N E W S    R E L E A S E
---------------------------

OFFICE OF PUBLIC RELATIONS
CLAREMONT GRADUATE SCHOOL
Claremont, CA   91711


for release Jan. 19, 1996, am

CONTACT: Casey Green +1 (818) 990-2212


USE OF INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY
JUMPS ON COLLEGE CAMPUSES

    CLAREMONT, CA . . . The use of information technology in college courses
- including electronic mail, multimedia, CD-ROM, commercial courseware and
simulations - grew dramatically this past year, as did the number of students
and faculty routinely using the Internet and World Wide Web (WWW).  According
to the 1995 Campus Computing Survey, the percentage of college courses using
e-mail and multimedia resources more than doubled, while the use of computer
simulations and commercial courseware increased by more than 50 percent.
Further, more than seven million college students and faculty routinely use
the Internet and WWW as part of their daily and weekly activities.

"Something very significant is happening," says Kenneth C. Green,
director of the national survey and a visiting scholar at The Claremont
Graduate School.  "Following several decades of great aspirations and more
than a dozen years of significant institutional investments, information
technology has emerged as a permanent, respected, and increasingly essential
component of the college experience."  Data from the sixth annual Campus
Computing Survey," says Green, "indicate that the use of information technology
in instruction is finally moving past the early adopters and breaking into
the ranks of mainstream faculty." The survey data indicate these gains occurred
across all types of institutions.

The new survey data suggest that upwards of half of all college students
and faculty now have some sort of recurring instructional experience with
information technology resources and technology-based learning activities.
Green reports that these technology experiences go beyond the routine use of
word processing (at one end of the continuum) and the technical expertise of
computer programming (at the other); rather, these are technology experiences
that extend the content of the curriculum, enrich the classroom discourse,
promote communication among class participants, and enhance the learning
opportunity.

"The much-discussed 'technology revolution' - in reality the slow, gradual
movement of information technology resources into the curriculum and the
classroom experience - is picking up speed,' says Green.  "Growing numbers of
college students expect a technology component in their courses; across all
disciplines growing numbers of faculty are utilizing technology resources to
enhance the content of the curriculum."  He adds that the increased use of
technology resources points to real demand for quality commercial products:
"The survey data bode well for individuals and firms interested in providing
digital curriculum for the college market: college publishers, entrepreneurial
faculty, and small firms that can produce engaging and effective instructional
products."

Not surprisingly, the use of the World Wide Web is growing rapidly on
college campuses.  More than half (55.2 percent) of the institutions partici-
pating in the 1995 survey report a WWW home page; still more campuses (25.8
percent) plan to raise an institutional flag in cyberspace during the current
academic year.  Research universities and other institutions with a well-
developed technology infrastructure are most likely to have home pages on
the WWW.

Green reports that more than half of all college students and upwards of
three-fourths of all faculty have access to the Internet and the WWW.  "The
campus market currently accounts for more than seven million Internet and
WWW users - students, faculty, administrators, and staff who have access to
cyberspace," says Green.  "Many routinely use the Internet and WWW in their
daily activities." He compares the seven million campus-based Internet and
WWW users with a recent, widely cited commercial study suggesting some 9.5
million Internet users in the United States.  "Commercial and consumer market
studies may miss the huge numbers of college students and faculty who use,
indeed depend on, the Net," says Green.  "Higher education was an early adopter
of the Internet and, more recently, has been an important advocate for the WWW.
At growing numbers of colleges and universities across the country, Net access
is viewed by faculty and students as a core resource and a basic right, similar
to a library card."

The 1995 survey data indicate that about six percent of all college courses
currently tap into Web resources to support instruction.  While the WWW plays
an interesting and increasingly important role in instruction and scholarship,
many colleges and universities also recognize the role of the Web as part of
a digital public presence intended for off-campus clientele.  The survey data
indicate that colleges and universities are more likely to focus their formal
institutional plans for the WWW on promotion to off-campuses audiences (38.1
percent), rather than instruction (24.4 percent) or distance education
(12.5 percent).  Target audiences for these WWW initiatives typically include
prospective students, alumni, news organizations, and potential donors.

Green says that the focus of formal plans for off-campus audiences can be
explained by two factors.  First, campus officials typically hesitate to
intervene in the instructional domain.  Consequently, an institutional mandate
defining the role of the WWW in instruction would be seen on many campuses as
an intrusion into traditional departmental and faculty prerogatives to set
program priorities, develop the curriculum, and define pedagogical strategies.
While growing numbers of faculty and academic departments want  (and
increasingly expect) institutional support for these efforts, few will readily
accept institutional imperatives.

Second, as Internet access and Web use grows rapidly among the general
population, institutional officials are increasingly concerned about look,
feel, and content issues affecting a campus Web site.  In essence, growing
numbers of campus officials recognize an institutional Web site as a marketing
tool and a competitive presence that can provide information and services to
important off-campus constituencies.

Like their corporate counterparts, colleges and universities appear cautious
about embracing Microsoft's Windows 95.  Less than a quarter (23.3 percent) of
the campuses participating in this year's survey report supporting or
recommending Windows 95 as of fall 1995, although more than half (56.8 percent)
indicate that Windows 95 will become very important in their computing plans and
strategy over the next two or three years.  At many institutions, the slow
transition to Windows 95 reflects concerns about significant migration costs:
the need for new applications software and more powerful computers, accompanied
by additional demands for user support.

Indeed, user support issues now present a major technology challenge for
most institutions.  Replacing aging equipment, updating obsolete software,
supporting the migration to Windows 95, and providing training for faculty
and students eager to explore the Internet and the WWW are the top
institutional priorities for the 1995 survey respondents.

In the context of user support, just one-fourth of the respondents
(24.3 percent) assess the technology infrastructure at their institution as
excellent.  Only a third (31.3) rate the networking and data communications
infrastructure on their campus as excellent; similarly less than a third (29.3)
offer a similar assessment of the telecommunications system.  Cable and video
capacity receive the lowest ranking: only an eighth (12.9 percent) of the
respondents rate their campus highly in this area.  Research universities are
most likely to give high marks to their campus network: over half (57.5
percent) of the public universities and more than a third (36.4) of the
private universities rate this part of the technology infrastructure as
excellent. Video and cable generally receive low marks across all campuses.

"Infrastructure helps foster innovation," says Green.  "One key element of
the technology infrastructure is a well-developed campus network; a second
is the telecommunications system.  Other important components include desktop
systems with CD-ROM drives, the routine upgrading of hardware and software,
multimedia-capable computers in faculty offices and student labs, and technical
support to help students, faculty, administrators and staff make effective
use of the technology."

 As noted in past survey reports, most campuses still do not have a
financial model for acquiring and retiring desktop computers.  In fall 1995,
just over a fifth (22.0 percent) report a budget model for amortizing and
routinely replacing technology, up slightly from 15.9 percent in 1990.
However, the vast majority of colleges and universities (78 percent) continue
to fund most of their equipment purchases and software upgrades with one-time
budget allocations or special appropriations.

"The survey data reflect the continuing problems colleges and universities
have in developing a viable financial plan for their technology needs,"
says Green. "The useful life of desktop computers and accompanying software
is a known factor, roughly 15 months for many core software applications and
maybe 30 months for hardware.  Yet rather than plan for the routine turnover of
aging technology resources, most institutions continue to find money rather
than reserve funds."

The 1995 Campus Computing survey is based on data provided by computing
officials (typically the chief academic computing officer) at some 650 two- and
four-year colleges and universities across the United States.  Participating
campuses completed the survey during fall 1995.

Copies of the 1995 Campus Computing Report are available from Campus
Computing for $35 (postpaid):

Kenneth Green
Campus Computing
PO Box 261242
Encino, CA  91426-1242
(818) 990-2212  (phone & fax)

cgreen@earthlink.net

Ken Friedman, Ph.D.
Associate Professor, Leadership and Strategic Design
Norwegian School of Management
Box 4676 Sofienberg
N-0506 Oslo, Norway

Phone: +47 22.98.51.07
Fax:     +47 22.98.51.11

e-mail: ken.friedman@bi.no