Engineering College Lecturers Reluctance to Adopt Online Courses

David Pundak 1 , Yoav Dvir 2  and Jordan Valley 3
  • 1 Kinneret College, ORT Braude College
  • 2 Kinneret College
  • 3 Israel 15132, Department of Mathematics, Ohalo College of Education, Katzrin, 12900, Israel

Abstract

The paper investigates difficulties involved in integrating online courses in academic colleges. Despite their growing prevalence in Israel and worldwide there are still no online courses offered as part of the learning process in many colleges. In order to identify factors for this phenomenon, a study was conducted to investigate the attitudes of 137 lecturers in an academic college concerning online courses. A questionnaire was employed to examine attitudes in four areas: cognizance of the online courses, willingness to teach these courses, influence of online courses on the college’s reputation and teaching methods in online courses. The study identified four sources of reluctance among college instructors to teach in these courses: lack of knowledge concerning teaching methods, fear of a heavy work burden, concern that students’ achievements might fall and impairment of the college’s reputation. Since there is desire to integrate online courses in academic colleges, it is recommended that an online pedagogy support centre should be opened in these colleges, and that colleges should consider making it mandatory for students to take at least one compulsory online course during their degree course.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • 1. Allen I.E. and Seaman, J. (2013). Changing course: Ten years of tracking online education in the United States. Babson Survey Research Group, MA: Sloan Consortium. Retrieved from http://www.onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports/changingcourse.pdf

  • 2. Allen I.E. and Seaman, J. (2014). Grade change tracking online education in the United States. Babson Survey Research Group, MA: Sloan Consortium. Retrieved from http://www.onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports/gradechange.pdf

  • 3. Berge, Z.L. (1998). Barriers to online teaching in post-secondary institutions: Can policy changes fix it? In Online Journal of Distance Education Administration, 1(2). Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/berge12.html

  • 4. Birch, D.P. and Burnett, B.M. (2008). Interactive multimodal technology mediated distance education courses: The academic’s perspective. In Japanese Journal of Educational Media Research, 15(1), (pp. 43-60).

  • 5. Chapman, D. and Nicolet, T. (2003). Using the project approach to online course development. In The Technology Source, March/April 2003. Retrieved March 10, 2013 from http://technologysource.org/article/using_the_project_approach_to_online_course_development/

  • 6. Cohen, A.; Shmueli, E. and Nachmias, R. (2011). The Usage of Data Repositories: The Case MAOR. In Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Object, 7. Retrieved from: http://www.ijello.org/Volume7/IJELLOv7p323-338Cohen762.pdf

  • 7. Dooley, K.E. (1999). Towards a holistic model for the diffusion of educational technologies: An integrative review of the educational innovation studies. In Educational Technology and Society 2(4), (pp. 35-45).

  • 8. Hall, G.E.; Wallace, R.C. and Dossett, W.A. (1973). A developmental conceptualization of the adoption process within educational institutions. Austin Research and Development Center for Teacher Education: University of Texas at Austin.

  • 9. Hawkes, M. and Coldeway, D.O. (2002). An analysis of team vs. faculty-based online course development, implications for instructional design. In Quarterly Review of distance Education, 3(4), (pp. 431-441).

  • 10. Hixon, E. (2008). Team-based online course development: A case study of collaboration models online. In Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 11(4). Retrieved Mach 10, 2013 from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/winter114/hixon114.html

  • 11. Holsombach-Ebner, C. (2013). Quality assurance in large scale online course production. In Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 16(2). Retrieved October 11, 2013. Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/winter164/holsombach-ebner164.html

  • 12. Jaggars, S.S. and Bailey, T (2010). Effectiveness of fully online courses for college students: response to a department of education meta-analysis. Community College Research Center Teachers College, Columbia University. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED512274.pdf

  • 13. Jahng, N.; Krug, D. and Zhang, Z. (2007). Student achievement in the online distance education compared to face-to-face education. In European Journal of Open, Distance and ELearning, 10(1). Retrieved from http://www.eurodl.org/index.php?p=archives&year=2007&halfyear=1&article=253

  • 14. Kampov-Polevoi, J. (2010). Considerations for supporting faculty in transitioning a course to online format. In Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 13(2). Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/summer132/kampov_polevoi132.html

  • 15. Kop, R. (2011). The challenge to connectivist learning on open online networks: learning experience during a massive open online course. In The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(3). Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/882/1689

  • 16. Liu, X.; Bonk, C.J.; Magjuka, R.J.; Lee, S.; Su, B. (2005). Exploring four dimensions of online instructor roles: A program level case study. In Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 9(4). Retrieved from http://sloanconsortium.org/jaln/v9n4/exploring-four-dimensions-onlineinstructor-roles-program-level-case-study

  • 17. Parthasarathy, M. and Smith, M.A. (2009). Valuing the institution: An expanded list of factors influencing faculty adoption of online education. In Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 11(4). Retrieved Mach 10, 2013 from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/summer122/parthasarathy122.html

  • 18. Phipps, R. and Merisotis, J. (1999). What’s the difference? A review of contemporary research on the effectiveness of distance learning in higher education. Washington, DC: Institute for Higher Education Policy.

  • 19. Rogers, E. (2003). Diffusion of innovation (5th Ed). Free Press, New York.

  • 20. Schifter, C.C. (2000). Faculty participation in Asynchronous Learning Networks: A case study of motivating and inhibiting factors. In Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 4(1), (pp. 15-22).

  • 21. Schonfeld, R.C. and Housewright, R. (2010). Faculty survey 2009: Key strategic insights for libraries, publishers, and societies. Ithaka S+R, 2010. Retrieved from http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/communia2010/sites/communia2010/images/Faculty_Study_2009.pdf

  • 22. Shea, P.; Pickett, A. and Pelz, W. (2003). A follow-up study of teaching presence in the online program. In Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(2), (pp. 61-80).

  • 23. Sitzmann, T.; Kraiger, K.; Stewart, D. and Wisher, R. (2006). The comparative effectiveness of web-based and classroom instruction: A meta-analysis. In Personnel Psychology, 59(3), (pp. 623-664).

OPEN ACCESS

Journal + Issues

Search