Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Dr. Judy Ashcroft, Associate Vice President and Director
Dr. Rob Bruce, Deputy Director
Ms. Shan Evans, Associate Director
Mr. Michael Sweet, Graduate Research Assistant
OverviewOverview
University Environment Introduction to DIIA From Assessment to Assessment
- Administrative and Infrastructure Outcomes
- Learning Outcomes
- Classroom Management Outcomes Pilots and Recommendations Audience Participation Questions
University EnvironmentUniversity Environment
2000 Gilbert Report on Technology Enhanced Learning
Finally, as the use of technology in instruction becomes the norm, the missions of CTE and the CIT, as well as some of the functions of MEC, will increasingly converge. Already faculty find themselves in the position of needing to assess the degree to which they want to include technology in a course before making a decision to consult with CTE or the CIT. Faculty seeking advice on on-line evaluation and assessment must decide whether to contact MEC, CTE or the CIT. Clearly this is an inefficient and ineffective approach to providing faculty support. A more effective and efficient solution would be to strive for a one-stop service for faculty that provides them with a seamless portfolio of instructional support services.
Recommendation 7.0.2: The Provost should respond to the converging missions of CIT, CTE and MEC by functionally integrating all appropriate services, activities and expertise in order to provide faculty with efficient and effective instructional support services.
Final Report of 2000 TELC
University EnvironmentUniversity Environment
2004 Kappelman Report on Technology Enhanced Learning
The committee recommends that the provost continue to respond to the growing faculty and program demands for TEL support by increasing the capacity of DIIA in promoting teaching excellence, providing instructional assessment, conducting measurement and evaluation of teaching and learning, and facilitating the integration of instructional technology. In addition, the relationship among teaching, learning, and technology should be investigated in light of outcome-based learning in order to inform and assist the accreditation process and improve our record of successes.
Final Report of 2004 TELC
Current Environment Current Environment
SACS ACCREDITATION
Reporting Group Division of Instructional Innovation and Assessment (DIIA)
Criterion Number
3.4.14
Short Description
Technology-Enhanced Learning
Full Version The institution's use of technology enhances student learning, is appropriate for meetings the objectives of its programs, and ensures that students have access to and training in the use of technology.
Current EnvironmentCurrent Environment
SACS Accreditation Summary
At the University of Texas at Austin, technology-enhanced learning represents one stage in the natural evolution of educational methods, integrating pedagogical advances with those of design, interaction, delivery, and assessment technologies. To ensure that its use of technology enhances student learning, is appropriate for meetings the objectives of its programs, and enables students to have access to and training in the use of technology, the university draws on several resources, including
− the work of specialized university committees,− a centralized division created to focus on technology-enhanced
learning, pedagogy, and assessment,− program support initiated by individual colleges and schools,
and− initiatives pursued by Information Technology Services (ITS) and
University Libraries.
Promoting effective and innovative instructional and evaluation practices
Striving to bring about positive change in the teaching and learning process
Making effective connections by sharing and building knowledge
Promoting effective and innovative instructional and evaluation practices
Striving to bring about positive change in the teaching and learning process
Making effective connections by sharing and building knowledge
www.utexas.edu/academic/diiawww.utexas.edu/academic/diia
Integrating pedagogy, instructional technology, and assessmentIntegrating pedagogy, instructional technology, and assessment
Introduction to DIIAIntroduction to DIIA
Division of Instructional Innovation and Assessment
MissionDIIA integrates pedagogy, instructional technology, and assessment
promoting effective and innovative instructional and evaluation practices in support of the University's core purpose and values.
VisioniDIIA (idea) people providing instructional services that
improve teaching to transform learning.
Position within University
DIIA is a centralized division which reports to the Office of the Provost.
DIIA TeamsDIIA Teams Administration Instructional
Technology Integration
and Development
Teaching and Learning
Excellence
Instructional Assessment and
Evaluation
•Central Administration
•Finance
•Human Resources
•Institutional Compliance
•Policy
•Research
•Strategy
•Consulting
•IT Design & Development
•Gaming/Simulations
•IT Campus Liaison
•Networking
•Programming
•Project Management
•Research
•Scanning
•System Security
•Tools/System Support
•Consulting
•Faculty Development
•Faculty Incentive Programs
•Graduate Student Development
•Instructional Consulting
•Instructional Design
•New Media Lab
•Research
•Technology-Enhanced Learning
•Assessment
•Consulting
•Course Evaluation
•Credit-by-Exam
•Instructor Evaluation
•Policy
•Program Evaluation
•Research
•SACS Training
•Student Placement
•Surveys
•Technology Evaluation
•Testing
The DIIA ApproachThe DIIA Approach
• Assessment
• Collaboration
• Infrastructure and Administrative Outcomes
• Learning Outcomes
• Classroom Management Outcomes
• Pilot Phase
• Assessment
• Recommendation
• Assessment
The DIIA ApproachThe DIIA Approach
• Infrastructure and Administrative Outcomes
• Learning Outcomes
• Classroom Management Outcomes
Individual ParticipationIndividual Participation
Think of a technology implementation you have either completed, are undertaking now, or are considering for the near future. What are the major steps of this implementation?
What constituencies are involved?
Reflecting upon what you have heard so far: What additional steps might you include?
Who else might you involve, and when?
Partner ParticipationPartner Participation
• Briefly share your story and concerns with the person next to you.
• Using the materials in the booklet and your own experience, help each other generate a list of:
1.objectives most in need of clarification in your project.
2.constituencies that could/should be involved in helping you clarify those objectives.
3.assessment steps and roles that these constituencies (and others) can help you can build into the implementation process.
Group ParticipationGroup Participation
• Any concerns that reflecting upon objectives, constituencies, and assessment plans helped address?
• Any concerns still not addressed that the whole room can help brainstorm?
QuestionsQuestions
Contact InformationContact Information
Dr. Judy Ashcroft, Associate Vice President and Director
Dr. Robert Bruce, Deputy [email protected]
Ms. Shan Evans, Associate [email protected]
Mr. Michael Sweet, Graduate Research Assistant
