The Administrative Impact on Implementing Learning Technologies "Lesson I Have Learned"
Academic administrators are faced with numerous challenges in their professional lives. You’ve almost certainly heard or expressed this sentiment recently, as those working in colleges and universities peer out into the gloom ahead, trying to find the best path forward yet knowing that all the territory ahead is new and uncertain and that they are surrounded by obstacles they’ve never encountered before (Klein, 2001). Where to allocate resources, who to hire, what program path to take, what email to answer next... In my experience, a growing administrative challenge is in the area of selecting and implementing technologies that are "good" for the students, customers, employees and our institution as a whole. So what do we do?
In considering the UTUT
model (Venkatesh et al., 2003), the ultimate goal of implementing a
learning technology that impacts a user's behavior in a positive way seems
straightforward. Employees and organizations want technologies that help
them in daily tasks, are fairly intuitive, seem important to their
work and that the technology is beneficial to the organization. So
why do administrators struggle to implement educational technologies? I
can share examples where I have witnessed or been "party-to-the-crime" of the
struggle.
Knee-Jerk Technology
Adaptation Performance expectancy is
the first area of focus in the UTAT model (Venkatesh et al., 2003).
How many of us have either been victim to or been a part of
implementing technologies that get implemented and people have no idea why. A
demonstration of a "cool" or cutting edge product occurs.
Immediately the software is flung into action by someone and yet we can't understand
why our employees or students struggle with it.
Lessons I have Learned: We as experienced administrators can sometimes see
immediate value in a technology. We need to slow down and let our team(s) determine the
value collectively with us. It is better to take some time to create supporters
and salespeople that are with you rather than rally troops against you.
Intuitive Is a Subjective Term Effort expectancy is the second part of
the UTAT model (Venkatesh et al., 2003). How many of us have attended
training for a new software and we hear how "easy" it is to use only
to be incredibly frustrated when we find this not to be the case? Users
revolt as they are unwilling to practice, learn or even give the application a
try because of the initial negative frustration of lack of ease.
Lessons I have Learned: Dang we teach for a living! Take time to teach to different
learning styles around the technology. Be mindful in the way the rollout and training
occurs. Get people excited and involved in the development of instruction from all
areas of the organization. Create videos, learning objects and quick (not
400 page manuals) FAQ sheets to help people find out how easy it can be. Take
the time to do this right and maybe it will be intuitive for most.
Cool and Comfortable! The third area of UTAT is social influence
(Venkatesh et al., 2001). We all have formal and informal leaders in our
organizations. Many times software packages are selected because of
influence from others. Sometimes a technology isn't adapted because
"so and so isn't using it so why should I?" The social aspect matters
in selection, acceptance and use.
Lessons I have Learned: Create cheerleaders for the technology
and you yourself try and become one for someone else's project. Find
influencers and let them help you get the ball rolling. Creating a
flywheel effect of acceptance starts with a positive attitude and willingness
to give it a try through you and others. Plastic Gucci sunglasses are still plastic. People buy them for a reason.
Demonstrate Practicality and
Sustainability We are using
Dynamics CRM this week then Salesforce the next. Blackboard was
great for the last five years but now Canvass is better...except we might not
be able to afford it...or it doesn't work with Peoplesoft... or we need an API to Workday for that...which we may be able to do in 3 months. Sound familiar? People naturally resist change. They can more quickly support change when it is practical and sustainable. If we
keep changing technologies year after year, employees know they can just live
this one out until the next one roles in and never really need to commit.
Lessons I have Learned: Time-tested matters to people as does being realistic. If existing technology works, maybe a few additional features or the latest-greatest may not be so great as a replacement. Along those lines, administrators need to be deliberate about selecting software that fits the environment, needs of the organization and will be around with updates for more than a year or two. Spend time picking technologies and ensuring the organization can support the features that make them great and helpful.
I certainly don't have all of the answers...but have administratively lived through many of the questions.
References:
Klein, K. (2001). Creating a strong, positive climate for technology implementation: Organization should, but often don’t. . .why? In K. Klein (Ed.), Work motivation in the context of a globalizing economy. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478. https://k-state.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/01KSU_INST/1260r8r/cdi_gale_infotracacademiconefile_A108912880
“We are using Dynamics CRM this week then Salesforce the next. Blackboard was great for the last five years but now Canvass is better...except we might not be able to afford it...or it doesn't work with Peoplesoft... or we need an API to Workday for that...which we may be able to do in 3 months. Sound familiar?”
ReplyDeleteI chuckled when reading the examples above…. I started with WebCT for about 1 year, Angel for 5+ years, Moodle for 1+ year, Blackboard for 2 years, and now Canvas….. one thing I can’t deny is the improvement of “Practicality and Sustainability” each time a new LMS is adopted. But you made a very good point that “If we keep changing technologies year after year, employees know they can just live this one out until the next one roles in and never really need to commit.” Not only that, frequently changing technology is also very costly to an organization. That’s why having a visionary administrator who can help identify and adopt a technology system that will not become completely obsolete in 2 to 3 years is so important.
Thanks for sharing your take-ons!
You have written an excellent piece. I hope you consider publishing it in a journal – yes, it is that good! Your lessons learned are so powerful and I found myself identifying with each one. Together they make a powerful argument for consideration when integrating technology.
ReplyDeleteAdditionally, you last line is brilliant. We all have lived through the questions—or at least many of us have—and that can give some hints for how we might act next.
One additional lesson that I though of when reading is that in K-12 teaching, I have teachers who are advocating for technology because they “like it” and it would “be helpful”. The lesson I have learned is to help them dig deeper and think broader.
I really appreciate your feedback- you are far too kind. I am a horrible writer with a lot of professional experience. Maybe we can collaborate :)
DeleteYour idea of creating videoss, learning objects, and brief manuals to help people adopt a technology resonated. At my work, we have been working on integrating more LTI in our organization's LMS. However, we need to help folks adopt them once they are there. So, we've taken this exact approach. We are creating a short video on how faculty can take integrate the LTI into their course. We're creating sales pitches as to how they'll be useful in the course. We are also embedding some FAQs about the tools online (and where those videos we're creating will be displayed). We're hopeful this will work, because it was a lot of work to get these LTI tools integrated, but only time will tell.
ReplyDeleteThank you for sharing your experiences and lessons learned. The truth within these statements rings true. Many of us have determined that buy-in is critical to success, but I like the way you phrased it: “let our team(s) determine the value collectively with us.” You make an excellent point about the initial rollout of technology. When that first experience is frustrating it affects the attitude and willingness to continue use. I have seen people turn against a specific technology based on their first experience and this aspect of training has not been addressed enough. I completely agree with your practical and specific goal of having videos and quick info sheets to make the introduction friendlier. Most people do resist change; some more than others. I have one child who loves it and one who gets upset for weeks if I simply move the furniture. Picking the right technology with clear benefits to fit their needs helps with willingness to change. You covered every aspect of the UTAUT model but went another step further providing specific ways to achieve these things!! Your experience will prove very helpful to anyone who reads this and applies it to help with their technology integration.
ReplyDeleteVery well written Aaron and enjoyed the personal examples! As the other commenters have noted here and there is that we need to really look at the problem trying to be solved and recognize that sometimes you cannot implement a technological change to solve an adaptive problem.
ReplyDeleteWhen you hear things such as "this system will fix all our problems" my red flags go up! No system can solve the underlying problems. It will simply mask the symptoms and as you noted just force you to keep jumping around looking for the next system or software to fix an adaptive problem