Concerns and perceptions of faculty using Web-based instructional technology.

Technology implementation;Stages of concern;Computer self-efficacy;Personalization;Leadership;Faculty profiles;Faculty;Web-based;Instructional technology

Elizabeth Romero Fuerte

University:University of Louisville

Department:College of Education and Human Development

关键词: Technology implementation;    Stages of concern;    Computer self-efficacy;    Personalization;    Leadership;    Faculty profiles;    Faculty;    Web-based;    Instructional technology;   

Others  :  https://ir.library.louisville.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1466&context=etd

美国|英语

来源: The Universite of Louisville's Institutional Repository

【 摘 要 】

This study examined faculty levels of implementation of Web-based instructional technology (WBIT) and computer self-efficacy beliefs (CSE) as factors associated to faculty perception of institutional mechanisms and its relative importance as conditions supporting the implementation of WBIT in higher education. Using a sample of 334 faculty teaching at selected universities in the Commonwealth of Kentucky, faculty perceptions of support mechanisms for the implementation of WBIT were examined. Results revealed that it is possible to develop faculty profiles that include psychological and behavioral variables and that adding such variables improve the prediction of faculty levels of technology implementation. Furthermore, findings from this study suggested there are perception differences regarding the conditions that support implementation at different stages. Factors such as levels of use of WBIT and faculty concerns about implementation provided an explanation of the perception differences. In the first phases of implementation (i.e., nonuse/preparation and self/task concerns) participation and the accessibility to resources, including incentives and rewards, were clearly more important. In later stages (i.e., focus on improvement and impact concerns) the administrative support in the form of leadership interventions--providing encouragement and serving as a role models--and the visible support by the upper level leaders became key factors. Further research is needed in the area of personalization in order for universities to develop not only a cost-effective but also an efficient way of offering professional development opportunities that consider specific users' profiles. Findings from this study are promising in the sense that it sets the basis for a theory-grounded definition of faculty profiles. This study establishes the foundation to reconsider the need for customized administrative practices and a more diverse spectrum of interventions which, in a constantly evolving field, are necessary for large scale technology implementations to expand in higher education institutions.