Incremental Revolution
Improving Teaching and Learning with
Technology:
A Model for Description, Planning, and Implementation
A Portfolio of Strategies for Collaborative
Change
The TLT Group, Steven W. Gilbert, February, 2002
For more on this model, see The Introduction and Expanded Outline
1. Institutional Educational Mission
(and Vision
Your strategies ought to advance a well-articulated and widely shared educational vision (including definition of the institutional community – who is being served, and who is providing and supporting the service). Your vision for the role of technology in teaching and learning should fit well with your institution’s educational mission. You’ll need to consider a number of criteria, including the pace of change and level of risk your institution can sustain. [For help in developing your own vision, see: http://www.tltgroup.org/gilbert/WhyBotherLIST.htm]
What does your institution hope to achieve by integrating information technology more fully into teaching and learning? Consider distinctions among basic paradigms for educational uses of information technology with goals such as:
a. increase
institutional productivity
b. increase access to
education
c. increase communication between faculty and students
d. build
community
e. expand content that can be
taught
f. support
collaborative learning
g. achieve information
literacy
2. Foundation
(Minimum Requirements
You need well-developed descriptions of minimum requirements for the technology infrastructure (people as well as hardware, facilities, and other information resources) and widely understood plans for achieving them.
What are your minimum acceptable levels for access, user’s mastery, and usage of various technologies – hardware, software, and telecommunications? How can/should your professional development plan provide lifelong learning for everyone? How much and how often? How can you develop and revise specifications for the minimum technology requirements for classroom equipment, laboratory configurations, residence halls, etc.? [For help in describing or planning your own Foundation, see: http://www.tltgroup.org/resources/rtltguide.html and http://www.ala.org/acrl/infolit.html.]
NOTE: In the following, the dimension of
“Wide-Narrow” refers to the number of people who are affected by the
strategy: a narrow strategy would
affect very few people. The
narrowest program is one that touches a single topic in a single course. The widest change is one that makes an impact on all teaching
and learning throughout the institution. The
dimension of “Deep-Shallow” refers to the magnitude of the impact on those
involved: a shallow strategy would
not cause dramatic change in the behavior of teachers and students.
3.
Wide/Shallow Projects, Programs
(Something for Almost Everyone,
Every Year)
Wide/Shallow strategies often enable modest changes or the development of instructional modules or materials within many different individual courses. What are some current examples of your wide/shallow programs? Do any of these depend on faculty helping each other to learn to use Low Threshold Applications (LTAs are easy to use, low incremental cost)? What additional wide/shallow programs would you like to launch? [For more on LTAs, see: http://www.tltgroup.org/LTAs/Overview.htm]
4.
Narrow/Deep Projects, Programs
(More Focused, Extensive, Risky Programs
for a Few)
Narrow/Deep strategies may enable some smaller groups to explore more expensive and risky combinations of technology and educational approach. These programs often work more deeply within individual courses or may focus on entire courses or programs that involve several courses; e.g., simulations of molecular models that help students visualize and understand principles in several introductory chemistry and biology courses. Many Narrow/Deep strategies have higher costs and higher risks than other strategies- with the hope that what they learn will prove useful to others later.
What are some of your current narrow/deep programs? What are some you hope to launch and support in the future? When? [For an example of a major “narrow/deep” project with “wider” potential use in the humanities, see: http://jefferson.village.virginia.edu/vshadow2/]?
5.
Culture of Collaboration and Learning
(Developing a Nurturing Community)
Many of the most valuable strategies, projects, or programs likely to be used in this model depend on inter-departmental and inter-office cooperation. How do you support collaboration and communication throughout your community? How well do you support everyone’s needs for learning about new instructional and technological options? How do you communicate to all stakeholders how they can influence and participate in the overall planning, decision-making, and implementation processes? [For more on Nurturing Communities and Compassionate Pioneering, see: http://www.tltgroup.org/gilbert/FireCircles&NurturingCommunity.htm]
6.
Thoughtful Planning, Assessment, Implementation
(Tools and approaches that generate information to guide successful
implementation, program revision, and realistic budgeting)
You need criteria and mechanisms for changing strategies and for supporting them through major resource allocation decisions. A local TLT Roundtable can provide valuable perspective and recommendations. The Flashlight Program can help you design studies and assess the progress of these efforts with the goal of making mid-course corrections and improvements. Items 2-4 above can be used as broad budget and planning categories. What process does/will your institution use to facilitate the extension and modification of the strategies, programs, and goals associated with this model? [For more on TLT Roundtables, Collaborative Change, and the Flashlight Program, see http://www.tltgroup.org/]