Literature Review of Faculty-perceived Usefulness of Instructional Technology in Classroom Dynamics

Abstract

This article provides a literature review of the research concerning the role of faculty perspectives about instructional technology. Learning management systems, massive open online courses (MOOCs), cloud-based multimedia applications, and mobile apps represent the tools and the language of academia in the 21st century. Research examined illustrates how important understanding user attitudes can be in the technology deliberation process. Consequently, the faculty opinions should not be underestimated in technology acceptance discussions as coupled with ongoing education technological developments is the challenge of innovation adoption.

Keywords

• e-tools, Distance Education, Faculty-perceived usefulness, Voice-authoring tools, Instructional technology

Kaynakça

1. Akbulut, Y., Odabasi, H., & Kuzu, A. (2011). Perceptions of preservice teachers regarding the integration of information and communication technologies in Turkish education faculties. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(3), 175-184. Retrieved on 15 February 2016 from http://www.tojet.net/articles/v10i3/10320.pdf
2. Birch, D. & Burnett, B. (2009). Bringing academics on board: Encouraging institution-wide diffusion of e-learning environments. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(1), 117-134. Retrieved on 15 February 2016 from http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet25/birch.html
3. Brown, A., Brown, C., Fine, B., Luterbach, K., Sugar, W., & Vinciguerra, D. C. (2009). Instructional uses of podcasting in online learning environments: A cooperative inquiry study. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 37(4), 351-371. doi: 10.2190/ET.37.4.b
4. Chen, B. (2009). Barriers to adoption of technology-mediated distance education in higher- education institutions. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 10(4), 333-338. Retrieved on 15 February 2016 from http://www.infoagepub.com/products/Quarterly-Review-of- Distance-Education
5. Chou, C., Hsiao, H., Shen, C., & Chen, S. (2010). Analysis of factors in technological and vocational school teachers' perceived organizational innovative climate and continuous use of e- teaching: Using computer self-efficacy as an intervening variable. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9(4), 35-48. Retrieved on 15 February 2016 from http://eric.ed. gov/?id=EJ908070
6. Christiansen, E. & Nyvang, T. (2006). Understanding the adoption of TELEs the importance of management. European Journal of Education, 41(3/4), 509-519. doi:10.1111/j.1465- 3435.2006.00279.x
7. Cochrane, T. & Bateman, R. (2010). Smartphones give you wings: Pedagogical affordances of mobile web 2.0. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(1), 1-14. Retrieved on 15 February 2016 from http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet26/cochrane.pdf
8. Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

9. Davies, C. (2011). Changing academics, changing curriculum: How technology enhanced curriculum design can deliver strategic change. Proceedings of the European Conference on E-Learning, 153-156. Retrieved on 15 February 2016 from http://academic-conferences.org/ecel/ ecel2011/ecel11-proceedings.htm
10. Esterhuizen, H. D., Blignaut, S., & Ellis, S. (2013). Looking out and looking in: Exploring a case of faculty perceptions during e-learning staff development. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 14(3), 59-80.
11. Gibson, S. G., Harris, M. L., & Colaric, S. M. (2008). Technology acceptance in an academic context: Faculty acceptance of online education. Journal of Education for Business, 83(6), 355-359.
12. Hall, O. P., & Jr. (2013). Assessing faculty attitudes toward technological change in graduate management education. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 9(1), 39. Retrieved on 15 February 2016 from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1500385874?accountid=40611
13. Harasim, L., Hiltz, S., Teles, L., & Turoff, M. (1995). Learning networks: A field guide to teaching and learning online. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
14. Heinrich, E., Milne, J., & Moore, M. (2009). An investigation into e-tool use for formative assignment assessment - status and recommendations. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 12(4), 176-192. Retrieved on 15 February 2016 from http://ifets.ieee.org/
15. Ho Yu, C., Brewer, L, Jannasch-Pennell, A., DiGangi, S. (2010, Summer). Adopting Web 2.0 for instruction: The effects of faculty rank and employment status. Journal of Technology Integration in the Classroom. 2(2), 131-143. Retrieved on 15 February 2016 from http://www.joti.us/
16. Keengwe, J., Kidd, T., & Kyei-Blankson, L. (2009). Faculty and technology: Implications for faculty training and technology leadership. Journal of Science Education & Technology, 18(1), 23-28. doi:10.1007/s10956-008-9126-2
17. Kowitlawakul, Y., Chan, S., Wang, L., & Wang, W. (2014). Exploring faculty perceptions towards electronic health records for nursing education. International Nursing Review, 61(4), 499- 506. doi:10.1111/inr.12141
18. LeBaron, J. & McFadden, A. (2008). The brave new world of e-learning: a department's response to mandated change. Interactive Learning Environments, 16(2), 143-156. doi:10.1080/10494820701331079.
19. Lei, S. A. & Gupta, R. K. (2010). College distance education courses: Evaluating benefits and costs from institutional, faculty and students' perspectives. Education, 130(4), 616-631. Retrieved on 15 February 2016 from http://www.projectinnovation.com/Education.html
20. Nicolle, P. S. & Lou, Y. (2008). Technology adoption into teaching and learning by mainstream university faculty: A mixed methodology study revealing the "how, when, why, and why not". Journal of Educational Computing Research, 39(3), 235-265. doi:10.2190/EC.39.3.c
21. Percival, J. & Percival, N. (2009). A case of a laptop learning campus: How do technology choices affect perceptions? ALT-J: Research in Learning Technology, 17(3), 173-186. doi:10.1080/09687760903247633
22. Persson, A., Fyrenius, A., & Bergdahl, B. (2010). Perspectives on using multimedia scenarios in a PBL medical curriculum. Medical Teacher, 32(9), 766-772. doi:10.3109/01421591003688381
23. Ping, G., Wong, A. L., Choy, D., & Jing, W. (2010). Developing leadership potential for technology integration: Perspectives of three beginning teachers. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(5), 643-658. Retrieved on 15 February 2016 from http://www.ascilite. org.au/ajet/ajet26/gao.pdf
24. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. (5th ed.). New York: Free Press.
25. Schulte, M. (2010). Faculty perceptions of technology distance education transactions: Qualitative outcomes to inform teaching practices. Journal of Educators Online, 7(2). Retrieved on 15 February 2016 from http://www.thejeo.com
26. Steel, J. & Hudson, A. (2001). Educational technology in learning and teaching: The perceptions and experiences of teaching staff. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 38(2), 103-11. doi:10.1080/13558000010030158
27. Stoltenkamp, J. & Mapuva, J. (2010). E-Tools and the globalised world of learning and communication. Contemporary Educational Technology, 1(3), 208-220. Retrieved on 15 February 2016 from http://www.cedtech.net/
28. Zhang, W. & Xu, P. (2011). Do I have to learn something new? Mental models and the acceptance of replacement technologies. Behaviour & Information Technology, 30(2), 201-211. doi: 10.1080/0144929X.2010.489665
29. Correspondence: Alexandra Salas, Director, MercerOnline, Center for Teaching and Learning,
30. Mercer County Community College, West Windsor, New Jersey, USA