1.0 Introduction and Background

While investment in technology can take place in a haphazard and disjointed fashion, planning those investments provides for more cost-effective and efficient distribution of technology resources. SCSU began campus-wide technology planning in 1997 when it developed a five-year plan (1998-2003). Many goals of that plan were realized, including ubiquitous campus network access and installation of one hundred electronic classrooms. Other goals have not been achieved, including a more timely replacement cycle for faculty and staff computer equipment and assessment of student learning with respect to technology.

In 2002, SCSU revived its technology planning efforts to prepare a technology plan for the next five-year cycle (2003-2008). This Technology Master Plan, really a plan to plan for technology, reviews the directions we expect to move during the next cycle. It reflects a greater dependence on technology across all campus constituencies, a heightened interest in technology at the MnSCU system level, and increasing technological sophistication in our incoming students, staff, faculty, and administrators. This plan also reflects pressure to develop and implement stronger technological support of pedagogy, especially in terms of training and development of personnel.

The process of developing the 2003-2008 Technology Master Plan has included the following steps:

  • The Teaching, Learning, Technology Roundtable (TLTR) conducted a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) analysis, spring 2002.
  • TLTR brainstormed goals and strategies, spring 2002.
  • TLTR asked knowledgeable people to draft sections, summer 2002.
  • A technology planning subcommittee was formed (fall 2002) including
    • David DeGroote, Biology
    • Judy Kilborn, English
    • Rubin Stenseng, Center for Information Systems
    • Kristi Tornquist, Learning Resources & Technology Services
  • The subcommittee reviewed MnSCU's suggested structure for campus technology master plans and developed a structure for SCSU's plan, fall 2002.
  • The subcommittee reviewed and revised draft sections, fall 2002 — spring 2003.
  • TLTR reviewed and revised sections recommended by the subcommittee, winter 2002 — spring 2003.
  • TLTR submitted the revised sections to the Faculty Association's Technology and Pedagogical Resources committee, spring 2003.
  • TLTR has requested a campus review of the draft, April — May 2003.
  • SCSU's Technology Master Plan is due to the Office of the Chancellor, June 2003.

Revised: May 2003