This document contains questions posed to Erkki Sutinen regarding his research on engaging HE/UH teachers in technology. The questions probe Sutinen's key claims, theoretical framework, methodology, findings on teacher learning, views on organizational change and innovation, context of the University of Helsinki, and visions for the future of educational technology. Sutinen is asked to reflect on the challenges of his research process and next steps in studying how technology can help higher education institutions cope with ongoing changes.

1. Anni Rytkönen: What does it take to get
HE/UH teachers engaged in technology?
Erkki Sutinen
School of Computing
University of Eastern Finland

2. Technology for coping with change?
• Besides that we need to cope with
technological changes, like from Blackboard to
Moodle, how can (web-based?) technology
help us to cope with changes?

3. What do you claim?
• What is your key message?
• What did we not know before your study?
• What were we not even thinking of before
your study?
• What was the most surprising result?

4. Your standpoint?
• How do you map your position within broader
research?
• What was your plan to hunt your background
literature – theoretical standpoint and related
references
• Your literature: 71 out of 124 references have
a Finnish background – is it a bit of an
exaggeration?

5. Your research philosophy?
• What is your research passion?
• What pushes you or pulls you?
• Does your research follow
– post-positivism and give objective facts?
– interpretivism and help you to understand?
– pragmatism and solve a given problem?
– emancipation and change the power play?

6. Your theoretical framework and key
concepts
• Could there be Level 0: what am I?
• How are teaching Levels 1..3 related to
monological (let learners get), dialogical (do)
and trialogical (create) learning to
behaviorism vs. constructivism to surface vs.
deep learning?
• Could you have combined them?

7. How do you know it – your methodical
approach?
• How do you base your research questions and
thus method on your chosen research
philosophy?
• Much of data (and thus results) was based on the
number of features, other technologies or similar
used; what about the level of using them?
• Categories – what is the relation of expertise
categories (p. 81) and the combination of
teaching level and technological innovativeness
(84)?

8. Transparency of your research?
• How did you map the answers of open
questions OR teachers behind onto the
categories (e.g., see p. 86 – isn’t the teacher at
Level 2 (p. 8: s/he is interested in what s/he
does))
• Did you categorize all by yourself or was there
another classifier – and to which extent did
you agree?
• Did you make use of codebooks or similar?

9. Learning teachers
• How could you follow up teachers’ learning process
from category to category (81 or 84) and would it be
helpful?
• Could you follow up a give teacher team’s emerging
distribution of skills?
• Explain Figs. 9.1 (129)
– 3a: glass ceiling; 3b: smoothened learning curve with more
simple systems or sets of apps
– How does Fig. 9.1 relate to Fig. 5.1 (52)?
• and 9.2 (132)
– Weakness-based or strength-based learning (133) –
creatively out of comfort zone empowered by one’s
strengths?

10. Learning organization
• Can an organization manage innovation?
• Or do innovations happen in an inspiring spirit as
a(n interpersonal) movement?
• What is the role of affections and attitudes for a
culture of innovation?
• Does a strategic approach to change require a
management studies approach instead of an
innovation diffusion model to understand the
dynamics of a change process?
• Based on your research, how do you characterize
UH as a cradle for innovation?

11. Your context: University of Helsinki
• What are the parameters that can change?
– Arrangements of teaching, e.g. 1:n
– Top-1 in Finland or Top-x internationally
– Surrounding society?
– Leadership?
• Re-contextualizing: (how) can HEIs similar (in
which way?) to UH benefit from your research?
• Up-scaling and down-scaling: (how) can bigger or
smaller HEIs learn from UH?

12. Your technologies – course
management systems
• System or sets of apps?
• Web-based – Web 1.0, 2.0, 3.0 or beyond
• What prevents from creating systems, tools
or apps to support Level 3?

13. Your field: Educational technology
as a discipline
• In your interdisciplinary research, how do you see
your roles as an educationalist and as a computer
scientist?
• Did you encounter any constructive or destructive
tension or conflicts between the disciplines when
doing your research, in terms of questions,
method, analysis, interpretation of results, or
application of them?
• (How) would it have helped your research if
educational technology had been an academic
discipline in the Finnish HE system?

14. Top-down vs. bottom-up renewal?
• Do you really believe in strategic leadership and top-
down driven management of universities (p. 9) –
supported by constructive alignment? If yes or no, why?
• Have you heard of Freakonomics by Levitt and Dubner –
how goal-based orientation might make teachers to
cheat?
• How could technology facilitate a bottom-up renewal of
teaching in HE?
• Has this something to do with control vs. trust (p. 88)?
Cf. early adopters (in control) vs. late adopters (peer
trust)
• Or organized, system-supported (heavy) change vs.
organic, apps-based light change?

15. Given that you were (with your
research-based wisdom) the Finnish
Minister of HE
• What would be your national program to
renew HE?
• How would you make sure that you get the
grass root level involved – teachers and
students?
• Role of decision-making in general: how is
expertise or competence in leadership related
to technical or pedagogical skills towards
improved education in HE?

16. Reflect upon your research process
• What were the main challenges on your road?
• What could you have done better?
• What are you most proud of?
• What does the current work advise you for
your continuing research? The plan for your
next paper?
• What should I have asked you and how would
you have imagined me to expect you to
answer?

17. Next steps – how can technology help
us to cope with change?
• What are the changes that HEIs are going to encounter
in the next ten years?
• What are the technologies that we need to cope with
the coming changes
– Affective computing?
– MOOCs, SPOCs?
– Ubiquitous (where?)
– Games?
– You tell us!
• How can your research inform us to cope with the
coming changes, with technology or otherwise?