Information Technology Incident Management: A Case Study of the University of Oviedo and the Faculty of Teacher Training and Education

  • Javier Fombona Cadavieco
  • Celestino Rodríguez Pérez
  • Carolina Barriada Fernández
Open Access
Dossier “Innovation and Good Practices in University Government and Management” Article


Since their introduction into higher education institutions, information technology (IT) resources have become an indispensable, dynamic and controversial component of teaching- and research-related activities. This article explores some of the complex issues surrounding such resources through a study of the most representative IT incidents that occurred at the University of Oviedo and in one of its faculties, specifically the Faculty of Teacher Training and Education. It also aims to provide some guidelines to improve decision making in this particular field, and also to disseminate a number of significant findings in relation to the use of such technologies by higher education centres.

To that end, incidents reported at the University of Oviedo (with 30,000 people across four campuses) over three consecutive academic years are analysed. Incidents occurring in computers (which may include software and peripheral devices) used by students and lecturers in the Faculty of Teacher Training and Education’s classrooms are also analysed. The results obtained show that, while the number of IT devices has increased, the number of incidents has remained constant. This indicates that users are able to use them better. Most of the problems reported by the university and faculty alike were connected with software. This suggests that robust centralised services for program updating and maintenance are required.


new technologies IT incidents education centre management higher education 

Gestion de incidencias informáticas: el caso de la Universidad de Oviedo y la Facultad de Formación del Profesorado


Las instituciones educativas universitarias incorporan progresivamente los recursos informáticos, que se convierten en instrumentos indispensables, dinámicos y controvertidos en la acción docente e investigadora. Este trabajo ex post facto intenta descubrir algunos rasgos de tal complejidad, a través del estudio de las incidencias informáticas más representativas que tuvieron lugar en la Universidad de Oviedo y en una de sus facultades (Formación del Profesorado y Educación). También pretende aportar pautas para tomar mejores decisiones en este ámbito y difundir las actuaciones significativas de uso de estas tecnologías en los centros de educación superior.

Para ello se analizan las incidencias recogidas durante tres cursos sucesivos en la Universidad de Oviedo, institución que acoge a unas treinta mil personas, repartidas en cuatro campus. También se analizan las actuaciones de los equipos que utilizaron los estudiantes y profesores de las aulas de la Facultad de Formación del Profesorado y Educación. Los resultados obtenidos destacan que, aunque aumenta el número de dispositivos informáticos, la cantidad de incidencias generadas permanece constante. Esto apunta a que los usuarios saben emplearlos mejor. La mayoría de los problemas, tanto en cuanto a la institución universitaria como a la facultad, están relacionados con el software, por lo que se sugiere la implementación de potentes servicios centralizados de actualización y mantenimiento de los programas utilizados.

Palabras clave

nuevas tecnologías incidencias informáticas gestión centro educativo educación superior 


  1. ACIKALIN, Mehmet (2010). “Exemplary social studies teachers’ use of computer supported instruction in the classroom”. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology. Vol. 9, No 4, pages 66–82.Google Scholar
  2. BENNETT, Sue; MATON, Karl; KERVIN, Lisa (2008). “The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence”. British Journal of Educational Technology. Vol. 39, No 5, pages 775–786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. BISCOMB, Kay; DEVONPORT, Tracey; LANE Andrew (2008). “Evaluating the use of computer aided assessment in higher education”. Journal of Hospitality Leisure Sport & Tourism Education. Vol. 7, No 1, pages 82–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. BOWMAN, Laura [et al.] (2010). “Can students really multitask? An experimental study of instant messaging while reading”. Computers & Education. Vol. 54, No 4, pages 927–931.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. BOZIONELOS, Nikos (2004). “Socioeconomic background and computer use: the role of computer anxiety and computer experience in their relationship”. International Journal of Human Computer Studies. Vol. 61, No 5, pages 725–746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. CARLSON, Scott (2005). “The Net generation goes to college”. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Vol. 52, No 7, pages 34.Google Scholar
  7. FLOWERS, Beverly; RAKES, Glenda (2000). “Analyses of acceptable use policies regarding the Internet in selected K-12 schools”. Journal of Research on Computing in Education. Vol. 32, No 3, pages 351–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. GARLAND, Kate; NOYES, Jan (2004). “The effects of mandatory and optional use on students’ ratings of a computer based learning package”. British Journal of Educational Technology. Vol. 35, No 3, pages 263–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. GIBERT, Guillén (2006). Diseño de un aula informática. Barcelona: Universidad Politécnica de Catalunya. [Accessed: 6 June 2010]. <>Google Scholar
  10. GUTIÉRREZ, Martín; PALACIOS, Andrés; TORREGO, Luis (2010a). “La formación de los futuros maestros y la integración de las TIC en la educación: anatomía de un desencuentro”. Revista de Educación. No 353, pages 267–293.Google Scholar
  11. GUTIÉRREZ, Martín; PALACIOS, Andrés; TORREGO, Luis. (2010b). “Tribus digitales en las aulas universitarias / Digital Tribes in the University Classrooms”. Comunicar. Vol. 27, No 34, pages 173–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. INAN, Fethi [et al.] (2010). “Pattern of classroom activities during students’ use of computers: Relations between instructional strategies and computer applications”. Teaching and Teacher Education. Vol. 26, No 3, pages 540–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. JUDD, Terry; KENNEDY, Gregor. (2011). “Measurement and evidence of computer based task switching and multitasking by ‘Net Generation’ students”. Computers & Education. Vol. 56, No 3, pages 625–631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. JUNCO, Reynol; COTTEN, Sheila. R. (2010). “Perceived academic effects of instant messaging use”. Computers & Education. Vol. 56, No 2, pages 370–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. KOH, Joyce; FRICK, Theodore (2009). “Instructor and student classroom interactions during technology skills instruction for facilitating preservice teachers’ computer self efficacy” Journal of Educational Computing Research. Vol. 40, No 2, pages 211–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. LOWERISON Gretchen [et al.] (2006). “Student perceived effectiveness of computer technology use in postsecondary classrooms”. Computers & Education. Vol. 47, No 4, pages 465–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. MENCHACA, Rolando; CONTRERAS, Salvador (2009). “Knowledge System for Application of Computer Security Rules”. Advances in Intelligent and Soft Computing. Vol. 63, pages 9–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. OYEWOLE, Samuel; HAIGHT, Joel; FREIVALDS, Andris (2010). “The ergonomic design of classroom furniture/computer work station for first graders in the elementary school”. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics. Vol. 40, No 4, pages 437–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. PRENSKY, Marc (2001). “Digital natives, digital immigrants. Part 1”. On the Horizon. Vol. 9, No 5, pages 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. SCHRAW, Gregory (2010). “Measuring self regulation in computer based learning environments”. Educational Psychologist. Vol. 45(4), pages 258–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. SELWYN, Neil (2007). “The use of computer technology in university teaching and learning: a critical perspective”. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. Vol. 23, No 2, pages 83–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. SELWYN, Neil (2009). The digital native — myth and reality. Paper presented at the Aslib Proceedings. London: New Information Perspectives.Google Scholar
  23. SHELL, Duane; HUSMAN, Jenefer (2008). “Control, motivation, affect, and strategic selfregulation in the college classroom: A multidimensional phenomenon”. Journal of Educational Psychology. Vol. 100, No 2, pages 443–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. SUREDA, Jaume; COMAS, Rubén; MOREY, Mercé (2010). “Menores y acceso a internet en el hogar: las normas familiares”. Comunicar. Vol. 27, No 34, pages 135–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. WILLINGHAM, Daniel (2010). “Have technology and multitasking rewired how students learn?” American Educator. No 23. [Accessed: 6 June 2010]. <>
  26. WITTEN, Ian; BAINBRIDGE, David; NICHOLS, David (2009). How to Build a Digital Library. Burlington: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Javier Fombona Cadavieco
    • 1
  • Celestino Rodríguez Pérez
    • 1
  • Carolina Barriada Fernández
    • 1
  1. 1.Universidad de OviedoOviedoSpain

Personalised recommendations