Change, technology and higher education: Are universities capable of organisational change?

ALT-J: Research in Learning Technology

Volumn 18, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 179-192

  Marshall, Stephen ^a  

^a VICTORIA UNIVERSITY OF WELLINGTON   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

e learning maturity model; organisational change

Indexed keywords

EID: 79957653483     PISSN: 09687769     EISSN: 17411629     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09687769.2010.529107     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. Allen, I.A., and J. Seaman. 2008. Staying the course: Online education in the United States, 2008. Needham, MA: Sloan Consortium. http://sloanconsortium. org/publications/survey/ staying-course (accessed August 28, 2010).
2. Bacsich, P. 2008. Higher Education Academy/JISC e-learning benchmarking phase 2 overview report. Report to the Higher Education Academy. http://elearning.heacademy.ac.uk/ weblogs/benchmarking/wp-content/uploads/2008/ 04/BenchmarkingPhase2-BELAreport. pdf (accessed August 28, 2010).
3. Bain, J. 1999. Introduction to the special edition. Learner-centred evaluation of innovations in higher education. Higher Education Research and Development 18, no. 1: 57-75.
4. Bates, T. 2000. The continuing evolution of ICT capacity: The implications for education. In The changing face of virtual education, ed. G.M. Farrel, 29-46. Vancouver: The Commonwealth of Learning.
5. Birnbaum, R. 1988. How colleges work: The cybernetics of academic organization and leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
6. Boyle, T. 2003. Design principles for authoring dynamic, reusable learning objects. Australian Journal of Educational Technology 191: 46-58. (Pubitemid 36370100)
7. Bush, V. 1945. As we may think. Atlantic Monthly August: 101-8. http://www.theatlantic. com/doc/194507/bush (accessed February 25, 2009).
8. Carr, N. 2003. IT doesn't matter. Harvard Business Review 81, no. 5: 5-12.
9. Chester, T.M. 2006. A roadmap for IT leadership and the next ten years. Educause Quarterly 29. http://www.educause.edu/apps/eq/eqm06/eqm0626.asp (accessed August 28, 2010).
10. Christensen, C.M., S.D. Anthony, and E.A. Roth. 2004. Seeing what's next: Using the theories of innovation to predict industry change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
11. Conole, G., M. Oliver, and J. Harvey. 2000. Toolkits as an approach to evaluating and using learning material. Paper presented at the 17th Annual ASCILITE Conference, in Southern Cross University, Coffs Harbour, Australia.
12. Cuban, L. 2001. Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
13. Cunningham, S., Y. Ryan, L. Stedman, S. Tapsall, K. Bagdon, T. Flew, and P. Coaldrake. 2000. The business of borderless education. Canberra, Australia: Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs, Commonwealth of Australia.
14. Daniel, J.S., A. Kanwar, and S. Uvalic-Trumbic. 2009. Breaking higher education's iron triangle: Access, cost and quality. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning 41: 30-5.
15. Demers, C. 2007. Organizational change theories: A synthesis. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.
16. DfES. 2003. Towards a unified e-learning strategy. London: Department for Education and Skills. http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/consultations/downloadableDocs/ towards%20a%20unified %20e-learning%20strategy.pdf (accessed February 25, 2009).
17. DiMaggio, P., and W. Powell. 1983. The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review 48: 147-60.
18. El Emam, K., J.-N. Drouin, and W. Melo. 1998. SPICE: The theory and practice of software process improvement and capability determination. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society.
19. Fullan, M. 2001. The new meaning of educational change. New York: Teacher's College Press.
20. GAO. 2003. Military transformation: Progress and challenges for DOD's Advanced Distributed Learning programs. United States General Accounting Office report GAO-03-393. Washington, DC: United States General Accounting Office.
21. Hamel, G., and L. Välikangas. 2003. The quest for resilience. Harvard Business Review 81, no. 9: 52-63.
22. Hanna, D.E. 1998. Higher education in an era of digital competition: Emerging organizational models. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 2, no. 1: 66-95.
23. Hawkins, B.L., and J.A. Rudy. 2006. Educause core data service: Fiscal year 2006 summary report. Boulder, CO: Educause.
24. Hedberg, J.G. 2006. E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come. Studies in Continuing Education 28: 173-85.
25. HCPAC. 2009. Widening participation in higher education: Fourth report of session 2008- 09. House of Commons Public Accounts Committee. http://www.publications.parliament. uk/pa/cm200809/cmselect/cmpubacc/226/ 9780215526557.pdf (accessed August 28, 2010).
26. Ison, R. 1999. Applying systems thinking to higher education. Systems Research and Behavioural Science 16: 107-12.
27. Jones, S. 2003. Measuring the quality of higher education: Linking teaching quality measures at the delivery level to administrative measures at the university level. Quality in Higher Education 9: 223-9.
28. Karelis, C. 1999. Education technology and cost control: Four models. Syllabus Magazine 12, no. 6: 20-28.
29. Kenny, J. 2001. Where academia meets management: A model for the effective development of quality learning materials using new technologies. Paper presented at the 18th ASCILITE Conference, in Biomedical Multimedia Unit, The University of Melbourne, Australia.
30. Kerr, C. 2001. The uses of the university. 5th ed. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
31. Kurzweil, R. 2005. The singularity is near. New York: Penguin.
32. Laurillard, D. 1997. Applying systems thinking to higher education. Milton Keynes, UK: Open University.
33. Laurillard, D. 1999. A conversational framework for individual learning applied to the learning organisation and the learning society. Systems Research and Behavioural Science 16: 113-22.
34. Levitt, T. 1975. Marketing myopia. Harvard Business Review 38, no. 4: 2-14.
35. Marginson, S. 2004. University futures. Policy Futures in Education 2, no. 2: 159-74.
36. Marshall, S. 2005. Determination of New Zealand tertiary institution e-learning capability: An application of an e-learning maturity model: Report on the e-learning maturity model evaluation of the New Zealand tertiary sector. Report to the New Zealand Ministry of Education. Wellington, New Zealand: Victoria University of Wellington.
37. Marshall, S. 2006a. New Zealand tertiary institution e-learning capability: Informing and guiding e-learning architectural change and development. Report to the New Zealand Ministry of Education. Wellington, New Zealand: Victoria University of Wellington.
38. Marshall, S. 2006b. eMM version two process guide. Wellington, New Zealand: Victoria University of Wellington.
39. Marshall, S.J. 2008. What are the key factors that lead to effective adoption and support of e-learning by institutions? In Proceedings of HERDSA 2008. Rotorua, New Zealand: HERDSA.
40. Marshall, S. 2009. Crossing the ditch: Applying the e-learning maturity model to Australian institutions. Paper presented at the 26th ASCILITE Conference, December 6-9, in Auckland, New Zealand.
41. Marshall, S., and G. Mitchell. 2002. An e-learning maturity model? Paper presented at the 19th ASCILITE Conference, in Auckland, New Zealand.
42. Marshall, S., and G. Mitchell. 2006. Assessing sector e-learning capability with an e-learning maturity model. Paper presented at the Association for Learning Technologies Conference, in Edinburgh, UK.
43. Marshall, S., G. Mitchell, and S. Beames. 2009. Report on the ACODE eMM Project. Report to the Australasian Council on Open and Distance Education. http://www.utdc.vuw.ac.nz/ research/emm/acode/20090625ACODEReport.pdf (accessed August 28, 2010).
44. Marshall, S., K. Udas, and J. May. 2008. Assessing online learning process maturity: The elearning maturity model. Paper presented at the 14th Annual Sloan-C International Conference on Online Learning, November 6-7, in Orlando, FL.
45. McCarthy, S.A., and R.J. Samors. 2009. Online learning as a strategic asset: Volume 1: A resource for campus leaders. Association of Public and Land-grant Universities. http:// www.aplu.org/NetCommunity/Document.Doc?id=1879 (accessed August 28, 2010).
46. McKinnon, K.R., S.H. Walker, and D. Davis. 1999. Benchmarking: A manual for Australian universities. Canberra, ACT: Commonwealth of Australia.
47. Means, B., Y. Toyama, R. Murphy, M. Bakia, and K. Jones. 2009. Evaluation of evidencebased practices in online learning. Washington, DC: US Department of Education.
48. Moore, G.A. 2006. Crossing the chasm. Rev. ed. New York: HarperCollins Publishers.
49. Oppenheimer, T. 2003. The flickering mind. New York: RandomHouse.
50. Paulk, M.C., B. Curtis, M.B. Chrissis, and C.V. Weber. 1993. Capability maturity model, version 1.1. IEEE Software 10: 18-27.
51. Perkins, J.A. 1973. Organization and functions of the university. Journal of Higher Education 43, no. 9: 679-91.
52. Peters, G. 1999. A systems failures view of the UK National Commission into Higher Education report. Systems Research and Behavioural Science 16: 123-31.
53. Radloff, A. 2001. Getting online: The challenges for academic staff and institutional leaders. In Proceedings of the 18th ASCILITE Conference, 11-13. Melbourne: Biomedical Multimedia Unit, The University of Melbourne.
54. Reid, I.C. 1999. Beyond models: Developing a university strategy for online instruction. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 3: 19-31.
55. Remenyi, D., M. Sherwood-Smith, and T. White. 1997. Achieving maximum value from information systems: A process approach. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
56. Rogers, E.M. 1995. The diffusion of innovations. 4th ed. New York: Simon and Schuster
57. Russell, C. 2009. A systemic framework for managing e-learning adoption in campus universities: Individual strategies in context. ALT-J, Research in Learning Technology 17, no. 1: 3-19.
58. Ryan, Y., B. Scott, H. Freeman, and D. Patel. 2000. The virtual university: The internet and resource-based learning. London, UK: Kogan Page.
59. Seel, R. 2007. The nature of organisational change. Higher Education Academy. http:// www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/York/documents/ourwork/ changeacademy/2007/ CA018D-Seel-NatureOfOrganisationalChange.doc (accessed August 28, 2010).
60. Sero. 2007. Baseline study of e-activity in Scotland's colleges. Report to the Scottish Funding Council, July. http://www.sfc.ac.uk/web/FILES/ learningfiles/sero-e-activity-study.pdf (accessed August 28, 2010).
61. Southwell, D., D. Gannaway, J. Orrell, D. Chalmers, and C. Abraham. 2005. Strategies for effective dissemination of project outcomes. Canberra, Australia: Commonwealth of Australia.
62. SPICE. 2002. SPICE software process assessment version 1.00. http://www-sqi.cit.gu.edu/ spice/ (accessed December 18, 2002).
63. Strauss, H. 2002. The right train at the right station. Educause Review 37, no. 2: 30-6.
64. Surrey, D.W. 2005. Editorial. British Journal of Educational Technology 36: 933-5.
65. Taylor, J. 2001a. 29 steps to heaven? Strategies for transforming university teaching and learning using multimedia and educational technology. Milton Keynes, UK: The Open University.
66. Taylor, J. 2001b. Fifth generation distance education. Keynote Address presented at the 20th ICDE World Conference, 1-5 April, in Düsseldorf, Germany.
67. University of London. 2008. Benchmarking eLearning at the University of London: Report from the steering group. London, UK: University of London. http://www.londoninternational.ac.uk/quality/comte-zone/sys-tech-sub/stsc2/ documents/stsc2-3.pdf (accessed August 28, 2010).
68. Waks, L. 2007. The concept of fundamental educational change. Educational Theory 57: 277-96.
69. Weick, K.E. 1976. Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative Science Quarterly 21: 1-19.
70. Young, B.A. 2002. The paperless campus. Educause Quarterly 252: 4-5.
71. Zemsky, R., and W.F. Massey. 2004. Thwarted innovation: What happened to e-learning and why. West Chester, PA: The Learning Alliance at the University of Pennsylvania.