Recent trends toward on-line learning and open education suggest that the role of technology will only become more prominent in higher education. As a result, faculty members will increasingly be expected to infuse more technology in face-to-face courses, while teaching in multiple course delivery modalities. Senior administrators and technology leaders are faced with the dilemma of advancing technology enhanced teaching and learning practices for a faculty that isn't necessarily convinced change is necessary. The resulting tension between the administration and faculty will either limit actual change or prevent it completely. The following research examines those factors influencing the growth in technology-based teaching and learning at three very different institutions that have a focus on research and teaching. The study also examines those strategies or actions shown to be helpful in advancing new and innovative teaching practices. The research sites include Duke University, the University of Central Florida and the University of California, Berkeley. The findings suggest that there isn't a one-size-fits-all solution to advancing technology enhanced teaching and learning, and an institution's ability to successfully lead change requires a shared understanding of why change is necessary. Change efforts require more than just a few faculty members that are willing to explore new teaching practices, as well as sufficient resources to advance experimental teaching initiatives. Incentives aimed at advancing the innovative use of technology to support teaching and learning goals also play an important role in leading change. The research suggests that the factors influencing technology enhanced teaching and learning differ among institutions and are unique to the institution's mission, history, culture, and student population. Senior leaders all too often come into an institution and attempt to lead change based on their experience at a former place of employment. The findings suggest that leaders need to become familiar with the unique characteristics of an institution before making decisions about how best to advance technology enhanced teaching and learning, while partnering with the faculty in leading change.
|Advisor:||Zemsky, Robert M.|
|Commitee:||Kumar, M.S. Vijay, Moneta, Larry|
|School:||University of Pennsylvania|
|Department:||Higher Education Administration|
|School Location:||United States -- Pennsylvania|
|Source:||DAI-A 74/12(E), Dissertation Abstracts International|
|Subjects:||Higher Education Administration, Pedagogy, Educational technology|
|Keywords:||Academic technology, Educational technology, Instructional technology, Online, Teaching with technology, Technology-enhanced teaching and learning|
Copyright in each Dissertation and Thesis is retained by the author. All Rights Reserved
The supplemental file or files you are about to download were provided to ProQuest by the author as part of a
dissertation or thesis. The supplemental files are provided "AS IS" without warranty. ProQuest is not responsible for the
content, format or impact on the supplemental file(s) on our system. in some cases, the file type may be unknown or
may be a .exe file. We recommend caution as you open such files.
Copyright of the original materials contained in the supplemental file is retained by the author and your access to the
supplemental files is subject to the ProQuest Terms and Conditions of use.
Depending on the size of the file(s) you are downloading, the system may take some time to download them. Please be