIES:

· Recommendations for Continuous

Improvement of Smart Classroom Standards;

· Recommend Priorities for Teaching/Learning

Technology Initiatives;

· Recommend Technology Support Services for

addressing Student & Faculty Needs;

· Recommendations for Faculty Computing and

Networked Resources including Desktops,

Laptops, Software, Mobility, Infrastructure &

non-computing technologies;

· Recommendations for technology standards

to be used by students;

· Develop & Recommend Appropriate

Technology Policies &/or Procedures;

· Recommend Technology Training Needs;

· Recommendations for Improving Technology

Labs and Lab Services;

· Research, Evaluate & Recommend New

Technologies.

PROJECT PRIORITIES

Ø SMART 18 - Classrooms

Ø SMART 18 - Faculty Laptops

Ø Technology Master Plan – Teaching/Learning

Ø ‘INNOVATION CENTER’

LEARNING TECHNOLOGY ADVISORY COMMITTEE

(LTAC)

CO-CHAIRS

MARY ANN LAUN, DEAN, LIBRARY

SANDRA HAYNES, PROFESSOR, VISUAL ARTS & MEDIA STUDIES

May 22, 2012DRAFT

AD HOC TEAMS

(CREATED AS NEEDED FOR RESEARCH, PILOT PROJECTS, POLICY, ETC...)

LATIRAPELLE

Typewritten Text

Appendix 1

1 of 16

Faculty Technology Survey - Fall 2009

1. What kind of office computer do you use?

Response

Percent

Response

Count

PC desktop 61.6% 197

PC laptop 6.9% 22

Apple/Mac desktop 12.5% 40

Apple/Mac laptop 10.3% 33

Do not use an office computer 8.8% 28

answered question 320

skipped question 2

2. Think about the PCC office computer you have used the most within the last year. Please

rate your degree of satisfaction with each of the items below

Very

SatisfiedSatisfied Dissatisfied

Very

DissatisfiedN/A

Response

Count

Software 10.2% (29) 63.9% (182) 16.1% (46) 5.6% (16) 4.2% (12) 285

Hardware (e.g., memory, speed,

etc.)9.2% (26) 44.0% (125) 25.7% (73) 17.6% (50) 3.5% (10) 284

Internet Access 12.0% (34) 51.9% (147) 21.6% (61) 11.3% (32) 3.2% (9) 283


skipped question 35

LATIRAPELLE

Typewritten Text

Appendix 2

2 of 16

3. If you marked "Dissatisfied" or "Very Dissatisfied", please indicate which item best

describes your dissatisfaction.

Response

Percent

Response

Count

Response Time 45.2% 76

Locking up/Freezing 17.3% 29

Software too dated 17.3% 29

No Internet access 9.5% 16

Other hardware issues 10.7% 18


skipped question 154

4. Do you feel you have the computer hardware you need to do your job?

Response

Percent

Response

Count

Yes 66.1% 185

No 33.9% 95


skipped question 42

5. Do you feel you have the computer software necessary to do your job?

Response

Percent

Response

Count

Yes 68.8% 192

No 31.2% 87


skipped question 43

3 of 16

6. Think about the PCC technology that you used in the classroom within the last year. For

each item below please rate your satisfaction with the technology.

Very

satisfiedSatisfied Dissatisfied

Very

dissatisfied

Did not

use

Response

Count

Smart Classroom 13.0% (38) 32.1% (94) 7.8% (23) 6.1% (18) 41.0% (120) 293

Smart Cart 3.2% (9) 15.3% (43) 11.7% (33) 5.3% (15) 64.4% (181) 281

Smart Board 3.2% (9) 9.6% (27) 5.0% (14) 3.9% (11) 78.2% (219) 280

VCR/DVD Player 10.7% (31) 40.8% (118) 11.8% (34) 3.5% (10) 33.2% (96) 289

TV 5.0% (14) 21.4% (60) 6.8% (19) 4.3% (12) 62.5% (175) 280

Turning Technologies/Audience

response system2.9% (8) 9.4% (26) 2.2% (6) 1.4% (4) 84.2% (234) 278

Broadcast audio boards 1.1% (3) 2.6% (7) 1.1% (3) 1.1% (3) 94.1% (255) 271

Sound System 6.6% (19) 29.4% (84) 6.6% (19) 4.5% (13) 52.8% (151) 286

LCD Projector 12.8% (36) 35.8% (101) 6.4% (18) 3.5% (10) 41.5% (117) 282

Opaque/Document Scan Overhead

Projector1.8% (5) 6.6% (18) 1.1% (3) 1.8% (5) 88.6% (241) 272

Overhead Transparency Projector 3.2% (9) 18.1% (51) 4.3% (12) 6.8% (19) 67.6% (190) 281

Flatbed Scanner 1.1% (3) 11.6% (32) 4.3% (12) 2.9% (8) 80.1% (222) 277

Computer desktop/Laptop 8.5% (24) 41.1% (116) 18.4% (52) 5.3% (15) 26.6% (75) 282

Internet Access 10.6% (31) 42.3% (124) 21.5% (63) 12.6% (37) 13.0% (38) 293

Flashdrive 13.6% (38) 37.9% (106) 4.3% (12) 4.3% (12) 40.0% (112) 280


skipped question 19

4 of 16

7. If you selected Dissatisfied or Very dissatisfied on any of the above items please indicate

the major reason you were dissatisfied. (Check all that apply)

Response

Percent

Response

Count

Hardware problems 47.4% 93

Software problems 24.0% 47

Inadequate support 29.1% 57

Insufficient training 13.3% 26

Other (please specify)

49.5% 97



8. Overall, how would you rate your computer skill level?

Response

Percent

Response

Count

Excellent 21.2% 64

Above Average 41.1% 124

Average 33.1% 100

Below Average 3.3% 10

Poor 1.3% 4


skipped question 20

5 of 16

9. Do you know what it means to have accessible resources that are Section 508(ADA)

compliant?

Response

Percent

Response

Count

Yes 48.3% 145

No 35.0% 105

Not Sure 16.7% 50


skipped question 22

10. Did you use at least one computer lab for instruction within the last year?

Response

Percent

Response

Count

Yes 54.3% 163

No 45.7% 137


skipped question 22

6 of 16

11. For each item below indicate your satisfaction as it pertains to your use in the computer

lab for instructional purposes last year.

Very


Very

DissatisfiedN/A

Response

Count

Software 16.0% (26) 60.1% (98) 11.7% (19) 4.9% (8) 7.4% (12) 163

Hardware (e.g., memory, speed,

etc.)14.2% (23) 58.0% (94) 15.4% (25) 8.6% (14) 3.7% (6) 162

Internet Access 12.5% (20) 53.1% (85) 19.4% (31) 8.1% (13) 6.9% (11) 160

Technical assistance with computer

hardware14.6% (23) 45.9% (72) 14.6% (23) 8.9% (14) 15.9% (25) 157

Technical assistance with computer

software15.1% (24) 38.4% (61) 15.7% (25) 7.5% (12) 23.3% (37) 159

Number of computers available 19.9% (32) 52.2% (84) 14.3% (23) 8.1% (13) 5.6% (9) 161



7 of 16

12. If dissatisfied or very dissatisfied, please indicate which lab you were the most

dissatisfied with.

Response

Percent

Response

Count

Athletic Zone 0.0% 0

Business and Computer Tech Lab 6.7% 6

Engineering and Technology Lab 4.5% 4

English Lab 3.4% 3

LAC 11.2% 10

Languages Lab 5.6% 5

Library 12.4% 11

Natural Sciences 14.6% 13

PCA - Music Lab 1.1% 1

Social Sciences Lab 4.5% 4

VAMS - Multimedia Lab 1.1% 1

Writing Lab 2.2% 2

Math Resource Center 3.4% 3

Media Center Lab 0.0% 0


29.2% 26



8 of 16

13. Some instructional support information is available online. Rate your satisfaction with

the following items.

Very


Very

dissatisfied

Did not

use

Response

Count

Online roster for a class section 31.3% (93) 47.1% (140) 6.7% (20) 1.7% (5) 13.1% (39) 297

Information about a class section 27.3% (80) 50.5% (148) 6.5% (19) 2.0% (6) 13.7% (40) 293

Status of all sections for a specific

course/instructor27.1% (79) 46.6% (136) 5.5% (16) 1.4% (4) 19.5% (57) 292

Student classes for a semester 21.0% (61) 40.3% (117) 5.5% (16) 1.4% (4) 31.7% (92) 290

History of classes for a student 17.1% (50) 33.9% (99) 7.5% (22) 1.7% (5) 39.7% (116) 292

Lookup a student's name 17.2% (50) 36.8% (107) 7.9% (23) 1.4% (4) 36.8% (107) 291

Online grade submission 29.0% (85) 44.7% (131) 8.5% (25) 2.7% (8) 15.0% (44) 293

Portal 14.8% (42) 37.5% (106) 11.3% (32) 4.2% (12) 32.2% (91) 283

Outlook mail 18.6% (54) 44.5% (129) 12.8% (37) 5.9% (17) 18.3% (53) 290

eLumen 5.2% (15) 27.2% (78) 9.8% (28) 2.8% (8) 55.1% (158) 287

WebCT/Blackboard 7.0% (20) 19.2% (55) 6.3% (18) 4.2% (12) 63.4% (182) 287

WebCMS (curriculum development) 3.9% (11) 27.1% (77) 9.9% (28) 4.2% (12) 54.9% (156) 284

Home access to Outlook mail

though PCC website17.5% (51) 42.3% (123) 12.4% (36) 7.2% (21) 20.6% (60) 291

PCC hosted web space

(faculty.pasadena.edu)8.0% (23) 26.4% (76) 4.9% (14) 3.5% (10) 57.3% (165) 288


skipped question 25

9 of 16

14. Rate how well PCC has provided you with technology training. Mark the N/A column if

you have no basis on which to answer.

ExcellentAbove

AverageAverage

Below

AveragePoor N/A

Response

Count

Overall quality of technology

training4.8% (14)

11.2%

(33)

27.2%

(80)

13.3%

(39)9.5% (28)

34.0%

(100)294

Training in the latest technologies 3.1% (9) 7.2% (21)21.2%

(62)

18.8%

(55)

11.9%

(35)37.9%

(111)293

Appropriate level of training for

your needs4.1% (12) 9.9% (29)

24.9%

(73)

20.1%

(59)

10.9%

(32)30.0%

(88)293

Training at a convenient date and

time3.8% (11) 8.9% (26)

22.0%

(64)

21.3%

(62)

16.2%

(47)27.8%

(81)291


skipped question 26

10 of 16

15. Rate how well PCC has provided you the following. Mark N/A column if you have no basis

on which to answer.

ExcellentAbove

AverageAverage

Below

AveragePoor N/A

Response

Count

Support to attend technology

workshops/conference4.2% (12) 9.4% (27)

22.0%

(63)

12.6%

(36)

16.1%

(46)35.7%

(102)286

Support for integrating technology

into instruction2.4% (7)

12.2%

(35)

25.2%

(72)

18.9%

(54)

15.0%

(43)26.2%

(75)286

Support for online courses 2.5% (7) 9.2% (26)10.9%

(31)9.9% (28) 9.2% (26)

58.5%

(166)284

Support for on-campus web

enhanced courses1.8% (5) 8.6% (24)

14.3%

(40)9.3% (26)

11.1%

(31)55.0%

(154)280

Support for computer assisted

instruction/simulation2.1% (6) 6.7% (19)

11.7%

(33)

11.7%

(33)

12.4%

(35)55.5%

(157)283

Support for Blackboard 5.6% (16) 8.4% (24)15.8%

(45)9.8% (28) 7.7% (22)

52.6%

(150)285

Support on WebCMS (curriculum

development)3.9% (11) 6.7% (19)

18.0%

(51)

11.3%

(32)8.1% (23)

51.9%

(147)283

Support for multimedia tools 1.8% (5) 7.4% (21)19.1%

(54)

11.7%

(33)

11.3%

(32)48.6%

(137)282

Support for eLumen 6.0% (17)12.3%

(35)

18.2%

(52)8.4% (24) 6.3% (18)

48.8%

(139)285

Support for web page development 1.8% (5) 5.3% (15)10.3%

(29)

13.9%

(39)

13.5%

(38)55.2%

(155)281


skipped question 34

11 of 16

16. Please rate the technical support that you used at PCC within the last year. Please mark

N/A if you did not use the service.

Very


Very

DissatisfiedN/A

Response

Count

Help Desk technical support 31.5% (91) 48.1% (139) 10.7% (31) 2.8% (8) 6.9% (20) 289

Timeliness of Help Desk

assistance25.9% (75) 43.4% (126) 16.6% (48) 6.9% (20) 7.2% (21) 290

Overall satisfaction with Help Desk

services30.7% (89) 46.6% (135) 11.0% (32) 4.5% (13) 7.2% (21) 290

MIS technical support 8.0% (23) 18.5% (53) 14.3% (41) 10.1% (29) 49.0% (140) 286

Timeliness of MIS assistance 7.3% (21) 17.8% (51) 15.0% (43) 10.5% (30) 49.3% (141) 286

Overall satisfaction with MIS

services7.0% (20) 20.6% (59) 15.0% (43) 11.8% (34) 45.6% (131) 287

Media Services technical support 10.5% (30) 25.3% (72) 7.4% (21) 2.5% (7) 54.4% (155) 285

Timeliness of Media Services

assistance11.9% (34) 24.6% (70) 6.3% (18) 2.5% (7) 54.7% (156) 285

Overall satisfaction with Media

Services12.2% (35) 25.2% (72) 7.3% (21) 2.4% (7) 52.8% (151) 286

Academic Support technical support 7.4% (21) 20.6% (58) 5.0% (14) 3.2% (9) 63.8% (180) 282

Timeliness of Academic Support

assistance6.3% (18) 19.4% (55) 5.6% (16) 3.2% (9) 65.5% (186) 284

Overall satisfaction with Academic

Support6.7% (19) 19.8% (56) 5.7% (16) 2.5% (7) 65.4% (185) 283

External Relations technical support 3.2% (9) 7.5% (21) 2.1% (6) 0.4% (1) 86.8% (244) 281

Timeliness of External Relations

assistance3.2% (9) 7.6% (21) 2.2% (6) 0.4% (1) 86.7% (241) 278

Overall satisfaction with External

Relations4.0% (11) 7.9% (22) 2.5% (7) 0.7% (2) 84.9% (236) 278


skipped question 32

12 of 16

17. Overall, do you feel PCC has adequate technical support available for faculty?

Response

Percent

Response

Count

Not at all adequate 23.4% 68

Somewhat adequate 48.3% 140

Adequate 23.8% 69

Very adequate 4.5% 13


skipped question 32

13 of 16

18. Below is a list of online instructional activities. Indicate your level of interest in using

these within your instruction. Assume the appropriate training will be provided.

Very Much A Lot Somewhat A Little Not at AllResponse

Count

Online assignments, quizzes, and

exams34.9% (99) 16.2% (46) 22.2% (63) 7.4% (21) 19.4% (55) 284

Online computer grade books 40.4% (115) 14.7% (42) 17.9% (51) 6.7% (19) 20.4% (58) 285

Online virtual office hours 30.5% (87) 16.1% (46) 17.5% (50) 7.0% (20) 28.8% (82) 285

Online student discussions 28.2% (80) 16.5% (47) 19.4% (55) 12.0% (34) 23.9% (68) 284

Online portfolios 21.9% (61) 11.2% (31) 18.0% (50) 9.4% (26) 39.6% (110) 278

Online evaluation of courses 28.3% (80) 18.7% (53) 19.8% (56) 8.1% (23) 25.1% (71) 283

Use of presentation software for

lectures (e.g., powerpoint)40.2% (115) 22.0% (63) 19.6% (56) 5.9% (17) 12.2% (35) 286

Computer-based simulations or

exercises33.6% (95) 18.4% (52) 18.4% (52) 8.8% (25) 20.8% (59) 283

Self-paced computer learning

tutorials for students31.9% (90) 20.6% (58) 18.8% (53) 9.2% (26) 19.5% (55) 282

Interactive video conferencing 19.0% (54) 12.3% (35) 19.0% (54) 13.0% (37) 36.6% (104) 284

Specific course software or

courseware (e.g., architecture

design etc.)

24.2% (68) 15.7% (44) 19.2% (54) 8.2% (23) 32.7% (92) 281

Online surveys to measure student

learning outcomes26.4% (74) 18.6% (52) 21.1% (59) 7.5% (21) 26.4% (74) 280

Web 2.0 (e.g., Wikis, Blogs, social

networks, etc.)22.5% (63) 12.9% (36) 16.1% (45) 11.1% (31) 37.5% (105) 280


skipped question 34

14 of 16

19. Please describe other online instructional activities that interest you.

Response

Count

47



20. Your job classification

Response

Percent

Response

Count

Faculty (contract) 73.8% 214

Faculty (hourly) 26.2% 76


skipped question 32

21. How long have you taught at PCC?

Response

Percent

Response

Count

less that 1 year 4.1% 12

1 to 5 years 26.9% 78

6 to 10 years 22.8% 66

11 to 15 years 14.8% 43

16 to 20 years 15.9% 46

21 years or more 15.5% 45


skipped question 32

15 of 16

22. Do you have access to a computer off-campus?

Response

Percent

Response

Count

Yes 99.3% 287

No 0.7% 2


skipped question 33

23. How old is your newest off-campus computer?

Response

Percent

Response

Count

less that 1 year 25.8% 74

1 to 3 years 52.3% 150

4 to 6 years 18.5% 53

7+ years 3.5% 10


skipped question 35

24. What is the primary type of Internet access you use with your off-campus computer?

Response

Percent

Response

Count

Dial-up Modem 2.4% 7

High Speed Internet access 96.2% 277

I do not have off-campus Internet

access1.4% 4


skipped question 34

16 of 16

25. Please mark your division:

Response

Percent

Response

Count

Business and Computer

Technology7.1% 20

CEC 2.8% 8

Counseling 7.5% 21

English 8.2% 23

Engineering and Technology 3.2% 9

Health Sciences 4.6% 13

Languages 13.9% 39

Library 3.6% 10

Mathematics 10.0% 28


Performing and Communication

Arts11.7% 33

Kinesiology, Health and Athletics 2.5% 7

Social Sciences 10.3% 29

Visual Arts and Media Studies 4.6% 13


skipped question 41

Priority List for New Smart Classroom Installations

A/V Requests Suitable for a

Room last year Smart Lectern Notes

C335 914 Yes

C325 498 Yes

C415 489 Yes

W208 434 Yes

C327 422 Yes

C302 421 Yes

E202 408 Yes

C364 386 Yes

C304 349 Yes

GM110 202 Yes

W201 486 No Room needs a LCD Projector, Proj. Enclosure,

Electric Screen, DVD/VCR, and a Computer.

Room has a Wall Cabinet w/ audio equip.

Would Require Asbestos Removal

R115 540 Yes

R209 390 Yes

R520 375 No There's no floor space for a Smart Lectern

LATIRAPELLE

Typewritten Text

Appendix 3

Evaluation of Smart ClassroomsEvaluation of Smart ClassroomsEvaluation of Smart ClassroomsEvaluation of Smart Classrooms

The Learning Technologies Advisory Committee is evaluating smart classrooms on campus in an effort to prioritize technology upgrades. There are many different configurations of "smart classrooms"and we would appreciate your comments about the EXISTING rooms.

Do you teach in any classrooms with smart boards, smart lecterns, a smart box or smart cabinet?

Do you teach in a room with a smart board? (Rooms that currently have an interactive smart board with projection are : C151, D208, D306B, R117, R121, R319, R321, V109, W208.)

Please evaluate your experiences with the smart board?Excellent Adequate Poor

smart board technology appropriate to my current needs

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

smart board technology appropriate to my future needs (threefive years)

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

Internet connection is reliable

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

Internet connection is fast enough

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

performance of computer nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

yes

nmlkj

no

nmlkj

yes

nmlkj

yes but don't use smart board

nmlkj

don't know

nmlkj

no

nmlkj

Comments:

55

66

LATIRAPELLE

Typewritten Text

Appendix 4

Evaluation of Smart ClassroomsEvaluation of Smart ClassroomsEvaluation of Smart ClassroomsEvaluation of Smart ClassroomsIn a typical semester, how often do you use the smart board?

What functions of the smart board do you use?

What other technologies and/or equipment would enhance or support your instruction and instructional activities in this smart board room?

Do you teach in a room with a smart lectern? (Smart lecterns have LCD Projector, installed computer, laptop hookup, and DVD, BlueRay, and/or VHS player) (Rooms that currently have smart lecterns are: C103, C111, C117, C155, C157, C163, C164, C253, C257, C261, C265, C301, C312, C315, C360, C369, CC208, CC233, D301, D303, D304, D306, E161, GM103, GM104, GM105, GM112A, IT113, IT116, IT140, IT206, IT209, IT212, IT214, IT215, IT224, IT230, LL306, LL311, R104, R108, R217, R219, R220, R221, R222, R224, R226, R402, R502, R508, U321 & U280, V100, W206 OR Blue Ray (no VHS): C323, C355, E317, GM102, GM107, R205, R317, R318, R320, V200, V201, V209)

55

66

every class

nmlkj

every other class

nmlkj

occasionally (once in 5 classes)

nmlkj

once a month

nmlkj


55

66

projection (web, files, Powerpoint, etc.)

gfedc

interactivity (draw, note taking, screen capture)

gfedc

touchscreen

gfedc


yes

nmlkj

no

nmlkj

yes, but don't use smart lectern

nmlkj

don't know

nmlkj

Evaluation of Smart ClassroomsEvaluation of Smart ClassroomsEvaluation of Smart ClassroomsEvaluation of Smart ClassroomsPlease evaluate your experiences with the smart lectern.

In a typical semester, how often do you use the smart lectern?

What other technologies and/or equipment would enhance or support your instruction and instructional activities in the smart lectern classroom?

Do you teach in a room with a smart lectern with Smartboard ? (LCD projector, installed computer, laptop hookup, DVD and VCR player, and a Smartboard) (Rooms that currently have smart lecterns with Smartboards are: C153, C158, C162, C301, R113, R218, R123)

Excellent Adequate Poor

Technology appropriate to my current needs

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

Technology appropriate to my future needs (in threefive years)

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj


nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj


nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

Performance of the computer

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

55

66

Comment

55

66

every class

nmlkj

every other class

nmlkj


nmlkj

once a month

nmlkj


yes

nmlkj

no

nmlkj

teach there but do not use it

nmlkj

do not know

nmlkj

Evaluation of Smart ClassroomsEvaluation of Smart ClassroomsEvaluation of Smart ClassroomsEvaluation of Smart ClassroomsPlease evaluate your experiences with the smart lecterns with Smartboard.

In a typical semester, how often do you use the smart lectern with Smartboard?

What other technologies and/or equipment would enhance or support your instruction and instructional activities in this smart lectern with Smartboard classroom?



nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj


nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj


nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj


nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

Performance of the computer

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

55

66

Comment

55

66

every class

nmlkj

every other class

nmlkj


nmlkj

once a month

nmlkj


Evaluation of Smart ClassroomsEvaluation of Smart ClassroomsEvaluation of Smart ClassroomsEvaluation of Smart ClassroomsDo you teach in a room with a smart cabinet? (LCD projector, installed computer, laptop hookup, and DVD and VCR player) SET UPS VARY. (Rooms that currently have smart cabinets are: C 116 C 217 C 333 CEC 219 and 221 CIRCADIAN (NO VCR)Can have Microphones w/Tech CREVELING TOUCH PAD/PASSWORD. (No VCR or Computer) Can have microphones with a Tech. Need Staging Service Tech. to work this room. C 233 (Need keys from President's office) E 220 E 320 FORUM HARBESON PIAZZA (NO VCR) Need Tech. for microphone R 102 (NO COMPUTER) R 109 R 122 W 203 WI FI)

yes

nmlkj

no

nmlkj

teach there but do not use the smart box

nmlkj

do not know

nmlkj

Evaluation of Smart ClassroomsEvaluation of Smart ClassroomsEvaluation of Smart ClassroomsEvaluation of Smart ClassroomsPlease evaluate your experiences with the smart cabinet.

In a typical semester, how often do you use the smart cabinet?

What other technologies and/or equipment would enhance or support your instruction and instructional activities in this smart cabinet room?

Do you teach in a room with a smart folddown box? (No computer) LCD projector, laptop hookup, DVD and VCR Player. (Rooms that currently have smart folddown boxes are: C269, C370, E203, E205, E211, R517, V103, V213, CEC: 204, 205, 206, 218, 220 & 222)



nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj


nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj


nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj


nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

Performance of computer nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

55

66

Comment

55

66

every class

nmlkj

every other class

nmlkj


nmlkj

once a month

nmlkj


yes

nmlkj

no

nmlkj

teach there but do not use it

nmlkj

do not know

nmlkj

Evaluation of Smart ClassroomsEvaluation of Smart ClassroomsEvaluation of Smart ClassroomsEvaluation of Smart ClassroomsPlease evaluate your experiences with the smart folddown box (no computer)

In a typical semester, how often do you use the smart folddown box (no computer)?

What other technologies and/or equipment would enhance or support your instruction and instructional activities in this smart folddown box (no computer) room?

Please tell us about ANY classrooms that should be at the top of the list for a conversion to a smart classroom or a "smart technology upgrade." List the building and room number and tell us why.



nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

Technology appropriate to my needs in threefive years

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj


nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

Internet speed is fast enough

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

55

66

55

66

Comment

55

66

every class

nmlkj

every other class

nmlkj


nmlkj

once a month

nmlkj


Evaluation of Smart ClassroomsEvaluation of Smart ClassroomsEvaluation of Smart ClassroomsEvaluation of Smart ClassroomsSince you do not currently teach in a smart classroom, would you use a "smart classroom" if it was available?

What other technologies and/or equipment would enhance or support your instruction and instructional activities?

For which items would you like additional training?

yes

nmlkj

no

nmlkj

Comment:

55

66

Projector for instructional materials (The web, Powerpoint, etc.)

gfedc

Support for my laptop (docking station)

gfedc

Clickers (audience feedback)

gfedc

Document camera (for projection of objects)

gfedc

Web access

gfedc

DVD

gfedc

VCR

gfedc

BlueRay DVD

gfedc

None (or does not apply to me)

gfedc


55

66

Smartboard or other interactive white board

gfedc

smart lectern

gfedc

smart lectern with interactive white board

gfedc

smart cabinet

gfedc

smart box fold down (no computer)

gfedc

nothing at this time

gfedc


55

66

Evaluation of Smart ClassroomsEvaluation of Smart ClassroomsEvaluation of Smart ClassroomsEvaluation of Smart ClassroomsIn order to follow up on specific needs, please tell us who you are:

What is your status?

Name:

Department

Email Address:

Phone Number:

Full time

nmlkj

Part time

nmlkj

Faculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey rev

The Learning Technologies Advisory Committee asks for your participation in one more survey this year that will help us finalize our recommendation for new and updated smart classrooms. Please consider your current pedagogy and approaches in your classrooms and where you feel you want to be in the next 3 to 5 years. Early responders by June 8th Will be placed into a drawing for an IPad. The Learning Technology Advisory Committee Co Chairs: Mary Ann Laun (Library) and Sandy Haynes (VAMS) Committee members: Business & Computer Technology: Jamal Ashraf, Dave Evans Counseling: Cecile Davis Anderson, Lan Truong English: Elsie RivasGomez, Kathy Kottaras Engineering and Technology: Coleman Griffiths, John Carri Health Sciences: Lynn Leloo Languages: Carol Curtis, Bárbara PadrónLeón Library: Pearl Ly, Krista Goguen Math: Jude Socrates, Carrie Starbird Natural Sciences: Valerie Foster, Rhea Presiado Performing and Communication Arts: Sarah Barker, Zac Matthews Social Sciences: Eloy Zarate Visual Arts/Media Studies: Silvia Rigon, Laurie Burrus Resource people: Dwayne Cable, Maureen Davidson, Craig Harris, Mark Sakata, Leslie Tirapelle, Gloria Wong

Introduction

SECTION I: About You

LATIRAPELLE

Typewritten Text

LATIRAPELLE

Typewritten Text

Appendix 5

Faculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey rev1. How would you rate your current digital and media literacy? For the purposes of this survey, which best describes you: Novice: Feel comfortable searching the web but do not use computers beyond that Consumer: Find and read articles and/or blogs online; purchase items online and/or view quality ratings of products or services; find and view videos or photos. Content creator: Actively contribute to a blog or forum conversation; search and contribute reviews for products or services; upload and tag photos or video for sharing online. Technologist: Create or maintain a Web site, wiki, blog or discussion forum for people with shared interests or concerns; produce and edit videos and audio for presentation online.

2. In your instructional area, when a new technology (hardware, software, or Web application) becomes available, how quickly do you tend to adopt it?

In this section, we ask about the technology you use in specific teaching contexts and the purposes for which you use (or would like to use) technology.

Section II: Pedagogy

Novice

nmlkj Consumer

nmlkj Content Creator

nmlkj Technologist

nmlkj


55

66

I never adopt it

nmlkj

I adopt it after most of my colleagues

nmlkj

I adopt it when it becomes mainstream

nmlkj

I adopt it before most of my colleagues

nmlkj

I'm one of the first to try it

nmlkj


Faculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey rev3. Which size of class do you primarily teach? SELECT ONE

4. Which type of class do you primarily teach? Select one

5. For the classes you teach, use the scale below to rate the extent to which each of the following met your instructional needs.

Did not meet my needs Met some of my needs Met most/all my needs Not applicable

Digital presentation technology (e.g. computer and projector, document camera, smart board)

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

Presentation technology (e.g. overhead projector, white boards, black boards)


Technical support nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

Consistent wireless access nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

Furniture/Flexibility of seating arrangement


Number and location of outlets


Lighting nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

Small (less than 20 students)

nmlkj

Medium (2045 students)

nmlkj

Large (45100 students)

nmlkj

Very Large (over 100 students)

nmlkj

On campus lecture

nmlkj

Hybrid course (substantial online content with limited inperson meetings)

nmlkj

Online course (taught exclusively online)

nmlkj

Studio or ensemble/rehearsal

nmlkj

Field experience, internship, practicum, or clinic (coursebased)

nmlkj

Mentoring or advising students

nmlkj


55

66

Additional comments

55

66

Faculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey rev6. Beyond the physical space, please indicate ALL of the technology tools or resources you use for instruction for your primary class type.

Course or project web page

gfedc

Learning Management System (e.g. BlackBoard)

gfedc

Presentation applications (e.g. Powerpoint)

gfedc

Online social networks (e.g. Facebook)

gfedc

Online discussion boards

gfedc

Online chat or instant messaging (e.g. Live Messenger, Gtalk)

gfedc

Online grade book

gfedc

Mobile device (e.g. mobile phone, iPad, iPod)

gfedc

Streaming or downloadable media (e.g. YouTube, Vimeo, podcasts)

gfedc

Blogs or Webbased journals (e.g. Blogger, Wordpress)

gfedc

Library ereserves

gfedc

Research databases and indexes (e.g. ProQuest, ERIC, PubMed, Google Scholar)

gfedc

ebooks or other online reading sources

gfedc

Online surveys, quizzes, or polls

gfedc

Online assignment submission

gfedc

Videoconferencing or Webconferencing

gfedc

Microblogging services (e.g. Twitter)

gfedc

Digital image collections (e.g. Flickr, Library Collections)

gfedc

Audience response system ("Clickers")

gfedc

Simulations/educational games

gfedc

Collaborative Web sites and applications (e.g. Wikis, Sharepoint, GoogleDocs)

gfedc

RSS feeds or readers (e.g. Google Reader, NetNewsWire)

gfedc

Online portfolios

gfedc

Visualization technologies (e.g. interactive graphics, virtual reality)

gfedc

Research and citation applications (e.g. RefWorks, Zotero, Endnote)

gfedc

Webbased file management (e.g. Dropbox)

gfedc

None of these

gfedc

Other

55

66

Faculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey rev7. How does/will technology help you in your instruction, now and in the future (35) years? Select all that apply.

Currently Future (35 years)

Saves time/increase my efficiency gfedc gfedc

Ensures student access to course information

gfedc gfedc

Provides lecture, overview, or study materials

gfedc gfedc

Facilitates distribution and/or collection of assignments

gfedc gfedc

Facilitates assessment of students’ learning

gfedc gfedc

Encourages student participation/interaction/collaboration during class time

gfedc gfedc

Encourages student participation/interaction/collaboration outside of class time

gfedc gfedc

Provides opportunities for students to create materials/share information

gfedc gfedc

Helps students synthesize their experiences across courses or across curricular and extracurricular activities

gfedc gfedc

Helps students develop technical skills

gfedc gfedc

Helps students develop research skills gfedc gfedc

Provides students with information about their progress and/or grade throughout the course.

gfedc gfedc

Facilitates submission of final grades. gfedc gfedc

Not applicable gfedc gfedc


55

66

Faculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey rev8. Which of the following web tools or technology are your students using or talking about?

In this section we would like to know what helps or hinders your use of technologies for teaching.

SECTION III: Obstacles and Support

ipad/tablet

gfedc

iphone/smartphone (list specific apps below)

gfedc

Khan Academy

gfedc

anki ap

gfedc

laptop

gfedc

facebook

gfedc

google docs

gfedc

pintrest

gfedc

twitter

gfedc

youtube

gfedc

instagram

gfedc

linkedin

gfedc

skype

gfedc

tablet

gfedc

podcasts

gfedc

I don't know what my students are using

gfedc


55

66

Faculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey rev9. Think of times when you needed to learn to do something new with a technology to support your teaching. Rate how helpful you found the following sources of support:

Never used this resource Not helpful Moderately helpful Very helpful

Self (trial and error) nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

Online help or tutorial nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

Webinars nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

Online courses nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

Campus technology workshop


Your students nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

Colleagues nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

Friends nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

Family nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

Technical support (divsion) nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

Classroom Support Services (via helpdesk)



55

66

Faculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey rev10. Consider the following in terms of time, support, knowledge and availability of technology to support your teaching:

Agree Disagree Not sure

I know about the types of teaching technologies available for use at PCC

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

I know about the types of technologies student are using and/or need.

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

I know where to go to learn the technology I need to support my teaching.

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

I have time to learn how to use these technology and applications.

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

I have time to maintain or monitor technology once implemented.

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

I know how to use the technology to achieve my goals.

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

I get timely technical support.

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

I have personal motivation to pursue the use of technology.

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

I have concern about a technical problem(s) affecting my teaching.

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

I have time to teach students to use the technology

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

I have concern about students’ ability to access needed software or equipment

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

I have poorly functioning or inadequate technology in my teaching environment

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

I have incentives to use technology in teaching

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj


55

66

Faculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey rev11. There are several technologyrelated changes that PCC could pursue over the next three years. What priority would you assign to each item?

There is a plan to replace faculty desktops with laptops. Please provide input on this plan.

High Priority Medium Priority Low Priority

Improve wireless infrastructure across campus

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

Increase Green IT efforts (reducing use of paper, networked printing, etc…)

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

Develop mobile applications to support teaching and learning

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

Expand the technical support available for instruction

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

Make campus spaces and classrooms more friendly for collaboration (e.g. add open spaces, flexible furniture, etc.)

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

Make campus more friendly for mobile devices and laptops (e.g. electrical outlets)

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

Provide range of professional development activities and forums on selecting and using technology

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

Support and integrate a variety of online tools that instructors and students can select from for use in courses

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

Create a demonstration classroom to showcase new technologies

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

Improve response to classroom technical problems (e.g. funding to hire more staff).

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

SECTION IV: Laptop Replacement Program


55

66

Faculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey rev12. How critical is your need for a laptop to replace your campus desktop computer?

13. Indicate your preference for the following type of laptop/portable device

14. On a campus provided laptop/portable device, rate the importance of the following specifications.

High priority Medium priority Low priority

light weight (for portability) nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

large screen size nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

webcam w/ integrated mic nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

large harddrive nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

lots of memory nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

variety of input ports nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

external monitor used with the laptop

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

docking station for the laptop (that provides easy access for peripherals and other devices)

nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

Would like to be in the first group to receive one

nmlkj

I can wait for the second phase

nmlkj

I don't have a preference

nmlkj

I prefer to have a desktop compuer only

nmlkj


PC Laptop

nmlkj

Mac Laptop

nmlkj

Tablet PC

nmlkj

iPad

nmlkj

Other (please specify in comments field)

nmlkj

Comments


Faculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey rev15. For INSTRUCTIONAL purposes, indicate the types of software you need loaded on your laptop. You can list specific software names in "other".

16. What concerns or questions do you have about the faculty laptop program?

17. Is there anything more we should consider regarding technology and teaching, as PCC sets its priorities? What are your ideas for anticipating the future technological needs of our students and faculty? Please explain.

18. What is your faculty status?

55

66

55

66

Microsoft Office Suite (e.g. Word, Excel, Powerpoint)

gfedc

Presentation software (e.g. Powerpoint)

gfedc

Photo editing software

gfedc

Adobe Acrobat

gfedc

Statistical software (e.g. SPSS)

gfedc

Video editing software

gfedc

Screencasting software

gfedc

Audio editing software

gfedc

Web page editing software

gfedc


55

66

Full time faculty

nmlkj

Part time faculty

nmlkj


55

66

Faculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey revFaculty Technology Survey rev19. What is your division/department?

20. Provide your contact information to facilitate follow up on your comments/concerns and to enter the drawing for an IPad. Name and email address

6

Name

Email address


1

©2011, Academic & Collaborative Applications, UW Information Technology, University of Washington.

2011 Faculty Survey on Teaching & Research Technologies

This survey asks about multiple aspects of your work as an educator at the University of Washington. It focuses on how and when you use technology to support both your teaching and research activities. Your participation in this survey is voluntary and confidential. No identifying information will be linked to your responses. You are free to skip any question. The survey should take about 15-20 minutes to complete.

Thank you in advance for your participation.

Section I: About You Question 1. Which of the following best describes your position at the University of Washington?

o Department Chair/Director o Teaching Faculty o Research Faculty o Professional Staff o Other: _______________________

Question 2. Which of the following best describes your tenure status? o Tenured o Tenure track (not yet tenured) o Non-tenure track appointment

Question 3. What is your primary college, school, or division (broad category)?

o Architecture & Urban Planning o Arts & Sciences – Arts o Arts & Sciences – Humanities o Arts & Sciences – Natural Sciences o Arts & Sciences – Social Sciences o Built Environments o Business o Dentistry o Education o Engineering o Environment o Information o Law o Medicine o Nursing o Pharmacy o Public Affairs o Public Health o Social Work o 50/50 appointment or other: _______________________

LATIRAPELLE

Typewritten Text

Appendix 6

2


Question 4. What is your age?

o 25 or under o 26-30 o 31-35 o 36-40 o 41-45 o 46-50 o 51-55 o 56-60 o 61-65 o 66-70 o 71 or over

Question 5. What is your gender?

o Male o Female o Other

Question 6. On a scale of 1 to 5, how would you rate your current technological expertise? For the purposes of this survey, we’re primarily concerned with your computer and Web-based skills. We’ve defined three points on the scale as follows. These tasks represent some of the things a person at each level might do. Beginner: Able to use a mouse and keyboard, create a simple document, send and receive email, and/or access Web pages Intermediate: Able to format documents using styles or templates, use spreadsheets for custom calculations and charts, and/or use graphics/Web publishing Expert: Able to use macros in programs to speed tasks, configure operating system features, create a program using a programming language, and/or develop a database.

Beginner Intermediate Expert (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) O O O O O

3


Question 7. On a scale of 1 to 5, how would you rate your current digital and media literacy?

For the purposes of this survey, we're primarily concerned with the types of activities you engage in online. We've defined three points on the scale as follows. These activities represent some of the things a person at each level might do.

Consumer: Find and read articles and/or blogs online; purchase items online and/or view quality ratings of products or services; find and view videos or photos.

Producer: Contribute to a blog or forum conversation; search and contribute reviews for products or services; upload and tag photos or video for sharing online. Activist: Create or maintain a Web site, wiki, blog or discussion forum for people with shared interests or concerns; produce and edit videos and audio for presentation online; use digital or online means to mobilize efforts in the public interest.

Consumer Producer Activist (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) O O O O O

Question 8.

When a new technology (hardware, software, or Web application) becomes available, how quickly do you tend to adopt it?

o I never adopt it o After most of my colleagues o When it becomes mainstream o Before most of my colleagues o I’m one of the first to try it

4


Section II: Teaching

A. Teaching Contexts In this section, we ask about the technology you use in specific teaching contexts and the purposes for which you use technology.

Question 9. Please choose one context in which you have taught UW students from Spring 2010 to Winter 2011.

o Seminar/small discussion-based class (< 25 students) o Large discussion-based class (25+ students) o Small lecture (< 100 students) o Large lecture (100+ students) o Hybrid course (substantial online content with limited in-person meetings) o Online course (taught exclusively online) o Research team/lab o Studio or ensemble/rehearsal o Field experience, internship, practicum, or clinic (course-based) o Mentoring or advising students o I have not taught a class in one of the above contexts from Spring 2010 to Winter 2011

Question 10.

For the context selected above, think of the physical space in which you last taught. Use the scale below to rate the extent to which each of the following met your instructional needs .

Not

applicable Did not

meet my needs

Met some of my needs

Met all or most of

my needs (1) (2) (3) Digital presentation technology (e.g. computer and projector, document camera, smart board)

O O O O

Presentation technology (e.g. overhead projector, white boards, black boards)

O O O O

Technical support O O O O Consistent wireless access O O O O Furniture/Flexibility of seating arrangement O O O O Number and location of electrical outlets O O O O

5


Question 11.

Beyond the physical space, please indicate ALL of the tools or resources you used for instruction in the context you selected above (question 9).

Note: If you used a course management system (e.g. Blackboard, Moodle), please indicate the individual components you used.

Course or project web page Presentation applications Online social networks (e.g. Facebook) Online discussion boards Online chat or instant messaging (e.g. Live Messenger, Gtalk) Online grade book Mobile device (e.g. mobile phone, iPad, iPod) Streaming or downloadable media (e.g. YouTube, Vimeo, podcasts) Blogs or Web-based journals (e.g. Blogger, Wordpress) Library e-reserves Online surveys, quizzes, or polls Online assignment submission Videoconferencing or Web-conferencing Micro-blogging services (e.g. Twitter) Digital image collections (e.g. Flickr, UW Libraries Collections) Research databases and indexes (e.g. ERIC, PubMed, Google Scholar) Audience response system ("Clickers") Simulations/educational games Collaborative Web sites and applications (e.g. Wikis, Sharepoint) RSS feeds or readers (e.g. Google Reader, NetNewsWire) Online portfolios Visualization technologies (e.g. interactive graphics, virtual reality) Research and citation applications (e.g. RefWorks, Zotero, Endnote) Web-based file management None of these Other: __________________________

Question 12.

What types of Web tools did you use or asked your students to use in this context? Select all that apply.

I did not use Web tools in this context Catalyst Web tools (e.g. WebQ, GoPost, Collect It, GradeBook) Course management system (e.g. Blackboard, Moodle) Google Apps (e.g. Docs, Sites, Calendar) Windows Live/Office 365 (e.g. SkyDrive, Spaces, Calendar) Department-created tools Other: __________________________

6


Question 13.

For which of the following purposes did you use technology in this context? Select all that apply.

I did not use technology in this context To save time/increase my efficiency To ensure student access to course information To provide lecture, overview, or study materials To distribute and/or collect assignments To assess students’ learning To encourage student participation/interaction during class time To encourage student participation/interaction outside of class time To provide opportunities for students to create materials/share information To help students synthesize their experiences across courses or across curricular and extra-curricular activities To help students develop technical skills To help students develop research skills To provide students with information about their progress and/or grade throughout the quarter To submit final grades at the end of the quarter Other: ______________________________

B. Supports & Obstacles In this section we would like to know what helps or hinders your use of technologies for teaching.

Question 14. Think of times when you needed to learn to do something new with a technology to support your teaching. Rate how helpful you found the following sources of support:

Never used this

resource

Not helpful Moderately helpful

Very helpful

(1) (2) (3) Self (trial and error) O O O O UW online help or tutorial O O O O Non-UW online help or tutorial O O O O Campus technology workshop O O O O Teaching or research assistant O O O O Your students O O O O Colleagues O O O O Friends O O O O Family O O O O Technical support (department, college or school)

O O O O

Catalyst Tools help (email, phone, or in person)

O O O O

UW Information Technology help ([email protected] or phone)

O O O O

Classroom Support Services O O O O

mailto:[email protected]

7


Question 15. When you used or planned to use technology to support your teaching, to what extent, if at all, did the following present an obstacle to you?

Not an obstacle

(1)

Minor obstacle

(2)

Major obstacle

(3) Lack of knowledge about teaching technologies available for use at the UW

O O O

Lack of knowledge about where to go to learn the technology O O O Lack of time to learn how to use the technology O O O Lack of knowledge about how to use the technology to achieve my goals

O O O

Lack of time to maintain or monitor technology once implemented O O O Lack of timely technical support O O O Lack of personal motivation O O O Concern about a technical problem affecting my teaching O O O Lack of time to teach students to use the technology O O O Concern about students’ ability to access needed software or equipment

O O O

Poorly functioning or inadequate technology in my teaching environment

O O O

Lack of incentives to use technology in teaching O O O Question 16. Budget reductions have affected, and will continue to affect, a range of issues related to teaching. Rate your level of agreement with the following statements based on your current experience as an instructor.

Strongly agree

Agree No opinion

Disagree Strongly disagree

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) There are too many students in my classes O O O O O I have the teaching assistant help I need O O O O O I am teaching the courses I want to teach O O O O O My department is not currently offering the range of courses students need

O O O O O

I have the technical support I need from my department, school, or college

O O O O O

I have the technical support I need from central UW (Classroom Support Services, Catalyst, UW-IT)

O O O O O

8


Section III: Research In this section, we are interested in learning about your research, and the tools and services you need to support this work.

Question 17. Do you conduct scholarly research as part of your position at UW?

o Yes o No

Question 18. In what ways, if any, have you integrated research activities in your teaching (in any context)? Select all that apply.

I use inquiry-based methods of learning in my classes I have students analyze and/or contribute information to a research dataset I require students to conduct independent research as part of their coursework I involve students in my own research projects I mentor students conducting independent research I do not integrate research activities in my teaching I do not teach Other: __________________________

Question 19. Which of the following best describes your current research?

o Solo research o Collaborative research o Both solo and collaborative research

Question 20. Which of the following describe your research collaborators? Select all that apply.

Colleagues at the UW Colleagues in other academic or research institutions Colleagues in the community or community-based organizations Domestic colleagues International colleagues Other: __________________________

Question 21. With approximately how many collaborators do you work?

9


Question 22. Which of the following tools do you use to share information or communicate with your collaborators? Select all that apply.

Telephone/teleconferencing Email Online chat or instant messaging Text messaging via mobile phone Desktop synchronization software Web seminar (e.g. Adobe Connect, WebEx) Skype Videoconferencing File sharing software Web-based file storage Project Web page Wiki Sharepoint None of the above Other: __________________________

Question 23. What types of data do you gather and/or analyze in your research? Select all that apply.

Quantities/statistics Text (e.g. literature, transcripts, field notes, musical scores) Images (e.g. photographs, maps, drawings, flow charts) Multimedia digital objects and/or Web artifacts Audio recordings Video recordings Geo-tagged objects/Spatial data Other: __________________________

Question 24. Which of the following units best describes the quantities of data you work with? o Megabytes (One megabyte = the contents of approximately one book) o Gigabytes (One gigabyte = the contents of approximately 30 feet of books) o Terabytes (One terabyte = the contents of an entire library of books) o Petabytes or greater (One petabyte = the contents of 1,000 libraries)

10


Question 25. Where do you store your data? Select all that apply.

On my computer On an external device (e.g., hard drive, thumb drive) On a server that I manage or that is managed by my research team On a server managed by my department, college, or school In a data center (w/multiple servers) that I manage or that is managed by my research team In a data center managed by my department, college, or school In a data center managed by UW Information Technology In a data center managed by an external (non-UW) provider (e.g., contract service, Google, Amazon, or

Microsoft) Other: __________________________

Question 26. Complete the statement: “Over the next three years, I expect the amount/complexity of data I work with to…”

o Decrease o Stay about the same o Increase o Increase exponentially

11


Question 27. Rate the extent to which the following resources represent an unmet need in your current research:

No need/ Need

currently met (1)

Minor need

(2)

Major need

(3)

Quick advice on technical matters, when needed, via telephone or email O O O Access to individuals with expertise in domain knowledge needed for my project

O O O

An ongoing relationship with technical consultants familiar with my research

O O O

Research assistant(s) with relevant knowledge/expertise O O O Access to hardware/software for investigations I am currently doing or would like to do

O O O

Solutions for storing/archiving/managing collected data or artifacts O O O Solutions for granting public access to data or artifacts O O O Opportunities to learn about technology that is relevant to my work O O O Opportunities for collaboration or knowledge sharing with individuals doing similar work

O O O

Question 28. Please elaborate on any needs indicated above or describe any additional needs not listed.

12


Section IV: Future

In this section, we are interested in knowing where you think the UW should put its resources in the next three years to support your work.

Question 29. There are several technology-related changes that the UW could pursue over the next three years. What priority would you assign to each item?

Low Priority

Medium Priority

High Priority

Improve wireless infrastructure across campus O O O Increase Green IT efforts (reducing use of paper, etc…) O O O Make campus spaces more friendly for mobile devices and laptops (e.g. add open spaces and electrical outlets)

O O O

Develop mobile applications to support teaching and learning O O O Expand the technical support available in my department, school, or college

O O O

Provide more support on how to select and use technology to meet my instructional goals

O O O

Sponsor forums for collegial discussion of teaching with technology O O O Require all courses to use a consistent set of online tools (e.g. all courses would use Blackboard or all courses would use Catalyst)

O O O

Support and integrate a variety of online tools that instructors and students can select form for use in courses (e.g. Catalyst, Google)

O O O

Better integrate all online information related to a single course in MyUW (e.g. course description, e-reserves, time schedule info)

O O O

Equip similarly-sized classrooms across campus with the same standard technologies

O O O

Create a limited number of classrooms with advanced technologies O O O Improve response to classroom technical problems (e.g. funding to hire more staff).

O O O

Question 30. Is there anything more we should consider regarding technology, teaching, and research as the UW sets its priorities? Please explain.

1 of 15

Evaluation of Smart Classrooms

1. Do you teach in any classrooms with smart boards, smart lecterns, a smart box or smart

cabinet?

Response

Percent

Response

Count

yes 78.5% 135

no 21.5% 37


skipped question 2

2. Do you teach in a room with a smart board? (Rooms that currently have an interactive

smart board with projection are : C-151, D-208, D-306B, R-117, R-121, R-319, R-321, V-109,

W-208.)

Response

Percent

Response

Count

yes 20.0% 26

yes but don't use smart board 9.2% 12

don't know 2.3% 3

no 68.5% 89


skipped question 44

LATIRAPELLE

Typewritten Text

Appendix 7

2 of 15

3. Please evaluate your experiences with the smart board?

Excellent Adequate PoorRating

Average

Response

Count

smart board technology appropriate

to my current needs29.2% (7) 50.0% (12) 20.8% (5) 1.92 24

smart board technology appropriate

to my future needs (three-five

years)34.8% (8) 34.8% (8) 30.4% (7) 1.96 23

Internet connection is reliable 33.3% (8) 50.0% (12) 16.7% (4) 1.83 24

Internet connection is fast enough 12.5% (3) 62.5% (15) 25.0% (6) 2.13 24

performance of computer 8.7% (2) 52.2% (12) 39.1% (9) 2.30 23

Comments:

16



4. In a typical semester, how often do you use the smart board?

Response

Percent

Response

Count

every class 68.2% 15

every other class 13.6% 3

occasionally (once in 5 classes) 9.1% 2

once a month 9.1% 2


5



3 of 15

5. What functions of the smart board do you use?

Response

Percent

Response

Count

projection (web, files,

Powerpoint, etc.)100.0% 22

interactivity (draw, note taking,

screen capture)40.9% 9

touchscreen 40.9% 9


2



6. What other technologies and/or equipment would enhance or support your instruction

and instructional activities in this smart board room?

Response

Count

12



4 of 15

7. Do you teach in a room with a smart lectern? (Smart lecterns have LCD Projector,

installed computer, laptop hook-up, and DVD, Blue-Ray, and/or VHS player) (Rooms that

currently have smart lecterns are: C-103, C-111, C-117, C-155, C-157, C-163, C-164, C-253,

C-257, C-261, C-265, C-301, C-312, C-315, C-360, C-369, CC-208, CC-233, D-301, D-303, D-

304, D-306, E-161, GM-103, GM-104, GM-105, GM-112A, IT-113, IT-116, IT-140, IT-206, IT-209,

IT-212, IT-214, IT-215, IT-224, IT-230, LL-306, LL-311, R-104, R-108, R-217, R-219, R-220, R-

221, R-222, R-224, R-226, R-402, R-502, R-508, U321 & U280, V-100, W-206 OR Blue Ray (no

VHS): C-323, C-355, E-317, GM-102, GM-107, R-205, R-317, R-318, R-320, V-200, V-201, V-

209)

Response

Percent

Response

Count

yes 65.3% 81

no 32.3% 40

yes, but don't use smart lectern 1.6% 2

don't know 0.8% 1


skipped question 50

5 of 15

8. Please evaluate your experiences with the smart lectern.


Average

Response

Count

Technology appropriate to my

current needs42.9% (33) 50.6% (39) 6.5% (5) 1.64 77


future needs (in three-five years)33.3% (25) 41.3% (31) 25.3% (19) 1.92 75



Performance of the computer 21.3% (16) 54.7% (41) 24.0% (18) 2.03 75

Comment

36


skipped question 96

9. In a typical semester, how often do you use the smart lectern?

Response

Percent

Response

Count




once a month 1.3% 1


4


skipped question 99

6 of 15


and instructional activities in the smart lectern classroom?

Response

Count

50



11. Do you teach in a room with a smart lectern with Smartboard ? (LCD projector, installed

computer, laptop hook-up, DVD and VCR player, and a Smartboard) (Rooms that currently

have smart lecterns with Smartboards are: C-153, C-158, C-162, C-301, R-113, R-218, R-

123)

Response

Percent

Response

Count

yes 17.1% 20

no 78.6% 92

teach there but do not use it 1.7% 2

do not know 2.6% 3


skipped question 57

7 of 15

12. Please evaluate your experiences with the smart lecterns with Smartboard.


Average

Response

Count


current needs41.2% (7) 58.8% (10) 0.0% (0) 1.59 17





Performance of the computer 23.5% (4) 35.3% (6) 41.2% (7) 2.18 17

Comment

9



13. In a typical semester, how often do you use the smart lectern with Smartboard?

Response

Percent

Response

Count




once a month 0.0% 0

Other (please specify) 0



8 of 15


and instructional activities in this smart lectern with Smartboard classroom?

Response

Count

5

answered question 5


15. Do you teach in a room with a smart cabinet? (LCD projector, installed computer, laptop

hook-up, and DVD and VCR player) SET UPS VARY. (Rooms that currently have smart

cabinets are: C - 116 C - 217 C - 333 CEC 219 and 221 CIRCADIAN - (NO VCR)Can have

Microphones w/Tech CREVELING -TOUCH PAD/PASSWORD. (No VCR or Computer) Can have

microphones with a Tech. Need Staging Service Tech. to work this room. C - 233 (Need

keys from President's office) E - 220 E - 320 FORUM HARBESON PIAZZA (NO VCR) Need

Tech. for microphone R - 102 (NO COMPUTER) R - 109 R - 122 W - 203 WI - FI)

Response

Percent

Response

Count

yes 32.8% 38

no 65.5% 76

teach there but do not use the

smart box 0.0% 0

do not know 1.7% 2


skipped question 58

9 of 15

16. Please evaluate your experiences with the smart cabinet.


Average

Response

Count


current needs40.0% (14) 42.9% (15) 17.1% (6) 1.77 35





Performance of computer 17.1% (6) 51.4% (18) 31.4% (11) 2.14 35

Comment

13



17. In a typical semester, how often do you use the smart cabinet?

Response

Percent

Response

Count




once a month 2.9% 1




10 of 15


and instructional activities in this smart cabinet room?

Response

Count

14



19. Do you teach in a room with a smart fold-down box? (No computer) LCD projector,

laptop hook-up, DVD and VCR Player. (Rooms that currently have smart fold-down boxes

are: C-269, C-370, E-203, E-205, E-211, R-517, V-103, V-213, CEC: 204, 205, 206, 218, 220 &

222)

Response

Percent

Response

Count

yes 6.1% 7

no 92.2% 106

teach there but do not use it 0.0% 0

do not know 1.7% 2


skipped question 59

11 of 15

20. Please evaluate your experiences with the smart fold-down box (no computer)


Average

Response

Count


current needs28.6% (2) 28.6% (2) 42.9% (3) 2.14 7


needs in three-five years28.6% (2) 14.3% (1) 57.1% (4) 2.29 7


Internet speed is fast enough 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 100.0% (7) 3.00 7

Comment

3

answered question 7


21. In a typical semester, how often do you use the smart fold-down box (no computer)?

Response

Percent

Response

Count

every class 57.1% 4



once a month 0.0% 0


answered question 7


12 of 15


and instructional activities in this smart fold-down box (no computer) room?

Response

Count

3

answered question 3


23. Please tell us about ANY classrooms that should be at the top of the list for a

conversion to a smart classroom or a "smart technology upgrade." List the building and

room number and tell us why.

Response

Count

79


skipped question 95

24. Since you do not currently teach in a smart classroom, would you use a "smart

classroom" if it was available?

Response

Percent

Response

Count

yes 87.9% 29

no 12.1% 4

Comment:

11



13 of 15


and instructional activities?

Response

Percent

Response

Count

Projector for instructional

materials (The web, Powerpoint,

etc.)

84.8% 28

Support for my laptop (docking

station)66.7% 22

Clickers (audience feedback) 48.5% 16

Document camera (for projection of

objects)48.5% 16

Web access 72.7% 24

DVD 45.5% 15

VCR 18.2% 6

BlueRay DVD 9.1% 3

None (or does not apply to me) 3.0% 1


6



14 of 15

26. For which items would you like additional training?

Response

Percent

Response

Count

Smartboard or other interactive

white board54.6% 71

smart lectern 20.0% 26

smart lectern with interactive white

board40.0% 52

smart cabinet 18.5% 24

smart box fold down (no computer) 14.6% 19

nothing at this time 33.1% 43


25


skipped question 44

27. In order to follow up on specific needs, please tell us who you are:

Response

Percent

Response

Count

Name:

100.0% 121

Department

99.2% 120

Email Address:

98.3% 119

Phone Number:

85.1% 103


skipped question 53

15 of 15

28. What is your status?

Response

Percent

Response

Count

Full time 70.8% 102

Part time 29.2% 42


skipped question 30

1 of 18

Faculty Technology Survey rev

1. How would you rate your current digital and media literacy? For the purposes of this

survey, which best describes you: Novice: Feel comfortable searching the web but do not

use computers beyond that Consumer: Find and read articles and/or blogs online; purchase

items online and/or view quality ratings of products or services; find and view videos or

photos. Content creator: Actively contribute to a blog or forum conversation; search and


online. Technologist: Create or maintain a Web site, wiki, blog or discussion forum for

people with shared interests or concerns; produce and edit videos and audio for

presentation online.

Response

Percent

Response

Count

Novice 6.7% 16

Consumer 50.2% 120

Content Creator 26.8% 64

Technologist 16.3% 39


7


skipped question 2

2 of 18

2. In your instructional area, when a new technology (hardware, software, or Web

application) becomes available, how quickly do you tend to adopt it?

Response

Percent

Response

Count

I never adopt it 1.3% 3

I adopt it after most of my

colleagues9.4% 22

I adopt it when it becomes

mainstream40.8% 95

I adopt it before most of my

colleagues32.2% 75

I'm one of the first to try it 16.3% 38


15


skipped question 8

3. Which size of class do you primarily teach? SELECT ONE

Response

Percent

Response

Count

Small (less than 20 students) 6.6% 15

Medium (20-45 students) 82.1% 188

Large (45-100 students) 10.5% 24

Very Large (over 100 students) 0.9% 2


skipped question 12

3 of 18


Response

Percent

Response

Count

On campus lecture 80.9% 178

Hybrid course (substantial online

content with limited in-person

meetings)

5.0% 11

Online course (taught exclusively

online)3.6% 8

Studio or ensemble/rehearsal 6.8% 15

Field experience, internship,

practicum, or clinic (course-based)2.3% 5

Mentoring or advising students 1.4% 3


28


skipped question 21

4 of 18

5. For the classes you teach, use the scale below to rate the extent to which each of the

following met your instructional needs.

Did not meet

my needs

Met some of

my needs

Met most/all

my needsNot applicable

Response

Count

Digital presentation technology

(e.g. computer and projector,

document camera, smart board)

9.7% (22) 33.6% (76) 47.3% (107) 9.3% (21) 226

Presentation technology (e.g.

overhead projector, white boards,

black boards)

7.1% (16) 33.2% (75) 51.8% (117) 8.0% (18) 226

Technical support 15.9% (36) 31.9% (72) 34.1% (77) 18.1% (41) 226

Consistent wireless access 13.5% (30) 38.1% (85) 34.5% (77) 13.9% (31) 223

Furniture/Flexibility of seating

arrangement21.7% (49) 38.5% (87) 33.6% (76) 6.2% (14) 226

Number and location of outlets 26.5% (60) 31.9% (72) 30.5% (69) 11.1% (25) 226

Lighting 18.2% (41) 31.6% (71) 44.9% (101) 5.3% (12) 225

Additional comments

37


skipped question 14

5 of 18

6. Beyond the physical space, please indicate ALL of the technology tools or resources you

use for instruction for your primary class type.

Response

Percent

Response

Count

Course or project web page 51.1% 116

Learning Management System (e.g.

BlackBoard)49.8% 113

Presentation applications (e.g.

Powerpoint)78.4% 178

Online social networks (e.g.

Facebook)25.1% 57

Online discussion boards 29.5% 67

Online chat or instant messaging

(e.g. Live Messenger, Gtalk)9.3% 21

Online grade book 36.1% 82

Mobile device (e.g. mobile phone,

iPad, iPod)39.2% 89

Streaming or downloadable media

(e.g. YouTube, Vimeo, podcasts)63.4% 144

Blogs or Web-based journals (e.g.

Blogger, Wordpress)16.3% 37

Library e-reserves 16.3% 37

Research databases and indexes

(e.g. ProQuest, ERIC, PubMed,

Google Scholar)

45.8% 104

e-books or other online reading

sources31.3% 71

Online surveys, quizzes, or polls 37.0% 84

Online assignment submission 44.1% 100

Videoconferencing or Web-

conferencing8.4% 19

6 of 18

Micro-blogging services (e.g.

Twitter)6.6% 15

Digital image collections (e.g.

Flickr, Library Collections)18.9% 43

Audience response system

("Clickers")11.9% 27

Simulations/educational games 17.6% 40

Collaborative Web sites and

applications (e.g. Wikis, Sharepoint,

GoogleDocs)

18.1% 41

RSS feeds or readers (e.g. Google

Reader, NetNewsWire)3.5% 8

Online portfolios 8.8% 20

Visualization technologies (e.g.

interactive graphics, virtual reality)11.0% 25

Research and citation applications

(e.g. RefWorks, Zotero, Endnote)9.3% 21

Web-based file management (e.g.

Dropbox)23.8% 54

None of these 2.2% 5

Other

21


skipped question 14

7 of 18

7. How does/will technology help you in your instruction, now and in the future (3-5) years?

Select all that apply.

Currently Future (3-5 years)Response

Count

Saves time/increase my efficiency 83.3% (174) 55.0% (115) 209

Ensures student access to course

information83.0% (181) 57.8% (126) 218

Provides lecture, overview, or

study materials83.7% (174) 56.3% (117) 208

Facilitates distribution and/or

collection of assignments74.6% (150) 63.2% (127) 201

Facilitates assessment of students’

learning62.3% (114) 67.8% (124) 183

Encourages student

participation/interaction/collaboration

during class time

62.6% (114) 64.8% (118) 182

Encourages student


outside of class time

64.1% (123) 67.2% (129) 192

Provides opportunities for students

to create materials/share

information

57.9% (110) 68.9% (131) 190

Helps students synthesize their

experiences across courses or

across curricular and extra-

curricular activities

39.0% (60) 76.6% (118) 154

Helps students develop technical

skills76.3% (142) 57.5% (107) 186

Helps students develop research

skills82.9% (160) 56.0% (108) 193

Provides students with information

about their progress and/or grade

throughout the course.

59.7% (105) 65.3% (115) 176

Facilitates submission of final

grades.75.8% (147) 58.2% (113) 194

8 of 18

Not applicable 66.7% (10) 40.0% (6) 15


14


skipped question 14

8. Which of the following web tools or technology are your students using or talking about?

Response

Percent

Response

Count

ipad/tablet 81.0% 183

iphone/smartphone (list specific

apps below)83.6% 189

Khan Academy 20.8% 47

anki ap 0.9% 2

laptop 82.3% 186

facebook 74.3% 168

google docs 48.7% 110

pintrest 13.3% 30

twitter 46.5% 105

youtube 82.3% 186

instagram 16.8% 38

linkedin 23.5% 53

skype 45.1% 102

tablet 38.1% 86

podcasts 20.8% 47

I don't know what my students are

using5.3% 12


17

9 of 18


skipped question 15

9. Think of times when you needed to learn to do something new with a technology to

support your teaching. Rate how helpful you found the following sources of support:

Never used

this resourceNot helpful

Moderately

helpfulVery helpful

Response

Count

Self (trial and error) 1.8% (4) 6.9% (15) 47.9% (104) 43.3% (94) 217

Online help or tutorial 5.1% (11) 11.5% (25) 56.7% (123) 26.7% (58) 217

Webinars 37.7% (78) 12.6% (26) 37.7% (78) 12.1% (25) 207

Online courses 38.0% (81) 11.3% (24) 29.6% (63) 21.1% (45) 213

Campus technology workshop 26.7% (56) 11.9% (25) 41.9% (88) 19.5% (41) 210

Your students 21.9% (47) 11.6% (25) 46.5% (100) 20.0% (43) 215

Colleagues 9.7% (21) 12.9% (28) 48.4% (105) 29.0% (63) 217

Friends 16.4% (35) 9.8% (21) 49.1% (105) 24.8% (53) 214

Family 23.3% (50) 19.5% (42) 37.2% (80) 20.0% (43) 215

Technical support (divsion) 22.9% (49) 17.3% (37) 42.5% (91) 17.3% (37) 214

Classroom Support Services (via

helpdesk)25.1% (53) 16.6% (35) 38.9% (82) 19.4% (41) 211


19


skipped question 23

10 of 18

10. Consider the following in terms of time, support, knowledge and availability of

technology to support your teaching:

Agree Disagree Not sureResponse

Count

I know about the types of teaching

technologies available for use at

PCC57.4% (124) 15.7% (34) 26.9% (58) 216

I know about the types of

technologies student are using

and/or need.66.5% (143) 12.6% (27) 20.9% (45) 215

I know where to go to learn the

technology I need to support my

teaching.54.8% (119) 23.5% (51) 21.7% (47) 217

I have time to learn how to use

these technology and applications.32.6% (70) 54.4% (117) 13.0% (28) 215

I have time to maintain or monitor

technology once implemented.44.2% (96) 41.5% (90) 14.3% (31) 217

I know how to use the technology

to achieve my goals.60.5% (130) 19.5% (42) 20.0% (43) 215

I get timely technical support. 34.9% (74) 38.2% (81) 26.9% (57) 212

I have personal motivation to

pursue the use of technology.86.0% (185) 6.0% (13) 7.9% (17) 215

I have concern about a technical

problem(s) affecting my teaching.51.6% (111) 36.7% (79) 11.6% (25) 215

I have time to teach students to

use the technology39.4% (85) 43.5% (94) 17.1% (37) 216

I have concern about students’

ability to access needed software

or equipment64.8% (140) 22.2% (48) 13.0% (28) 216

I have poorly functioning or

inadequate technology in my

teaching environment60.5% (130) 32.1% (69) 7.4% (16) 215

I have incentives to use

technology in teaching49.8% (107) 37.7% (81) 12.6% (27) 215

11 of 18


26


skipped question 24

11. There are several technology-related changes that PCC could pursue over the next

three years. What priority would you assign to each item?

High Priority Medium Priority Low PriorityResponse

Count

Improve wireless infrastructure

across campus74.5% (161) 20.4% (44) 5.1% (11) 216

Increase Green IT efforts (reducing

use of paper, networked printing,

etc…)42.8% (92) 38.1% (82) 19.1% (41) 215

Develop mobile applications to

support teaching and learning44.4% (95) 37.4% (80) 18.2% (39) 214

Expand the technical support

available for instruction72.8% (158) 25.8% (56) 1.4% (3) 217

Make campus spaces and

classrooms more friendly for

collaboration (e.g. add open

spaces, flexible furniture, etc.)

55.1% (119) 29.6% (64) 15.3% (33) 216

Make campus more friendly for

mobile devices and laptops (e.g.

electrical outlets)59.7% (129) 33.8% (73) 6.5% (14) 216

Provide range of professional

development activities and forums

on selecting and using technology63.1% (137) 30.4% (66) 6.5% (14) 217

Support and integrate a variety of

online tools that instructors and

students can select from for use in

courses

59.2% (126) 35.7% (76) 5.2% (11) 213

Create a demonstration classroom

to showcase new technologies43.3% (93) 33.5% (72) 23.3% (50) 215

Improve response to classroom

technical problems (e.g. funding to 62.0% (134) 31.9% (69) 6.0% (13) 216

12 of 18

hire more staff).


23


skipped question 23

12. How critical is your need for a laptop to replace your campus desktop computer?

Response

Percent

Response

Count

Would like to be in the first

group to receive one52.7% 99

I can wait for the second phase 14.9% 28

I don't have a preference 22.9% 43

I prefer to have a desktop compuer

only9.6% 18


47


skipped question 53

13 of 18


Response

Percent

Response

Count

PC Laptop 36.1% 75

Mac Laptop 38.5% 80

Tablet PC 7.2% 15

iPad 15.4% 32

Other (please specify in comments

field)2.9% 6

Comments

20


skipped question 33

14 of 18

14. On a campus provided laptop/portable device, rate the importance of the following

specifications.

High priority Medium priority Low priorityResponse

Count

light weight (for portability) 71.2% (148) 25.5% (53) 3.4% (7) 208

large screen size 49.8% (103) 40.6% (84) 9.7% (20) 207

webcam w/ integrated mic 49.3% (101) 26.3% (54) 24.4% (50) 205

large harddrive 64.3% (133) 28.5% (59) 7.2% (15) 207

lots of memory 74.0% (154) 23.6% (49) 2.4% (5) 208

variety of input ports 63.9% (133) 31.7% (66) 4.3% (9) 208

external monitor used with the

laptop34.3% (69) 32.8% (66) 32.8% (66) 201

docking station for the laptop (that

provides easy access for

peripherals and other devices)51.2% (106) 31.4% (65) 17.4% (36) 207


16


skipped question 32

15 of 18

15. For INSTRUCTIONAL purposes, indicate the types of software you need loaded on your

laptop. You can list specific software names in "other".

Response

Percent

Response

Count

Microsoft Office Suite (e.g.

Word, Excel, Powerpoint)98.1% 208

Presentation software (e.g.


Photo editing software 41.0% 87

Adobe Acrobat 86.8% 184

Statistical software (e.g. SPSS) 17.9% 38

Video editing software 39.6% 84

Screencasting software 32.1% 68

Audio editing software 29.2% 62

Web page editing software 38.7% 82


27


skipped question 29


Response

Count

115



16 of 18

17. Is there anything more we should consider regarding technology and teaching, as PCC

sets its priorities? What are your ideas for anticipating the future technological needs of

our students and faculty? Please explain.

Response

Count

102




Response

Percent

Response

Count

Full time faculty 63.3% 136

Part time faculty 36.7% 79


9


skipped question 26

17 of 18

19. What is your division/department?

Response

Percent

Response

Count


Technology6.5% 14

Community Education Center 7.4% 16

Counseling (Guidance) 3.7% 8

DSPS or Special Services 0.5% 1


English 13.5% 29

Health Science 7.0% 15

Kinesiology, Health and Althletics 2.3% 5

Languages 11.6% 25

Library 4.2% 9




Arts4.7% 10




13


skipped question 26

18 of 18

20. Provide your contact information to facilitate follow up on your comments/concerns and

to enter the drawing for an I-Pad. Name and e-mail address

Response

Percent

Response

Count

Name

100.0% 210

E-mail address

99.5% 209


skipped question 31

1 of 18

Faculty Technology Survey rev

1. How would you rate your current digital and media literacy? For the purposes of this

survey, which best describes you: Novice: Feel comfortable searching the web but do not

use computers beyond that Consumer: Find and read articles and/or blogs online; purchase

items online and/or view quality ratings of products or services; find and view videos or

photos. Content creator: Actively contribute to a blog or forum conversation; search and


online. Technologist: Create or maintain a Web site, wiki, blog or discussion forum for

people with shared interests or concerns; produce and edit videos and audio for

presentation online.

Response

Percent

Response

Count

Novice 6.7% 16

Consumer 50.2% 120

Content Creator 26.8% 64

Technologist 16.3% 39


7


skipped question 2

LATIRAPELLE

Typewritten Text

Appendix 8

2 of 18

2. In your instructional area, when a new technology (hardware, software, or Web

application) becomes available, how quickly do you tend to adopt it?

Response

Percent

Response

Count

I never adopt it 1.3% 3

I adopt it after most of my

colleagues9.4% 22

I adopt it when it becomes

mainstream40.8% 95

I adopt it before most of my

colleagues32.2% 75

I'm one of the first to try it 16.3% 38


15


skipped question 8

3. Which size of class do you primarily teach? SELECT ONE

Response

Percent

Response

Count

Small (less than 20 students) 6.6% 15

Medium (20-45 students) 82.1% 188

Large (45-100 students) 10.5% 24

Very Large (over 100 students) 0.9% 2


skipped question 12

3 of 18


Response

Percent

Response

Count

On campus lecture 80.9% 178

Hybrid course (substantial online

content with limited in-person

meetings)

5.0% 11

Online course (taught exclusively

online)3.6% 8

Studio or ensemble/rehearsal 6.8% 15

Field experience, internship,

practicum, or clinic (course-based)2.3% 5

Mentoring or advising students 1.4% 3


28


skipped question 21

4 of 18

5. For the classes you teach, use the scale below to rate the extent to which each of the

following met your instructional needs.

Did not meet

my needs

Met some of

my needs

Met most/all

my needsNot applicable

Response

Count

Digital presentation technology

(e.g. computer and projector,

document camera, smart board)

9.7% (22) 33.6% (76) 47.3% (107) 9.3% (21) 226

Presentation technology (e.g.

overhead projector, white boards,

black boards)

7.1% (16) 33.2% (75) 51.8% (117) 8.0% (18) 226

Technical support 15.9% (36) 31.9% (72) 34.1% (77) 18.1% (41) 226

Consistent wireless access 13.5% (30) 38.1% (85) 34.5% (77) 13.9% (31) 223

Furniture/Flexibility of seating

arrangement21.7% (49) 38.5% (87) 33.6% (76) 6.2% (14) 226

Number and location of outlets 26.5% (60) 31.9% (72) 30.5% (69) 11.1% (25) 226

Lighting 18.2% (41) 31.6% (71) 44.9% (101) 5.3% (12) 225

Additional comments

37


skipped question 14

5 of 18

6. Beyond the physical space, please indicate ALL of the technology tools or resources you

use for instruction for your primary class type.

Response

Percent

Response

Count

Course or project web page 51.1% 116

Learning Management System (e.g.

BlackBoard)49.8% 113

Presentation applications (e.g.


Online social networks (e.g.

Facebook)25.1% 57

Online discussion boards 29.5% 67

Online chat or instant messaging

(e.g. Live Messenger, Gtalk)9.3% 21

Online grade book 36.1% 82

Mobile device (e.g. mobile phone,

iPad, iPod)39.2% 89

Streaming or downloadable media

(e.g. YouTube, Vimeo, podcasts)63.4% 144

Blogs or Web-based journals (e.g.

Blogger, Wordpress)16.3% 37

Library e-reserves 16.3% 37

Research databases and indexes

(e.g. ProQuest, ERIC, PubMed,

Google Scholar)

45.8% 104

e-books or other online reading

sources31.3% 71

Online surveys, quizzes, or polls 37.0% 84

Online assignment submission 44.1% 100

Videoconferencing or Web-

conferencing8.4% 19

6 of 18

Micro-blogging services (e.g.

Twitter)6.6% 15

Digital image collections (e.g.

Flickr, Library Collections)18.9% 43

Audience response system

("Clickers")11.9% 27

Simulations/educational games 17.6% 40

Collaborative Web sites and

applications (e.g. Wikis, Sharepoint,

GoogleDocs)

18.1% 41

RSS feeds or readers (e.g. Google

Reader, NetNewsWire)3.5% 8

Online portfolios 8.8% 20

Visualization technologies (e.g.

interactive graphics, virtual reality)11.0% 25

Research and citation applications

(e.g. RefWorks, Zotero, Endnote)9.3% 21

Web-based file management (e.g.

Dropbox)23.8% 54

None of these 2.2% 5

Other

21


skipped question 14

7 of 18

7. How does/will technology help you in your instruction, now and in the future (3-5) years?

Select all that apply.

Currently Future (3-5 years)Response

Count

Saves time/increase my efficiency 83.3% (174) 55.0% (115) 209

Ensures student access to course

information83.0% (181) 57.8% (126) 218

Provides lecture, overview, or

study materials83.7% (174) 56.3% (117) 208

Facilitates distribution and/or

collection of assignments74.6% (150) 63.2% (127) 201

Facilitates assessment of students’

learning62.3% (114) 67.8% (124) 183

Encourages student


during class time

62.6% (114) 64.8% (118) 182

Encourages student


outside of class time

64.1% (123) 67.2% (129) 192

Provides opportunities for students

to create materials/share

information

57.9% (110) 68.9% (131) 190

Helps students synthesize their

experiences across courses or

across curricular and extra-

curricular activities

39.0% (60) 76.6% (118) 154

Helps students develop technical

skills76.3% (142) 57.5% (107) 186

Helps students develop research

skills82.9% (160) 56.0% (108) 193

Provides students with information

about their progress and/or grade

throughout the course.

59.7% (105) 65.3% (115) 176

Facilitates submission of final

grades.75.8% (147) 58.2% (113) 194