The new methods of communication provided by technology and the impact of the Internet have changed our economy from the “Industrial Age” into the “Information Age” and have transformed higher education. These changes call into question the traditional ways in which faculty and institutions of higher learning have functioned. The aim of this study was to examine faculty use of instructional technology in the university classroom. For the purposes of this study, instructional technology has been limited to Internet-related technologies including e-mail, the World Wide Web, newsgroups, file transfer protocol (FTP), and Gopher. The study addressed the strengths of the relationships between the use of instructional technology and 1) faculty demographics, 2) teaching styles, and 3) faculty perceptions of the effectiveness of instructional technology, access to technology, and administrative support. All of the full-time faculty at a four-year, doctorate I granting institution in the Midwest were surveyed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
CarterV.DedenA., Using Technology to Enhance Student Skills, in New Directions for Higher Education (96), JonesE. (ed.), Jossey Bass, San Francisco, 1996.
2.
OblingerD.HafnerK., Transforming the Academy, in The Future Compatible Campus, OblingerD.RushS. (eds.), Anker Publishing Co., Boston, Massachusetts, pp. 3–23, 1998.
3.
DunnK.DunnR., Administrator's Guide to New Programs for Faculty Management and Evaluation, Parker Publishing Company, New York, 1997.
4.
SpottsT. H.BowmanM. A., Faculty Use of Instructional Technologies in Higher Education, Educational Technology, 35:2, pp. 56–64, 1995.
5.
BakerM. H., Distance Teaching with Interactive Television: Strategies that Promote Interaction with Remote-Site Students, doctoral dissertation, The University of Iowa, Dissertation Abstracts International, 55–12, p. A3818, 1994.
6.
MiletL. A., Descriptive Analysis of Factors Affecting Faculty Implementation of Computer-Based and Video-Based Technology in Higher Education, doctoral dissertation, Lehigh University, Dissertation Abstracts International, 52–02, p. A0439, 1991.
7.
RuthM. L., Faculty Acceptance and Resistance: Internet Technologies at Moorhead State University, doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, Dissertation Abstracts International, 57–11, p. A4670, 1996.
8.
LeeJ., Information Technology at the Gate: Faculty Perceptions and Attitudes About Technology-mediated Instruction Innovation in Higher Education, doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, Dissertation Abstracts International, 58–02, p. A0353, 1996.
9.
WalshS. M., Attitudes and Perceptions of University Faculty Toward Technology Based Distance Education, doctoral dissertation, The University of Oklahoma, Dissertation Abstracts International, 54–03, p. A0781, 1993.
10.
HeathC. L., Faculty Attitudes Towards Distance Education and Use of Instruction Technology, doctoral dissertation, University of San Francisco, Dissertation Abstracts International, 57–04, p. A1517, 1996.
11.
BlancoC. A., Faculty Use of Technology Resources: Frequency, Purposes, and Instructional Assignments for Students, doctoral dissertation, The University of Arizona, Dissertation Abstracts International, 57–04, p. A1577, 1996.
12.
CheamnakarinP., Attitudes of Faculty Members in Rajamangala Institute of Technology, Thailand, Toward the Implementation of Computers, doctoral dissertation, University of North Texas, Dissertation Abstracts International, 53–07, p. A2262, 1992.
13.
FuY. S., Computer Literacy among Faculty in Higher Education, doctoral dissertation, University of North Texas, Dissertation Abstracts International, 52–08, p. B4309, 1991.
14.
LewisR. J., Faculty Perspectives on the Role of Information Technologies in Academic Instruction, Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Washington, D. C., 1985.
15.
HillJ. A., The Impact of Computers on the Performance of Faculty in Three Mid-western Universities, Ed.D. thesis, Dissertation Abstracts International, 54–08, p. A2902, 1993.
16.
JiangL., Educational Computing at Northern Illinois University: Academic Staff Use, Knowledge, Skills, Interests, Attitudes, and Perceptions, Ed.D. thesis, Northern Illinois University, Dissertation Abstracts International, 54–08, p. A2993, 1993.
17.
Leong-ChildsD. L., Professors' Use of Computers for Innovative Instruction, doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, Dissertation Abstracts International, 50–07, p. A1961, 1989.
18.
HayesE. (ed.), Effective Teaching Styles, New Directions for Continuing Education, Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco, 1989.
19.
DunnK. J.FrazierE. R., Teaching Styles, National Association of Secondary School Principals Publications, Reston, Virginia, 1990.
20.
BlackE. J., Faculty Support for Distance Education in a Conventional University, doctoral dissertation, The University of British Columbia, Dissertation Abstracts International, 54–02, p. A0490, 1992.
21.
ClarkT. A., Faculty Attitudes Toward Distance Education in United States Public Higher Education, doctoral dissertation, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, Dissertation Abstracts International, 54–09, p. A3293, 1992.
22.
NovekE., Do Professors Dream of Electronic Sheep? Academic Anxiety about the Information Age, EDRS Accession No. ED 399594, 1995.
23.
AworuwaB. O., Qualitative Study of Faculty's Perceptions of Computer Use for Teaching and the Impact on Teaching and Learning, doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, Dissertation Abstracts International, 55–07, p. A1919, 1994.
24.
BurkeM. A., Student and Faculty Perceptions of Interaction in Two-way Interactive Television Classrooms, doctoral dissertation, The University of Tennessee, Dissertation Abstracts International, 55–07, p. A1788, 1994.
25.
NassehB., A Study of Computer-Based Distance Education in Higher Education Institutions in Indiana, doctoral dissertation, Ball State University, Dissertation Abstracts International, 57–10, p. A4287, 1996.
26.
BakerS. J. S., Access and Attitudes Regarding the Use of Online Services among Socioculturally Divers College Students, doctoral dissertation, Arizona State University, Dissertation Abstracts International, 57–03, p. A1103, 1996.
27.
EpperR. M., Coordination and Competition in Postsecondary Distance Education: A Comparative Case Stuy of Statewide Policies, doctoral dissertation, University of Denver, Dissertation Abstracts International, 57–03, p. A1043, 1996.
28.
GallagherG. J., Factors Influencing the Attitudes of Educators in Professional Programs Towards the Use of Computer Technology in Teaching, masters thesis, University of Guelph (Canada), Masters Abstracts International, 32–02, p. 0420, 1993.
29.
KlineJ. P., Managing Change for a Distance Learning Imitative: An Evaluation, doctoral dissertation, The College of William and Mary, Dissertation Abstracts International, 57–08, p. A3341, 1996.
30.
LecuyerK. F., Changes in Teacher Thinking and Instructional Methods When Integrating Computers into the Curriculum, doctoral dissertation, George Mason University, Dissertation Abstracts International, 57–10, p. A4335, 1997.
