Running head: ARE FACULTY READY?
1
Are Faculty Ready for Emerging Technologies?
Cynthia P. Lyons
University of Maryland University College
DETC 630
ARE FACULTY READY FOR EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES?
2
Are Faculty Ready for Emerging Technologies?
Introduction
Incorporating emerging technologies into distance education programs is a challenge for
organizations whose faculty are not properly prepared to use these technologies. This paper
summarizes the trend in distance education to use emerging technologies as learning tools, and
the need for the organization to provide faculty support. Research on the implications of
unprepared faculty response to emerging technologies follows the summary. Finally, the author
of this paper describes two recommendations to ensure organizational success when using
emerging technologies in distance education.
Summary
Organizations rely on distance education programs to meet the needs of secondary and
higher education (Rashid & Rashid, 2012). Research shows that in order to successfully
introduce technology as a tool to facilitate learning, faculty preparedness is essential to success
(Rashid & Rashid, 2012). According to Rashid and Rashid (2012), many instructors are
reluctant to use new and different technologies because they are not properly trained; thus,
institutions need to adequately plan and support any technological implementation. Introducing
tools that are not understood or supported can have a significant impact on the success of the
program; as well as impact the instructor’s success (Rashid & Rashid, 2012). The next section of
this paper explores the implications of poorly trained or unprepared instructors using technology
in distance education.
Implications
There are several factors to consider when an institution chooses to introduce new
technologies into its distance education programs. This section presents research on how these
ARE FACULTY READY FOR EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES?
changes affect faculty. Wallace and Young (2010) identify two possible cases that occur when
planning to introduce newer technologies. In the first case, an organization selects technology
based on the existing skill sets of its faculty. In the second case, the institution decides which
type of technology is needed to meet its goals. Then, the institution plans how to develop its
faculty to use the prescribed technology (Wallace & Young, 2010, p. 3). It appears that the first
case can lead to a stagnant environment where the institutional growth and development are
restricted by the existing status quo. However, the second case appears more forward-thinking,
but requires significant institutional support and attention to its faculty development programs
(Wallace & Young, 2010). Moreover, Wallace and Young (2010) suggest that as institutions
create more online programs and increase their reliance on technology for delivering course
content, faculty promotion and tenure criteria will change to include these skills. Once the
institution begins to recognize faculty who show evidence of adopting technologies into the
curriculum, it is more likely that the faculty will be motivated to develop the necessary skills
(Wallace & Young, 2010).
Birch and Sankey (2008) suggest that some faculty are inclined to naturally adopt
technology because of the benefits provided to the student learning experience. However, it is
very difficult for instructors to keep up the pace with the rapidly changing technology
environment and continuous introduction of new tools and devices (Birch & Sankey, 2008).
Therefore, it is critical that the institution create faculty training and development programs so
that faculty are up to date with the latest technologies (Birch & Sankey, 2008). These faculty
challenges can be addressed using the recommendations set forth below.
3
ARE FACULTY READY FOR EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES?
4
Recommendations
The author’s recommendations focus on two units of an organization: academic
resources and development. Rashid and Rashid (2012) suggest that the institution provide
technological resources and training to its faculty and students. For example, the library can
supply hardware, software, and training on the use of Web 2.0 technologies or mobile apps
(Rashid & Rashid, 2012). In other words, providing a central facility for academic users to
access and learn technologies can help to ensure that faculty receive standard and customized
training. Moreover, a standardized training program allows the institution to assess student
learning outcomes based on the technology used (Rashid & Rashid, 2012).
In addition to addressing the institution’s responsibility in faculty development, the
institution also needs to understand how to incorporate faculty development into faculty
workload. According to Wallace and Young (2010), faculty are unable to complete training and
development programs due to workload requirements. Furthermore, research shows that faculty
are more likely to take time to learn and incorporate technologies into the curriculum if they are
allowed release time from teaching; or, if they are granted extra time (i.e. contact hours) for
delivering online courses (Wallace & Young, 2010).
Conclusion
Growth in distance education and the constant development of emerging technologies
require continuous review and assessment of best practices for delivering online course content.
It is difficult for faculty to maintain pace with new technologies and to keep their skills current.
Workload, promotion, and tenure requirements leave little time for training and developing
technological skills. However, with sufficient institutional support, faculty can keep their skills
up-to-date. Faculty need to be adequately prepared for implementing emerging technologies to
ARE FACULTY READY FOR EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES?
5
meet the needs of today’s students. Without proper faculty preparation and institutional support,
the organization is a target for the stagnant environment previously outlined in this paper.
Distance education programs can meet the challenge of unprepared faculty when deploying
emerging technologies by including faculty support in its organizational goals.
ARE FACULTY READY FOR EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES?
References
Birch, D., & Sankey, M.D. (2008). Drivers and obstacles to the development of interactive
multimodal technology-mediated distance higher education courses. International
Journal of Education and Development Using Information and Communication
Technology, 4(1), 6-79. Retrieved from http://ijedict.dec.uwi.edu//index.php
Rashid, N., & Rashid, M. (2012). Issues and problems in distance education. Turkish Online
Journal of Distance Education, 13(1), 20-26. Retrieved from http://tojde.anadolu.edu.tr
Wallace, L., & Young, J. (2010). Implementing blended learning: Policy implications for
universities. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 13(4). Retrieved from
http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/
6