2012 Blackboard Instructor Survey 2012 – Executive Summary
2012 Blackboard Instructor Survey – summary report
In November 2012 the Blackboard Steering Committee distributed a 19-question survey of OSU
instructors, faculty and GTA’s designed to find out the following:






What types of courses are instructors using Blackboard for?
If they are not using Blackboard, why not?
Of those who are using Blackboard, which features do they use, and how frequently are those
features used to assess student learning?
How do instructors access technical and user support?
Are instructors aware of the Blackboard Steering Committee?
What comments do instructors have on Blackboard features and potential improvements for
Blackboard?
This document summarizes conclusions and recommended next steps that the Blackboard Steering
Committee derived from responses to the survey. Full survey results are available here (location TBD).
Survey response rate
Approximately 340 instructors responded to the survey; they represent a broad diversity of positions
from tenured professor to TA’s, as well as emeritus faculty, research staff, administrators and INTO
instructors. 91% of respondents use Blackboard; 9% do not.
On-campus, Ecampus and Hybrid courses were well represented in the survey, as were both small and
large sections (over 400 students) that used Blackboard. The responses indicate that Blackboard is
widely-used for a range of teaching activity.
Background
The Blackboard Steering Committee was formed in April 2012. Its mission is to ensure strategic
alignment of OSU’s learning management system with campus needs. Our charter is to establish a
repeatable process to gather, evaluate and prioritize requests for features and functionality in
Blackboard.
One of the goals of the survey is to establish a baseline metric for awareness of our committee among
OSU’s Blackboard users. Future surveys will help us measure the effectiveness of the committee’s work.
The 2012 instructor survey was based in part on a survey launched in 2008 by Technology Across the
Curriculum. The 2008 study queried undergraduate students and instructors at Oregon State University
about their use of OSU Blackboard and invited them to identify aspects of the Blackboard system that
may be improved to better serve the OSU educational community.
Methodology
The 2012 instructor survey was developed with the Qualtrics online survey software; all responses were
collected anonymously. Links to the survey were emailed out to two Inform distribution lists: Associate
Page 1 of 2
2012 Blackboard Instructor Survey 2012 – Executive Summary
and Assistant Professors, and Instructors, Research Associates and Assistants. The link was also
advertised on multiple days in OSU Today; instructors were encouraged to respond whether or not they
use Blackboard. The survey was open from November 1-21.
Key findings
1. Survey respondents feel that Blackboard in general is a clunky, unfriendly tool. There is a clear
tension between users who feel it contains too many unnecessary features and those who have
specific needs that Blackboard doesn’t meet. The areas of greatest frustration are also those with
the most technical complexity: grade center and exams. Many users do not like having to learn new
tools when the system is upgraded.
2. The majority of instructors use Blackboard to support sharing course content, communicating (oneway with students), and sharing grades. Blackboard is used least in facilitating other communication
(such as student-student and student-instructor) and in delivering other forms of assessment (such
as quizzes). OSU is not realizing potential “high-value” functionality that an online LMS can provide
to connect students outside the classroom and share and collaborate on files.
3. Over half of respondents do not contact the OSU helpdesk first for help with Blackboard. Nearly
40% of those will turn first to peers in their department for help. This also reflects where these
instructors receive most of their information about Blackboard.
4. Three-quarters of respondents have never requested a new feature or fix to OSU’s version of
Blackboard. The majority of those who have made requests directed those primarily to OSU
Blackboard administrators and secondarily to TAC or Ecampus staff. 85% of respondents were
unaware that there is a Blackboard Steering Committee at OSU.
5. Blackboard is a complex system, and what users perceive as a monolithic application is actually a
series of interdependent technologies: browsers and their settings for security, and caching; Java;
Internet connection type and bandwidth; network traffic, all of which can affect performance and
user experience.
Recommended next steps



Instructors will benefit from more frequent, consistent training about Blackboard, including online
tutorials, webinars, and regular updates on new and existing features. Details about training should
be delivered by a new communication channel that serves as a reliable source of information about
Blackboard-related events and activities.
Arrange a meeting with Blackboard solutions specialists to identify adjustments we could make to
improve performance of exams and gradebook (whether from end-user or system perspective).
Cross reference instructor survey results with the ten findings from the Teaching and Learning
Expectations taskforce. This work should be a reference point in two fronts: 1) training and support
in our LMS (Blackboard), and 2) providing a baseline for needs analysis in teaching/learning
technology decisions.
Page 2 of 2