TTitle: A Study of Faculty Governance Leaders Perceptions of Online and Blended Learning

Faculty Governance Leaders’ Perceptions of Online and Blended Learning:

A Preliminary Analysis

Elizabeth Ciabocchi, Ed.D.Amy P. Ginsberg, Ph.D.Anthony G. Picciano, Ph.D.

October 15, 2015

Introduction

“…the faculty are not employees of the University – they are the University.”

(I.I. Rabi), in response to Dwight D.Eisenhower, then President of Columbia University, 1948 )

2015 ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ONLINE LEARNING

Rationale for the Study

The purpose of this study was to examine the attitudes and perceptions of faculty governance leaders regarding online education including fully online courses, blended/hybrid learning, and MOOC-developed courseware.


Literature Review: Online Learning

• > 7 million students, or 1/3 of the college population, enrolled in at least 1 fully online course in any given year (Allen & Seaman, 2015)

• Millions enrolled in blended/hybrid courses and Web-enhanced courses

• MOOC providers offered more than 1200 courses (Sturgis, 2015)


Literature Review: Faculty Governance

• Forms of Faculty Governance

- Faculty councils

- Collective bargaining organizations and unions

- Academic departmental bodies (in by-laws)



• Large body of faculty governance literature, but few studies on its relationship to online education and governance leaders’ attitudes

• Numerous surveys of other leaders including presidents, chief academic officers, CIO’s, students & faculty re: perceptions of developments in online education

• No broad studies of opinions/perceptions of faculty governance leaders re: online learning; limited to descriptive accounts and case studies of faculty governance issues, online education in specific settings



•Faculty governance bodies have been active in responding to development of online education since its inception in the 1990’s:

- CUNY (1997)

- Theresa Sullivan, President, University of Virginia, 2012

- San Jose State University (2013)


Methodology of Study

•Participants - faculty governance leaders at 144 colleges & universities identified

through chapter websites of the American Association of University Professors

• Requests for participation were emailed to 717 faculty governance leaders

• 129 surveys were returned (response rate = 18%)

- 74% of respondents affiliated with public, non-profit higher education institutions

- 25% affiliated with private, non-profit higher education institutions

- <2% affiliated with private, for-profit institutions


Survey Results


74%

23%

3%

Q2. To better prepare for the future, American higher education needs:

Continue to evolve in carefullyplanned manner

Major transformation

No major change

Survey Results


Q3. The institution with which you are primarily affiliated offers:

Traditional degree and/or certificate programs (87.9%)

Blended/hybrid courses in traditional degree/cert programs (78.23%)

Blended/hybrid degree/cert programs (60.48%)

Fully online courses in traditional degree/cert programs (58.06%)

Fully online degree/cert programs (45.16%)

MOOCs (8.06%)

Survey Results


Department (78%)

College or university (71%)

School (56%)

Q4. The development and approval of blended (hybrid) and online courses at your institution requires the approval of (check all that apply):

Survey Results


Traditional (95%)

Blended (hybrid) (51%)

Fully online (39%)

MOOC (0%)

Q5. Which of the following types of courses have you personally taught or developed (check all that apply):

Survey Results


Weighted Average Scores

Traditional Courses 4.29

Hybrid Courses 3.26

Online Courses 2.71

MOOCs 1.79

Q6. On a scale of 1-5 (5 = highest score), what is your perception of the overall quality of the following types of courses offered by your institution?

Survey Results


Q7. On a scale of 1-5 (5 = highest score), please rate your level of concern about each of the following considerations for the development and implementation of online courses at your institution.

Top Five Concerns

1. Time required to develop & deliver course2. Perceived academic quality of course/Overuse of adjunct faculty3. Compensation for course design & development4. Student learning outcomes5. Time & effort required for faculty development

Survey Results

Q8. On a scale of 1-5 (5 = highest), please rate your level of concern about each of the following considerations for development and implementation of blended courses at your institution.

Top Five Concerns

1. Time required to develop & deliver course

2. Time & efforts required for faculty development

3. Overuse of adjunct faculty

4. Compensation for course design & development

5. Student learning outcomes


Survey Results

Crosstab Q5 by Q3: Perception of overall quality of course types offered at institution who have taught in blended/online formats vs. only traditional formats (% of respondents who rated courses Satisfactory to Excellent)

Online Courses:Blended/Online Instructors = 55%Traditional-only Instructors = 30%

Blended Courses: Blended/Online Instructors = 68%Traditional-only Instructors = 55%

Traditional Courses:Blended/Online Instructors = 93%Traditional-only Instructors = 98%


Survey ResultsCrosstab Q7/8 by Q3: Level of concern re: considerations for various course types by respondents who have taught in blended/online formats vs. traditional format only (% of respondents with Moderate to Very High Levels of Concern)

Online Courses:

Traditional-only instructors are more concerned about:

• Compensation

• Perceived academic quality

• Student attrition

Blended/online instructors are more concerned about:

• Time required to develop/deliver courses

• Intellectual property rights

• Instructional design support

• Technical support for faculty/students


Survey ResultsCrosstab Q7/8 by Q3: Level of concern re: considerations for various course types by respondents who have taught in blended/online formats vs. traditional format only (% of respondents with Moderate to Very High Levels of Concern)

Blended Courses:

Traditional-only instructors are more concerned about: • Student learning outcomes• Student attrition

Blended/online instructors are more concerned about: • Intellectual property rights• Instructional design support • Technical support for faculty/students • Overuse of adjunct faculty


Interview Response Themes

Theme 1: American higher education needs to focus on teaching to better prepare for the future.

Theme 2: The development/review of blended or online programs appears to go through the same faculty review process (i.e., curriculum committees at various levels) as traditional programs.


Interview Response Themes

Theme 3: The perception that online & blended courses are of lower quality than traditional, face-to-face courses appears to stem from the perception that there is not enough attention to faculty development and clear assessment of outcomes in the online environment.

Theme 4: There is overuse of adjunct faculty, which is particularly problematic in online/blended environments, where there is insufficient training in online teaching.


Discussion & Questions

1) Substantial number of faculty leaders in sample were well familiar with teaching in fully online (nearly 40%) and blended (50%) learning environments, which gives them direct experience with issues.

2) Concerns of faculty governance leaders were consistent with other stakeholders in higher education re:

- Need for greater focus on teaching

- Over-reliance on adjunct faculty

- Perceptions of quality of various teaching formats, with MOOCs ranked lowest and face-to-face teaching highest

3) Study of governance leaders is important area of research in understanding dynamics of development of online/blended learning in higher education


References

Allen, I.E. & Seaman, J. (2015). Grade level: Tracking online education in the United States. Babson Park, MA: Babson Survey Research Group and Quahog Research Group, LLC.

Sturgis, I. (2015). MOOCs: More hype than hope. Convergence: Diversity and Inclusion. Supplement to The Chronicle of Higher Education.


Contact Information

Elizabeth (Liz) Ciabocchi, Ed.D.Vice Provost for Digital LearningSt. John’s [email protected]: drlizcTwitter: @drlizc


Anthony Picciano, Ph.D.Professor & Executive OfficerPh.D. Program in Urban EducationGraduate Center - City University of New YorkPicciano, Anthony [email protected]

Amy P. Ginsberg, Ph.D.Acting Dean, School of EducationLIU [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]



Session Evaluations Contest

• Open OLC Conferences Mobile App• Navigate to session to evaluate • Click on "Rate this Session“• Complete Session Evaluation*(As part of our "green" initiatives, OLC is no longer using paper forms for session evaluations.)

*Contact information required for contest entry but will not be shared with the presenters. Winners will be contacted post-conference.

Each session evaluation completed (limited to one per session) = one contest entryFive (5) $25 gift cards will be awarded to five (5) individuals Must submit evals using the OLC Conferences mobile app

Session Evaluations ContestSession Evaluations Contest

Documents

TTitle: A Study of Faculty Governance Leaders Perceptions of Online and Blended Learning