Influences and Barriers to the Adoption of Instructional Technology

Abstract

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of Educational Research and Improvement EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) ® This document has been reproduced as received from the person or organization originating it. Minor changes have been made to improve reproduction quality. Points of view or opinions stated in this document do not necessarily represent official OERI position or policy. As instructional technology becomes ubiquitous in classrooms, faculty will be asked to utilize new technologies in their pedagogy. Some will accept new ways to teach with technology while others resist. What are factors that influence faculty to adopt this technology and find effective pedagogy to utilize it? The Department of Learning Resources at the State University of West Georgia asked its faculty about influences to technology adoption while creating a plan to tackle technology resistance. The resulting data showed the faculty recognized common barriers to instructional technology as well as influences that helped them overcome the barriers. Introduction Why don't we do it in the classroom? (with apologies to the Beatles) Instructional technologists have asked this question since before we knew there were instructional technologists. Audiovisual specialists and librarians were among the first to ask why faculty members don't use new technology in the classroom? What barriers exist to the integration of technology into pedagogy? The success of our faculty members in adopting technology also impacts the success of our students and ultimately our institution. As the rate of adoption of technology in higher education has increased (Green, 1996, 1998), it is apparent this reflects the explosion of information technology in business and in the home in the 1990s. In this technology age, higher education must prepare students to integrate technology in their learning if our institutions expect to continue to be viable venues for students to prepare for the workforce. If higher education does not provide these instructional technology opportunities to students, it will be a disservice to them (Gilbert & Green, 1997). Integrating technology into is a critical aspect of the adoption process (Groves & Zemel, 1999). This is supported by the 1998 National Survey of Information Technology in Higher Education (Green, 1998) that showed 33.3% of the respondents reporting that assisting faculty integrate technology 00 into instruction was the most important technology issue at their college or university (p. 1). cr) , O oA study undertaken in Spring Semester 1999, asked the full-time faculty at the State University of West Georgia (UWG) about the barriers and influences to their adoption of technology into instruction. Their answers showed that UWG instructional technology support staff had already correctly identified many factors influencing faculty adoption of technology. The data also revealed that members of the UWG faculty are increasingly adopting technology and are planning to integrate more technology into 1 of 13 2 lInT COPY AVAILABLE 4/19/00 11:45 AM As instructional technology becomes ubiq...ilize new technologies in their pedagogy http://www.mtsu.edu/-itconf/proceed00/beggs/beggs.hlin 2 of 13 instruction. The data also makes clear what faculty expect in support. Literature Michael Albright (1996) said in a keynote address to the Southern Regional Faculty and Instructional Development Consortium that so many barriers have existed in higher education to the adoption of instructional technology that faculty use of technology has been accomplished in spite of the campus environment. He notes that education may be the only business which actually discusses the existence of barriers to its employees' adoption of technology. Change in higher education has traditionally been slow. In the literature there is a reference to an anonymous quote apparently by a frustrated instructional technologist: The pace of academe is perhaps best measured by the 25 years it took to get the overhead projectors out of the bowling alley and into the classroom (in Gilbert & Green, 1997, p. 25). Until the recent past, much information about the adoption of instructional technology has mostly been anecdotal or based on case studies. However, thanks to K.C. Green's Campus Computing Project and other researchers, we have a much better view of higher education faculties and of their use of instructional technology. The survey in the UWG study is based on a previous survey by Groves and Zemel (1999) from an instrument developed by Spotts and Bowman (1995). The definition of instructional technology used in our study is one that refers to the use of technology to achieve an instructional objective (Spotts & Bowman, 1995). This technology includes computer hardware and software, networks, email, multimedia, and computer peripherals such as CD players. Traditional media such as video and audio are also defined as instructional technology. A number of factors have been identified as barriers to the adoption of instructional technology. The fear of failure in using the technology is a factor that has been cited as an initial barrier (Hannafin & Savenye, 1993). While faculty members are experts in their content area, they are not experts in the use of technology. The fear that they will not be able to use the technology well in front of their students and colleagues is strong (Armstrong, 1996). Faculty also are afraid that technology will be difficult to use (Byron, 1995). When it is difficult to use, then faculty have problems and often refuse to use it again (Albright, 1996). Availability of support staff when problems occur is an important factor for faculty using technology (Nantz & Lundgren, 1998). As technology becomes more user friendly, this becomes less of an issue. But as instructors first use instructional technology, the friendly, helping hand of support staff can make the experience easier. Other anxieties that faculty face with technology are the devaluation of their profession and the possible elimination of their job (Novek, 1996). As distance learning and computer based become more popular, some faculty may wonder if the role of the traditional campus is threatened (Oblinger & Rush, 1997). Faculty also worry that technologies may alienate students and diminish communication and other social skills. Whether the use of instructional technology in the classroom is effective for teaching is also an issue which faculty consider critical (Byron, 1995). Faculty question whether students' performance will be improved with the use of technology. Research has shown that it is not the technology itself but how the