INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY TASK FORCE

DRAFT REPORT

 

James Madison University

 

 

 

TASK FORCE MEMBERS:

Dr. James Benedict

Mr. Tom Bonadeo

Dr. Robert Brookshire

Dr. Mohamed Eltoweissy

Dr. Mark Hawthorne

Dr. George Johnson

Dr. Helmut Kraenzle

Dr. Joseph Marchal

Dr. Ronald Nelson

Dr. Robert Reid, Chair

Dr. Caroline Smith

Dr. Judy Weishar

Dr. Ken Williamson

 

 

 

 

 

 

APRIL 24, 2000

Executive Summary

This report is by design brief. It was developed with the goal that members of the James Madison University community will read it and consider the possibilities that information technology affords. The report is divided into four sections – (1) introduction, (2) task force work plan, (3) an analysis of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats, and (4) recommendations. The recommendations are organized into the following areas:

Introduction

Dr. Douglas Brown, the Vice President for Academic Affairs, established the Information Technology task force in October 1999. The task force was one of three Academic Affairs task forces that conducted work during the 1999-2000 academic year. The other task forces were organized to study – (1) Integrating Science, Mathematics and Technology and (2) Health and Human Services. The members of the three task forces were selected by Dr. Jim Couch, the Speaker of the Faculty Senate, Dr. Vida Huber, Chair of the Health and Human Services Task Force, Dr. Richard Roberds, the Chair of the Integrating Science, Mathematics and Technology, Dr. Robert Reid, Chair of the Information Technology Task Force and Dr. A. Jerry Benson, Interim Dean of the College of Integrated Science and Technology. Members of the task forces were selected from a list of faculty nominated by the Faculty Senate, nominated by academic unit heads and self-nominations.

The specific charge to the task forces was stated as follows:

It is envisioned that the task forces will (1) work through a process of thinking broadly, scanning the environment, to identify potential programs (i.e., academic programs like majors, minors, concentrations, etc., but also opportunities for collaborative research, seeking of external funds, and service) in each of the broad areas, and (2) then attempt to evaluate each of these programmatic ideas against the mission, existing and potential resources, expertise of faculty and staff, etc. within the university to identify directions which would be recommended for further detailed follow-up.

 

Task force work plan

The task force members began their work in early November 1999, holding three meetings during the fall semester. The members of the task force spent a considerable period of time discussing the rich diversity of information technology education that exists at James Madison University. The task force identified three types of information technology education that exist on this campus, (1) developing information technology, (2) managing information technology, and (3) using information technology. Elements of one or more of these types of information technology can be found in virtually all major programs at James Madison University. The recommendations contained at the conclusion of this report attempt to address all three levels of activity.

Following the series of meetings in the fall semester, the task force members developed a set of questions that were then used to solicit information from more than 20 separate groups across the James Madison University campus. This set of questions can be found in Appendix A. Included in these groups with which members of the task force met were (1) faculty and staff members in all colleges, (2) representatives from the information technology, educational technology, and information technology infrastructure support areas, and (3) advisory councils in the College of Business and the College of Integrated Science and Technology. In addition, the questions were posted on the Academic Affairs task force web site, with an invitation to submit ideas and suggestions to the members of the information technology task force.

While these data-and idea-gathering activities were underway, the members of the task force met to develop an analysis of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOTs) related to information technology at James Madison University.

Summary of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOTs)

The members of the task force carefully identified the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats associated with information technology at James Madison University. The SWOT analysis examined the broad environment and included the following elements: academic programs; information technology support systems; and information technology infrastructure. Once the specific items in each of the four areas of the SWOT analysis were identified, the task force members then ranked the specific strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats.

 

Strengths

    1. James Madison University benefits from a faculty that is innovative and creative.
    2. There exists a very solid core of information technology faculty which have the expertise and potential to develop new academic programs in the information technology area. These faculty are most commonly found in Accounting Information Systems, Computer Information Systems, Computer Science, Geographical Information Systems, Integrated Science and Technology, Market Information Systems, and the School of Media Art and Design.
    3. There is a solid network infrastructure in place.
    4. There are growing linkages between academic units with common information technology interests.
    5. There is an ever-increasing number of mediated classrooms.
    6. The Center for Instructional Technology and the College of Integrated Science and Technology media laboratory are valuable campus resources.
    7. James Madison University is located less than 2 hours from the concentration of information technology firms located in Northern Virginia.

Weaknesses

    1. James Madison University operates in a very resource constrained environment. This manifests itself most visibly in the level of operating budget that can be allocated to support information technology infrastructure and academic programs.
    2. Our relations with representatives of the information technology industry are not well developed and are not developed with individuals at high levels within these firms. This hinders the development of information technology programs.
    3. Development programs for current faculty members are not as widely utilized as they might be.
    4. James Madison University is not identified as one of the universities that will have access to Internet 2. If James Madison University intends to become a more prominent force in information technology education, access should be a high priority.
    5. The upgrade cycle for faculty, staff and student computer laboratories is too long. The result is computers and software that lag behind state-of-the-art. This creates curriculum delivery problems in majors which rely heavily on information technology.
    6. There is an inequity of computerized or mediated classrooms among the various colleges. This phenomenon was termed the "digital divide". There is a shortage of networked classrooms and classrooms that are truly state-of-the-art on the campus.
    7. The level of information technology and educational technology support has not kept pace with the need in both of these areas.
    8. James Madison University has not established a policy to require students to purchase or lease computers upon entry into the university or into a specific major. Appropriate options to require student purchase and lease of computers should be established at the earliest possible date.
    9. The information technology costs associated with specific majors are quite high. The number of majors that fall into this category is increasing.
    10. Some student computer laboratories are not utilized to the fullest possible extent because of access control, the lack of available funds to support extended hours of operation and laboratory security.
    11. Faculty and staff do not have the same level of off-campus high-speed network access that is available to students living in off-campus housing.
    12. There is not a well-defined and clearly understood university policy related to distance education. The role that distance education will play in the future of James Madison University is not widely understood.

Opportunities

    1. Faculty representing several academic units have developed prototype curricula in several cutting edge areas related to information technology. These programs include Electronic Commerce and Telecommunications.
    2. There is potential to develop additional programs in areas of need and/or areas in which James Madison University has expertise, including Health Infomatics and Educational Technology.
    3. The initial distance education programs, both at the master’s degree level, offer great opportunity. These include the M.S. degree in Information Security offered by Computer Science and the soon-to-be- launched M.B.A. degree with a concentration in Information Security.
    4. Virginia is a major center for Internet traffic and web based commerce. James Madison University is well positioned to take advantage of this proximity.
    5. James Madison University has the potential to significantly enhance development efforts by building relationships and partnerships with private sector information technology firms. Potential relationships might include James Madison University faculty providing content for private sector partners, as well as fund-raising opportunities.
    6. There is strong faculty interest in K-12 education in information technology.
    7. As more information technology related employment opportunities are created in the Shenandoah Valley, this will help when recruiting new faculty members
    8. It is important for James Madison University to develop a set of specific plans to act on these opportunities, before the information technology revolution passes and the environment becomes more competitive.

Threats

    1. Faculty teaching loads are high, thereby limiting the available time for curriculum and program development. In comparison with other universities with whom we compete, faculty teaching loads are higher.
    2. The mission and institutional priorities of James Madison University are in a period of re-definition. Until clearly articulated priorities are established, program development in the area of information technology will be delayed.
    3. Competition, from both the public and private sector, for faculty with information technology skills is very keen. Attracting and retaining high-quality faculty will be challenging. Salaries and operating budget support for information technology faculty must be competitive.
    4. Faculty perceive that the quality of entering students has declined, thereby making it more difficult to differentiate James Madison University graduates from those graduating from other universities.

Recommendations

Based on the input received from the various individuals and groups with whom members of the Information Technology task force met, recommendations have been developed in three areas (1) curriculum development and enhancement, (2) faculty and staff support, and (3) Information Technology infrastructure. Each of these is outlined in greater detail in the section that follows.

A. Curriculum development and enhancement

A-1. Continue to support the development of curricula in the areas of (1) electronic commerce and (2) telecommunications. Begin to explore the feasibility of developing a program in the area of health and bio-infomatics. Health and bio-infomatics would include but not be limited to such areas as management simulation, monitoring of patient quality measures and financial analysis. Aspects of each of these programs will require additional faculty effort to refine areas such as: the development of program objectives; course objectives and content; and resource requirements.

A-2 Explore the feasibility of developing a graduate program in Educational Technology. Graduate students in this program could in turn facilitate and support faculty development across campus.

A-3 Through the Department/Program and College annual reporting and Academic Program Review processes, ensure that major programs build on, and don't duplicate, the information technology foundational skills provided by the General Education program.

A-4 Expand the utilization of shared resources across departments/programs and colleges. Examples of shared resources include computer laboratories and software, and instruction related to these resources. A specific example of such shared resources are skill acquisition and building in areas such as the use of statistical software packages.

Examine and establish a policy for the development of more open university labs, rather than laboratories reserved for specific majors or programs. These labs should have available program specific software, but would be open to all students during non-class time, thereby increasing availability to students. Each college and/or major should be required to develop a standard for both hardware and software in computer labs for their students and for laboratory space within their immediate physical proximity.

A-5 Establish an on-going advisory council on information technology as it relates to academic programs, infrastructure, technology transfer research and academic, business, government, and community partnerships. Membership on this council should include broad representation from stakeholders.

A-6 Encourage faculty to examine the role and nature of research in information technology related fields, including such aspects as proprietary data, intellectual property as it relates to ownership of data, revenue and patent ownership.

A-7 Encourage the development of a cross-disciplinary informational technology environment where teaching, research and practice are integrated into a common framework.

A-8 Develop and implement a university-wide computer purchase and lease program for students. Appropriate options, develop on a college-wide basis, would require students to purchase or lease computers which meet hardware and software standards established by each college.

B. Faculty and staff support

B-1. Develop explicit rewards for faculty who incorporate aspects of information technology into the learning environment of the courses taught.

B-2 Develop a staffing plan to provide additional information technology and educational technology support within each college. Faculty have expressed a strong need for such support and the frustrations of being largely self-taught. The Center for Instructional Technology (CIT) does a good job and has provided service to more than 1,700 faculty contacts during the 1998-99 academic year. However, the CIT resource is not used by a significant number of faculty.

B-3 Develop a model that supports faculty internships in the area of information technology and other forms of experiential learning with private and public sector partners.

B-4 Provide at the earliest feasible date, all support materials, documentation and learning materials for faculty and staff on-line. There is the need to make these resources more readily available and identifiable through the use of search engines.

B-5 Develop support and training for such products as Blackboard, which many faculty desire to learn and use in their courses.

 

C. Information technology infrastructure

C-1 Increase the speed and performance of the university network in order to support student skill development in majors which are directly related to developing and managing information technology.

C-2 Develop additional mediated classrooms to support the faculty and student demand for such facilities.

C-3 Develop a documented and widely disseminated computer equipment replacement cycle.

 

 

Appendix A

Academic Affairs Information Technology Task Force

Questions for Faculty and Staff

 

Academic Programs

  1. Identify the programs in your department, program or academic unit that currently have as a goal to teach students about one of the three IT components: developing IT, managing IT, or using IT.
  2. How well prepared are your graduates to meet the IT demands for the entry-level positions they assume upon graduation?
  3. Please give examples of baseline IT related competencies that graduates working in your discipline should possess upon graduation from JMU.
  4. In what classroom/laboratory activities do you employ IT? Briefly describe the role of IT in each of these activities.

User Level and Professional Development

  1. Please give examples of IT related competencies or capabilities that would enhance your teaching, research, and professional development.

Resources

  1. What resources (human resources, professional development, or facilities and equipment) would allow you to make greater use of IT in your teaching and research?