First-time Online Instructors Use of Instructional Technology in the Face-to-face Classroom. Heather E. Arrowsmith. Kelly D.

Transcription

1 Running Head: USE OF INSTRUCTIONAL TECH First-time Online Instructors Use of Instructional Technology in the Face-to-face Classroom Heather E. Arrowsmith Kelly D. Bradley 1 University of Kentucky 1 Use Kelly D. Bradley, Ph.D. as author of contact, kdbrad2@uky.edu, 131 Taylor Education Building, Lexington, KY

2 Use of Instructional Technology 1 First-time online instructors use of instructional technology in the face-to-face classroom Abstract The number of online courses being taught is increasing each year. Many instructional technology tools are available to help support this type of environment. Historically, research has focused on the specific technologies available to support different learning experiences; however limited research exists that identifies if using these tools in the online environment transfers to and changes or enhances the traditional face-to-face learning environment. This paper outlines the process of the construction of a reliable and valid survey to measure how teaching in an online course environment for the first time later impacts the traditional face-toface classroom environment taught by the same instructor.

3 Use of Instructional Technology 2 First-time online instructors use of instructional technology in the face-to-face classroom The number of online courses offered each year is increasing, as is the number of students taking online courses. As of 2009, almost 12 million post-secondary students were taking online classes (Nagel, 2009). As the number of students enrolled in online courses increases, so does the number of professors teaching online courses. Research has historically focused on the technology used in online education, as well as perceptions, and attitudes. Little exploratory research exists on how professors experiences teaching online influence the methods they use to deliver content in their face-to-face classes following their online teaching experience. Here, the purpose is to outline the process of constructing a reliable and valid survey that identifies if teaching an online course for the first time has an impact on subsequent traditional face-to-face classes taught by the same instructor. Items identify changes in the use of instructional technology use regarding content distribution, assignments, and collaboration. Additionally, items designed to identify the instructor s satisfaction with each are included. Theoretical Framework The integration of instructional technology tools, specifically those associated with online education, into the traditional face-to-face class environment creates a blended learning environment. Condie & Livingston (2007) discuss the benefits of blending online learning tools with the traditional classroom. They used quantitative data gathered from a questionnaire and qualitative data gathered from focus groups and interviews to measure the impact of the SCHOLAR program (similar to Blackboard) on learning and teaching experiences and achievements of students in the range of subjects covered (p. 340). They reported 56% of students said they worked with the online materials at home for up to 2 hours per week but did not say how much teachers thought they worked with the material (p.341). SCHOLAR gave

4 Use of Instructional Technology 3 students the opportunity to be responsible for their own learning (p. 345). Focus group responses from students supported this statement. Parker, Bianchi & Cheah (2008) also used a survey to gather quantitative data of participant perceptions and conducted focus group interviews with both faculty and students. The web-based survey administered to students had a response rate of 11.5%. The web-based survey administered to faculty had a response rate of 24.2% (p. 278). They concluded that too often instructors use the course management system as a location to dump course instead of using it to facilitating interactivity and collaboration. Both of these articles point to teacher readiness and pedagogical support as imperative for successfully blending instructional tools into the traditional classroom and identify some of the faculty fears and misconceptions. In addition, these articles support the importance of the instructional design process because blended learning does not just require an integration of technology but a different type of teaching (Condie & Livingston, 2007; Parker, et al., 2008). The literature identifies some barriers to blended learning. Teacher readiness, faculty attitudes, faculty perceptions about the value of technology and institutional factors can be obstacles which inhibit the exploration and integration of instructional technology tools into the face-to-face class (Condie & Livingston, 2007; Dey, Burn, & Gerdes, 2009; E. Oh & S. Park, 2009; Yudko, Hirokawa, & Chi, 2008). Yudko, Hirokawa, & Chi (2008) investigated the common perception that classroom attendance will be adversely affected if lecture notes and other materials are put online. They used a survey instrument to collect data from thirty-seven college-level students. The study findings showed that students did not report missing class because of the availability of online lecture notes. These findings are of interest because they indicate that a decline in attendance do to the availability and integration of instructional

5 Use of Instructional Technology 4 technology tools may in fact be a misconception. Oh & Park (2009) used Likert-type statements to measure the attitudes and perceptions of 133 university faculty. They found the faculty had positive attitudes about blended learning and learning new technologies. The researchers included their Likert-style statements in their published results that will help future researchers with both the creation of a survey instrument and data analysis. A larger study was conducted by Lin, Singer & Ha (2010). They used a survey to gather data from 1022 participants and semi-structured interviews to ask both closed and open-ended questions to twenty participants (p.42). The results identified a significant difference in the attitudes of university administration and faculty. They concluded that the university should communicatively engage university members and educate them about the strategic importance of teaching online courses, not just using financial or materialistic rewards to motivate members to use technology (pp ). This conclusion reiterates the importance of using technology for sound educational reasons. Keengwe, Kidd & Kyei-Blankson (2009) conducted a qualitative study of 25 participants. When reviewing the narratives gathered from the interviews, the researchers identified several themes: organizational support, leadership, training and development, and resources (p. 25). One interesting finding was that faculty were more likely to use technology if they had departmental and peer support, cross collaboration with other faculty using technology, and if there was a rewards program in place to attract and motivate them (p. 25). Respondents also reported that they enjoyed teaching and learning new approaches (p.26). A review of these themes and responses can help future researchers adapt these areas into survey items in order to better identify faculty attitudes. Also helpful to future researchers is the outline provided by the

6 Use of Instructional Technology 5 researchers of the process by which faculty adopt ICT for teaching and learning practices (p.28). The instrument described in this paper will incorporate faculty attitudes, perceptions, and intentions of using instructional technology tools used as a first-time online instructor into the traditional face-to-face classroom. In order to ensure reliability and validity, research studies and literature closely related to this topic will be used to help with the development of survey items. Method This study examines the instrument construction process from the conceptual stage through the creation of a reliable and valid survey. When preparing to construct the survey discussed in this paper, the researcher first reviewed the literature for existing items and research pertaining to demographic information, self-assessment of technology readiness, identification of tools used, attitudes and barriers, and intentions and used this information to make informed decisions of what items to include in the survey. Next the researcher constructed a survey with an awareness of the literature. The survey was then deconstructed and each item was analyzed for content, construct, and face validity by the researcher, colleagues, and experts in the field. The final survey included up to twenty-three items, some of which displayed only if the participant selected a specific option. Results and Discussion The first section of the survey inquired about instructors self-perceptions of technology competency. The items asked instructors to rate their proficiency, using a four category Likertstyle scale. Instructors were asked to rate their proficiency with technology in general ; instructional technology, Blackboard, and the degree to which they agreed with the statement I enjoy learning new instructional technologies (see Table 1). Roberts, Meier, Santogrossi & Moore(1978) suggest it is important to provide instructors an opportunity to self-assess their

7 Use of Instructional Technology 6 readiness because it is critical to the success of an online course. In addition students have high expectations for faculty members technology knowledge and skill (Roberts, et al., 1978). Table 1 Example of Results-validation of items for Section 1 Survey Items Please type your name in the text box below. (Last name, First name) Please check the box that best indicates the level to which you agree or disagree with each statement. I consider myself proficient with technology in general. I considered myself proficient with instructional technology. I consider myself proficient with Blackboard. I enjoy learning new instructional technologies Answer Choices TBD Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree The second section included questions about how many course sections instructors taught in the fall semester in order for the researchers to have an understanding of how widespread any course changes might be. Next, the survey included items asking instructors if they used instructional technologies in the face-to-face classroom in the fall semester. If faculty chose not to use instructional technology tools in the fall semester, they were asked to identify why they chose not to include instructional technologies in their course. These items helped to identify barriers to online and blended learning. Three of the four possible responses were created based on findings from the literature (Yudko, et al., 2008); (Eunjoo Oh & S Park, 2009); (Bongalos, Bulaon, Celedonio, de Guzman, & Ogarte, 2006). The fourth option was Other and included a textbox. The other textbox provided a means for researchers to find out if there were other barriers not discovered in the research. If faculty did choose to use instructional technology tools in their face-to-face class the previous semester they were asked to identify the tools they used

8 Use of Instructional Technology 7 (see Table 2). The list of instructional technologies is not exhaustive but includes the tools most readily available at the institution where the research was conducted ("Technology Toolkit for Teaching," 2010). Table 2 Example of Results-validation of items for Section 2 Survey Items Please select the number of course sections you taught during the Fall 2010 semester. Did you use instructional technology tools (such as those provided within Blackboard) in any of your Fall 2010 courses? (If no) Which of the following best reflects your decision not to include instructional technology in your Fall 2010 courses? Which instructional technologies did you use during the Fall 2010 semester? (Please select all that apply.) Answer Choices 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5+ Yes No I did not teach in the Fall 2010 semester I do not have enough time to plan and develop these tools. I do not believe it is necessary to include these tools in the traditional face-to-face classroom Other Upload course content feature Messages feature Paper/Assignment Submission Online Tests/Quizzes Discussion Board Group feature in Blackboard (or other such as Facebook) Recorded Presentations/Lectures (Camtasia or other) Online videos or films ConnectPro Podcasts Wiki Blog Other (text field) The third section of the survey was only for faculty who indicated they did use instructional technology tools in their course. For each instructional technology tool they

9 Use of Instructional Technology 8 identified as using, they were asked to rate their satisfaction with each using a four category Likert-style scale. This question also helped researchers identify barriers to using instructional technologies in the classroom. Information that identified technologies instructors were willing to use but dissatisfied with was valuable because it indicated both a need for the tool as well as a need for a better design or better functioning tool (see Table 3). Table 3 Example of Results-validation of items for Section 3 Survey Items Rate your satisfaction with Uploading course content Using the feature in Blackboard Using the messages feature in Blackboard Using ConnectPro Using online tests/quizzes Using the discussion board Using recorded presentations/lectures (Camtasia or other) Using recorded online videos or films Using recorded podcasts Using the group feature in Blackboard (or other such as Facebook). Using the paper/assignment submission Using a wiki Using a blog Answer Choices Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Satisfied Very Satisfied The fourth and last section was for all survey participants. It asked the participants to indicate whether they planned to use instructional technology tools in their face-to-face class during the following semester, what influenced their decision if they decided not to and which tools they planned to use if they did intend to use technology. All three of the items in this section were very similar to items presented earlier in the survey. Whereas the previous items asked about past behaviors, these three questions asked about future behaviors (see Table 4).

10 Use of Instructional Technology 9 Table 4 Example of Results-validation of items for Section 4 Survey Items Do you plan to use instructional technology tools (such as those provided within Blackboard) in any of your Spring 2011 courses? (If no) Which of the following best reflects your decision not to include instructional technology in your Spring 2011 courses? (If yes) Which of the following features do you plan to use during the Spring 2011 semester? (Please select all that apply.) Answer Choices Yes No I am not teaching in the Spring 2011 semester. I do not have enough time to plan and develop these tools. I do not believe it is necessary to include these tools in the traditional face-to-face classroom Other (text field) Upload course content feature Messages feature Paper/Assignment Submission Online Tests/Quizzes Discussion Board Group feature in Blackboard (or other such as Facebook) Recorded Presentations/Lectures (Camtasia or other) Online videos or films ConnectPro Podcasts Wiki Blog Other (text field) Conclusion Online classes are gaining in numbers and popularity. The instructional technology tools which help support the delivery of online education are making their way to the face-to-face classroom. Many have embraced and integrated these tools but others have not. Research has addressed some of the benefits of the blended learning classroom and even some of the barriers

11 Use of Instructional Technology 10 but this research instrument is designed to help identify if a university faculty member who teaches online for the first-time makes changes to their face-to-face classroom in the following semesters. Results from this instrument could help researchers identify issues that promote the use of instructional technology tools in the traditional face to face classroom. In addition, since the use of instructional technology integration is both a national trend and a goal of the college, it is important to identify barriers to its integration in the face-to-face environment. The researchers have distributed the survey and are currently analyzing the data gathered from the survey. A couple issues have come to our attention since the distribution of the survey. The first issue concerns the commonly used phrase instructional technology. There is disagreement within the field of instructional design about the meaning of this phrase. It is our decision that in future surveys, the phrase instructional delivery tools will be used in place of what was previously referred to as instructional technology (Clark, 2001). The second issue is also an instructional design issue. After reflecting on the outcomes of the survey, it has been realized that in addition to finding out what instructional delivery tools instructors used, it is also desired to know if the course design of face-to-face classes changed. For example, with the availability of online groups and tools supporting collaboration, it would have been useful to know if instructors who previously chose not to assign group work in their face-to-face class, changed their course design to include more group assignments and opportunities for collaboration. Once the survey instrument is edited and reworked as necessary, it will be administered to gather information about the use of instructional delivery tools and changes to the instructional design of face-to-face classes.

12 Use of Instructional Technology 11 References Bongalos, Y. Q., Bulaon, D. D. R., Celedonio, L. P., de Guzman, A. B., & Ogarte, C. J. F. (2006). University teachers' experiences in courseware development. [Article]. British Journal of Educational Technology, 37(5), doi: /j x Clark, R. E. (Ed.). (2001). Learning from Media: Arguments, Analysis, and Evidence. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing. Condie, R., & Livingston, K. (2007). Blending online learning with traditional approaches: changing practices. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(2), doi: /j x Dey, E. L., Burn, H. E., & Gerdes, D. (2009). Bringing the classroom to the web: effects of using new technologies to capture and deliver lectures. Research in Higher Education, 50(4), doi: /s Keengwe, J., Kidd, T., & Kyei-Blankson, L. (2009). Faculty and Technology : Implications for Faculty Training and Technology Leadership. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18, doi: /s Lin, C., Singer, R., & Ha, L. (2010). Why university members use and resist technology? A structure enactment perspective. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 22, doi: /s Nagel, D. (2009). Most College Students To Take Classes Online by Campus Technology. Campus Technology. Retrieved from website:

13 Use of Instructional Technology 12 Oh, E., & Park, S. (2009). How are Universities Involved in Blended Instruction. Educational Technology & Society, 12(3), Oh, E., & Park, S. (2009). How are universities involved in blended instruction? Educational Technology & Society, 12(3), Parker, R. E., Bianchi, A., & Cheah, T. Y. (2008). Perceptions of Instructional Technology: Factors of Influence and Anticipated Consequences. Educational Technology & Society, 11(2), Roberts, M. C., Meier, R. S., Santogrossi, D. A., & Moore, D. R. (1978). Relationship of Student Characteristics and Performance In a Personalized System of Instruction Course. [Article]. Teaching of Psychology, 5(3), Technology Toolkit for Teaching. (2010), from Yudko, E., Hirokawa, R., & Chi, R. (2008). Attitudes, beliefs, and attendance in a hybrid course. Computers & Education, 50(4), doi: /j.compedu