In the Fall of 2012, Georgetown launched the Initiative for Technology-Enhanced Learning or ITEL. The initiative incentivized innovation by faculty within existing courses, most of it related to using internet and other computer-based technologies to enrich the learning experience. Given that Georgetown faculty are often innovating in their pedagogy, we were hopeful that some would turn their attention to technological innovation.
The Center for New Designs Learning and Scholarship (CNDLS) issued a report summarizing the progress to date on ITEL initiatives. While many of the projects launched are still in progress, the report has some signals on how the initiative is proceeding.
All of the ITEL projects were proposed and led by faculty who wanted to improve a course under their direction. Almost all of the innovations funded had unproven odds of success. Hence, each project was asked to plan an evaluation.
At this point there have been three calls for proposals. There are roughly 100 different projects launched by ITEL. The projects are spread throughout all the schools and departments of Georgetown. There are about 175 faculty involved in the different projects. We estimate that about 5,200 students on all three campuses have experienced one or more of the innovations.
The projects were diverse and collectively we learned, among other things, how games and simulations might be effective tools as part of courses. We learned more about effective “flipping” of the classroom, whereby content traditionally presented in lectures is moved outside of class, using computer-assisted interactive exercises. We learned what it really takes in staff support to build into existing classes the types of innovations the faculty want to use. In this regard, a common experience was an underestimation of the amount of time required to deign and implement the innovations proposed. Some of the classes used interactive video segments to convey course material. We learned how to use modules of MOOCs inside Hilltop classrooms.
In several ITEL projects, students reported liking the innovation and their performance on exams showed greater mastery of the material. Of course, we knew not all projects would demonstrate breakthroughs; such is the nature of research and development activities. But all projects taught us collectively about what features of new techniques deserve further attention.
While faculty involved in the developments learned new ways of communicating course content to the students, the larger institution, especially the CNDLS staff, learned what skills and effort are required to support Georgetown more broadly as it moves to use technology to improve learning on campus. We now see the way forward to create routine “production” services to support faculty in these endeavors.
Importantly, the course-level innovation started in ITEL prepared us as a community of faculty to take on innovation at the program level. Program level, versus course-level, innovation is the meat of the Designing the Future(s) initiative. However, course level innovation must continue and thrive in order that Designing the Future(s) succeeds. Some of the ITEL innovations at the course level are building blocks to the experimental degree programs in Designing the Future(s).
While we used internal funds to start ITEL and to prove to ourselves that there was merit to these innovations, it appears that Designing the Future(s) is attracting philanthropy from parents, alumni, and foundations. These gifts and grants have the promise of funding much of the activity of Designing the Future(s). Georgetown should be proud of this vote of confidence from important stakeholders to our faculty and staff.