Wednesday, October 1, 2014

Educause 2014: IT Benchmarking and the EduCause Core Data Service


Actually, the title of this presentation is 'Educause 2014: Transform IT with a New Generation of IT Assessment Tools' but the new title is a better decription of what I've actually written below.
So, first up at 8am is a session delivered by an EduCause organisation called Core Data Service.

Presenters include
-          Leah Lang, Manager, Core Data Service, EDUCAUSE
-          Ronald Yanosky, Senior Research Fellow, EDUCAUSE
CDS are about creating tools and benchmarks to evaluate IT value and to publish collected data from the Higher Education sector.  There is a free annual benchmark.  If institutions participate then they gain access to the benchmark data.  This year they expect around 800 institutions will participate.
The benchmark data is pretty helpful and allows comparisons between institutions.  In the UK, many institutions use the Tribal benchmarking service.
I asked the presenters about International participation.  They have about 50 International participants including a few in the UK.  However, Leah did make the obvious point that ‘like institution’ comparison would be difficult.  At the moment the 50 Internationals are lumped into one category ‘which doesn’t make sense to us’.
During the session we’re asked to vote online https://www.polleverywhere.com/leahlang400
Q: Who measures the value of IT?  Out of about 30 respondents – 1 does, 15 sort of, 14 no. 
Benchmark data provided by CDS outlined below.
A fair number of Institutions provide help desk support by Instant Messaging (37%) with less offering by text (8%).  We don't do either at the moment but probably should.
Automatic Lecture capture systems are not popular. Automatic lecture-capture systems (audio only) (0%) .  Automatic lecture-capture systems (audio and video) (1%)
58% of institutions had an increase in funding from FY 2010/11 to FY 2012/13 - median increase was 19%

$925 is the central IT median spent per institutional FTE (students, faculty, and staff)
 

The following benchmark data is available on-line:
Extracts of particular interest below.
SUPPORT SERVICES
15% Support services spending as a percentage of central IT spending
2.2 Central IT support services FTEs per 1,000 institutional FTEs
0.2 Walk-in tickets (annually) per institutional FTE
0.9 Phone tickets (annually) per institutional FTE
0.5 E-mail tickets (annually) per institutional FTE
75% Institutions offering help desk services via web form
-       Offered by us
37% Institutions offering help desk services via instant message
-       Not offered by us
8% Institutions offering help desk services via text message
-       Not offered by us
35% Institutions offering full support for smartphones (any type)
-       Only for staff
44% Institutions offering full support for iPads or other tablets
7% Institutions offering full support for e-book readers
78% Institutions offering assistance with mobile apps for faculty and staff
39% Institutions offering tablet checkout for faculty and staff
70% Institutions offering assistance with mobile apps for students
25% Institutions offering tablet checkout for students
Learning technologies most commonly deployed
• Clickers (90%)
• Document management tools (86%)
• Hybrid courses (85%)
• Blogs (83%)
• Collaboration tools (82%)
Learning technologies most commonly being considered or planned
• Early-alert systems that identify at-risk students (39%)
• Open content (35%)
• Gaming (34%)
• Information literacy requirement (33%)
• E-textbooks (32%)
Least common capabilities in centrally scheduled classrooms:
• Automatic lecture-capture systems (audio only) (0%)
• Automatic lecture-capture systems (audio and video) (1%)
• Two-way video conferencing (2%)
CORE METRICS
$ 902 Total central IT spending per institutional FTE (students, faculty, and staff)
$4,938 Total central IT spending per institutional employee (faculty and staff)
4% Total central IT spending as percentage of institutional expenses
86% Central IT operating spending as a percentage of total central IT spending
12% Central IT capital spending as a percentage of total central IT spending
1% Central IT training spending as a percentage of total central IT spending
2% Central IT outsourcing spending as a percentage of total central IT spending
54% Central IT compensation spending as a percentage of total central IT spending
4% Central IT staff as a percentage of institutional employees (faculty and staff)
18% Student workers as a percentage of total central IT FTE
7.5 Central IT FTEs per 1,000 institutional FTEs
INSTITUTIONAL IT STRATEGY
53% Institutions whose highest-ranking IT officer is on presidential cabinet
54% Institutions with a designated student technology fee
$ 240 Median student technology fee (annualized)
50% Percentage of central IT spending in support of institutional administration
40% Percentage of central IT spending in support of teaching and learning
0% Percentage of central IT spending in support of research
79% Percentage of central IT spending on running the institution
13% Percentage of central IT spending on growing the institution
6% Percentage of central IT spending on transforming the institution


No comments:

Post a Comment