Study Title:     The effects of digital media and communications technologies on post-secondary teaching and learning environments: a phenomenological approach with recently appointed university faculty

Research Details:

Purpose and goals of the study

The proposed study will seek to understand how university faculty think about their teaching responsibilities and how they view the effects of educational technologies and media on their instructional work.  Additionally, the study will document and analyze the induction of new faculty including processes employed, training received, and mentoring relationships established.

Introduction

The popular media are currently posing questions about the pertinence and place of universities and academic scholarship in an age of greatly expanded access to global information and communications networks. A recent CBC broadcast, “The Big Disruption: Universities in the Digital Age”, called into question “the very nature and purpose of higher education, at a time when demand for it has never been greater” (Basen, 2012).  In a similar vein, The Victoria Times Colonist ran an article describing the Internet as a major threat to institutions of higher education (Klassen, 2012). These are only a few examples of an apparent trend toward concern about the nature and even relevance of traditionally organized post-secondary education given the ubiquity of the Internet and the range of educational programs and services now provided through it.

Relatively little recent research exists regarding the lifeworlds of new faculty in the academy.  Richard Boice is well known for research conducted in the 80s and 90s on the experiences of university faculty. Boice (2000) reported that many new faculty found that the demands of teaching and instruction were far greater than expected, a finding which added to the observation of Seidel, Benassi, & Richards (1999) noting that most new faculty felt  that their graduate programs had not prepared them for teaching in higher education institutions.  In a recent post to the University of Toronto News  Ali (2012) interviewed seasoned professors who recounted the surprises of their first teaching assignments, and gave their best advice for mitigating the pressures associated with higher education teaching. (Ali, 2012).

Preparing Future Faculty (2002), a publication of the Association of American Colleges & Universities made the following claim.

Most colleges and universities have increased the emphasis placed on the quality of teaching.  One result is that well-structured lectures alone no longer meet the criteria for excellent teaching.  Faculty are expected to utilize creative techniques that effectively engage students and support learning.  Schools expect faculty to embrace new pedagogies including the use of technology, collaborative learning, simulations, and field experiences. Because students come from a variety of backgrounds, demonstrate various levels of motivation and diverse learning styles, and exhibit a wide assortment of career goals, faculty are expected to address their multiple needs, without sacrificing academic rigor(Adams, 2002, p. 3).

A growing focus on university teaching is also evident in Canada.  For example, Simon Fraser University (SFU) is currently inviting all faculty to discuss questions centering on curriculum review in the areas of skill development, learning experiences, and the development and assessment of learning outcomes.  The five year SFU Academic Plan for 2013 – 2018 (still in draft format as of Jan 15, 2013) notes that “there is increased questioning from academia, governments and the general public about the value of a university education and the role of university research in economic development.” (Driver, 2012, p. 1) One tier of SFU’s response to this issue is to propose diversifying and enhancing the scholarship of teaching by “providing better access to high quality and relevant learning experiences in desired courses, increasing the diversity of teaching methods, [and] linking curriculum to student needs after graduation…”. (Driver, 2012)

Through the research proposed here, I hope to better understand the induction of new faculty into their instructional roles as professors and to examine the mental models and expectations of faculty in regard to their roles as teachers.  What are the personal, formal institutional, and organizational cultural expectations that confront newly appointed faculty?  How do new faculty derive identity, develop meanings and understand their personal and social contexts (Brown & Duguid, 2000), and how does this understanding of role translate into actual instructional practices with their students, particularly in a time of rapid change in media and technologies having direct and indirect applications to post-secondary education.

The proposed research will undertake a phenomenological examination of the role perceptions of newly appointed faculty play.  The study will seek to understand how university faculty think about their teaching responsibilities and how they view the effects of educational technologies and media on their instructional work.  Additionally, the study will document and analyze the induction of new faculty including processes employed, training received, and mentoring relationships established. The study results may be useful in making recommendations in regard to the induction and in-service preparation of faculty for teaching in a social and cultural context shaped by new media and technology and affected by dramatic changes in the access to instruction across a full spectrum of skill and information.

The proposed research will be structured around the following guiding questions.

What are the perceptions of newly appointed university faculty concerning the effects of digital media and communications technologies on post-secondary teaching and learning environments? Particularly, in regard to:

1. Self-efficacy
2. University initiatives in support of teaching
3. The availability of training and resources
4. The nature of Induction processes

How do recently appointed faculty think about education technology and related media, and what value do these technologies offer to their roles as instructors? In particular, what are the effects of new media and technologies on:

1. Content
2. The Processes of learning and instruction
3. Scholarship of teaching

Welman & Kruger (1999) suggest that phenomenological interview questions should be “directed to the participant’s experiences, feelings, beliefs and convictions about the theme in question” (p. 196) With this criterion in mind the study will employ an open-ended structure to a series of 1:1 interviews with a sample of recently appointed university faculty.  The interviews will be loosely structured around the following topics.

• How do faculty describe their current activities as teachers—what do they commonly do when engaged in teaching? 
• What teaching strategies do they claim to use most commonly? 
• What descriptions do faculty apply to their roles as teachers: lecturer, mentor, tutor, coach, facilitator, and provocateur?  How do they rank the relative importance of different roles in their instructional repertoire?
• How do faculty understand the purposes of the university curriculum for which they have instructional responsibility: personal development, vocational preparation, development of the capacity for self-direction and independent learning, development of effective citizenship and social contribution?
• What are the opinions of the   study participants about the roles and influences of various technologies and media in their teaching and learning? 
• What are their perceptions of the arrangements made by the university to provide them with orientation, assistance, or learning opportunities in order to prepare them for teaching? If the university did offer some form of assistance or induction to teaching, what effect has it had on their instructional activities?

Study Participants and Methods of Recruitment

The participants in this study will be recruited from the population of faculty appointed into the professoriate within the previous four years (this shall be considered as the defining characteristic of ‘new’ faculty unless otherwise stated).  The study will focus on new faculty appointed at Simon Fraser University, located in the Vancouver Metro area of British Columbia and will extend its inclusion to the University of British Columbia, also located mainly in Vancouver, if required by considerations of sample composition and size.

My target sample size will be 10 to 20 new faculty members. Boyd (2001) and Creswell (1998, p. 65 & 113) suggest that 10 subjects are sufficient for saturation in a phenomenological study.  Faculty will be invited to participate in the study through the utilization of recruitment letters requesting their involvement and to set up interview times.  The recruitment letter (Appendix A) outlines the topics of discussion to be addressed during the individual interviews.  Participants will be asked to submit a signed informed Consent Form (Appendix B) prior to involvement in the study. Consent Forms and Project Information and Recruitment information will be distributed and returned electronically where possible. Prior to each interview session the participant will be asked to further confirm their agreement to participate and the completed, signed Consent Letters will be verified.

Based on Bailey’s(1996, p. 11) recommendations, the informed Consent Agreement will include and outline these items:

1. Confirmation of voluntary participation in research
2. The purpose of the research (without stating the central question)
3. Research procedures
4. The risk and benefits of the research
5. Participant’s right to stop involvement at any time and a description of procedures to remove and destroy any data collected prior to the participant's departure from the study.
6. The procedures employed to protect confidentiality and personal identities.

 

The process for recruitment of participants is proposed to be as follows:

1. A request will be made to the office of the Director of Academic Relations at SFU asking that he distribute project information and an invitation to participate in the study to faculty who meet the criteria of having been appointed within the last 4 years. The assistance of the staff of the Teaching and Learning Centre at SFU will also be sought in distributing information about the study to their clients. The invitation will include my contact information and also the contact information for my senior supervisor so that faculty who receive the study information and invitation to participate can verify my credentials and the legitimacy of the proposed study. Participants will be asked to self-select, knowing the sample criteria.
    
2. Faculty who agree to participate in the study will be scheduled for interviews at a time convenient to them.  Should less than twenty participants be garnered from SFU, the search will increase to include faculty at UBC who meet the same sampling criteria. In order to expand the number of participants in the study those subjects who do complete an interview may be asked if they have colleagues who might be willing to participate. If so, they will be asked to have their colleague contact me directly via email or other communication.   No contact will be made directly with potential subjects on the recommendation of an agreed participant.  Only persons who initiate contact will be invited to consider participating in the study.
    
3. If it is found necessary to extend the study to include faculty at UBC, the appropriate university department will be asked to distribute the invitation to potential participants and study information to an appropriate distribution list. In this case, as for SFU, participants will self-select for participation by contacting me to arrange an interview. If the study is expanded to include UBC Faculty appropriate institutional Research Ethics approvals will sought.

Consent, Level of Risk, and Benefits

The proposed research will only be conducted with individuals who have submitted signed copies of the informed consent forms to the Principal Investigator.  Named identities of participants will be coded and protected through the use of pseudonyms in all research and findings. In the final thesis report the names of the university and any references made to departments, programs, or other persons will also be changed to protect identities.

The proposed research should be considered as of minimal risk.  The likelihood of any possible harm being incurred as a result of participating in this research is no greater than the potential for harm to participants in their everyday lives and occupation.  Participation is completely voluntary.  Participants will also reserve the right to withdraw from participation at any time.  The interviews and other study processes will be conducted with utmost consideration and attention paid for the wellbeing of the participants and to protect them from any avoidable risk elements.  Potential participants will also be informed, via the Informed Consent Form that their participation will not form part of any career evaluation process.

There will be no direct benefit to participants in this study. The Consent Form states that participation in the study will have no application to any part of faculty performance assessment or reviews for purposes of tenure or promotion. The results of the overall study may have application to the development of programs of induction for newly appointed university faculty and to professional development programs to assist faculty at all levels in addressing the challenges and opportunities presented by new educational technologies and digital media.

Data Collection and Secure Storage

Interviews will be conducted by the researcher around the themes presented in the research questions.  Each interview will be audio-recorded to unique digital files and assigned a code such as “Participant A, Feb 2013”.  Field notes may be taken by the researcher during the interview. As soon as possible following each interview I will, listen to the recording and make notes in a field notes book.  I will make complete transcriptions of interviews, noting key words, phrases and statements in addition to my observations of the interview.

As developed by Leonard Schatzman and Anselm Strauss, I will create field notes of the following four types:

1. Observational Notes – utilization of all the senses based on ‘what happened’.
2. Theoretical notes – consideration and pondering on possible meaning coming out of the experiences
3. Methodological notes – a refining of the craft of interviewing for further research encounters
4. Analytical memos – final thoughts and summary notes or review

All interview sessions will be transcribed into text from the audio-recording.  All digital data will be handled and maintained on a Windows 8 Enterprise operating system version computer with BitLocker Drive Encryption enabled at both the hard drive and data level.  Unlocking the drive and data is managed through the use of a complex password.  Backup of data will also be maintained locally to an external drive.  The contents of data to be backed up will be scripted for incremental, compressed, and password protected transfer and storage on a BitLocked device. I.e. stored backup files exist with 4 levels of privacy security.  Any hard copy or print text will be maintained in a locked personal filing cabinet at the Primary Investigator’s residence.

Participants will be given the option and opportunity to review transcribed interviews and make edits to their comments if preferred.  Inclusion of member checking review ensures the highest degree of insurance that intended meanings are portrayed faithfully.

Data Analysis

The recordings and transcripts of interviews, observational, theoretical, methodological and analytical field notes will be considered and throughout all seasons of my research.  The information must speak for itself.   Upon review of interviews and field notation, I will work to delineate units of meaning which emerge, and work to cluster these units forming themes.  First, I will use a grounded theory approach.  Interview documents will be hierarchically coded and categories created as they emerge from the content based on themes, ideas, concepts, phrases, terms and keywords.  Attention will be given to the research questions and topics outlined earlier in this document.  Once themes emerge each interview will be revisited and summarized with the emergent themes in mind, providing a holistic a reconstruction of the participant’s “inner world experience of the subject” (Hycner, 1999, p. 153). 

Second, a quasi-statistical approach will be taken with respect to answers provided in regard to the experience of faculty induction processes.  Counts and patterns observed across participants with respect to induction process descriptions, training opportunities and mentoring relationships formed will be calculated.  This will provide some insight into possible ‘norms’ for university faculty induction.  Further, this research will contrast the new faculty member’s lived instructor experiences with their experience of induction to the faculty.

Finally, themes common to the interviews will be sought and analyzed, possibly lending to the construction of composite characterizations.

Research Instruments and Supporting Documents

Please find attached a copy of the Project Information and Recruitment document (Appendix A) and the Informed Consent Form (Appendix B) for participants who opt to take part in the study.  The Informed Consent includes information regarding the focus of this study. 

Supporting Documents:

Recruitment Letter - Appendix A