******************************************************************************* RECOMMENDED ACTION OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Information only.

SOUTH DAKOTA BOARD OF REGENTS

Full Board

AGENDA ITEM: 17

DATE: May 15-16, 2013 ******************************************************************************* SUBJECT: 2012 Mobile Computing Survey Report This report presents data and interpretation with respect to the 2012 administration of the Mobile Computing Survey, a questionnaire-based study conducted by SDBOR during the Fall 2012 semester. The attached Executive Summary (Attachment I) reviews the broad findings of this survey effort, and the Full Report (Attachment II) provides a detailed examination of the complete study, including a discussion of method, data, and findings. This report marks the third annual administration of the Mobile Computing Survey. In light of growing evidence of students’ and faculty members’ broad support for mobile computing technologies, this survey project is implemented to be phased out next year subject to the Board’s agreement, and will be replaced with an alternative monitoring approach.

ATTACHMENT I 2

Executive Summary

In 2009, the South Dakota Board of Regents approved a new student technology fee of $6.00 per semester, established for the purpose of supporting a number of infrastructure and integration needs associated with the system’s new mobile computing initiative. In general, this initiative pursues two related objectives: 1) comprehensive expansion of technology infrastructure, including wireless computing networks, personal computers, and classroom hardware, and 2) broader integration of technology resources in pedagogical applications. The new technology fees established by SDBOR were intended to facilitate these objectives by underwriting the costs of equipment, software, and support staff arising from implementation and maintenance of the program.

One element of the initiative’s system-wide implementation plan is the periodic deployment of an evaluative campus survey. Developed by SDBOR staff, the Mobile Computing Survey is intended to serve as a tool for assessing the views of campus stakeholders (students and faculty) with respect to the general state of technology integration in the state’s Regental institutions. This annual web-based questionnaire was deployed for the third time during September-October of 2012 via Qualtrics, an online survey research platform. Altogether, usable responses were collected from 2,338 students and 376 faculty members.1

As described in the main report (Attachment II), analysis of survey data produced a number of key observations: Overall, 99.9% of the student sample reported ownership/assignment of at least one personal

computer, the majority of which are Windows-based devices. Of students with at least one portable computer, more than half (65.7%) regularly take it to class; this represents a dramatic two-year jump (i.e., from 43.9% in 2010).

Students continue to lack awareness of campuses’ mobile computing initiatives. Almost half

(45.2%) of students reported being completely unaware of any singular development program. Faculty members were much less likely (10.4%) to report no knowledge of campuses’ mobile computing efforts.

Classroom accommodations are a concern to campus stakeholders. Asked to rate their campuses

on a series of computing quality measures, both students and faculty gave comparatively low marks for access to power and classroom desk space for laptops.

Positive appraisals tended to greatly exceed negative ones with regard to the general

consequences of enhanced mobile computing resources. The creation of mobile computing environments at Regental institutions was seen by participants to facilitate improved access to course materials, expanded use of multimedia and interactive resources, and improved student learning. Data suggest that students tend to be slightly more positive in their general impressions of mobile computing programs than do faculty members.

Students report that faculty use mobile computing technology to support a variety of

pedagogical processes. Delivering course information, interactive tutorials and self-tests, and group assignments and projects were identified by students as the leading ways by which mobile computing has been integrated into instruction.

1 Gross yields of 3,281 student responses and 473 faculty responses were recorded. A total of 943 student records and 97 faculty records were filtered from the dataset due to persistent item nonresponse or rigid response. Screened records included self-identified distance-only students/faculty (who were not eligible to submit a survey). Overall, student and faculty samples produced generalized margins of error of ± 2.0 and ± 4.3, respectively (at the 95% confidence level).

ATTACHMENT I 3 Both students and faculty support the use of new instructional technologies. Overall, 93.7% of

students and 90.8% of faculty indicated feeling that classroom technologies “are used at about the right amount at my university” or “need to be used more at my university.” As reported by survey participants, the most frequently used instructional technologies in the Regental system are automated grading features, learning management software, and electronic projections systems. When asked about the extent to which student learning is affected by the increased use of classroom technologies, more than 6 in 10 respondents indicated that such technologies “usually lead to improved student learning.” Only 1 in 10 respondents indicated that the increased use of classroom technologies “usually impedes student learning.”

Several models of technology training hold interest for faculty members. Spending one-on-one

time with instructional design staff, pursuing independent experimentation, and consulting with departmental colleagues were identified by more than half of faculty respondents as being “quite helpful” or “extremely helpful.”

Many of the above findings harmonize with national trends. For example, the notion that students view the expanded use of classroom technologies as vital to academic success and career preparation also is asserted by the EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research (ECAR) “2012 Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology.”2 The ECAR survey further notes – similar to the current study – that students are increasingly likely to: own their own mobile computing devices, affirm the value of diverse instructional technologies, and recognize instructors’ efforts to introduce new technologies into the classroom. These observations affirm that South Dakota is not alone in its move toward greater campus technology integration.

The remainder of this report provides an analytical and interpretive exploration of the data collected

through the above surveying effort. After a concise presentation of demographic data describing the survey sample, the report will move to a detailed examination of substantive findings. The report is organized along four main areas of interest: 1) personal use of technology resources, 2) general impressions of mobile computing, 3) appraisals of instructional technology integration, and 4) faculty preferences for technology training. Subsequently, Appendix A (students) and Appendix B (faculty) provide an assortment of supplemental reference tables. Campus wireless maps – where available – are presented in Appendix C. Finally, Appendix D gives – for each campus – revenue and expenditure details for FY2010 through FY2012 with respect to student technology fees.

2 Several Regental institutions (NSU, SDSU, and USD) participated in the 2012 administration of the ECAR study. A summary of this study is available at http://www.educause.edu/library/resources/ecar-study-undergraduate-students-and-information-technology-2012

ATTACHMENT II 4

Full Report

Two versions of the Mobile Computing Survey were administered in 2012: a student form and a faculty form.3 These surveys were roughly parallel, although faculty respondents were asked an additional sequence of questions (beyond those asked of students) regarding their preferred methods of technology training. Respondent Characteristics

This section provides data tables that describe the demographic and institutional characteristics of the study’s participant sample.4 These tables are provided as a general reference, and therefore are not given substantial annotation. Additionally, several of the group characteristics presented in these tables will serve as bases for cross-tabulations used throughout the remainder of the survey report.

3 Participation by students and faculty members was solicited through campus-wide email distributions coordinated by campus provosts. These invitation emails contained a hyperlink to the appropriate version (faculty form or student form) of the online survey instrument. Reminder messages were sent out one week following the distribution of the invitation emails. Survey hosting services were provided by Qualtrics, a web-based research platform. 4 In all tables, integer totals may not add to 2,338 (students) or 376 (faculty) due to item nonresponse; percentage column totals may not add to 100.0% due to rounding. Full response distributions for most survey items are given in Appendix A (students) and Appendix B (faculty).

Student Participation n N % n % N

BHSU 175 4,407 8.9% 4.0%DSU 220 3,110 11.1% 7.1%NSU 143 3,622 7.2% 3.9%SDSMT 207 2,424 10.5% 8.5%SDSU 572 12,583 29.0% 4.5%USD 657 10,284 33.3% 6.4%

(Tot.) 1,974 36,430 100.0% 5.7%

Faculty Participation n N % n % N

BHSU 59 140 16.7% 42.1%DSU 56 97 15.9% 57.7%NSU 28 92 7.9% 30.4%SDSMT 67 142 19.0% 47.2%SDSU 78 596 22.1% 13.1%USD 65 429 18.4% 15.2%

(Tot.) 353 1,496 100.0% 34.3%

Table 1Survey Participation Rates

ATTACHMENT II 5

Group n % Group n %Total Participants - 2,338 100.0% - 376 100.0%

By Gender Male 780 39.6% " 192 57.7%Female 1,190 60.4% " 141 42.3%

By Age <19 528 28.6% 20s 13 5.2%19-20 583 31.5% 30s 60 23.9%21-22 332 18.0% 40s 55 21.9%23-24 129 7.0% 50s 82 32.7%

25+ 276 14.9% 60s+ 41 16.3%

By Location Main Campus 1,907 96.9% " 327 95.6%UC - SF 19 1.0% " 4 1.2%UC - RC 18 0.9% " 3 0.9%

CUC 0 0.0% " 0 0.0%Distance 23 1.2% " 8 2.3%

By Course Type (Avg.) Traditional - 79.9% " - 77.6%Hybrid - 11.7% " - 13.6%

Dist./Online - 8.8% " - 9.3%

By Grade Level Freshman 765 38.8% - - - Sophomore 337 17.1% - - -

Junior 313 15.9% - - - Senior 342 17.4% - - -

Grad Student 214 10.9% - - -

By Enrollment Status FT 1,873 94.9% - - - PT 100 5.1% - - -

By Tenure Status - - - Term 69 20.7%- - - Ten-Track 84 25.1%

Tenured 155 46.4%- - - Non-Term, non-Ten 26 7.8%

By Rank - - - TA 4 1.2%- - - Adjunct 13 3.9%- - - Instructor 53 16.1%- - - Asst Prof 77 23.3%- - - Assoc Prof 79 23.9%- - - Full Prof 95 28.8%- - - Other 9 2.7%

Table 2Demographic Characteristics

Students Faculty

ATTACHMENT II 6 Personal Use of Technology Resources

The first substantive section of the Mobile Computing Survey asked participants to report on their personal computing resources and habits. Overall, 99.9% of students and 100.0% of faculty members reported either owning or having been assigned at least one personal computer. Further, 45.8% of students and 71.0% of faculty reported having multiple personal computers. Multiple computer usage was highest at SDSMT (57.5%) and NSU (51.8%) for students and at USD (78.5%) and SDSMT (74.6%) for faculty.

Table 3 (below) indicates that among both respondent groups, laptop computers are the leading personal computer type.5 About 9 in 10 students (90.9%) reported using a laptop for school work, while 74.2% of faculty indicated using a laptop for teaching-related activities.6 Tablet computers appear to be the least popular computer type among both groups. However, reports of tablet ownership were up somewhat from 2011 to 2012 among both students (20.8% to 24.9%) and faculty (38.2% to 45.7%). Finally, Windows-based devices are dominant among all three computer types, particularly desktops and laptops.

5 ECAR (2012) reports that laptop computers are – by a large margin – the dominant personal computing device among US college students. 6 These results vary somewhat by campus. SDSMT and DSU, which operate formal tablet PC programs, show tablet rates in excess of 50.0%.

Students (n=2,338)

% Owned System "Share" % Owned % AssignedDesktop 36.7% Windows 84.4% 53.6% 46.4%

Apple 10.8% 50.5% 49.5%Unix-based 4.8% 85.7% 14.3%

Laptop 90.9% Windows 75.0% 91.9% 8.1%Apple 22.4% 95.6% 4.4%Unix-based 2.7% 76.8% 23.2%

Tablet 24.9% Windows 57.7% 14.1% 85.9%Apple 27.5% 93.4% 6.6%Unix-based 14.9% 84.6% 15.4%

Faculty (n=376)

System "Share" % Owned % AssignedDesktop 72.6% Windows 80.2% 20.6% 79.4%

Apple 14.2% 48.8% 51.2%Unix-based 5.6% 35.3% 64.7%

Laptop 74.2% Windows 68.9% 34.0% 66.0%Apple 27.5% 46.4% 53.6%Unix-based 3.6% 63.6% 36.4%

Tablet 45.7% Windows 57.6% 12.6% 87.4%Apple 36.4% 76.1% 23.9%Unix-based 6.0% 63.6% 36.4%

Table 3Devices Used for School-Related Purposes

ATTACHMENT II 7 Students were asked to report whether or not they routinely take a portable computer to class, and Table 4 (below) shows data collected from this item. It appears that the proportion of students who regularly take a computer to class has climbed somewhat since last year, and now stands at 65.7%. Analogous rates were highest among students at DSU and SDSMT (97.3% and 91.7%, respectively).

Student respondents also reported feeling greater pressure from faculty to bring computers to class. Table 5 shows that the percentage of students who reported having “any faculty this semester who require that you bring a laptop/tablet to each class period” ticked up from 30.9% in 2011 to 31.8% in 2012. This figure varied dramatically by institution, and was higher at DSU (88.2%) than at any other institution, and also tended to be higher among underclassmen students. A total of 36.6% of faculty members reported “ever requiring that students bring a laptop/tablet to each class [this semester],” including a system-high of 82.1% at DSU.

Combining information from the above two survey items, it was found – not surprisingly – that students who are required to bring a computer to class do so with dramatically more frequency than students for whom the decision is optional. Just over half (54.2%) of students reporting no in-class computer requirement indicated taking a computer to class regularly.

2011 2012Yes 61.2% 65.7%No, because I choose not to… 34.8% 31.2%No, because I do not own one… 1.4% 1.3%No, b/c faculty does not allow… 2.6% 1.8%

(Tot.) 100% (n=2,783)

100% (n=2,287)

Table 4Students: Routinely Take Portable Computer to Class

2011 2012Yes 30.9% 31.8%No 69.1% 68.2%

100.0% (n=2,912)

100.0% (n=2,337)

2011 2012Yes 27.9% 36.6%No 72.1% 63.4%

100.0% (n=498)

100.0% (n=374)

Students

Faculty

Table 5Students Required to Bring Computer to Class

ATTACHMENT II 8 General Impressions of Mobile Computing

Participants were asked to respond to a series of items related to their impressions of the costs and benefits of mobile computing. As a preface, one item directly asked participants to consider the following question: “To what extent are you familiar with the mobile computing program currently underway on your campus?” System-wide output for this item is reported below.

Statewide, it appears that students continue to lack awareness of any overarching mobile computing initiative. A plurality (45.2%) of student respondents in 2012 indicated being completely unaware of any singular technology development program, though this figure has fallen considerably from the initial measurement of 52.9% (2010). Faculty members, on the other hand, appear to be much more familiar with the mobile computing initiative, with only 10.4% indicating no familiarity whatsoever.

Students from SDSU (61.7%), USD (50.8%), and BHSU (48.9%) were more likely to report no awareness of their institution’s mobile computing initiative, while students from NSU (25.2%), SDSMT (18.8%), and DSU (12.3%) less commonly reported no awareness. Among faculty members, awareness levels were highest at DSU (1.8% not aware) and NSU (3.6% not aware).

2011 2012Not at all aware 47.8% 45.2%Somewhat aware 39.7% 43.4%Fully Aware 12.6% 11.4%

100.0% (n=2,925)

100.0% (n=2,337)

2011 2012Not at all aware 11.7% 10.4%Somewhat aware 55.0% 57.2%Fully Aware 33.3% 32.4%

100.0% (n=498)

100.0% (n=374)

Faculty

Table 6Awareness of Mobile Computing Program

Students

ATTACHMENT II 9

The next series of items asked respondents to assess the quality of mobile computing capacity on Regental campuses. Table 7 summarizes output from this series of items in weighted mean format.7 For each rated item, the institution generating the highest weighted mean (which in all cases was DSU) is shaded in grey.8

It can be seen that both students and faculty tended to give relatively low marks for the two classroom accessibility items (classroom desk/table space for laptops and classroom access to power source). For both respondent groups, these items generated weighted means either near or below the scale midpoint, indicating a nearly equal magnitude of favorable and unfavorable sentiment. These items generated system-wide median responses of Md=3 (or “fair”). Both BHSU and SDSU received particularly low ratings on one or both of these items.

In contrast, both students and faculty appear to hold wireless coverage on campus and technical support services in moderately high esteem. System-wide, the median response on these two items was Md=4 (or “good”). Finally, the system-wide weighted means for both respondent groups were higher in 2012 than in 2011 for all survey items, suggesting a more positive view of campus services.

7 Weighted means are based on response distributions, and may range from 1.00 (worst) to 5.00 (best). Although averaging techniques offer imperfect summarizations of ordinal data, this method nonetheless provides a quick and parsimonious indicator of distributional patterns. 8 Full response distributions for these items are given in Appendices A (students) and B (faculty).

Students

BHSU DSU NSU SDSMT SDSU USDTotal

(2011)Total

(2012)Wireless coverage on campus 3.43 4.33 3.59 3.48 3.20 3.75 3.47 3.57Quality of wireless network on campus 3.13 4.05 3.10 2.85 2.74 3.47 na 3.19Reliability of wireless network on campus 3.04 4.05 3.30 2.68 2.77 3.43 na 3.18Classroom desk/table space for laptops 2.79 4.19 3.20 3.15 2.74 3.08 3.02 3.10Classroom access to power source 2.42 3.80 3.13 2.50 2.39 2.84 2.68 2.77Technical support services 3.26 4.09 3.69 3.86 3.39 3.51 3.51 3.56

n 175 220 143 207 572 657 2,585 1,974

Faculty

BHSU DSU NSU SDSMT SDSU USDTotal

(2011)Total

(2012)Wireless coverage on campus 3.51 4.39 4.04 3.65 3.48 3.66 3.45 3.73Quality of wireless network on campus 3.42 4.23 3.93 3.56 3.44 3.60 na 3.65Reliability of wireless network on campus 3.36 4.07 3.52 3.59 3.35 3.54 na 3.55Classroom desk/table space for laptops 3.14 4.16 2.85 3.43 2.93 3.28 3.23 3.30Classroom access to power source 2.29 3.73 2.63 2.71 2.55 2.66 2.74 2.74Technical support services 3.19 4.04 3.86 3.71 3.54 3.65 3.55 3.62

n 59 56 28 67 78 65 463 353** Note: Response scale: 1= Very Poor, 2=Poor, 3=Fair, 4=Good, 5=Very Good

Table 7Ratings of Campus Services & Accessibility

ATTACHMENT II 10

Both students and faculty were asked to assess the consequences of their newly-created mobile computing environments. Specifically, participants were given an opportunity to rate the extent to which the creation of mobile computing environments has influenced a variety of pedagogies. Results for this series of ratings are given in Table 8.9

In exploring this table, several observations are worth noting. First, data suggest that stakeholder impressions of the mobile computing project are slightly to moderately favorable. The statement related to improved student learning, which is perhaps of chief importance among these items, elicited 57.8% agreement from students (compared to only 9.7% disagreement) and 52.3% agreement from faculty (with 14.5% in disagreement). Comparable response distributions were generated for most items in this matrix. (Note that several items in this matrix used negative phrasing; for these items, low agreement indicates positive valence.)

Second, it appears that faculty members tend to be slightly less optimistic about the positive effects of

mobile computing programs than are students. Returning to the example of improved student learning, students in the 2012 sample generated an agreement proportion of 57.8% while faculty generated an analogous value of 52.3%. A similarly small but consistent gap can be seen in many items in this sequence, including those related to use of multimedia materials, easier student learning, and meeting students’ needs and demands. The net effect of these disparities suggests that faculty may see less utility (either potential or realized) in mobile computing programs than do students.

Another key finding from the above table is that both participant groups trended upward from 2011 to 2012. Comparing data from 2011 and 2012, it can be seen that 2012 figures tend to be more favorable (as indicated by blue shading). On such items as easier student learning, improved student learning, and increased student collaboration, both groups were more likely to offer positive appraisals in 2012 than in 2011.

9 Full response distributions for these items are given in Appendices A (students) and B (faculty).

2011 2012 2011 2012Improved student access to course materials 74.0% 75.5% 73.4% 77.5%Expanded the use of multimedia materials 59.3% 62.9% 51.6% 54.6%Met students' needs and demands 56.6% 60.2% 49.4% 55.4%Facilitated easier student learning 54.4% 58.9% 51.0% 54.8%Improved student learning 54.7% 57.8% 50.0% 52.3%Started to change the way faculty teach 54.2% 55.6% 53.0% 55.5%Increased student collaboration 54.8% 55.2% 49.3% 54.4%Increased the use of simulations and interactives 48.0% 52.8% 31.3% 38.3%Created a more interactive classroom 48.0% 49.4% 43.9% 49.3%Led to improved technical support 39.7% 40.4% 31.1% 30.9%Caused major disruptions † 18.5% 22.6% 20.1% 28.5%Decreased student-faculty interaction 18.8% 17.9% 13.1% 16.4%Increased faculty resistance 14.3% 14.8% 9.5% 10.5%Negatively impacted students' classroom experiences 10.5% 9.6% 12.6% 13.9%Improved course preparation efficiency na na 48.6% 50.5%

n 2,928 2,338 500 376** Note: Response scale: 1= Strongly Disagree, 2=Disagree, 3=Neither, 4=Agree, 5=Strongly Agree

Students Faculty

Table 8Perceptions of Mobile Computing Consequences (Percent "Agree" or "Strongly Agree")

† Item wording changed in 2012 from "disruptions in a number of my classes" to "disruptions in at least one of my classes."

ATTACHMENT II 11 Appraisals of Instructional Technology Integration

An important line of questioning pursued by the Mobile Computing Survey centered on user evaluations of the specific technological resources deployed on Regental campuses. Accordingly, survey respondents were presented two distinct item sequences: 1) one that asked them to gauge the extent to which faculty employ mobile computing capacity to facilitate various pedagogical techniques, and 2) one that asked them to rate faculty members’ use of particular technological devices in support of the student learning process. Results from the first sequence are shown in Table 9.10

10 Full response distributions for these items are given in Appendices A (students) and B (faculty).

Students

BHSU DSU NSU SDSMT SDSU USDTotal

(2011)Total

(2012)Delivering course information 3.70 4.11 3.88 3.80 3.60 3.94 3.73 3.78Interactive tutorials and self-tests 3.17 3.71 3.46 3.14 3.18 3.36 3.26 3.30Group assignments and projects 3.12 3.62 3.28 3.30 3.00 3.13 3.14 3.16Problem solving / critical thinking 3.01 3.53 3.08 3.09 2.80 3.06 2.99 3.04Collaborative learning 2.89 3.47 3.09 3.07 2.85 3.06 3.03 3.03Student presentations 3.08 3.61 3.12 2.95 2.65 2.95 2.94 2.96Student-student discussions 2.79 3.32 3.24 2.62 2.79 2.89 2.92 2.90Hands-on practicum or lab work 2.65 3.44 2.81 3.08 2.60 2.77 2.80 2.83Case studies 2.72 3.11 2.73 2.52 2.56 2.75 2.76 2.71Peer review of student assignments 2.53 3.08 2.83 2.39 2.45 2.75 2.64 2.66Games and simulations 2.44 3.27 2.45 2.41 2.45 2.61 2.55 2.60

n 175 220 143 207 572 657 2,585 1,974

Faculty

BHSU DSU NSU SDSMT SDSU USDTotal

(2011)Total

(2012)Delivering course information 3.69 4.63 3.86 3.43 3.88 3.97 3.80 3.90Problem solving / critical thinking 3.02 3.57 3.18 2.88 3.06 2.98 2.86 3.08Group assignments and projects 3.07 3.30 2.68 2.86 2.64 2.79 2.77 2.88Collaborative learning 2.93 3.27 2.75 2.60 2.77 2.72 2.75 2.81Student presentations 2.90 3.14 3.04 2.66 2.55 2.70 2.55 2.79Interactive tutorials and self-tests 2.66 3.45 2.39 2.41 2.47 2.71 2.64 2.69Hands-on practicum or lab work 2.72 3.39 2.14 2.72 2.44 2.32 2.27 2.64Student-student discussions 2.72 2.93 2.57 2.14 2.51 2.56 2.50 2.54Case studies 2.03 2.82 2.07 2.09 2.47 2.26 2.28 2.31Games and simulations 2.16 2.79 2.04 1.78 2.05 2.13 2.05 2.16Peer review of student assignments 2.26 2.55 2.36 1.86 1.99 2.19 1.97 2.15

n 59 56 28 67 78 65 463 353

** Note: Response scale: 1= Never, 2=Seldom 3=Sometimes, 4=Often, 5=Always

Table 9Teaching Strategies Supported by Mobile Computing

ATTACHMENT II 12

Table 9 (above) suggests a good deal of overlap in the ratings of students and faculty. Delivering course information was the highest-rated approach for each group, with group projects and assignments, collaborative learning, and problem solving or critical thinking activities appearing in the top five of each list. Further, games and simulations and peer review of student assignments rounded out the bottom two on each list. In both groups, DSU participants produced the highest weighted means on all items.

Data suggest that students recognized nearly all of the methods presented in this sequence as at least occasional components of faculty’s attempts to integrate mobile computing in the classroom. 89.5% of students said that delivering course content was part of their instructors’ technology-based pedagogy at least “sometimes,” with most other approaches attracting an analogous proportion in the 70s, 60s, or 50s (%). In fact, no strategy was more frequently labeled with “never” or “seldom” (combined) than with “sometimes,” “often,” or “almost always” (combined). However, weighted means tended toward the center-left of the distribution for these items – particularly for the faculty group – implying that the integration of mobile computing with these instructional techniques is not yet robust.

The next item sequence stepped away from mobile computing to ask about other devices,

applications, and resources used in regental classrooms. Results for this sequence are provided in Table 10 for both samples.11 As in the previous sequence, similarities are evident between students and faculty with respect to the relative standing of items in the series. Learning management software, electronic projection systems, automated grading features, and open source data repositories were rated highest by both samples. At the bottom end of the list, the samples also identified many of the same least-used tools: concept-mapping software, classroom management software, and Elluminate web conferencing. DSU tended to generate the highest weighted mean values across both samples.

Data suggest considerable separation between high-use and low-use technologies. For

example, 89.2% of students and 74.2% of faculty reported the use of learning management software at least “sometimes.” At the same time, only 27.8% of students and 18.9% of faculty reported the use of Elluminate web conferencing at least “sometimes.” It is important to note, however, that infrequent use of particular classroom technologies should not necessarily be understood as problematic. In reality, all courses are not equally amenable to the use of certain tools, and expectations for response distributions should reflect this reality. Indeed, one might argue that the most-used classroom technologies (as reported by respondents) are also among those that are the most agnostic to course content. More specialized tools, such as Elluminate web conferencing, simulations and applets, and concept-mapping software, appear further down the ranked list.

11 Full response distributions for these items are given in Appendices A (students) and B (faculty).

ATTACHMENT II 13

Students

BHSU DSU NSU SDSMT SDSU USDTotal

(2011)Total

(2012)Automated grading features 3.86 4.24 3.91 3.48 4.14 4.13 3.94 4.03Electronic projections systems † 4.10 4.23 3.69 3.84 4.01 4.07 3.60 4.02Learning management software 3.91 4.18 3.84 3.33 3.99 4.08 3.82 3.94Open source data repositories 2.74 3.22 2.90 2.75 2.66 2.95 2.75 2.85Interactive whiteboards 2.15 2.43 2.85 1.92 2.34 2.97 2.46 2.54Tablet computer features 1.87 3.68 2.26 3.18 2.24 2.39 2.46 2.52Handheld devices 2.25 2.29 2.18 1.83 2.80 2.68 2.34 2.51Open-source resources ‡ 2.33 3.04 2.50 2.25 2.34 2.40 2.36 2.45Sims, interactive animations, applets 2.26 2.93 2.41 2.26 2.38 2.46 2.39 2.45Lecture casting 2.05 2.87 2.33 2.06 2.28 2.51 2.37 2.38Concept-mapping software 2.02 2.79 2.24 2.23 2.27 2.37 2.29 2.34Simultaneous collaborative editing software 2.13 2.68 2.19 1.96 2.09 2.43 2.14 2.27Classroom management software 1.77 2.37 2.28 2.11 2.05 2.18 2.14 2.13Elluminate web conferencing 1.58 2.13 2.03 1.60 1.78 1.93 1.89 1.86

n 175 220 143 207 572 657 2,585 1,974

Faculty

BHSU DSU NSU SDSMT SDSU USDTotal

(2011)Total

(2012)Electronic projections systems † 4.14 4.44 4.21 4.08 4.23 4.42 2.88 4.24Learning management software 3.55 4.52 3.75 2.61 4.03 3.89 3.62 3.69Automated grading features 3.14 4.21 3.75 2.06 3.32 3.38 3.31 3.22Open source data repositories 2.37 2.91 2.75 2.38 2.27 2.63 2.42 2.52Open-source resources ‡ 2.46 2.73 2.48 1.98 2.06 2.12 2.03 2.25Sims, interactive animations, applets 2.19 2.61 1.93 1.98 2.01 1.97 1.97 2.12Tablet computer features 1.69 3.23 1.56 2.30 1.67 1.68 1.80 2.02Lecture casting 1.86 2.95 2.04 1.64 1.76 2.00 1.94 2.00Simultaneous collaborative editing software 2.07 2.46 1.61 1.55 1.55 2.00 1.74 1.86Interactive whiteboards 1.85 1.91 1.82 1.74 1.55 1.98 1.84 1.79Handheld devices 1.83 2.18 1.61 1.27 1.96 1.71 1.72 1.76Elluminate web conferencing 1.47 2.23 1.46 1.33 1.49 1.88 1.66 1.64Concept-mapping software 1.62 2.11 1.46 1.47 1.59 1.43 1.51 1.61Classroom management software 1.26 1.95 1.32 1.30 1.42 1.42 1.34 1.45

n 59 56 28 67 78 65 463 353** Note: Response scale: 1= Never, 2=Seldom 3=Sometimes, 4=Often, 5=Always† Item wording changed in 2012 from "wireless projection systems" to "electronic projections systems"‡ Item wording changed in 2012 from "open access portals" to "open-source resources"

Table 10Use of Instructional Technologies

ATTACHMENT II 14

Figure 2 gives further clarity to the global views of students and faculty on the rise of classroom technology use. Overall, 93.7% of students and 90.8% of faculty indicated feeling that classroom technologies “are used at about the right amount at my university” or “need to be used more at my university.” The response distribution for this item was stable across institutions within the student sample, but the faculty sample showed a somewhat greater tendency toward “need to be used less at my university” among respondents from NSU. For both samples, “right amount” or “more” responses were nearly unanimous among respondents who previously had agreed that the Regental mobile computing initiative has had a positive impact on student learning.

Figure 3 depicts responses received for the item asking respondents to generalize about the extent to which student learning is affected by the increased use of classroom technologies. By large margins, respondents tended to affirm the positive role played by classroom technologies. More than six in ten members of each sample (act. 64.4% of students, 61.3% of faculty) indicated that, “generally speaking, the increased use of classroom technologies usually leads to improved student learning.”

ATTACHMENT II 15 Technology Training

The faculty instrument concluded with a short series of items related to technology training methods.12 Respondents were presented with a brief sequence of training techniques, and were asked to rate each (using a five-point scale) on its potential usefulness in fostering the integration of mobile computing in classrooms. Output for this sequence is provided Table 11.13

Faculty identified several methods as offering particular usefulness. Summing response proportions from the “quite helpful” and “extremely helpful” columns, values of 50.0% or greater were recorded for several techniques: one-on-one with instructional design staff or tech fellow (61.6%), experimenting on my own (60.4%), and consultation with departmental colleagues (55.2%). A comparison of weighted means shows that while most values dipped slightly in 2012, training options were ranked in a similar order as in 2011. Institutional cross-tabulations suggest that faculty across the Regental system tend to have similar views of these techniques. 12 This series of items was not included on the student survey form. 13 Full response distributions for these items are given in Appendices A (students) and B (faculty).

Faculty

BHSU DSU NSU SDSMT SDSU USDTotal

(2011)Total

(2012)One-on-one time with instructional design staff or tech fellow 4.05 3.57 3.93 3.17 3.95 3.70 3.82 3.70Experimenting on my own 3.54 4.02 3.79 3.52 3.69 3.72 3.63 3.69Consultation with departmental colleagues 3.63 3.59 3.71 3.23 3.58 3.46 3.46 3.50Face-to-face tech workshops provided by my university 3.58 3.56 3.21 2.98 3.53 3.48 3.50 3.40Using online tutorials and resources 3.19 3.55 2.93 3.08 3.36 3.14 3.23 3.23Viewing technical handouts such as MS Word and PDF documents 2.80 3.27 2.59 2.78 3.09 3.05 2.96 2.95Face-to-face tech workshops provided by external organizations 3.10 3.21 2.58 2.94 2.99 2.66 2.98 2.94Train-the-trainer model 2.81 3.05 2.81 2.65 2.82 2.77 2.86 2.82Taking online technology classes 2.90 3.14 2.54 2.47 2.92 2.49 2.84 2.75

n 59 56 28 67 78 65 463 353

** Note: Response scale: 1= Not helpful at all, 2=Barely helpful, 3=Somewhat helpful, 4=Quite helpful, 5=Extremely helpful

Table 11Technology Training Preferences

ATTACHMENT II 16

Appendix A – Supplemental Tables: Student Data by Institution

Total 1,974 100.00 USD 657 33.28 100.00 SDSU 572 28.98 66.72 SDSMT 207 10.49 37.74 NSU 143 7.24 27.25 DSU 220 11.14 20.01 BHSU 175 8.87 8.87 Inst Freq. Percent Cum.

Total 66.15 33.85 100.00 USD 60.56 39.44 100.00 SDSU 57.99 42.01 100.00 SDSMT 91.71 8.29 100.00 NSU 71.53 28.47 100.00 DSU 97.26 2.74 100.00 BHSU 38.32 61.68 100.00 Inst Yes No Total Take PC to Class

Total 33.03 66.97 100.00 USD 19.33 80.67 100.00 SDSU 24.30 75.70 100.00 SDSMT 58.45 41.55 100.00 NSU 43.36 56.64 100.00 DSU 88.18 11.82 100.00 BHSU 5.14 94.86 100.00 Inst Yes No Total PC Required in Class

ATTACHMENT II 17

Total 44.30 44.04 11.66 100.00 USD 50.84 44.14 5.02 100.00 SDSU 61.71 34.09 4.20 100.00 SDSMT 18.84 53.62 27.54 100.00 NSU 25.17 59.44 15.38 100.00 DSU 12.27 50.45 37.27 100.00 BHSU 48.85 44.25 6.90 100.00 Inst None Some Full Total Awareness of Mob. Comp.

Total 6.11 72.51 21.38 100.00 USD 5.35 71.56 23.09 100.00 SDSU 8.44 71.35 20.21 100.00 SDSMT 5.34 70.39 24.27 100.00 NSU 6.29 76.22 17.48 100.00 DSU 4.11 82.65 13.24 100.00 BHSU 4.62 66.47 28.90 100.00 Inst Need Less No Change Need More Total Use of Classroom Technology

Total 9.68 25.49 64.83 100.00 USD 8.88 22.59 68.54 100.00 SDSU 12.12 28.75 59.13 100.00 SDSMT 7.61 25.89 66.50 100.00 NSU 10.49 32.17 57.34 100.00 DSU 7.31 21.46 71.23 100.00 BHSU 9.52 25.00 65.48 100.00 Inst Impedes No Effect Improves Total on Learning Effect of Classroom Technology

Total 2.51 5.64 32.21 41.44 18.21 100.00 USD 2.30 4.60 27.30 43.87 21.93 100.00 SDSU 3.60 6.65 47.84 32.37 9.53 100.00 SDSMT 1.93 5.31 19.32 49.28 24.15 100.00 NSU 2.11 8.45 33.80 45.07 10.56 100.00 DSU 1.37 4.57 17.81 44.75 31.51 100.00 BHSU 2.30 5.75 32.76 44.83 14.37 100.00 Inst Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Total Easier Learning

ATTACHMENT II 18

Total 15.54 35.49 31.59 13.79 3.59 100.00 USD 19.17 36.20 26.23 14.57 3.83 100.00 SDSU 9.75 27.26 45.67 12.82 4.51 100.00 SDSMT 18.36 41.55 28.02 8.70 3.38 100.00 NSU 16.08 35.66 28.67 17.48 2.10 100.00 DSU 21.00 38.81 23.74 13.24 3.20 100.00 BHSU 9.71 47.43 23.43 17.71 1.71 100.00 Inst Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Total Decreased Student-Faculty Communication

Total 2.56 7.79 33.73 41.93 13.99 100.00 USD 2.45 9.05 29.91 44.02 14.57 100.00 SDSU 3.78 8.47 43.96 35.32 8.47 100.00 SDSMT 0.97 5.31 30.92 44.44 18.36 100.00 NSU 2.10 5.59 37.06 46.15 9.09 100.00 DSU 0.91 3.65 24.66 45.66 25.11 100.00 BHSU 3.43 10.86 27.43 44.00 14.29 100.00 Inst Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Total Increased Collaboration

Total 1.79 3.13 18.44 43.08 33.56 100.00 USD 1.38 2.45 13.63 43.03 39.51 100.00 SDSU 2.70 4.68 30.45 38.20 23.96 100.00 SDSMT 1.93 2.42 11.11 43.48 41.06 100.00 NSU 2.10 1.40 17.48 51.75 27.27 100.00 DSU 0.46 1.83 11.42 47.49 38.81 100.00 BHSU 1.71 4.57 16.57 45.71 31.43 100.00 Inst Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Total Improved Access to Materials

Total 2.57 7.61 36.74 40.18 12.90 100.00 USD 2.00 7.85 31.85 44.62 13.69 100.00 SDSU 3.24 9.19 46.49 32.97 8.11 100.00 SDSMT 4.37 7.28 36.89 37.86 13.59 100.00 NSU 1.41 9.15 37.32 46.48 5.63 100.00 DSU 0.92 1.38 26.61 47.25 23.85 100.00 BHSU 3.43 8.57 36.00 35.43 16.57 100.00 Inst Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Total Greater Use of Simulations

ATTACHMENT II 19

Total 1.95 4.97 29.33 48.72 15.03 100.00 USD 1.54 4.92 25.96 52.07 15.51 100.00 SDSU 2.52 5.22 40.11 41.19 10.97 100.00 SDSMT 3.38 7.73 24.15 51.21 13.53 100.00 NSU 1.41 4.23 26.06 58.45 9.86 100.00 DSU 0.46 2.74 21.00 48.86 26.94 100.00 BHSU 2.29 4.57 26.86 49.14 17.14 100.00 Inst Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Total Expanded Use of Multimedia Materials

Total 2.72 10.83 36.24 38.66 11.55 100.00 USD 2.00 11.25 32.97 40.68 13.10 100.00 SDSU 4.14 11.69 47.48 29.32 7.37 100.00 SDSMT 3.86 9.18 29.47 48.31 9.18 100.00 NSU 1.41 11.27 35.21 43.66 8.45 100.00 DSU 0.91 5.48 25.11 45.21 23.29 100.00 BHSU 2.86 14.86 35.43 37.14 9.71 100.00 Inst Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Total Created More Interactive Environment

Total 2.41 6.77 31.95 43.13 15.74 100.00 USD 2.00 6.31 28.00 46.31 17.38 100.00 SDSU 3.95 8.80 42.73 35.37 9.16 100.00 SDSMT 2.42 5.31 24.64 46.86 20.77 100.00 NSU 2.11 7.75 29.58 50.70 9.86 100.00 DSU 0.46 4.57 22.83 43.38 28.77 100.00 BHSU 1.71 5.71 34.29 45.14 13.14 100.00 Inst Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Total Improved Student Learning

Total 2.52 5.50 30.25 45.66 16.08 100.00 USD 2.00 4.31 27.23 48.92 17.54 100.00 SDSU 4.50 7.37 41.55 37.77 8.81 100.00 SDSMT 2.44 6.34 20.00 52.68 18.54 100.00 NSU 2.11 5.63 26.76 52.82 12.68 100.00 DSU 0.46 1.83 19.18 46.58 31.96 100.00 BHSU 1.14 7.43 34.29 43.43 13.71 100.00 Inst Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Total Met Student Demands

ATTACHMENT II 20

Total 14.54 30.41 33.23 15.97 5.86 100.00 USD 16.36 33.18 31.02 14.04 5.40 100.00 SDSU 11.33 26.80 41.55 14.03 6.29 100.00 SDSMT 12.56 37.20 22.22 18.84 9.18 100.00 NSU 11.19 25.17 37.76 20.28 5.59 100.00 DSU 17.89 28.44 27.98 22.02 3.67 100.00 BHSU 18.86 30.29 30.86 14.86 5.14 100.00 Inst Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Total Caused Major Disruptions

Total 2.01 6.38 35.42 44.47 11.72 100.00 USD 1.69 7.40 33.90 43.45 13.56 100.00 SDSU 2.53 6.14 45.85 37.91 7.58 100.00 SDSMT 4.35 4.83 26.57 56.04 8.21 100.00 NSU 0.70 4.93 35.92 48.59 9.86 100.00 DSU 0.91 2.28 24.20 50.68 21.92 100.00 BHSU 1.15 11.49 32.18 44.25 10.92 100.00 Inst Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Total Change the Way Faculty Teach

Total 6.22 24.20 55.19 11.51 2.88 100.00 USD 6.76 27.04 50.84 11.98 3.38 100.00 SDSU 4.87 15.16 70.04 8.66 1.26 100.00 SDSMT 6.76 39.13 41.55 7.73 4.83 100.00 NSU 2.82 24.65 50.70 19.72 2.11 100.00 DSU 11.52 23.04 45.62 14.29 5.53 100.00 BHSU 4.00 25.71 56.00 13.14 1.14 100.00 Inst Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Total Increased Faculty Resistance

Total 5.13 10.16 43.33 32.19 9.19 100.00 USD 4.77 11.38 40.77 34.00 9.08 100.00 SDSU 7.37 10.43 56.29 21.58 4.32 100.00 SDSMT 5.83 8.74 30.10 43.69 11.65 100.00 NSU 2.11 8.45 43.66 36.62 9.15 100.00 DSU 1.83 4.57 29.68 42.01 21.92 100.00 BHSU 5.14 14.86 44.00 29.71 6.29 100.00 Inst Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Total Led to Better Tech Support

ATTACHMENT II 21

Total 20.83 35.30 34.89 6.52 2.46 100.00 USD 23.38 39.69 29.85 4.92 2.15 100.00 SDSU 12.23 29.32 47.12 9.17 2.16 100.00 SDSMT 28.02 35.27 28.02 5.31 3.38 100.00 NSU 14.79 34.51 38.03 9.15 3.52 100.00 DSU 32.42 32.42 28.31 5.02 1.83 100.00 BHSU 20.57 42.29 28.57 5.14 3.43 100.00 Inst Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Total Hurt Classroom Experience

Total 6.25 8.42 26.95 37.12 21.27 100.00 USD 3.25 5.57 24.30 46.75 20.12 100.00 SDSU 12.14 13.21 30.89 29.82 13.93 100.00 SDSMT 6.37 10.78 30.88 32.35 19.61 100.00 NSU 3.55 6.38 36.88 34.04 19.15 100.00 DSU 0.46 1.85 12.50 34.72 50.46 100.00 BHSU 7.65 10.59 29.41 35.88 16.47 100.00 Inst Very Poor Poor Fair Good Very Good Total Wireless Coverage on Campus

Total 10.18 15.65 30.94 30.53 12.71 100.00 USD 4.33 10.37 32.20 40.25 12.85 100.00 SDSU 17.89 23.97 30.23 22.36 5.55 100.00 SDSMT 17.65 23.53 25.98 22.06 10.78 100.00 NSU 8.45 15.49 42.25 25.35 8.45 100.00 DSU 1.86 3.26 20.00 38.14 36.74 100.00 BHSU 10.00 14.71 38.82 25.29 11.18 100.00 Inst Very Poor Poor Fair Good Very Good Total Bandwidth Capacity on Campus

Total 10.36 15.95 31.07 29.83 12.79 100.00 USD 4.34 11.63 33.64 37.05 13.33 100.00 SDSU 17.20 21.51 32.97 23.30 5.02 100.00 SDSMT 22.06 25.00 25.98 16.67 10.29 100.00 NSU 7.09 12.77 34.04 34.75 11.35 100.00 DSU 1.41 5.63 16.43 39.44 37.09 100.00 BHSU 10.59 18.82 37.06 23.53 10.00 100.00 Inst Very Poor Poor Fair Good Very Good Total Reliability of Wireless Network

ATTACHMENT II 22

Total 9.45 21.89 30.77 25.35 12.55 100.00 USD 8.06 22.95 32.25 26.20 10.54 100.00 SDSU 13.95 28.80 31.84 20.21 5.19 100.00 SDSMT 6.37 21.57 34.31 25.98 11.76 100.00 NSU 5.63 16.90 38.03 30.99 8.45 100.00 DSU 0.46 2.78 17.13 36.57 43.06 100.00 BHSU 18.13 23.98 28.65 19.30 9.94 100.00 Inst Very Poor Poor Fair Good Very Good Total Classroom Desk Space for Laptops

Total 17.18 26.81 27.85 18.89 9.27 100.00 USD 13.71 28.19 28.50 19.94 9.66 100.00 SDSU 24.24 35.01 22.80 13.82 4.13 100.00 SDSMT 20.59 29.41 33.33 13.24 3.43 100.00 NSU 11.27 14.08 35.92 28.17 10.56 100.00 DSU 2.31 5.56 30.09 34.26 27.78 100.00 BHSU 26.90 29.24 25.73 11.11 7.02 100.00 Inst Very Poor Poor Fair Good Very Good Total Classroom Access to Power Source

Total 5.09 7.43 32.05 36.47 18.96 100.00 USD 6.37 6.06 33.23 38.66 15.68 100.00 SDSU 5.76 9.89 37.41 33.81 13.13 100.00 SDSMT 3.47 4.95 24.26 36.63 30.69 100.00 NSU 1.43 6.43 33.57 39.29 19.29 100.00 DSU 1.39 2.78 19.44 38.43 37.96 100.00 BHSU 7.78 14.37 34.13 31.74 11.98 100.00 Inst Very Poor Poor Fair Good Very Good Total Technical Support on Campus

Total 10.62 13.70 43.46 25.94 6.28 100.00 USD 10.76 14.08 40.51 27.69 6.96 100.00 SDSU 14.47 14.47 45.97 21.43 3.66 100.00 SDSMT 10.34 11.33 44.83 27.59 5.91 100.00 NSU 6.43 12.86 50.00 27.14 3.57 100.00 DSU 5.50 6.88 38.53 33.49 15.60 100.00 BHSU 8.09 21.97 45.66 21.39 2.89 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Collaborative Learning

ATTACHMENT II 23

Total 18.68 20.09 38.14 18.05 5.04 100.00 USD 18.86 18.38 36.77 20.92 5.07 100.00 SDSU 22.79 20.96 37.50 15.26 3.49 100.00 SDSMT 22.66 22.17 39.90 10.84 4.43 100.00 NSU 15.11 23.02 37.41 23.02 1.44 100.00 DSU 8.29 15.67 44.24 20.74 11.06 100.00 BHSU 16.28 24.42 36.05 17.44 5.81 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Case Studies

Total 11.13 16.26 37.64 27.44 7.53 100.00 USD 10.41 16.25 37.54 28.71 7.10 100.00 SDSU 17.83 17.83 36.21 22.43 5.70 100.00 SDSMT 10.29 16.18 35.78 29.90 7.84 100.00 NSU 5.71 14.29 50.00 26.43 3.57 100.00 DSU 3.67 8.26 34.86 37.61 15.60 100.00 BHSU 7.51 23.12 38.15 23.70 7.51 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Problem Solving / Critical Thinking

Total 24.05 22.06 30.89 16.83 6.17 100.00 USD 22.59 23.70 29.07 19.27 5.37 100.00 SDSU 29.41 19.30 32.72 14.34 4.23 100.00 SDSMT 27.94 25.98 27.94 13.24 4.90 100.00 NSU 24.29 27.86 31.43 11.43 5.00 100.00 DSU 7.80 16.51 34.40 23.85 17.43 100.00 BHSU 28.16 22.41 30.46 15.52 3.45 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Games and Simulations

Total 10.09 13.70 35.04 30.70 10.46 100.00 USD 11.36 14.98 33.75 29.18 10.73 100.00 SDSU 13.26 13.63 39.59 26.70 6.81 100.00 SDSMT 8.82 12.75 28.43 39.22 10.78 100.00 NSU 6.43 11.43 38.57 35.00 8.57 100.00 DSU 3.23 9.68 29.49 37.33 20.28 100.00 BHSU 8.62 17.24 37.36 27.01 9.77 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Group Assignments and Projects

ATTACHMENT II 24

Total 10.08 10.50 31.19 34.01 14.21 100.00 USD 8.82 10.39 31.34 34.49 14.96 100.00 SDSU 13.44 10.68 33.15 29.83 12.89 100.00 SDSMT 13.30 13.30 31.53 29.56 12.32 100.00 NSU 7.09 7.09 31.91 40.43 13.48 100.00 DSU 2.75 9.17 25.69 38.99 23.39 100.00 BHSU 12.07 11.49 30.46 39.08 6.90 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Interactive Tutorials and Self-Tests

Total 16.81 18.01 32.46 24.03 8.69 100.00 USD 17.01 18.11 32.28 23.94 8.66 100.00 SDSU 18.82 18.45 34.87 20.85 7.01 100.00 SDSMT 25.00 20.59 27.45 21.57 5.39 100.00 NSU 8.63 11.51 35.25 35.97 8.63 100.00 DSU 7.37 16.13 31.34 27.19 17.97 100.00 BHSU 18.50 20.81 30.64 23.70 6.36 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Student-Student Discussions

Total 18.48 17.85 34.82 20.68 8.17 100.00 USD 18.90 19.69 33.70 20.47 7.24 100.00 SDSU 25.69 17.98 33.58 16.51 6.24 100.00 SDSMT 11.82 17.24 33.00 27.09 10.84 100.00 NSU 10.07 24.46 42.45 20.14 2.88 100.00 DSU 7.41 7.87 36.57 30.09 18.06 100.00 BHSU 22.67 18.60 36.63 15.70 6.40 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Hands-On Practica or Lab Work

Total 22.30 21.51 31.79 17.63 6.77 100.00 USD 20.44 19.81 31.38 20.76 7.61 100.00 SDSU 26.75 22.51 34.87 10.52 5.35 100.00 SDSMT 25.49 33.33 22.55 14.22 4.41 100.00 NSU 16.55 20.86 30.94 26.62 5.04 100.00 DSU 11.98 16.13 35.48 24.88 11.52 100.00 BHSU 28.90 17.92 30.64 16.18 6.36 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Peer Review of Assignments

ATTACHMENT II 25

Total 16.42 15.27 33.74 24.55 10.02 100.00 USD 17.06 15.80 32.39 24.96 9.79 100.00 SDSU 23.01 18.18 35.62 16.70 6.49 100.00 SDSMT 15.69 15.20 35.78 25.00 8.33 100.00 NSU 9.35 12.95 39.57 32.37 5.76 100.00 DSU 5.05 8.72 29.82 33.49 22.94 100.00 BHSU 14.45 14.45 30.64 29.48 10.98 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Student Presentations

Total 5.14 4.93 25.33 32.09 32.51 100.00 USD 4.12 3.65 23.45 32.17 36.61 100.00 SDSU 8.82 6.80 29.04 26.29 29.04 100.00 SDSMT 4.46 5.94 22.77 38.61 28.22 100.00 NSU 0.71 4.29 27.86 40.71 26.43 100.00 DSU 2.31 3.24 20.83 28.70 44.91 100.00 BHSU 5.17 5.17 27.01 39.66 22.99 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Deliver Course Information

Total 34.78 14.38 23.12 18.04 9.68 100.00 USD 23.34 12.46 23.50 25.24 15.46 100.00 SDSU 38.55 14.73 26.36 14.73 5.64 100.00 SDSMT 56.44 16.34 11.88 9.41 5.94 100.00 NSU 20.00 15.71 31.43 25.00 7.86 100.00 DSU 35.98 18.22 22.90 13.08 9.81 100.00 BHSU 50.00 12.21 18.02 12.79 6.98 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Interactive Whiteboards

Total 5.34 3.56 18.02 29.70 43.37 100.00 USD 5.85 2.53 17.09 27.85 46.68 100.00 SDSU 6.75 3.65 17.70 25.55 46.35 100.00 SDSMT 6.40 4.93 17.24 40.89 30.54 100.00 NSU 3.57 8.57 29.29 32.14 26.43 100.00 DSU 0.93 1.40 18.69 31.78 47.20 100.00 BHSU 4.65 4.07 13.37 31.98 45.93 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Electronic Projections Systems

ATTACHMENT II 26

Total 30.98 22.43 32.08 11.56 2.96 100.00 USD 29.84 23.49 30.48 12.70 3.49 100.00 SDSU 33.82 19.67 33.82 11.03 1.65 100.00 SDSMT 33.00 23.00 33.00 10.00 1.00 100.00 NSU 29.50 27.34 33.09 9.35 0.72 100.00 DSU 16.59 21.80 36.97 15.17 9.48 100.00 BHSU 42.69 23.39 24.56 8.19 1.17 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Concept-Mapping Software

Total 17.22 17.64 35.85 21.15 8.14 100.00 USD 15.19 16.61 36.08 22.31 9.81 100.00 SDSU 21.10 18.72 37.80 17.61 4.77 100.00 SDSMT 19.70 20.69 31.53 21.18 6.90 100.00 NSU 10.71 20.71 40.71 23.57 4.29 100.00 DSU 9.86 13.15 38.50 22.54 15.96 100.00 BHSU 23.84 17.44 26.74 24.42 7.56 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Open Source Data Repositories

Total 31.55 18.90 25.20 14.96 9.40 100.00 USD 34.28 21.17 23.85 12.95 7.74 100.00 SDSU 37.94 20.26 26.15 11.60 4.05 100.00 SDSMT 14.29 12.81 29.56 27.09 16.26 100.00 NSU 33.81 23.02 30.22 9.35 3.60 100.00 DSU 5.14 10.28 26.17 28.50 29.91 100.00 BHSU 52.60 20.81 16.76 6.36 3.47 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Tablet Computer Features

Total 4.14 4.77 18.68 28.33 44.07 100.00 USD 4.29 3.97 16.67 25.08 50.00 100.00 SDSU 4.20 3.29 17.55 23.95 51.01 100.00 SDSMT 6.90 13.30 25.12 34.48 20.20 100.00 NSU 3.60 2.88 25.90 34.53 33.09 100.00 DSU 0.47 2.34 16.82 33.64 46.73 100.00 BHSU 5.20 6.94 18.50 35.26 34.10 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Automated Grading Features

ATTACHMENT II 27

Total 4.53 6.00 20.95 26.79 41.74 100.00 USD 3.97 5.25 17.81 24.48 48.49 100.00 SDSU 5.17 4.98 20.48 24.91 44.46 100.00 SDSMT 8.37 14.29 30.54 29.56 17.24 100.00 NSU 2.86 6.43 29.29 27.14 34.29 100.00 DSU 1.40 1.40 20.09 31.78 45.33 100.00 BHSU 5.23 7.56 16.86 31.40 38.95 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Learning Management Software

Total 40.96 22.09 24.35 8.59 4.01 100.00 USD 39.07 22.97 24.24 8.77 4.94 100.00 SDSU 42.41 22.22 25.93 6.67 2.78 100.00 SDSMT 42.86 21.18 22.17 9.85 3.94 100.00 NSU 30.00 26.43 30.71 11.43 1.43 100.00 DSU 35.05 21.03 23.83 11.68 8.41 100.00 BHSU 57.23 17.34 17.92 6.36 1.16 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Classroom Management Software

Total 27.77 23.57 30.19 13.94 4.52 100.00 USD 30.16 23.81 26.98 14.13 4.92 100.00 SDSU 30.07 24.72 30.26 11.25 3.69 100.00 SDSMT 32.51 25.62 28.57 10.84 2.46 100.00 NSU 18.57 29.29 37.86 12.14 2.14 100.00 DSU 13.62 14.55 37.09 23.47 11.27 100.00 BHSU 31.21 23.12 28.90 15.03 1.73 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Open Source Resources

Total 26.44 24.49 31.03 14.20 3.85 100.00 USD 27.03 23.37 31.16 13.67 4.77 100.00 SDSU 29.39 22.92 31.24 13.68 2.77 100.00 SDSMT 30.85 28.36 26.37 12.44 1.99 100.00 NSU 21.01 30.43 36.23 10.87 1.45 100.00 DSU 13.08 21.03 35.05 21.96 8.88 100.00 BHSU 30.81 28.49 26.16 12.79 1.74 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Simulations / Interactive Animations / Applets

ATTACHMENT II 28

Total 29.70 20.48 26.75 16.01 7.06 100.00 USD 25.91 18.28 27.66 18.60 9.54 100.00 SDSU 22.18 15.34 31.24 22.55 8.69 100.00 SDSMT 49.26 27.59 16.26 4.43 2.46 100.00 NSU 35.00 22.86 32.14 9.29 0.71 100.00 DSU 32.71 26.17 27.10 7.94 6.07 100.00 BHSU 36.05 27.33 16.86 15.12 4.65 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Handheld Devices

Total 33.91 18.54 28.49 13.59 5.48 100.00 USD 31.74 17.38 27.59 14.99 8.29 100.00 SDSU 35.24 18.63 31.37 11.99 2.77 100.00 SDSMT 44.33 19.21 25.62 7.88 2.96 100.00 NSU 30.50 23.40 30.50 14.18 1.42 100.00 DSU 19.63 16.36 33.64 18.22 12.15 100.00 BHSU 45.93 20.35 18.02 13.95 1.74 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Lecture Casting

Total 35.65 21.92 27.08 10.94 4.42 100.00 USD 32.06 21.59 24.76 14.76 6.83 100.00 SDSU 40.15 22.47 27.44 7.92 2.03 100.00 SDSMT 44.33 24.63 24.14 4.43 2.46 100.00 NSU 35.00 22.86 31.43 10.00 0.71 100.00 DSU 23.36 16.36 38.79 12.15 9.35 100.00 BHSU 40.12 24.42 19.77 13.37 2.33 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Simultaneous Collaborative Editing Tools

Total 53.36 19.35 18.67 6.03 2.59 100.00 USD 51.75 17.68 20.06 7.01 3.50 100.00 SDSU 55.10 19.11 19.29 5.19 1.30 100.00 SDSMT 65.17 17.41 11.94 2.99 2.49 100.00 NSU 42.14 24.29 22.86 10.00 0.71 100.00 DSU 43.46 20.56 21.96 7.94 6.07 100.00 BHSU 61.54 23.08 11.83 2.96 0.59 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Elluminate Web Conferenceing

ATTACHMENT II 29

Appendix B – Supplemental Tables: Faculty Data by Institution

Total 353 100.00 USD 65 18.41 100.00 SDSU 78 22.10 81.59 SDSMT 67 18.98 59.49 NSU 28 7.93 40.51 DSU 56 15.86 32.58 BHSU 59 16.71 16.71 Inst Freq. Percent Cum.

Total 38.07 61.93 100.00 USD 26.15 73.85 100.00 SDSU 24.36 75.64 100.00 SDSMT 39.39 60.61 100.00 NSU 50.00 50.00 100.00 DSU 82.14 17.86 100.00 BHSU 20.34 79.66 100.00 Inst Yes No Total PC Required in Class

Total 9.97 57.26 32.76 100.00 USD 10.77 60.00 29.23 100.00 SDSU 5.19 54.55 40.26 100.00 SDSMT 5.97 77.61 16.42 100.00 NSU 3.57 42.86 53.57 100.00 DSU 1.82 32.73 65.45 100.00 BHSU 30.51 64.41 5.08 100.00 Inst None Some Full Total Awareness of Mob. Comp.

ATTACHMENT II 30

Total 9.40 58.69 31.91 100.00 USD 7.69 43.08 49.23 100.00 SDSU 8.97 62.82 28.21 100.00 SDSMT 9.09 72.73 18.18 100.00 NSU 17.86 50.00 32.14 100.00 DSU 8.93 64.29 26.79 100.00 BHSU 8.62 53.45 37.93 100.00 Inst Need Less No Change Need More Total Use of Classroom Technology

Total 11.40 26.61 61.99 100.00 USD 14.06 17.19 68.75 100.00 SDSU 12.00 38.67 49.33 100.00 SDSMT 10.94 40.63 48.44 100.00 NSU 14.29 17.86 67.86 100.00 DSU 10.71 10.71 78.57 100.00 BHSU 7.27 25.45 67.27 100.00 Inst Impedes No Effect Improves Total on Learning Effect of Classroom Technology

Total 4.58 7.16 31.52 36.96 19.77 100.00 USD 6.25 1.56 32.81 40.63 18.75 100.00 SDSU 3.85 11.54 43.59 28.21 12.82 100.00 SDSMT 4.69 12.50 32.81 39.06 10.94 100.00 NSU 3.57 7.14 35.71 35.71 17.86 100.00 DSU 3.57 5.36 16.07 39.29 35.71 100.00 BHSU 5.08 3.39 25.42 40.68 25.42 100.00 Inst Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Total Easier Learning

Total 18.29 35.43 30.86 12.29 3.14 100.00 USD 15.63 40.63 29.69 9.38 4.69 100.00 SDSU 17.95 28.21 30.77 20.51 2.56 100.00 SDSMT 18.46 32.31 38.46 9.23 1.54 100.00 NSU 17.86 46.43 25.00 10.71 0.00 100.00 DSU 25.00 32.14 28.57 12.50 1.79 100.00 BHSU 15.25 40.68 28.81 8.47 6.78 100.00 Inst Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Total Decreased Student-Faculty Communication

ATTACHMENT II 31

Total 1.71 8.00 34.57 42.29 13.43 100.00 USD 1.56 4.69 45.31 39.06 9.38 100.00 SDSU 2.56 12.82 42.31 25.64 16.67 100.00 SDSMT 1.54 13.85 29.23 44.62 10.77 100.00 NSU 3.57 7.14 42.86 42.86 3.57 100.00 DSU 0.00 3.57 12.50 64.29 19.64 100.00 BHSU 1.69 3.39 35.59 44.07 15.25 100.00 Inst Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Total Increased Collaboration

Total 2.57 3.14 15.71 41.71 36.86 100.00 USD 6.25 3.13 14.06 34.38 42.19 100.00 SDSU 1.28 2.56 21.79 46.15 28.21 100.00 SDSMT 1.54 7.69 12.31 52.31 26.15 100.00 NSU 3.57 0.00 17.86 39.29 39.29 100.00 DSU 0.00 0.00 8.93 35.71 55.36 100.00 BHSU 3.39 3.39 18.64 38.98 35.59 100.00 Inst Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Total Improved Access to Materials

Total 11.75 14.04 34.96 25.50 13.75 100.00 USD 18.75 15.63 26.56 28.13 10.94 100.00 SDSU 16.67 19.23 39.74 14.10 10.26 100.00 SDSMT 7.81 17.19 39.06 25.00 10.94 100.00 NSU 17.86 14.29 25.00 32.14 10.71 100.00 DSU 3.57 3.57 28.57 32.14 32.14 100.00 BHSU 6.78 11.86 44.07 28.81 8.47 100.00 Inst Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Total Greater Use of Simulations

Total 5.73 12.03 26.07 35.53 20.63 100.00 USD 12.50 4.69 23.44 37.50 21.88 100.00 SDSU 3.90 22.08 31.17 31.17 11.69 100.00 SDSMT 7.69 13.85 30.77 36.92 10.77 100.00 NSU 7.14 10.71 17.86 46.43 17.86 100.00 DSU 0.00 5.36 16.07 35.71 42.86 100.00 BHSU 3.39 11.86 30.51 32.20 22.03 100.00 Inst Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Total Expanded Use of Multimedia Materials

ATTACHMENT II 32

Total 5.14 14.00 29.71 32.86 18.29 100.00 USD 9.38 14.06 34.38 21.88 20.31 100.00 SDSU 3.85 19.23 32.05 25.64 19.23 100.00 SDSMT 7.69 16.92 35.38 32.31 7.69 100.00 NSU 3.57 14.29 28.57 46.43 7.14 100.00 DSU 1.79 5.36 16.07 42.86 33.93 100.00 BHSU 3.39 11.86 28.81 38.98 16.95 100.00 Inst Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Total Created More Interactive Environment

Total 4.86 8.86 32.86 38.00 15.43 100.00 USD 9.38 6.25 34.38 35.94 14.06 100.00 SDSU 5.13 11.54 41.03 28.21 14.10 100.00 SDSMT 3.08 7.69 35.38 47.69 6.15 100.00 NSU 10.71 10.71 32.14 32.14 14.29 100.00 DSU 1.79 10.71 14.29 46.43 26.79 100.00 BHSU 1.69 6.78 35.59 37.29 18.64 100.00 Inst Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Total Improved Student Learning

Total 2.86 6.29 34.00 42.86 14.00 100.00 USD 7.81 1.56 34.38 43.75 12.50 100.00 SDSU 2.56 11.54 38.46 33.33 14.10 100.00 SDSMT 1.54 4.62 43.08 43.08 7.69 100.00 NSU 3.57 7.14 35.71 39.29 14.29 100.00 DSU 0.00 0.00 23.21 50.00 26.79 100.00 BHSU 1.69 11.86 27.12 49.15 10.17 100.00 Inst Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Total Met Student Demands

Total 15.47 30.66 25.50 19.20 9.17 100.00 USD 23.44 31.25 18.75 18.75 7.81 100.00 SDSU 11.54 29.49 32.05 21.79 5.13 100.00 SDSMT 15.38 30.77 30.77 12.31 10.77 100.00 NSU 14.29 21.43 14.29 35.71 14.29 100.00 DSU 8.93 35.71 26.79 16.07 12.50 100.00 BHSU 18.97 31.03 22.41 18.97 8.62 100.00 Inst Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Total Caused Major Disruptions

ATTACHMENT II 33

Total 3.14 8.86 31.43 44.57 12.00 100.00 USD 6.25 7.81 29.69 46.88 9.38 100.00 SDSU 2.56 12.82 35.90 38.46 10.26 100.00 SDSMT 4.62 7.69 35.38 49.23 3.08 100.00 NSU 3.57 10.71 17.86 53.57 14.29 100.00 DSU 0.00 5.36 26.79 42.86 25.00 100.00 BHSU 1.69 8.47 33.90 42.37 13.56 100.00 Inst Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Total Change the Way Faculty Teach

Total 25.29 34.77 30.17 5.75 4.02 100.00 USD 29.69 37.50 23.44 4.69 4.69 100.00 SDSU 12.99 42.86 35.06 7.79 1.30 100.00 SDSMT 18.46 33.85 36.92 6.15 4.62 100.00 NSU 32.14 21.43 28.57 3.57 14.29 100.00 DSU 37.50 32.14 23.21 3.57 3.57 100.00 BHSU 29.31 31.03 31.03 6.90 1.72 100.00 Inst Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Total Increased Faculty Resistance

Total 9.14 17.43 41.43 24.00 8.00 100.00 USD 9.38 25.00 37.50 21.88 6.25 100.00 SDSU 11.54 14.10 50.00 20.51 3.85 100.00 SDSMT 7.69 15.38 44.62 29.23 3.08 100.00 NSU 7.14 17.86 32.14 25.00 17.86 100.00 DSU 5.36 10.71 37.50 28.57 17.86 100.00 BHSU 11.86 22.03 38.98 20.34 6.78 100.00 Inst Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Total Led to Better Tech Support

Total 20.86 36.29 29.14 10.86 2.86 100.00 USD 25.00 29.69 26.56 12.50 6.25 100.00 SDSU 7.69 43.59 35.90 8.97 3.85 100.00 SDSMT 18.46 38.46 27.69 13.85 1.54 100.00 NSU 17.86 32.14 28.57 21.43 0.00 100.00 DSU 33.93 35.71 19.64 7.14 3.57 100.00 BHSU 25.42 33.90 33.90 6.78 0.00 100.00 Inst Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Total Hurt Classroom Experience

ATTACHMENT II 34

Total 7.45 11.17 28.94 33.52 18.91 100.00 USD 9.38 9.38 21.88 40.63 18.75 100.00 SDSU 10.26 12.82 35.90 30.77 10.26 100.00 SDSMT 7.69 15.38 35.38 26.15 15.38 100.00 NSU 11.11 11.11 22.22 37.04 18.52 100.00 DSU 1.79 7.14 19.64 37.50 33.93 100.00 BHSU 5.08 10.17 32.20 32.20 20.34 100.00 Inst Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Total More Efficient Course Preparation

Total 3.71 7.43 24.29 40.29 24.29 100.00 USD 4.62 12.31 16.92 44.62 21.54 100.00 SDSU 3.90 7.79 33.77 45.45 9.09 100.00 SDSMT 3.03 9.09 27.27 40.91 19.70 100.00 NSU 3.70 0.00 25.93 29.63 40.74 100.00 DSU 1.79 1.79 8.93 30.36 57.14 100.00 BHSU 5.08 8.47 30.51 42.37 13.56 100.00 Inst Very Poor Poor Fair Good Very Good Total Wireless Coverage on Campus

Total 3.71 9.14 26.57 39.14 21.43 100.00 USD 4.62 10.77 24.62 40.00 20.00 100.00 SDSU 5.19 5.19 40.26 38.96 10.39 100.00 SDSMT 3.03 10.61 30.30 39.39 16.67 100.00 NSU 3.70 3.70 25.93 29.63 37.04 100.00 DSU 1.79 7.14 3.57 41.07 46.43 100.00 BHSU 3.39 15.25 28.81 40.68 11.86 100.00 Inst Very Poor Poor Fair Good Very Good Total Bandwidth Capacity on Campus

Total 4.01 10.03 28.65 40.69 16.62 100.00 USD 7.69 6.15 24.62 47.69 13.85 100.00 SDSU 3.90 7.79 44.16 37.66 6.49 100.00 SDSMT 1.52 13.64 24.24 45.45 15.15 100.00 NSU 3.70 25.93 14.81 25.93 29.63 100.00 DSU 3.64 3.64 10.91 45.45 36.36 100.00 BHSU 3.39 11.86 40.68 33.90 10.17 100.00 Inst Very Poor Poor Fair Good Very Good Total Reliability of Wireless Network

ATTACHMENT II 35

Total 7.20 17.58 27.95 30.84 16.43 100.00 USD 3.08 21.54 27.69 40.00 7.69 100.00 SDSU 9.33 28.00 29.33 26.67 6.67 100.00 SDSMT 6.15 7.69 35.38 38.46 12.31 100.00 NSU 25.93 11.11 37.04 3.70 22.22 100.00 DSU 0.00 5.36 14.29 39.29 41.07 100.00 BHSU 8.47 25.42 27.12 22.03 16.95 100.00 Inst Very Poor Poor Fair Good Very Good Total Classroom Desk Space for Laptops

Total 17.48 28.94 24.64 18.62 10.32 100.00 USD 16.92 27.69 33.85 15.38 6.15 100.00 SDSU 25.00 28.95 19.74 18.42 7.89 100.00 SDSMT 12.12 31.82 34.85 15.15 6.06 100.00 NSU 25.93 22.22 29.63 7.41 14.81 100.00 DSU 3.57 17.86 8.93 41.07 28.57 100.00 BHSU 23.73 40.68 22.03 10.17 3.39 100.00 Inst Very Poor Poor Fair Good Very Good Total Classroom Access to Power Source

Total 5.73 9.17 24.93 36.10 24.07 100.00 USD 0.00 12.31 30.77 36.92 20.00 100.00 SDSU 1.32 11.84 35.53 34.21 17.11 100.00 SDSMT 6.06 9.09 16.67 43.94 24.24 100.00 NSU 7.14 0.00 25.00 35.71 32.14 100.00 DSU 9.09 0.00 10.91 38.18 41.82 100.00 BHSU 13.56 15.25 27.12 27.12 16.95 100.00 Inst Very Poor Poor Fair Good Very Good Total Technical Support on Campus

Total 18.68 16.95 34.77 21.55 8.05 100.00 USD 25.00 12.50 35.94 18.75 7.81 100.00 SDSU 20.51 21.79 25.64 24.36 7.69 100.00 SDSMT 21.54 23.08 30.77 23.08 1.54 100.00 NSU 25.00 7.14 42.86 17.86 7.14 100.00 DSU 7.27 14.55 40.00 20.00 18.18 100.00 BHSU 13.79 15.52 41.38 22.41 6.90 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Collaborative Learning

ATTACHMENT II 36

Total 34.97 22.83 22.54 15.32 4.34 100.00 USD 35.48 24.19 20.97 17.74 1.61 100.00 SDSU 32.47 18.18 27.27 14.29 7.79 100.00 SDSMT 40.00 26.15 20.00 12.31 1.54 100.00 NSU 57.14 3.57 17.86 17.86 3.57 100.00 DSU 14.29 26.79 28.57 23.21 7.14 100.00 BHSU 41.38 29.31 17.24 8.62 3.45 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Case Studies

Total 13.58 12.43 34.97 28.61 10.40 100.00 USD 19.05 9.52 36.51 23.81 11.11 100.00 SDSU 14.29 15.58 31.17 27.27 11.69 100.00 SDSMT 15.63 15.63 37.50 28.13 3.13 100.00 NSU 10.71 10.71 39.29 28.57 10.71 100.00 DSU 5.36 8.93 30.36 33.93 21.43 100.00 BHSU 13.79 12.07 37.93 31.03 5.17 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Problem Solving / Critical Thinking

Total 43.68 18.39 22.13 10.92 4.89 100.00 USD 46.88 14.06 23.44 10.94 4.69 100.00 SDSU 48.72 16.67 19.23 11.54 3.85 100.00 SDSMT 53.13 23.44 15.63 7.81 0.00 100.00 NSU 46.43 17.86 25.00 7.14 3.57 100.00 DSU 19.64 23.21 28.57 16.07 12.50 100.00 BHSU 44.83 15.52 24.14 10.34 5.17 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Games and Simulations

Total 22.25 13.01 28.03 26.88 9.83 100.00 USD 26.98 12.70 26.98 20.63 12.70 100.00 SDSU 25.64 16.67 32.05 19.23 6.41 100.00 SDSMT 26.98 6.35 28.57 30.16 7.94 100.00 NSU 28.57 10.71 32.14 21.43 7.14 100.00 DSU 12.50 14.29 21.43 33.93 17.86 100.00 BHSU 13.79 15.52 27.59 36.21 6.90 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Group Assignments and Projects

ATTACHMENT II 37

Total 27.54 18.26 24.35 17.68 12.17 100.00 USD 30.16 12.70 23.81 22.22 11.11 100.00 SDSU 29.49 25.64 21.79 14.10 8.97 100.00 SDSMT 30.16 22.22 30.16 11.11 6.35 100.00 NSU 46.43 10.71 14.29 14.29 14.29 100.00 DSU 5.45 21.82 21.82 23.64 27.27 100.00 BHSU 31.03 10.34 29.31 20.69 8.62 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Interactive Tutorials and Self-Tests

Total 29.31 20.11 24.71 17.24 8.62 100.00 USD 30.16 25.40 14.29 19.05 11.11 100.00 SDSU 33.33 15.38 25.64 17.95 7.69 100.00 SDSMT 36.92 26.15 26.15 7.69 3.08 100.00 NSU 32.14 14.29 25.00 21.43 7.14 100.00 DSU 16.07 17.86 35.71 17.86 12.50 100.00 BHSU 25.86 18.97 22.41 22.41 10.34 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Student-Student Discussions

Total 32.56 13.54 22.48 19.31 12.10 100.00 USD 45.16 12.90 12.90 22.58 6.45 100.00 SDSU 37.18 16.67 19.23 19.23 7.69 100.00 SDSMT 27.69 13.85 29.23 16.92 12.31 100.00 NSU 50.00 17.86 7.14 17.86 7.14 100.00 DSU 14.29 8.93 28.57 19.64 28.57 100.00 BHSU 27.59 12.07 31.03 18.97 10.34 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Hands-On Practica or Lab Work

Total 43.80 18.16 22.19 9.22 6.63 100.00 USD 42.86 15.87 25.40 11.11 4.76 100.00 SDSU 50.65 20.78 15.58 5.19 7.79 100.00 SDSMT 55.38 16.92 16.92 7.69 3.08 100.00 NSU 46.43 10.71 14.29 17.86 10.71 100.00 DSU 23.21 25.00 35.71 5.36 10.71 100.00 BHSU 41.38 15.52 24.14 13.79 5.17 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Peer Review of Assignments

ATTACHMENT II 38

Total 23.78 15.19 30.66 18.91 11.46 100.00 USD 29.69 12.50 28.13 17.19 12.50 100.00 SDSU 28.21 23.08 26.92 8.97 12.82 100.00 SDSMT 24.62 12.31 41.54 15.38 6.15 100.00 NSU 14.29 21.43 21.43 32.14 10.71 100.00 DSU 14.29 14.29 30.36 25.00 16.07 100.00 BHSU 24.14 8.62 31.03 25.86 10.34 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Student Presentations

Total 9.46 4.01 15.76 28.65 42.12 100.00 USD 12.50 1.56 12.50 23.44 50.00 100.00 SDSU 7.69 6.41 17.95 25.64 42.31 100.00 SDSMT 10.77 7.69 32.31 26.15 23.08 100.00 NSU 10.71 3.57 10.71 39.29 35.71 100.00 DSU 1.79 0.00 1.79 26.79 69.64 100.00 BHSU 13.79 3.45 13.79 37.93 31.03 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Deliver Course Information

Total 61.82 14.25 12.54 5.41 5.98 100.00 USD 58.46 9.23 16.92 6.15 9.23 100.00 SDSU 70.51 12.82 10.26 3.85 2.56 100.00 SDSMT 69.70 9.09 6.06 7.58 7.58 100.00 NSU 57.14 25.00 3.57 7.14 7.14 100.00 DSU 49.09 21.82 21.82 3.64 3.64 100.00 BHSU 59.32 15.25 13.56 5.08 6.78 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Interactive Whiteboards

Total 6.61 3.16 9.20 20.40 60.63 100.00 USD 6.15 3.08 4.62 15.38 70.77 100.00 SDSU 6.49 2.60 10.39 22.08 58.44 100.00 SDSMT 6.15 1.54 15.38 32.31 44.62 100.00 NSU 3.57 7.14 7.14 28.57 53.57 100.00 DSU 7.41 3.70 3.70 7.41 77.78 100.00 BHSU 8.47 3.39 11.86 18.64 57.63 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Electronic Projections Systems

ATTACHMENT II 39

Total 66.29 14.57 12.86 4.00 2.29 100.00 USD 70.77 20.00 6.15 1.54 1.54 100.00 SDSU 69.23 11.54 14.10 1.28 3.85 100.00 SDSMT 69.70 15.15 13.64 1.52 0.00 100.00 NSU 71.43 14.29 10.71 3.57 0.00 100.00 DSU 47.27 16.36 20.00 10.91 5.45 100.00 BHSU 68.97 10.34 12.07 6.90 1.72 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Concept-Mapping Software

Total 28.49 20.51 29.34 14.53 7.12 100.00 USD 18.75 29.69 25.00 23.44 3.13 100.00 SDSU 37.18 21.79 25.64 7.69 7.69 100.00 SDSMT 37.88 15.15 25.76 13.64 7.58 100.00 NSU 21.43 7.14 53.57 10.71 7.14 100.00 DSU 17.86 17.86 33.93 16.07 14.29 100.00 BHSU 30.51 23.73 27.12 15.25 3.39 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Open Source Data Repositories

Total 50.71 17.38 16.81 7.98 7.12 100.00 USD 60.00 21.54 9.23 9.23 0.00 100.00 SDSU 64.10 15.38 14.10 2.56 3.85 100.00 SDSMT 36.36 22.73 24.24 7.58 9.09 100.00 NSU 74.07 11.11 7.41 0.00 7.41 100.00 DSU 14.29 14.29 30.36 16.07 25.00 100.00 BHSU 62.71 15.25 11.86 10.17 0.00 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Tablet Computer Features

Total 25.85 9.09 13.64 17.90 33.52 100.00 USD 21.54 4.62 16.92 27.69 29.23 100.00 SDSU 20.51 12.82 16.67 14.10 35.90 100.00 SDSMT 51.52 15.15 15.15 12.12 6.06 100.00 NSU 17.86 3.57 10.71 21.43 46.43 100.00 DSU 1.79 10.71 10.71 17.86 58.93 100.00 BHSU 35.59 3.39 8.47 16.95 35.59 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Automated Grading Features

ATTACHMENT II 40

Total 16.91 8.31 10.60 14.90 49.28 100.00 USD 13.85 7.69 9.23 13.85 55.38 100.00 SDSU 5.13 8.97 15.38 19.23 51.28 100.00 SDSMT 42.42 12.12 9.09 15.15 21.21 100.00 NSU 14.29 7.14 17.86 10.71 50.00 100.00 DSU 5.36 1.79 5.36 10.71 76.79 100.00 BHSU 19.64 10.71 8.93 16.07 44.64 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Learning Management Software

Total 76.92 11.97 4.56 2.56 3.99 100.00 USD 78.46 12.31 3.08 1.54 4.62 100.00 SDSU 75.64 14.10 6.41 0.00 3.85 100.00 SDSMT 83.33 9.09 3.03 3.03 1.52 100.00 NSU 85.71 7.14 0.00 3.57 3.57 100.00 DSU 57.14 16.07 12.50 3.57 10.71 100.00 BHSU 84.48 10.34 0.00 5.17 0.00 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Classroom Management Software

Total 37.32 23.93 20.23 11.97 6.55 100.00 USD 36.92 30.77 20.00 7.69 4.62 100.00 SDSU 48.72 17.95 17.95 8.97 6.41 100.00 SDSMT 42.42 27.27 22.73 4.55 3.03 100.00 NSU 37.04 14.81 18.52 22.22 7.41 100.00 DSU 23.21 28.57 14.29 19.64 14.29 100.00 BHSU 30.51 20.34 27.12 16.95 5.08 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Open Source Resources

Total 43.10 20.40 21.26 12.07 3.16 100.00 USD 45.31 23.44 20.31 10.94 0.00 100.00 SDSU 48.05 20.78 16.88 10.39 3.90 100.00 SDSMT 44.62 20.00 27.69 7.69 0.00 100.00 NSU 50.00 17.86 21.43 10.71 0.00 100.00 DSU 28.57 23.21 19.64 16.07 12.50 100.00 BHSU 43.10 15.52 22.41 17.24 1.72 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Simulations / Interactive Animations / Applets

ATTACHMENT II 41

Total 62.00 13.71 13.71 6.57 4.00 100.00 USD 67.69 10.77 9.23 7.69 4.62 100.00 SDSU 54.55 14.29 18.18 6.49 6.49 100.00 SDSMT 81.82 10.61 6.06 1.52 0.00 100.00 NSU 67.86 10.71 14.29 7.14 0.00 100.00 DSU 48.21 12.50 21.43 8.93 8.93 100.00 BHSU 53.45 22.41 13.79 8.62 1.72 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Handheld Devices

Total 54.83 13.35 15.06 9.66 7.10 100.00 USD 53.85 13.85 15.38 12.31 4.62 100.00 SDSU 58.97 15.38 19.23 3.85 2.56 100.00 SDSMT 71.21 6.06 15.15 3.03 4.55 100.00 NSU 57.14 10.71 10.71 14.29 7.14 100.00 DSU 25.00 19.64 14.29 17.86 23.21 100.00 BHSU 59.32 13.56 11.86 11.86 3.39 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Lecture Casting

Total 56.82 16.48 13.64 9.09 3.98 100.00 USD 50.77 16.92 16.92 12.31 3.08 100.00 SDSU 71.79 8.97 12.82 5.13 1.28 100.00 SDSMT 66.67 18.18 10.61 3.03 1.52 100.00 NSU 57.14 32.14 3.57 7.14 0.00 100.00 DSU 35.71 19.64 16.07 19.64 8.93 100.00 BHSU 52.54 13.56 16.95 8.47 8.47 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Simultaneous Collaborative Editing Tools

Total 64.27 16.71 11.24 5.76 2.02 100.00 USD 60.94 10.94 10.94 14.06 3.13 100.00 SDSU 71.05 13.16 13.16 1.32 1.32 100.00 SDSMT 76.56 14.06 9.38 0.00 0.00 100.00 NSU 67.86 21.43 7.14 3.57 0.00 100.00 DSU 41.07 23.21 14.29 14.29 7.14 100.00 BHSU 66.10 22.03 10.17 1.69 0.00 100.00 Inst Never Seldom Sometimes Often Almost Al Total Elluminate Web Conferenceing

ATTACHMENT II 42

Total 5.73 6.88 31.81 41.26 14.33 100.00 USD 7.69 4.62 33.85 41.54 12.31 100.00 SDSU 3.90 9.09 29.87 38.96 18.18 100.00 SDSMT 10.94 7.81 34.38 40.63 6.25 100.00 NSU 3.57 3.57 28.57 46.43 17.86 100.00 DSU 3.57 10.71 25.00 44.64 16.07 100.00 BHSU 3.39 3.39 37.29 38.98 16.95 100.00 Inst Not at Al Barely He Somewhat Quite Hel Extremely Total Consultation with Colleagues

Total 14.61 23.78 37.25 19.77 4.58 100.00 USD 21.54 26.15 35.38 15.38 1.54 100.00 SDSU 11.69 20.78 38.96 20.78 7.79 100.00 SDSMT 17.19 34.38 34.38 12.50 1.56 100.00 NSU 21.43 25.00 32.14 21.43 0.00 100.00 DSU 8.93 17.86 35.71 25.00 12.50 100.00 BHSU 10.17 18.64 44.07 25.42 1.69 100.00 Inst Not at Al Barely He Somewhat Quite Hel Extremely Total Online Training Classes

Total 6.59 8.02 36.39 36.10 12.89 100.00 USD 6.15 9.23 32.31 35.38 16.92 100.00 SDSU 1.30 7.79 40.26 37.66 12.99 100.00 SDSMT 12.31 12.31 47.69 20.00 7.69 100.00 NSU 10.71 14.29 25.00 42.86 7.14 100.00 DSU 5.45 0.00 43.64 34.55 16.36 100.00 BHSU 6.78 6.78 22.03 50.85 13.56 100.00 Inst Not at Al Barely He Somewhat Quite Hel Extremely Total Training Provided by University

Total 13.49 18.48 37.24 21.70 9.09 100.00 USD 19.35 25.81 30.65 17.74 6.45 100.00 SDSU 9.33 22.67 37.33 21.33 9.33 100.00 SDSMT 14.06 14.06 43.75 20.31 7.81 100.00 NSU 23.08 19.23 38.46 15.38 3.85 100.00 DSU 7.14 10.71 44.64 28.57 8.93 100.00 BHSU 13.79 17.24 29.31 24.14 15.52 100.00 Inst Not at Al Barely He Somewhat Quite Hel Extremely Total Training Provided by Other Organization

ATTACHMENT II 43

Total 4.60 7.47 26.15 35.63 26.15 100.00 USD 3.17 6.35 28.57 41.27 20.63 100.00 SDSU 0.00 6.49 23.38 38.96 31.17 100.00 SDSMT 12.31 10.77 35.38 30.77 10.77 100.00 NSU 0.00 7.14 32.14 21.43 39.29 100.00 DSU 5.36 8.93 26.79 41.07 17.86 100.00 BHSU 5.08 5.08 13.56 32.20 44.07 100.00 Inst Not at Al Barely He Somewhat Quite Hel Extremely Total One-on-One with Inst. Design Staff

Total 5.73 11.46 43.55 32.09 7.16 100.00 USD 4.69 9.38 54.69 29.69 1.56 100.00 SDSU 6.49 6.49 42.86 32.47 11.69 100.00 SDSMT 4.62 18.46 44.62 29.23 3.08 100.00 NSU 14.29 17.86 32.14 32.14 3.57 100.00 DSU 1.79 7.14 42.86 30.36 17.86 100.00 BHSU 6.78 13.56 37.29 38.98 3.39 100.00 Inst Not at Al Barely He Somewhat Quite Hel Extremely Total Using Online Tutorials

Total 2.57 6.00 30.57 40.57 20.29 100.00 USD 1.54 6.15 30.77 41.54 20.00 100.00 SDSU 0.00 7.79 35.06 37.66 19.48 100.00 SDSMT 6.15 7.69 29.23 41.54 15.38 100.00 NSU 3.57 0.00 28.57 50.00 17.86 100.00 DSU 1.79 3.57 21.43 37.50 35.71 100.00 BHSU 3.39 6.78 35.59 40.68 13.56 100.00 Inst Not at Al Barely He Somewhat Quite Hel Extremely Total Experimenting on my Own

Total 14.80 17.22 45.62 16.31 6.04 100.00 USD 21.31 16.39 37.70 13.11 11.48 100.00 SDSU 15.07 15.07 49.32 13.70 6.85 100.00 SDSMT 15.87 19.05 49.21 15.87 0.00 100.00 NSU 15.38 15.38 42.31 26.92 0.00 100.00 DSU 7.27 14.55 52.73 16.36 9.09 100.00 BHSU 13.21 22.64 39.62 18.87 5.66 100.00 Inst Not at Al Barely He Somewhat Quite Hel Extremely Total Train-the-Trainer Model

ATTACHMENT II 44

Total 9.83 18.21 43.06 23.41 5.49 100.00 USD 10.77 12.31 43.08 29.23 4.62 100.00 SDSU 6.76 16.22 43.24 28.38 5.41 100.00 SDSMT 9.23 32.31 36.92 13.85 7.69 100.00 NSU 18.52 29.63 25.93 25.93 0.00 100.00 DSU 3.57 10.71 48.21 30.36 7.14 100.00 BHSU 15.25 13.56 52.54 13.56 5.08 100.00 Inst Not at Al Barely He Somewhat Quite Hel Extremely Total Reviewing Technical Handouts

ATTACHMENT II 45

Appendix C – Campus Wireless Coverage Maps

BHSU Wireless Coverage Map

ATTACHMENT II 46

NSU Wireless Coverage Map

ATTACHMENT II 47

SDSU Wireless Coverage Map

ATTACHMENT II 48

USD Wireless Coverage Map

Appendix D – Technology Fee Revenues and Expenditures by Campus

ATTA

CH

MEN

T II 49

ATTA

CH

MEN

T II 50

ATTA

CH

MEN

T II 51

ATTA

CH

MEN

T II 52

ATTA

CH

MEN

T II 53

ATTA

CH

MEN

T II 54