Preparing Students for a Future with Technology
A Quality Enhancement Plan Proposal
Brian Mallory
University of South Carolina Upstate
January 12, 2011
Table of Contents
Executive Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1
Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2
Program Description. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5
Student Learning Outcomes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5
Foundation and Oversight. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5
Initiatives. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6
Program Assessment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
10
Program Expenses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
14
Appendix I
Initiatives and Assessments Requiring Additional Funds. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
15
Note
Despite slight differences in connotation, information technology literacy, digital literacy,
technology skills, computer skills, etc... are used interchangeably in this document.
Executive Summary
With the increasing role that technology plays in information management and dissemination, it
is imperative that USC Upstate graduates leave the University prepared to embrace a lifelong
relationship with computers and their fast-changing applications. While it is clear that students are
adept at many more casual uses of technology—cell phones, texting, social networking, and the like—
there is often a disconnect between knowledge of these applications and facility with the more formal
applications of technology in a professional environment.
Preparing Students for a Future with Technology is intended to address this dichotomy by
providing students with additional instruction in a wide range of digital literacy applications.
Proficiency with these applications of technology will give students the skills to excel in their academic
and career endeavors, while aiding USC Upstate in fulfilling its metropolitan mission by providing the
Upstate of South Carolina with an applicant pool capable of meeting the needs of local employers.
For adult learners and return-to-learn students who sometimes enter the University having little
experience with computers and other technology, the Preparing Students for a Future with
Technology program will give them the skills necessary to participate in online and distance education
courses and succeed academically.
The Preparing Students for a Future with Technology proposal focuses on Microsoft® Office
applications in order to explain the concept as briefly as possible. However, because the intention of
the initiative is to prepare students to use their digital literacy skills to adapt to unfamiliar applications
of technology, instructing students in discipline-specific software, search tools, and other technology
resources is also an integral piece of the program.
The program allows for implementation despite the limited funding that may be available due to
reductions in state funding. This is accomplished by taking advantage of the University’s current
technology resources, including knowledgeable staff and access to technology on campus. The
program will be assessed throughout its implementation, and the results of these assessments will be
used to ensure USC Upstate graduates are prepared to embrace technology.
1|P a g e
Introduction
At the University’s founding more than 40 years ago, graduates were not expected to
use computers in their post-baccalaureate endeavors, much less to use computers
effectively, efficiently, and daily. But the past decades have seen technological
advancements that were unimaginable to the University’s founders. In order to fulfill the
University’s mission of preparing students “to participate as responsible citizens in a diverse,
global and knowledge-based society, to pursue excellence in their chosen careers and to
continue learning throughout life”, graduates now need extensive digital literacy skills. These
dramatic changes have allowed computers to impact—even transform—almost every aspect
of higher education and subsequent employment. No longer can graduates enter the
workforce with only a cursory understanding of technology and its applications. Technology
can only be employed efficiently and effectively by experienced users. Therefore, employers
in all fields expect their employees to be competent in the use of current applications and
capable of learning new applications.
Nonprofit organizations, state agencies, and schools have investigated the top skills
employers in various fields are seeking in new employees and, while some of the skills
identified are specific to the type of employment or category of business, proficiency with
computers, software knowledge, and digital literacy skills are almost always in the top ten,
especially word processing, spreadsheet, and presentation applications! (Hansen and
Hansen, n.d.; Oregon Employment Department, 2004; U.S. Department of Labor, 2000)
Ironically, a survey of college freshmen and seniors found that students were least confident
in their abilities with “spreadsheets, advanced word processing and, (sic) PowerPoint
presentations” (Heimler, Denaro, Cartisano, Brachio, and Elsa-Sofia, n.d.) compared with
their abilities to email, search the internet, and perform “general computer use” activities.
2|P a g e
(Heimler et al.) Similarly, research conducted in 2008 by IBM, in conjunction with the Marist
College Institute of Public Opinion found that over 50% of the 1600 students surveyed hoped
their post-secondary education would improve their proficiency with technology, and they
identified technology as one of the three most important skills they needed to improve. (IBM,
2009)
Of equal importance to USC Upstate is the positive impact digital literacy ability would
have on students’ academic performance. Regardless of their major, students would benefit
from improved computer skills. Education majors, for example, could use technology to
facilitate collaboration with other educators and sharing of information and resources;
technology would expedite Business majors’ trend analyses, modeling, and forecasting; and
Psychology majors would be able to more efficiently conduct, analyze, and present research,
as well as review literature relevant to their research. Additionally, with the University striving
to provide additional online and distance learning opportunities in response to the needs of
the Upstate South Carolina region, and with the concurrent goal of serving adult learners and
“return-to-learn” students, and the likelihood that many in this new population will lack
significant experience in at least some technologies, it will be increasingly important to ensure
that students have the computer skills necessary for success in the virtual classroom.
On a survey of USC Upstate graduates from 2007/2008, participants rated their
satisfaction with “Integration of computers/technology into coursework a 3.9—the third lowest
of 13 satisfaction items. Similarly, they rated their preparation for using computers and
technology in their jobs as only slightly better than the preparation of their peers from other
colleges (the fifth lowest of 20 items) yet they rated using computers and technology as “Very
Important”. At USC Upstate, when an Information Technology Literacy competency was
developed for the general education curriculum, only 12 courses indicated that they
3|P a g e
supported the associated student learning outcomes. In contrast, 60 courses aligned with the
Critical Thinking competency, 53 courses aligned with the Quantitative Reasoning and
Scientific Inquiry competency, 42 courses aligned with the Communication competency, and
32 courses aligned with the Globalization and Diversity competency. A Total Testing
assessment was administered to 147 students in capstone courses in Spring 2010 at USC
Upstate to evaluate students’ ability to function in simulated Internet Explorer, Windows
Explorer, and Microsoft® Word, Excel, and PowerPoint environments. Overall, students
completed only about 65% of the items correctly. They correctly completed less than 60% of
the items rated “intermediate” and fewer than 45% of the “advanced” items.
It is USC Upstate’s responsibility to ensure that graduates are prepared for participation
in this “diverse, global and knowledge-based society” by arming them with an understanding
of the most common computer applications and providing opportunities to apply their
understanding appropriately. Anything less results in graduates who are fundamentally
lacking the skills necessary to compete for, obtain, and excel in their chosen careers.
4|P a g e
Program Description
Student Learning Outcomes
Preparing Students for a Future with Technology provides a framework that will allow
USC Upstate students to learn and apply digital literacy skills that will serve them in their
academic and career endeavors. The program will address multiple student learning
outcomes (SLOs) needed for success in the technologically advance workplaces that are
today’s standard. Through the Preparing Students for a Future with Technology program,
graduates of USC Upstate will be able to:

Demonstrate competent use of technology to gather information;

Use technology to correctly process and analyze information;

Communicate information appropriately to others though technology; and

Understand and demonstrate ethical use of technology in gathering, processing,
analyzing, and communicating information.
The Preparing Students for a Future with Technology program will build upon the University’s
current Information Technology Literacy general education requirement thereby providing
students with the more in-depth training and experience necessary to meet their academic
and employment goals. The program takes advantage of the technology infrastructure and
services provided by USC Upstate’s Information Technology and Services, and helps make
sure students have the skills they need to take full advantage of these resources.
Foundation and Oversight
A key piece of the program is the formation of a Digital Literacy Task Force (DLTF) with
faculty, staff, and student representation. The DLTF will be responsible for:

Identifying the specific digital literacy related skills USC Upstate graduates should
possess.
5|P a g e

Developing a concrete implementation plan that factors in student, faculty, staff, and
budgetary constraints. These constraints may require phasing in the Preparing
Students for a Future with Technology program—piloting it in one or two courses
required of all students (SEGL 101/102, perhaps) or implementing it first in only one
or two departments.

Working with faculty and staff to develop interventions to teach and reinforce the
identified skills.

Initiating Faculty Development programs.

Collecting data and assessing the efficacy of the implemented interventions.

Making the results of the assessment activities available to constituents internal and
external to the University.
In order to identify the most important digital literacy related skills for USC Upstate
graduates, the DLTF could work with Institutional Research, Assessment, and Planning to
survey faculty and staff, students, employers, and other University constituents. Conducting
interviews and focus groups would also be beneficial for this purpose.
Initiatives
South Carolina has consistently cut appropriations to public universities in the state
over the past several years. The DLTF will be responsible for looking at the cost of each
intervention, and others as developed, and deciding which would make best use of limited
funds. The decreases in state funding make it imperative that the DLTF capitalize on the
University’s current IT professionals as resources.
With little or no cost, the University could develop a “Digital Literacy Across the
Curriculum” model which would require faculty to demonstrate and expect students to
implement new uses of technology in every course. Deans and department heads would
6|P a g e
compile the course-level modifications for their department, school, or college and submit
them to the DLTF for review. The DLTF would make the complete list of modifications
available to all faculty to provide them with suggestions of additional course-level changes
they could implement. It would also be beneficial for the DLTF to create a course map, of
sorts, with specific skills students are expected to learn in 100, 200, 300, and 400+ level
courses, in addition to or to reinforce the skills learned in the introductory computer course
students take to fulfill the general education requirement. Using Microsoft® as an example:

100-level courses—Provide students with an introduction to Microsoft® Word,
Excel, Outlook, and PowerPoint, their applications, and a basic overview of their
use; require students to create basic documents in each of these applications and
to communicate via e-mail.

200-level courses—To reinforce the skills learned in 100-level courses, require
students to electronically submit Excel spreadsheets with graphics formatted
appropriately for the discipline, Word documents with embedded tables and more
complex formatting, and PowerPoint presentations demonstrating moderate ability
with the application. Require electronic submission via e-mail appropriate for
business communication. Provide explanations and examples of ethical technology
use.

300-level courses—Build upon the 200-level skills by requiring appropriate Internet
research (from academic publications rather than Wikipedia type sources) in
preparation for creating and submitting more complex data representations in Excel
and Word and PowerPoint documents requiring more complex formatting. Initiate
more involved discussions regarding the ethical use of computers and technology,
especially as it relates to internet research and data analysis and presentation.
7|P a g e

400-level and above courses—Because students will have had significant
experience with Microsoft® Office software and internet applications, require
students to submit packages of related Microsoft ® Word, Excel, and PowerPoint
documents reflecting advanced formatting and creativity with the applications, as
well as an understanding of when to use each in formal communications. Ensure
that students are composing e-mails that are suitable for professional
communications.
To assist faculty in implementing these technology initiatives in their classes, an efficient
system of reserving smart classrooms would be required so students would be able to use
the computers in class, on occasion, for hands-on exercises.
Another low- or no-cost addition to the USC Upstate experience would be creating and
promoting a blog or other online discussion group, possibly overseen by the current
Information Technology and Services (ITS) staff. In this blog, students, faculty and staff
could pose questions relating to the use of information technology and respond to the
questions of others. Not only would this serve as an information resource, but it would likely
foster a sense of connection between members of the University community and encourage
a mindset aimed at helping others.
The Preparing Students for a Future with Technology initiative would also be supported
by providing technology training to students. It would be ideal to offer these training sessions
shortly before the beginning of each semester, with one session covering an introduction to
the basics of the applications and a second session on intermediate to early advanced level
skills. These trainings could be tailored to transfer students and adult learners who may have
not had significant experience with the Microsoft® Office Suite or the Internet, or they could
focus on discipline-specific technologies, like statistical analysis software needed for
8|P a g e
Psychology majors. In support of the University’s outreach goals, these trainings could be
expanded to the Upstate region, if feasible, for a small charge that would help alleviate the
cost burden. For other students who have achieved a basic level of proficiency with the
applications, ITS could offer “flash trainings”—brief how-to presentations on specific aspects
of applications, like formatting tables in Word or embedding media files into PowerPoint
presentations. All of these trainings should take place in computer labs where each student
has access to a computer and can actually perform the steps shown rather than simply
watching someone else.
To assist students with questions related to the use of specific applications, a studenttutor would be hired and overseen by the Office of Student Success, similar to the academic
tutors they already employ. This student would have a high level of knowledge regarding the
Microsoft® Office applications and internet research, along with the ability to work in the most
popular discipline-specific applications used on campus, and would be available by
appointment.
9|P a g e
Program Assessment
Student attainment of the identified SLOs for the Preparing Students for a Future with
Technology program will be assessed annually through multiple direct and indirect measures,
and the results of these assessments will be provided to the Digital Literacy Task Force
(DLTF). The DLTF will analyze the assessment results to ascertain the impact of the
program, use this analysis to guide development of modifications aimed at improving student
learning, and report their findings to the USC Upstate community.
The primary direct assessment measure of the program will be the administration of the
Skills Assessment Manager (SAM) application (available through Cengage Learning) to a
sample of students enrolled in SEGL 101 and capstone courses. SAM is similar to the Total
Testing assessment administered to students in Spring 2010—it has the same activities and
questions—but it provides additional simulated tasks to be completed in a more user-friendly
format. (Although offered by different companies, the results of the Spring 2011
administration of SAM in capstone courses are expected to be similar and comparable to the
Total Testing results.) Once completed, SAM provides an overall measure of students’
performance in each of the applications assessed, as well as individual results by item.
These detailed data allow analysis to determine specific items that were problematic for
students and implement initiatives intended to improve future student performance. For
example, if analysis of the SAM data reveals that students have difficulty adding rows to
tables in Microsoft® Word, faculty can include opportunities in their classes for students to
create and manipulate tables in Word.
Results of indirect assessments of the Preparing Students for a Future for Technology
are also important indicators of the program’s success. The DLTF will work with Institutional
Research, Assessment and Planning to modify current, regularly administered surveys of
10 | P a g e
freshmen, graduates, and alumni to provide information on their perceived digital literacy skill
level. Additional surveys will be developed to gauge satisfaction with the initiatives
implemented through the program, and modifications to the initiatives will be undertaken in
response to the results.
11 | P a g e
Table 1. Assessments
Assessment
Direct: Skills Assessment
Measure (SAM)
Indirect: National Survey of
Student Engagement
(NSSE)
Indirect: Freshman Survey
Indirect: Graduates Survey
Indirect: Alumni Survey
Indirect: Training Surveys
Indirect: Employer/Constituent
Surveys
Population Assessed
A sample of students in
SEGL 101 and capstone
courses
Current freshmen and
seniors
Administration Detail
Online in a sample of SEGL
101 and capstone courses
All first-time freshmen
from the previous year
All graduates from the
previous year
All graduates from the
academic year three
years prior
All participants in IT
trainings
Employers of graduates
Online; every three years
Table 2. Assessment Schedule*
Assessment
Direct: Skills Assessment Measure
(SAM)
Capstone Course
SEGL 101
Indirect: National Survey of Student
Engagement (NSSE)
Indirect: Freshman Survey
Indirect: Graduates Survey
Indirect: Alumni Survey
Indirect: Training Surveys
Indirect: Employer/Constituent
Surveys
Online; every three years
Online; every other year
Online; Spring of oddnumbered years
Hardcopy via Class Climate
Hardcopy via Class Climate
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
*Assumes program begins Fall 2012
12 | P a g e
Program Expenses
The table below reflects the estimated expenses for the Preparing Students for a
Future with Technology Quality Enhancement Plan proposal. The total estimated cost over
five years is $20,000.
2016/2017
Estimated
Expense
2015/2016
Estimated
Expense
2014/2015
Estimated
Expense
2013/2014
Estimated
Expense
2012/2013
Estimated
Expense
Table 3. Estimated Costs of Proposal
Initiative Expenses
ITTF
In-class initiatives*
Blog/Discussion Group
Technology Trainings*
Student Tutors ($10/hr, 5hrs/wk)
Faculty Development
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
$1,400
$1,400
$1,400
$1,400
$1,400
$1,000
$1,000
$1,000
$1,000
$1,000
N/A*
N/A*
N/A*
N/A*
Assessment Expenses
Direct: Skills Assessment Measure
(SAM)--$20/person
Capstone Course
SEGL 101
Indirect: National Survey of Student
Engagement (NSSE)
Indirect: Freshman Survey
Indirect: Graduates Survey
Indirect: Alumni Survey
Indirect: Training Surveys
Indirect: U201 Survey (if applicable)
Indirect: Employer/Constituent
Surveys
Total Cost
N/A*
$4,000
$4,000
N/A*
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
$2,400
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
$6,400
$2,400
-
$6,400
$2,400
*If funding is available, financial support for this initiative would likely result in improved learning gains
*Assessment is currently part of the University’s assessment plan
13 | P a g e
References
Hansen, R. S., Hansen, K. (n.d.). What do employers really want? Top skills and values
employers seek from job-seekers. Quintessential Careers. Retrieved October 3, 2010,
from http://www.quintcareers.com/printable/ job_skills_values.html
Heimler, R., Denaro, E., Cartisano, R., Brachio, B., Elsa-Sofia, M. (n.d.). College freshmen
and seniors perceptions of information technology skills acquired in high school and
college. Shirley, New York: Dowling College Department of Educational Administration,
Leadership, and Technology.
IBM. (2009, March 12). IBM and Marist survey shows U.S. college students want technology
skills to compete for jobs. Retrieved October 3, 2010, from http://www-03.ibm.com/
press/us/en/pressrelease/26893.wss
Oregon Employment Department. (2004). Skills employers want. Salem, Oregon.
SACS Compliance Certification. (2003). Raleigh: North Carolina State University.
Stevens, B. (2005). What communication skills do employers want? Silicon Valley recruiters
respond. Journal of Employment Counseling, 42(2), 2-9.
U.S. Department of Labor. (2000). Skills and tasks for jobs – a SCANS report for America
2000. Washington, DC.
14 | P a g e
Appendix I
Initiatives and Assessments Requiring Additional Funds
Because South Carolina has consistently cut state appropriation funding to the
University over the past several years, the Preparing Students for a Future with Technology
QEP Proposal was developed with a very modest $20,000 budget over 5 years. With
additional funds, the initiative could be expanded significantly, likely resulting in a more
pronounced improvement in graduates’ digital literacy skills. For example, the need for
scheduling smart classrooms and working to find space that allows faculty the opportunity to
provide students with hands-on computer instruction could be alleviated through the
purchase of a set of computers (30?) that would be available for faculty to check out for inclass use. These laptops would also be beneficial in administering online assessments of
students learning with respect to the QEP, general education, and program goals.
To assist students with questions related to the use of specific applications, a student
or several students could be hired to work at the ITS Help Desk to answer questions specific
to the applications that are not handled by the Help Desk currently. This student would have
a high level of knowledge regarding the Microsoft® Office applications and internet research,
and would be available by appointment. Similarly, to provide assistance “in the field”,
student-manned help desks could be set up in one or all computer lab(s) to instruct individual
students in the applications as needed. These positions would also serve as useful
internships for students in computer-related majors.
If additional funds were available to support the University’s commitment to improving
students’ digital literacy skills, an additional one-hour SUNV 201 course could be added as a
graduation requirement. One option for this course would be to offer it online, with only a few
face-to-face sessions scheduled. Students would be required to complete the course when
15 | P a g e
they have between 60 and 90 credits. A common syllabus would be created, and the
instructors could be faculty, staff, etc... with educational and other requirements similar to
those of SUNV 101 instructors. Activities and deliverables might include a properly formatted
resume and a research report and presentation of the types of jobs and associated
responsibilities related to the student’s major. Although the overarching purpose of the
course would be to reinforce and refine students’ computer skills, it would also serve as a
point approximately midway through the students’ education to administer assessments of
both information technology literacy skills obtained through the Preparing Students for a
Future with Technology program and their attainment of the University’s general education
competencies.
Pending funding, student portfolios would be a beneficial direct assessment measure of
the Preparing Students for a Future with Technology program. To be eligible for graduation,
students would be required to submit electronic documents from any of their courses or
extracurricular experiences, and these documents would need to demonstrate the student’s
proficiency in all of the technologies addressed by the program. The portfolios would be
assessed by the Digital Literacy Task Force (DLTF) and the results provided to the University
community. An alternative application of the portfolio would require documents to be
submitted soon after the student has earned 60 credit hours. The portfolio would still be
evaluated by the DLTF committee, but if they determined the documents did not demonstrate
sufficient proficiency with one or more applications, there would still be time to provide the
student with instruction and other course experiences to attain the skills. For example,
perhaps the student would be required to take the SUNV 201 course described above.
16 | P a g e
While the current budget climate makes it unlikely that all of these initiatives would be
implemented, careful consideration by the DLTF could determine that one or more would be
2012/2013
Estimated
Expense
2013/2014
Estimated
Expense
2014/2015
Estimated
Expense
2015/2016
Estimated
Expense
2016/2017
Estimated
Expense
feasible. The estimated budget for each of these initiatives is provided below.
$10,500
$10,500
$10,500
$10,500
$10,500
$5,250
$5,250
$5,250
$5,250
$5,250
$10,500
$10,500
$10,500
$10,500
$10,500
$33,000
$33,000
$33,000
$10,000
$10,000
$10,000
$2,000
$2,000
$2,000
$0-10,000
$0-10,000
$0-10,000
Initiative Expenses
ITS Help Desk support
Cost for full-day support
($10/hr, 37.5 hrs/wk)
Cost for half-day support
($10/hr, 18.75 hrs/wk)
Lab Help Desk Support
Cost per lab ($10/hr, 37.5 hrs/wk)
SUNV 201
All students (33 sections)
Only students not passing portfolio
(10 sections)
Laptops for classroom use (30)
$30,000
Assessment Expenses
Direct: Skills Assessment Measure
(SAM)--$20/person
SUNV 201
Direct: Student Portfolios
$0-10,000
17 | P a g e