Summary of EdTech Symposium EdTech Decision Making in Higher Ed for eLearn
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•95 views
This presentation is a summary of the working group findings and reports from the EdTech Efficacy Research Academic Symposium in May 2017, presented at eLearn in October 2017.
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Summary of EdTech Symposium EdTech Decision Making in Higher Ed for eLearn
Similar to Summary of EdTech Symposium EdTech Decision Making in Higher Ed for eLearn (20)
More from Dr. Kristin Palmer
More from Dr. Kristin Palmer (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Summary of EdTech Symposium EdTech Decision Making in Higher Ed for eLearn
- 1. EdTech Research in Higher Education: Best Practices and Next Steps from the Efficacy Symposium held in Washington, DC in May 2017 Dr. Kristin Palmer
- 4. What did we do? Conducted 47 interviews from 43 colleges/universities with 52 decision- makers representing different types of higher education institutions to understand EdTech decision-making Asked about sources and networks and had interviewees describe one particular EdTech decision in detail Interviews were recorded or annotated and then coded for themes
- 5. Why did we do it? Understand what factors and information - including research - influence EdTech decisions Provide transparency regarding decision making Identify and showcase best practices
- 6. What is Higher Ed trying to accomplish with EdTech? 41% Support Teaching and Learning 36% Gain Operational Efficiencies/Decrease Costs 30% Increase capacity to serve students online 27% Improve user experience/modernize existing system
- 7. Unpacking: 41% Support Teaching and Learning Collaboration Individualization Active learning Virtual reality Authentic assessments Competency-based education Flipped classrooms and blended learning Feedback
- 8. “I get bombarded with stuff” Interviewees reported that their major sources of information include:
- 9. Where do EdTech decision-makers get their information? 93% Network Events/Conferences 91% Written Publications 89% Social Media and Online Communications
- 10. All interviewees stated they conduct research: 38% Review student outcomes after implementing a strategy/product 29% Asked other IHEs for feedback about products 24% Administered own student /faculty/staff surveys 22% Ran Pilots 18% Read scholarly articles and journals
- 11. Thoughts from the interviewees on research: 78% indicated they do their own research Studies varied widely in goals and methodological rigor with few resulting in peer-reviewed publications and most not being shared publicly Results were often used for: ● continuous improvement of instruction ● deciding whether to continue or scale up pilots Others lack “bandwidth” to do research
- 12. Decision Making Processes At public and non-profit, tends to be protracted and inclusive with strong faculty voice. Input is gathered in meetings, committees, and surveys with the final decision most often being made by one or more administrators. For-profits tend to have swifter, more centralized decision-making processes with faculty and student buy-in sought after decision is made.
- 13. What criteria mattered for decision making? Feasibility of implementation Features and functionality User experience/usability Cost/ROI considerations Vendor capacity and relationship
- 14. Evaluating EdTech options 73% Decisions involved cost assessment 64% Decisions informed by vendor demos 59% Decisions involved IT vetting 47% Involved formal RFP/RFI/RFQ 39% Involved piloting solution
- 15. Advice for EdTech Decision Makers: Talk to people outside of higher education Focus on functionality that faculty and students use Consider ancillary costs such as training Standardize the EdTech procurement process Involve stakeholders (faculty, staff, students) early in process Plan change facilitation strategies
- 16. Advice for Researchers: Focus on pedagogical strategies the technology supports and how to use it better to improve student outcomes (What works, how, and in what conditions) Use cases and studies of real-world implementations are most useful to decision-makers Differentiate findings by context and types of students
- 17. Advice for Vendors: Do due diligence for clients and tailor your pitch for their specific needs Transparency around product and functionality is critical Aim for mutually beneficial relationships with “partners” Consider pro bono exchanges with schools - product for research Be prepared to customize your product
- 18. Advice for Funders: Fund a hub for sharing results of EdTech pilots for higher education Incentivize grantees to build in time and resources to share their internal study findings with peers Develop a tiered system of funding to support edtech research at amounts appropriate to the level of higher education investment in the product/strategy
Editor's Notes
- Fiona
- Stephanie - note re: units usually by interview not by interviewee and FYI all but one in USA
- Stephanie
- Whitney I’m going to share with you the findings from our interviews related to their goals for the use of edTech, the sources of information that they referenced in making their decisions related to EdTech, and the research they conducted. The number one reason why decision makers are utilizing EdTech is to support teaching and learning with the following coming in close behind that; decreasing cost while gaining operational efficiencies, increasing the capacity to serve online students (including increasing mobile accessibility), and improving their user experience or modernizing existing systems. FYI - Unit is generally at the interview level (i.e. 44) vs. the interviewee level (i.e. 52 people)
- Whitney Digging deeper to unpack the response “To support teaching and learning” as a reason to make an EdTech decision, we found the following comments related to the goals of making their EdTech product decision. The most common goal identified for EdTech decisions was to support a particular pedagogical or assessment model or strategy. Specifically, these included: Increasing opportunities for collaboration among students, faculty, and alumni Increasing interactivity of content Individualization of instruction, e.g., by establishing data analytics capacity to adjust curriculum, instruction, and supports provided based on student performance; allowing students to accelerate at own pace Promoting active learning Experimenting with virtual reality Increasing student agency Providing authentic assessments Implementing competency-based education Facilitating flipped classrooms and blended learning options Increasing amount of academic feedback provided to students.
- Whitney - The comment “I get bombarded with stuff” was a common theme when interviewees described BOTH the sources of information and the media through which they obtained the information. Notice the lack of researchers, think tanks and foundations on this list?
- Whitney Eighty unique network events were mentioned as media for gathering information on EdTech products and trends a total of 167 times across 93% of our interviews. The most commonly mentioned network events were EDUCAUSE conferences (identified in 24 interviews), followed by ASU-GSV conferences, (identified in 8 interviews) and Online Learning Consortium (OLC) events
- Whitney Everyone “thinks” they are doing research but what counts as research varies widely as well as the RIGOR of the research. % is out of 45 interviews
- Whitney In thirty-five interviews (78%), participants indicated that their IHE conducts its own investigations or research into how well EdTech products currently being used work. These studies varied widely in goals and methodological rigor with few resulting in peer-reviewed publications but most not being shared publicly. Results were often used for continuous improvement of instruction or for deciding whether to continue or scale up use. For those IHEs who did not undertake such investigations, the reasons were related to costs, time, capacity or “bandwidth.”
- Kristin
- MIA: Documented improvement in student learning?
- Kristin - Few considered total cost of ownership and only 11% considered student outcomes like engagement, completion or retention
- Stephanie Stakeholder involvement comes out in change research over and over again as a reason for success or failure, so involving your stakeholders throughout is a good change facilitation strategy Good to take a performance support perspective, not just an acquisition perspective - what resources, supports, policies, job descriptions, etc. require attention to make this successful
- Stephanie > comments about Bror and applying pedagogical strategies C.f. Clark & Mayer (2016); Means, Bakia, & Murphy (2016); these are points I hear in discussions and the types of research being conducted at conferences where ed tech research is presented.
- Stephanie
- Stephanie FH: The last item will be a significant topic for our group’s last session on Thursday that Bror is running. He has invited Matt Rascoff (who came up with this idea), Edith Gummer, Katrina Stevens, Karl Rectanus to discuss. I will also plan to mention it in our group’s first “lightning update”
- Fiona