O3.1.1

=Institutional e-learning technology plans guide the adoption of technology during e-learning initiatives.=

Evidence
Bates (2007) explains how a mandate for e-learning planning from the executive management committee coupled with a detailed rationale for e-learning can smooth the transition to e-learning in an institution. The plan at the Southern Alberta Institute of Technology described by Bates was to ‘provide a means by which SAIT could meet the increased market demand, particularly for workplace training, and increase overall student numbers, without the full cost of additional physical facilities’ (p. 53).

A risk of using technology to support learning is that poor quality technology can seriously compromise the learning outcomes (process D2) and the diversity of available technologies can encourage a range of ad-hoc and disconnected approaches that fail to build on institutional experience and success (process D1). A technology plan combines a strategic focus on the selection of technology with practical experience based on previous work in the institution to ensure that technological resources are chosen in ways that build capability rather than dilute it.

E-learning operates in a complex, dynamic, continually evolving environment, which includes ‘mechanisms to facilitate the development of and access to a variety of learning services; an underpinning technological platform; means to help potential learners select and enrol in learning experiences; and supporting administrative processes’ (Elloumi, 2004, p.61). Elloumi argues that because technology change is constant and accelerating technology planning must be embedded in a wider institutional strategy that generatively encompasses all teaching and learning, and servicing aspects (pp. 61-2).

The implications and challenges of rapid change affecting planning also concern Bates and Poole (2003). They propose the 'SECTIONS' model for selecting and applying technology, which identifies the following criteria: Students, Ease of use, Costs, Teaching and learning, Interactivity, Organizational issues, Novelty, Speed (pp. 79-80). In concluding their discussion of the model, Bates and Poole remark on its heuristic nature and comment that it ‘is not mechanical or “scientific.” There are many different factors to be taken into account, and the decisions will need to be context specific’ (p. 105). They also emphasise the complexity of the decision making process and, in addition to proposing the use of a framework to identify factors for consideration, they recommend the following strategies: Formulating questions that enable a systematic analysis of the factors; reviewing responses to the question; assessing available skill resources; and, making an intuitive or subjective decision based on all the information obtained (p. 105).

Evidence of capability in this practice is seen in the use of a formally documented technology plan that is used to guide the selection of technologies appropriate to the local context. Formal institutional standards are used where available to inform and guide the plan. This should include existing technologies that are defined as standard by the institution and for which there is clear evidence of effectiveness and ability to be supported. The plan, along with the associated standards and guidelines, is communicated widely to encourage wider adoption and compliance throughout the institution. Policy should mandate compliance with the technology plan and explicit reference to it should be made in processes for the resourcing and development of e-learning resources.

Haughey (2007) analyses the organizational responses of several Canadian universities to provision of faculty support for teaching and learning over the period 1997-2005. Several recommendations follow. Haughey notes that there is a shift in technology focus from emphasis on course management systems and presentation software to blended learning and technological assistance for active learning. ‘The integration of digital technologies occurs not only in response to changing conditions, it is also driven by the vision of the institution’ (p. 28). The seven recommendations made on the basis of the research are: 1. A digital technologies vision is required to coordinate top down and bottom up adoption of technology. 2. Technology support and developmental units must work closely together. 3. Faculty need strong support to understand and employ learner-centred methods. 4. A combination of centralized and decentralized support. 5. The development of sufficient in-house technology expertise among faculty to track technological trends. 6. Be aware that policy change does drive pedagogic change first by restructuring and then by changes to teaching practice. 7. Resistance to change is inevitable.

Bates (2007) describes the transition to e-learning at the Southern Alberta Institute of Technology. Instructors in academic departments indicated in discussions that they wanted to see a set of core values and principles for the development of e-learning if any plan was to receive their support. They wanted assurance of job security, without workload increases. Some examples of the core values agreed upon are:

1.	E-learning will be used only where there are clearly identified benefits (educational, financial, strategic positioning, etc.). 2.	Decisions about appropriate use of e-learning is an academic decision to be made at departmental level, but based on knowledge and understanding of the strengths and limitations of e-learning. 3.	E-learning is not being used to replace instructors but to strengthen their role in teaching and learning. 4.	Increase in workload for instructors and students is to be avoided by following best practices in e-learning, which includes team work, quality assurance processes, new approaches to teaching and learning, organizational change, and project management. 5.	Instructors will have adequate time and resources for training in the use of e-learning. 6.	E-learning materials and programs will be developed in a cost effective manner, although costs will vary depending on the market and the requirements of the subject matter.

By establishing this sort of plan, many potential points of conflict were avoided in the transition to e-learning. The core values also provide a framework to evaluate and guide decisions in an environment of trust.