LEARNING IN A TECHNOLOGY-RICH ENVIRONMENT:
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE QUALITY-ENHANCEMENT PLAN

The LITRE plan will describe initiatives intended to enrich the learning environment at North Carolina State University through technology, and will establish an ongoing, empirical inquiry into the effects of technology on student learning.

The purposes served by this plan will be:
1. to implement, coordinate, and integrate projects and programs critical to advancing NC State's technology-rich learning environment immediately;
2. to develop empirical evidence about which aspects of a technology-rich environment are most effective in improving student learning and faculty engagement in student learning; and
3. to use that evidence to invest in and inform future technology-based projects, programs, services, and policies.

The LITRE plan will recommend the immediate implementation of several initiatives at the university, college, and department levels. These initiatives will be developed from a strategic curricular perspective that recognizes the unique needs of each discipline. For example, we might launch the LITRE plan by using revised classroom standards to increase investments in classrooms, by revising the general-education requirements for technology literacy, by implementing a faculty-development strategy, and/or by supporting specific projects of colleges or departments. Each new initiative will require an evaluation of the impact on student learning and/or faculty engagement in learning through technology.

The LITRE plan will involve several modes of inquiry, for example:

• A retrospective look at the impact of existing and/or past technology initiatives on student learning and faculty engagement (e.g., Project 25, College of Engineering Student-Owned Computing Initiative, etc.);
• The continuing collection of data on faculty- and student-use patterns, and on satisfaction with the educational-technology applications, resources, digital content and infrastructure currently available, leading to the recommendation of appropriate actions based on identified needs;
• Experimentation with new uses of technology, perhaps comparing two or more different environments;
• Monitoring the impact of key investments to which NC State is already committed, such as classroom
• Improvements and the new classroom technology standards (in collaboration with the Classroom Environment Committee and academic computing committees in colleges);
• Developing a literature review and/or review of best practices on other campuses, including those of our university peers (e.g., Technology across the Curriculum at George Mason University).

The LITRE plan will spell out several steps toward implementation, for example:
· A mechanism to ensure reasonable levels of support for learning and teaching with technology across the institution.
· A mechanism to guide implementation of the plan, coordinate future projects, reflect on the results of various project evaluations, disseminate results, and advocate for student learning in a technology-rich environment.
· A grant program to departments and colleges wanting to test or adapt a new technology, requiring a post hoc evaluation of the effect of that technology on the quality of student learning. Curriculum committees, deans and department heads should be encouraged to target strategic programs and disciplines for integrating technology with the curricula, so that students can build skills over multiple semesters/years. The program should not award resources primarily to individual courses without evidence that a multi-year curricular approach is in place.
· Ensuring that adequate support is available for faculty and students as they use educational technologies, whether or not they are involved in a grant project.
· Implementing several large-scale projects immediately.
· A mechanism for evaluating the impact and role of technology with respect to student learning, perhaps including guidelines, mechanisms for collecting and disseminating results, and new assessment tools.
· Adapting faculty incentives and rewards, perhaps through reappointment, promotion and tenure criteria, release time, study leaves, and professional-development grants.
· Adapting university decision-making processes, including compact planning and resource allocation, building in stronger requirements for using assessment results.