Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 15

1

Chapter 1 Introduction In this chapter, the researcher will overview the current state of online education in the United States, the focus on quality in online education, faculty perceptions of teaching online, and models and theories for training faculty to teach online. For the purposes of this study, the term faculty will be used interchangeably with the term instructor. Both terms refer to persons who teach at a two -year or four-year institution of post-secondary education. Problem Statement: ver the past two decades, online education has become the primary form of distance education and has been established as an accepted mode of education. nline education has

demonstrated its success in utili!ing technology to facilitate asynchronous learning "#ui, $%&$'. (urrently, )*.+ , of higher education institutions in the U.S. offer some form of online learning "-llen . Seaman, $%&/'. -dditionally, enrollment rates for post-secondary online courses have increased over the past ten years and as of Fall $%&&, /$, of all higher education enrollment was in online courses "ibid'. 0esearch on online education focuses heavily on student e1perience and needs in the online environment "2arrison, (leveland-Innes, . Fung, $%%34 5oo, #im, .6im, $%&&4 6emp, $%%$4 7orris, $%&&'. 8hile there is a great deal of research being conducted regarding online education from the view of student success "(olorado . 9berle, $%&%4 5aggers . :u, $%&/4 #ui $%&&', it is imperative to equally focus on the quality of classes and nature of online instruction in order to provide quality online education and to achieve online student success and satisfaction. ;here is a growing base of research on faculty development programs which e1amine the general form

and function of faculty development programs for online faculty "(hou, $%&$4 <ittmar . 7c(ac=en, $%&&4 #ac=ey, $%&&4 and Uttendorfer, $%%>' and faculty perceptions of training and support needs "Brill . ?ar=, $%&&4 2in!burg, (hepya, . <emers, $%&%4 @i1on, et al., $%&&4 ;erantino . -gbehonou, $%&$' yet there is no standardi!ed definition of online faculty development programs or necessary program components "(hou, $%&$4 6eengwe . 2eorgina, $%&$'. ;his causes a problem for both the new online instructor and online students, as students can have vastly different online learning e1periences based on the =nowledge and e1perience level of online teaching theory and practice held by the instructor. For this study, quality is defined by the researcher as rigorous academic policy and practice in online education which supports and enhances the pursuit of =nowledge in a computer based academic environment. ;he quality of online education, as compared to face-to-face courses, has been a primary topic of concern among administrators and faculty involved in online education "0osas . 8est, $%%>4 Shaw, $%&$4 8ic=ersham . 7c9lhany, $%&%'. 8ith no standardi!ed form of online education in the United States "nor globally' designating what constitutes as quality teaching and learning in online education, as well as how to achieve this, has been determined on an institutional level and individual basis "?allof . ?ratt, $%&&'. 0esearch on quality in online education spans from a focus on the dynamics of content delivery and student authentification and performance "Barc!y=, Buc=enmeyer, . Feldman, $%&%4 5aggers . :u, $%&/4 0osas . 8est, $%%>' to the use of technology and faculty involvement in the online teaching process "2as=ill . Aang, $%&&'. Student success and retention levels have been shown to be directly related to the type and degree of instructor engagement in the course "-=yol . 2arrison, $%%)4 2arrison, (leveland-Innes, . Fung, $%&%4 ?allof . ?ratt, $%&&4 Shea, $%%*'. In this research, three

primary concerns are evident. First, not all online instructors are aware of the need to be continuously and actively engaged with their students in an online environment4 assuming instead that students can proceed through the course independently once it has been filled with course content. Second, few online instructors have e1perienced training regarding online learning pra1is. ;his is a largely a result of institutions not having or requiring training to teach online prior to assigning their faculty online courses. -nd third, the requirements for online faculty training differ per institution, resulting in a variation in the student learning e1perience and success. ;hese factors combined illustrate the importance of the need for more research to e1plore strategies which can be used to enhance the motivation and ability of online faculty and to better provide e1cellent online education "#ui, $%&$'. Significance of Study: nline education is a form of distance education which has shown steady growth over the past ten years and will be a maBor part of the future of higher education. -ccording to the $%&/ Babson report on online education in the United States, *.C million students "/$, of all US students in higher education' were enrolled in at least one online course in the fall of $%&&, which is a >./, growth rate in online enrollments from $%&%. 8hile this growth rate is a reduction from the $&, growth documented in $%&%, overall since $%%/, online enrollments have increased by /+), "-llen . Seaman, $%&/' "see Figure &'.

Figure 1. 0ates of increase for annual online enrollment and total online enrollment numbers for students ta=ing at least one online course at a U.S. institution of higher education based on Fall enrollment numbers between $%%/ and $%&&. SourceD Babson Survey 0esearch 2roup 0eport "$%&/'. Changing Course: Ten Years of Tracking Online Education in the United States.

nline course offerings at community colleges and universities continue to increase "Ice, 2ibson, Boston, . Belcher, $%&&4 #ui, $%&&4 7aier, $%&$4 8ach, Broughton, . ?owers, $%&&'. Shaw "$%&$' proBects that by $%$%, online courses will ma=e up over half of a studentEs course load. 7any community colleges and universities either already have or are in the process of establishing online course curriculum due to the growing acceptance of online education and student demand "#ac=ey, $%&&4 #ui, $%&$4 ;erantino . -gbehonou, $%&$'. 8ith this tremendous growth in online course offerings, the need for online instructors has also been rapidly e1panding "@orvit! . Beach, $%&&4 7aier, $%&$', and thus there is a growing need for faculty training and support for online education. Institutions of higher education are faced with assisting faculty in the transition from teaching face-to face courses to online course delivery, as well as in providing faculty with the necessary =nowledge and understanding of online teaching practices "-ragon, $%%/4 0osas . 8est, $%%>'. ;his transition includes developing the technological and andragogical s=ills necessary for successful, quality online course delivery and instruction "@orvit! . Beach, $%&&' and ultimately a paradigm shift in regard to the role of the online instructor "#in, <yer, . 2uo, $%%>4 7aier, $%&$4 Shaw $%&$'. Included in this paradigm shift is the acceptance of the validity

of online learning and the changing role of instructor toward one of a facilitator of learning rather than a distributer of =nowledge "7aier, $%&$4 Shaw, $%&$'. In an asynchronous learning environment the student is not dependent on the instructorEs personal communication of course content to gain course =nowledge, as is a student in a face-toface class. -s a facilitator of learning, online instructors assist students in their understanding of the posted course materials and engage in discussions in a manner supportive to collaborative student learning, rather than solely departing =nowledge ";aylor . 6roth, $%%>'. Facilitating learning includes providing insights and guidance to student application of course concepts and ideas, creating critical thin=ing opportunities, and developing communities of learning. 2arrisonFs "$%%%' (ommunity of Inquiry "(oI' framewor= provides an understanding of the facilitation of learning and identifies the need for instructor presence in the online classroom in the form of social, teaching, and cognitive presence to establish this role. ;he technological and andragogical s=ill set needed for faculty to successfully teach online presents new practice, theory, and methodology for online faculty to master to be able to provide teaching e1cellence in online education. ;he e1perience teaching online will vary for faculty based on their perceptions of online education, their ability to successfully deliver online course content, and the training and support they have e1perienced for teaching online. nline

faculty need to have training and ongoing support to assist with using technology to best meet student learning outcomes and to motivate faculty in their online teaching efforts. ne means of

assessing faculty ability and satisfaction with teaching online is studying faculty sense of selfefficacy in online course curriculum development, instruction, and delivery via an asynchronous, te1t-based environment . ;his will provide important insights to better understand faculty training and support needs for quality online education.

Purpose of Study: ;he purpose of this study is to e1plore whether there is a relationship between sense of self-efficacy of college faculty who teach online and the level of training for online teaching and learning they have e1perienced. Faculty who teach online at institutions of higher education throughout the U.S. will be surveyed using convenience sampling to determine whether the nature and amount of faculty training respondentsE have had impacts their sense of self-efficacy for teaching online. ;his study will provide institutions offering online courses a greater understanding of the training and support needed by online faculty in efforts to provide teaching e1cellence in online education. ;he goal of this study is to better understand levels of instructor sense of self-efficacy for teaching online in efforts to enhance the quality of online education. ;his study will address a gap in the current research regarding the relationship between faculty development and online instructor self-efficacy. It is the intent of the researcher that study findings will be used by online learning campus administrators "e.g., faculty development professionals, instructional designers, directors of online learning programs, assessment coordinators' to better train and support online faculty in teaching and learning theories and practice, which enhance student success. Furthermore, this study is intended to provide a stronger understanding of the paradigm shift necessary regarding the online instructorEs role and how to better support online instructors through this process to ensure quality online education. Research Questions: ;he research questions for this study are intended to e1plore the relationship between sense of self-efficacy for online faculty and levels of training and support they have e1perienced

to provide a better understanding of the training and support needs of online instructors and to ensure quality online courses and student success. ;herefore, this study will e1amine the following research questionsD &. Is there a relationship between the sense of self-efficacy of online college instructors and the level of training for online teaching and learning they have e1periencedG

$. 8hich faculty and institutional characteristics are reflected in highest levels of sense of selfefficacy for online instructorsG

/. Is the quantitative instrument designed to answer the above questions valid and reliableG

Independent HariablesI FactorsD &. Aears e1perience teaching online $. -mount of training e1perienced /. ;ype of institution "public, private non-profit, private for-profit'

Methodological Overvie : ;he researcher will develop a quantitative instrument to collect data on online instructor self-efficacy and will pilot the instrument in this study. ;he quantitative instrument will be designed to test online instructorEs sense of self-efficacy using BanduraEs "&>CC' theory of selfefficacy, particularly in regard to performance accomplishments. Bandura presents a model of assessing e1pectations of personal self-efficacy based on the four factors ofD &' performance accomplishments, $' vicarious e1perience, /' verbal persuasion, and 3' physiological states.' For the purposes of this study, only instructors who teach post-secondary classes in which the course content delivery and interaction with students is in a fully asynchronous online

learning environment will be selected as study participants. Study participants will be identified and selected via the use of convenience sampling and will represent faculty from a variety of institutions of higher education "e.g. community colleges, four -year institutions, public, and private'. !imitations: #imitations of this study include the e1perience level of the survey respondents, the forthrightness of respondents, and possible assumptions by the researcher due to e1perience teaching online. 8hile this study see=s to e1amine a variety of online faculty e1perience levels, faculty who have less e1perience teaching in an online learning environment may not be aware of all of the teaching resources and pra1is currently available and applicable to online learning which relate to faculty engagement. For e1ample, the researcher could encounter faculty members who teach online courses but have no understanding of online terminology, course management systems, and andragogical practices or faculty members who have e1tensive =nowledge and e1perience teaching online and are aware of different asynchronous and synchronous tools, curriculum development, and online teaching training and pra1is. @owever, understanding this variance in instructor =nowledge of online teaching pra1is is a desired outcome of this study. -n additional limitation for this study concerns the forthrightness of survey answers which relate to their professions and employment. -ll data will be collected anonymously and no specific institutional data will be as=ed, to maintain participant anonymity. ;hird, the researcher has taught online courses for over seven years. -s a result, the researcher has e1periential =nowledge about the online learning environment. ;his has produced

a variety of assumptions regarding the efficacy of online education as well as the need for a paradigm shift in the role of the online instructor. ;hese assumptions are based on the researchers e1perience and practice teaching online courses and training on online learning pra1is. -s a result of this researcher e1perience, the researcher will be cogni!ant to maintain obBectivity in the analytic process. "elimitations: <elimitations for this study include the selection of instructors only if they have online teaching e1perience in fully online courses. Study participants will be selected to participate in this study only if they have taught at least one fully online course. ;he study is being delimited to fully online classes, e1cluding Jhybrid coursesJ which are taught partially online in conBunction with on-site meetings and Jweb enhancedJ courses which use course management systems to provide web support and supplement to an on-site course. ;he reason for this delimitation is due to the focus of this study being on an e1amination of faculty self-efficacy in teaching courses in which they do not interact with students in person at all and must establish all instructor presence through a computer based medium only. "efinition of #ey $erms: ;he following terms will be used in this study and are defined as suchD %ndragogy& -ndragogy is an approach to teaching that is focused on the differences in how adults and children learn. <rawing off of educational learning theories by 5ohn <ewey and 9duard #indeman, 6nowles defined andragogy as Jthe art and science of helping adults learnJ "6nowles, &>C$, p. /$' and generally refers to learners over $+ years of age "cite'. -lso referred to as Jlearner -focused educationJ ";aylor . 6roth, $%%>'.

10

%dult !earning $heory& ;he study and practice of the idea that adults learn differently than children which is based on five =ey assumptions of adult learner learning styles and needs "6nowles, &>C$'. 'or (Profit institutions& ;wo and four year institutions of higher education providing courses based on a profit generating model. )on(Profit institutions& ;wo and four year institutions of higher education providing courses based on a not-for profit model. Online education& -s defined by the researcher, online education refers to postsecondary distance education courses delivered entirely "&%%,' through an asynchronous, computer based format using a course management systemIlearning management system as a Jsubstitute or alternative to face-to-face learningJ "U.S. <epartment of 9ducation, $%&%'. Pedagogy& ;he Jart and science of teaching childrenJ ";aylor and 6roth, $%%>'. ;his concept is generally e1tended to youth as well and includes learners up to $+ years of age "cite'. Private institutions& ?ost-secondary institutions which are not supported by state funds and are not subBect to state laws, policies and regulations. Public institutions& ?ost-secondary institutions which are supported by state funds and are subBect to state laws, policies and regulations. Quality& -s defined by the researcher in relation to online educationD 0igorous academic policy and practice in online education which supports and enhances the pursuit of =nowledge in a computer based academic environment

11

Self(efficacy& In regard to teaching this concept is defined as, "a construct that re resents teachers! confidence in their a"ility to facilitate the develo #ent of students! kno$ledge% a"ilities% and values" "Bandura, &>CC4 ;schannen-7oran, @oy . @oy, &>>) as cited in @orvit!, Beach, and -nderson, $%&&'. Outline: In (hapter $ the current research on quality concerns in online teaching and learning will be covered. ;his section will include a discussion of quality measures being developed and used in online education, as well as research on faculty development "training and support' for teaching online, online teaching and learning theories, and BanduraEs theory of self-efficacy. (hapter / will present a detailed discussion of the methodology used in this study on instructor sense of self-efficacy for teaching online. (hapter 3 will present an analysis of the instrument pilot test validity and reliability and the pilot test data using BanduraEs theory of self-efficacy. (hapter + will assess the results of the pilot survey study and the implications of using the instrument for future studies on the relationship between the use of faculty training for online instructors, instructor self-efficacy for teaching online, and quality online education.

12

09F909K(9S -=yol, L. . 2arrison, <. 0. "$%%)'. ;he development of a community of inquiry over time in an online courseD Understanding the progression and integration of social, cognitive, and teaching presence. &ournal of 'synchronous (earning )et$ork% 1* "$-/'.

-llen I., . Seaman, 5. "$%&/+ Changing Course: Ten Years of Tracking Online Education in the United States. 8ellesley 7-D Babson Survey 0esearch 2roup

-ragon, S.0., "$%%/'. (reating social presence in online environments. )e$ ,irections for 'dult and Continuing Education% 1-- "8inter, $%%/'.

Fang, B. "$%%C'. - performance-based development model for online faculty. .erfor#ance /# rove#ent% 01"+', &C-$3.

13

2arrison, <.0., -nderson, ;., . -rcher, 8. "$%%%'. (ritical inquiry in a te1t-based environmentD (omputer conferencing in higher education. /nternet and 2igher Education% *"$/', )C-&%+.

2arrison, <. 0., (leveland-Innes, 7. . Fung, ;. "$%&%'. 91ploring causal relationships among cognitive, social and teaching presenceD Student perceptions of the community of inquiry framewor=. The /nternet and 2igher Education% 13"&-$', /&-/*.

@orvit!, B. . Beach, -. "$%&&'. ?rofessional development to support online teaching. &ournal of Faculty ,evelo #ent% 4*5+$% $3-/$.

Ice, ?., 2ibson, -. 7., Boston, 8. . Belcher, <. "$%&&'. -n e1ploration of differences between community of indicators in low and high disenrollment online courses. &ournal of 'synchronous (earning )et$orks% 15"$'.

5oo, A.5., #im, 6.A. . 6im, I.6. "$%&&'. nline university studentsE satisfaction and persistenceD 91amining perceived level of presence, usefulness and ease of use as predictors in a structural model. Co# uters 6 Education% 57, &*+3-&**3.

6nowles, 7.S. "&>C$'. Innovations in teaching styles and approaches based upon adult learning. &ournal for Education of Social 8ork, 9"$', /$-/>.

#ac=ey, 6. "$%&&'. Faculty developmentD -n analysis of current and effective training strategies for preparing faculty to teach online. Online &ournal of ,istance (earning 'd#inistration, 10"3', ).

#in, @., <yer, 6., . 2uo, A. "$%%>'. 91ploring online teachingD - ;hree-year composite Bournal of concerns and strategies from online instructors. Online &ournal of ,istance (earning 'd#inistration% 9"/' M?ara 3-*N.

14

#ui, .#. "$%&&'. Student evaluation of instructionD In the new paradigm of distance education. :esearch in 2igher Education% 53, 3C&-C)*.

7aier, #. "$%&$'. 8hat are online teaching faculty telling us about building communityG Co##unity College &ournal of :esearch and .ractice, 31"&&', ))3-)>*.

7orris, ;. -. "$%&&'. 91ploring community college student perceptions of online learning. /nternational &ournal of /nstructional Technology 6 ,istance (earning% 9"*'.

?alloff, 0., . ?ratt, 6. "$%&&'. The e;cellent online instructor: Strategies for rofessional develo #ent. 5ohn 8iley . Sons, #td.

0osas, ( . 8est. 7 "$%%>'. Ouality -ssuranceD - descriptive study of online courses in higher education. In. I. 2ibson et al. "9ds.', ?roceedings of Society for Information ;echnology . ;eacher 9ducation International (onference $%%> "pp. $&%%-$&%)'.

Shae, ?.5. "$%%*'. - study of studentsE sense of community in online learning environments. &ournal of 'synchronous (earning )et$ork% 1- "&', /+-33.

Shaw, 6. "$%&$'. #eadership through instructional design in higher education. Online &ournal of ,istance (earning 'd#inistration% 7"/' "Fall $%&$'.

Swan, 6., 2arrison, <.0., . 0ichardson, 5.(. "$%%>'. - constructivist approach to online learningD the (ommunity of Inquiry framewor=. In ?ayne, (.0. "9d.' /nfor#ation technology and Constructivis# in higher education: .rogressive (earning Fra#e$orks "pp 3/-+C'. @ershey, ?-D I2I 2lobal.

;aylor, B. . 6roth, 7. "$%%>'. -ndragogyFs transition into the futureD 7eta-analysis

15

of andragogy and its search for a measurable instrument. &ournal of 'dult Education% 39"&', &&&.

;erantino, 5.7., . -gbehonou, 9. "$%&$'. (omparing faculty perceptions of an online development courseD -ddressing Faculty Keeds for nline ;eaching. Online &ournal of ,istance learning 'd#inistration% 104&&', Summer. University of 8est 2eorgia, <istance 9ducation (enter. U.S. <epartment of 9ducation "$%&%'. 9valuation of evidence-based practices in online learningD - meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. 0etrieved fromD httpDIIwww$.ed.govIrschstatIevalItechIevidence-based-practicesIfinalreport.pdf 8ach, @., Broughton, #., . ?owers, S. "$%&&'. Blending in the Bron1D ;he dimensions of hybrid course development at Bron1 community college. &ournal of 'synchronous (earning )et$orks, 15"&', )C->3.

Вам также может понравиться