 |
Introduction The Good News Challenges What We're Doing A Summary of the Survey Results References U-M Information Technology Guiding Principles U-M's IT Strategic Goals and Objectives |
In the spring of 1999, the University of Michigan (U-M) Chief Information Officer (CIO) and the Faculty Senate Advisory Committee on University Affairs co-sponsored a survey of University of Michigan faculty on information technology use and needs. Professor Carl Berger, professor in the School of Education and a Director in the Information Technology Division, led the survey project. The U-M Institute of Social Research was retained to assist with the development of the survey, identify a representative sample, and collect and provide initial tabulation of the data. Fifteen hundred faculty members on the Ann Arbor campus were given surveys, and 743 provided responses.(1)
The survey was commissioned and designed to provide information for the continuing integration of information technology into the work of the faculty at the University of Michigan. This integration is based on defined IT Guiding Principles, Strategic Goals and Objectives(2), and key Measures by which we can evaluate the progress U-M is making toward transforming the potential of information technology into an even more powerful, usable resource for faculty, students, researchers and staff. Data from this 1999 faculty survey provide excellent confirmation of these established Guiding Principles and Strategic Goals and Objectives, and vital assessment data for the defined Measures. It also provides important information to guide future strategic directions for information technology (IT) at the University of Michigan.
Faculty are using IT–and value it
IT is now part of the daily life of practically every U-M faculty
member, and they see it as adding value to their work and career.
99%of U-M full professors with tenure use a computer every day, 92%
of them in their office and 7% at home. 100% of associate professors
with tenure use a computer every day, 97% at their office and 3% at
home.
95% of all of the respondents said they use IT tools every day at a certain location, with more than 87% using a computer in their University office every day. More than half of all respondents –52%–use a computer at home every day.
When daily through yearly use is factored in, close to 90% of respondents reported using a computer at both their office and home, and more than 60% use a computer sometime while traveling. Labs and Campus Computing Sites are the least used sites for computing for faculty. 12% of faculty use computers in their labs every day in addition to computers in their offices or at home.
77% strongly or somewhat agree that IT helps them increase their impact or productivity, and 66% believe that IT is important to their students' success. 73% use IT to contribute to their own professional development and 59% use IT to collaborate with both colleagues and students. For 24% of the faculty respondents, U-M's IT resources are a factor for remaining at the University. Fewer than 5% said that IT is not useful to them.
We are clearly no longer in the position of having to promote the value of IT to faculty. Now we need to ensure that they derive full value from the IT and resources provided by the University.
Faculty see themselves as skilled in using IT - and want to learn more
83% of all of the respondents rate themselves as intermediate to
advanced computer users, and 8% rate themselves as expert. Only 0.3%
say they are not using computers. 9% rate themselves as novice
users. However, more than half of those in that 9% novice rating are
tenure-track assistant, associate or full professors (rather than
lecturers, instructors, visiting or others).
The distribution of perceived expertise by faculty rank is quite consistent, though not surprisingly slightly more of the younger professors assess their computer skills at the “expert” level:
Q.1. How would you rate your expertise as a computer user?
| Faculty Rank | Expert | Advanced | Intermediate | Novice |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full Professor | 8% | 31% | 51% | 10% |
| Associate Professor | 8% | 32% | 51% | 9% |
| Assistant Professor | 11% | 31% | 52% | 7% |
More male faculty than female faculty see themselves as “expert” users: 13% of male faculty put themselves in that category, while only 1% of female faculty did so. However, almost all male and female faculty see themselves as having at least intermediate computer skills: 93% of male faculty and 88% of female faculty rate themselves at that level or higher.
It is encouraging that 85% of the respondents report that they are able to use IT more than they were able to 2 years ago.
Survey respondents were given a list of technologies and asked if they could easily obtain support and service, to what extent they would like to use various resources for their work. More than 50% would like to use computer-based instructional support materials like Web pages with course materials, e-mail lists of students, audio and/or video clips, animations or slides and class bulletin boards or forums on the Web. Close to 70% of faculty would like to use the Web for collaboration, presenting their work to others around the world, materials archives, research and course work.
Faculty are happier with U-M's IT services than they were three years ago - but there is still room for improvement
Three years ago, in 1996, in a survey done by the U-M Information
Technology Division (ITD) only 16% of faculty felt that University IT
personnel understood their needs and/or were helpful and responsive
in finding IT solutions and support that met those needs(3). In this
1999 faculty survey, 79% state that University IT services meet their
IT needs very or somewhat adequately. 74% rated University IT support
services as very or somewhat helpful.
In real estate, it's &E147;location, location, location.” For faculty use of IT, it's “support, support, support.” But “support” for faculty clearly means far more than the traditional definition of “computer support”–a class, a manual, or even a consultant. For faculty, support encompasses all aspects of the human dimensions of IT, which include:
"It boggles my mind that the University postures about collaboration, interdisciplinary projects, distance learning, creativity, etc. - and is willing to throw millions into the hardware - and yet so profoundly neglects the human aspect."
"I strongly feel that technology is exceeding our current limits, so any information to make it simpler will be priceless."
"My experience is mostly that I can never figure out how any of this technology works unless an actual human being shows me. (on-line help?! Blah!)"
Faculty were asked to identify their top 3 concerns about using IT. Two of the top three concerns focus on the human dimension of IT use: 64% identified the time it takes to learn and use IT as their 1st, 2nd or 3rd greatest concern. 38% identified lack of necessary support as their 1st, 2nd or 3rd greatest concern.
Faculty are clear about the ways they like to learn about IT, and the ways they do not. 66% of faculty members want a human to assist them in gaining IT skills. 58% of faculty also want to have time to figure it out on their own. And they want the individuals assisting them to be people who are &E147;close in” to them, who know their work– friends, family or colleagues. It is these individuals who are most likely to understand what it is the faculty member wants to do and thus can tailor assistance to the faculty member's need.
"...the #1 problem for me is keeping my computers functioning. I went into my field with the intention of doing research. I waste huge amounts of time now just keeping my computers running."
Reliability - the car is useless if the engine doesn't run
The overall number two concern for faculty - and the number one
concern for a significant number of faculty - is the reliability of
IT. 42% stated that IT reliability is a serious problem. Many
faculty included anecdotes of experiences they have had investing
time and energy into an IT application, either for their courses or
research, only to have the technology fail at a critical time. If we
are to make it easy for faculty to say yes to IT use when IT use is
appropriate, we must first and foremost ensure that the technology
always runs and is always available.
An additional issue with IT reliability is the constant need to upgrade hardware and software to stay current not only with the newest IT capabilities, but to remain interoperable with other higher education and research institutions. The work over the last few years for the Year 2000 rollover highlighted the degree to which many areas of the University were running old hardware and software. According to the 1999 campus computing survey of higher education faculty conducted by Casey Green of the Campus Computing Project, the third-ranking significant challenge (behind IT integration in instruction and user support) is "financing the replacement of aging hardware and software", cited by 14.3% of respondents. (4)
"Access from home is a serious issue for me–this is my life work, not just a job. Some of my best ideas come at 2:00am, when I am not going to drive into the office but I need to get to my work files from home."
>Access - you can't get there from here
As IT is more and more woven into the fabric of the daily life of
faculty, access to IT-based resources is more and more an issue. 45%
are not able to access all the U-M IT resources they need from their
office–the location that close to 100% use every day for their
computing. Only 23% are using the Internet and Web in course delivery
and administration but 50% more of the respondents would like to. The
lack of Internet access and network connectivity in classrooms was
cited by 20% of the faculty as a serious barrier. 66% of the
respondents believe that IT is important to their students' present
and future success, so it's not surprising that faculty are more and
more concerned about the lack of adequate network connectivity in U-M
offices, classrooms and labs.
A change from 1996 to 1999 is a 30% drop in the number of faculty who believe they can effectively use University IT resources from home. In 1996 80% of faculty said that they spent “all/most/some” time using a computer from home for University work (33% all or most, 47% some). In 1999, only 52% use a computer at home every day, though close to 100% do computing every day. This can certainly in part be explained by the fact that 47% report they cannot access all the U-M computing resources they need from home. 46% of respondents are dissatisfied with the speed of their home Internet connection. Given that 77% of respondents strongly or somewhat agree that IT helps them increase their impact or productivity, it's not surprising that many of the verbatim comments from survey respondents emphasize the frustration faculty members have with slow, limited or non-existent access to U-M resources from off-campus locations.
These access issues also highlight a dimension of higher education that creates IT access challenges at the University at a scale not faced by the corporate world. At a major research university like U-M, the work of faculty and students is not confined to an 8-to-5, Monday-through-Friday schedule. At most corporate organizations there is a small percentage of employees, generally top-level managers and executives, who require 24-hours-a-day, 7-days-a-week access to a limited subset of the IT resources of the company. The vast majority of the company's employees do their work during assigned hours and at company sites. At a university, the ratio is reversed - the vast majority of the University community, U-M faculty and students, work in a constantly fluctuating schedule, literally any hour of the day or night, any day of the year, at any one of thousands of locations, on-campus or off. They want access to all of U-M IT resources all the time, from any location. This need for unlimited IT access can only be expected to increase.
Building on our strengths
U-M faculty members now have the skills, interest and desire to use
IT to enhance and expand their teaching, research and service. Many
faculty are ready to take the next steps to bring more IT into the
classroom. They are ready to acquire the skills necessary to use new
IT tools to amplify and accelerate their research and international
impact. Faculty need world-class IT resources to continue to excel in
their disciplines. See the U-M Guiding Principles and Strategic Goals, a comprehensive review with data from the faculty survey matched to many of the identified objectives
and measures. That review highlights how many IT activities are
already in process to build on the IT strengths of our faculty and
institution.
Support, support, support
One of the clearest messages from faculty is in accord with one of
the main tenets of the CIO: we must do everything possible to
reallocate resources from supporting the technology to supporting the
people who use the technology.
To address these human dimensions of IT use will require ongoing changes in the way the University integrates IT into every aspect of teaching, learning, research and administration. This will include developing new models for delivering IT services and new skills in our technology staff members, built on an understanding of the day-to-day endeavors of those in the U-M community, especially faculty.
We need to enhance the skills of our technology professionals so that they not only understand the technology but also have a basic understanding of what it is that the people they are supporting need and want to accomplish in their work. Once the technology support people have those understandings, then and only then can they begin to truly provide meaningful and visionary IT support.
And our IT service delivery models must be built on these understandings as well. When it comes to IT support, especially for faculty, it is clear that one size does not fit all. Budget constraints demand that whenever possible we pool resources and coordinate services across the University, to create economies of scale and eliminate needless and costly duplications of resources. But within a coordinated framework, as we have now established with the creation of the U-M IT Federation model, we must find ways to provide decentralized, people-centric IT support to faculty. The reallocation of resources and the design of new IT service delivery models toward these ends must be one of our highest IT priorities.
"Reliability and technical support are always problems&#quot;
Reliability and access
In many cases, reliability, access and support are interwoven. While
user error is only infrequently a cause of hardware or software
crashes or network connectivity difficulties, problems can appear to
users as their own lack of knowledge or skill in using the
technology. Any time an IT service does not operate reliably, it
immediately increases the need for support - already the weak link in
the system. This survey shows that almost all faculty now use and
rely on IT every day. If they cannot access IT resources, either
because the particular technology resource is not working or because
it is not available where faculty need to do their work, then IT has
turned into a liability for the University, not an asset. U-M IT
must be more robust. It is imperative that we strengthen the
reliability of IT systems, and improve remote access to all of U-M's
IT services.
The rest of the story...
In March of 1999 the University CIO established four Guiding Principles for implementing IT at the University of Michigan:
Contribution
Information technology must first add value to the core mission,
values and work of the University. Except for those areas where
experimentation with technology is part of the discipline, we will
not focus on information technology for its own sake. Technology is a
tool, at times a powerful tool, but one that must further our basic
mission and values.
Community
Second, information technology must draw people together rather than
push or keep them apart. For example, the synergy of a student's
interest and energy joined together with a faculty member's
experience and expertise, along with that student's interaction with
peers, combine to create a learning/teaching community unique to the
educational experience of a large research university. We must focus
on ways that information technology can enhance interaction.
Equity
Third, information technology must be accessible in an equitable,
though not necessarily identical, manner. We must ensure that
information technology does not disadvantage or unfairly advantage
some members of our knowledge communities to the detriment of others.
Diversity
And fourth, we must balance economies of scale with our need and
commitment to a diverse information technology environment. The
reality is that funding cannot keep up with the pace of information
technology change and the needs of our many communities. This pushes
us towards economies of scale and uniformity of hardware and
software. However, we must simultaneously fulfill the need for and
maintain a commitment to a diverse information technology
environment. Faculty, researchers and students must have the
information technology needed to pursue work in their discipline. And
students benefit from exposure to a range of technologies.
In 1999 we defined a set of strategic goals and objectives for IT at the University of Michigan (6). There are three main goals: Academic Initiatives, Infrastructure and Core Services, and Collaboration Services, with objectives and measures defined for each Goal. The 1999 Faculty Survey provides much relevant data as to how we are doing on many of the measures. A 1996 Information Technology Division (ITD) survey of faculty, students and staff addressed many of the challenges raised in the measures (7). This section summarizes some of the relevant information provided by faculty in 1999 along with comparisons from the 1996 data where available.
