0. Do you use this strategy?
Yes = 8
No = 1
|1. How effective do you feel it is?
Scale 1=Very ineffective | 5=Very effective
|2. Are you planning to continue or discontinue using it?
One respondent who uses this strategy marked N/A for this question.
|3. List the three main benefits of using this strategy.
- Provides convenient, readily accessible, central location for information on training opportunities that can be referred to in email and other publications (3)
- Creates faculty awareness of tech training opportunities (1)
- Training session registration can be initiated directly from calendar (1)
- Helps meet faculty expectations (1)
- Help avoid frustration for faculty who need this info (1)
- Helps promote faculty knowledge (1)
- Helps promote faculty growth (1)
|4. List the three main issues to consider when using or introducing this strategy.
- Faculty may not visit the calendar on their own, as they are already busy. Remember to promote the calendar to drive interested people to it (3)
- Calendar must be in a format that is easily accessible (1)
- Calendar should incorporate a way to sign up in advance for the training (1)
- You need to have enough content to keep interest going and trainers must keep their materials interesting (1)
- Offer people the option of requesting an ‘off calendar’ or group training if the dates aren't conducive (1)
- Collaborate: faculty engagement and development happens in a lot of other places besides central IT and all available opportunities should be provided in one spot (1)
- Remember to get input from faculty on what events and training they are interested in and their preferred formats (1)
|5. Which strategy do you think holds the biggest potential for faculty engagement?
||See the Biggest Potential page.
|6. What is the biggest obstacle to faculty engagement and training at your institution?
- Time (29)
- Faculty having difficulty prioritizing their time between need for conducting research and working to improve their teaching skills and pedagogy
- Convincing faculty that the time investment in professional development pays off. If we cannot offer concrete value then it is difficult to get faculty engaged.
- Teaching and Educational innovations, including effective use of educational technology, are not part of faculty evaluation criteria (4)
- Includes lack of support from administration
- Lack of incentives for faculty to devote time to improving their teaching methods (3)
- Faculty attitudes toward use and implementation of technology in the classroom and fear of the unknown (2)
- Instructor lack of understanding about the potential for big instructional gains with engagement and a small time commitment (2)
- Teaching and use of instructional technology are valued less than research and publication (particularly at some research universities (1)
- Changing nature of technology and faculty needing to/failing to keep up with developments (1)
- Lack of clear policy or standards for training before teaching online or blended courses (1)
- Lack of coordinated and well-structured center for faculty to consult with educational technology specialists (1)
- Lack of personnel resources (1)
- Making faculty feel valued for participating (1)
- Change fatigue (1)
- Getting faculty to commit to working on integrating educational technology into their teaching (1)
- Faculty governance reduces operational effectiveness that could require specific training and professional development be met and/or maintained (1)
- Some colleges preferring workshops specifically for them instead of participating in mixed workshops with attendees from other colleges (1)
- Demonization of online learning (1)
- Identifying the most apparent need, from the perspective of the faculty (1)
- Faculty resistance to ‘training’ (1)
- Gaining faculty attention and finding ways to reach more faculty, including those who may be hesitant towards using technology without personal support & training. (2)
- The need for changing strategies to accommodate changing needs together with the personnel to manage this (1)
7. Calendar links submitted by respondents.
|8. Other comments
- Even if you have the best calendar and announcements system, it remains extremely challenging to find a time when a sufficient number of faculty can attend a f2f session. We are moving more toward pre-recorded, self-paced videos, supplemented by one-on-one assistance. We use Magna Commons and OLC Workshops as part of our offerings, as well as support from the online team of instructional designers and an online faculty development specialist.
- This is just one of numerous ways to reach out to faculty who are quite diverse in their preferred sources of information. You are never going to reach all faculty with one method.
|Institutions that have responded
Cycle 1 (March 2014 - March 2015):
- Edgewood College
- UC Riverside
- Towson University
- Boston University
- West Virginia University
- Penn State
- Louisiana State University
- Texas A&M University-Commerce
- Langara College
Cycle 2 (April 2015 – April 2016):
- Pepperdine University
- University of Mississippi