N+-+sections

N and **second S** - How important is technological change to the program planning process. Should institutions be trying to 'keep up'? What level of 'being behind' is acceptable?

In a previous (N)ovelty discussion the group differentiated between adopting new technologies such as Web 2.0 and upgrading to a new version of software already in use. We concluded that the speed of implementation of an upgrade would be much quicker due to previous familiarity with using the application. The issue of site licensing, for example, could be worked out much quicker. Faculty and staff would likely be more supportive of an upgrade to something familiar than a completely new and unfamiliar tool. The issue of when to upgrade or introduce something new is likely the most difficult to determine. There are many factors that go into such a decision including need, cost of implementation and on-going support. Lewis and Starsia, (2009) describe the steps typically taken to introduce new technology as follows: 1.  Consultants are hired to outline technology needs by analyzing the current technology being used in the institution. 2.  List of options are provided 3.  The purchase is made. The authors suggest that this process is risky because it leads to “sunk” costs that tie the institution into technologies that are expensive and underutilized. They also seem to support the Caffarella and Sork program planning model of including all of the stakeholders in the needs analysis and decision making process including not only administration but faculty, staff and learners as well. Including all stakeholders in the planning process will provide a better assessment of the type of technology needed. While the speed of selection and implementation using the inclusive approach will slow the process down drastically, the end result will be a most cost effective system with more users.

Ultimately the answer to the question of the need to "keep up" and the level of technological currency should be left up to each individual institution to decide. The decision to upgrade or implement new technology will be up to the stakeholders within that institution and the organizational culture, vision, values, and strategic directions tha t guide the institution. By being inclusive of the stakeholders into the decision-making process the institution will utilize industry best practices. So while it is understandable that what is right for one institution may not be right for another, hopefully at the end of the day, all of the institutions will be moving the same direction with respect to learning and technology as they already have done with respect to the basic concepts of learning theory and curriculum development.

As an example of a government initiation to help schools to purchase and use TML is the Special Education Technology BC (SETBC) [] One goal of a project called Technology Inclusion Project (TIP) in partnership with Provincial Integration Support Program (PISP) [] is to provide assistive technology equipment, training, and a set of related resources to 30 intermediate or secondary schools.

Another example from BC is BC Campus [] which has a mission to connect institutions and educators with learners in BC, enabling them to receive an education no matter where, when or how they wish to study.

With initiatives such as these it become much more plausible that schools can purchase TML software that is affordable, well tested, current, and sustainable. Via initiatives such as these institutions will be able to "keep up" and not fall behind.

The importance of technological change to the program planning process is quite frankly a separate topic. I'm assuming the intent is that when planning a program decisions have to be made about whether to use technology, which technology to use, how best to integrate the technology. If a newer software application is available is it paramount to use this newer application rather than existing software? Here the planners need to evaluate factors such as costs (including training), educational value (is the new software able to improve the learning in comparison to the older software), novelty (is the software truly innovative), sustainability (is the old software due for retirement which is forcing adoption of the new software), and infrastructure (will the new software run on existing machines and network infrastructure). I'm sure there are other factors as well such as competition between institutions and programs which will influence the planning process.

The Quality Dilemma in Onling Education - Nancy K.Parker, Athatbasca University, chapter 16 p 385 & 386 [] - Theory and Practice of Online learning