Faculty Uses of Computers: Fears, Facts and Perceptions

Abstract

Higher education spent billions of dollars on computer equipment' during the 1980s. Unfortunately, current studies indicate that the use of computers for instructional purposes has not yet hit the mainstream of university education. Some researchers emphasized the importance of organizational factors, such as costs of implementation and incentives for faculty in form of money, release time and promotions as the most important variables in the success of computer-based instruction.(1,2,3) Others considered student and faculty attitudes in their studies.(4,5) In addition, faculty characteristics such as an instructors' age, length of service, gender and the technology orientation of their discipline have also been considered.(6,7) These variables of personal attributes, organizational factors and attitudinal elements are usually considered separately, but it is certainly plausible that they interrelate. Thus, we conducted our own study to determine the requirements for faculty adoption of computers for instruction. The goal was to identify those factors that demand the most attention from educators and administrators attempting to implement widespread adoption. Findings indicate that the technical orientation of the faculty's discipline, plus their computer sell-efficacy, utility beliefs and general attitude toward computers are the significant predictors of adoption. The findings are discussed in terms of the need for training to raise the confidence of faculty members in their use of computers. Asking the Right Questions The question is not Why aren't computers widely used for The question is What kind of instructors use computers for To explore these questions, our study examined the differences between faculty who were adopters of computers for instruction and those who were non-adopters. The following questions were posed: * To what extent are faculty using computers in their instructional activities? * Do the personal attributes of discipline, rank, research commitment and gender relate to faculty's level of adoption of computers for instruction? * Do organizational factors such as instructional policy, incentives, technical support and staff development affect faculty adoption of computers in their instructional activities? * Do attitudinal factors: computer selfefficacy, computer utility beliefs and general attitudes toward computers, affect the adoption of computers for instruction? * Findings of Study A survey was designed to obtain data on instructional computing activities, personal attributes, organizational support and the attitudes of faculty. This questionnaire was mailed to faculty selected at random from six state universities in Ohio. The response rate was 43% of the 600 faculty originally polled: Overall, the results show no significant difference between computer adopters and non-adopters in their personal attributes of gender, rank and research commitment. The lack of a significant relationship between research commitment and computer adoption for instruction weakens the frequent argument that the low value given to teaching in promotion and tenure decisions may be responsible for faculty not wanting to involve themselves in integrating computers into their teaching. The only personal attribute that was a consistent predictor of computer adoption was the technological orientation of the faculty's discipline. One explanation is that disciplines that are neither quantitative nor technological in orientation require more cognitive effort to integrate computers. The study also found a lack of significant relationship between adoption and the organizational variables of instructional policy, technical support and staff development. However, this may not be interpreted to mean that these factors are not relevant in any way. …

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 31 citations exist upstream.