Contents

  1. Executive Summary
  2. Introduction
  3. Methodology
  4. Findings

Executive Summary

The overall study has been designed in response to an increasing rejection of technologically deterministic approaches to researching ICTs in HE, and the call for more in-depth, grounded research of what university teachers are doing with technology and why. This study explores the relationships between university teachers’ experiences and perceptions of teaching, learning, and ICTs in order to foster a deeper connection between the learning technologies community and the academic communities that it seeks to inform. This exploration adopts a case study strategy and is based on in-depth interviews conducted with ten university teachers’ at the University of Oxford. First level coding and categorical aggregation were used as a means of analysing the data, teasing out patterns that emerged across the interviews. Individual teacher vignettes are also available to place experiences and perceptions within context.

The case-study provides a rather different picture to that painted by the dominant discourses about ICTs and HE. Experiences and perceptions of ICTs are multi-dimensional, influenced a great deal by experiences and perceptions of teaching and learning. In particular, in this study the Oxford pedagogy is shown to play a very strong role in shaping interviewees’ perceptions of ICTs and their place within teaching and learning. Findings included the identification of four principle themes relating technology to university teaching; interaction; information and knowledge; dependency; and professional identity. These four patterns illuminated why some teachers chose to adopt certain technologies in their teaching, whilst others did not. Along with these themes motivations for the adoption, and non adoption, of ICTs were constituted. Recommendations based on these findings ghave been made to aid project management processes, marketing, and services. In summary the research highlighted a mesh of interrelating factors that are at work when using ICTs in teaching and learning, and the importance of considering the full range of experiences and perceptions when embarking on ICT ventures.

Introduction

To be able to support and enhance university teaching with ICTs we must first find out how academics are currently teaching their subjects, and why they teach in certain ways. To be able to embed technology sucessfully within teaching and learning we must understand how teachers' experience and perceive teaching, learning, and ICTs and the mesh of factors that motivate them to adopt, or not to adopt technology.

The aim of this study was to identify some core themes that are of significance when implementing ICTs in university teaching, and in doing so be able to respond to needs, alleviate fears, and the illuminate benefits of using ICTs in teaching and learning.

The key questions that informed this research were as follows:

Methodology

This study required a detailed, qualitative approach along with a close review of other research in the field. A case study strategy was used, with indepth interviewing as the main method of data collection. Interviews were conducted with 10 lecturers from a range of disciplines, and with a range of experiences using ICTs.

The General CRT interview scedule was developed specifically for use within this project and the data also fed into the Admin Burden Project.

The majority of the interviews were transcribed and first level coding and categorical aggregation were used to analyse the data and identify common themes and patterns. Summaries of the interviews can be found at in the CRT interview summaries section, and full transcripts are available upon request. Pseudonyms have been used instead of the interviewees’ real names. However, any reader who feels they can relate descriptions and comments to individuals should ground their views within a previous and whole knowledge of that person, and not in the way they have been portrayed in this study.

Findings

Patterns of experiencing ICTs

Five of the interviewees had been involved with specific ICT innovation projects of varying complexities. Others had taught themselves various packages to enhance their teaching materials, while some, had used a smaller selection of more administrative technologies to ‘make life easier’. However, for all of those interviewed certain ICTs had become part of the blend of their everyday working practices. Nearly all of the respondents commented that they would frequently direct students to useful URLs or library Internet resources, use online catalogues to find resources, and use e-mail as a first port of call for communication.

According to their accounts, interviewees mostly used technology to aid the administration of teaching (producing course materials, contacting students, collecting course feedback), or to enhance learning (use of PowerPoint in delivering lectures, online reading lists, formative assessment) rather than to substitute any part of it. Whilst some embedded technology extensively in their teaching, it was still additional to the traditional teaching techniques of the lecture and the tutorial. The ICT innovation projects in which some interviewees had been involved in, were ‘add-ons’ to enhance traditional teaching practice. These included online formative multiple-choice questions (MCQs) to aid revision by David (philosophy) and Chris (business studies); and the use of flash animations to teach chemistry by Stuart. Rosa used the VLE extensively to introduce her students to a range of materials. Peter’s simulation project was an exception within the group in that the project replaced a practical class.

Use of the institutional VLE

WebLearn is currently the preferred VLE system supported and hosted by the University. The interviews revealed a great deal of awareness about the presence of WebLearn, with four of the interviewees using it to host materials on a regular basis. Others, however, had little practical experience of using it, and three of the interviewees used alternative departmental or college intranets instead. In all instances WebLearn was used purely for the administration of course content rather than for any form of learning activity.

Patterns of experiencing teaching

Experiences of teaching at Oxford tended to focus on the tutorial, a technique that largely consists of the tutor teaching a student on their own or in a small group. At Oxford the tutorial largely consists of a tutor exploring a topic in greater depth with a student face-to-face, this may be through discussing and debating essays, problems, or readings. The majority (seven) of university teachers interviewed held regular undergraduate tutorials on a one-to-one basis, the remaining held slightly larger tutorials with two or three students at one time. In relation to the aims of the tutorial, comments included: ‘enabling each student to learn at their own pace;’ ‘giving immediate feedback’ on a student’s work and performance; ‘two minds working on the same problem;’ ‘guiding intellectual growth;’ and ‘an academic demonstrating scholarly skills to enable the student to become an academic themselves.’ In the interviews the tutorial was seen to focus on the individual student, assisting them to develop their own learning style, directing them in their studies, but also giving them some freedom of choice in what they studied. June, a tutor of religious studies, commented ‘I give them a range of essay titles so they can think flexibly around a particular subject; it gives them mental agility’. The tutorial process puts student and tutor face-to-face in a way that is affected by distinctive personalities and approaches, and thus becomes a highly personalised learning experience.

A number of the interviewees expressed that the role of the tutorial was not to deliver information or facts, or to bring students ‘up to speed’ for their exams; rather, it was to ‘contest knowledge’ and ‘articulate argument’, fostering in students scholarly skills so that in time they would become less dependent on their tutor’s guidance. This opinion, however, was not shared across the group, and others indicated that knowledge was accumulated rather than challenged, within the tutorial process. For instance teachers from chemistry, medical sciences, and philosophical logic felt that the main aim of the tutorial was to go over particular problems that the students were having with the course material. Some interviewees also commented that there was a fine line between the tutorial essays and the examination questions:

The tutorial was perceived to be at the very heart of the teaching experience, with other aspects of the learning environment, such as lectures, classes, labs and private study, feeding into it. Experiences of group teaching were largely more information- focused. Interviewees commented that they gave traditional ‘performance style lectures’: ‘it’s just me at the front talking really’. Some interviewees broke up their lectures with activities and used visual stimuli like Peter had described, but there was usually little room for discussion or debate, in many cases because the group was too large to do this effectively, or because the students were unresponsive. As one teacher commented:

Lectures were largely seen as a means of delivering facts and information to the students, the tutorials as a place to articulate understanding and critical thinking.

Patterns connecting experiences and perceptions of teaching to experiences and perceptions of technology

Overall, relating teachers’ perceptions of teaching to their use of ICTs through the transcripts was a complex task and varied immensely within the group. After the process of analysis four main themes in particular emerged from the interview responses of the group. Discussed in order these are; face-to-face interaction versus virtual interaction; dependence versus independence in learning; knowledge versus information; and lastly old versus new teaching styles.

Face-to-face interaction versus virtual interaction

A significant theme that emerged was a concern about the potential reduction of face-to-face contact if ICTs were used increasingly for teaching. Oxford University has a favourable tutor-to-student ratio and teachers perceived the majority of their teaching commitment as organising and holding tutorials. They expected to have a high level of face-to-face contact with their students, and said they believed that their students felt the same way. Further, face-to-face contact was considered to affect a student’s motivation to learn in a positive manner:

One interviewee commented that what online learning environments, like VLEs, were in effect trying to achieve was the contact that one gets through the Oxford tutorial:

The perception that ICTs could not replace or enhance what Oxford already had in terms of the tutorial was widespread across the group. Teachers often mentioned that they were ‘sceptical’ about the advantages of using discussion tools in this environment, and that they were ‘not convinced’ of the benefits any form of online interaction could bring to their teaching and their students learning. Some teachers who had tried online discussion forums, or had seen their colleagues do so, commented that online discussion facilities would not be used as students social networking patterns were already well established, largely due to the collegiate structure of the university. Comments included:

In those subjects heavily reliant on fact (chemistry, Turkish studies, physiology) more debate and discussion were not perceived as aspects of learning that would be beneficial; for instance, one chemistry teacher commented:

Interviewees felt that there was no real need to ‘rescue students from their loneliness’ as students were placed in highly supportive and effective networks consisting of their tutor and their college peers. When engaged in lecturing to much wider groups some interviewees commented that they had used e-mail lists, or created question and answer web pages, to answer any questions concerning lecture content. However, more often than not these points could be clarified in tutorials and these mechanisms were largely unused or not needed.

Further, often entwined within the role of tutor was a more pastoral aspect of general support and care of the student through their academic career, and it was not seen as desirable to use technology to provide this. Many of the group felt that they had come to know the students whom they tutored. By providing other forms of interaction new technologies challenged the very basic formulae of what ‘makes Oxford work’, and a shift to new technologies for communication purposes would require an organizational change that saw the dismissal of the tutorial, an aspect of teaching that many of the group felt was an important aspect of their professional identity (the group regularly referred to their role as ‘tutor’ rather than ‘lecturer’ or ‘teacher’).

In the case of graduate students, some of the group felt that there could be scope for using technologies to aid communication, especially for doctoral students. Interviewees met their graduate students on a one-to-one basis much less regularly (once or twice a term), usually to discuss research projects rather than any form of teaching their were receiving. Communication between tutor and student was largely conducted through e-mail, and efforts were made in some disciplines to place research students in groups with other students covering similar topics. These met on a regular basis or, in the case of science subjects, shared the same laboratory. However, connecting to the theme of independency of learning discussed earlier, tutors also felt that at this stage students should not rely so much on the support of their tutor, as Phillip states: ‘they can’t have the sense that we are permanently available’. Those interviewees who felt they would consider using discussion facilities were sceptical of the amount of time that they would have to commit to make them beneficial.

Dependence versus independence in learning

Commonly recurring themes in the interviews were those of dependency and independency within student learning. Teachers who held the perception that teaching was about guiding and assisting students to develop understanding, knowledge and techniques felt that increasing uses of ICTs would ‘spoon-feed’ students, encouraging forms of dependency. As the teachers’ experiences of ICTs were largely as information delivery systems, rather than activity-based learning tools, ICTs were seen to encourage passive learning. An important aspect of developing a learning style was the ability to be able to conduct ‘independent research’, learning to use online databases and bibliographies to find relevant material and explore connections between them, rather than being given links to such resources directly. An example of this are some of the interviewees’ comments about electronic reading lists which contained hyperlinks to journal articles:

An interesting comment was made by Phillip, who expressed the concern that new means of communication afforded by ICTs (e.g. discussion boards, synchronous chat rooms) would actually encourage the students to depend more upon their tutor:

Interestingly, none of the interviewees voiced the opinion that ICTs could encourage students to take responsibility for their own learning. Being able to ‘develop’ learning styles and techniques, conducting ‘independent’ research and developing ‘complex understandings’ was seen to be very much a part of the ‘Oxford experience’.

Information versus knowledge

A further important pattern that emerged from the interview responses was the perception that information differs significantly from knowledge, and that only a real teacher can guide a student. As discussed previously, the role of teacher as tutor is largely experienced as assisting the student in constructing and contesting knowledge and in developing learning styles though guidance, tutoring and personal attention, not by disseminating information. The boundless amount of information available on the Internet might enrich what is learnt from a teacher but it does not substitute it for the latter. This was expressed by one teacher’s comment on the problems of using the Internet as a mechanism for resource discovery:

Information is more accessible through the Internet, but a teacher is needed to help mould this into meaningful knowledge.

Old versus new teaching styles

Although, Rosa and Peter both conveyed that their teaching styles had changed to encompass new technologies in their teaching; this shift in method was raised as a concern by a number of the other teachers interviewed. Many of the teachers felt that ICTs would bring about a change in their roles within the teaching and learning context. However, perceptions varied as to what those changes would be. Interestingly, in contrast to the perception discussed above that ICTs would not encourage an independent and self-conscious learning style, some teachers voiced a concern that technology would reduce their control over the learning situation:

Other teachers feared that an increased use of ICTs would force a greater focus on administration rather than teaching within their work. Comments included:

The online university teacher takes on the roles of facilitator, administrator, technical support and evaluator, the focus in this change is seen to shift away from the student to the general running of the course.

Principle motivations for university teachers to adopt, or not to adopt, ICTs in teaching and learning

In addition to the above themes, a number of other points arose specifically in relation to motivations for adopting, or not adopting ICTs in teaching practices.

Principle motivations not to adopt ICTs in teaching

In addition to the concerns emerging in the themes discussed above, other barriers for using ICTs for teaching and learning were: demands on time; lack of incentives for using ICTs; lack of evidence in terms of educational benefits; and lack of technical infrastructure, skills and support. Some teachers perceived that ICTs would require a greater amount of administration, both in authoring teaching materials and in maintaining an online environment. Whilst Rosa felt that in the long term ICTs had helped her to reduce her workload, other teachers who had incorporated technologies within their teaching felt that it had been far more time-consuming, especially when used as a supplementary teaching method. Chris discussed his worries over another university teacher who was assisting him in creating formative online MCQs for undergraduate business studies students:

Similarly, Phillip admitted to difficulty finding the time to create online materials for his students:

Like Margaret, other interviewees were interested in increasing the use of technology in their teaching but were discouraged by the increase in workload they perceived it would demand. As Karen commented:

A lack of incentive for using ICTs was also a key point raised by some of the interviewees, in terms of both staff and student commitment. There was a general feeling that teaching and learning were held in low self-esteem in comparison to research activities, which were generally rewarded with promotion. Chris discussed the response of his colleagues to the e-learning MCQ project which the department had undertaken:

In terms of the benefits that students could gain from using educational technology, most of the teachers interviewed did not perceive any clear obstacles or barriers to which ICTs could provide a solution. Chris also raised the issue that, while the online MCQs had been ‘a valuable adjunct to learning’ for some students, he explained that this was only for students who felt the need to test their knowledge: ‘I’m sure many students just wouldn't bother to engage with it routinely’. The question of whether a student would feel motivated to engage with online formative assessments is closely connected with the perceived educational benefits of using ICTs within the Oxford educational system. As Stuart succulently summarised:

There was also some concern over the technical infrastructure and support needed to use ICTs within teaching. Four of the interviewees commented that the lecture theatres that they used were not set up with the data projectors or the Internet connections that they needed to use technology in their lectures. Some teachers also voiced their concerns over dealing with ‘technical glitches’ that may occur when using ICTs for teaching and confessed to a fear of appearing to look incompetent in front of their students:

Some interviewees perceived the support to aid the implementation of ICT into teaching and learning as inadequate. For instance two of the interviewees who used WebLearn were discouraged that they had to use a mailing list to have their questions answered, preferring support on a one-to-basis. Others felt that the they required more pedagogical support rather than technical support, as June stated ‘Well, I’m sure I know how to use some of the technology already, or it would be easy enough to learn, but I wouldn’t know how it use it you see. How do I know where and when I should do it?’

Principle motivations to adopt ICTs in teaching

All those interviewed who had used ICTs were asked what the main motivations was for implementing them within their teaching. The responses could be classified into four areas: addressing a practical need, enriching course content, personal rewards, and institutional recognition.

Peter and Rosa shared a common theme in their reasons for adopting ICTs - each had experienced situations in their teaching that had required them to look for enhancement from elsewhere. Peter needed to substitute lab activities and Rosa needed to address a lack of material available to teach Turkish studies. Others had used ICTs to ‘liven up’ or ‘enrich’ their teaching, through the use of PowerPoint presentations and multimedia to make the content more ‘interesting’ for their students. As Chris commented on his use of electronic visual aids in his lectures:

Another main motivation discussed in the interviews was the personal reward teachers received from using ICTs. Some interviewees cited a personal interest in using technology as reason for adoption, and some their interest in teaching issues, often prompted by professional certificate in teaching in HE or a similar course. Some institutional rewards, such as available funding or development time, awards for best practice, or the occasional committee responsibility or post, were mentioned. However, it was evident that institutional factors were not of great importance in motivating the more innovative teachers to use ICTs.

Summary

The results from the interviews were varied. They showed the many different ways that the teachers used ICTs in their work, and highlighted the tendency within the group use technologies to enhance and enrich learning rather than to transform or substitute it. Perceptions of teaching, learning, and ICTs clearly influenced the ways in which the teachers used technology, and in many cases perceptions were highly influenced by the established Oxford pedagogy of the tutorial. Although perceptions were multifaceted they largely revolved around notions of interaction, dependency, information, knowledge, and professional identity; allowing for the identification of some common themes. Additionally, the findings from the interviews highlighted some principle motivations for university teachers to adopt, or not to adopt, ICTs in their teaching. Time; lack of incentives; a lack of evidence for educational benefit; lack of defined problems; and technical provision and support; were seen as barriers to the uptake of ICTs; whilst, practical need; enriching course content; personal reward; and institutional recognition were seen as levers to adopt ICTs.