Technology adoption into teaching and learning by mainstream university faculty

 

Abstract:

Within the broad spectrum of educational policies, pedagogies, plans, and processes designed to boost student learning, the area of educational technology has been and continues to be an influential aspect. In their teaching and professional and personal development, faculty are conscious of the importance and potential of educational technologies. However, for many educators, the gap between envisioning technical usage and actual implementation is often a long, winding path. Members of the university faculty are in the midst of a strong focus on travelling the path and travelling it with pace and precision through various stakeholders.

In varying degrees and ratios, the mainstream members of tertiary faculty face both challenges and support along the way. The goal of this mixed exploratory methodology study was to uncover the voice of those travellers who are often reluctant and to decide how, where, when and why they want to incorporate technology into their teaching and learning. Data was gathered from three academic colleges through a survey administered to faculty and interviews with selected survey respondents. Data were analysed descriptively and with the constant comparative approach by way of route analysis(Karsh, 2015).

This research aimed to provide insight into the processes of technology acceptance by conventional faculty members, culminating in a Model of Technology Incorporation Process. The findings indicate that faculty members understand potential teaching and learning benefits of technology and that peer interactions and collegiality are necessary to help them learn new technologies and strategies. It is expected that this fundamental awareness will inform the professional development design applicable to those who continue on the journey and those who have not yet chosen to fly.

1.Introduction:

For a lunches seminar where faculty members will share their latest study, a group of departmental faculty members assemble voluntarily. With a sense of true collegiality present, the setting is casual and comfortable. The faculty member presents the results of her current analysis using a format improved by technology. Other members of the faculty raise concerns about the study and show interest in the outcome. The topic extends to similar subjects and breaks down into debates in small groups. One faculty member, who is a personality 'non-techie', is further examining the presenter's use in her classes of Blackboard course management methods. His need for information for his own use of the class triggers a request for extended assistance in developing and using Blackboard as a part of the course(Karsh, 2014).

By way of route analysis, and with the constant comparison, data was analysed descriptively. This research aimed to provide insight into the processes of innovation adoption by conventional faculty members, culminating in a Model of Technology Incorporation Process. The findings indicate that faculty members understand potential teaching and learning benefits of technology and that peer interactions and collegiality are necessary to help them learn new technologies and strategies. It is expected that this fundamental awareness will inform the design of professional development applicable to those on the path and those who have not yet chosen to fly(Karsh, 2019).

Reasonable venues for professional learning need to be made accessible in order for university faculty to efficiently model and use instructional technologies. A university's diverse structure, history, and historical autonomy offer a different framework for professional development for technology-integration than that recommended for K-12 classroom teachers and administrators. Schwieso (1993) noticed a little over a decade ago that little study was performed on the use of computer technology by academics in higher education. Subsequent research centred mainly on the skills needed to use technology, the challenges and problems faced in the use of technology (Adams, 2002; Neal, 1998), and the preparation needed either to place courses on the Web or to improve skills in online teaching (Crawford, 2003; (Karsh, 2020 ; White & Myers, 2001).

Pierson (2001), Jacobsen (1998a), and Ebersole and Vorndam (2003), similar to most research explorations, examined the features, talents, and leadership qualities of experts or exemplars in adoption with the underlying premise that these groups are seen as templates for the majority and the way to lead the masses to incorporation of technology. Studies involving the mainstream (Baldwin, 1998; Adams, 2002) are required, thus recording their innovation adoption tale. The voice of the majority comprising Rogers' adopter groups - Early Majority, Late Majority, and Laggards - is absent in the report (Karsh, 2018).

"Categories of adopters are categorised as members of the social system on the basis of creativity, the degree to which the member or other unit of adoption is comparatively earlier than other members of the system in adopting new ideas." (1995 by Rogers, p. 279). On the basis of two attributes of a typical distributed bell-shaped curve, the mean and the 5 standard deviation, the spectrum of innovativeness can be divided into five adopter groups. Adopter distributions appear to adopt an S-shaped curve over time and to approach normality, as defined by Rogers (1995). The total number of adopters is defined by the S-shaped curve. This distribution is steadily increasing, then accelerating to a limit until half of it has been adopted. As less and fewer adopt, this tends to rise steadily (Karsh, 2017). There is positive progress and professional teaching in all groups, but there is no recorded proof of how and why the mainstream members of the community chose to accept technologies, as seen on this S-curve continuum of acceptance, albeit slowly (Karsh, 2016).

2. Purpose of the Study:

There is a recent revitalization of teaching and learning at the post-secondary level (Hativa, Barak, & Simhi, 2001). The value of successful teaching against student learning types, multiple intelligences, modalities and levels of motivation generates an emphasis on the creative methods and strategies of university faculties. The goal of this study was to highlight the positive steps or progress of the adoption of faculty innovation and to provide insight into the rich details involved in the processes of how a faculty member seeks improvement, the significance of the practise communities of which he/she is a member, And the advantages that both faculty and students benefit from embracing technical advancement. This research, similar to Ely (1999), tried to "tease out explanations for good efforts" (p. 24). Holloway (1996) provides this analysis with a concise view of active research: We need to understand the context of technology and education in the wider community if we are to understand how technology is disseminated and what kind of adaptation is required. The views of educators, students, and other stakeholders in the method, their true reasons for use and non-use, require reflective, grounded analysis. The most successful new perspectives for dissemination and acceptance research are studies that concentrate on the social context of technology for decision-makers, educators, viewers, and students. The aim of this study was to examine the variables of institutional support, institutional capital, and peer support in relation to the teaching design and delivery processes in which mainstream faculty participate in their efforts to incorporate technology.

                        

3. Research Questions

 This research review was motivated by the following research questions arising from the literature and from the clinical experience of the investigator. (RQ1) What factors allow a member of the mainstream faculty to integrate advances in technology into their private teaching and learning? (RQ2) What is the role of institutional support in the adoption and implementation of developments in educational technology?

4. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

At many educational and administrative levels of education, technical incorporation into teaching and learning is currently a subject of concern. In recent years, the large amount of computer infrastructure installed in educational institutions has drawn attention to the fact that educators who are supposed to use this equipment optimally in the classroom need to be given professional development in terms of what entails successful integration of technology and how it is done. Successful incorporation of technology includes the teacher's relationship between the information areas of technology, pedagogy and material (Pierson, 2001). Paradigm changes in the field of instructional technology reflect an increasing focus on technology curriculum integration (Hargrave & Hsu, 2000). Massey (2001) notes that "it is the promise and expectation of what technology will do in the future that currently influences attitudes and thoughts on how we can teach and learn". A body of research focused on those changes and the human element needed to make them happen was generated by the growing and increasingly widespread thrust towards curricular, technical, and pedagogical changes. This review of applicable literature will focus on many interrelated topics that provide the structure and context for this report. When viewed as parts of a whole, these topics blend to understand how historical and current research led this research to expose the majority's often unheard voice: those faculty members who accept developments within their own extended timeframes and respond to their own perceived needs rather than those prescribed by others.  The theoretical structure that drives this study provides a multi-dimensional basis for the 'how and why' of technology adoption by the mainstream faculty to be examined. It provides applicable research that supports the theories and their connection with the subject of this report. An interrelated undergirding of this analysis was the Everett Rogers Theory of Diffusion of Innovations, social network models, practise groups, and the associated learning theories of situated learning, constructivism, and andragogy(Karsh, 2016).

5. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:

In collecting advice on the technology adoption and implementation processes of university faculty members, this study was designed to expose the voices of mainstream faculty members about their views, motives, and experiences related to educational technology. A hybrid methodology using both primary and secondary data was used in this research study.. The aim of using data from quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews was to provide both scope and depth of knowledge on the mainstream use of educational technology by faculty in teaching and learning. The use of multi-method research procedures was essential to investigate a wide range of acceptance and implementation process details. In the following pages, descriptions of the methodology are described: (1) Research Questions, (2) A Conceptual Model, (3) Research Design, (4) Environment, (5) Methods for Population and Sample size, (6) Equipment, (7) Collections of Pilot Data, (8) Compilation of Study Data, (9) Analysis Methods, and (10) Overview.

6. RESEARCH RESULTS:

This research was planned to expose the voices of mainstream university faculty members in their teaching and learning about their attitudes, motivations, beliefs, and use of educational technology. For descriptive and bivariate correlations between constructs, data from the quantitative survey was first analysed. The correlations were subsequently used to test a hypothesised model of the mechanism of technology incorporation in which conventional university faculty participate. The described constructs were used to evaluate qualitative interview data from nine cases as the basis for coding and categorization. The findings of this research study are recorded in the following subsections of this chapter: (1) descriptive features of the sample of the university faculty, (2) survey data analysis, (3) path model analysis, (4) data analysis of the interview, and (5) results overview. The Survey Demographics Both Interviewees A total of 129 professors responded to the questionnaire. For pilot and study respondents, the average response rate was 16.9 percent. Data on the self-selected stages of adoption and introduction of technology was analysed for dissemination. This was conducted as a means of differentiating between those who consider themselves early adopters or very adept at the technology integration process and the mainstream faculty. The specific survey question with identifying stage descriptions is found in Appendix F. In the selfselection of a technology adoption stage, the largest percentage of respondents (36.4%) felt that they were in Stage 3 (Table 4.1). This stage reflects “Understanding and Applying the Process.” "A descriptive example of Stage 3 on the survey is, "In my planning, instructional execution, and assessment, I use a range of 78 technology resources/tools. In the creation of curriculum-based items, my students use a range of technology resources/tools. "Awareness" is the lowest level on the continuum of acceptance and integration (Stage 1). I am aware of technology and have some basic skills, but I do not feel that I have enough experience to use technology without assistance. I seldom involve students' use of technology to accomplish tasks.

7. Conclusions

 This section includes conclusions that are explored and grouped by Research Question on the basis of the results within this report. Findings are included from survey results, route observations, and data from interviews. Research Question 1: What factors allow a member of the conventional faculty to integrate advances in technology into their personal teaching and learning? Both research variables tended to have a direct or indirect influence on any stage of the technology integration phase of an university professor. In the educational technology process model, peer reinforcement, inspiration, and instructional strategies emerged from the data as having the greatest significant overall causal effects on the tested variables. Institutional support, institutional capital, instructional delivery, student use, and the process of learning all had important direct effects on the variables evaluated. In the analysis, the tested path relationships seem to satisfy the proposed linkages. These linkages and the prevalence of some over others were corroborated by interview results. Research Question 2: What is the role of institutional support for the implementation and adoption of innovations in educational technology? Members of the faculty use institution-provided technical assistance by aid desks and technicians. They engage in institution-provided professional development on a low scale. It emerged from the data from the interview that faculty members expect these to be accessible and use them when applicable to their specific case. The eventually presented findings that Institutional Support had highly significant causal effects, especially on Motivation, on three endogenous variables. Although the agreement levels within the survey metrics were generally just above neutral, the data indicate that the survey results from the analysis, the technology integration model tested, and the interviews will inform the production and implementation at tertiary education of more efficient, discipline-specific professional development offers.

 

 

 

Reference:

Karsh, Sharif M Abu; ,Monitoring Investor Behavioral Finance: Examining Its Applicability on Egyptian Investors,Insights into Economics and Management,,,86,,

Karsh, Sharif M Abu; 2016, The impact of working capital efficiency on stock returns: Evidence from Palestine exchange,International Information Institute (Tokyo). Information,19,7A,2487 ,International Information Institute

KARSH, Sharif Musbah ABU;2018,Investor Behavioral Finance: Examining Its Applicability on Egyptian Investors,The Eurasia Proceedings of Educational and Social Sciences,10,,85-91,,

Karsh, Sharif Musbah Abu; Abumwais, Radwan Mahmoud;2018 ,Evaluation Strategies of Credit Risk used by Commercial Banks Listed in Palestine Stock Exchange (PSE),Global Journal of Management And Business Research

Karsh, Sharif M Abu;2017,New technology adoption by business faculty in teaching: Analyzing faculty technology adoption patterns,The Eurasia Proceedings of Educational and Social Sciences,7,,80-92,

Karsh, Sharif M Abu; 2016, Social Responsibility by Islamic Banks in Palestine,International Journal of Business and Social Science,7,6,, ,

Karsh, Sharif Musbah Abu;2016, BUSINESS EDUCATION IN PALESTINE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND BUSINESS EDUCATION,Research Highlights in Education and Science 2016,,,69

Karsh, Sharif M Abu; Alqadi, Bassem Ahmad;2014 ,"Local economic development opportunties using participatory appraisal of competitive advantage"" South Hebron region",International Journal of Business and Economics Perspectives,9,1,107-135, ,International Academy of Business and Public Administration Disciplines

Karsh, Sharif M Abu;2016, Using Information Technology to Enhance Business Education in Palestine: A Theoretical View,International Information Institute (Tokyo). Information,19,10B,4779, International Information Institute

Karsh, Sharif M Abu; Dua’a, AL-Deek; 2019, Corporate Social Responsibility and Its Relation to Profitability: Evidence from Banks Operating in Palestine

Hill, Cassandra; Abu Karsh, Mithat;2008 ,West Bank Curfew: West Bank curfew prolonged after further violence & demonstrations against extension of Israeli West Bank barrier,,,,, ,SBS Melbourne

Karsh, Abu; 2020,Fintech in the eyes of Millennials and Generation Z (the financial behavior and Fintech perception),,,,, ,Banks and Bank Systems

Karsh, Sharif M Abu; 1996,Credit Risk Evaluation Practices of Selected Financial Intermediaries in the Philippines,,,,, ,UST Graduate School

Karsh, Abu;2020 ,Business Education Key for Achieving Financial Inclusion in Palestine,,,,, ,Journal of Economics and Public Finance

Karsh, Abu; 2020, Strategic Planning Impact on Banks Employees' Performance: Palestine ,International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology

Karsh, Abu; Sharif, M; Deek, Anan; 2019,Microfinance institutions: It’s role in Palestine economic development,International Business Research,12,2,165-173,Canadian Center of Science and Education

Sharif Abu Karsh, Yusuf Abufara;2020, The New Era of Financial Technology in Banking Industry,Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University,55,4

Abu Karsh, Sharif; Zain, Younis;2015,The Impact of Porter’s Competitive Strategies on the Performance of the Industrial Sector in the city of Hebron,An-Najah University Journal for Research-B (Humanities),29,5,1,

Karsh, Abu; ,المصارف والبطاقات االلكترونية: الفرص والتحديات دراسة حالة المصارف الفلسطينية,,,,,2014,"Journal of Banking and Financial research, The Arab Academy for Financial …"

Karsh, Abu; ,"Sheriff,"2005" bank credit risk management","the first Scientific Conference for Investment and Finance in Palestine between the development prospects and modern challenges, Islamic University",9

Karsh, Abu; ,Levant Charter Company’s Business Plan 2020,"Journal of Banking and Financial research, The Arab Academy for Financial Sciences",22,3,48 To:  53,2014,https://www.aaup.edu/publication/sharif.abukarsh/article/banks-and …

Rogers, E.M. (1962). Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press.

Holloway, R.E. (1996). Diffusion and adoption of educational technology: A critique of research design. In D.H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 1107-1133). New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.

Pierson, M.E. (2001). Technology integration practice as a function of pedagogical expertise. [Electronic version]. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33(4), 413-430.

Massey, W.E. (2001). Uncertainties in the changing academic profession. In S.R. Graubard (Ed.), The American academic profession (pp. 67-94). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.