The Chronicle: Colloquy Live Transcript

How Will Technology Change Research Universities?

Friday, November 22, at 3 p.m., U.S. Eastern time

How dramatically will technology change research universities? How should university officials prepare for these changes?

Information technology is likely to reshape research universities drastically -- changing how they are organized, financed, and governed -- and will also prod the institutions to emphasize instruction more heavily, a new report from the National Academy of Sciences predicts. The report, titled "Preparing for the Revolution: Information Technology and the Future of the Research University," warns academe against "complacency" in the face of fast-paced technological developments and new competition from online universities and for-profit institutions. It cautions that research universities should respond "with carefully considered strategies backed by prudent developments -- not just to avoid extinction but to actively cultivate opportunity."

» Technology Reshapes Universities, Report Says (11/22/2002)

Daniel E. Atkins is a member of the National Academy of Sciences panel that prepared the new report. Mr. Atkins is a professor in the School of Information, a professor of electrical engineering and computer science, and director of the Alliance for Community Technology at the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor. Mr. Atkins will respond to questions and comments about the new report on Friday, November 22, at 3 p.m., U.S. Eastern time. Advance questions are encouraged and may be posted now.

A transcript of the chat follows.

Vincent Kiernan (Moderator):
Good afternoon. I'm Vincent Kiernan, a senior editor here at The Chronicle. Our guest today is Daniel E. Atkins, a professor in the School of Information, a professor of electrical engineering and computer science, and director of the Alliance for Community Technology at the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor. We will be discussing a report issued this month by the National Academy of Sciences on the impact of information technology on research universities. Mr. Atkins was a member of the panel that produced the study. Welcome, Mr. Atkins.

Daniel E. Atkins:
On behalf of all the member of the panel, I thank you for this opportunity to have conversation about the report from the National Research Council. The primary goal of this report was indeed to initiate conversation on a topic of great strategic importance to higher education. We're pleased that The Chronicle is one of the first to help us do this.

Vincent Kiernan (Moderator):
Before we start, here's an announcement from the National Academy of Sciences:

Thanks to The Chronicle for hosting this discussion, and to Dr. Atkins for representing the Panel. Just wanted to let people know that I have a limited number of copies of Preparing for the Revolution available. Please forward your mailing address to me at tarrison@nas.edu and I will send them out as long as they last. The report is also available for sale from the National Academies Press (http://www.nap.edu or 800-624-6242).
--Tom Arrison, The National Academies

Vincent Kiernan (Moderator):
We'll start with some questions that were submitted in advance.

Question from Dick Jensen, U of Illinois, Chicago:
Would it be fair to suggest that academe led in the introduction of technology, but as development and use of that technology moved from the lab to the larger economy that academics have been slow to adapt technology and loath to invest in it because it costs real money and requires new learning?

Daniel E. Atkins:
I don't agree that the universities have been loathe to invest in information technology. It's estimated that 10-15% of the overall budgets of higher education institutions are now invested in IT. Universities, like many other knowledge-intensive organizations, use IT for business functions, scientific and engineering analysis, and increasingly for information access. The real issue here is that the marriage of computing and communication gives us the opportunity to build new types of learning organizations and to support learning and discovery processes in new ways. I agree that universities are only beginning to explore the new wave of possibilities that are enabled by, but will ultimately go well beyond, the internet and the web as we now know it. Universities should be leaders in exploring this future and so far, in general, they are not.

Question from Anita Klesch, Birkbeck College, University of London:
Do you see the humanities disciplines, for example, art history and English Literature in a technolgically driven university surviving and able to competing with the disciplines that appear to have been more computer compatable such as engineering and business studies or the newer diciplines in computer science?

Daniel E. Atkins:
Several people on the panel, including Bill Wulf, the president of the National Academy of Engineering, feel that ultimately the humanities will be the most exciting and challenging area for the use of information technology. Ironically, IT has just recently become powerful enough to really be interesting and useful to the humanities for supporting access to and manipulation of images, video, audio, and new multimedia forms. Some people, for example Elizabeth Daley, dean of the Annenberg School at the University of Southern California, are advocating that IT will soon support both reading and writing literacy of video forms. Although much of the investment in advanced information technology (cyberinfrastructure) is being motivated and funded in the name of science and engineering research, much of this investment can and hopefully will be in service of the humanities.

Question from Arlene, medium sized university graduate student:
What would you consider the most crucial opportunities and threats (trends, politics, market, credibility, technology, etc.) facing DE organizations today? Do you have thoughts on how to avoid the threats and optimize the opportunities? Thanks.

Daniel E. Atkins:
The most meaningful use of technology in education is to reinforce the activity of knowledge-creating and learning communities. A byproduct of learning mediated through information technology is that students, teachers, and other learning resources can be distributed both in time and space. The biggest danger is that technology will be used to simply automate the traditional classroom and could even lead to second-class status to those who "access the campus" remotely. On the other hand, the great opportunity is to provide great new capabilities for learning communities to access people, information, and facilities on a global scale. Technology can potentially augment but not fully replace an education model based primarily on people interacting together at the same time and the same place.

Question from David Potenziani, University of North Carolina:
Information technology promises to lower some economic and logistical barriers in collaborating on research, but I have yet to see much evidence of a leap in sharing of research datasets and other cooperative activities. How can we reduce formidable cultural and political barriers to encourage researchers that collaboration with peers they have never met can be fruitful?

Daniel E. Atkins:
I fully agree that the principal barriers to distributed collaborative research are more social and cultural than technological. There needs to be readiness and incentive for collaboration, with or without technology. I believe that growth in IT supported collaboration (collaboratories, grids, e-science) will be driven by the emerging next generation of major scientific problems. Many fields of science are now persuing grand challenges that can only be achieved through the use of distributed information technology to link people, information, and instruments. This includes high-energy physics, environmental sciences, the National Virtual Observatory for Astronomy, and earthquake engineering research.

Question from Bill Hair, Baylor University:
When, if ever, do you see publication of articles by tenure track faculty in e-journals being viewed on a par with articles published in print journals?

Daniel E. Atkins:
We agree that in most cases e-journal articles are not yet taken at par with traditional, paper-based publication in promotion and tenure decisions. One of the points from our report is that these technologies are just beginning to change the basic sociology of research and higher education. It will take some time for traditions such as you mentioned to change.

Question from Scott Jaschik, The Chronicle of Higher Education:
Are there some universities that you think are ahead of the curve in responding to the challenges discussed in the report? What policies or approaches at which universities should others watch for guidance?

Daniel E. Atkins:
I don't pretend to have a comprehensive view of all the pilot projects in this area in higher education, but I will mention a few that I see as real leadership. The MIT initiative around open courseware is a bold experiment in openness and providing resources on a global scale to the higher education community. On the one hand, it is using technology to freely share high-quality learning material, and on the other, it is placing a big bet that information technology will not replace the value of the on-campus experience at MIT.

The University of Indiana is a leader in creating advanced IT infrastructure and financial models for sustaining it at the leading edge.

The University of Michigan through its CHEF project is forming a consortium of higher education institutions to produce open-source versions of course-management and learning-workflow tools.

Many universities have undertaken initiatives in creating digital libraries, which is a key component of the "revolution." During the next phase of this NAS project, we expect to do a much more comprehensive inventory of innovative projects underway.

Question from Jay Douglas, U. of Southern California:
How might universities' attempts to commercialize newly-developed intellectual property dampen or restrict what professors are willing (or allowed) to teach in their classes? How can the research community keep the flow of ideas from lab to class open?

Daniel E. Atkins:
The question you raise is a very crucial one. One of the most fundamental attributes of higher education is openness, and many of us feel that technology should be used to reinforce rather than curtail it. The MIT project I just mentioned is an example of using the Internet to enhance openness and sharing. On the other hand, emerging IT infrastructure further complicates a question of whether a faculty member works for/in a university, as a member of an intellectual community of practice, or as an individual entrepreneur. Policies on patents, copyright, and other "rules of the road" for use of intellectual properites will need to be evaluated and re-evaluated as part of this "revolution." We are also confronting the increasing challenge of "rights management" from the commercial, entertainment, and media industries. It is my hope that universities can provide some counterbalance to a trend against openness.

Vincent Kiernan (Moderator):
We're about half way through the chat. If you have a question for Daniel Atkins, now would be a great time to send it along.

Question from Deba Dutta, U of Michigan:
In the years ahead (say 5-10) do you see a convergance of distance learning activities in universities with global education progarms. As of now, in most universities, these two are handled (and administered) by separate units. Thanks.

Daniel E. Atkins:
I think one of the most exciting potentials for using cyberinfrastructure in higher education is the potential to do learning, research, and social engagement on a global scale. Distance learning, international education programs, and extension services now often sit outside the mainstream teaching and research activities of the university. As we find effective ways for using IT to support a broader scope of the university's mission, I expect that the mainstream and these auxilliary activities will converge.

Question from Sandra M. Waters, Old Dominion University:
Do you see technology pushing higher education into the "edutainment" business? Where do we draw the line?

Daniel E. Atkins:
That's a good question, too. In this first phase of our deliberations we have talked quite a lot about the potential complimentary activities between "education" and "entertainment." In thinking about this we need to distinguish between passive, one-way "entertainment" such as traditional television, and the much more interactive forms and formats possible in the IT-based environments. Much more study needs to take place to understand the meaningful intersection between these two fields. But, for example, the enormous popularity of the massively multiplayer internet games suggest that the topic is well-worth pursuing. Universities also need to consider the possibility of the entertainment industry quite deliberately moving into higher education as a commercial venture.

Question from Eugene Jones, Information Technology Consultant:
Do research institutions have a responsibility to help assure the benefits of information technology "flow down" to institutions that serve a larger proportion of students with the least prior exposure to technoloy? The relevance of the question is that the top 100 research institutions in this country garner nearly 80% of the total federal research dollars committed to academia, but enroll less than 15% of the (native) minority population. From this fact alone, one could argue that rapidly advancing IT in a selected segment of higher academia (i.e., research institutions) will continue to widen the "educational" and "digital" divides in this country.

Daniel E. Atkins:
My personal answer is very definitely "yes." I believe that part of the fundamental mission of the research university is meaningful engagement with broader society and enhancing the equity of access to learning and creative activities. Information technology used to create collaboratories or virtual/grid communities offers bold new opportunities for cross-cultural engagements between majority- and minority-serving institutions. Hopefully we will find ways to link institutions in ongoing, mutually benficial ways. To the extent that technology creates new opportunities in this area, I believe it is the responsibility of the leading universities to pursue them.

Question from Mark Notess, Indiana University:
Which technology investments made by universities seem to you to yield the most value? Which investments seem less fruitful?

Daniel E. Atkins:
I don't have a definite answer to this question, but would say that the most important investment for the university is a state-of-the-art and comprehensive network infrastructure that connects in both internally and externally.

Question from Sara, U of M:
I was wondering if you thought that the introduction of technology to the university and research fundementally changes the way that people should or do learn? Do currucula need to bend, and in what ways?

Daniel E. Atkins:
This is one of the most fundamental questions we are confronting. We have lots of anecdotal evidence that the "plug and play" generation learns differently. There are to date, however, very few scientific studies validating this and much less known about the principals for using interative multimedia for enhanced learning. One of the most exciting potentials for me is that of customizing learning environments. As a country, we need to invest much more funding to basic research to answer the question you pose. By the way, a very interesting book laying the basis for the question you're asking is How People Learn published by the National Academy Press and available at http://www.nap.edu.

Question from Vincent Kiernan, The Chronicle:
Many faculty members are likely to be disturbed by some predictions made in your panel's report -- such as the notion that faculty members could evolve into a pool of freelance instructors selling their services to multiple institutions. What strategies can colleges use to convince faculty members to cooperate in the development of a future for academe with which they may disagree?

Daniel E. Atkins:
The question of freelancing versus membership in a university community is not new, although it becomes more vivid in a cyberuniversity scenario. Part of the answer lies in stressing that technology can and should reinforce the faculty's role as members of a specific knowledge community and finding reinforcement between physical and virtual space communities rather than dichotomy. As usual, the answer will lie in finding areas of mutual self-interest.

Question from Jim Harvey, U of M School of Information:
I was surprised at the extent to which 'Preparing' went in predicting the changes in universities (freelance or contract professors, for instance). I was also surprised at the credence given to programs like the University of Phoenix' online degrees. I realize it will vary in different organizations, but how quickly do you see these types of extreme changes coming about? 5-10 years or longer?

Daniel E. Atkins:
It is important to realize that this report, only the first phase of a multi-phase process, is not attempting to predict the future. It is largely trying to present scenarios and examples of what is underway and what might happen. It should not be taken at this point as sanctioning either of the models you suggest. On the other hand, we are trying to make this potential revolution more vivid by describing activities and initiatives that could potentially be very disruptive to the status quo. We are trying to stimulate dialogue, planning, and eventually informed activity.

Question from Linda Goff, Instruction Librarian Calif. State Univ., Sacramento:
Campus administrators have always viewed academic libraries as bottomless pits for money - we never have had enough budget to buy everything we wanted for our collections. Now we're spending a big part of our periodical budget on electronic databases and the hardware to access them. Won't campuses have the same problem funding these new resources? And how will the need for traditional research materials compete with the newer technologies?

Daniel E. Atkins:
Physical, intellectual, and long-term access to data, information, and knowledge will continue to be at the heart of the university. Traditionally much of this function has been provided by the campus library. Institutions need to find ways to create common IT infrastructure for both the library and other parts of the campus. Libraries will eventually need to find ways to replace rather than supplement their print on paper collections with digital resources. Academic libraries also need to be more aggeressive in exploring technology-based collbarative activities between campuses. There are also many new opportunities for academic libraries to take on new, expanded roles and increase their value and funding stream at the institution. For example, in managing and curating the digital resources produced by the faculty of the university, as well as the growing need for long-term curation of scientific data. My advice would be to not wait to be asked but to be proactive in defining the library's role in the future our report is trying to sketch.

Vincent Kiernan (Moderator):
That's all our time for today. Thanks for participating, Mr. Atkins.

Daniel E. Atkins:
I'd like to thank the participants for excellent questions and encourage them to continue this type of dialogue with their colleagues in their academic and university communities.

Vincent Kiernan (Moderator):
Thanks to everyone who sent in questions, and apologies to those whose questions we didn't have time to answer. A transcript of the chat will be posted here shortly. Good day.