Uys,
P.M. & Siverts, S.A (2001, April). Managing
Technological Transformation in Higher Education: A Southern African
Perspective. Proceedings of the 22nd World ICDE (International Council
for Distance Education) Conference".
Managing Technological Transformation in
Higher Education:
A Southern African Perspective
Deputy Director: Educational Technology
Tel: +267- 3552799 Fax: +267-302884
E-mail: philip.uys@globe-online.com
http://www.globe-online.com/philip.uys
(Formerly Senior Lecturer and Director: hydi Educational New
Media Centre
Prof S.
Siverts
Vice-Chancellor
Tel: +267- 352252 Fax: +267-584747 E-mail: ssiverts@mopipi.ub.bw
http://www.ub.bw
Contact
person: philip.uys@globe-online.com
E-mail: philip.uys@globe-online.com
Personal
homepage: http://www.globe-online.com/philip.uys
Other On-line Papers
|
Invitation
If you need assistance in the strategic implementation of
e-Learning (networked education/distributed learning) in your institute, you
are welcome to contact philip.uys@globe-online.com to discuss your needs.
ABSTRACT
This paper reports key aspects of
managing technological transformation in higher education particularly as
it applies to
Introduction
The pursuit of technological
transformation in
higher education has become widespread also in
Technological
transformation however has major systemic implications and needs to be
carefully managed as Drucker (1998, p. 100)
points out: "… as soon as a company takes the first
tentative steps from data to information, its decision processes, management
structure, and even the way it gets its work done begin to be transformed." Attempts to introduce any
significant reform will impact on all of its sub-systems. Bates (2000:196)
contends, "…using technology to extend the campus on a global basis will
affect all aspects of a university or college, but particularly administrative
systems". Fullan (1991:349) refers to the necessity of looking at
innovations within the framework of institutional development.
Thomas, Carswell, Price and Petre (1998) argue for a transformation of
practices (both teaching and administrative) in order to take advantage of
technology so as to provide needed functions, rather than superficial
translation of existing practices. Bates (1999) argues that the introduction of
e-Learning will prompt "…a thorough re-examination of the core practices
of an organization, whether advertising, or registration, or design and
delivery of materials, or student support or assessment of students, in order
to arrive at the most effective way of providing these services in a networked,
multimedia environment."
Managing
change in general and in higher education in particular is however problematic
and it is therefore necessary, as Fullan (1991:350) suggests, "… that we
explicitly think and worry about the change process" in educational reform.
This paper presents some aspects
of the doctorate research of Uys (2000) since 1995 and contextualises it within
higher education in
Educational reform
There
is no neatly formulated theory of generic change (Goodman and Kurke, 1982).
Cannon (1986) further points to the absence of a general theory of educational
development and notes that educational developers therefore draw on theories
from other disciplines to inform their educational practice.
Tertiary
educational institutes in general are very conservative and have been highly
resistant to change and reform over the centuries (Evans and Franz, 1998 April;
Richardson, 1979). Educational institutions in general "…which exist to
open minds and challenge established doctrine, are themselves extremely
resistant to change" (Robbins and Barnwell,
1998). Higher education can be described as largely bureaucratic and
"…bureaucracies by definition resist change…" (Tapscott, 1996:36).
Technological
innovation has often been implemented as an isolated, bottom-up initiative of
academic staff for efficiency purposes. In this scenario the wider systems
within tertiary education are often not considered and neither affected by the
innovation. The management of an institute may thus feel justified in
disregarding the innovation. Systems theory calls for an integrated approach to
technological innovation: "a system is a whole that cannot be taken apart
without loss of its essential characteristics, and hence must be studied as a
whole" (Ackhoff, 1972:40).
Technological
innovations have also experienced difficulty in education because of a problem
that Michael Porter calls "metrics" (Pastore,
1995, October 1). Higher
education, similar to other sectors of society, has often responded to new ICT
applications on the basis of efficiencies rather than using more strategic
considerations. Porter (Pastore, 1995, October 1) describes this problem as follows:
"The traditional criteria by which IT applications have been chosen have
been ones of operational effectiveness—How many people can we save? How much
faster can we process the paper?—rather than more strategic measures, such as
how much have quality or service levels gone up". Fullan (1991) further
refers to first order (or first level) and second order (or second level)
changes to explain this phenomenon. He believes that most changes in education
in the twentieth century have been first order changes, which are aimed at
improving efficiency and effectiveness of current practices.
To
ensure ownership by academic staff as well as sound educational quality in
e-Learning, it is important that educators and educational principles drive the
technological transformation of higher education (Willmot and McLean, 1994; Caladine, 1993). The structures
supporting technology-based education have to ensure an educational focus and
pre-eminence of educational principles rather than administrative desires or
technical possibilities. Caladine (1993:7), who reviewed the literature on
non-traditional modes of delivery in higher education using state-of-the-art
technologies, indicates that the extensive use of ICT in education
"...poses previously unencountered problems in pedagogy and
andragogy". Bates (1992:265) contends that "… technological decisions
need to be preceded by policy and educational decisions...". This also
highlights the importance of following bottom-up and more organic approaches
during technological transformation in higher education.
Tillema
(1995) considers engaging academics in the reform process as one of the two
significant management issues to address in educational reform and in education
in general. He asserts that reform has to be based on the development of
'learning communities'. That means that the actual process of reform must
engage academics in local communities of discourse about their educational
practices. Tillema further points out that historical studies, based largely on
experience in schools, show that 'top down' attempts to achieve educational
reform have failed, and suggests that they will be doomed to failure until they
'confront the cultural and pedagogical traditions and beliefs that underlie
current practices and organizational arrangements' (Goodman 1995:2). In
technological transformation in higher education, it therefore seems necessary
to address the concerns and perceptions of academic staff in the light of the
need for changing their attitudes and to ensuring ownership by academic staff
(Evans and Franz, 1998 April; Taylor, Lopez and Quadrelli, 1996).
Ownership
of the technological transformation by academic staff is critical as Bates
(1984:227) contends that "… the introduction of new technology in distance
education requires major changes in professional roles". Bates (1984)
points to the need for specialised roles and the need for academics to gain the
skills and knowledge for effective use of the new technologies, and the
requirement for extensive training. These aspects would be amplified when
managing the transformation of higher education through technology with its ICT
base and range of technical options. Mason (1998:157) asserts that the new
technologies in global education point to "… a new role for the teacher,
for the student and for course material. It centres on the construction of
knowledge by the student... a teacher as facilitator… information is no longer
something to organise, transmit and memorise, but something to work with, think
with, discuss, negotiate and debate with partners".
Academic
staff may also act as the content experts in a multi-disciplinary course development
team. (Holmberg, 1995:135) contends that "…the various tasks are divided
between a group of highly specialized team members, among them subject
specialists, specialists in instructional design, media, technical production
etc. and editors". Paquettee, Ricciardi-Rigault, Paquin, Liegeois and
Bleicher (1996, June) describe the team roles in terms of "five actor
categories", namely learner, trainer, content-expert, manager and
designer. Katz and Tushman (1997:331) further highlighted the importance of the
role of gatekeepers in the "… effective transfer and utilization of
external technology and information". Gatekeepers can be defined as key
individual technologists who have a strong connection to both external sources
of information and internal colleagues.
The
specialized skills needed to develop technology based learning materials
further point to the rationale for using development teams. Bates (1993:232)
asserts that producing good quality technology based learning materials
"…will require people who can combine good pedagogic practice with an
understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of different media and
technologies". Garrison (1989:98&117) points to "…course design
teams… as the accepted model in distance education" and that the British
Open University uses course development teams extensively. Holmberg (1995:98)
confirms the predominant course-team model in distance education and that the
main advantage of this model is that it operates to high professional
standards. Garrison however also indicates that in distance education this
model is not always considered "…feasible or appropriate for all distance
education enterprises". Holmberg (1995:135) described the drawbacks of the
team model as impeding personal approaches and also dealing with knowledge as a
finished product instead of a complex process of "knowledge under
development".
In
educational reform in particular the reward systems need to be tied to
engagement with the processes that facilitate the desired reform. To enable the
wide technological transformation of higher education, it needs to be stated as
a strategic objective and direction, and the reward systems then need to be
tied to its implementation (Munitz, 1997). The institute's reward systems
should encourage academic staff and students to become and remain involved in
e-Learning if it desires to implement technology based education widely within
the institute. Marquardt (1996:97) contends that "one of the most powerful
management principles in the world is 'That which get rewarded gets done'
".
Implementing innovation
Technological transformation often
relates to innovation as it is frequently based on new approaches to
organizational processes. An innovation
can be described as "...an idea or behaviour that is new to the
organization adopting it" (Swanson, 1994:1070).
A
top-down innovation process is important. Drucker (1985) points to the
importance of a top-down process for a successful innovation aims at
leadership. He believes that if it does not aim at leadership right from the
outset, it is unlikely to be innovative enough, and therefore unlikely to be
capable of establishing itself. This statement is made within the context of
the business world, but with the increasing competitive nature of the educational
milieu this assertion is becoming more relevant for higher education.
A
combination of top-down and bottom-up processes seems possible in the learning
organisation. Marquardt (1996:218) contends in the context of the learning
organisation that "…it is possible for any member to be an
awareness-enhancing agent or an advocate for new competence development. In
this way, both top-down and bottom-up initiatives are made possible". Gunn
(1998:142) asserts that
An effective technology strategy works
in both directions. From the top down, it is articulated through institutional
objectives, sensitive to existing culture, constraints, strengths and
weaknesses, and presented as a coherent, achievable set of goals with
appropriate incentives and rewards. It must also move from the bottom-up where
knowledge of teaching strategies, learning contexts and disciplinary expertise
can be translated into action plans geared to achievement of institutional
strategic objectives and so creating a sense of ownership at all levels of the
institution.
Innovation diffusion theory
(Rogers, 1983) provides a general explanation for the manner in which new
entities and ideas like IT and technology based education over time,
disseminate through social systems, in this case higher education. Rogers
reviewed studies of diffusion of innovations from many technological contexts
and forwarded a model for adoption of innovations describing key roles and
behaviours in the adoption. Innovation diffusion theory is essentially a
bottom-up approach based on individual responses.
Roger's diffusion of innovation
curve can be used as a starting point to depict technological
transformation in higher education. Initially there is a take-off stage (that is introduction)
during which an innovation is introduced in a social system. An entrepreneurial
group called the innovators often then adopts it. During the next phase of
maturation the "early adopters", who are change agents or opinion
leaders among the social system, will enter the process thereby legitimising
the innovation and opening the potential for adoption to all members of the
system. The final saturation stage in an innovation's adoption is characterised
by widespread adoption. The innovation saturates the social system and growth
tapers off. This process can be plotted as an S-shaped growth curve.
Innovation
in higher education – as with most innovations - takes place within the context
of the organizational and management structures. According to Daft (1989:274)
"... organic organizations encourage a bottom-up innovation process"
which is seen as typical for technological innovation. This position aligns
itself with Roger's diffusion theory that also proposes a bottom-up approach
when the innovation starts from outside management. Daft (1989:274) however
also indicates that administrative innovations follow a top-down direction of
change within a mechanistic management structure. Daft (1989:570) observes that
"… the trend over the last thirty years has been toward more organic
structures" which he partly attributes to "… greater environmental
uncertainty and nonroutine technologies". In contrast, it seems that
conventional management of tertiary education does not provide the required
organic structures that foster innovation. Fullan (1991:349) refers to this
dilemma as the tension of "… combining individual and institutional
development..." and the necessity of having both in tandem for successful
educational change.
Bates
(2000) suggests a distributed organisational structure for the support of
e-Learning. His model includes a fairly large professional centre while each
faculty (or school) or large department will have a small flexible unit of
technical support and generalist educational technology support. The center
will operate on a project management model with many of its staff seconded to
work in the faculties on a continuing basis while the units will provide
immediate support and find appropriate support from the centre for bigger
projects. Szabo, Anderson and Fuchs (1997) who reported on technological
transformation in higher education at the University of Alberta, Canada
suggests a similar approach:
There are two major intended goals of
TIES [Training, Infrastructure and Empowerment System]. The first is that the
chief academic officers identify a vision for alternative delivery systems of
instruction for the university, publish that vision widely, and demonstrate
their commitment to it in a clear and convincing fashion. Secondly, departments
within the university create leadership task forces to interpret the vision for
their unit and prepare colleagues to implement the shared vision.
Managing technological transformation at
Massey University and Cape Technikon
A
few aspects of technological transformation, which stood out at Massey University
and Cape Technikon, are highlighted below.
1. Using both top-down and bottom-up
strategies
"Top-down"
and "strategic" need to be interchangeable concepts for diffusion to
be effective. At Massey University the president was the sponsor of the project
but the project was not viewed as being of strategic importance that led to
limited diffusion. At both Massey University and Cape Technikon however the
level of resources made available would not have been possible without senior
management and middle management support. Furthermore when typical political
problems like irrational resistance to change were encountered, senior
management was able to step in and direct matters. Middle management, that is
heads of academic and administrative departments, played an important role in
controlling resources; in some cases in a positive way and in other cases in
restricting support. At Cape Technikon where the initiative was regarded as one
of strategic importance, the top-down strategies which included the creation of
a widely owned strategic plan that included a clear and unified vision, having
the vice-rector as sponsor and a task group with wide and senior representation
as a sub-committee of Senate. Furthermore a high level summit on E-Learning was
held, an extensive business plan was developed which was approved by the
finance committee of Council, a presentation to Council was made and
fortnightly input was provided at rectorate meetings. This created a strong
top-down impetus and the creation of a reward structure by means of a central
fund that encouraged participation, which confirmed the view of Berge and
Schrum (1998:35) that the key to success of campus initiatives in
technology-enhanced learning and distance education is the support of campus
leaders. This further correlates with Drucker's
(1985) assertion that a successful innovation should aim at leadership
from the beginning in order to be innovative enough and capable of establishing
itself.
Running
regular workshops on relevant aspects for academic staff members was an
effective bottom up strategy at both Massey University and Cape Technikon. At
Cape Technikon the bottom up strategies further included using pilots to create
successful role models in each faculty, aggressively extending the library
holdings on e-Learning, distributing possible research topics in e-Learning to
academic staff, holding an e-Learning seminar week, running information
sessions in each faculty and having a project team with wide representation.
Furthermore a centre for e-Learning was established, an acronym and slogan
competition for the project was held, regular news items appeared in the campus
newspaper and in the Alumni and Student publications, a library exhibition on
E-Learning was organised, departmental meetings on e-learning was encouraged,
e-Learning was linked to other thrusts within the organisation, and extensive
conferencing occurred on an individual level with interested academic staff
members. These strategies led for example to an overwhelming response of 40
proposals for pilot projects.
Bottom-up
and top-down strategies converged at Cape Technikon at faculty level in the
workgroups that were established under the leadership of the deans in each
faculty and chaired by an enthusiastic and capable academic. Each faculty
workgroup consists of keen academic staff members and further with wide
representation including administration, the information technology group and
the Centre for e-Learning.
The
findings in this research therefore suggests that Rogers' diffusion of
innovation theory, when the innovation emerges from outside of senior
management, needs to be augmented with a top-down component that includes both
senior and middle management in order to accomplish effective diffusion of
technology based education.
2. A team approach is required for the
development of e-Learning materials
At
both Massey University and Cape Technikon a development team for e-Learning
were effective in operationalising the strategic directives which included the
development of materials. The following roles were used at both Massey
University and Cape Technikon: a sponsor, project manager, content provider,
creative director / graphic designer, computer specialist, instructional
designer, editor and media developer.
At Cape
Technikon the team was extended to include a business manager, project
secretary, IT representative, library representative and representative from
administration and the six chairpersons of the Faculty E-Learning Workgroups.
The
role of each team member at Cape Technikon to be a gatekeeper was emphasized.
During
the development process at
3. A distributed implementation
structure is required
At
Cape Technikon the diffusion has been sustained through the use of a
distributed implementation structure. A Centre for e-Learning was established
to provide central support and to coordinate the progress of the project. The
task team on e-Learning of Senate furthermore creates institute-wide policies.
Linked
to the central structure are workgroups within each faculty that includes a
representative from the Centre for e-Learning.
This
structure seems to be working well and confirms suggestions by Bates (2000) on
having a fairly large professional centre while each faculty (or school) or
large department will have a small flexible unit of technical support and
generalist educational technology support. Szabo, Anderson and Fuchs (1997 suggests
a similar approach where departments within the university create leadership
task forces to interpret the vision for their unit and prepare colleagues to
implement the shared vision.
4. Ownership by academic staff
Ensuring
ownership by academic staff was found to be essential in the diffusion of
e-Learning. Strategies such as one-to-one and small group discussions,
demonstrations, academic involvement in decision-making wherever possible and
explanation of the benefits of e-Learning were used to ensure academic
ownership.
In
order to ensure ownership by academic staff as well as sound educational
quality in e-Learning, it was important at both Massey University at Wellington
and Cape Technikon for educators and educational principles to drive the technological
transformation. This confirms similar views held by Szabo et al. (1997), Willmot and McLean (1994), Caladine (1993) and
Tillema (1995).
The
extensive interest in the workshops that the writer conducted regarding
e-Learning indicates that staff development can be used as an important
strategy to advance the transformation of higher education through technology
among academic staff.
The
benefits and advantages of technology based education for the institute,
teachers and students were consistently highlighted in order to gain the
positive interest of administrative managers and academic staff in the
technological transformation of higher education. At the same time specific
issues relating to e-Learning were identified and strategies to address these
were developed as part of the strategic plan. The issues of intellectual
property (Johnston and Challis, 1994) and copyright (Barnard, 1997; McCullagh,
1995 September) in particular are amplified in e-Learning where copying and
replicating materials are alarmingly easy. This issue is further complicated by
the notion of instructional design through teams. A model of shared ownership
can be explored where the institute retains the right to use the materials if
members of the course development team should leave, and where staff have the
right to use the materials developed by the team in their new environment.
5. S-curve has a rather ragged contour
The
experience of pursuing technological transformation at both Massey University
at Wellington and Cape Technikon does not confirm the smooth contours of
Roger's diffusion of innovation curve. The various barriers that were
encountered (both internally and externally), the uncontrollable events that
negatively impacted on the implementation like key staff being allocated work
with a higher priority, mistakes made and some fruitless experiments all point
to a more ragged contour of the innovation curve.
Technological
transformation at Massey University and Cape Technikon proved to be complex
within its systemic dimensions and required a high level of determination by
all involved and high standards of teamwork.
Planning the technological
transformation at the University of Botswana
The University of Botswana has been
fortunate in many respects regarding the application and implementation of
educational technology into the curriculum and using such technology to expand
access. For example, the university has a very robust technology
infrastructure. Every staff has a Pentium computer, printer or access to a printer,
access to the Internet and e-mail with power failures and network shutdowns
minimal. A new library addition is in final stages of construction and will
make available 800 new student workstations to create a technology rich
learning environment.
The University has recently completed a
major restructuring exercise, which among others, created a Centre for Academic
Development. Key components include a subunit for Teaching and Learning,
focussing on the transformation to a student centered learning environment and
a subunit on Educational technology, a subunit focused on assisting staff in
the use of educational technology to improve their teaching and further engage
students in collaborative learning.
And, recently the university engaged in
a process to redefine itself, resulting in a new vision and mission statement
including a revised process for planning. Within this context, the use of
technology to assist in institutional transformation is a central element. The
institution has furthermore recently received a two million dollar grant within
the Education, Democracy and Development Initiative (EDDI) program of the US
government to assist in expanding the use of technology on campus and in
distance education.
These and other factors posit the University
of Botswana for effective transformation to appropriate application and
implementation of educational technology through the fibre and fabric of
academic enterprise.
At the same time, there are challenges.
The University of Botswana, like many institutions is steeped in the
traditional mould of lecture, staff dispensing information. Thus the challenge of changing the mindset of
both staff and students. The second is that of adequate staffing. Without
adequate professional and technical staffing it is difficult to make the kinds
of changes needed within a speedy timeframe in order to keep up with the
massive changes occurring in technology and its related application to sound
educational practice. Needless to say, this is compounded by traditional faculties,
increasing number of students, limited academic staff resulting in heavy
teaching loads, often leaving little time for innovation and change in one's
teaching.
But the University of Botswana is
committed to the integration of technological transformation of its educational
enterprise and will be using both top-down and bottom-up strategies to achieve
this. The challenge is making sure key
The University of Botswana recognises
that without academic staff buy-in, involvement in setting the educational
technology transformation agenda and adequate reward structures, change is
extremely difficult. Thus, as the process unfolds, this critical element must
receive the highest priority.
The
challenge to an institution in Southern Africa, even though with so much to its
credit, is for the university leadership to continue to vision the future and
create the enthusiasm and wherewith all for staff to catch the vision in a way
that together there is every opportunity to be an institution that creates an
educational environment to assure that the quality of graduates matches that of
the developed world, thereby adding value to the global economy.
Conclusion
Creating
an enduring vision and a strategic implementation framework for the effective
implementation of technological innovations seems critical. Berge and Schrum
(1998:35) contends that "the most important function of institutional
leadership may be to create a shared vision that includes widespread input and
support from the faculty and administration, articulates a clear educational
purpose, has validity for stakeholders, and reflects the broader mission of the
institution". Naidoo and Schutte (1999:90) also point to this need in the
African context: "If African countries cannot take advantage of the
information revolution and surf this great wave of technological change, they
may be crushed by it… Catching this wave will require visionary leadership in
Africa".
"In a time of drastic change it is
the learners who survive;
the 'learned' find themselves fully
equipped
to live in a world that no longer
exists"
Eric Hoffer
REFERENCES
Ackhoff,
R. (1972). A note on systems science. Interfaces, August 40. WP Press,
Wellington, New Zealand.
Barnard,
J. (1997). The World Wide Web and higher education: the promise of virtual
universities and online libraries. Educational Technology, May-June
30-35.
Bates,
A.W. (1983). Trends in the use of audio-visual media in distance education,
55-72; 227-241. In Sewart, D., Keegan, D. & Holmberg, B. (Eds.). Distance
education: international perspectives. London: Croom Helm.
Bates,
A.W. (Ed.) (1984). The role of technology in distance education. London:
Croom Helm.
Bates,
A.W. (1992). Technology for distance education, 241-265. In Tait, A. (Ed.). Key
issues in open learning. Harlow: Longman.
Bates,
A.W. (1993). Theory and practice in the use of technology in distance
education, 213-233. In Keegan, D. (Ed.).
Theoretical principles of distance education. London: Routledge.
Bates,
A. W. (1999) Strategies for the Future.
[Online]. Available:
http://bates.cstudies.ubc.ca/strategies.html
[1999, July 10]
Bates,
A.W. (2000) Management technology change.
Strategies for college and university leaders. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.
Berge,
Z. L. & Schrum, L. (1998) Strategic
planning linked with program implementation for distance education. CAUSE/EFFECT, 21(3), 31-38.
Caladine,
R. (1993). Overseas Experience in Non-Traditional Modes of Delivery in
Higher Education Using State-of-the-Art Technologies: A Literature Review. Canberra:
Australian Government Printing Service.
Cannon,
R.A. (1986). Theoretical perspectives in changing tertiary education. In Jones,
J. & Horsburgh, M. (Eds.). Research and development in higher education.
Kensington, Australia: HERDSA.
Daft,
R.L. (1989). Organization theory and design. 3rd edition. St. Paul, MN:
West Publishing Company.
Daniel,
J. S. (1998) Mega-universities and
knowledge media. Technology strategies for higher education. London, Kogan
Page.
Drucker,
P.F. (1985). Innovation and entrepreneurship. London: Heinemann.
Drucker,
P.F. (1998) Peter Drucker on the
profession of management. Boston, MA, Harvard Business School Publishing.
Evans,
F.J. & Franz, J.B. (1998, April). Managing change in the global
university. Proceedings of the
Towards the Global University: Strategies for the Third Millennium Conference.
Tours: University of Central Lancashire.
Evans,
T. & Nation, D. (1993). Reforming open and distance education. Critical
reflections. London: Kogan Page.
Fullan,
M.G. (1991). The new meaning of educational change. 2nd edition. London:
Cassel Education Ltd.
Gabel,
M.R. & Feeg, V.. (1996, June). Institutional academic staff development
in education technologies to improve classroom teaching: launching the IDO
pioneers and guides. Proceedings of the ED-MEDIA 96-World Conference on
Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications. Boston, MA: AACE.
Garrison,
D. R. (1989) Understanding distance
education. A framework for the future. London, New York, Routledge.
Goldenfarb,
M. (1995). Critical Success Factors in Diffusing a Campus Wide Information
System. Paper presented at AusWeb95 - The First Australian World Wide Web
Conference [Online]. Available:
http://www.scu.edu.au/sponsored/ausweb/ausweb95/papers/education4/goldenfarb/
[1998, June 20].
Gundry,
J. & Metes, G. (1996). Team Knowledge Management: A Computer Mediated
Approach. [On-line]. Available: http://www.knowab.co.uk/wbwteam.html
[1999, April 9].
Gunn,
C. (1998). Virtual technologies in higher education: vision or reality?
134-145. In Peters, M. & Roberts, P. (Eds.). Virtual technologies and
tertiary education. London: Routledge.
Hart,
I. (1999, July). Restructured, reengineered & realigned: Managing media
in the digital age. Proceedings of the ED-MEDIA 99-World Conference on
Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications. Seattle: AACE
Holmberg,
B. (1995). Theory and practice of distance education. 2nd edition.
London &, New York: Routledge.
Johnston,
R. & Challis, K. (1994). The learning relationship: A study of staff
development and satisfaction in relation to distance learning teaching. International
Journal of University Adult Education 33(1):62-76.
Katz,
R. (Ed.) (1997). The Human side of managing technological innovation : a
collection of readings. New York: Oxford University Press.
Katz,
R. & Tushman, M.L. (1997). A study of the influence of technical
gatekeeping on project performance and career outcomes in an R & D
facility, 331–346. In Katz, R. (Ed.). The Human side of managing
technological innovation: a collection of readings. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Marquard,
M. J. (1996) Building the learning
organization – a systems approach to quantum improvement and global success.
New York, McGraw-Hill.
Mason,
R. (1998) Globalising education. Trends and
applications. London & New York, Routledge.
McCullagh,
A. (1995, September). What are the risks? (1). Paper presented at New
Media and On-line Commerce conference, Brisbane, Australia.
Munitz,
B. (1997. The New Educational
Paradigm. Keynote at the 18th
World International Council for Distance Education Conference. Pennsylvania:
ICDE.
Naidoo,
V. & Schutte, C. (1999). Virtual Institutions on the African Continent,
89-124. In Farrell, G. M (Ed.). The development of virtual education: a
global perspective. Vancouver: The Commonwealth of Learning. [Online].
Available: http://www.col.org/virtualed/index.htm [2000,
January 8].
Nguyen,
A.T.A, Tan, W., & Kezunovic, L. (1996). Interactive Multimedia on the World Wide
Web: Implementation and Implications for the Tertiary Education Sector. [Online]. Available:
http://www.scu.edu.au/sponsored/ausweb/ausweb96/educn/nguyen/paper.html [1997, July 10].
Paquettee,
G., Ricciardi-Rigault, C., Paquin, C., Liegeois, S. & Bleicher, E. (1996,
June). Developing
the virtual class environment. Proceedings of the ED-MEDIA 96-World Conference on
Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications. Boston, MA: AACE.
Pastore,
R. (1995, October 1). Interview: Michael E. Porter. CIO Magazine.
[On-line]. Available: http://www.cio.com/archive/100195_porter_print.html
[2000, January 19].
Randle,
K. & Brady, N. (1997). Further education and the new managerialism. Journal
of Further and Higher Education 21(2):2, 229-238.
Rayport,
J.F., & Sviokla, J.J. (1995). Exploiting the virtual value chain. Harvard
Business Review, November - December 1995:75-85.
Richardson,
J.M., Jr. (1979). Information technology serving society: past, present and
future, 119 - 124. In Chartrand, R.L. & Morentz, J.W (Eds.). Information
technology serving society. Elmsford, NY: Pergamon Press.
Rogers,
E. (1983). Diffusion of Innovations. 3rd edition.
Swanson,
E. B. (1994). Information Systems Innovation Among Organizations. Management
Science 40(9): 1069-1092.
Szabo,
M., Anderson, T., & Fuchs, A. (1997). A change system: the
training, infrastructure and empowerment system: (TIES). [On-line].
Available:
http://www.quasar.ualberta.ca/edmedia/TIES/TIES_Report.html
[1999, July 10].
Tapscott,
D. (1996) The digital economy: promise
and peril in the age of networked intelligence.
Taylor,
P., Lopez, L. & Quadrelli, C. (1996). Flexibility, Technology and
Academics'
Practices:
Tantalising Tales and Muddy Maps, Evaluations and Investigations Programme, Department
of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs,
Canberra.
[On-line]. Available: http://www.anu.edu.au/uniserve/eip/muddy/muddy.html
[1998, June 20].
Tillema,
H.H. (1995). Changing the professional knowledge and beliefs of teachers: A
training study. Learning and Instruction. 5:291-318.
Thomas,
O., Carswell, L., Price, B., Petre, M. (1998) A holistic approach to supporting distance learning using the Internet:
transformation, not translation. British Journal of Educational Technology,
Vol 29, No 2, 149-161.
Uys,
P.M (2000) Towards the virtual class: key
management issues in tertiary education. PhD thesis,
Willmot,
M. & McLean, M. (1994). Evaluating flexible learning: A case study. Journal
for Higher Educatioin 18(3):99-108.
Yetton,
P. (1993). Managing the Introduction of Technology in the Delivery and
Administration
of Higher Education. [Online]. Available
http://www.deetya.gov.au/divisions/hed/operations/eip9703/front.htm [1998, June 20].