Faculty Instructional Computer Use Model

Abstract The purpose of this research study was to explore predictor variables for faculty instructional computer use. Analysis of data collected from 198 college of education (COE) faculty members indicated that instructional computer use and mainstream computer use form two strong and distinct variables. This study also proposes a faculty instructional computer use model that shows the relationships between these two types of computer uses and suggests different prediction paths for these two variables. While mainstream computer use was predicted significantly by personal computer access, collegial support, and mainstream computer expertise, instructional computer expertise and collegial support affect faculty attitudes toward instructional computer use. It is an important finding that collegial support is a motivation factor both to increase mainstream computer use and to change faculty attitudes positively toward instructional computer use. Finally, instructional computer skills, along with positive faculty attitudes toward computers as instructional tools, increase the likelihood of instructional computer use. The faculty instructional computer use model provides some key elements regarding how COE faculty use of instructional computer applications and software may be improved. Results from this study clearly suggest that faculty development programs should be focused upon instructional computer use and not on developing mainstream computer skills.

[1]  Thomas H. Spotts.  Discriminating Factors in Faculty Use of Instructional Technologyin Higher Education , 1999, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[2]  Paul E. Post,et al.  Relationships of selected factors and the level of computer use for instructional purposes by technology education teachers in ohio public schools: a statewide survey , 2003 .

[3]  A. Grasha,et al.  Integrating Teaching Styles and Learning Styles with Instructional Technology , 2000 .

[4]  Noel Bitner,et al.  Integrating Technology into the Classroom: Eight Keys to Success , 2002 .

[5]  Ismail Sahin,et al.  Using Rogers’ Theory to Interpret Instructional Computer Use by COE Faculty , 2006 .

[6]  June Lee,et al.  Instructional support for distance education and faculty motivation, commitment, satisfaction , 2001, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[7]  Joseph O'Brien,et al.  Learning Generation: Fostering Innovation with Tomorrow’s Teachers and Technology , 2005 .

[8]  Pamela Rups.  Training Instructors in New Technologies , 1999 .

[9]  Margaret L. Niess.  Preparing Teachers to Teach Science and Mathematics with Technology , 2001 .

[10]  Michael M. Grant,et al.  One College of Education’s Effort to Infuse Technology , 2002 .

[11]  Robert S. Pred,et al.  Evaluation of a Faculty Development Model for Technology Use in Higher Education for Late Adopters , 2001, Evaluation and Assessment in Educational Information Technology.

[12]  Cleborne D. Maddux,et al.  Barriers to the successful use of information technology in education , 1999 .

[13]  Kevin M. Elliott,et al.  Diffusion of Technology Into the Teaching Process: Strategies to Encourage Faculty Members to Embrace the Laptop Environment , 2003 .

[14]  Margaret L. Rice,et al.  Faculty Involvement in Planning for the Use and Integration of Instructional and Administrative Technologies , 2001 .

[15]  Melissa M. Groves,et al.  Instructional Technology Adoption in Higher Education: An Action Research Case Study , 2000 .

[16]  Jerry Martin.  What does faculty really want from information technology? , 2001, SIGUCCS '01.

[17]  I. Sahin.  UNDERSTANDING FACULTY ADOPTION OF TECHNOLOGY USING THE LEARNING/ADOPTION TRAJECTORY MODEL: A QUALITATIVE CASE STUDY , 2005 .