Year 1 Summary

Year 1 Summary

As of March 2015 the Faculty Engagement survey has run for a full cycle of all its 13 strategies and provided a wealth of information that has been shared on the CCUMC mailing list and various EDUCAUSE mailing lists. In addition, the results have been shared at various area conferences such as ELI and CCUMC. In an effort to provide a more easily digested overview of the data collected, I have put together the following summary.

Below, Table 1 lists the different strategies and the ratings collected from the participants. In addition, Figure 1 provides a visual comparison of the different strategies with mean ratings and standard deviation values.

Lastly, the results for each strategy are listed, including the number of respondents using that strategy and their ratings of its effectiveness. The top three comments for questions 4. List the three main benefits of using this strategy and 5. List the three main issues to consider when using or introducing this strategy are provided. For those questions which asked respondents to provide links to websites, or calendars, this information is also listed. The column Respondents refers to all those who answered the given questionnaire; the names of those who use the strategies are boldfaced.

Table 1: Strategy ratings and values.

Strategy

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

SUM

Mean

4.13

4.00

4.00

3.64

3.25

3.40

3.75

2.67

3.00

2.50

3.20

3.17

2.83

 

SD

0.85

0.05

1.00

1.08

0.50

1.17

0.50

1.21

1.26

0.71

1.03

0.98

0.75

 

Respondents using this strategy

24

3

3

14

4

10

5

6

6

2

10

6

6

99

total number of respondents

27

18

4

14

4

13

10

15

11

10

15

10

7

158

 

Figure 1: Strategy comparison and values.
Bar graph of strategy mean scores and standard deviations

 

1. Does you institution conduct a local conference or educational technology event(s) to encourage innovation and sharing among your faculty and staff? (Surveyed March 2014 - Results)

Respondents
using
Mean SD Median Mode Continue
24 4.13 0.85 4 4 24
Benefits and Issues Respondents

Three main benefits.

  • Faculty sharing of ideas and  experiences.
  • Makes faculty aware of new educational technologies, innovative uses of ed. technologies and/or good ed. tech practices.
  • Challenges faculty to think about ed. tech and/or creates a focus on ed. tech.

Three main issues.

  • Encouraging attendance.
    • Prizes / raffle / food.
    • Presentations by peers.
    • Selecting topics of interest.
  • Faculty/staff availability to attend.
  • Planning, organization, marketing.
    • Top-down support helpful.
    • Use faculty planning committee.
  • Saint Michaels College
  • NYU Abu Dhabi
  • Iowa State University
  • Maricopa Community College District
  • Northeastern University
  • Granite State College (USNH)
  • Salem State Unversity
  • University of Oklahoma
  • UCLA
  • Genesee Community College
  • Saint Anselm College
  • Weber State University
  • City University of Seattle
  • Indiana University Purdue University Fort Wayne (NOT IUPUI)
  • UC Irvine
  • Colorado College
  • Brigham Young University
  • Langara College
  • Eastern Michigan University
  • University of Florida
  • Southeastern Community College

2. Does you institution maintain a faculty awards program to encourage innovation in the area of teaching with technology? (Surveyed April 2014 - Results)

Respondents
using
Mean SD Median Mode Continue
3 4 0 4 4 3
Benefits and Issues Respondents

Three main benefits.

  • Faculty recognition.
  • Provide examples for others to follow.
  • Promotes innovative technology use and awareness.

Three main issues.

  • Resources (financial and human).
  • Challenge expanding beyond early adopters.
  • Reward impact, creativity, and innovation.
  • Pepperdine University
  • NC State University
  • GateWay Community College
  • Louisiana State University - Baton Rouge
  • Valparaiso University
  • Massachusetts School of Professional Psychology
  • University of Arizona
  • Mitchell College
  • Canisius College
  • Genesee Community College
  • Northeast Community College
  • JWU
  • Reed College
  • Pima Community College
  • Emerson College
  • Maryville University
  • Yale University
  • Our Lady of the Lake University

 

3. Does your institution maintain a faculty grant program for technology-assisted course development (e.g. money to pay for faculty release time to convert FTF courses to online or blended format)?  (Surveyed May 2014 - Results)

Respondents
using
Mean SD Median Mode Continue
3 4 1 4 N/A 3
 
Benefits and Issues Respondents

Three main benefits.

  • Signals to faculty that process is not quick and easy – that it needs serious time commitment – and provides faculty with needed resources.
  • Helps increase number of online / hybrid courses.
  • Teaches faculty process for future replication.

Three main issues.

  • Check quality of courses, not just during program but also beyond, by using approval process and quality checks.
  • Explore resources at academic conferences on this topic to create unique program for your institution.
  • Carefully consider aims and goals of program.
  • Emerson College
  • Penn State University - Berks Campus
  • Iowa State University
  • Canisius College

 

4. Does your institution use a faculty advisory group to advise on educational technology use and support? (Surveyed June 2014 - Results)

Respondents
using
Mean SD Median Mode Continue
14 3.64 1.08 4 4 14
Benefits and Issues Respondents

Three main benefits.

  • Promotes cross-campus perspectives, provides feedback on faculty needs and priorities, and enhances faculty voice in campus technology governance.
  • Promotes and improves communication with faculty, dissemination of information, technology implementation and faculty technology awareness.
  • Helps instruction drive technology adoption and prioritize strategic needs. Also promotes faculty development and provides organized body for evaluation of faculty use of technology for teaching and research.

Three main issues.

  • Group should have a faculty chair or co-chair to help keep meetings productive and on task. Faculty should have their participation recognized and be compensated for their time/service, otherwise their involvement might suffer.
  • Make sure that IT staff are part of group and try to have even mix of novice/experienced faculty in terms of technology usage from across campus. Consider also including library staff and students.
  • It is important to consider whether group is an official governance committee and has a clear, strategic mission with available funding to decide on actionable items: It needs institutional support to have an impact.
  • Providence College
  • Albert Einstein College of Medicine
  • Scottsdale Community College
  • UCLA
  • Genesee Community College
  • University of Oregon
  • Grand View University
  • Valparaiso University
  • San Francisco State University
  • maryville University
  • Saint Michaels College
  • Emmanuel College
  • University of North Dakota
  • McGill University
  • Canisius College
  • UoPhoenix
  • HKUST
  • Menlo College

 

5. Does your institution conduct surveys on student and faculty perceptions of technology (e.g. participate in the ECAR survey)? (Surveyed July 2014 - Results)

Respondents
using
Mean SD Median Mode Continue
4 3.25 0.5 3 3 4
Benefits and Issues Respondents

Three main benefits.

  • Provides data that allows for comparison with other institutions and better understanding of user perceptions of campus technology.
    • One respondent feels survey does not reach enough faculty and students.
  • Helps open communication with faculty about their concerns, feelings and experiences and shows community that management is interested in their views.
  • Helps educate IT Staff on pedagogical trends and their effect on technology utilization.

Three main issues.

  • Survey fatigue may happen, so time the survey carefully to not interrupt other initiatives and provide incentives for faculty and students to answer.
  • Open communication must be followed by responsive reporting.
  • Surveys don't necessarily represent the situation of any one faculty member, and many are unique in their pedagogical needs.
    • Online surveys overlook the small, yet meaningful, percentage of faculty who are yet to adopt modern IT.
  • Westfield State University
  • State University of New York at Buffalo
  • Wesleyan University
  • Valparaiso University
  • University of Phoenix

 

6. Does your institution employ local IT liaisons in different departments and units? (Surveyed August 2014 - Results)

Respondents
using
Mean SD Median Mode Continue
10 3.40 1.17 3.5 2 10
Benefits and Issues Respondents

Three main benefits.

  • Helps build stronger relationships with faculty and increase faculty comfort level.
  • Promotes better two-way communication between IT and department to better communicate faculty concerns and disseminating IT information to unit.
  • Local staff/liaison know culture of college or department better and can specialize to better address specific needs and opportunities.

Three main issues.

  • Obtain buy-in from all parties and make sure role of liaison is clear to everyone involved.
  • Getting the right skills and abilities in the liaisons: Can be difficult to hire for positions requiring terminal degree.
  • Determine clear reporting structure.
  • Wesleyan University
  • Univ of California, Riverside
  • UC Riverside
  • University of Arizona
  • Nevada State College
  • Massachusetts College of Art and Design
  • University of South Florida
  • Sauk Valley Community College
  • NC State Univ.
  • Valparaiso University
  • Union College
  • Simmons College
  • Edgewood College

 

7. Does your institution maintain a blog with links to news items, educational technology resources, etc. for faculty?  (Surveyed September 2014 - Results)

Respondents
using
Mean SD Median Mode Continue
5 3.75 0.5 4 4 5
Benefits and Issues Respondents

Three main benefits.

  • A just-in-time repository of information that faculty can subscribe to and which lists all supported technologies.
  • An easily shared resource.
  • Continuous communication that is available 24/7.

Three main issues.

  • Resource must be kept up-to-date and you need commitment from people to post regularly.
  • Always set deadlines for contributions.
  • Need to get faculty to engage with resource.

Respondent Blog Links

  • Southern Illinois University
  • Granite State College
  • University of Washington School of Nursing
  • Canisius College
  • La Salle University
  • Indiana University Purdue University Fort Wayne
  • Valparaiso University
  • Jefferson Community College
  • University of Nevada, Las Vegas
  • Roosevelt University
  • Northeastern University

 

8. Does your institution use social media such as Facebook and Twitter to engage faculty on educational technology matters?  (Surveyed October 2014 - Results)

Respondents
using
Mean SD Median Mode Continue
6 2.67 1.21 2.5 2 5
One N/A
Benefits and Issues Respondents

Three main benefits.

  • Easy and quick to post information and create immediate connection to faculty.
  • Using several different channels to meet faculty needs.
  • Important to demonstrate social media engagement for faculty, who are encouraged to use it with students.

Three main issues.

  • Content must have purpose, tie to learning objectives, or be otherwise useful.
  • Keeping content current and moderating environment.
  • Faculty reluctance/lack of time to use social media.

Which social media platforms do you use?

  • Twitter = 5/6
  • Facebook = 3/6
  • LinkedIn = 1/6
  • Google+ = 1/6
  • Blog = 1/6

Note: The total exceeds 6 because several respondents use more than one platform.

  • McGill University
  • College of New Rochelle
  • Missouri S&T
  • The University of Texas at El Paso
  • James Cook University, Australia
  • University of North Dakota
  • Genesee Community College
  • Canisius College
  • Scottsdale Community College
  • Bacone College
  • Iowa State University
  • Edgewood College
  • St. Catherine University
  • UCR
  • Skidmore College

 

9. Does your institution encourage faculty to attend and present at technology-focused educational conferences (whether online or FTF) such as ELI, the main EDUCAUSE conference, SLOAN-C, etc? (Surveyed November 2014 - Results)

Respondents
using
Mean SD Median Mode Continue
6 3 1.26 3 3 6
Benefits and Issues Respondents

Three main benefits.

  • Encourages instructors to talk about what they do and show off what works for them while giving them another avenue to present on their work in teaching and learning (3)
  • Helps create informed advocates and faculty mentors for home campus (2)
  • Faculty can build connections and form relationships / partnerships with other faculty and institutions (2)

Three main issues.

  • Who supplies travel funds? Faculty’s department, IT, library, provost’s office? (3)
  • Tailoring presentation to audience – should not simply be reading of a paper or discussion of pedagogy (2)
  • Potential for discouragement of faculty who may not get repeated proposals accepted at competitive conferences (1)
  • Saint Michaels College
  • University of Oregon
  • Bucknell University
  • Georgia Perimeter College
  • Genesee Community College
  • Missouri S&T
  • Univ of TN Health Science Center
  • University at Buffalo
  • Towson University
  • Olivet Nazarene University
  • St. Catherine University

 

10. Does your institution use a listserv/mailing list to maintain a continuous discussion and idea exchange with faculty and staff? (Surveyed December 2014 - Results)

Respondents
using
Mean SD Median Mode Continue
2 2.50 0.71 2.5 N/A 2
Benefits and Issues Respondents

Three main benefits.

  • Good for specific, interested audience and purpose.
  • Convenient to be able to throw question or idea out to a group.
  • Uses a familiar channel - email.

Three main issues.

  • Has not had widespread adoption.
  • Distributed use and ownership can lead to lack of control of messaging.
  • May lead to email overload.
  • Harvard
  • USFSP
  • University of Texas at Arlington
  • Towson University
  • Macalester College
  • Cornell
  • Beloit College
  • Genesee Community College
  • Bacone College
  • St. Catherine University

 

11. Does your institution maintain a website with links to local and outside technological / pedagogical / professional resources relevant to educational technology use? (Surveyed January 2014 - Results)

Respondents
using
Mean SD Median Mode Continue
10 3.20 1.03 3 2 10
Benefits and Issues Respondents

Three main benefits.

  • Provides an easily accessible resource that is available 24/7.
  • Provides a central location for curated collection of resources.
  • Provides helpful resource when talking to faculty and doing training.

Three main issues.

  • Gathering and maintaining comprehensive site resources while keeping them current.
  • Organization, structure and formatting of resources.
  • Ensuring that resources are easily located and publicized to the appropriate audience.

Websites submitted by respondents

  • University of Maryland Libraries
  • Concordia College
  • Towson University
  • UofP
  • Missouri S&T
  • Ramapo College of NJ
  • University of Alabama
  • Niagara College
  • University of Florida
  • University of Central Missouri
  • New York University
  • Edgewood College
  • University at Buffalo
  • University of Nebraska at Omaha

 

12. Does your institution regularly publish an educational technology newsletter with links to news items, resources, etc. for faculty? (Surveyed February 2015 - Results)

Respondents
using
Mean SD Median Mode Continue
6 3.17 0.98 3.5 4 6
Benefits and Issues Respondents

Three main benefits.

  • An easy way to distribute information and reach all faculty members.
  • Provides reference material and acts as persistent resource for faculty.
  • Provides exposure, such as for faculty members implementing new strategies and for new tools and resources.

Three main issues.

  • Consider timeliness of info and when it is sent in the semester in relation to instructor schedules.
  • Provide the info faculty need in a concise way, while trying to informing faculty in the way they prefer, and try to market ideas without trying to define them.
  • Make sure expenditure info focuses on supporting faculty needs.

Newsletter websites submitted by respondents.

  • St. Catherine University
  • University of Florida
  • Utica College
  • Dickinson College
  • Missouri University of Science and Technology
  • University of Maryland, Baltimore
  • Tyler Junior College
  • Towson University
  • University of Phoenix
  • UT Martin
  • City University of Seattle

 

13. Does your institution maintain an online events and training calendar for faculty?  (Surveyed March 2015 - Results)

Respondents
using
Mean SD Median Mode Continue
6 2.83 0.75 3 3 6
Benefits and Issues Respondents

Three main benefits.

  • Provides convenient, readily accessible, central location for information on training opportunities that can be referred to in email and other publications.
  • Creates faculty awareness of tech training opportunities.
  • Training session registration can be initiated directly from calendar.

Three main issues.

  • Faculty may not visit the calendar on their own. Remember to promote the calendar to drive interested people to it.
  • Calendar must be in a format that is easily accessible.
  • Calendar should incorporate a way to sign up in advance for the training.

Calendar websites submitted by respondents.

  • Edgewood College
  • UC Riverside
  • Towson University
  • Boston University
  • West Virginia University
  • Penn State
  • Louisiana State University
  • Texas A&M University-Commerce
  • Langara College

 

Limitations

The data for this study have been collected through the CCUMC mailing list and three EDUCAUSE mailing lists from March 2014 to March 2015. For most strategies the sample size is very small. Thus, while the numbers here are provided for information and comparison it is not possible to claim that these scores represent the opinions of all those who may employ these strategies, nor that they provide a full an accurate picture of all benefits and issues one may experience when employing them. Furthermore, the themes identified for questions four and five were identified by the survey administrator Jacob E. Larsen only. No particular framework was employed and it is possible that another analyst or rater might see different patterns or categorize responses differently. Those who may have questions, comments or suggestions about these data or the survey itself are welcome to contact Dr. Larsen at jlarsen@iastate.edu.