The primary purpose of this study was to design a valid and reliable survey instrument gauging three concepts; (a) utilization of technology-enhanced instructional practices, (b) perceptions of Missouri higher education faculty concerning self-reported instructor role and (c) perceptions of millennial students’ preferred learning styles. The secondary purpose of this study was to identify differences and similarities among various subsets of the data, examined by investigated concepts, as well as disaggregated by each demographic for individual survey items.
The six independent variables included type of institution, size of institution (based on Carnegie Size Classification), department, rank, gender and age range. The study also included 34 dependent variables divided into three sections. First were 8 items (items 7–14), designed to discern the HE faculty’s self-reported utilization of technology-enhanced instruction in their classroom. Next were 10 items (items 15–24), focusing on faculty perceptions of their instructional role in the classroom. Following were 16 items (items 25–40) asking for self-reported faculty perceptions concerning the learning preferences of higher education students.
The population for this study included 2,978 faculty at a randomly selected group of 15 two-year and four-year, public and private Missouri higher education institutions based on a listing of Missouri higher education institutions provided by the Missouri Department of Higher Education (MDHE). The survey was completed by 249 of these faculty members. Cronbach’s alpha and a pilot survey were conducted to determine validity and reliability. Univariate analyses, including cross tabulations and graphs showing frequency counts and percentages and measures of central tendency and dispersion, consisting of mean, median, mode, standard deviation and variance, were employed to determine utilization of technology-enhanced instruction by Missouri HE faculty as well as perceptions concerning instructional roles and millennial students’ learning characteristics as identified by research. Finally, Chi-square analysis and cross tabulations showing frequency numbers and percentages of each survey item were generated for each of the six demographic items.
The findings confirmed that the Survey of Higher Education Instructional Practices (SHEIP) was a valid and reliable instrument for collecting information concerning utilization of technology-enhanced instruction as well as perceptions of instructor role and students’ preferred learning styles. It was also shown a majority of Missouri higher education faculty are employing technology-enhanced instruction. Findings also indicated percentages of faculty using traditional and contemporary instructor roles were nearly equal. A small percentage more faculty did report using more contemporary instructor roles, but this is a point that could be explored in further research. Furthermore, outcomes indicated that a majority of faculty did agree with the manners which current research indicated millennial students prefer to learn. The theory of disruptive innovation indicated manners in which higher education can implement the change needed to “disrupt” the current system in academia. Research indicates change is needed if higher education is going to prosper in the rapidly changing academic world.
|Advisor:||Edmonds, Carole, Wall, Timothy|
|Commitee:||Fridell, Max, Hedge, William, Hiatt, Rochelle, Piveral, Joyce|
|School:||University of Missouri - Columbia|
|Department:||Educational Leadership and Policy Analysis|
|School Location:||United States -- Missouri|
|Source:||DAI-A 78/03(E), Dissertation Abstracts International|
|Subjects:||Educational evaluation, Higher Education Administration, Instructional Design, Educational technology, Higher education|
|Keywords:||Disruptive innovation, Education change, Instructional design, Instructor role, Millennials, Survey of Higher Education Instructional Practices, Technology-enhanced instruction|
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