Food for Thought:Technology, Tradition and

Transformation in Higher Education

Professor José-Marie GriffithsUniversity of Michigan Chief Information Officer

Executive Director, Information Technology Division

Professor, School of Information

March, 1999

Food for Thought: A Metaphor

People Changes

• more students• new student demographics• new student lifestyles and attitudes

Technology Changes

• personal availability• distance learning availability

Technology change impacts: same time, same place

• Traditionally, higher education has operated in a “same time, same place” mode — faculty and students

at the same time in the same place.

Technology change impacts: same time, different place

• Technology can expand the scope to same time, different place — faculty in the classroom,

student who knows where?

Technology change impacts: different time, same place

• Technology can expand the scope to different time, same place —

student and faculty do not have to be in the classroom at the same time.

Technology change impacts: different time, different place

• Technology can expand the scope to different time, different place —

no restraint on either time or place.• E-mail, electronic conferencing, electronic

data transfer, etc.

Responses• more use of technology at “traditional”

universities• more outreach to communities by traditional

universities• redefinition of communities by traditional

universities

Responses

• new model for institutions of higher education

• consortia model for institutions of higher education

• for-profit, technology-based educational institutions

• corporate education efforts growing

Responses

• change in the role of faculty• change in the goals of students• new instructional

technology approaches

Responses

Need to examine what it means to change the role of faculty — issue of presence: – Physical– Electronic, not seen– Telepresence– Virtual– Simulated

What is the future for traditional colleges and universities?

• Knowledge Communities: groups of individuals with common or complementary interests who join together as they pursue common or complementary goals around the creation, enhancement, or sharing of knowledge.

Knowledge Communities

• Educational institutions are the most easily identifiable Knowledge Communities.

• Technology creates potential for Knowledge Communities where none existed before.

• Knowledge Community activities take place at various levels of expertise, sophistication and complexity.

Knowledge Communities: a spectrum of activity

• Address the desires and needs of particular student groups.

• Can assist in enhancing income and vocational opportunities.

• Provide mass higher education.• Can provide customized

learning programs.

Knowledge Communities: The Role of Virtual Universities

• Must become enculturated into what it means to think and work like a scholar or researcher.

• Must know not only the answers but how to fashion the questions that are yet to be asked in the discipline.

Research Universities:Enculturation

• looking to technology to enhance the master/apprentice experience.

• expand the opportunities available to our more traditional market — advanced placement courses in high schools; ongoing professional education.

Research Universities: Enculturation

• University of Michigan — over 25% of all undergraduates participate in research with faculty.

Research Universities: the community of scholars

• The traditional higher education experience is still desired by many.

• In 1998 University of Michigan received close to 19,000 applications for admission to a freshman class with 5,500 openings.

Research Universities: the community of scholars

• Graduates are familiar with not only the historical background of their chosen discipline but are also current with leading edge scholarship and research results.

Research Universities: students sharing in research

• Research universities have a responsibility to produce the next generation of faculty and researchers

• Students gain experience in leading-edge research techniques and methodologies.

• Students graduate with established relationships with other scholars.

Research Universities: the next generation of scholars

• Research universities can provide an institutional and physical structure in which collaboration with industry and other external partners can be facilitated and supported.

Research Universities: collaboration with external partners

• University of Michigan Strategic Alliance Program — internal federation, external “hands on” involvement.

• Opportunities for shared research and development, technical exchange, staff enrichment, deep product discounts.

Research Universities: new models for partnerships

• Innovation, discovery and creativity need a stimulating and receptive context in which to develop.

• We need industry involved in the higher education environment.

Research Universities: industry must participate

• Issues of developing instructional technology that can scale and make migration of courses to electronic delivery easier.

• Media Union - coordinated approach to instructional technology.

Research Universities: instructional technology development

• Guiding Principles

The University of Michigan Information Technology Directions

Guiding Principles for implementing information technology

Add Value Draw People Together

Add Value Draw People Together

Accessible,

Equitable

Balance

Guiding Principles for implementing information technology

Research Universities: managing our priorities

Research Universities: managing our priorities

Research Universities: managing our priorities

TRADITION

TECHNOLOGY

TRANSFORMATION

Food for Thought:

Professor José-Marie GriffithsUniversity of Michigan Chief Information Officer

Executive Director, Information Technology DivisionProfessor, School of Information

E-mail: jmgriff@umich.eduCIO Web Site: http://www.cio.umich.edu

5085 Fleming Administration BuildingUniversity of Michigan

Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109U.S.A.