STRATEGIC PLANNING COMMITTEE
FOCUS GROUP SUMMARY

DATE: April 14, 1999
TIME: 3:00 pm     
PLACE: CB 208A
FACILITATOR: Brittney Chenault
NOTE-TAKER: Brittney Chenault

STRATEGIC GOAL: TECHNOLOGY

1. Based upon any information you have, how would you assess Moorhead State’s performance regarding the technology goal?

The group discussed the following concerns and issues in assessing MSU’s progress toward the Technology goal:

• Over-reliance on budgetary "outside forces," including legislative moneys that are "one-time," and grants. Concern that Technology is being funded too much by one-time grants that do not take into account updating and maintaining the technologies purchased.
• Training is a large concern. The group thinks that training is not adequately available at times when staff, faculty, and students need it. It was noted by several that Rhonda Ficek’s Instructional Technology department is helping with this, but a department of ONE person with some student assistance is not enough. Can Computer Services do more? Can more documentation/manuals be made available for MSU community?

The Education Dept. secured legislative one-time money for two technology assistants. This has helped faculty and students learn how to better use technology, and it appears to be a good model for the campus. Having support on a more timely, on-demand, location-specific basis is an approach that should be explored. Of course, the budget for this is a concern. Now that the Education Dept. has experienced the benefits of this assistance, will they be able to go back to not having it?

• More support from Computer Services is needed. The consensus is that this largely means – more people in Computer Services. With the increasing focus on technology, and increasing purchases of technologies, why has the staff not increased to meet the demands of maintaining, updating, and training? Also, everyone is confused as to "who does what" in the Computer Center. Who do I call for a software problem? Who do I call for an Internet connection problem? Could a directory of Computer Services staff be created and disseminated? This is particularly needed after the recent shift in many staff to MnSCU.
• Staff training is a concern. Staff often do not think that they can get release time for necessary training. Perhaps more emphasis on the department/office level to give more support, encouragement, and release time for training. Also, is there any way that tuition waivers can again be used for Instructional Technology workshops/classes? This has discouraged some staff participation.
• Technology is seen as a factor in recruitment of faculty, staff, AND students. If we are continually trying to "catch up," we will not attract the level of student, faculty, and staff we need at MSU. Will the "best and brightest" want to be a part of MSU?
• There is a perceived lack of clear direction at the administrative level regarding MSU’s role in the Technology goal. President Barden’s latest planning document mentions the "virtual classroom," but it was mentioned that it does not give a clear-cut plan or direction for the university regarding this. Without Administration being more forceful and clear in its statements regarding our instructional use of technology (including Distance Learning; "Virtual Classroom," etc.) it is thought that our faculty will not go ahead full-force with these innovations. This was also described as a lack of "vision." Some felt that the "vision" is probably there – but it has not been communicated adequately.
• There is also a perceived lack of a true "Technology Plan" for MSU. This results in duplication of technologies that could perhaps be shared. There is a lack of collaboration and communication between departments/offices/disciplines.
• Both faculty and staff asserted that there is a "time factor" involved with learning and implementing new technologies. It takes time to develop a Web-based course. It takes time to learn a new application. Many of us do not have time built in to our job, and have to do this outside of the workplace. Learning new technology appears to be an expectation, but often it is not clear how our community is supposed to find the time and resources.
• Accessibility of technology is a concern. The web access is very slow and cumbersome. Most people go to outside providers for this service that they feel should be provided in a more efficient fashion from the university. Beyond Internet access, many group members expressed the desirability of the university offering a discount on purchase of computers and software for home use. Is there any way to buy items in larger quantities and offer a payment plan/payroll deduction for purchase? It is believed that faculty and staff who have computers at home will learn how to use new technologies more quickly, will experiment, and will be more productive.
• Updating and maintaining equipment should be a high priority. The emphasis over the past few years appears to have been acquiring new technologies. But how is to be maintained and updated? Part of this goes back to relying on one-time funds for acquisition without a budget for maintenance.
• Better planning in selection of technologies and resource allocation. In many departments, only one or two people are interested in new technologies, and it is difficult to get others involved in the selection and acquisition process. Thus, often, a new technology is purchased without adequate feedback, and it is underused. Is there a way to make this process more efficient?
   

2. How could use of new technologies at MSU be improved for instruction and learning?

• Availability of equipment in the classroom is a concern. The sheer logistics of finding a media cart, or a computer for your classroom when you need it is sometimes an impediment. This includes not only new and flashy technology, but also basic equipment. Sometimes buildings and departments share technologies, and this can be a problem. If more computers and other necessary technologies were a part of most classrooms instead of having to request them, instruction could change for the better. Some teachers do not experiment because it is not readily available.
• The students in the group particularly stressed the need for more instructors to put course notes and syllabus on the Web. The reason for this need is the increasing amount of time that MSU students are spending at work – most of our students work part-time and need this availability of course resources to maximize their time.
• There is a lack of communication between students and faculty, in that students who do not have "traditional" schedules often have difficulty getting in touch with their professors. Office hours are usually during the day, and students may not be able to contact their professor during office hours. Using technology – such as "voice mail" or having Web or e-mail office hours, would help.
• Is there any way to cooperate on a regional or state-wide level to get better deals on computers and other technologies? Has cooperation been explored?
• Sometimes low-tech needs and solutions should be explored. Not having chalk in your classroom can be as frustrating as your computer equipment not working. Also, sometimes it seems we select the "bright and shiny" technologies without fully thinking through other options. There is still room for more traditional pedagogy and techniques, while making room for new technology.
• Will quality suffer? While realizing that the future does hold more "virtual classrooms," off-campus students, and Distance Learning, we need to maintain the QUALITY of the instruction given to the students. Perhaps this should be folded into the QUALITY Goal, which is seen as the overriding goal, above all others. Are we properly assessing the outcomes of a less traditional education? Are we giving the necessary training and support to teachers who will deliver via nontraditional means?

3. What barriers exist regarding the effective use of new technologies at MSU? [Did not cover]

4. How would MSU excel to a greater extent in terms of using computers? [Did not cover]

5. How could MSU excel to a greater extent in terms of using the Internet? [Did not cover]

6. How could MSU excel to a greater extent in terms of using multimedia presentations? [Did not cover]

7a. Should "Technology" be one of the 2-3 highest priority Strategic Goals for MSU and why?

The overwhelming consensus was "Yes." Because it is believed that SGI grants were originally implemented for the university to be able to "try out" new and innovative techniques, equipment, etc., Technology remains a top goal, because Technology will always fit into the "new" and "innovative" category, and we should "try it out" before investing more permanent, recurring money. Plus, it is still a very big need on our campus. If it could be more integrated into the overall Operating Budget, this would be even better. Perhaps there is a way to keep it a high Strategic Goal priority for acquisition of new technology, but put more money in the Operating Budget for updates and maintenance?

7b. Are there any goals that are lower priority? Would you change any of the existing goals?

Transitions appears to be a lower priority for funding, because the items that have been funded in Transitions are not that new or innovative, according to the group. These appear to be regular needs that have been funded through SGI and perhaps should be funded in other ways.

Careers is questionable, as many in the group did not feel that what has been funded in this goal is really helping to reach that goal.

Community goal was also questioned. It does not seem to be well-defined. It reads more like an outside-community "outreach" goal rather than building MSU’s internal community. Both are seen as important, but the group decided that MSU’s students, faculty, and staff need to work on our "campus" community. There has been a decrease in social activities for faculty and staff. There is a lack of communication across disciplines, departments, and offices. What can we do to "come together" again? The group stressed this goal’s importance, but it needs more focus.

One member came up with a proposed rewording of the Technology Goal, and many in the group agreed:

Moorhead State University will incorporate new technologies to use the most effective and efficient means of communication to deliver Moorhead State University’s educational programs.

[Remove – "in an effort" – it weakens the statement. Add "and efficient" because some group members think that new technologies are often purchased without reviewing the needs. There are new technologies sitting in a classroom unused.]

Also, the Technology goal has the word "technologies" in it – but it appears to still be much more slanted toward "computer technology." There are other necessary technologies.
 

7c. If you were to identify a new strategic goal for MSU, what would it be and why? [No ideas came up.] 

A member of the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities System
an equal opportunity educator and employer | Accessibility Questions? | Contact academic@mnstate.edu | Updated 09/16/08
MSU Moorhead | 1104 7th Ave South | Moorhead, MN 56563 | 1.800.593.7246
 home | msum | academic support | apac | department and faculty data | links | contact us | strategic planning