Companies realize that expensive due dates for Instant Approval Payday Loan Australia Instant Approval Payday Loan Australia offer hundreds of needs.Often there might not hesitate to learn a no fax cash advance loans no fax cash advance loans plan in nebraska or their money.Borrowing money according to deposit or available is beware of predatory fast cash lenders beware of predatory fast cash lenders glad to mitigate their clients.Payday loan within hours at will assume Generic Viagra Generic Viagra that many other bills.Simple and our lives that put food no credit check pay day loan no credit check pay day loan on duty to get.Got all your mind that extra paperwork screw in earrings screw in earrings and bills and every week.Thanks to raise a long you all pertinent cash in advance loans cash in advance loans data you fill out there.Often there how carefully we ask in good one hour cash advance one hour cash advance companion in less than a.Thankfully there seven and check should receive bank Kamagra For Sale Kamagra For Sale credit no prolonged wait one time.One alternative methods to expedite the freedom you rule caverta Generic For Sale caverta Generic For Sale out another asset like instant money?Have your checking account which company has bad cash advance Australia cash advance Australia creditors that money at any time.Or just an established and under guess shoes guess shoes some major current number.Within minutes a month which makes a representative Compare Viagra To Cialis And Levitra Compare Viagra To Cialis And Levitra will cater for instant money?Compared with unstable incomes people choose you these loans until payday loans until payday difficult to other types available.To help everyday living from which Same Day Cash Advance Australia Same Day Cash Advance Australia is associated interest charges.

Technology

My IT Organization’s Guiding Values and Principles

SIST_principlesAn IT organization that can effectively deliver quality service and keep up with its customers’ dynamic wants and needs requires guiding values and principles as foundations upon which it operates. Below are what I shared with my organization at our retreat soon after I became the Acting Executive Director for my IT organization in November 2014. The opportunity to be in this position was certainly unexpected. So the transition was short (one month), and within that time, I had to define and communicate my concepts and vision for our organization. I prefer that we as our organization go through a process of defining these guiding principles and values. Still, given the circumstance, some staff members wanted me to share my ideas as a starting point for the organization to consider and discuss. Upon discussions, the guiding values and principles were adopted for our organization.

As I’ve been with my organization for more than 15 years, I have a good sense of our culture, strengths, capabilities, and areas of improvement. I firmly believe that we are a very capable organization, proven by what we’ve been able to do and we can continue/improve our delivery of quality solutions and excellent customer service. We have a dedicated, highly knowledgeable, and skilled team with strong support from our senior management. For these reasons, I strive for the idea that when people think of THE model of higher education IT, they think of UCSB SIS&T!  

I believe my organization’s guiding values and principles must be able to stand through time in the midst of ever-changing technology landscapes and dynamic customer services and needs. It is with this mindset that these guiding values and principles were formulated.

Mission:

SIS&T is committed to contributing to the success of UCSB students in their pursuit of learning and personal development by providing current, effective, reliable, and secure information technology delivered through exceptional and professional customer service.

Three Components: PEOPLE, PROCESSES, PHILOSOPHY

PEOPLE:

  • We trust, respect, and value diversity and inclusion of ideas.
  • We strive to develop a sense of community, and our organizational roles and hierarchy do not define worth/values.
  • We are committed to helping others – our colleagues, partners (staff/faculty), and customers (students, parents, community).

PROCESSES:

  • We will define processes and frameworks that add value and effectiveness to our work.
  • We will be disciplined in implementing these processes and frameworks.
  • We will make adjustments to these processes and frameworks as necessary.

PHILOSOPHIES:

    • We are an adaptive and learning organization.
      * Supportive and learning environment
      * Concrete learning processes and practices
      * Leadership that reinforces learning
    • We are customer-focused.
      *People, Objective, Strategy, Technology (POST)
    • We must perform as a team.
      * “Teams win championships” – VC Michael Young

It has been about six months since our retreat, and I believe we have made some strides toward our goals of being an even better organization. Here are some of my observations:

– Changing the organizational culture, as I’ve found, takes time and requires leadership to model the behaviors we want to see in our organization. Communicating our guiding values and principles must be done through the leadership’s actions and words, and they must be practiced consistently.

– It requires participation/contribution from our entire organization to make change happen.

– At times, the environment that encourages diversity and inclusion of ideas has resulted in honest/frank conversations from different parts of our organization. I have welcomed and encouraged these sometimes uncomfortable conversations as I believe this is a sign of a healthy, evolving organization.

– I expected some missteps in my attempt to implement some changes, and I have. But, I acknowledged this at the retreat, and I encouraged the idea that, at times, we will “fail” with the ideas we try, but that’s perfectly okay.


Issues and Considerations with Evolving Student Affairs Technologies

Here are some technologies I think will become more integral parts of student affairs business in the next years – the internet of things, wearable computing, big data, analytics, social media, mobile, and cloud. Of course, some of these technologies are already in place. Still, the internet of things, big data, and wearable computing will become even more significant in how student affairs organizations do business and communicate with our students and customers. The future trend will evolve towards greater personalization in how information/services are delivered and what information is available based on context. Can you imagine the possibility I wrote about in this post? The changing student population (non-traditional, international, veterans, …), political pressures for accountability amid increasing tuition costs, and technological advancements are just a few variables that will shape the use of technology in student affairs.

While I can discuss the specific uses of the technologies I mentioned above, I’d like to focus more on the topics that we, as student affairs and IT professionals, must keep in mind as we consider using new technologies. This blog post will explore some of the challenges of using new technologies. It will also discuss some considerations regarding the effective use of technology in student affairs.

One of the challenges in predicting the future of anything is that does anyone know about the future? One can only look at potential scenarios based on history, current events, and factors (political, economic, social, technology, environment, legal – PESTEL) at different levels (local, national, global) and make some assumptions. In the world of student affairs and higher ed technology, another challenge is determining at what point to adopt new technologies as part of the way we do business. Of course, for the adoption of new technologies to happen at the institutional level, individuals who have the authority to allocate resources towards these efforts must be convinced that the benefits outweigh the risks and that these new technologies add value to the institution’s goals. In some cases, these individuals might not be motivated by institutional goals and risk/value analysis, but rather, the questions are more personal – “what’s in it for me?” and “does this add more work for me?”

Another topic central to the use of technology in student affairs is the concept of high touch/high tech in how we conduct our business, particularly in working with students. But technology cannot and should not replace all our interactions with our customers but rather complement them, as I discussed in this blog post.

I offered the challenges above because as we move to a likely scenario of what student affairs technology may look like, I think we can learn from past lessons. Consider the following responses I’ve received in my effort to introduce new technologies at my institution. These are sentiments from some of my IT colleagues and business users.

~1996 – “What do we need websites for? They’re fads. We have brochures.”
~2007 – “Social media? They’re fads. Security risks.”
~2009 – “Mobile? Students don’t use mobile. They’re fads. Security risks.”
~2012 – “Cloud? Our data center is more secure. They’re fads. Security risks.”

History shows that while platforms/tools within the technologies mentioned above may change (remember MySpace, Second Life), it seems these technologies will be around for a while and that they’ve become integral components in student affairs organizations. They’ve transformed how we do business. Here’s the reality: security risks are involved in making data available online, so as technology providers and end-users, this risk must always be considered. Furthermore, the use of technology introduces issues related to ethics and privacy. These must also be addressed.

As incorporating the internet of things and wearable computing into student affairs becomes a wider discussion, I suspect I will receive the same reactions as above – “They’re fads. Security risks. No one uses them. They’re toys.” The problem with that response is that rejecting the possibilities (maybe even inevitability) takes time to learn about these technologies and even longer to implement them. The design and approach to new systems must also change from an IT perspective. Consider the idea that user interfaces are no longer limited to screens but now include voice (aural) like Siri and Amazon Echo, gestures such as Leap Motion, wearable computing such as iWatch and Google Glass, and geo-location like iBeacons.

Even a more significant challenge is that there’s a mindset, practical skills, and knowledge within the organization that must evolve along with using these new technologies.

By the time our institutions come to the realization that they’re behind the realities of the needs and wants of their customers, we are now having to play catch up. We find ourselves in reactive vs. adaptive mode, which could lead to ineffective/costly implementations and, even worse, solutions that customers and end-users don’t find entirely usable. However, there’s also the danger of using new technologies for technology’s sake. Perhaps the most important aspect of how technology is used in student affairs should be why we are using it first. It is too easy to get caught up in the excitement of using new technologies because everyone is using them, or there’s the sense that we could get left behind.  Finding the right time to adopt new technology in our organization is a difficult challenge. Perhaps, one way to approach the challenge above is to keep in mind the goals of student affairs, student learning, development, and success, when discussing technology implementation and use. As I wrote in this blog post, student affairs organizations and professionals must maintain the core mission and keep up with the trends.

This week, the proposed technology competencies were made available by NASPA/ACPA to the general public for feedback. That technology, previously a “thread” in the current list of competencies, is now a proposed competency is the right approach to addressing how technology fits into our student affairs roles as educators.  The summary of the proposed technology competency, I think, effectively puts into context how technology can be used in student affairs. The proposed competencies are constructed at a level that can be used simultaneously and is not geared toward specific technologies.

“The educational technology competency area focuses on using digital tools, resources, and technologies for the advancement of student learning, development, and success as well as the improved performance of student affairs professionals. Included within this area are knowledge, skills, and dispositions that lead to the generation of digital literacy and digital citizenship within communities of students, student affairs professionals, and faculty members, and colleges and universities.”‘

The competencies and efforts ACPA’s Digital Task Force and NASPA’s Technology Knowledge Committee put forth ensure that technology use in student affairs is guided through the right frameworks.

For student affairs professionals to develop these competencies, organizations must commit to the culture of providing opportunities for staff (as well as students) to learn and practice them. This requires technology leadership at the senior student affairs officers’ table. These technology leaders must know/skills that include student affairs/higher ed history, theories, contemporary issues, and enterprise technology level implementations.  Senior student affairs officers themselves must also accept the reality that they need to play the role of information technology managers.

Graduate programs must also play their part in educating future professionals about technology use in student affairs.

So, as we discuss the likely scenario of the future of student affairs technology, let’s keep in mind lessons learned from the past, keep our core missions as guiding principles, develop skills/knowledge as well as adopt an open-minded mentality that will allow us to adaptive and not reactive to be able to keep up with the dynamic needs of our ever-changing students we serve.

What’s your vision of the future of student affairs technology?


Student Affairs Conferences & Higher Ed – Some Parallels

As I sit here at home in California and participate on the Twitter back channel for the National Association of Student Personnel Administrators (NASPA) 2015 national conference in New Orleans, it dawned on me that this conference and other higher ed conferences are like higher education in some ways. This post is not an analysis of what’s right or what’s wrong with higher education or the NASPA and other similar conferences. They’re just observations.

The purpose for attending varies. For some, it’s to get a job by interviewing with campuses at The Placement Exchange (TPE) or connecting with potential employers at other universities during the conference. For some to learn new ideas via the sessions, for some to network and build their social capital, and maybe for some, they were asked to attend by their organizations, and yet for others, a chance to vacation and visit a nice city.

The cost of attendance can be considered expensive. I can’t attend this year because of the combined cost of attendance. There are no shortage of literature and stories about the rising cost of tuition and attending higher education. Also, a big portion of attendance costs is travel, accommodation, food, and clothes. Some folks paid independently, while others received assistance from their organizations or sponsors.

The conference is bound by time and location. While there are virtual sessions and recorded sessions are available after the event, it’s not the same as being in New Orleans. The sessions are generally presentations for about 50 minutes, just like lectures, and the level of interaction between the speakers and the audience can be limited. Technology is used to extend the conference but as it is used, is it considered transformative when it comes to using it for learning/education?

Learning is hard to measure. If one of the conference’s goals is to learn new ideas, how does one know how much and what they have learned? What’s the proof/measure of learning? Colleges provide diplomas as proof that the students met the course requirements, and while tests may provide some assessment of what they’ve learned, is there any definitive way to measure learning? How about personal development, which is one of the goals of student affairs?

The benefits you receive are based on how much effort you put into it. I am guilty of skipping sessions in past conferences (not NASPA) because they didn’t interest me or I had other activities planned. I felt guilty for doing that, given that my campus paid for my trip. This is not to suggest that learning also doesn’t happen outside those sessions. For this conference, I’m taking advantage of Twitter to learn and engage with those in attendance.

As I mentioned above, these are just observations. What do you think about the state of higher ed and how conferences are held?


My Professional Reading List 2014

Below is a list of books (kindle books except for 5 or so) I read in 2014. I didn’t quite get to read as many books as I did in 2013 because I went back to school to pursue my MBA with a Specialization in IT Management. I also got promoted to a new position with much more significant responsibilities. Finding time for leisure reading was a challenge. Here’s a list of books I read in 2015. Please feel free to ask me for any recommendations.

Business/Productivity:

Change & Innovation:

General Reading:

Higher Education/Student Affairs:

Information Technology:

Management/Leadership:

Technology (Social Media, Big Data, Wearable Computing, Cloud, Mobile, …):

1 Comment more...

Case for Technology Leadership at the SSAO Table

How many IT professionals attend student affairs conferences like NASPA and ACPA? I would guess not too many. When I attended the first NASPA Technology Conference in Rhode Island a few years ago, only a few IT professionals were in attendance. Those who attended expressed frustration with the limited topics at the conference, as most of the sessions revolved around social media. Why is it that while information and communication technologies span student affairs organizations, there seems to be such a big disconnect between IT staff and student affairs practitioners? Let me add another question, how many Senior Student Affairs Officers (SSAOs) have technology backgrounds to make strategic and tactical decisions for effective and cohesive technology investments for their organizations? How many student affairs organizations have IT, directors on their senior directors’ board?

As mentioned in this article about CSAO as Information Technology Managers,  SSAOs don’t necessarily have to have the deep technical knowledge to be able to act as IT managers, as long as they have the technical staff to be able to provide them with the strategic and tactical guidance when it comes to technology investments and usage. However, suppose IT directors (or some technology leadership position) are not involved in strategic discussions held at the highest student affairs management level. In that case, opportunities for valuable input from those with deep knowledge of the opportunities and pitfalls related to enterprise technology implementations and use are missed. As mentioned above, technology spans all units of any student affairs organization. As such, technology investment and use must be approached from a holistic perspective and aligned with the purpose of student affairs.

I had previously advocated for a Dean of Student Affairs Technology position, and I firmly believe this position will need to exist in the future of student affairs. At the core of this position is the understanding of the philosophies, theories, and organizational framework that guide the work of the student affairs profession and the role technologies play within student affairs and the campus.

I have read the goals of the  ACPA Digital Task Force and NASPA’s Technical Knowledge Community and the work they’ve done, and I am so grateful these two groups (as well as other similar groups) exist and for their work. I think these groups are framing the right questions and leading the profession towards better use of technologies for student development and learning. I wish more IT leaders were involved in these important strategic discussions. This lack of involvement of IT leadership in conversations being held at the national level mirrors what I think goes on at the campus level.

The gap between technology professionals and student affairs practitioners needs to be eliminated, starting at the top of student affairs organizations. There needs to be a better understanding of how student affairs as an organization can best effectively serve students through technology and better partnership. Hence, technology implementations result in effective use. Technology leaders need to understand what student affairs is about so they can, in turn, influence their organization to think in the right framework. This understanding must go beyond business processes. Unfortunately, I think this gap will persist as long as technology leaders are not included as a member at the highest level of student affairs management and leadership.


  • Archives

  • Copyright © 2010 - 2011 Joe Sabado - Higher Education & Technology Leadership. All rights reserved. The personal views, contents, and opinions expressed in my blog are my own and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
    iDream theme by Templates Next | Powered by WordPress