The choice not to use computers: A case study of community college faculty who do not use computers in teaching

The primary purpose of this investigation is to study the motives of community college faculty who decide not to use computers in teaching. In spite of the fact that many of the environmental blocks that would otherwise inhibit the use of the computers have been eliminated at many institutions, many faculty do not use a computer beyond its word-processing function. For the purpose of the study non-adoption of computers in teaching is defined as not using computers for more than word-processing. ^ The issues in the literature focus on resistance and assume a pro-innovation and pro-adoption bias. Previous research on the questions is primarily surveys with narrowly focused assumptions. This qualitative research directly asks the participants about their feelings, beliefs, attitudes, experiences, and behaviors in regard to computers in teaching. Through the interview process a number of other correlated issues emerge. ^ The investigation was conducted at Miami-Dade Community College, a large urban multicampus institution, in Miami-Dade, Florida. It was conducted through a series of in-depth phenomenological interviews. There were nine interviews; eight within the profile; two were pilots; and one was an extreme opposite of the profile. Each participant was interviewed three times for about 45 minutes. ^ The results indicate that the computer conflicts with the participants' values in regard to their teaching and their beliefs in regard to the nature of knowledge, learning, and the relationship that they wish to maintain with students. Computers require significant changes in the values, beliefs, and consequent behaviors. These are changes that the participants are not willing to make without overwhelming evidence that they are worth the sacrifice. For the participants, this worth is only definable as it positively improves learning. For even the experts the evidence is not there. Unlike the innovator, the high end computer user, these participants are not willing to adopt the computer on faith. ^

The effects of a professional development course on the teaching practices of P--12 classroom teachers

This follow-up study examined the long term effects of a staff development model on P–12 classroom teachers' instructional practices and dispositions regarding a curricular innovation. The sample, 44 private school practitioners who participated in the staff development program that used the model, was administered a survey at three checkpoints over a three year period to gather quantitative data regarding the participants' concerns about the curricular innovation. A comparison group of 19 practitioners also completed the survey. Qualitative data, gathered through interviews conducted with ten of the 44 participants, contributed to understanding the participants' perspectives on changes they perceived in their teaching practices as a result of the staff development. Elements of the model that were most instrumental in effecting those changes were identified. ^ The findings indicated that the participants demonstrated changes in the quality of their concerns, moving from self concerns and task concerns to impact concerns immediately following the training. The decrease in self concerns was sustained three years after the staff development, while task concerns increased and impact concerns returned to pre staff development levels. A significant difference in stages of concern between the participant and the comparison groups was noted at self and impact stages. ^ Findings revealed that participants changed their teaching practices and beliefs about instructional processes as a result of the staff development, becoming more collaborative and confident in implementing innovative approaches; they were perceived as leaders among their peers. Elements of the staff development model that participants identified as being influential in the change process included the opportunity for collaboration, authenticity of the training activities, and ongoing and comprehensive nature of the training. ^