10 SES 11 A, Research in Teacher Education: Cultures and Methodologies
Paper/Ignite Talk Session
We present a nationwide study carried out in Spanish public universities about the topic of the acceptation and/or adoption of the Blended Learning methodology (hereinafter referred to as B-Learning) by university lecturers, in the context of a growing expansion of B-Learning methodology in a significant number of universities around the world. (Becker et al., 2017; Dziuban, Graham, Moskal, Norberg, & Sicilia, 2018, Graham, Moskal, Norberg, & Sicilia,2018, Martín-García, 2014 etc.)
The research question is based on determining which main factors are associated with the implementation of this training modality, detecting which factors can predict the intention of its use in this context. The theoretical framework that belongs to the proposal is defined by the Technology Acceptation Model (TAM) and Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT)that offer the conceptual support of reference to define the main considered variables: personal and professional characteristics, attributes perceived on BL and climate or organizational context and contextual variables.
The study starts out from the basic idea that B-Learning is, at present, one of the teaching and learning modalities with the most potential to improve training within the context of higher education centres in Europe. For this reason, there is an increasing interest in not only getting to know the processes of distribution and acceptation of this type of methodology, but also in knowing the objective advantages that B-Learning gives for either traditional (face-to-face) modes of learning or e-Learning. In the same way, it is important to keep in mind what both the students and teachers expect from, and think of, an education based on a combined model of learning.
In this respect, the theoretical and empirical framework that the aforementioned models of technology acceptation offer, can be of enormous use in offering a comprehensive model of the existing relationship between the variables that analyse and measure the perception of expectations in respect to the results obtained using B-Learning, and the way in which teachers perceive the use of this model. That is to say, if it is perceived as a system that is relatively easy to implement or, on the contrary, as one that is complex and inefficient.
In the same way, the following aspects are also evaluated: the way in which the social influence or pressure from academic authorities, peers or even students is perceived in order to accelerate the use of B-Learning, or how teachers perceive the existence, or nonexistence, of conditions and diverse resources that facilitate, or hinder, the use of this type of methodology.
More specifically, in our study we use the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) proposed by Venkatesh et al. (2003); Venkatesh, Brown, Maruping & Bala (2008) given that it brings together the main elements of the TAM models and the Innovation Diffusion Theory (IDT) proposed by Rogers in the 1960s. To this end, we present the empirical results obtained from a nationwide survey carried out in various public universities, in which 982 academic teachers participated.
These results have allowed this sample of university teachers to make their valuations about the previously mentioned aspects known. The results highlight both the factors directly related to individual decision-making on whether or not B-Learning will be implemented and the development of a discussion proposal destined towards european institutes of higher education. The objective of this proposal will be to promote strategic action to optimise the diffusion of B-Learning in universities.
The study was carried out within an ex post facto design, of a descriptive and comparative-casual type looking to discover cause and effect relationships between variables. Being a national study, an online based self-administered survey was chosen in order to facilitate a greater access to the population under study and a greater speed at which the data was collected. The participant sample consists of 982 teachers from over 40 public universities in Spain. The variables that were studied were organised into sociodemographic and identification variables (age, gender, professional category, university, teaching experience, etc.) and those of the UTAUT model. The following UTAUT variables were considered: Performance Expectancy, (PE), Effort Expectancy (EE), Influence (SI), and Facilitating Condition, (FC). For the measurement of these UTAUT variables, reactives taken from specialised literature within the field were used (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975; Davis, 1989; Venkatesh et al., 2008; Brown, Dennis, & Venkatesh, 2010; Teo, et al., 2015, etc.). In regards to the analysis of the data, a descriptive study on average scores and frequencies was carried out using tests comparing average scores (t of Student and ANOVA). Furthermore, a measurement model based on confirmatory factorial analysis (Amos v.25) has been estimated for the initial exploratory analysis of the reliability and dimensionality of the scales. Finally, the predictive capacity of the obtained structural model has been valued.
The intention of implementation (adoption) of the B-Learning methodology by teachers at public Spanish universities appears explained in the model through the 68.3% of the total variance. This implementation of the B-Learning system is something voluntary, as perceived by 76% of the teaching staff. The main predictor variables of this intention are defined in the UTAUT model (Performance Expectancy and Effort Expectancy). Statistically significant differences can be appreciated not only in the different groups of teachers based on professional and individual variables but also in the previous experience and frequency of use of systems based on B-Learning methodology. Additionally, it was found that age has a moderating effect on all the variables of the model in regard to the intention of use in the B-Learning system. On the other hand, one of the initial hypotheses is based on both the lack of training of Spanish university teaching staff in the use of blended teaching methodology and the lack of institutional recognition towards teachers who implement this type of methodology. The study shows that only 56.1% of educators manifested that their university contemplated training on B-Learning, just 41.1% of lecturers affirm to have received training from their own university on this methodology, and a mere 16.2% had received training from other institutions. 56% of teachers recognised that they didn’t know whether or not their university possessed specific regulations on the use of these methodologies, 33.2% affirmed that in their university this methodology isn’t taken into account in management and promotion policies; however, around 40.4% of educators declared that B-Learning is a quality indicator in innovation policies. More than 72.9% of teaching staff said that they were unsure of whether or not their university even offered incentives that encourage and recognise the use of Information Computer Technology by teachers in the classroom.
Becker, S. A., Cummins, M., Davis, A., Freeman, A., Hall, C. G., & Ananthanarayanan, V. (2017). NMC horizon report: 2017 higher education edition (pp. 1-60). The New Media Consortium. Brown, S. A., Dennis, A., & Venkatesh, V. (2010). Predicting collaboration technology use: Integrating technology adoption and collaboration research. Journal of Management Information Systems, 27(2), 9-53. https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222270201 Dziuban, C., Graham, C. R., Moskal, P. D., Norberg, A., & Sicilia, N. (2018). Blended learning: the new normal and emerging technologies. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 15(1), 3. Fishbein, M. y Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading MA: Addison-Wesley. Martin García, A.V. (coord.) (2014). Blended Learning en Educación Superior. Perspectivas de innovación y cambio. Madrid, Síntesis Porter, W. W., Graham, C. R., Bodily, R. G., & Sandberg, D. S. (2016). A qualitative analysis of institutional drivers and barriers to blended learning adoption in higher education. The internet and Higher education, 28, 17-27. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B., & Davis, F.D. (2003) User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27, 3, 425-478. Venkatesh, V., Brown, S.A., Maruping, L.M., & Bala, H. (2008). Predicting different conceptualizations of system use: The competing roles of behavioral intention, facilitating conditions, and behavioral expectation. MIS Quarterly, 32(3), 483–502. Venkatesh, V., Thong, J.Y., & Xu, X. (2016) Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology A Synthesis and the Road Ahead, Journal of the Association of Information Systems, 17, 5, 328-376.
Some networks have already started to plan their chairperson(s).
But at the moment chairpersons are only pencilled in, as we will still need to check for time conflicts between presentation and chairing duties. EERA office will work on this in due course and then officially let chairpersons know about their chairing duties.
Meanwhile, thank you for your patience.
00. Central Events (Keynotes, EERA-Panel, EERJ Round Table, Invited Sessions)
Network 1. Continuing Professional Development: Learning for Individuals, Leaders, and Organisations
Network 2. Vocational Education and Training (VETNET)
Network 3. Curriculum Innovation
Network 4. Inclusive Education
Network 5. Children and Youth at Risk and Urban Education
Network 6. Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures
Network 7. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Network 8. Research on Health Education
Network 9. Assessment, Evaluation, Testing and Measurement
Network 10. Teacher Education Research
Network 11. Educational Effectiveness and Quality Assurance
Network 12. LISnet - Library and Information Science Network
Network 13. Philosophy of Education
Network 14. Communities, Families and Schooling in Educational Research
Network 15. Research Partnerships in Education
Network 16. ICT in Education and Training
Network 17. Histories of Education
Network 18. Research in Sport Pedagogy
Network 19. Ethnography
Network 20. Research in Innovative Intercultural Learning Environments
Network 22. Research in Higher Education
Network 23. Policy Studies and Politics of Education
Network 24. Mathematics Education Research
Network 25. Research on Children's Rights in Education
Network 26. Educational Leadership
Network 27. Didactics – Learning and Teaching
The programme is updated regularly (each day in the morning)
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.