Perceptions of Faculty on the Effect of Distance Learning Technology on Faculty Preparation Time.

Over the course of three consecutive semesters, faculty members involved in both video-conference-based and online-based distance learning environments were surveyed in order to determine their perception regarding the technical support services, equipment, training and additional preparation time it takes to teach in a distance environment. The results showed that the faculty spent less additional time on training and preparation for distance teaching for courses that they repeated teaching in the same environment. However, thirty percent of the faculty still reported needing between ten and twenty additional hours of preparation time even in their third semester of teaching. Over the past several years, as the number of courses offered through distance learning technologies has increased, so has the discussion among college faculty regarding the perceived added responsibilities of faculty who teach in these environments. Of particular interest to faculty is the perception that these courses require far more development and preparation time on the part of the instructor than traditional classroom-based instruction. But when faculty are surveyed over time, do they report the same additional responsibilities associated with distance learning when they are repeated teaching the same preparation? Do faculty still require the same support services or receive the same encouragement or financial support after repeated semesters? This article will discuss the results of a research study that collected research over the course of three semesters from instructors teaching in a distance learning environment across one metropolitan campus. Background Since about 1997, the large, mid-Western university where this research took place has developed both synchronous (real-time) and asynchronous (delayed time) distance learning technologies and subsequent coursework. Specifically, there are two synchronous environments on campus. One is a relatively simple system with a dedicated T-1 line connected to another state university forty miles north and used to deliver a shared graduate program between the two campuses. The other is and a high-end fiber-optic-based system able to transmit voice, video, and media simultaneously to several branch campus, high school, and community center locations across two counties. Both systems, whether simplistic or state-of-the-art, were known to have the typical issues associated with synchronous systems, such as delays in class start time and complications during class time such as loss of audio. At the same time that these environments were being developed, there was interest from faculty across campus to develop completely online course materials. In particular, the dean of the