ITS 831 University of Cumberlands ?Application of Information Technology PPT

User Generated

fehguv0311

Programming

its 831

University of cumberlands

ITS

Description

1. You can also conduct a literature review on Strategy and how it is applied to an Information Technology organization. You are to review the literature on Information Technology Strategic Planning and discuss problems and gaps that have been identified in the literature. You will expand on the issue and how researchers have attempted to examine that issue by collecting data – you are NOT collecting data, just reporting on how researchers did their collection. As you read the literature, it will become apparent that there are multiple issues, pick one issue that stands out in the literature.

2. The presentation will have a slide that addresses each

    • Cover
    • Topic
    • Background of the problem
    • Research Questions (if any)
    • Methodology
    • Data Analysis
    • Conclusion
    • Discussion
    • References

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Residency Session Assignment – ITS831 Course Deliverable ITS831 Information Technology Importance in Strategic Planning Conduct a literature review in Information Technology Strategic Planning. You can also conduct a literature review on Strategy and how it is applied to an Information Technology organization. You are to review the literature on Information Technology Strategic Planning and discuss problems and gaps that have been identified in the literature. You will expand on the issue and how researchers have attempted to examine that issue by collecting data – you are NOT collecting data, just reporting on how researchers did their collection. As you read the literature, it will become apparent that there are multiple issues, pick one issue that stands out in the literature. Format Cover: Include the names of those who participated in the project Table of contents: Use a Microsoft Enabled Table of Contents feature. Background: Describe the issue, discuss the problem, and elaborate on any previous attempts to examine that issue. Research Questions: In your identified problem area that you are discussing, what were the research questions that were asked? Methodology: What approach did the researcher use, qualitative, quantitative, survey, case study? Describe the population that was chosen. Data Analysis: What were some of the findings, for example, if there were any hypotheses asked, were they supported? Conclusions: What was the conclusion of any data collections, e.g., were research questions answered, were hypotheses supported? Discussion: Here you can expand on the research and what the big picture means, how do the results found in the literature review help organizations in the Information Technology strategy planning. What do you see as long-term impacts and what further research could be done in the field? References: Include at least ten scholarly references in APA format. Sunday PowerPoint Presentation Your presentation will have a slide that addresses each o o o o o o o o o Cover Topic Background of the problem Research Questions (if any) Methodology Data Analysis Conclusion Discussion References Running head: IMPACT OF LEARNING SPACES ON STUDENT SUCCESS Literature Review Research Related to Learning Spaces Learning spaces convey an institution’s philosophy about teaching and learning. EDUCAUSE introduced the debate on learning spaces with the publication of Learning Spaces in 2005, a description of learning spaces at various colleges and universities. Oblinger (2005) states that leaders in higher education need to understand how decisions affecting learning space design impact student success, and suggests that good learning space design supports an institution’s mission of enabling student learning. Space enables or inhibits different styles of teaching as well as learning. Moving from classrooms to learning spaces requires a conceptual shift and the discipline to put learning ahead of technology. Initial discussions on learning space focused on university libraries investment in learning commons. Research articles propose that student competence is developed in active, exploratory, and social settings (Bennett, 2007a; Chism, 2006; Cox, 2011; Oblinger, 2005;). Chism’s (2006) research suggests that learning scenarios occur regardless of how spaces are arranged. She argues that learning is facilitated when we design spaces with learning in mind. Her research suggests institutions align the physical environment with institutional priorities and goals for student success. Advances in learning theory have implications on the way learning takes place; the emphasis is on active construction of knowledge. The common theme of learning spaces highlights the impact of collaboration and social learning in 21st century learning environments (Oblinger, 2005; Chism, 2006). Whether or not learning spaces are truly important to student satisfaction and success is a point of contention with researchers. Neither Solomon and Rooney (2006) or Thomas (2010) agrees with Chism (2006) about the level of importance a space can have in the learning IMPACT OF LEARNING SPACES ON STUDENT SUCCESS 2 environment or the need for a formal design process. Solomon and Rooney (2006) state that a learning space can grow naturally without assistance in an informal setting such as a break room where employees frequently congregate and share information. These informal settings become learning spaces at times because they’re simply ideally suited for collaboration and learning, at other times the space may not be ideal and if design had been done to purposely create the space learning could be positively impacted. The earliest adopter to focus on learning space design was the local college and university library. Libraries have received the greatest attention in the research of learning spaces. Bennett (2007a) expanded the study of learning spaces by reviewing the commitment of libraries nationwide to learning spaces. To accomplish this, he surveyed and analyzed 66 university libraries’ methods of investing in learning spaces as they created learning commons. His survey recognized that rapid change in information technology created uncertainties about the value capital delivers in higher education’s investment in learning spaces. The survey addressed the areas of uncertainty by focusing on three approaches to designing learning spaces: the services/instructional approach, the marketing approach, and the mission-based approach. The service/instructional approach addressed benefits students received in learning spaces from the perspective of the librarian. The marketing approach asked what was useful to students from their perspective. This collaborative process engaged the customers of the college/university, the students, to seek their input on optimal arrangements. The mission-based approach focused first on the instructional mission and second on the needs of staff and students. His survey identified that the greatest return in designing the information common learning space is recognition of the collaborative approach to shaping services that help students and faculty face the uncertainties from the rapid changes in technology. IMPACT OF LEARNING SPACES ON STUDENT SUCCESS 3 Learning Spaces have been shown to impact student engagement. Student preferences have changed in recent decades with the influence of social networking and information resources available on the Internet. Many students embrace collaborative study and active learning in higher education. Unfortunately, many of today’s traditional classrooms are not equipped to support the environment favored by students. Oblinger (2007) states that today’s students have attitudes, expectations, and constraints that are different than those of ten years ago. Learning spaces reflect the learning approach of the time they were established, so spaces designed in the 1950’s frequently do not match the preferences of students today. Oblinger research shows that a learning space can be a change agent in higher education and that a different type of space is required to meet today’s students’ learning requirements. Colleges and Universities are encouraged to spend time understanding learning and then design relevant spaces. Increasingly spaces are becoming flexible and networked in order to have the capability of combining formal and informal activities in a seamless environment that can be physical or virtual. Integrating the tools and techniques of virtual learning with physical space design could alleviate problems identified in research conducted by Fielding (2001) claiming the traditional classroom is no longer a viable space for learner centered activities Learning space designs can vary in complexity depending on the project scope and resources available to the instructor. This resource availability typically dictates the depth at which a designer can plan changes to the physical and virtual learning environments. Radcliffe (2008) shows that instructors have numerous studies to draw on for assistance in design and gives examples of several comprehensive frameworks for best practices in learning space design. These frameworks have been created exclusively for use in the design of learning spaces incorporating pedagogy, space, and technology needs. As with any profession, the more IMPACT OF LEARNING SPACES ON STUDENT SUCCESS 4 experienced a designer is, the better the end product will be and typically for less cost than if designed by a novice. This may lead some institutions to seriously consider consultants for learning space design projects simply because they will likely incur less cost and a better end product. Educational professionals may not realize that well designed learning spaces are not restricted to new building construction nor are they necessarily expensive. Research by Black & Roberts (2008) gave real-life examples of low cost classroom space redesigns which produced meaningful improvements in student experience and knowledge retention. These improvements were made possible by simply rearranging furniture into collaboration-friendly designs such as round tables and hollow squares. The shape the seating forms in the room drives the level of collaboration, if you can see a classmates face, it is easier to communicate with them. Fisher (2005) argues the physical learning space layout works best when it can be adjusted based upon the type of teaching being performed. An adjustable physical space relies on easily reconfigurable furniture such as wall partitions, tables mounted on rollers, and portable seating. Learning space design can take many shapes, but many of them include technology augmentation, which statistical evidence has shown, can produce higher student grades versus a non-enhanced space with all other factors equal. (Brooks, 2011) Today’s researchers continue to study students’ preferences for learning spaces by focusing on virtual or physical spaces that result in engagement (Cox, 2011). Cox’s research was a small-scale exploratory study of 75 students; the primary data source consisted of six in-depth interviews with third-year undergraduate students. Students were asked to respond to a dozen photos to determine the preferred learning space and study practice. The results indicate that students do not have a preference in the type of learning space, but students did prefer IMPACT OF LEARNING SPACES ON STUDENT SUCCESS 5 collaborative spaces that were technologically equipped. Results indicate that a student’s residence is inferior to a learning commons space for study, suggesting students prefer to be with others while studying even if they are studying independently. Bennett (2011) continued his research on students’ preferences regarding using university learning spaces by studying learning spaces’ impact on learning behavior. The survey evaluated learning behavior and learning spaces by asking students to complete a questionnaire based on the National Survey of Student Engagement. The questionnaire identified learning behaviors that are important to students and reviewed non-classroom spaces important to fostering learning behavior. Survey responses suggested a misalignment between learning behaviors identified as important and the campus spaces that should be an asset in achieving the mission of instruction. Results were inconclusive that any learning space was more important than another in improving learning behavior. Faculty and students respondents rarely identified any learning behaviors, except collaborative learning and studying alone, as being distinctively supported by campus spaces. Research in learning spaces required higher education institutions to understand which factors must be addressed to improve the impact of learning spaces on student success. Learning space research focused on space and place in the changing context of post-secondary teaching and acknowledged elements of the learning environment that have largely been treated in isolation from the developments in pedagogical practices (Jamieson, Fisher, Giding, Taylor, & Trevitt, 2000). The study suggested that college and university architecture must do more than appeal aesthetically to users and that the idea that formal teaching and learning “takes place” needs to be acknowledged by administrators and be the primary consideration in the design of new buildings. All stakeholders need input in the design process, not just the administrators and IMPACT OF LEARNING SPACES ON STUDENT SUCCESS 6 facility planners, but faculty as well. Drawing on the experience of the authors, the pedagogyplace nexus is examined from an educational and architectural perspective to highlight the necessary multidisciplinary approach to creating learning environments. Successful learning space design requires the input of academics, universities are complex environments established to meet the demands of teaching and research (Bickford, 2002; Jamieson, Fisher, Giding, Taylor, & Trevitt, 2000). Research reveals a description of how stakeholders in the building process come from different institutional cultures and have different requirements that is often conflicting. Bickford (2002) proposes a cross-functional design team that encourages competing needs and interests to be harnessed to create learning environments that support learning. The research recommends a design team includes faculty, students, administrators, facilities managers and architects to ensure all viewpoints of the learning space are addressed. The creation of learning spaces calls for new ways of campus collaboration and leaving behind the specialist approach. Bennett (2007b) continued his research of spaces that support learning. Bennett’s research focused on non-discipline specific spaces where students take control of and responsibility for their learning. Historically the design of learning spaces centers on operation and service considerations rather than learning. Bennett proposed six design questions that would guide decisions when a higher education institution establishes learning spaces. The questions require thought be given to why are we building the space, how will the space encourage students to spend time studying, does the design encourage collaboration/social learning, will the space encourage student/teacher collaboration outside the classroom and will the space enrich educational experiences. Evaluating the questions is important throughout the building program. IMPACT OF LEARNING SPACES ON STUDENT SUCCESS 7 Further research by Radcliffe (2009) followed that offers frameworks for designing learning spaces. He proposed a pedagogy-space-technology framework to guide the design process of learning spaces through influencing the conceptual design and post-occupancy evaluation of discrete learning environments. The question-based framework aids diverse stakeholders approach to the creation, operation and evaluation of new learning spaces. The sequencing of the items in the framework is intentional and important. Each of the three elements, pedagogy, space, and technology, influence each other in a reciprocal fashion. While all three elements are interdependent in a cyclical manner, the question remains which element do you start with? The framework suggests starting with pedagogy, then space, and finally technology. Interest in learning spaces in the United Kingdom resulted in several case studies that discussed the outcomes of universities creating learning spaces from a holistic approach. Weaver (2006) explored the relationship between creating physical learning space and changing conceptions of learning/teaching to enable student centered learning. St. Martin’s College created the Learning Gateway to demonstrate the impact of learning spaces on student success; the Learning Gateway is a framework for providing a holistic view of the learner and the institutional support required for student to flourish. The Learning Gateway combined the technological and social elements of the blended learning model by establishing a set of pedagogical principles based on the constructivist theory of learning. St. Martin mapped digital media and furniture options to the framework resulting in a student centered learning environment. Jankowska and Atlay (2008) research detailed the University of Bedfordshire project of renovating classroom space into “Creative Space” that emphasizes social learning, classroom IMPACT OF LEARNING SPACES ON STUDENT SUCCESS 8 space and creative space. The study explored the impact of teaching in a specially designed learning space on student engagement. A survey of 43 staff and 39 students measured perceived influence of user experience. The survey results document student satisfaction with the new environment, reporting an improved student experience. Survey response infers visual and aesthetical aspects combined with technology had the greatest impact on student opinion. Students and staff agreed the space was excellent for multiple uses and enabled teamwork and collaboration. Academic Interest in Learning Spaces Current research on learning spaces documents that faculty have minimal, if any, input on the creation of learning spaces. The creation of learning spaces favored by students reflects many of the principles of active learning. Creating learning spaces highlighting collaborative study, social learning and engagement requires adoption by faculty to be successful. The research suggests the absence of faculty input is often the result of centralized planning by a central facilities group that is unaware of emerging learning theories. Literature reviews documents campus classrooms, lecture halls, tutorial rooms and other formal places of learning have remained unchanged for centuries (Jamieson, 2003). Higher education attempts to create new teaching and learning facilities have often resulted in celebrated architecture that proved to be educationally problematic. Jamieson argues the design and development of appropriate on-campus learning environments should be a priority for academic developers. Academics participation in planning learning space allows faculty to contextualize the learning process. His research encourages universities to create learning spaces that encourage multiple contrasting experiences, spaces that are flexible and encourage exploration IMPACT OF LEARNING SPACES ON STUDENT SUCCESS 9 and relationship building. His example is the collaborative common spaces developed in libraries often referred to as information commons. Spaces are influenced by learning artifacts, faculty use concrete and abstract learning artifacts to construct multiple representation of expert knowledge for students (Ching, Levin, & Parisi, 2004). The artifacts studied were inscriptions, gestures, tools, furniture, technology, sound and temperature. The study videotaped seven instructors’ classes at the College of Education at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. The study analyzed the artifacts relationship to the pedagogical goals in higher education. Findings noted all instructors used multiple artifacts in classroom instruction. Data analysis suggests technology artifacts are insufficient to capture the complexity of teaching practices. The researchers acknowledge the longitudinal study needs will require further research. Kolb, Kolb, and Lewin (2005) research examined the theory of experiential learning to explore how information can be used to enhance learning in higher education. Experiential learning gives experience a central role in theories of learning and development. Experiential learning theory is the process of creating knowledge through the transformation of experience. The authors argue the enhancement of experiential learning in higher education is achieved through the creation of learning spaces that promote growth-producing experiences. Establishing unique spaces for students to take responsibility for their learning greatly enhances their ability to learn from experience. Evaluation of Learning Spaces Understanding the importance of learning spaces requires rigorous evaluation. Hunley and Schuller (2006) questions how do we know when learning space enhances learning and proposed a formal needs assessment program. The researchers assert three issues must be IMPACT OF LEARNING SPACES ON STUDENT SUCCESS 10 addressed in learning space assessment: 1) does it focus on teaching and learning, 2) identifying the specific requirements of the audience, and 3) that assessment recognizes learning can take place outside the classroom. Assessment must integrate the evaluation of teaching methods and use of learning space. Their research argues academic and co-curricular program pedagogical approaches used by faculty become critical elements affecting learning space assessment. The research recognizes learning space assessment targets the facilitation of student interactions with faculty in formal and informal environments. Other research focused on “technology-rich” learning spaces and explores approaches to evaluation (Roberts & Weaver, 2006). The need to evaluate technology-rich learning spaces by exploring approaches and tools from a practitioner perspective is highlighted as important. Effective evaluation considers inputs, outputs and outcomes, providing a quantitative and qualitative approach to assessment. The framework proposed evaluates accountability, development and knowledge. Two case studies of technology-rich learning spaces were presented with accompanying evaluation models used to evaluate if objectives were met evaluation. The authors conclude that a sound theoretical framework must underpin rigorous evaluation in order to understand the complexities of the success of the student experience (Roberts & Weaver, 2006). Best practices for creating learning spaces in new buildings Libraries’ success in establishing learning spaces has resulted in many colleges and universities exploring the need to expand the concept to study spaces and classrooms. Leather and Marinho’s (2009) article introduces a template for building classroom buildings for the 21st century. The process requires faculty to articulate a values statement that includes its mission and the goals for student development. The second step recognizes millennial students’ needs are IMPACT OF LEARNING SPACES ON STUDENT SUCCESS 11 different and pedagogical strategies have improved therefor must be the primary drivers in providing space that meets the student’s instructional needs. The third recommendation requires the provost office to appoint faculty as participants in building programming to ensure the academic agenda is satisfied. Finally, the design team must consider how technology will encourage academic collaboration between faculty and students. Butler Community College established a team of students, faculty, administration, and a corporate partner to create a framework for developing learning spaces as a strategic initiative to improve student engagement and retention (George, Erwin, & Barnes, 2009). The college applied the framework in building a new student union building that included four classrooms. Institution Research followed with a study to determine what results did students experience from the new learning space and did the college achieve planned outcomes. The survey measured preoccupancy and post occupancy responses from students and faculty. Results indicate positive experiences in the learning studio and greater levels of student engagement and satisfaction. Student technology labs are often viewed as learning spaces. Brett and Nagra (2005) examined the relationship between open-access labs and student’s approaches to self-study. Today’s traditional open-access labs are large structured computer rooms with restrictions on talking, eating, and drinking. The University of Wolverhampton recognized the limitations of the traditional approach to creating labs and created a design team to establish a social learning space model to encourage collaborative learning. Results gathered from observations, questionnaires, and structured interviews found: 1) 62.5% of the student indicate the environment is a key factor in developing collaborative learning spaces, 2) students are not affected by allowing talking, eating or drinking while studying, and 3) 82.5% of the students IMPACT OF LEARNING SPACES ON STUDENT SUCCESS 12 indicate the nature of the environment was a key aspect of a student’s choice to study in a room (Brett and Nagra, 2005). Providing flexible technology rich spaces that encourage collaboration and socialization should be seen as a way of supporting a learning environment. Understanding the college and university learning space is an important element in understanding these institutions work in terms of teaching and learning. Current research suggests campus and building design needs to give consideration to the social underpinnings of learning and the importance of collaborative study space. Emphasis has been placed on enriching spaces with technology to create learning spaces. Research findings documents enriching learning spaces with technology does not result in improving learning, but does provide a tools to support the learning process. Focus must be placed on encouraging faculty to be active participants in creating learning spaces. A majority of the research of higher education learning spaces has focused on the investments of college and University libraries in learning commons. Teaming faculty, librarians and technologist provide a first step in understanding the requirements of establishing successful learning spaces. Literature Reviews Temple’s (2008) literature review addressed how higher education learning spaces supports teaching, learning and research. The literature concludes connections between design and use of space in higher education is not well understood and has not attracted the attention of researchers. His literature review highlights decisions on the design of learning spaces have been the responsibility of facilities management resulting in current buildings projects and often lack collaborative student workspace. His review of literature challenges universities to give greater consideration to the impact of social learning and collaborative study by encouraging input from IMPACT OF LEARNING SPACES ON STUDENT SUCCESS 13 faculty. Temple’s literature review validates libraries are providing leadership in transforming traditional spaces into learning spaces. A literature review by Savin-Baden, McFarland, and Savin-Baden (2008) used an interpretative meta-ethnography, a qualitative approach to manage a large range of literature in a way that presents an analysis of findings of data across all studies and interprets results it in relation to themes that emerge. Findings indicate that issues of pedagogical stance, learning spaces and notions of improvement can help locate themes that are strong influences on areas of teaching and learning practice. Learning Spaces’ effect on student success is a subject in need of further research. Attention should be placed learning outcomes achieved in creating learning spaces. A next step is to create a framework that faculty can use in determining the appropriate learning space for courses. To accomplish this, a study of learning spaces in Kentucky Community and Technical Colleges will be undertaken to determine if the selection of an appropriate learning space can result in improved student success and can increase student retention. Methodology Overview of the Study Researchers Role Thorough analysis of the literature Survey of Bluegrass faculty / adjunct faculty Lecture Active learning Flipped classroom Interviews Diana Oblinger – Ask her who we might talk to IMPACT OF LEARNING SPACES ON STUDENT SUCCESS 14 Scott Bennett – Yale librarian Nancy Chism – Ohio State Chris Brooks - University of Minnesota Linny Scott-Webber Steelcase Rationale for the Qualitative Case Studies Research Design Using a qualitative study (interviews, surveys, etc) Site selection Bluegrass Community and Technical College (BCTC), located in Lexington, Kentucky, is one of 16 two-year, open-admissions colleges of the Kentucky Community and Technical College System (KCTCS). It was formed from the consolidation of two separate institutions: Lexington Community College and Central Kentucky Technical College. Lexington Community College was the last remaining college in the University of Kentucky Community College System, until a vote by the trustees transferred governance to KCTCS in 2004. Prior to 1984, the college was named Lexington Technical Institute. Central Kentucky Technical College was part of the Workforce Development Cabinet of Kentucky State Government until the creation of KCTCS in 1997. KCTCS was formed in 1997 by the state legislature through House Bill 1 that combined the technical colleges of the Workforce Development Cabinet and the community colleges previously with the University of Kentucky. BCTC is accredited by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS). Participant selection and introduction of participants Faculty & adjuncts Data collection methods Interview: Participants & demographics Individual semi-structured IMPACT OF LEARNING SPACES ON STUDENT SUCCESS Focus groups Document analysis Instruments: questions, field notes, journals, and analytic memos Room roster Validity & reliability Procedures Ethical considerations Traditional considerations Research Product Workbook Summary 15 IMPACT OF LEARNING SPACES ON STUDENT SUCCESS 16 References Bennett, S. (2007a). Designing for uncertainty: Three approaches. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 33(2), 165-179. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2006.12.005 Bennett, S. (2007b). First questions for designing higher education learning spaces. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 33(1), 14–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2006.08.015 Bennett, S. (2011). Learning behaviors and learning spaces. Learning, 11(3), 765-789. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/pla.2011.0033 Bickford, D. J. (2002). Navigating the white waters of collaborative work in shaping learning environments. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2002(92), 43-52. Black, C., & Roberts, S. (2008). Learning the Social Way: Enhancing Learning in a Traditional Setting. New Review of Academic Librarianship, 83-93. Brett, P., & Nagra, J. (2005). An investigation into students’ use of a computer-based social learning space: Lessons for facilitating collaborative approaches to learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(2), 281-292. Brooks, D. (2011). Space matters: The impact of formal learning environments on student learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 719-726. Ching, C. C., Levin, J. A., & Parisi, J. (2004). Classroom artifacts: Merging the physicality, technology and pedagogy of higher education. Education, Communication & Information, 4(2-3), 221-235. Chism, N. V. N., (2006). Challenging traditional assumptions and rethinking learning spaces. In D.G. Oblinger (Ed.), Learning Spaces, (pp. 2.1-2.12). Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/PUB7102b.pdf IMPACT OF LEARNING SPACES ON STUDENT SUCCESS 17 Cox, A. M. (2011), Students’ experience of university space: An exploratory study. Sociological Research, 23(2), 197-207. Fielding, M. (2001) Learning Organisation or Learning Community? A Critique of Senge. Reason in Practice, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2001, pp 17 - 29 Fisher, B. (2005). THE NEW LEARNING ENVIRONMENT : HYBRID DESIGNS FOR HYBRID LEARNING. Teaching and Learning Colloquium, 15-22. George, G., Erwin, T., & Barnes, B. (2009). Learning Spaces as a Strategic Priority. EDUCAUSE Quarterly, 32(1), n1. Hunley, S., & Schuller, M., (2006) Assessing Learning Spaces. In D.G. Oblinger (Ed.), Learning Spaces, (pp. 13.1-13.12). Retrieved from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/PUB7102m.pdf Jamieson, P. (2003). Designing more effective on-campus teaching and learning spaces: a role for academic developers. International Journal for Academic Development, 8(1/2), 119133. Jamieson, P., Fisher, K., Gilding, T., Taylor, P. G., & Trevitt, A. F. (2000). Place and space in the design of new learning environments. Higher Education Research & Development, 19(2), 221-236. Jankowska, M., & Atlay, M. (2008). Use of creative space in enhancing students’ engagement. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 45(3), 271-279. Joint Information Systems Committee. (2006). Designing spaces for effective learning: A guide to 21st century learning space design. Bristol, UK: JISC Development Group. Kolb, A. Y., Kolb, D. A., & Lewin, K. (2005). Learning styles and learning spaces: Enhancing experiential learning in higher education. Management Learning, 4(2), 193-212. IMPACT OF LEARNING SPACES ON STUDENT SUCCESS 18 Leather, D. J., & Marinho, R. D. (2009) Designing an academic building for 21st century learning. Change, 42-49. Oblinger, D. (2005). Leading the transition from classrooms to learning spaces. EDUCAUSE Quarterly, 28(1), 14-18. Oblinger, D. G. (2007). Space as a Change Agent. In D.G. Oblinger (Ed.), Learning Spaces, (pp. 1.1-1.4). Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/PUB7102a.pdf Radcliffe, D. (2008). Learning Spaces in Higher Education: Positive Outcomes by Design. Proceedings of the Next Generation Learning Spaces 2008 Colloquium (pp. 10-16). Brisbane: University of Queensland. Radcliffe, D. (2009). A pedagogy-space-technology (PST) framework for designing and evaluating learning places. In Learning spaces in higher education: Positive outcomes by design. Proceedings of the Next Generation Learning Spaces 2008 Colloquium, University of Queensland, Brisbane (pp. 11-16). Roberts, S., & Weaver, M. (2006). Spaces for learners and learning: Evaluating the impact of technology-rich learning spaces. New Review of Academic Librarianship, 12(2), 95-107. Savin-Baden, M., McFarland, L., & Savin-Baden, J. (2008). Learning spaces, agency and notions of improvement: What influences thinking and practices about teaching and learning in higher education? An interpretive meta-ethnography. London Review of Education, 6(3), 211-227. Solomon, N., Boud, D., & Rooney, D. (2006). The in‐between: exposing everyday learning at work. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 3-13. Thomas, H. (2010). Learning spaces, learning environments and the dis'placement' of learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 502-511. IMPACT OF LEARNING SPACES ON STUDENT SUCCESS 19 Temple, P. (2008). Learning spaces in higher education: an under-researched topic. London Review of Education, 6(3), 229-241. Weaver, M. (2006). Exploring conceptions of learning and teaching through the creation of flexible learning spaces: The learning gateway—a case study. New Review of Academic Librarianship, 12(2), 109-125.
Purchase answer to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

Here is the complete paper and ppt;let me know if you need changes.

INTERDEPENDENCE BETWEEN IT AND STRATEGIC PLANNING

Literature Review:
Application of Information Technology in Strategic Planning
Student’s Name
Professor
Course
Date

1

INTERDEPENDENCE BETWEEN IT AND STRATEGIC PLANNING

Table of Contents

Table of Contents .......................................................................................................................................... 2
1.

Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 3

2.

Background Information ....................................................................................................................... 3
2.1.

Process of Strategic Planning and Information Technology ......................................................... 3

2.2.

Types of Strategic Planning and Information Technology ........................................................... 4

2.3.

Big data analytics in strategic decisions........................................................................................ 6

2.4.

Information Technology as a communication tool for Strategic Planning ................................... 7

2.5.

Information Technology Application in strategic planning concerning the firm size .................. 8

3.

Research Questions ............................................................................................................................... 8

4.

Methodology ......................................................................................................................................... 9

5.

Data Analysis ...................................................................................................................................... 10

6.

Conclusion .......................................................................................................................................... 10

7.

Discussion ........................................................................................................................................... 11

References ................................................................................................................................................... 12

2

INTERDEPENDENCE BETWEEN IT AND STRATEGIC PLANNING

1. Introduction
When Apple Inc. was launching its first Apple iPhone in the year 2007, Steve Jobs made
it clear that the technology giant aimed at producing a smartphone for the future. As an
information technology-based company, this was a clear indication of the application of strategic
planning (Mickalowski, Mickelson, & Keltgen, 2008). Strategic planning focuses on the
development of organizational decisions that are aimed at enhancing the business process and
outcome in the future. Information technology, on the other hand, enhances the process of
embracing communication through the use of technological tools including networks, hardware
appliances, and software. Although the two fields seem to have very varied applications, their
interrelation in the contemporary world is colossal. Information technology enhances strategic
planning decisions while information technology firms also need to embrace strategic planning
to improve their future business prospects (Kamariotou, & Kitsios, 2019). Literature show the
extent of the application of information technology in strategic planning is considerably high, but
there is need to understand its effectiveness in small organizations.

2. Background Information
2.1.Process of Strategic Planning and Information Technology
The process of strategic planning has steps that need the application of information
technology to optimize the output. Strategic planning has several steps. After the development of
the visions and mission statements for an organization, the organization has to perform a GAP
analysis where the actual performance is compared to the desired organizational performance
(Kamariotou, & Kitsios, 2019). Where the formulation of vision and mission might need little to
no data, the GAP analysis needs data from the past and the present to give insight into whether

3

INTERDEPENDENCE BETWEEN IT AND STRATEGIC PLANNING

the organization is delivering to expectations. In the contemporary world, most transactions and
business activities are registered on information systems such as Electronic Resource Planning
(ERP) systems where the information can easily be stored and retrieved for processes such as the
Gap analysis. The systems are information technology tools that the organizations find essential
in the gap analysis which makes part of the organizational strategic planning process
(Kamariotou, & Kitsios, 2019).
Moreover, after the Gap Analysis, the organization then designs goals driven by the Gap
Analysis results. After implementing the goals, the organization also needs to monitor progress
on the implementations to ensure that they are working towards achieving the goals. The
monitoring process calls for the use of different Information Technology tools depending on the
type of work. In the service industry, for instance, the organization might need to monitor the
number of clients served by an operator and ensure that all operators are meeting the objective to
serve a certain threshold of customers for them to deliver to the long term goal set in the
organizations strategic plan. The process of strategic planning, hereby, shows the need for
information technology (Kamariotou, & Kitsios, 2019).
2.2.Types of Strategic Planning and Information Technology
One part of strategic planning is articulated plans. An organization develops an
articulated plan. Articulated plans include the mission, vision, values, goals, objectives, and other
cultural elements of the organization’s internal environment (Seyal, 2019). Information systems
linking the elements of the organization internally provide the required dat...


Anonymous
Excellent! Definitely coming back for more study materials.

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4
Similar Content
Related Tags