EDUCAUSE Research in the Academic Communities
Student Technology Study 2015 and Faculty Technology Study 2015
2015 Research Prospectus
I. Project Overview
Technology is a critical part of the teaching and learning mission as well as the research mission of
higher education. Since 2004, the EDUCAUSE Center for Analysis and Research (ECAR) has been
researching undergraduate student technology experiences and expectations. In 2014, ECAR
expanded this work to investigate faculty technology perspectives and is poised to extend this
research further into the academic community in 2015. The scope of the EDUCAUSE Technology
Research in the Academic Community (ETRAC) work includes surveying academic community
members annually, with reengineered versions of this base survey that capture parallel information
from other populations of the academic community (e.g., college aspirants, graduate students,
faculty, alumni, staff, leaders, etc.). Expanding the academic community studied in this type of
research allows ECAR to tell a broader story about the status and efficacy of technology in higher
education.
This research is survey based, with ECAR developing the survey instruments and the research
methodology before partnering with individual institutions to invite members of their respective
academic communities to participate in the surveys. Our surveys ask respondents to share their
current technology experiences, needs, and expectations about technology and technology issues
at their campus. Depending on the year, respondents could be undergraduate students, faculty,
graduate students, and/or other members of the academic community. The results of these studies
can be combined to provide multidimensional perspectives of these stakeholders’ technology
experiences.
The Undergraduate Student Study explores technology ownership, use patterns, and
expectations as they relate to the undergraduate student experience.
The Faculty Study explores technology ownership, use patterns, and expectations as
they relate to the faculty role, including teaching faculty, research faculty, clinical faculty,
and professional school faculty.
©2014 EDUCAUSE. Reproduction by permission only.
Research Objectives
The purpose of ETRAC is to understand the technology, experiences, needs, and expectations of
academic community members and stakeholders for the purpose of helping higher education IT
professionals and decision makers fulfill the following jobs to be done:
1. Improve information technology services
2. Increase technology-enabled productivity
3. Prioritize strategic contributions of information technology to higher education
4. Plan for technology shifts among the various constituencies of the academic community
5. Become more technologically competitive among their peer institutions or ideal
benchmarks
6. Catalyze new business models around technology use and adoption to transform higher
education in innovative ways
In order to attain these objectives, survey contents focus primarily on the measures and dimensions
in the following rubric:
Measures
Dimensional Categories
Extent of Ownership,
Use, or Activity
User Satisfaction
or Importance Ratings
Needs Assessment
or Expectations
Devices
Services
Applications
Websites
Activities
Connections/Engagement
Resources/Tools
Outcomes
Security/Privacy
Research Services
II. Research Methodology
These studies consist of web-based quantitative surveys of members of the academic community
(e.g., undergraduates students, faculty, and/or graduate students) from different types of higher
education institutions. EDUCAUSE develops the survey instruments for each population in the
academic community being studied in a particular year (the survey questions align with the
project’s research objectives), and locally assigned survey administrators at our partner institutions
administer the survey(s) to their community. The data are centrally collected in a secure, cloudbased repository that is only available to authorized ECAR researchers.
General Timeline
 Annual Conference: Resource materials and the “intent to participate” form are made
available
 Annual Conference through January: Survey invitation window open for participation in the
next round of studies (formal invitations sent to all EDUCAUSE primary reps plus past survey
administrators)
 Mid-August through mid-January 2015: Survey development and programming
2



Mid-January through mid-April 2015: Data-collection windows for the studies (note:
individual study survey windows may be staggered in this time frame)
Early June 2015: Institution-specific data files sent to participating institutions
Early August 2015 through Annual Conference: Public reports begin to be released
III. Form Factors/Deliverables
Publicly available
 Research hub: all studies profiled
 Report: Student study only
 Survey instruments: Student study only
 Slide deck: Student study only
 Infographics: Student study only
ECAR subscribers only
All other academic community research, including but not limited to:
 Reports
 Survey instruments
 Slide decks
 Infographics
Participating institutions only
Specific institution-based results and comparative (anonymous) peer benchmarks will be shared
with participating institutions. For each study an institution participates in, they will receive the
following package:
 Raw data files of de-identified (anonymous) survey responses
 Aggregated summative data and comparative benchmarking data from (anonymized) peer
institutions to each participating institution
IV. Partners/Collaborators
Principal Investigator/Project Lead
 Eden Dahlstrom, Director of Research, EDUCAUSE, [email protected]
ETRAC Research Team
 Jacqueline Bichsel, Senior Researcher, EDUCAUSE, [email protected] (student lead)
 Christopher Brooks, Senior Researcher, EDUCAUSE, [email protected] (faculty lead)
 Jamie Reeves, Research Assistant, EDUCAUSE, [email protected]
Subject-Matter Experts
 Jennifer Sparrow, Senior Director of Teaching and Learning Technology, The Pennsylvania
State University
 Stephen diFilipo, Strategic Consultant
 Esteban Cruz, CIO, Lincoln Land Community College
 Henry Delcore, Professor of Anthropology, California State University, Fresno
 Helen Chu, Director of Academic Technologies, University of Oregon
3





Tanya Joosten, Director of E-learning Research and Development, University of Milwaukee
Mitch Davis, CIO, Bowdoin College
Mike Roedema, Statistician, EDUCAUSE
Malcolm Brown, Director, EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative
Veronica Diaz, Director, Online Programs, EDUCAUSE
V. Dissemination/Marketing Plan
The audience for this work is broad and includes people both inside and outside higher education
information technology. Below is a partial list of potential audiences:
1. IT leaders
6. Vendors of technology products
2. T&L leaders
7. Librarians
3. IR professionals
8. Faculty professional development
4. Higher education press
providers
5. Technology researchers
Dissemination plans beyond the traditional EDUCAUSE systems are TBD but will include:
1. Sharing preliminary results with ECAR premium subscribers
2. Posting a research hub on the EDUCAUSE website and announcing the publication of the
2015 studies
3. Hosting an E-Live! webinar to share final results
4. Presenting the results at the 2015 EDUCAUSE Annual Conference and at least one national
non-EDUCAUSE conference such as the AIR Forum.
VI. Risks/Contingency Plan
There are minimal risks associated with these studies. Participation is voluntary.
VII. Subject Consent
By responding to the survey, students/faculty will be giving their consent to participate (see project
website for full details about informed consent: http://www.educause.edu/ecar/aboutecar/technology-research-academic-community. Individuals under the age of 18 will not be
permitted to participate. Data are collected only via the survey. Responses to the survey questions
will be anonymous. Participating institutions will receive their participants’ responses (de-identified
without any confidential data).
Risks for the implementation of these studies are nominal since this is an annual iteration of an
established study (student study) and a spin-off of an existing study (other academic community
research). Providing adequate time for institutions to secure IRB approval is essential, and delay on
our part to provide the necessary resource materials about the studies to institutions could delay
the data-collection period. If data collection from individual institutions is not possible, ECAR can
collect data from a national consumer panel.
4