The change from ‘Institute of Technology’ (IoT) to ‘Technological University’ (TU) is the most recent development in the evolution of higher education in Ireland. It has resulted in increased demands on faculty to embrace digital technologies and engage in Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL), while also being research active against a backdrop of the COVID pandemic and its consequences and pressures (Carroll & Conboy, 2020).  This is in addition to tensions that have been identified between the needs and aims of multiple stakeholders including learners, teachers, educational organisations/institutions, employers, industry and society, as well as national and European governments and organisations (Karlsen, 2013). Among these include regulatory changes (Scott, 2021), and increasing demands for digitisation (European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice, 2019). This places increased pressure on faculty to bridge the gap while themselves attempting to maintain their status as highly qualified teachers and researchers - qualities that are identified as being crucial to high quality provision and equity of access (Caena & Redecker, 2019; Redecker, 2017).

Aims: The aim of this research is to explore faculty experiences of their work and its context. The data then would be used to map the conditions that influence their engagement with the digital technologies that support their pedagogical and research activities and identify the elements that lead to success in digital Teaching and Learning Environments (dTLEs).

Research questions: Theresearch questions include:

• How do faculty experiences of their work and its context influence their personal engagement/disengagement with the digital technologies that can support their pedagogical and research activities?

Theoretical frameworks: The research is based on a theoretical framework that includes the following areas:

• Digital Mindsets. Mindset literature refers to the assumptions, beliefs and values that determine how individuals perceive and understand the world and consequently how they act and interact. Digital mindsets influence adoption of technology and organisational digital transformation (Solberg et al., 2020). The characteristics of a digital mindset include knowledge, skills and competencies, as well as the ability to apply these to multiple contexts (Janssen et al., 2013; Redecker, 2017). It also has an affective dimension and an association with attitudes that include curiosity, openness, creativity and an ability to be adaptable and flexible (Donat et al., 2009).
• Personal engagement. Kahn’s conception of personal engagement/disengagement (1990) indicated that the constantly varying degrees to which individuals invest themselves (physically, cognitively and emotionally). High levels of personal engagement have been linked to passion and enthusiasm, increased discretionary effort and innovation (Meyer & Schneider, 2021).
• Transformative learning/perspective transformation. This focuses on the process of a change in self-perception that adults experience following critical reflection on experience. This leads to a changed perspective and a changed self-perception and guides future action and practice (Cranton, 2016; Mezirow, 2012).

Identity self-states. Identity self-states are ‘motivational self-systems’ in a theory that incorporates ‘possible’ ‘feared’ and ‘ideal’ selves (Markus & Nurius, 1986) that facilitate movement towards a future state of being. These possible selves contribute to the formation of a professional identity (Hamman et al., 2013).

This qualitative, phenomenological research aims to study individual faculty experiences and their experiences of and orientations towards digital technologies (Yin, 2016). The primary data collection method will be semi-structured interviews (planned 30-35), followed by an invitation to participate in a subsequent focus group (approx. 5 participants in each). The interviews will facilitate a broad understanding of the individual faculty perspectives. Other, primarily documentary, sources of data provided by the participants will also be used to inform the research. These will be gathered from three sources: i) directly from the participants, ii) from their Technological University and iii) from their publications on experiences of digitalisation in HE. Sampling and procedures. The first stage of this is to map the landscape of the TU structure and identify key figures and likely participants. Following ethical approval, the researcher will use purposive sampling (Yin, 2016) to identify and using email invite faculty to participate in the interviews. Invitees will self-select (by deciding to agree or not agree to participate). Those who agree will be interviewed (40 – 60-minutes) and, with consent, this will be recorded. Following the interview, the data will be transcribed, and member checked. If necessary or beneficial, interviewees will be invited to attend a follow-up interview. Any available documentary data will be used to triangulate and contribute to further insights. The follow-up focus groups would be used to share preliminary findings and provide an additional opportunity for member-checking with those willing to participate. Notes taken by the facilitator and/or scribe will be consolidated and shared with the participants, again for member-checking. Analysis and Dissemination. Consistent with qualitative methodology the data will be analysed using the constant comparative method (Glaser, 1965; Saldaña, 2016) to construct themes/categories from recurring patterns in the data and using appropriate software (e.g., ATLASTti). Data analysis and synthesis will be used to produce project reports for stakeholders.

This research will focus on TU faculty at the level of the individual. It will specifically focus on the psychological conditions of engagement and disengagement that influence individual perception and action in relation to digital technologies for professional (pedagogical and research) purposes. The expected outcomes of this research are: i) To understand how faculty personal experiences and work contexts influence their engagement/disengagement with digital technologies. ii) To identify the conditions, elements and components that underpin faculty engagement with digital technologies that facilitate digital pedagogy and research partnerships. iii) To identify the elements that underpin faculty success in building and maintaining online teaching-learning environments and research partnerships. iv) To contribute to what is known on the impact of the psychological conditions that influence the engagement and/or disengagement of individual faculty members with digital technologies and their use in pedagogical and research activities. It will provide a basis for further research that seeks to understand the influences on and attitudes of individual faculty members and could contribute towards the development of individual faculty and their agency, as well as provide towards a guide for organisational policies and practices. This is an early-stage doctoral study. It is anticipated that the findings from the pilot stage of the research will be presented at this conference.

Caena, F., & Redecker, C. (2019). Aligning teacher competence frameworks to 21st century challenges: The case for the European Digital Competence Framework for Educators (Digcompedu). European Journal of Education, 54, 356–369. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12345 Carroll, N., & Conboy, K. (2020). Normalising the “new normal”: Changing tech-driven work practices under pandemic time pressure. International Journal of Information Management, 55(June). Cranton, P. (2016). Understanding & Promoting Transformative Learning: A Guide to Theory and Practice. Stylus Publishing. Donat, E., Brandtweiner, R., & Kerschbaum, J. (2009). Attitudes and the digital divide: Attitude measurement as instrument to predict internet usage. Informing Science, 12, 37–56. https://doi.org/10.28945/427 European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice. (2019). Digital Education at School in Europe. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2797/763 Glaser, B. G. (1965). The Constant Comparative Method of Qualitative Analysis. Social Problems, 12(4), 436–445. Hamman, D., Coward, F., Johnson, L., Lambert, M., Zhou, L., & Indiatsi, J. (2013). Teacher Possible Selves: How Thinking about the Future Contributes to the Formation of Professional Identity. Self and Identity, 12(3), 307–336. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298868.2012.671955 Janssen, J., Stoyanov, S., Ferrari, A., Punie, Y., Pannekeet, K., & Sloep, P. (2013). Experts’ views on digital competence: Commonalities and differences. Computers and Education, 68, 473–481. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.06.008 Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological Conditions of Personal Engagement and Disengagement At Work. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 692–724. https://doi.org/10.2307/256287 Karlsen, J. E. (2013). Reframing University Adaptation. In J. E. Karlsen & R. Prichard (Eds.), Resilient Universities: Confronting Changes in a Challenging World. Peter Lang. Markus, H., & Nurius, P. (1986). Possible Selves. American Psychologist, 41(9), 954–969. Meyer, J. P., & Schneider, B. (Eds.). (2021). A Research Agenda for Employee Engagement in a Changing World of Work. Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789907858 Mezirow, J. (2012). Learning to think like an Adult: Core Concepts of Transformation Theory. In E. W. Taylor & P. Cranton (Eds.), The Handbook of Transformative Learning: Theory, Research and Practice. Jossey-Bass. Redecker, C. (2017). European Framework for the Digital Competence of Educators. Saldaña, J. (2016). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers (3rd ed.). Sage Publications Ltd. Scott, C. (2021). Managing higher education for a changing regulatory environment. Public Administration and Policy, 24(1), 7–20. https://doi.org/10.1108/pap-10-2020-0045 Solberg, E., Traavik, L. E. M., & Wong, S. I. (2020). Digital Mindsets: Recognizing and Leveraging Individual Beliefs for Digital Transformation. California Management Review, 62(4), 105–124. https://doi.org/10.1177/0008125620931839 Yin, R. K. (2016). Qualitative Research From start to finish (2nd ed.). The Guilford Press