Innovation as a chalenge for the traditional University: slow the growth of changes or accelerate them?

Author(s):

Edita Butrime(presenting / submitting)Raimonda Bruneviciute

Conference:

ECER 2013

Network:

20. Research in Innovative Intercultural Learning Environments

Format:

Paper

Session Information

20 SES 09, Using New Technologies and Systems Transforming Education and Learning in Multicultural Contexts

Paper Session

Time:

2013-09-12

11:00-12:30

Room:

D-404

Chair:

Carmen Carmona Rodríguez

Contribution

According to M. C. Clayton, H., J. Eyring (2011) traditions are important at the University and researches „must understand not only current realities, especially the threat of competitive disruption, but also how universities have evolved over the past several hundred years. Even more than most organizations, traditional universities are products of their history“ (Clayton, Eyring, 2011). Contemporary higher education is changing under the influence of many factors, among which the advancement of technologies has an important role. When the business world is rapidly changing and using continuously developing ICT, according to A.L.Davidson and D.Waddington (2010), universities are establishments technologically resistant to the admission of new paradigms. Admission policy of innovations plays a significant role at universities, i.e. may slow the growth and changes as well as may accelerate them. One of the key obstacles related to the successful implementation of ICT at a lot of European universities is the fact that the managerial do not support and determine relevant ICT priorities (Rutkauskiene, Pociute, Targamadze and Stricka, 2006).

According to A. Ausra (2005), today, for the first time in history, information and scientific knowledge is becoming not only the means of development for the modern society, but the key product of its economic activities.

Nowadays there have grown up so called net generation or digital natives – the youth born in 1980s and later (Lenhart, Madden, Hitlin, 2005; Brill, Park, 2008; Bennett, Maton, Kervin, 2008; Jones, 2010; Thomas, 2011). They are modern students who spend most time of their life online. Modern web technologies enter daily life and broaden the boundaries of the latter one (Talbot, 2007). ‘Digital natives’ are willing to apply modern technologies of web in all fields of life and certainly at university.

When evaluating the efficiency of virtual collaboration, communication and teamwork environment (VCCTE), interests of all the actors of the learning and teaching process (students, teachers and administration) must be taken into account, these interests being rather different. Also, specific needs of individual study subjects, experience in ICT use, financial capabilities of the institution and other factors have to be taken into account.

Case-by-case analysis of separate ICT-supported ideas implementations in the traditional university shows, that successful applications do exist, but there are not many of them and in most cases they are operating in rather closed environments and are not being replicated. One possible explanation could be given by applying the qualitative diffusion model, that was initially described by Everett Rogers, and then interpreted by G. A. Moore [12] for the diffusion of IT innovations in the corporate market .

The main goal of the whole research is using the Moore diffusion model to investigate VCCTE in the context of the traditional university.

Problem question of the research: Innovation as a chalenge for the traditional University: slow the growth of changes or accelerate them?

The subject of the research is VCCTE in the technologically resistant university.

The research aim Reveal the students, teachers and administration's approach to VCCTE at the University

Method

Research methods: Questionnaire survey in order to find out how university students, teachers and administrators apply the possibilities virtual collaboration, communication and teamwork environment and how they evaluate such collaboration. Statistic processing methods of data. Methodology Structuralism (Glazer, 1994) - during the research of complex objects it is possible to divide them into elements, parts and functions, and having analyzed that separately the entire object may be interpreted through joining the researched parts into the whole. Pragmatism according to which it is necessary to seek for an optimal result under the lowest expenditure (Dewey, 1991)

Expected Outcomes

Summarizing there may be highlighted the following virtual collaboration, communication and teamwork problems to be solved: universities are ‘resistant’ to modern new technologies; virtual collaboration, communication and teamwork has not naturalized completely; students, teachers and administration interests being rather different. Results of the empirical research: • For students it is important to have a possibility to participate in the study organization process, to use modern learning tools and to acquire quality knowledge. Teachers and administration must ensure the necessary conditions for satisfying student needs, but they have their own interests as well, and these interests shouldn’t be ignored. Higher student needs, mastering of new technologies and preparation of new learning material matching these technologies impose additional workload on the teacher, therefore the problems of workload reduction and compensation become important for these actors. Administration is interested in study infrastructure support and study process organization cost issues; • Identification of the adopters according to five categories of Moore diffusion model: a) Technology Enthusiasts, b) Visionaries (or Early Adopters), c) Pragmatists (or Early Majority), d) Conservatives (or Late Majority), e) Laggards; • Clarification of diferences in approach towards implementation of virtual collaboration, communication and teamwork environment.

References

Davidson, A., L., Waddington, D. 2010. E-Learning in the university: When will it really happen? eLearning Papers. Nº 21 September 2010. ISSN 1887-1542. http://www.elearningeuropa.info/files/media/media23710.pdf . Rutkauskiene D., Pociute E., Targamadze A., Stricka M. 2006. Lietuvos virtualus universitetas. Kaunas. http://distance.ktu.lt/livun/. Ausra A. 2005. Atvirųjų resursų reikšmė vystant žinių visuomenę. Mokslinė elektroninė biblioteka. http://www.ebiblioteka.lt/resursai/Science%20online/05_2/eLibrary_lt_Egypt_text_2005_lt.pdf . Glazer. M., 1994.Structuralism. http://www.panam.edu/faculty/mglazer/Theory/structuralism.htm. Dewey, J. 1991. The public and its problems. (Fotogr. leid.). Athens (Ohio): Swallow Press : Ohio University Press. 236 p. Lenhart A., Madden M., & Hitlin, P. 2005. Teens and technology: Youth are leading the transition to a fully wired and mobile nation. http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/162/report_display.asp. Clayton M. C., Eyring H., J. (2011) The Innovative University: Changing the DNA of Higher Education from the Inside Out ISBN: 978-1-1180-6348-4. 512 p. Brill J., M., Park, Y. 2008. Facilitating Engaged Learning in the Interaction Age Taking a Pedagogically‐Disciplined Approach to

Author Information

Edita Butrime (presenting / submitting)

Lithuanian University of Health Sciences

Department of Languages and Education

Kaunas

Raimonda Bruneviciute

Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Lithuania

Search the ECER Programme

Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
Search for authors and in the respective field.
For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.