Faculty Conceptions and Misconceptions of Hybrid Education

Courses Helen C. Wittmann, Ed.D.

Elsa-Sofia Morote, Ed.D.

Thomas Kelly, Ph.D.

Conceptual Rationale

Institutions play a key role in the

adoption of hybrid education. Faculty

are the facilitators who develop and

implement hybrid courses. If

administrators want to adopt this form of

education then investigating what

motivates or challenges faculty would

prove to be an invaluable tool.

• Institutional Change• Rogers (2003) Diffusion of Innovations • Fullan (2002) Leading in a Culture of Change• Boleman & Deal (1997) Reframing Organizations

• Conceptual Change• Alparslan, Tekkaya, & Geban (2003)• Posner, Strike, Hewson, & Gertzog (1982)

• Hybrid Studies• Arabasz, P., Parani, J., & Fawcett, D. (2003) • Aycock, A., Garnham, C., & Kaleta, R. (2002) • Graham, C.R., Allen, S., & Ure, D. (2005)

Major Theorists

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to

identify factors that influence the

adoption of hybrid courses by faculty

at private institutions of higher

education in New York.

EarlyAdopters

13.5%

EarlyMajority

34%

LateMajority

34%

Laggards16%2.5%

Innovators

- 2sd -sd +sd

Rogers, 2003 (p.281)

Adopter Categorization on the Basis of Innovativeness

Statement of Problem

There are known factors

(1) Technology,

(2) Pedagogy,

(3) Faculty-Centered Issues, and

(4) Institutional Policy that contribute to faculty

adoption of online distance education.

Conceptions/misconceptions

Technology

• Reliability of Technology• Technical Support• Hardware/Software Availability• Connectivity issues/problems• Course Development• Network Security• Pace of Technology Change• Privacy Rights

Pedagogy

• Nature of Course Content

• Course Objectives

• Methods of Evaluation and Assessment

• Depersonalization of Instruction

Faculty-Centered Issues

• Control of Curriculum

• Level of Administrative Support

• Institutional Reward System

• Annual Performance Review

• Promotion and Tenure

Institutional Policy

• My institution provides technical support for computer equipment used in a hybrid course

• My institution provides adequate training to faculty

• Information about hybrid learning Technology

What are the conceptions or

misconceptions of faculty

members in reference to

hybrid courses?

ConceptualQuestions

Major Findings

Conceptions

Correct IncorrectNo Basis

for Knowing

Hybrid teaching is not appropriate for all courses.

81.1% 11.9% 7.2%

Adequate technical support systems are a major concern to faculty delivering hybrid courses.

78.6% 7.1% 14.3%

Problems with equipment are a major concern to faculty delivering hybrid courses.

63.0% 18.9% 18.1%

Faculty time commitment is greater for hybrid learning preparation, delivery, and revision.

60.6% 18.1% 21.3%

Correct IncorrectNo Basis

for Knowing

Content is better in the hybrid course. 11.2% 64.8% 24%

Students need access to a home computer with Internet access. 21.8% 71.8% 6.5%

Cheating in a hybrid course is a common threat to the quality of hybrid courses.

30.6% 37.1% 32.3%

Students Taught with hybrid learning perform at least as well or better than those taught in a traditional face-to-face classroom.

31.6% 15.1% 53.3%

Misconceptions/ No Basis for Knowing

The data revealed an interesting distinction, on 8 of

the 13 questions, over 50 percent of the faculty responded with either

misconceptions or No Basis for Knowing.

Is there a relationship among conceptions, misconceptions, score and (1) Technology, (2) Pedagogy, (3) Faculty-Centered Issues and (4) Institutional Policy?

StatisticalAnalysis

A “score” was created by utilizing points for each

response of a faculty member, 1 = Correct,

0 = Incorrect, and

0.5 = No basis for knowing.

Pearson product-Moment correlation for: Score, Misconceptions and Conceptions

Score Misconceptions Conceptions

Technology Factors r .29* -.03 .32*

Pedagogy Factorsr

.13 .19* .16

Faculty-Centered Issues

r .21* .13 .22*

Institutional Policy r .27* .15 .21*

Taught utilizing Hybrid Learning

r.15 -.37* .28*

*. The mean difference is significant

Can the level of conceptions, misconceptions or score be predicted using

(1)Technology, (2) Pedagogy, (3) Faculty-Centered Issues and(4) Institutional Policy of faculty with previous experience

utilizing hybrid learning?

Multiple Linear Regression Analysis for Conceptions of faculty with previous experience utilizing hybrid learning

Standardized Coefficients

Model Beta p

3 (Constant) .00*

Technology Factors

.16 .150

Experience Teaching Hybrid

-.33 .00*

Pedagogy Factors .22 .05* a. Predictors: (Constant), Conceptions

Please note that “Technology” has a p = 0.150. The prediction model for Conception:

= 4.9 + 0.06 (Technology) – 1.8 (Experience Teaching)

+ 0.15 (Pedagogy)

The negative number of experience means that faculty members who have experience teaching hybrid tend to have better conceptions than those who have not.

Multiple Linear Regression Analysis for Misconceptions of faculty with previous experience utilizing hybrid learning

Standardized Coefficients

Model Beta p

1 (Constant) .00

Experience Teaching Hybrid

.30 .00*

a. Predictors: (Constant), Misconceptions

Conclusions

• Identify faculty innovators and

employ their skills as opinion

leaders.

• Understand the role of technology

and its role in the future of higher

education..

• Communicate more effectively with faculty in reference to hybrid courses.

• Offer faculty professional development to ease some of the anxiety and uncertainty caused by the use of technology to deliver education.

• Develop Institutional Policies that clearly identify and promote hybrid education.

Conclusions

• Open a dialogue with faculty to

better define hybrid education.

• Understand it will take time for

institutions of higher education to

change the way instruction is being

delivered

Conclusions

Recommendations• Conduct thorough study of the

diffusion of hybrid education in

institutions of higher education.

• Conduct periodic investigations of how

technology is being perceived by

faculty and administrators at

institutions of higher education.

• Conduct qualitative studies focusing on

faculty conceptions and misconceptions of

hybrid courses offered at institutions of higher

education.

• Conduct periodic investigations of

administrative conceptions, and

misconceptions of hybrid courses offered at

institutions of higher education.

Recommendations

• Conduct periodic studies of student conceptions, and misconceptions of hybrid courses offered at institutions of higher education.

• Both state and federal guidelines need to be researched in order for a clearer understanding of actual seat time vs. online time and credit hours earned.

Recommendations

"Copyright Helen C. Wittmann, Ed.D., Elsa-Sofia Morote, Ed.D., & Thomas Kelly, Ph.D. 2006. This work is the intellectual property of the author. Permission is granted for this material to be shared for non-commercial, educational purposes, provided that this copyright statement appears on the reproduced materials and notice is given that the copying is by permission of the author. To disseminate otherwise or to republish requires written permission from the author."