Motivating Factors* for TransitioningProfessors from the Traditional Classroom to the Online Learning Environment *from a pedagogical perspective Dennis McGeehan
IntroductionThe Concerns•Environmental shifts in and outside the academic community have accelerated the shift to virtual learning.•Competitors now include prestigious institutions. Enhancements must be implemented to remain ahead of the emerging competition.•Current Context: must include at least one hour of virtual learning weekly in all campus classes•Leadership Role: motivate faculty to comply with the one hour requirement and to regularly teach courses online
Problem Statement••Some outstanding classroom instructors have been reluctant to apply their skills in the virtual environment. Motivational factors that enable these professors to successfully migrate to the virtual learning environment must be identified and applied to serve this growing student population.
ContextImpetus for Change to Virtual LearningPlatforms by institutions: The expense associated with any increase in physical capacity with•Private and Public - Shrinking budgetaryresources via public funds and privateendowments•For Profit - Investor demands for highreturns
ContextImpetus for Change to Virtual Learning Platformsby ConstituencyFor faculty:•Trend – student demand for virtual education•Job preservationFor students:•Difficult balance career/life/studies in 24/7 world•Increasing costs associated with studies•Dwindling time available to dedicate to studies
Conceptual Framework for Change•External environmental influences•Their influence upon institutional leadership•Elements of the learning community•Motivating factors for faculty transition
Economic Workplace Transformati Authentic on (Moral) Environm Students ent FacultySocio-Cultural Family Administr ation Social Justice Transaction Technology
Findings on Motivating Factors•Motivating and de-motivating factors surveyed are widely diverse among experienced professors who have transitioned to the online environment•Enhanced learning platform interactivity is high on the faculty wish list•There are institutional communications disconnects at the strategic, tactical and operational levels regarding infrastructure, pedagogical quality and technical support needed for virtual education•Common themes emerge from interviews and focus groups
Emerging Themes•Teachable moment vs. guide on the side•Interactivity•Auditor intrusiveness•Validation/verification of student work•Technical infrastructure and software support•Academic freedom•Ownership (of course material)
References• Argyris, C. (1990). Overcoming organizational defenses: Facilitating organizational learning. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.• Biernbaum, R. (1988). How colleges work: The cybernetics of academic organization and leaders. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.• Burns, J.M. (2002). Transforming leadership: The pursuit of happiness. New York, NY: Grove/ Atlantic, Inc. Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R. & McKee, A. ( 2002). Primal leadership. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.• Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading change. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.• Stansbury, S.L. and Kymes, A.D. (2007). Transformative learning through “teaching with technology” electronic portfolios. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 50(6), 488-496.
Baseline Data Motivational Factors: Survey Learning Interview Platforms Focus Group Usage Training Hybrid Platform Motivational Factors: SurveyTechnology Support Interview Focus GroupAsynchronous Platform Usage Pedagogy Critical, Cognitivism, Constructivism Motivational Factors: Survey Andragogy Interview Connectivism, Focus Group Objectivism Usage