A Reflection on Boise State's 2011 Labs, Classrooms and Learning ...

June 5, 2012 by markfitzgerald

Introduction

Over the last five years we have witnessed powerful and dramatic changes in technology directly impacting computer labs, classroom technologies and pedagogy. There has been an explosion of smartphones, laptops, tablets and other handheld wireless devices. Virtual technologies, cloud computing and increased processing power enable greater access to resources and have helped create the evolution of digital learning commons ? the infusion of personalized service, instructional resources and learning spaces to embrace collaborative education.

Today?s students need more than a computer lab; they need access to computerized learning spaces and information centers.?At the same time, the concept of a classroom as a learning space continues to evolve. Classrooms technology standards must be simplified, easy to use, and supported and maintained similar to other learning spaces. Such equipment must be standardized and intuitive, as well as flexible and open to technological advances.

Research and Implementation

In 2010, using data acquired from EDUCAUSE, our peer institutions, and our own research, the Office of Information Technology (OIT) analyzed the dichotomy between the majority of students having ample access to personal computers while noting continued strong utilization of University computer lab resources. We found that, though students usually have access to a computer, they still require University technology resources. Students often do not have access to specialized software, customized printing solutions, and technical expertise to integrate all technologies into learning.

OIT changed traditional computer labs and classrooms to a variety of learning spaces while staying budget-neutral, doing more with what we have, and without occupying additional space.?The planning for these changes started in January 2011, with approvals in May of that year. The project?s implementation phase started in June 2011, with the final shuffling of equipment complete by mid-August 2011. ?Since then improvement projects have been ongoing.

Five types of learning spaces were created:

1. Help and Support Interaction Centers (or ?Zones?): Collaborative areas are located in our?Interactive Learning Center and Student Union. Students can congregate and work on group projects, check out multimedia and computing equipment, ask for help for their own computing devices, and consult with employees on how to better use software and hardware.
2. Quick Access Labs:?Quick access labs utilize lobbies, hallways, lounges and?breakout rooms. We refer to these as ?kiosks,? workstations configured in a variety of ways to adapt the environment to learning, collaboration and study. Equipment is now available in the lobbies and hallways of 10 buildings throughout campus.
3. Traditional Labs:?We maintained traditional computer lab configurations in?our MultiPurpose Classroom Building, and Business and Economics Building. These areas receive heavy usage, and consist of rows of computers with a lab assistant on hand to answer questions and offer computing support. These are ideal locations for individual computing. Yet there is nothing traditional about the level of support and staffing we introduced to reinvigorate these spaces.
4. Computerized Classrooms:?Computerized classrooms are used for hands-on?instruction. These classrooms have the same software and technical configuration, and include projection and instructor presentation areas. Four computerized classrooms were created, in a variety of sizes.
5. 21st Century Classrooms:?The majority of general purpose classrooms on campus had a base?level of technology, but lacked consistency and stability. This project replaced all of the computer and projectors in each classroom. These computers were configured the same as in labs and learning spaces.

Each of these learning areas build upon one other.?For example, a learning space allows a professor to demonstrate a task in a classroom. After class, a group gets together in a Quick Access Area and reviews that task using the same setup and configuration as the professor. An individual student then goes to a Zone and consults with staff about the technology. The student then sits down in a Traditional Computer Lab and individually works on the task.

The work was carried out by 22 full time employees and 55 student employees within the Office of Information Technology, with additional assistance from facilities, our Student Union, and external vendors.

Boise State has long had the strategic direction to become a Metropolitan Research University of Distinction, with emphasis on academic excellence, public engagement, vibrant culture and exceptional research. This project was in direct alignment with those strategic aims. We set out to leverage technology and create services to directly engage the academic missions of the university, that reached out to the public and embraced the culture of our campus community. We were able to do this while maintaining fiscal stewardship and staying within FERPA and ADA guidelines.

Results

In the first semester, we had over 17,000 unique individuals use one of our facilities. With a student and faculty population of approximately 21,000, we were able to reach over 80% of our community within the first three months. Halfway through the semester we sent a series of three surveys to those who had used classrooms, labs and kiosks to find out?how we were doing, and where we could improve. These surveys were highly complimentary, but also pointed out several key corrections that we could and did make.

The project allowed us to return four large rooms to the University; with space saved, the University created an engineering lab, four offices, a classroom, and doubled the size of a computerized testing center. The return of over 2,000 square feet saved the University thousands of dollars in new construction costs.

Additionally, the project reduced a large amount of time and labor by minimizing duplication of effort; we estimate this initiative returned 150 hours of work to each of the five areas, allowing them to allocate resources toward more strategic initiatives. And, we were able to bring each area into current ADA compliance.

Benefits to Stakeholders

Students

For the first time there is a formal centralized resource on campus for technology needs. Students can both learn and utilize advanced and cutting edge technologies.

Faculty

There is consistency and stability in the learning platform, providing a common foundation on which to build and design courses. There is a single place to engage with technologists for training, support, and assistance.

Technologists

We have reduced the duplication of effort and allowed department technical resources to focus on high value, strategic departmental projects instead of dealing with labs and classrooms.

Administration

Without creating new departments or increasing expenditures,?Boise State now has the ability to focus on common goals. Current strategic resources, such as redesigning our foundational classes, now have a common tool set for the University administration to rely and build upon.

Conclusion

The goals and success of this project were not about technology itself, but rather about strategic alignment and personalization of technology. By working together we can accomplish more with what we have, and continue working toward Governor Otter?s goal of promoting responsible government. We have also aligned technology and pedagogy with Boise State?s mission of becoming a Metropolitan Research University of Distinction.

berkshire hathaway ufc 144 james jones james jones aladdin black forest ufc 144 fight card