• Executive Summary
• Report on Distance Education: A Blueprint for Action
• Report on Faculty Development
• Report on In-Classroom Applications
• Report on Library Electronic Resources and Services Relating to Teaching, Learning, and Technology

Background

Task Force Reports

Major Recommendations
In-Classroom Applications
Distance Education
Faculty Development

Members of the TLTR

Background

The University of Delaware Teaching, Learning, and Technology Roundtable (TLTR) was formed during the Fall of 1996 at the request of Provost Melvyn Schiavelli. In keeping with the model for TLTRs developed by the American Association for Higher Education (AAHE), the membership of the TLTR reflected diverse constituencies throughout the University. Dr. John C. Cavanaugh (Vice Provost for Academic Programs and Planning) was asked to chair the TLTR.

Over the course of several meetings during the Fall, the TLTR identified several major themes that represented key issues the members believed the University must address: in-classroom applications, distance education, faculty development, and the library. These themes became the basis for the principal task forces that were formed. Each task force was charged with developing a report that outlined the existing situation and made specific recommendations for the University. The task forces met separately throughout the Spring semester, with the TLTR meeting as a group to share information across the task forces. Drafts of the task force reports were presented at TLTR meetings and were distributed as Web documents during the summer of 1997. Based on TLTR members' feedback, the final report was submitted to Provost Schiavelli in September, 1997.

Task Force Reports

Each of the four task force reports can be considered a separate planning document to address key issues in each respective domain. Brief summaries of each are listed below.

The In-Classroom Applications report includes three main sections: (a) an extensive review of models of instructional technology, including presenting and communicating more effectively, encouraging students to collaborate on projects, considering knowledge as design, and providing students with multimedia tools for learning and communicating; (b) a thorough report of technology in classrooms, laboratories, and residence halls; and (c) initiatives needed in the University.

The Distance Education report includes five major sections: (a) definitions of the important terms and concepts in distance education; (b) the history and current status of distance education at the University of Delaware; (c) a vision of distance education at the University; (d) barriers to change; and (e) six strategic goals. In addition, several important documents relating to policies, mission, and enrollments are included as appendices.

The Faculty Development report includes two main sections: (a) a review of existing resources for faculty and technology on campus; and (b) challenges to progress in faculty adoptions of information technologies. The focus of the latter section is on both identifying barriers to change and suggesting recommendations for how to overcome them and implementation strategies for achieving these goals.

The Library Electronic Resources report consists of four primary sections: (a) an overview of the library, collections, and resources; (b) how the library supports teaching and learning; (c) technological infrastructure supports for faculty and students; and (d) scholarly communication, intellectual property, and future issues.

Major Recommendations

The heart of the In-Classroom Applications, Distance Education, and Faculty Development task force reports is their respective recommendations aimed at improving the teaching and learning environment at the University through the appropriate use of technology. The TLTR firmly believes that it is in the University's best interest to use these recommendations as the basis for planning purposes, and to implement them at the earliest practicable time. One consistent theme that emerged in the TLTR discussions is the lack of an obvious, coherent planning mechanism that integrates teaching, learning, and technology. Current administrative structures create barriers to such integration, and serious efforts should be undertaken to dismantle them. Many of these are discussed in detail in the various reports. The recommendations summarized below, and described in detail in the respective reports, were carefully tailored to build on existing University strengths while charting a course for continuous quality improvement and improved integration. Although contained in separate reports, the recommendations should be considered as an integrated, interrelated package of initiatives.

In-Classroom Applications

Four primary sets of recommendations are proposed:

• Curriculum:
• To support innovative teaching/learning models, an equipment grant program should be developed to complement existing instructional grants in the Center for Teaching Effectiveness, and laptops for selected classroom use.
• Departments should ensure that students in introductory level courses acquire basic computing skills, and that each department should maintain a computing plan to support its curriculum.
• Maintain funding at current levels for University computing sites, and institute support for mobile computing (e.g., DCHP to full campus, docking stations in some computing sites).
• Laboratory assistants and TAs need better training regarding computing skills.
• Place funding for computing sites and staff support in the Parallel Program under a single authority, and upgrade facilities (especially at Georgetown).
• The Assistive Technology Subcommittee of the Americans with Disabilities Act Office should assess how well the needs of these students are currently being met, and submit appropriate recommendations.
• Teaching:
• Make laptops available for classroom use by faculty who demonstrate competence and need, and provide one laptop to each department.
• Implement Web form for faculty to request a classroom assignment based on demonstrated technology needs linked to SIS/Plus.
• Make course syllabi readily available for browsing, and assist faculty in creating syllabi on the Web.
• Continue support for the Teaching, Learning, and Technology Summer Institute, and increase number of Web workshops for faculty.
• Implement workshops on collaborative learning and its interface with technology.
• Technology support:
• Implement more workshops on digital video, and begin pilot of MPEG use in classes.
• Explore feasibility of using network computers in classrooms as a cost-saving approach.
• Student access:
• Increase support for mobile computing as listed above.
• Encourage use of laptops in class for note taking, submitting papers, etc.

Six primary recommendations are proposed:

• Foster the expansion and diversity of the academic community by utilizing distance education technologies to remove the barriers imposed by location, time, culture, language, or disability.
• Support faculty in their development and delivery of excellence in instructional practices in distance teaching.
• Support students in accessing distance education courses and in learning within distance education courses so that their educational experience is equally or more rewarding than that of traditional instructional formats.
• Provide leadership in distance education through significant contributions to the knowledge base on distance education.
• Seamlessly integrate distance education into the teaching, research, and service activities of every University unit.
• Systematically evaluate and refine distance teaching, distance learning, and the distance education system at the University.

Six main recommendations are proposed:

• Central coordination of teaching, learning, and technology resources should be established in the Provost's Office.
• A broad representation of faculty, professional staff, and administrators must be involved in establishing strategic plans for teaching, learning, and technology; thus a permanent TLTR should be established.
• A coordinated entity which builds on the University's existing resources and which would lead the University to the next level of technology integration in learning should be established.
• Expand existing grant and fellowship programs for faculty to provide the necessary time and support to develop high quality instructional materials and strategies.
• Central coordination of distance education is essential to address future developments.
• An integrated Web site should be developed linking University policies as well as national information on copyright and intellectual property and freedom issues.

Members of the TLTR

John C. Cavanaugh, Chair, Vice Provost for Academic Programs and Planning
Deborah Allen, Department of Biological Sciences
Susan Brynteson, Director, University Libraries
Martha Carothers, Chair, Department of Art
Al Cavalier, Department of Educational Studies
Biliana Cicin-Sain, College of Marine Studies
John Courtright, Chair, Department of Communication
Richard Fischer, Associate Provost and Director of Continuing/Distance Education
Susan Foster, Vice President for Information Technologies
Judith Greene, Director, Center for Teaching Effectiveness
Marcia Halio, Department of English
Carlos Hervas, Video Producer, Student Life
Carol Hoffecker, Department of History
Fred Hofstetter, Director, Instructional Technology Center
Eric Jacobson, Assistant Director, School of Public Policy
William Johnson, Administrative Academic Advisor
Jo Kallal, Department of Consumer Studies
Dene Klinzing, Department of Human Development and Family Studies
Christine Kydd, Department of Business Administration
Madeline Lambrecht, Director, Special Nursing Programs
Larry Peterson, Department of Music
Mary Richards, Department of English
William Saylor, Associate Dean, College of Agricultural Sciences
Clinton White, Department of Accounting
Dick Wilkins, Department of Mechanical Engineering

Top of Executive Summary

In-Classroom Applications Report
Distance Education Report
Faculty Development Report
Library Electronic Resources Report
 

UD Home Page

Comments and suggestions should be sent to jcc@udel.edu
© 1997 University of Delaware. All rights reserved.