Early Beginnings and Evolution - Revision history

BerkmanSysop: UTurn to 1185926401

2013-04-15T20:40:21Z

UTurn to 1185926401

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:40, 15 April 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Early Beginnings<br />		Early Beginnings<br />
	<p>At Harvard University, instructional technologists have historically experienced difficulties inspiring a critical mass of faculty to innovate with centralized technology. In the late nineties, the University established a central group of developers, i.e., not affiliated with a particular school, called iCommons to assist with this problem. This group began to produce a centralized system of course technologies that all faculty could access and use in their teaching. When the first version of this course management system was deployed in 2001, the problem initially became one of motivation: how do instructional technologists entice Harvard faculty to use these tools appropriately and innovatively? Instructional technologists, ideally, want to work with faculty members who will exchange appropriate and innovative practices with one another and proselytize colleagues in order to achieve an early majority of faculty using the centralized tools. If this early majority of faculty can be formed, instructional technologists could then stop promoting the technology and spend more time consulting about the technology. In other words, the main problem for technology adoption cycles is always to develop a critical mass of interested faculty who will make the technology self-sustainable.</p> ~~[http://www.essaymill.com essay search]~~		<p>At Harvard University, instructional technologists have historically experienced difficulties inspiring a critical mass of faculty to innovate with centralized technology. In the late nineties, the University established a central group of developers, i.e., not affiliated with a particular school, called iCommons to assist with this problem. This group began to produce a centralized system of course technologies that all faculty could access and use in their teaching. When the first version of this course management system was deployed in 2001, the problem initially became one of motivation: how do instructional technologists entice Harvard faculty to use these tools appropriately and innovatively? Instructional technologists, ideally, want to work with faculty members who will exchange appropriate and innovative practices with one another and proselytize colleagues in order to achieve an early majority of faculty using the centralized tools. If this early majority of faculty can be formed, instructional technologists could then stop promoting the technology and spend more time consulting about the technology. In other words, the main problem for technology adoption cycles is always to develop a critical mass of interested faculty who will make the technology self-sustainable.</p>

	<p>After the new course management system was deployed in 2001, University leaders realized the University was at the stage where only early adopters with a certain level of technical sophistication had the inclination to integrate the new technologies. As a result, Harvard University President Larry Summers et al began an initiative to centrally fund and develop a program where Harvard students could work with local instructional technology staff and faculty with a primary goal of increasing the use of technology in instruction. This program became the Presidential Instructional Technology Fellows (PITF) program and was rolled out initially at the Faculty of Arts and Sciences (FAS) in 2004. From the outset, no formal structures, principles or procedures were established for the PITF program. President Larry Summers and University officials laid out a few main objectives and established a funding model. The programâs modest goals were to help faculty utilize the newly developed centralized tools and increase student face-to-face time with Harvard faculty. </p>		<p>After the new course management system was deployed in 2001, University leaders realized the University was at the stage where only early adopters with a certain level of technical sophistication had the inclination to integrate the new technologies. As a result, Harvard University President Larry Summers et al began an initiative to centrally fund and develop a program where Harvard students could work with local instructional technology staff and faculty with a primary goal of increasing the use of technology in instruction. This program became the Presidential Instructional Technology Fellows (PITF) program and was rolled out initially at the Faculty of Arts and Sciences (FAS) in 2004. From the outset, no formal structures, principles or procedures were established for the PITF program. President Larry Summers and University officials laid out a few main objectives and established a funding model. The programâs modest goals were to help faculty utilize the newly developed centralized tools and increase student face-to-face time with Harvard faculty. </p>

Qwe at 15:25, 21 January 2010

2010-01-21T15:25:11Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:25, 21 January 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Early Beginnings<br />		Early Beginnings<br />
	<p>At Harvard University, instructional technologists have historically experienced difficulties inspiring a critical mass of faculty to innovate with centralized technology. In the late nineties, the University established a central group of developers, i.e., not affiliated with a particular school, called iCommons to assist with this problem. This group began to produce a centralized system of course technologies that all faculty could access and use in their teaching. When the first version of this course management system was deployed in 2001, the problem initially became one of motivation: how do instructional technologists entice Harvard faculty to use these tools appropriately and innovatively? Instructional technologists, ideally, want to work with faculty members who will exchange appropriate and innovative practices with one another and proselytize colleagues in order to achieve an early majority of faculty using the centralized tools. If this early majority of faculty can be formed, instructional technologists could then stop promoting the technology and spend more time consulting about the technology. In other words, the main problem for technology adoption cycles is always to develop a critical mass of interested faculty who will make the technology self-sustainable.</p>		<p>At Harvard University, instructional technologists have historically experienced difficulties inspiring a critical mass of faculty to innovate with centralized technology. In the late nineties, the University established a central group of developers, i.e., not affiliated with a particular school, called iCommons to assist with this problem. This group began to produce a centralized system of course technologies that all faculty could access and use in their teaching. When the first version of this course management system was deployed in 2001, the problem initially became one of motivation: how do instructional technologists entice Harvard faculty to use these tools appropriately and innovatively? Instructional technologists, ideally, want to work with faculty members who will exchange appropriate and innovative practices with one another and proselytize colleagues in order to achieve an early majority of faculty using the centralized tools. If this early majority of faculty can be formed, instructional technologists could then stop promoting the technology and spend more time consulting about the technology. In other words, the main problem for technology adoption cycles is always to develop a critical mass of interested faculty who will make the technology self-sustainable.</p> [http://www.essaymill.com essay search]

	<p>After the new course management system was deployed in 2001, University leaders realized the University was at the stage where only early adopters with a certain level of technical sophistication had the inclination to integrate the new technologies. As a result, Harvard University President Larry Summers et al began an initiative to centrally fund and develop a program where Harvard students could work with local instructional technology staff and faculty with a primary goal of increasing the use of technology in instruction. This program became the Presidential Instructional Technology Fellows (PITF) program and was rolled out initially at the Faculty of Arts and Sciences (FAS) in 2004. From the outset, no formal structures, principles or procedures were established for the PITF program. President Larry Summers and University officials laid out a few main objectives and established a funding model. The programâs modest goals were to help faculty utilize the newly developed centralized tools and increase student face-to-face time with Harvard faculty. </p>		<p>After the new course management system was deployed in 2001, University leaders realized the University was at the stage where only early adopters with a certain level of technical sophistication had the inclination to integrate the new technologies. As a result, Harvard University President Larry Summers et al began an initiative to centrally fund and develop a program where Harvard students could work with local instructional technology staff and faculty with a primary goal of increasing the use of technology in instruction. This program became the Presidential Instructional Technology Fellows (PITF) program and was rolled out initially at the Faculty of Arts and Sciences (FAS) in 2004. From the outset, no formal structures, principles or procedures were established for the PITF program. President Larry Summers and University officials laid out a few main objectives and established a funding model. The programâs modest goals were to help faculty utilize the newly developed centralized tools and increase student face-to-face time with Harvard faculty. </p>

Kmartin at 02:27, 1 June 2007

2007-06-01T02:27:49Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:27, 1 June 2007
Line 6:		Line 6:
	<p>From such humble beginnings within FAS, the PITF program developed organically into an unprecedented institutional initiative that focused on teaching and technology adoption. Today, the PITF program is a flourishing operation that has a successful impact on technology integration across multiple faculty.</p>		<p>From such humble beginnings within FAS, the PITF program developed organically into an unprecedented institutional initiative that focused on teaching and technology adoption. Today, the PITF program is a flourishing operation that has a successful impact on technology integration across multiple faculty.</p>

	~~History~~ of the PITF Program<br />		Evolution of the PITF Program<br />
	<p>In April 2004, Harvard President Larry Summers et al instituted the Presidential Instructional Technology Fellows (PITF) program. The program was derived as a collaborative partnership between the Provost office and Harvardâs individual schools. Local schools would recruit and train graduate and undergraduate students to be fellows who work with faculty one-on-one to utilize technology for educational uses (Powell, 2004). During the roll-out, Provost Steven Hyman remarked that âour effort is designed to place resources close to faculty to empower them to better use the remarkable software tools that have developed in recent years. Weâre out of the early adopter phase and ready to use more broadly what weâve created through the diligent efforts of faculty, staff and studentsâ (Powell, 2004). President Summers added that âfinding ways to enhance the student experience and to support our faculty in applying technology is the main goalâ (Powell, 2004). A year after the program began, Summers remarked that ânew technologies hold important promise to improve teaching and learning, and we're fortunate to have a group of talented individuals translating these innovations into practical useâ (Powell, 2005). The program strives to have students benefit from the initiative as much as faculty. Fellows share experiences with other students in regular plenary meetings where work is showcased and ideas are shared (Powell, 2004). They also develop valuable technical skills that enhance resumes and are useful in real life career development. Finally, each spring, awards are handed out to students who have been involved with top projects that have had a major impact on teaching and learning (Powell, 2004).</p>		<p>In April 2004, Harvard President Larry Summers et al instituted the Presidential Instructional Technology Fellows (PITF) program. The program was derived as a collaborative partnership between the Provost office and Harvardâs individual schools. Local schools would recruit and train graduate and undergraduate students to be fellows who work with faculty one-on-one to utilize technology for educational uses (Powell, 2004). During the roll-out, Provost Steven Hyman remarked that âour effort is designed to place resources close to faculty to empower them to better use the remarkable software tools that have developed in recent years. Weâre out of the early adopter phase and ready to use more broadly what weâve created through the diligent efforts of faculty, staff and studentsâ (Powell, 2004). President Summers added that âfinding ways to enhance the student experience and to support our faculty in applying technology is the main goalâ (Powell, 2004). A year after the program began, Summers remarked that ânew technologies hold important promise to improve teaching and learning, and we're fortunate to have a group of talented individuals translating these innovations into practical useâ (Powell, 2005). The program strives to have students benefit from the initiative as much as faculty. Fellows share experiences with other students in regular plenary meetings where work is showcased and ideas are shared (Powell, 2004). They also develop valuable technical skills that enhance resumes and are useful in real life career development. Finally, each spring, awards are handed out to students who have been involved with top projects that have had a major impact on teaching and learning (Powell, 2004).</p>
			<p>At present the majority of Harvard schools administrate the PITF program at their local level.</p>

	<hr>		<hr>
	Powell, A. (2004). Presidential Technology Initiative Unveiled: New fellows, grants stem from implementation-focused effort. Harvard Gazette, (8 April 2004). http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2004/04.08/13-tech.html.		Powell, A. (2004). Presidential Technology Initiative Unveiled: New fellows, grants stem from implementation-focused effort. Harvard Gazette, (8 April 2004). http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2004/04.08/13-tech.html.

	Powell, A. (2005). First Presidential Instructional Technology Fellows Awarded: Technology fellows teach, learn; help others teach, learn. Harvard Gazette, (2 June 2005). http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2005/06.02/11-preztech.html.		Powell, A. (2005). First Presidential Instructional Technology Fellows Awarded: Technology fellows teach, learn; help others teach, learn. Harvard Gazette, (2 June 2005). http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2005/06.02/11-preztech.html.

Kmartin at 02:03, 1 June 2007

2007-06-01T02:03:53Z

New page

Early Beginnings 
At Harvard University, instructional technologists have historically experienced difficulties inspiring a critical mass of faculty to innovate with centralized technology. In the late nineties, the University established a central group of developers, i.e., not affiliated with a particular school, called iCommons to assist with this problem. This group began to produce a centralized system of course technologies that all faculty could access and use in their teaching. When the first version of this course management system was deployed in 2001, the problem initially became one of motivation: how do instructional technologists entice Harvard faculty to use these tools appropriately and innovatively? Instructional technologists, ideally, want to work with faculty members who will exchange appropriate and innovative practices with one another and proselytize colleagues in order to achieve an early majority of faculty using the centralized tools. If this early majority of faculty can be formed, instructional technologists could then stop promoting the technology and spend more time consulting about the technology. In other words, the main problem for technology adoption cycles is always to develop a critical mass of interested faculty who will make the technology self-sustainable.

After the new course management system was deployed in 2001, University leaders realized the University was at the stage where only early adopters with a certain level of technical sophistication had the inclination to integrate the new technologies. As a result, Harvard University President Larry Summers et al began an initiative to centrally fund and develop a program where Harvard students could work with local instructional technology staff and faculty with a primary goal of increasing the use of technology in instruction. This program became the Presidential Instructional Technology Fellows (PITF) program and was rolled out initially at the Faculty of Arts and Sciences (FAS) in 2004. From the outset, no formal structures, principles or procedures were established for the PITF program. President Larry Summers and University officials laid out a few main objectives and established a funding model. The programâs modest goals were to help faculty utilize the newly developed centralized tools and increase student face-to-face time with Harvard faculty. 

From such humble beginnings within FAS, the PITF program developed organically into an unprecedented institutional initiative that focused on teaching and technology adoption. Today, the PITF program is a flourishing operation that has a successful impact on technology integration across multiple faculty.

History of the PITF Program 
In April 2004, Harvard President Larry Summers et al instituted the Presidential Instructional Technology Fellows (PITF) program. The program was derived as a collaborative partnership between the Provost office and Harvardâs individual schools. Local schools would recruit and train graduate and undergraduate students to be fellows who work with faculty one-on-one to utilize technology for educational uses (Powell, 2004). During the roll-out, Provost Steven Hyman remarked that âour effort is designed to place resources close to faculty to empower them to better use the remarkable software tools that have developed in recent years. Weâre out of the early adopter phase and ready to use more broadly what weâve created through the diligent efforts of faculty, staff and studentsâ (Powell, 2004). President Summers added that âfinding ways to enhance the student experience and to support our faculty in applying technology is the main goalâ (Powell, 2004). A year after the program began, Summers remarked that ânew technologies hold important promise to improve teaching and learning, and we're fortunate to have a group of talented individuals translating these innovations into practical useâ (Powell, 2005). The program strives to have students benefit from the initiative as much as faculty. Fellows share experiences with other students in regular plenary meetings where work is showcased and ideas are shared (Powell, 2004). They also develop valuable technical skills that enhance resumes and are useful in real life career development. Finally, each spring, awards are handed out to students who have been involved with top projects that have had a major impact on teaching and learning (Powell, 2004).
<hr>
Powell, A. (2004). Presidential Technology Initiative Unveiled: New fellows, grants stem from implementation-focused effort. Harvard Gazette, (8 April 2004). http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2004/04.08/13-tech.html.

Powell, A. (2005). First Presidential Instructional Technology Fellows Awarded: Technology fellows teach, learn; help others teach, learn. Harvard Gazette, (2 June 2005). http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2005/06.02/11-preztech.html.