Instituting an institute: go for it!

ABSTRACT

The University of New Hampshire set out to inaugurate a Faculty Instructional Technology Summer Institute (FITSI) addressing the pedagogical principles that support the successful integration of instructional technology into teaching and learning. After a survey of existing programs at other institutions, we developed a model grounded in the widely acclaimed research of Chickering and Gamson detailing the "Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education" (1987) and Chickering and Erhmann's subsequent work, "Implementing the Seven Principles: Technology as Lever" (1996), which further developed Chickering's theory by applying the seven principles to the field of instructional technology. The primary purpose of the Institute was to provide faculty with the theory, research, and hands-on experience necessary to explore and implement innovative technology-based learning solutions in their classrooms.During the development and implementation of the Institute, we identified five best practices that can help other institutions plan similar faculty development initiatives. These can be summarized in the acronym GO FOR IT!:Gain support for the program, Organize your resources, First pedagogy, then technology, Offer an incentive, Review and evaluate your efforts, Instructional Technology!This paper will expand on the design and implementation of our Institute model and analyze the effectiveness of these five best practices in the light of initial evaluation data from Institute participants.

REFERENCES

• 1: Butler, D and M. Sellborn. "Barriers to Adopting Technology for Teaching and Learning," Educause Quarterly 2002, vol. 25, no. 2, 22--28.
• 2: Chickering, Arthur and Zelda Gamson. "Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education," AAHE Bulletin, March 1987, 3--7.
• 3: Chickering, Arthur and Stephen Erhmann. "Implementing the Seven Principles: Technology as Lever," AAHE Bulletin, October 1996, 3--6.
• 4: Emerson, John D. and F. Mosteller. "Development Programs for College Faculty: Preparing for the Twenty-first Century," Educational Media and Technology Yearbook 2000, vol. 25, 26--42.
• 5: Gillespie, Kay Herr. "Using Technology in Faculty Development: Practical Examples," New Directions for Teaching and Learning, Winter 1998, no. 76, 79--92.
• 6: Hershfield, Allan F. "Education's Technological Revolution: An Event in Search of Leaders," Change, Nov.-December 1980, vol. 12, no. 8, 48--52.
• 7: Kaminski, Karne. "Infusing Technology into the Classroom: A Comparison of Three Faculty Development Workshops," Tech Trends, April 2000, vol. 44, no. 3, 38--39.
• 8: Privateer, Paul Michael. "Academic Technology and the Future of Higher Education: Strategic Paths Taken and Not Taken," Journal of Higher Education, January-February 1999, vol. 70, no. 1, 60--70.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  K. Computing Milieux
  K.0 GENERAL

Additional Classification:
  K. Computing Milieux
  K.3 COMPUTERS AND EDUCATION
      K.3.1 Computer Uses in Education
      K.3.m Miscellaneous

General Terms:
Design, Experimentation, Management, Performance, Theory

Keywords:
design, educational technology, faculty development, institute, instructional technology, training