The IRMA Community
Newsletters
Research IRM
Click a keyword to search titles using our InfoSci-OnDemand powered search:
|
Barriers to and Strategies for Faculty Integration of IT
|
|
Author(s): Thomas M. Brinthaupt (Middle Tennessee State University, USA), Maria A. Clayton (Middle Tennessee State University, USA)and Barbara J. Draude (Middle Tennessee State University, USA)
Copyright: 2009
Pages: 8
Source title:
Encyclopedia of Distance Learning, Second Edition
Source Author(s)/Editor(s): Patricia L. Rogers (Bemidji State University, USA), Gary A. Berg (California State University Channel Islands (Retired), USA), Judith V. Boettcher (Designing for Learning, USA), Caroline Howard (HC Consulting, USA), Lorraine Justice (Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong)and Karen D. Schenk (K. D. Schenk and Associates Consulting, USA)
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-60566-198-8.ch021
Purchase
|
Abstract
At most institutions of higher education, faculty members wear many “hats.” Among other responsibilities, they are expected to teach, conduct research, and participate in institutional and public service. Within the teaching realm, faculty members have always had multiple responsibilities. For example, in addition to being content experts, they may need to become course design, assessment, communication, community or interaction experts. Instructors can be described as architects, consultants, resources, reviewers, and role models (Oblinger & Hawkins, 2006). It is primarily (though not exclusively) in the teaching realm where instructional technology (IT) is relevant. The more that faculty utilize IT, the more the non-content aspects of teaching become salient. Depending on level of faculty expertise, asking them to increase the time and effort they put into their teaching might reduce the time and effort they can devote to research, service, and other institutional requirements and responsibilities. Why should they, especially if there is very little acknowledgment or tenure/promotion credit given for incorporating IT into their teaching? This is, in part, why many faculty members may have to be dragged “kicking and screaming” into using these technologies.
Related Content
|
Sylvia Robertson.
© 2023.
28 pages.
|
|
Dimitrios Stamovlasis, Charalampos Tsanidis.
© 2023.
23 pages.
|
|
Ikram Chelliq, Lamya Anoir, Mohamed Erradi, Mohamed Khaldi.
© 2023.
26 pages.
|
|
Vasiliki Ioakeimidou.
© 2023.
27 pages.
|
|
Eleni Bonti.
© 2023.
25 pages.
|
|
Lamya Anoir, Ikram Chelliq, Mohamed Erradi, Mohamed Khaldi.
© 2023.
29 pages.
|
|
Shibu Puthalath, M. R. Mallaiah, Viswesh Sekhar.
© 2023.
17 pages.
|
|
|