Integrating Technology into Higher Education
1.1 Problem
The business of higher education is becoming more competitive. Online technology is gaining enormous popularity in today’s higher educational milieu and has become part of most school and university’s education system. One mode of instruction that has grown in popularity is the hybrid mode of instruction. Hybrid courses integrate a combination of classroom and online activities. Most blended courses replace 25% to 50% of classroom time with online activities, allowing active learning and flexible scheduling while maintaining the face-to-face contact characteristic of the traditional classroom (Rochester Institute of Technology, 2004).
1.2 Rationale for the Problem
According to Sinha (2011), online technology is the incorporation of the Internet and other information technologies into the learning experience to help support and enhance the learning process. Most importantly, as the popularity for online technology grows, so does the need for teachers to utilize online technology in the classroom. Smith (2007) affirmed that teaching today’s technology driven students will requires the utilization of online technology in the classroom to keep students’ attention focused and to communicate with them in ways that are comfortable and engaging to them.
According to Lowerison, Sclater, Schmid, and Abrami (2006), online technology is growing tremendously and is changing the way instruction is delivered across the United States, especially in terms of classroom instruction. Subsequently, this exponential growing pace of online technology is forcing classroom teachers to become technology experts or technology literate overnight (Allen & Seaman, 2008). Many classroom teachers are not able to keep up with this demand and believe that the incorporation of online technology into the learning process is difficult and time consuming (Kotrlik & Redmann, 2009).
1.3 Terms
1.3.1. Hybrid courses. Hybrid courses integrate a combination of classroom and online activities. Most hybrid courses replace 25% to 50% of classroom time with online activities, allowing active learning and flexible scheduling while maintaining the face-to-face contact characteristic of the traditional classroom (Rochester Institute of Technology, 2004.).
1.3.2. Direct Instruction. The term used to categorize the educational activities that are credit bearing, which may be a part of a student’s degree plan. Direct instruction is a general term for the explicit teaching of a skill-set using lectures or demonstrations of the material, rather than exploratory models such as inquirybased learning (Kim & Axelrod, 2005).
1.3.3. Online Courses. Educational programs taught asynchronously and at a distance allowing an innovative approach to both technology and pedagogy (Tallent-
Runnels, Thomas, Lan, Cooper, Ahern, Shaw, & Liu 2006).
1.4 Significance
The importance of information technology in education cannot be ignored. With educational technologies, it has become easier for the instructors to provide knowledge and the students to grasp it (Lee, & Soutar, 2009). Across the world, Computer-assisted Instruction has become the preferred way of educating many people on a variety of subjects. Subjects ranging from learning a new language to basic skills testing are now taught using computers. According to the KAlliance (2001), many corporations utilize e-learning modules as a method of training employees. Because individuals can access the programs at home and at the office, the employees can train in an environment that allows them to learn at their own pace (KAlliance). For example, Microsoft has engaged in a training program that allows novice users to enhance their computer skills through online tutorials. In this manner, a person can learn what aspects of a particular program interest them (KAlliance). As Dalton (2007) asserted, there is a continual need for education and development of computer online training. Dalton stated that online training is not only convenient and flexible, but it is 90% cheaper than an instructor-led course. The content is clear and concise, and the courses require the user to interact with information that is relevant and more thorough than simply relying on a manual, which might not have current information on the subject. To understand and analyze the hybrid course model, this study will be able to contribute to the myriad of studies highlighting the importance of information technologies in the classroom, the role of faculty in implementing such mode of instruction, and the barriers that have yet to be resolved.
1.5 Problem Statement
Although most of the studies conclude that IT has a positive impact on the student’s success and achievement, they varied on the level of this impact (Cavanaugh, 1999; Christmann & Badgett, 1999; Lee, & Soutar, 2009; Schacter & Fagnano, 1999). The majority of the studies showed a moderate direct positive relationship between IT and student achievement. In addition, Allen and Seaman (2008) noted that teachers are finding the utilization of online technology in the classroom to be an unreasonable request and that the demand to keep up with the everchanging pace of online technology is becoming almost impossible. Also, many educators are becoming less familiar and less comfortable with technology than their students and are struggling to seamlessly integrate a growing list of technology tools into their regular curriculum (Carnevale, 2007; Columbaro & Monaghan, 2009). In light of these concerns, there is a need to analyze the hybrid course delivery model and its use of innovative technology solutions and how it has helped universities remain competitive in terms of achieving success with students, faculty, and school administration.
1.6 Brief Literature Review
Benefits of Utilizing Online Technology in the Classroom
Christmann and Badgett (1999) compared science students who were exposed to traditional methodology with those who received traditional methodology supplemented with computer-assisted instruction (CAI). The study showed that on the average, students receiving traditional instruction supplemented with CAI attained higher academic achievement than those receiving only traditional instruction. The study also reported that CAI has a bigger effect on student achievement in urban areas than suburban areas, and in suburban areas than rural areas.
Cavanaugh (1999) studied the impact of interactive distance education using videoconferencing and telecommunications on the academic achievement of K-12 students. The study included 929 student participants and analyzed across sample characteristics, study methods, learning environment, learner attributes, and technological characteristics. Cavanaugh found that technology plays an important role in distance education but he emphasized that the students who were typically successful in online learning were those who had independent orientations towards learning, and who had strong time management, literacy, and technology
skills.
By reviewing other studies, Schacter and Fagnano (1999) confirm the claim that technology can make the learning process easier, more efficient and motivating, but they argue that this should not be the reason why technology should be utilized in education. Their study reported that when technology utilized and implemented in education, it needs to be designed according to sound learning theories and pedagogy. “When administrators, teachers, and parents understand that different computer technologies serve and augment different learning experiences, they can make informed judgments about which technologies are best suited to enhance student learning and achievement” (Schacter & Fagnano, 1999, p.335).
Another study that confirmed the positive impact of technology on academic achievement was the report by the National School Board Association (NSBA, 2000) which stated that based on the different everyday experiences of educators, students, and their families, when properly used, technology can enhance the achievement of most students, increase families’ involvement in their children’s schooling, improve teachers’ skills and knowledge, and improve school administration and management.
Some of the studies also analyzed the effect technology has on the teachers’ professional development. Christmann and Badgett (1999), Schacter and Fagnano (1999) and Reeves (1998) concluded that for the technology to impact the educator professionally, the type of technology needs to be pertinent to the teacher specialty, the educator should get the needed training to use the technology and the technology should always be available for the teachers to be used in their own practice.
According to Scagnoli, Buki, and Johnson (2009) the integration of online technologies in educational practice will provides new opportunities for teaching and learning. Online technology is a powerful resource for online teaching and course development, which have the ability to enhance teaching and learning while bringing together expert teachers and scholars who will be able to assess technology’s impact on traditional, hybrid, or blended courses (Dunn, 2011). According to Allen and Seaman (2008) over 20% of all students in a higher education institution took at least one online course in 2006 and this is projected to continue to increase over time. These findings have the potential to inform innovations in faculty training and development and to promote further research in this area. Relatively few studies have focused on teaching outcomes and the effect of the online technology on higher education faculty members.
Cummins et al wrote “the failure to realize the educational potential of technology has much more to do with pedagogy than with technology itself” [emphasis in original] (p. 91). The dominant pedagogy of the classroom, they wrote, is structured towards a rigid environment of accountability and standardization, which has a chilling effect on introducing new content or new tools to deliver new content. “The accountability mandates of adequate yearly progress (AYP) and high-stakes testing have resulted in a pedagogical focus on teaching to the test in many schools serving low-income and minority students,” the authors wrote.
Because drill-and-practice transmission pedagogy predominates in these schools, computer use tends to conform to the same orientation. In this context, imaginative inquiry-focused teaching, with or without technology, is frequently considered ‘off-task.’ Consequently, the potential power of technology is only rarely and minimally harnessed in these school contexts (p. 91).
Teachers, Cummings et al. (2007) continued, would be willing to use ICT if it delivered what its advocates promised, but teachers don’t have the flexibility to incorporate ICT in the classrooms in a way that compliments the existing curriculum. To be effective as a teaching tool, ICT needs to be “harnessed” in the classroom by facilitating students’ creative development (p. 91). The authors quoted research on “low-income students” and noted that the research shows that “low-income students are very much capable of using technological resources to collaborative critical inquiry when they are given opportunities in school or out of school to do so,” and it must be assumed that:
“the ways in which technology is likely to be used in any school context are intimately connected to the pedagogical orientations operating in the school and the associated image of the student that is constructed in these pedagogical interactions” (pp. 91 – 92).
The second element of the preceding citation is of particular interest, as teachers’ expectations of students might play a role in how they deliver technology to their students.
Disadvantages of not Utilizing Online Technology in the Classroom
Researchers have reported that today’s educational surroundings are being transformed by online technologies that open new venues for teaching and make education reachable far beyond the traditional classroom environment (Dominguez, Mcminn, & Moon 2009). As a result, the latest survey conducted by the Sloan Foundation, reported that over two-thirds of higher education institutions were offering a variety of online courses and programs. Observations at a specific urban university in the mid-west, shows vast variation in terms of faculty who choose to utilize online instructional technologies and a significant lag in desired online development
(Osika, Johnson, & Buteau, 2009).
Research reveals that educators use technologies for personal and communicative purposes, but teachers, for the most part, have not yet applied these technologies in their classroom teaching and learning (McVee, Bailey, & Shanahan, 2008). According to Liu, Theodore and Lavelle (2011), despite the increases in resources and training opportunities, several factors still affect teachers’ use of computers and the Internet. The first factor is years of teaching experience. Although expert teachers demonstrated the empowerment that students feel when they create a product or master the art of computer use, novice teachers undermined this empowerment with tension. Novice teachers were concerned that the elementary students could harm the expensive and sensitive computers and at times were more preoccupied with feelings of dread and stress than with motivation to teach (Meskill et al., 2000). This supports the finding in Education Week (1999) that indicated expert teachers were careful to integrate technology to enhance and complement the curricula, while inexperienced teachers use computers a method of punishment and reward. Novice teachers would allow students to use computers to reward cooperative behavior and deny them use as punishment for misbehaving (as cited in Meskill et al., 2002). Experienced teachers took the opposite approach taking every opportunity to improve and complement the language potential of working on a computer.
Nevertheless, all three groups of participant teachers found that the computer was motivational and praised it for being so. Yet each group found motivation in different areas. For instance, the novice group found the “locus of motivation lying solely with the machine and, as such, being a one-time ‘product’ of interaction…” (Meskill et al., 2002, p. 52). Expert instructors found the motivational aspect of computer use to be related to the process of student learning and how the student experience was enhanced.
Meskill et al. (2002) posited that teachers need to seize opportunities to enact, support and observe learning in complex classrooms that may be using computers or other technologies.
Teaching extends beyond the matters of curriculum and envelope a larger concept of knowledge. New teacher preoccupation with new technologies can undermine their transformation from novice to expert. Colleges and universities that train today’s teachers must acknowledge the experience of most new teachers and professional development and assessment courses regarding technology so new teachers will be ready for such encounters in a real world classroom. However, the novice teachers who participated in the research had been educated in the use of technology in the classroom, but not in the conceptual starting and end points regarding tension, empowerment, and external factors not related to the machine itself, but rather to the perception of the novice teacher.
In a research carried out by Fish and Gill (2009), the authors reported that despite the benefits of online teaching, many university faculty members are still gravitating toward traditional instructional practices that are most comfortable to them. Fish and Gill asked faculty to rate their comfort levels and training towards online technology, as well as their perceptions pertaining to student learning outcomes and the delivery of academic tasks being taught with online technology. The study findings revealed that the teaching and learning outcomes are strongly influenced by the teacher’s ability to utilize online technology into the teaching process. Teachers who had positive online technology experiences felt the teaching and learning outcomes were important to traditional classrooms while those who had never taught with online technology, or had previously negative experiences, did not feel that online technology improved learning outcomes.
This indicates that educators should encourage environments that promote problemsolving that increase learning, multimodal redesign of texts, and technology as transactional processes. The critical component of the fast growing pace of technology-based education has increased the need for more faculty members to utilize online technology in the classroom.
Faculty Experiences and Interactions with Online Technology
When instructors perceive that they can contribute to positive student outcomes, they become more satisfied. This happens for those students who have had the opportunities to access these courses, as the instructors highly value that they are able to continue their formal education. The faculty members are satisfied with the opportunities for high-quality student-toteacher interaction through online courses as the students can be richer and deeper as they are given more time to think and reflect rather than the traditional institution. However, others see a challenge with the lack of face-to-face contact and group interaction. There may also be cases of isolation that would in turn affect their levels of participation. The expectations of online availability can also be unrealistic and could irritate and discourage online instructors as they are made available on a 24 hours a day, 7 days a week basis. Visual cues are scarce, so name recognition and the development of personal relationships is also limited (Wasilik & Bollinger, 2009).
The flexibility and accessibility of the online environment make it more enjoyable for faculty members. The online delivery helps them in their opportunities for growth in both personal and professional aspects. They are able to acquire new knowledge and skills with the introduction of new technologies or instructional strategies. Online teaching also presents the faculty additional opportunities for research and interdisciplinary collaborations with colleagues.
However, involvement in instructional design and development can be limited as they would just conform to standards. This would also be dependent on their attitudes (Wasilik & Bollinger, 2009).
The institutional support and value for online teaching also affects the level of faculty satisfaction. While this may usually require more time and effort for class preparation and delivery, the faculty members are dissatisfied with the increase in workload associated with online teaching and if compensation and reward systems are not adjusted accordingly. Thus, professional development support in online instruction and design has a positive impact on faculty satisfaction. As they provide adequate levels of instructional design and development support to instructors, they become more satisfied with online teaching. However, technical difficulties and inadequate technical support affect this satisfaction negatively. It is important to assist instructors and students with troubleshooting issues, as to keep satisfaction at a high level. Quality control should be exercised on the quality of courses and the student evaluations, as these tend to be lower and affect the promotion and tenure decisions. The institution should provide these online instructors assurance that proper policies for online teaching and learning are implemented. Intellectual property issues should also be the same as the traditional way of teaching- with rights for course content developed or be given appropriate compensation (Wasilik & Bollinger, 2009). In a study conducted by Sutton, White, Mbizo, and Stewart (2010), the authors explore the effectiveness of faculty experience with online technology in order to improve faculty and student engagement with online technology in the classroom. This literature confirmed the notion that online technology is a useful tool in the classroom, both as a resource for teachers and as a learning tool for students.
Teacher’s acceptance and efficacy of new technology is very important. Without teacher’s acceptance and willingness, institutions are unable to implement any e-learning system in educational institutions (Waheed & Jam, 2010). Personal experience with online technology also plays a role in the barriers affecting teacher utilization of online technology in the classroom. The success for any technology initiative relies on a critical and core resource, namely having participating faculty who provide quality instruction. Research is important to the barriers affecting teacher utilization of online technology in the classroom because teachers technology use, attitudes toward technology, and their adoption plays an important role in their willingness to integrate online technology in higher educational opportunities (Tabata & Johnsrud, 2008).
In the past 20 years, substantial investments have been made in educational technology that reveal that teaching is more likely to occur when prospective teachers are exposed to a variety of computer uses in the majority of their courses (Koch, 2010). A survey of recent graduates at Arizona State University West (ASUW) supports this finding. In the 1990s, graduates of ASUW reported that they generally felt unprepared to integrate technology into their teaching, and they experienced few models of technology integration in their methods courses (Wetzel, Zambo, Buss, & Arbaugh, 1996). These survey results led two ASUW teacher education professors to integrate technology in a BLE and an ESL elementary language arts course and to ensure that education majors would visit elementary school sites where they could see and participate in appropriate models of technology integration in their practicum experiences. Follow-up research at ASUW shows that the university’s decision to implement a program that “directly impacts field placements for pre-service teachers” as “pre-service teachers are paired with in-service mentor teachers for training in technology integration just prior to and during their practicum semester” (Beckett, Marquez-Chisholm, & Wetzel, 2003; p. 81). The program has had positive results in helping pre-service teachers learn not only how computers and IT can be utilized in the classroom but also to help the pre-service teachers learn teaching methods that allow them to use computers and IT as effective tools for the LEP/ESL classroom (Becket et al, 2003).
The information from the ASUW study corresponds to information about teaching partnerships between experienced and novice teachers, as novice teachers often turn to experienced teachers for advice on classroom design, adapting curricula, and teaching approaches regarding technology. This prompted Meskill, Mossop, Diangelo, and Pasquale (2002) to conduct a study that compared and contrasted the interactions regarding technology between the inexperienced and expert teachers of Kindergarten through eighth grade language and literacy (ESOL) classes. The study served to demonstrate the differences between those who have adapted various technologies for use as a powerful learning and teaching tool and others find it to be difficult and burdensome. It was also found that partnering a novice teacher with a teacher who believed computers and IT to be useful tools in developing a strong curriculum to assist LEP/ESL students helped the novice teacher appreciate the use of these tools in his or her own classroom.
Hybrid courses
In hybrid courses, online technologies can be adapted into learning process to assist in creating enriched learning environments for both the teachers and the students. For example, many courses today involve some level of team or group project work. Conferencing on the Web can provide live presentations and discussions that will enhance student learning and force active participation by each student. Live presentations incorporate both verbal and non-verbal communication forms (Singh, Managalaraj, & Taneja, 2011).
Web-based Simulations and role-playing techniques are effective teaching methods that supplement lecture based learning in the classroom. Collaborative document-management system and many others web-based systems allow for the creation and maintenance of documents on the Web in a collaborative way. They have many advantages over traditional personal-productivity tools such as word processors and spreadsheets (Singh, Managalaraj, & Taneja, 2011).
According to Beer and Burrows (2007), the potential of Web 2.0 technologies is yet to explored. Although many are seeing the advantages that these technologies bring, more benefits could be gleaned. The researchers claimed that these technologies could rework hierarchies, change social divisions, create possibilities and opportunities, as well as regulate individuals’ relations with objects, spaces as well as with each other. Web 2.0 technologies range from social networking sites (SNS), video sharing sites, wikis, blogs, collaborative tagging or social indexing where users are the producers, the consumers of web content or both. Currently, research on SNS has earned considerable attention (Boyd2007a; Boyd and Ellison 2007; Thelwall 2008). Nowhere is a thing more effective than in the course of teaching and learning. Social networking sites (SNS), video sharing sites, blogs, wikis—these are examples of Web 2.0 technologies. Its increasing number of users is highly involved in generating web content, and also getting trough it. Right now, explorations on these SNS has gained the most enthusiasm (Boyd, 2007; Boyd and
Edison, 2007; Thelwall, 2008).
Santiago (2002) mentioned a list of precautions when preparing for online teaching. They include clearly specifying instructions for students, ensuring accuracy of materials, finding effective pedagogical approaches, providing examples, and including feedback and practice exercise. Before going through online teaching, new faculty members to this type of approach should seek advice from experienced colleagues and also from technical support people to ensure quality of service and success.
Dolan (2008) compared the efficacy of online teaching to that of classroom-based instruction. Though the study illustrated the fundamental differences in how the education is delivered, it illustrated that educational success can be influenced by a multitude of variables. Variables such as the ability, interests and motivation of both the faculty and students, have little or no impact on the efficacy of the educational model between traditional and online educational programs.
This research illustrated that online programs resulted in slightly higher test scores and student satisfaction than the traditional classroom. Dolan attributed this difference to the flexibility of online programs, allowing students to engage in their courses at a time and place conducive to their specific needs. In contrast, Fabry (2009) reviewed the obstacles to effective online course design. Fabry’s research reflected on the issues and challenges of converting the traditional classroom-based course to meet the needs of online education. The results of the study illustrated that when faculty design online courses using predefined educational shells, such as Blackboard, courses do not align well with the anticipated learning outcomes. However, when courses are designed from their inception as online courses, the classes significantly engage the learners and avail the students opportunity to succeed. The research suggests that online education has unique traits that traditional classes do not possess and therefore need to be designed with online pedagogy in mind.
In the research conducted by Tang (2007) a qualitative research study was conducted describing the advantages of electronic modes of education. This research compared traditional classroom education with that of online and blended educational programs. From the faculty’s perspective, the research illustrated that blended learning offered improved faculty support in the delivery of the class material. Blended learning offered faculty an improved method to offer tutoring to their students and allowed faculty the ability to easily share their educational materials.
Adult Learning Theory
Knowles (1980; Knowles et al., 2005) suggested that adults have learning needs that are distinct from those of growing children. His theory of adult learning, which he termed andragogy is different from pedagogy, the traditional method of educating children, and addresses the following six attributes of the mature student: (a) the student’s need to know, (b) the student’s self-concept, (c) prior experience, (d) readiness to learn, (e) orientation to learning, and (f) motivation. The theory assumes that mature students participate in educational environments in order to satisfy an existing need. Moreover, adult learners have a wide variety of prior experience that will influence their learning. According to the adult learning theory, the instructor should acknowledge the needs and accumulated learning of the adult pupil and implement a collaborative classroom in which the instructor and student learn from one another.
Identifying which attributes individual learners possess will assist in determining their readiness for adult instructional strategies. Because many adults received a pedagogical education when they were young, it may be essential to introduce them to adult learning styles. A critical element in adult learning is a student’s earlier experience. Mature learners have a wide range of experience that they can refer to and share with their classmates when participating in training activities.
In this regard, it should not be assumed that a learner has no pertinent experience that can be applied to a particular subject. In fact, ignoring learner knowledge may cause resistance to learning. Therefore, the teacher must acknowledge the degree of prior experience mature learners bring to a training session. Moreover, prior learning is related to a student’s self-concept, another important element of the adult learning theory. Adult students depend on their prior learning when making decisions. For this reason, it may be difficult for them to recognize that an instructor has something to teach them. After all, they may have been making decisions successfully in their jobs every day based on their own knowledge. As opposed to the traditional role of the instructor to transmit knowledge (Knowles, 1980), in the adult learning theory, the role of the instructor is to facilitate learning rather than manage the process. The instructor collaborates with students to convert the subject matter into education that will be meaningful for the students.
The last element of the adult learning theory is orientation to learning. This variable is related to the learner’s need for examples or simulations that resemble real-world applications. Hands-on, relevant examples are more significant and facilitate instant application to real-life situations when learners are on the job. In the present case, illustrating how a lesson plan relates to effective teaching in the classroom via simulation might clarify the best way to present information from a lesson plan while using efficient time management (Barkley et al., 2004).
1.7 Implications
The literature review reveals the importance of online technology use in higher education settings, which can be useful in the discussions of teaching online courses as well as curriculum development. In a critique of current pedagogical theory and its effects on teachers’ reluctance to promote ICT, Cummins, Brown, and Sayers (2007) identified that teachers might be resistant to ICT in schools because teachers have long been told that increasing the prevalence of technology in the classroom will result in direct positive gains among students. The authors explored a persistent myth of technology in education – that more computers in more classrooms results in real academic gains for all students – and how the pervasiveness of this myth has caused some educators to see investing in ICT as a waste of limited resources. This comprehensive study of hybrid courses will contribute more to these questions and reveal both the benefits and barriers to conducting and implementing an effective hybrid course.
1.8 Summary
The literature discussing modes of instruction in higher education, i.e. hyrbrid courses revealed themes of access, faculty satisfaction and efficacy of the online educational model. According to the research done by Santiago (2002), “When a faculty member decides to use online technology for teaching, support is sought in various ways: self-study/self-help, attending workshops, reading reports and publications, interviewing or listening to an experienced colleague, or going to the faculty development center” (p. 1382). An important task to be prepared for when shifting from the tradition classroom method of teaching to a new environment is to address the right issues. In order to do this, a faculty member must know the campus culture and campus factors that may be a hindrance to the chosen method of teaching
(Santiago, 2002). For best practices and things to avoid, research is still the best solution for this.
Checking online advises on how to smoothly go about online teaching would help faculty members in knowing what to do in order to be successful. Thus, the importance of this current study being designed.
References
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2007). Online nation: Five years of growth in online learning. Needham, MA: Sloan-C. Retrieved from http://www.sloan-consortium.org/ publications/survey/pdf/online_nationa.pdf
Barkley, E., Cross, K.P., & Major, C.H. (2004). Collaborative learning techniques: A handbook for college faculty. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Beckett, E.C., Marquez-Chisholm, I., & Wetzel, K., (2003). Preparing technology-competent teachers: a strategy for multicultural schools. Technological Horizons in Education,
30(3). 81-84.
Beer, D., and R. Burrows. (2007). Sociology and, of and in Web 2.0: Some initial considerations.
Sociological Research Online 12(5) article 17. http://www.socresonline.org.uk/12/5/17.html
Carnevale, D. (2007). Employers often distrust online degrees: Some say they prefer job applicants who earned diplomas the old-fashioned way. The Chronicle of Higher
Education, 53(18), A28.
Christmann, E. & Badgett, J. (1999). A Comparative analysis of the effects of computer-assisted instruction on student achievement in differing science and demographical areas. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 18 (2), 135-143.
Columbaro, N. L. & Monaghan, C. H. (2009, Spring). Employer perceptions of online degrees:
A literature review [Electronic version]. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 12(1). Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/spring121/columbaro121.html Cummins, J., Brown, K., & Sayers, D., (2007). Literacy, technology, and diversity: Teaching for success in changing times. Boston, MA: Pearson.
Curran, C. (2008). Online learning and the university. In W. J. Bramble & S. Panda (Eds.), Economics of distance and online learning: Theory, practice, and research (pp.26-51).
New York: Routledge.
Dominguez, A. W., Mcminn, M. R., & Moon, G. W. (2009). Teaching integration outside the traditional classroom. Journal of Psychology & Theology, 37(1), 48-53.
Dunn, D.S. (2011). Best practices for technology-enhanced teaching and learning: Connecting to psychology and the social sciences. New York: Oxford University Press.
Fish, W. W., & Gill, P. B. (2009). Perceptions of online instruction. Turkish Online Journal of
Educational Technology, 8(1), 53-64.
Kim, T., & Axelrod, S. (2005). Direct instruction: An educators’ guide and a plea for action.
. The Behavior Analyst Today, 6(2), 111-123.
Koch, A. S. (2010). Teacher education and technology integration: How do preservice teachers perceive their readiness to infuse technology in the learning environment? (Doctoral dissertation). (2010-99090-239)
Liu, Y., Theodore, P., & Lavelle, E. (2011). Experimental effects of online instruction on teacher’s concerns about technology integration. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning.
Lowerison, G., Sclater, J., Schmid, R. F., & Abrami, P. C. (2006). Are we using technology for learning? Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 34(4), 401.
McVee, M.B., Bailey, N.M., & Shanahan, L.E. (2008). Teachers and teacher educators learning new literacies and new technologies. Teacher Education 19(3), 197-210.
Meskill, C., Mossop, J., Diangelo, S., Pasquale, R.K. (2002). Expert and novice teachers talking technology: Precepts, concepts, and misconcepts. Language, Learning & Technology,
6(3), 46-65.
Osika, E. R., Johnson, R. Y., & Buteau, R. (2009). Factors influencing faculty use of technology in online instruction: A case study. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration,
12(1), 7-7.
Rochester Institute of Technology. (2004.). Blended learning pilot project. Retrieved from https://ritdml.rit.edu/…/BL%20Pilot%20Final%20Report%2003-04.
Scagnoli, N. I., Buki, L. P., & Johnson, S. D. (2009). The influence of online teaching on faceto-face teaching practices. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 13(2), 115-128.
Schram, T. H. (2006) Conceptualizing and proposing qualitative research. Upper Saddle
River, N.J.: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.
Schuster, J., Finkelstein, M., & University of California, B. (2007). On the brink: Assessing the status of the American faculty. Research & Occasional Paper Series: CSHE.3.07. Center for Studies in Higher Education, retrieved from ERIC database.
Singh, A., Mangalaraj, G., & Taneja, A. (2011). Bolstering teaching through online tools.
Journal of Information Systems Education, 21(3), 299 – 311.
Sinha, S. (2011). Why educational technology? Educational Technology Insight.
Smith, M. F. (2007). Academic freedom and higher education employees. National Education
Association Update, 11(4), 1-8.
Tallent-Runnels, M., Thomas, J., Lan, W., Cooper, S., Ahern, T., Shaw, S., & Liu, X. (2006, Spring). Teaching course online: A review of the research. Review of
Educational Research, 76(1), 93-135.
Wetzel, K., Zambo, R., Buss, R., & Arbaugh, N. (1996). Innovations in integrating technology into student teaching experiences. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 29(2), 196-214.
Whitehead, B. (2005). Educational technology allows for flexibility in learning and teaching.
Educational Technology