Technology Support on a University Campus Contingency Theory and Collaboration.

Technology Support on a University Campus

Contingency Theoryand

Collaboration

Central versus Local Support•Difficult in a distributed environment

•Technology functions and services which are campus wide in nature or which have institutional wide impact are best managed centrally

•Local units desiring specialized, discipline-specific or departmental-specific functions may not be suited to central support

Contingency Theory•Modern contingency theory is rich with insights into organizational effectiveness

•Brown and Bostrom (1989) developed a model that suggested the importance of strategy and organizational structure

•Contingency theory suggests that appropriate behavior in a given situation depends on a variety of variables and that each situation is different

Organizational Structure•Shapes the actions taken by individuals in organizations as they reaffirm or modify in an ongoing recursive interaction

•Structural differences between organizations and how these differences are designed are based on three contingency variables: the size, technology, and the environment

Environmental Variables•A supportive administration

•Sharing of resources

•Availability of support staff

•Effective training

•Personal social cognitive factors of faculty that affect whether a faculty member will take advantage of the resources available

Personal social cognitive factors of faculty

•Attitude

•Anxiety

•Self-efficacy

•Competency

Personal social cognitive factors of faculty

•Beliefs and perceptions of technology’s relevance

•Willingness to make commitment and face the risks involved with using technology

•Lack of knowledge

Characteristics of Organizations that Predict

their Level of Centralization in Institutions of Higher

Education

Surveys by Institution TypeTable 1

Surveys Sent and Returned by Institution Type Institution Type Surveys Sent Surveys Returned Usable Surveys Four year public 133 53 44 Four year private 141 66 49 Two year public 53 17 15 Total 327 136 108

Responses by Carnegie Classification

Table 2 Responses by Carnegie Classification Carnegie Classification Surveys Sent Usable Surveys Returned BS Colleges Liberal Arts 35 10 BS Colleges General 35 5 Masters Colleges and Universities I 83 24 Masters Colleges and Universities II 14 3 Doctoral Research Universities - Extensive 38 16 Doctoral Research Universities – Intensive 32 11 Associate Colleges 64 15 Other 26 24

Variables Used in Analysis

Table 3 Variables Used in the Analysis Var iable Description of the Var iable centrali A measure referring to the concentration of placing authority in a center or

central organization. tasku A measure of task uncertainty within an organization. distribu A measure of the distribution of technology resources within an organization. discipli A measure of discipline specificity within an organization. enduser A measure of end user perceptions of the accessibility of centralized support

staff.

endusk A measure of end users’ perceptions regarding their knowledge of technology.

Enduese A measure of end users experience with technology. ctools A measure of end users knowledge of their computer tools. capplic A measure of end users experience with technology.

Descriptive Statistics

Table 4 Descriptive Statistics for All Variables(n=108) Var iable Mean SD centrali 91.37 10.72 tasku 22.63 2.68 distribu 12.93 3.76 discipli 18.91 1.81 enduser 13.90 2.87 endusk 30.64 5.02 endusee 21.89 5.20 ctools 43.07 5.93 capplic 43.11 5.89

Correlations Among Variables

Table 5 Pearson Correlations Among the Variables (n=108)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1. centrali — . 02 -.24** .14 -.29** -.07 -.13 -.05 -.08 2. tasku — -.09 -.04 .03 .04 .08 .07 .07 3. distribu — -.24* -.09 . 28** .17 .14 .15 4. discipli — -.09 -.07 -.15 -.19 -.19* 5. enduser — -.22* -.14 -.20* -.20* 6. endusk — .32** .39** .39** 7. endusee — .40** .40** 8. ctool — .99** 9. capplic —

*p<.05 **p<.01

Independent Variables Related to Centralization

•Distribution of resources throughout the organization

•End user’s perceptions of the accessibility of the centralized support staff

Degree of Centralization of IT Support by Institutional Size

Table 6 Descriptive Statistics for Degree of Centralization of IT Support by Institutional Size FTE Mean SD n 5000 or less 92.63 10.72 63 5,001 to 10,000 92.30 7.47 23 10,001 to 20,000 83.79 14.80 14 Above 20,000 92.00 4.93 8

Eastern Illinois University

•Original mechanism for implementing this approach was everything centralized in Information Technology Services (ITS)

Variables affecting this environment

•Advent of online teaching

•The explosiveness of emerging technologies

•An antiquated infrastructure

Instructional Support Specialist

•Instructional Support Specialist were to be the first lines of support for faculty within each of the colleges

•Their duties included hardware and software support

•This distributed support model proposed a support shift from the central help desk of ITS to the department

Advantages

•Support is as close as possible to the end user.

•College based support personnel understand the information issues of the discipline.

•College based support personnel have a better understanding of their faculty’s needs

Advantages

•Colleges can best weigh costs against benefits for their constituencies

•Colleges can best decide when a particular technology is introduced into the pedagogy, and to what extent

Results•Well received by the faculty

•Still not enough to fully support their instructional needs

•The appropriate college defined each position and no two were the same

•This resulted in varied support levels across campus

Discipline Specificity of IT Support by Institutional Size

Table 7 Descriptive Statistics for Discipline Specificity of IT Support by Institutional Size FTE Mean SD n 5000 or less 19.35 1.76 63 5,001 to 10,000 18.26 1.68 23 10,001 to 20,000 18.50 1.40 14 Above 20,000 18.00 2.39 8

ANOVA for Discipline Specificity by Institution Size

Table 8 ANOVA for Discipline Specificity by Institutional Size Source df F p Institutional size 3 3.34 .09 .02 error 104 (3.08) Note: Va lues enclosed in parentheses represent mean square errors.

Center for Academic Technology Support

(CATS)•The mission of CATS is to provide Eastern Illinois University (EIU) with comprehensive services in the design, development, implementation, and evaluation of technology enhanced materials in support of courses and programs

Center for Academic Technology Support

•CATS also supports research and development of creative, innovative, and effective uses of established and emerging technologies by the University community

Services Provided by CATS

•Development of Web-pages, online forms, spreadsheets, databases, and multimedia presentations

•Computer programming and scripting

•Streaming video applications

•Videoconferencing

Services Provided by CATS•Production and duplication of

CD-ROMs, DVD’s, and other interactive resources

•Capture and editing for video or audio resources

•Information about copyright, distance learning, ADA compliance, and other technology related topics

Services Provided by CATS•Course and resource

development using WebCT and other Internet based services

•Research in the use of new and emerging technologies

•Creation of technology-enhanced materials for instruction

CATS Goals•Offer professional expertise and leadership in emerging technologies, learning theory, instructional design, computer programming, digital media, graphic design, computer-mediated communications distance learning

•Promote an academic environment conducive to the exploration of innovative applications of technology for teaching, research and service

CATS Goals

•Help the faculty and staff continue to learn about the use of instructional technologies in a variety of learning environments

•Assist faculty with the improvement of instruction and learning through appropriate integration of technology into the curriculum

CATS Goals•Support the design, development, implementation, and evaluation of materials for courses

•Develop resource materials to support the technology needs of faculty, staff, and students involved in the face-to-face, online, and distance learning courses

•Provide technology training and information sessions for faculty, staff, and students

CATS Goals•Fund and support creative and innovative applications of technology

•Collaborate with individuals, groups, departments, organizations, and the colleges at Eastern to address the academic mission of the University

Structuring or Restructuring of

technology support organizations

• Establish the goals and objectives of the organization

• Prioritize the goals and objectives

• Define the services

Structuring or Restructuring of

technology support organizations

•Decide which type of organization (centralized, decentralized, or combined) best fits the the goals and objectives of the organization

•Determine the precepts that apply