The ACTWAN Study University of Wisconsin, Division of Information Technology, 2007

1. The ACTWAN StudyUniversity of Wisconsin, Division of Information Technology, 2007 Aligning Collaborative Tools With Academic Needs

2. Bruce Barton, eLearning Solutions Ron Cramer, Academic Technology Cheryl Diermyer, Academic Technology Hildy Feen, Academic Technology Nancy Rebholz, Engineering Outreach ACTWANAligning Collaborative Tools With Academic Needs • Mission • Explore the current use , values, successes and challenges of collaborative activities and technologies on the UW-Madison campus from both the instructors’ and students’ viewpoints. • Method • Literature & Survey Review: University of Michigan, UW-Madison, ECAR… • Student Survey: 1200, 192 respondents • Faculty Survey: 1500 faculty/teaching staff, 85 respondents • ACTWAN Members: • Lauren Rosen, Languages • Michael Roy, Student, Sophmore • John Thomson, Student, Ph. D. • Susan Weier, Learning Support Services Sue Weier and Cheryl Diermyer University of Wisconsin-Madison

3. Key Findings • Face-to-Face environments hold the highest value to instructors and students when collaborating. • 90% of instructors state that learning is aided when collaborating face-to-face, while only 41% of instructors indicate that student learning is aided by online collaboration. Sue Weier and Cheryl Diermyer University of Wisconsin-Madison

4. Key Findings • Discussion • Study groups and • Group problem solving The top three most valuable collaborative activities for learning chosen by students and instructors are Sue Weier and Cheryl Diermyer University of Wisconsin-Madison

5. Key Findings • 81% of instructors indicate that collaborative activities are essential for student learning. • 57% of instructors do not currently assign the use of collaborative technologies. Sue Weier and Cheryl Diermyer University of Wisconsin-Madison

6. Key Findings • 79% of the faculty would consider integrating various collaborative tools into future courses. • Numerous comments indicate student and instructor lack of knowledge of online collaborative technologies; • what are they? • how do they work? • how can they be used? Sue Weier and Cheryl Diermyer University of Wisconsin-Madison

7. Key Findings • Students find more value in the use of study groups than faculty (20% variance). • Faculty value group presentations more than students (12% variance). • 75% of students and 83% of faculty want control of who can or cannot see course work. Sue Weier and Cheryl Diermyer University of Wisconsin-Madison

8. Recommendations Group Participation and ACTWAN Recommendations

9. Key Findings and Recommendations Activities • ACTIVITY 1: • Select three key findings that you feel are the most essential to the planning of a collaborative tools campus service. (30 seconds) • ACTIVITY 2: • What recommendations do you have for “next steps” that integrate these three key findings into the planning stages of a collaborative tools campus service? (2 minutes) Sue Weier and Cheryl Diermyer University of Wisconsin-Madison

10. A Few ACTWAN Recommendations • Evaluate existing face-to-face (f2f) collaborative spaces • Enhance and extend f2f collaborative activities • Continue to strengthen partnerships with campus stakeholders • Formation of focus groups • Work with instructors already using collaborative tools • Strong communication and marketing plan • Annual review of Instructional Technology needs Sue Weier and Cheryl Diermyer University of Wisconsin-Madison

11. Further information • ACTWAN Website: • http://academictech.doit.wisc.edu/resources/products/actwan/ • ACTWAN Committee Members • Lauren Rosen, Languages • Michael Roy, Student, Sophmore • John Thomson, Student, Ph. D. • Susan Weier, Learning Support Services • Bruce Barton, eLearning Solutions • Ron Cramer, Academic Technology • Cheryl Diermyer, Academic Technology • Hildy Feen, Academic Technology • Nancy Rebholz, Engineering Outreach Sue Weier and Cheryl Diermyer University of Wisconsin-Madison

12. Thank You!