University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Ensuring faculty success in effective online instruction

(USC Thesis Other)

Ensuring faculty success in effective online instruction

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running
head:
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

ENSURING FACULTY SUCCESS IN EFFECTIVE ONLINE INSTRUCTION
By
Tamara Espinet

___________________________________________________________________

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Education
August, 2016

Copyright 2016 Tamara Espinet
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

2

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
“He who is not courageous enough to take risks will accomplish nothing in life.”
– Muhammad Ali
To my partner in crime, my heart and soul, Marlee Flanagan, you gave me the
courage to persist through this arduous process. I am eternally grateful for your saint-like
patience and support. I also appreciate my family and friends for their continued support
throughout all my years of education – this one the last one, I promise! Thank you to Dr.
Karin Roback for crawling through the trenches with me. Thank you to Dr. Robert
Filback for your enthusiasm and guidance during the research, writing, and rewriting of
this project. And finally, thank you to my dissertation committee, Drs. Melora Sundt and
Ronni Ephraim for your constructive feedback, which helped me strengthen my paper.

EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

3

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
.............................................................................................................................
2

TABLE
OF
CONTENTS
..............................................................................................................................
3

LIST
OF
TABLES
AND
FIGURES
...........................................................................................................
7

ABSTRACT
.....................................................................................................................................................
9

CHAPTER
1:
INTRODUCTION
............................................................................................................
10

Introduction
of
the
Problem
..........................................................................................................................
10

Organisational
Context
and
Mission
..........................................................................................................
11

Organisational
Performance
Status
............................................................................................................
11

Background
of
the
Issue:
Related
Literature
..........................................................................................
12

Importance
of
this
Study
.................................................................................................................................
14

Organisational
Stakeholders
.........................................................................................................................
14

Stakeholder
for
the
Study
...............................................................................................................................
15

Purpose
of
the
Project
and
Questions
.......................................................................................................
15

Methodological
Framework
..........................................................................................................................
16

Definitions
.............................................................................................................................................................
16

Organisation
of
the
Study
...............................................................................................................................
17

CHAPTER
2:
REVIEW
OF
THE
LITERATURE
..............................................................................
18

Introduction
..........................................................................................................................................................
18

Definition
of
Quality
Faculty
..........................................................................................................................
18

Research
Productivity
.................................................................................................................................
18

Service
................................................................................................................................................................
20

Teaching
............................................................................................................................................................
21

EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

4

Faculty
Appointment
Types
...........................................................................................................................
22

Definition
of
Effective
Instruction
...............................................................................................................
25

Criteria
for
Online
Instructional
Effectiveness
......................................................................................
26

Learning
and
Motivation
Theory
.................................................................................................................
28

Knowledge
and
Skills
...................................................................................................................................
29

Motivation
........................................................................................................................................................
30

Organisation
....................................................................................................................................................
31

Factors
Facilitating
or
Inhibiting
Online
Instructional
Effectiveness
..........................................
32

Knowledge
........................................................................................................................................................
32

Motivation
........................................................................................................................................................
35

Organisation
....................................................................................................................................................
38

Conclusion
.............................................................................................................................................................
41

CHAPTER
3:

METHODOLOGY
...........................................................................................................
42

Purpose
of
the
Project
and
Questions
.......................................................................................................
42

Methodological
Framework
..........................................................................................................................
42

Presumed
Performance
Needs
and
Assets
..............................................................................................
43

Knowledge
and
skills
...................................................................................................................................
44

Motivation
........................................................................................................................................................
44

Organisation
....................................................................................................................................................
45

Summary
...........................................................................................................................................................
46

Validation
of
the
Performance
Assets
.......................................................................................................
48

Validation
of
the
Performance
Assets:
Knowledge
.........................................................................
48

Validation
of
the
Performance
Assets:
Motivation
.........................................................................
50

Validation
of
the
Performance
Assets:
Organization/Culture/Context
.................................
51

Participating
Stakeholders
.............................................................................................................................
52

EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

5

Data
Collection
.....................................................................................................................................................
53

Surveys
...............................................................................................................................................................
54

Interviews
.........................................................................................................................................................
54

Trustworthiness
of
Data
.................................................................................................................................
55

Role
of
Investigator
...........................................................................................................................................
56

Data
Analysis
........................................................................................................................................................
56

Conclusion
.............................................................................................................................................................
57

CHAPTER
4:

RESULTS
AND
FINDINGS
.........................................................................................
58

Sample
Characteristics
.....................................................................................................................................
58

Knowledge
Assets
..............................................................................................................................................
58

Conceptual
Knowledge
...............................................................................................................................
59

Metacognitive
Knowledge
.........................................................................................................................
63

Motivational
Assets
...........................................................................................................................................
66

Task
Value:
Extrinsic
Value
.......................................................................................................................
66

Task
Value:
Intrinsic
Value
........................................................................................................................
71

Task
Value:
Cost
Value
................................................................................................................................
73

Self-‐Efficacy
......................................................................................................................................................
74

Organisational
Assets
.......................................................................................................................................
76

Cultural
Model
................................................................................................................................................
77

Cultural
Setting
...............................................................................................................................................
78

Summary
................................................................................................................................................................
85

CHAPTER
5:
RECOMMENDATIONS,
IMPLEMENTATION
AND
EVALUATION
.............
89

Validated
Assets
Selection
and
Rationale
................................................................................................
90

Recommendations
Based
on
Validated
Assets
......................................................................................
90

EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

6

Recommendations
for
Increasing
Knowledge
..................................................................................
90

Recommendations
for
Increasing
Motivation
..................................................................................
96

Recommendations
for
Increasing
Organisational
Assets
.........................................................
102

Implementation
Plan
.....................................................................................................................................
109

Evaluation
Plan
................................................................................................................................................
111

Level
1:
Evaluate
Reaction/Awareness
............................................................................................
112

Level
2:
Evaluate
Instructor
Learning
...............................................................................................
113

Level
3:
Evaluate
Full
Implementation/Use
of
New
Learning
................................................
114

Level
4:
Evaluate
Impact
.........................................................................................................................
114

Limitations
and
Delimitations
...................................................................................................................
115

Future
Directions
for
Study
........................................................................................................................
116

Conclusion
..........................................................................................................................................................
116

REFERENCES
.........................................................................................................................................
118

APPENDIX
A
...........................................................................................................................................
129

APPENDIX
B
...........................................................................................................................................
131

EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

7

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
Figure 3.1. Promising practice process. ........................................................................... 43

Table 3.1. Summary of assumed needs and assets for knowledge, motivation, and
organizational issues based on the literature. .................................................. 47

Table 3.2. Summary of assumed knowledge assets and their validation. ......................... 50

Table 3.3. Summary of assumed motivation assets and their validation. ......................... 51

Table 3.4. Summary of assumed organisational/culture needs/assets and their validation.
........................................................................................................................................... 52

Figure 4.1. Faculty position type of participating online instructional faculty. ............... 58

Table 4.1. Faculty Extrinsically Value Ability of Students to Access Online Education
From Anywhere in the World. ........................................................................... 66

Table 4.2. Faculty Extrinsically Value Increased Student Access to Online Education. . 67

Table 4.3. Faculty Extrinsically Value Developing Online Teaching Abilities to Improve
Upon Student Academic Performance. ............................................................. 68

Table 4.4. Faculty Extrinsically Value Wider Range of Resources for Students Online. . 69

Table 4.5. Faculty Extrinsically Value the Flexibility Provided by Teaching Online. ..... 69

Table 4.6. Faculty Intrinsically Value Being Creative When Teaching Online. .............. 72

Table 4.7. Faculty Intrinsically Value Using Technology to Teach. ................................ 72

Table 4.8. Faculty Intrinsically Value Teaching Online as Compared to On-ground. .... 73

Table 4.9. Faculty Value Appropriate Compensation for Teaching Online. .................... 74

Table 4.10. Faculty Value Receiving Extra Time to Prepare to Teach Online. ............... 74

Table 4.11. Faculty Self-Efficacy in Navigating the Internet. .......................................... 75

Table 4.12. Faculty Self-Efficacy in Communicating With Students in Online
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

8

Synchronous Classroom. ................................................................................ 75

Table 4.13. Faculty Self-Efficacy in Communicating With Students Asynchronously. .... 76

Table 4.14. Faculty Self-Efficacy in Navigating the LMS. ............................................... 76

Table 4.15. Faculty Peers Value Legitimacy of Online Education. .................................. 77

Table 4.16. Faculty are Provided Reliable Infrastructure and Technology. .................... 79

Table 4.17. Faculty Frustration With Technical Issues. ................................................... 80

Table 4.18. Faculty Believe PD in Technology and Pedagogy are Essential to Prepare
For Online Teaching. ...................................................................................... 80
Table 4.19. Faculty Frequency Using Online Tools and Resources Provided by LMS. .. 81

Table 4.20. Faculty Utilize PD Opportunities Provided. ................................................. 81

Table 4.21. Faculty Believe Preparation for Online Courses Requires More Time Than
On-ground Courses. ........................................................................................ 82

Table 4.22. Faculty Believe the Workload is Higher for Online Courses Compared to
On-ground. ..................................................................................................... 83

Table 4.23. Faculty Receive Extra Time to Prepare for Teaching Online Courses. ........ 83

Table 4.24. Faculty Believe They Receive Fair Compensation. ....................................... 84

Table 4.25. Summary of validated knowledge, motivation, and organisational assets. ... 88

Figure 5.1. Pedagogical technological content knowledge .............................................. 91

EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

9

ABSTRACT
This study examined the knowledge, motivation, and organisational variables
facilitating effective delivery of online graduate education. Recent proliferation of online
degree programs has highlighted the increasing need for institutions to define teaching
quality standards in the new online teaching environment. Given the central role online
members of faculty play in the success of online educational programs, it is important to
understand from their perspective what factors lend to effective instruction in the online
environment. Using a promising practice model – as adapted from Clark and Estes’
model of gap analysis – this study investigated factors that contribute to successful online
teaching. A total of 40 members of faculty who teach across six different online graduate
programs participated in the study. Data was collected through a survey (n = 40) and
interviews (n = 6) to explore the knowledge, motivation, and organisational factors
facilitating effective online instruction. Findings revealed assets facilitating effective
online instruction, and also illuminated factors potentially inhibiting such practices.
Based on these findings, recommendations were proposed to improve upon the facets of
knowledge, motivation, and organisation lending to effective online instruction.
Implementation and subsequent evaluation plans for the recommended strategies were
also outlined.

EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

10

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
Introduction of the Problem
Central to the success of any professional graduate program is the commitment of
the program to ensuring academic quality. The proliferation of online degree programs
over the past decade has led to increasing concerns related to institutional compliance
with traditional academic quality standards (Allen & Seaman, 2014; Benson, 2010;
Bruce, 2010). With the ever-growing competition for students by institutions of higher
education globally, the necessity for offering quality online education has become critical
for survival (Allen and Seamen, 2007).
The growing interest in online education has challenged educators to rethink the
way in which they deliver content to their students (Baran, Correia, & Thompson, 2011;
Bolliger & Wasilik, 2009; Kreber & Kanuka, 2006). Research has proven traditional
face-to-face instructional methods ineffective when transferred online (Baran et al., 2011;
Kreber & Kanuka, 2006), thus forcing teachers to rethink their current practices. In
addition to strong content knowledge, effective online instruction requires facility with
technology as well as skill in adapting pedagogy to the online environment (Kreber &
Kanuka, 2006). Given the instrumental role of faculty in the success of online programs,
coupled with the mounting interest and demand for online education, “there is an
imperative to advance our understanding of how to facilitate effective online learning
activities” (Kreber & Kanuka, 2006, p. 121). As such, the purpose of this study is to
elucidate the knowledge, motivation, and organisational variables that facilitate effective
delivery of online instruction from the perspective of the faculty in online graduate
programs at a set of high-performing institutions of higher education.
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

11

Organisational Context and Mission
A number of leading graduate schools nationwide have established online
graduate programs in various professional fields. These partner sites share a common
online program management (OPM) provider to deliver online graduate programs to
students around the globe. Though the missions of each individual university vary, the
software provider aspires as part of its mission to partner with prominent institutions to
deliver a high-quality educational experience to students.
Organisational Performance Status
The majority of the graduate programs in the partnership identify as highly
selective institutions with high rankings in the respective fields (“Best Colleges U.S. New
Education”, 2014). In addition, the shared OPM provider used by the partner institutions
was considered among 10 startup companies to be world changing by Forbes magazine
(Kelly & Hess, 2013). The partnership between the provider and the institutions of
higher education has enabled schools to readily move existing programs to on online
platform while maintaining the same cost structure for online students (2013). The OPM
offers a blended learning approach grounded in evidenced-based practice to ensure
delivery of a quality education to its students. According to Boud and Prosser (2002),
high-quality learning activities must demonstrate four principles: engagement of learners,
acknowledgement of context, challenge for learners, involvement of practice. The OPM
shared by the partner sites uses immersive course content, interactive course materials,
live online synchronous classrooms, field placements or global immersions, and social
engagement between students and their instructors or peers to ensure these four principles
are satisfied.
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

12

Background of the Issue: Related Literature
In the face of reduced state budgets in tandem with increased participation and
diversity in higher education, as well greater global competition for students, institutions
of higher education have been forced to find alternatives to traditional brick and mortar
education (Bruce, 2010). One way in which academia has responded to such pressures is
through offerings of online distance education programs (2010). Currently, 90% of US
degree-granting public institutions offer online courses (Allen & Seamen, 2014), and a
total of 7.1 million students – around 33.5% of higher education students – are taking at
least one online course (2014). However, along with the propagation of online education
has come growing concern for adherence of online programs to traditional academic
standards.
There are many challenges with quality assurance even in traditional educational
settings, including coming to a consensus on a clear definition of academic quality. In
general, quality has been defined in the research across three separate areas: institutional
reputation, faculty research and productivity, and student experiences (Brooks, 2005).
However, current assessments still fail to capture the multidimensional facets of
academic quality (2005). These problems are confounded in online distance education
programs as online student enrolments continue to grow at rates far exceeding campus-
based enrolments, while policies and standards of academic quality in the online milieu
lag far behind (Bruce, 2010).
Traditionally, accrediting agencies assessed the quality of online education
programs by applying the existing on-ground program standards (Benson, 2010).
However, no specific quality standards were outlined, leaving institutions to establish
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

13

their own quality standards (Bruce, 2010). The first accreditation agency standards for
online education in the US did not appear until 2007, when the Commission on Colleges
addressed five key areas for quality assurance: institutional context and commitment,
curriculum and instruction, evaluation and assessment, student support, and faculty
support (2010). The Commission– comprised of the eight regional accrediting agencies
recognised by the U.S. Department of Education – established best practices for quality
online education that addressed each of the separate components.
Though academic quality has often thought to be synonymous with “learning
effectiveness” (Lorenzo & Moore, 2002), consideration of all five pillars is critical for
quality assurance in online education. The first pillar, institutional context and
commitment, addresses policies, program growth, and other key issues pertaining to
online programs in higher education. The curriculum and instruction component is
focused on issues of learning effectiveness and pedagogy in the online milieu, while
student achievements and the online programs themselves are the focal point of the
evaluation and assessment pillar. Student support in online programs is concerned with
provision of services for students by the institution, as well as addressing the diversity of
the online student population. Finally, institutional support of faculty is a key area of
concern for quality assurance in online education, as the online instructors are responsible
for fostering students in the learning process.
Faculty support in online distance education is a crucial component of online
program quality assurance, since teachers are the key factor in student learning and
achievement (GAO Report to Congressional Committees, 2002). Institutional support of
faculty for online educational programs includes issues of training for online instruction,
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

14

proper compensation and system of rewards, workload considerations, and technical
support for effective delivery of online education (Bruce, 2010). Further, faculty
perceptions of support from the institution are imperative to consider in order to aid
campus leaders in policy change for improvement of online learning and teaching
environments (Bolliger & Wasilik, 2009).
Importance of this Study
As institutions seek to increase access to education for students, diversify their
educational delivery methods, and improve upon their market competitiveness, the
literature suggests (Bruce, 2010) organisations of higher education should strive toward
increasing the quality of the education delivered in the online milieu to that of traditional
on-ground programs. Over the past decade, proliferation of online degree programs has
led to increasing concerns related to institutional compliance with traditional academic
quality standards. With the ever-growing competition for students by institutions of
higher education globally, research has highlighted the offering of quality online
education as an imperative for some institutions (Allen & Seaman, 2014; Benson, 2010;
Bruce, 2010). As online faculty are largely responsible for satisfying the primary mission
of universities and colleges – that is, they play a critical role in the teaching and learning
environments created for students in on-ground and online programs – knowing more
about the roles and competencies that facilitate effective online instruction may help
faculty improve upon the quality of online education within their institution.
Organisational Stakeholders
The stakeholders in an organisation are those who are directly impacting, or are
impacted by, attainment of the organisational goal. The stakeholders for the current
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

15

study will comprise those impacted by effective delivery of online education in the
partner sites, including program facilitators, members of faculty, staff, administrators,
accrediting bodies and students within the program. Program facilitators are involved in
developing and maintaining the online programs, and may include faculty members, staff,
and/or administrators. Members of faculty who teach within the programs are charged
with designing curriculum and effectively disseminating knowledge to the students.
Administrators within the programs and institutions are required to afford assistance and
support for the faculty by providing reliable infrastructure and technology, and are also
responsible for ensuring the online program meets all professional, state, and/or national
accreditation standards. Finally, the success of the students in the program is ultimately
reflective of successful implementation of the online curriculum.
Stakeholder for the Study
The stakeholder for the current study will focus upon any members of faculty
responsible for delivering online education. Members of faculty who teach online are
ultimately responsible for design and facilitation of the content in the online learning
environment. Both the university and the individual program depend on these members
of faculty to deliver a high quality product to the students, thus the instructors are charged
with possessing the competencies and skills required to do so effectively.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this study is to identify the knowledge, skills, and motivation
factors that facilitate or inhibit effective delivery of online instructional from the
perspective of the faculty in online graduate programs at a set of high-performing
institutions of higher education by addressing the following questions:
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

16

1. What knowledge, skills, motivational and organizational factors facilitate or
inhibit effective online teaching from the perspective of the faculty?
2. For those factors perceived to be facilitating the successful support of online
teaching faculty, what promising practices could be adapted to and utilized by
other units in the same agency? For those factors perceived as inhibitors, what
solutions may be helpful for improving the support of faculty to teach online
within the organization or program?
3. How might those interventions, whether promising practices or solutions, be
evaluated for effectiveness?
Methodological Framework
The framework for this study is a promising practice model adapted from the gap
analysis method described by Clarke and Estes (2008). Data will be gathered and
analysed using a qualitative approach to study the partner institutions’ assets in the areas
of knowledge, motivation and organisational resources. The assets of members of faculty
who instruct online courses will be studied using surveys and interviews.
Definitions
Accreditation: “Accreditation is the recognition that an institution maintains standards
requisite for its graduates to gain admission to other reputable institutions of higher
learning or to achieve credentials for professional practice” (U.S Department of
Education).
Online education: “The design and delivery of instructional resources via the World
Wide Web for the purpose of obtaining observable and measurable outcomes in student
learning” (Dabbagh & Kitsantas, 2005).
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

17

Faculty satisfaction: “The perception that teaching in the online environment is effective
and professionally beneficial” (Bolliger & Wasilik, 2009, p.105)
Contingent faulty: Includes adjunct, part- and full-time faculty who are appointed off the
tenure- track (American Association of University Professors, 2014).
Organisation of the Study
The current study is organised into five chapters. The preceding chapter provided
the reader with the key concepts and terminology commonly found in discussions about
effective delivery of online instructional by members of faculty. The organisation’s
mission, goals and stakeholders as well as the review of the promising practice
framework were provided. Chapter Two provides a review of current literature relevant
to the scope of the study. Topics of quality faculty and instructional effectiveness in
online programs, as well as knowledge, motivational, and organisational assets lending to
such factors, will be addressed. Chapter Three details the choice of participants, data
collection and analysis. In Chapter Four, the data and results are described and analysed.
Chapter Five provides recommendation for practice, based on data and literature as well
as recommendations for an implementation and evaluation plan.

EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

18

CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Introduction
This chapter provides a literature review addressing the variables involved with
support of faculty and effective online teaching. From the literature, the assumed
knowledge, motivational and organisational factors facilitating or inhibiting effective
online instruction are drawn. The chapter begins by providing definitions for quality
faculty, faculty appointment types, and effective teaching in academia. Then,
considerations for teaching in an online milieu are delineated. Finally, the knowledge,
motivational and organisational factors contributing to or constraining effective delivery
of online instruction are explored.
Definition of Quality Faculty
Given the extremely disparate missions, teaching philosophies and valued
outcomes for students held by institutions of higher education, faculty quality is a broad
concept that can be defined in a variety of ways. The majority of American academic
institutions measure the performance of their faculty members in the areas of research
productivity, service, and teaching (Sharobeam & Howard, 2002).
Research Productivity
Government funding toward applied research vastly improved at the university
level following World War II, when the U.S. lost major market shares in autos, various
electronics, steel, machinery, and microelectronics to competing developed countries
(Congressional Research Service, 2009). As a result, numerous organisations declared an
increased need to implement strategies to improve education and research in order for the
U.S. to compete globally, giving rise to formal graduate education across American
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

19

universities (Middaugh, 2001). Faculty positions were subsequently filled by research-
trained graduate students, who rapidly took the place of those trained in teaching
paradigms (2001).
Throughout the 1960s and 1970s – decades marked by the cold war and the race
to space – universities shifted their emphasis from being teaching-centered institutions to
those concentrated mainly on the development of novel research by faculty (Middaugh,
2001). The new research-oriented culture in academia forced faculty efforts in the
direction of developing research programs in their respective fields. Evidence of this
shift can be seen in the trends for university expenditures over the last few decades;
though tuition for students has continually increased in both private and public
universities, expenditures for instruction in public institutions of higher education
declined by 4.5% from 1980 to 2000, while spending on research increased by 2.8%
(Dill, 2006). Further, the quality and quantity of faculty research has direct implications
for the university, both financially and in terms of public reputation. Faculty research
yielding new inventions or patents, as well as faculty-acquired grants, can attract external
funding and advance the reputation and prestige of the university (Bland et. al., 2006).
As such, research productivity and visibility by faculty has become vital to institutional
stature and prominence, and increases a university’s competitive edge for shrinking
economic resources and applicant pools (2006). Consequently, research has become the
primary metric by which tenure-track and tenured faculty members are evaluated –
despite the fact that many institutions of higher education tout teaching as a priority
(Sharobeam & Howard, 2002). According to the National Research Council (NRC),
quality in research productivity can be characterised by the number of publications,
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

20

number of citations, receipt of external research grants, interdisciplinary work,
racial/ethnic and gender diversity, and peer recognition of work as demonstrated by
honours and awards (Brooks, 2005).
Service
Another major component of faculty workload is service, both to the university as
well as the community. While there are fairly concrete guidelines for determining levels
of faculty productivity in the area of research, there is a lack of consensus among
institutions for assessing performance in this area (Sharobeam & Howard, 2002). Most
often, members of faculty are expected to fulfill service requirements via institutional
administrative activities, such as involvement in departmental or college-wide
committees and student recruitment efforts (2002). Typically, faculty performance in the
service component is measured by the number of committees on which faculty members
serve (2002). A survey conducted by Sharobeam and Howard revealed that faculty
members serve on an average of 4.97 committees over the period of two years, a
commitment many members of faculty deem too time consuming, thereby limiting time
for research (2002). Some faculty members also choose to perform “professional
service”, or service activities external to the university (Gamson, 1995). This type of
service draws upon the disciplinary and professional expertise of the faculty (1995), and
is generally not included by the administrators in the narrow definition of what
constitutes service (Sharobeam & Howard, 2002). However, Gamson argues that faculty
professional service should be a more essential role for faculty, as many of them perceive
themselves as service providers who should not be bound to the campus (Gamson, 1995).
Gamson believes that higher education needs to be more engaged in societal issues in
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

21

order to better facilitate student commitment and learning, and that new reward structures
should be in place that bring the service component to the center of focus rather than
treating it as an ancillary dimension in the role of the faculty (1995).
Teaching
The third major facet of faculty workload is teaching, a component widely
claimed to be the main function and priority of many universities and colleges
(Sharobeam & Howard, 2002). Surveyed faculty in a Sharobeam and Howard study
reported an average of thirteen contact hours per week, and an average of 36.5 hours per
week devoted to teaching activities (2002). This comprises upwards of 70 percent of
faculty time for those who work 55 hours per work, typical of many faculty members
(2002). The remainder of faculty time is dedicated to research and service.
Despite devoting the large majority of their time to teaching activities, members
of faculty often receive conflicting messages from the administration about the priorities
of the institute. According to research conducted on faculty workload, excellence in
teaching is not rewarded to the same extent as research excellence (Sharobeam &
Howard, 2002). A 1998 study conducted by Meyer revealed that faculty who spend less
than 35 percent of their time on teaching duties earn salaries on average 1.5 times greater
than those who spend more than half of their time on teaching activities (Meyer, 1998).
Further, the study showed that considerations for promotion and tenure of faculty were
based mainly upon research productivity, and minimally upon excellence in teaching
(1998). More recent data concurs, illustrating how research productivity does and “will
continue to occupy a primary role in overall appraisals of faculty performance and
subsequent rewards of merit, promotion, and tenure” (White, James, Burke & Allen,
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

22

2012). However, Gomez-Mejia and Balkin assert that this is likely due to the subjectivity
and ambiguity in measuring teaching performance (Gomez-Mejia & Balkin, 1992).
Members of faculty largely believe research and teaching to be complementary
activities (Sharobeam & Howard, 2002). Many of them have expressed the desire to be
considered as scholars in lieu of just teachers, as arguments have been made that active
researchers may make the most important contributions to teaching in higher education
(Kreber & Kanuka, 2006). Yet, excellence in research does not necessarily translate into
excellence in teaching (2006). The most frequently used metric for assessing teaching
performance is student ratings, though the majority of faculty members greatly mistrust
such ratings, believing them to be “a popularity contest” rather than a true reflection of
teaching performance (Gomez-Mejia & Balkin, 1992, p. 947). Gomez-Mejia and Balkin
suggest other approaches for measuring performance in the classroom, including peer
class observation or evaluation of syllabi and course content. However, the researchers
also argue that such methods may be “less practical, more intrusive, more vulnerable to
political manipulations, and more time consuming than student ratings” (p. 947), and may
not add any value to the use of teaching ratings. The research suggests that a more
effective and transparent system of teaching assessment and rewards needs to be
implemented in academia.
Faculty Appointment Types
Further compounding the difficulty of defining faculty quality is the large
disparity of faculty appointment types. Over the past few decades, there has been a
growing trend in the number of contingency faculty teaching in institutions of higher
education. Contingency faculty comprise any members of faculty, part- or full-time, who
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

23

are appointed off the tenure track (American Association of University Professors, 2014).
A report released by the National Education Association Research Center (2007)
demonstrated that combined, part-time and full-time non-tenure track faculty comprise
approximately two-thirds of all faculty – and these numbers have only increased since
(National Education Association Research Center, 2007).
Over the course of forty years, the composition of tenure-track (TT) faculty and NTT
faculty saw a dramatic change, going from 78% and 22% in 1969 to 33.5% and 66.5% in
2009, respectively (Kezar, Maxey, and Eaton, 2014). Academic institutions are turning
increasingly to contingent members of faculty, including part-time and full-time NTT
faculty, in the face of growing student enrolments and budgetary constraints (Shulock &
Moore, 2002). Universities can afford to hire multiple NTT faculty members for the
price of one TT faculty member to instruct more classes, thus fulfilling the ever-
increasing teaching loads of undergraduate students (Kezar & Sam, 2010). While part-
time NTT faculty began to see rapid growth in numbers in the 1970s, significant
increases in full-time NTTs did not occur until the 1990s, when hiring of full-time NTT
faculty began to outpace that of TT (Kezar et al, 2014). Currently, full-time NTTs
comprise approximately 23% of the faculty at private research and doctorate-granting
institutions (2014). As such, institutions of higher education have become significantly
more reliant upon NTT faculty for ensuring a high quality teaching and learning
environment for the students.
Despite the rapid growth of NTT faculty in academia, there are apparent disparities in
the policies and practices concerning equitable treatment of these members of faculty.
On many campuses across the nation, NTT faculty are subject to inequitable
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

24

compensation, job insecurity, exclusion from meaningful governance and professional
development, and lack of respect for NTT faculty from TT faculty and administrators
(Kezar et al, 2014). Often time, universities and departments view NTT faculty as short-
term solutions – expendable and easily replaceable. NTT members of faculty often
experience a negative climate among colleagues that is at best disrespectful or dismissive,
or sometimes even hostile (Kezar & Sam, 2010). Such destructive cultural climates may
negatively impact the motivation of NTT faculty to contribute to the improvement of the
learning environment of their students (Kezar, 2013).
Kezar further asserts that the institutional culture is largely defined at the
departmental level, which, in turn, is typically influenced by the department chair – that
is, whether the chair is supportive of NTT faculty or not (2013). In departments where
the values, norms, and expectations of NTT faculty are largely supportive, NTT faculty
have been shown to enjoy their experience, in spite of inequitable pay, minimal benefits,
and being “still generally exploited” (Kezar, 2013).
As well as improving upon their working conditions, adequate institutional support
for contingent faculty has been demonstrated to contribute to improvements in student
learning outcomes. Jaeger and Eagan (2010) examined the link between institutional
practices regarding contingent faculty – including part- and full-time NTTs, postdoctoral
fellows, and graduate teaching assistants – and student success across six public
universities. The results of the study suggest that greater integration of contingency
faculty into the culture of the institution would lend to improved student success (Jaeger
& Eagan, 2010). Figlio, Schapiro, and Soter (2013) found that courses taught by NTTs at
Northwestern University resulted in similar, and in some cases even better, learning
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

25

outcomes for students as TT faculty. Taken together, the results of these studies reinforce
the notion that institutional support for NTT faculty has positive implications on the
quality of teaching and learning.
Definition of Effective Instruction
Given the significant amount of time and effort members of faculty devote to their
teaching responsibilities, it is important to include a discussion about what constitutes
quality, or effective, instruction. Boyer (1990) asserts, “As a scholarly enterprise,
teaching begins with what the teacher knows” (Boyer, 1990, p. 23). Instructors must
have extensive knowledge of their respective fields, but must also thoroughly
comprehend how to translate such knowledge into student learning (1990). The dynamic
enterprise of teaching also requires disseminators of knowledge to “carefully [plan],
continuously [examine], and relate directly to the subject taught” (p. 24), as well as to
endlessly learn and push themselves in creative new directions (1990).
Kreber and Kanuka (2006) further suggest that, while expertise in subject matter
is important, “pedagogical content knowledge” is also imperative to effectively teach.
Members of faculty who possess such knowledge understand how to best deliver the
content such that student learning is optimally facilitated (2006). Instruction by faculty is
considered to be optimal or effective if student learning outcomes are successfully met.
Delegates to the World Conference on Higher Education recommended that, as well as
discipline-specific knowledge and skills, “university graduates should be able to
demonstrate that they can cope with uncertainties, work in teams, apply generic skills that
cut across different disciplines, and be literate in areas of knowledge that form the basis
for various professional skills” (Kreber & Kanuka, 2006, p. 117). Faculty who can
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

26

successfully facilitate such proficiencies, as well as encourage students to be creative,
critical thinkers, are deemed as engaging in effective instruction in higher education
(Boyer, 1990).
Criteria for Online Instructional Effectiveness
Dabbagh and Kitsantas (2005) define online education as the “design and delivery
of instructional resources via the World Wide Web for the purpose of obtaining
observable and measurable outcomes in student learning” (p. 514). Kanuka and Garrison
(2004) argue, “if effectively facilitated, [online education] could lead to higher levels of
learning (e.g. critical, creative, and complex thinking) and, hence, overcome the lack of
interactivity that currently characterizes most early undergraduate on-campus courses (p.
120). However, much remains to be understood about effectively delivering online
education such that student learning is optimal (2004). Friedman and Friedman (2013)
contend the goal of education in general is to provide students with the tools and skills
that enable lifelong learning, including “problem solving, critical thinking,
communication, collaboration (ability to work with others), navigating the Internet and
finding accurate and useful information, and making ethical judgments” (Friedman &
Friedman, 2013). Rudd and Rudd (2014) assert that members of faculty must employ
more creative and engaging methods to transition students into virtual classrooms.
However, most members of faculty who teach online tend to replicate their practices from
on-ground courses to the online environment, though Kreber and Kanuka argue that
online teaching requires implementation of new methods of instruction and new sets of
pedagogies (2006). More recently, Huss and Eastep found that while many professors
are making progress integrating pedagogy with technology in the online classroom,
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

27

online faculty need to more fully comprehend the necessity of an interactive pedagogy
when online courses are designed and implemented (2015).
Kreber and Kanuka (2006) believe that online teaching is most effective when
teachers reflect upon their teaching content, process, and premise in the knowledge areas
of student learning and developmental outcomes in the online environment, as well as
online teaching and evaluation strategies. Such reflection allows online members of
faculty to engage in inquiry-based learning that employ pedagogical problem solving, and
in turn, optimise student learning (2006). In his 2010 study, Bruce reviewed 121 studies
related to online instructional quality. When compared to the traditional classroom,
Bruce found differences in online student characteristics, including learning styles and
outcomes and acquisition of knowledge (2010). He also asserted that distinctions in
pedagogical methods, instructional strategies, instructor skills, resources, and
technologies used were all imperative considerations for online instruction as compared
to on-ground courses (2010).
As online education strives to gain a foothold in providing quality instruction in
the virtual classroom, pioneers in the field have provided some insight into online
instructional strategies that have proved effective. For instance, Glynn Crawford-Ferre
and Wiest (2012) advised that the technology selected while teaching online needs to be
compatible with the various student needs, and multiple methods of content transmission
– both synchronous and asynchronous – should be incorporated. Such methods may
include compressed videos, presentation slides, video lectures, website viewing, email,
chat rooms, and webcam conversations (2012). The researchers in this study further
found that students perceive classes with synchronous communication as having higher
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

28

quality than those with only asynchronous methods of communication (2012). Likewise,
Rudd and Rudd (2014) suggest using synchronous and asynchronous video formats while
teaching online, and found that video is “most effective when paired or grouped with
other instructional tools (blogs, chatting, screen sharing, file sharing, and a host of
others)” (p.6).
Ferrario et al. (2013) reported on the experience of more than 120 instructors who
had transitioned to online teaching from the tradition on-ground classroom. From their
online instructional encounters, faculty participants relayed the methods they found to be
effective in circumventing common problems faced in the online classroom. The five
main points that emerged from the Ferrario et al. study were: 1) time feels different
online; 2) the cognitive overload of learning to teach online and its impact on the self-
confidence of instructors is often underestimated; 3) engaging students in the virtual
classroom requires a high degree of structure; 4) the asynchronous component of online
education is a critical partner to the synchronous portion; and 5) technology can help
instructors facilitate building relationships with their students better than previously
expected (2013). The main takeaway from the article, however, was that in order to
achieve online instructional quality, it is imperative for instructors to figure out how to
appropriately apply the same principles of teaching using the new tools available online,
“and then learn the strengths of [the new tools] so that [they can] be exploited” (2013,
p.89).
Learning and Motivation Theory
In order to investigate the factors facilitating or inhibiting effective instruction of
online courses by faculty, the promising practice method outlined by Clark and Estes
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

29

(2008) and adapted by Rueda (2011) will be implemented. This framework will work to
identify the organisational goals set forth by the partner sites, as well as the intermediate
goals of the primary stakeholders (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011) – that is, the
members of faculty in the various programs of study at the sites. When addressing a gap
in performance, it is imperative to identify the real or actual problem before
implementing the corresponding solution (Rueda, 2011). Too often, organisations
employ solutions that are misaligned with the issue at hand – which can inevitably result
in squandered resources and decreased performance, further exacerbating the problem
(Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011). Rather than forming assumptions based on
perceived understanding of a performance gap, Rueda emphasises the need to identify
and validate various possible causes prior to applying the appropriate solution (2011, p.
9). Potential problems in organisational performance may arise from a) existing
knowledge about the stakeholder or setting based upon informal scanning interviews, b)
review of the literature on the topic at hand, and c) learning, motivation, and
organisation/culture theories (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011). Only once these
assumed causes have been validated should congruent solutions be proposed and
implemented (Rueda, 2011).
Knowledge and Skills
Assets and inhibitors to faculty knowledge will be assessed using the framework
established by Anderson and Krathwohl (2001). This methodology will evaluate if the
faculty possess the factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive knowledge
required for successful online instruction (Anderson and Krathwohl, 2001). According to
Anderson and Krathwohl, factual knowledge requires a grasp of the basic elements
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

30

pertaining to the discipline (2001). For instance, faculty members need to possess strong
content expertise in their respective field order to effectively disseminate knowledge to
the students. Conceptual knowledge comprises the interrelationships between and
functionality of the basic elements of the topic of interest (2001). Here, members of
faculty who teach effectively in online learning environments know the best pedagogical
approach to use in such a milieu (Baran et al., 2011). Procedural knowledge involves
knowledge of the skills, procedures, and necessary involved with the task of interest
(Anderson and Krathwohl, 2001), such as knowing how to properly navigate the
technology used to teach online. Awareness of one’s cognition, including the ability to
reflect upon and monitor one’s progress and adjust skills and knowledge accordingly
reflects one’s metacognitive knowledge (2001). Online instructors demonstrate
metacognitive knowledge when they become aware and critical of their own assumptions
toward online education, and make adjustments to apply new teaching methods
appropriate for the online environment (Baran et al., 2011).
Motivation
Variables involved with faculty motivation will be addressed using the
Expectancy Value theory, which places emphasis on valuing the task at hand and self-
efficacy (Ambrose, 2010). In order to identify motivational factors among online
teaching faculty, it is important to consider three indices: choice, persistence, and mental
effort (Pintrich, 2003). Using this three-point index, we could then examine the
underlying variables that facilitate or inhibit motivation: self-efficacy, task value,
attributions, or goals.
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

31

Self-efficacy describes the confidence one has in one’s own ability to be
successful at a given task, for instance, an online instructor’s conviction in their ability to
effectively teach in the online environment (Rueda, 2011). Task value, or how much
value faculty members who teach online place in online education, is comprised of four
types: intrinsic value, extrinsic value, attainment value, and cost value (2011). Intrinsic
value involves the interest of a person in a task; for example, members of faculty may be
motivated to teach online because they are interested in using technology (2011).
Extrinsic value describes the utility of a task to an individual – faculty may be motivated
to teach online if they believe it will help advance them professionally (2011).
Attainment value involves an individual’s belief in the importance of a task, while cost
value is the benefit of a task to the individual (2011). For instance, the motivation of
online instructors may be positively impacted if they believe online education is
effective, and if effort and time required to teach online is considered reasonable (2011).
Further, the motivation of members of faculty who teach online may be enhanced if they
attribute their success in teaching effectively to the effort they put into doing so rather
than their ability – a motivational variable known as attribution (2011). Finally, goals
that are clear, current and challenging may enhance the motivation of online instructors to
effectively disseminate knowledge to students online (2011).
Organisation
Finally, the gap analysis will seek to identify facilitators or inhibitors of effective
online instruction due to the structure of the organisation. Using Vygotsky’s
sociocultural theoretical framework (1978), the analysis will determine if performance of
the faculty is supported or impeded upon by the existing cultural models or shared mental
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

32

schema. The cultural model describes the shared behavioural, cognitive and affective
aspects of an organisation (Rueda, 2011) – here the collective cultural model as described
by the partner sites. Within the partner sites, the shared values, beliefs and attitudes are
often invisible and imperceptible to those who hold them (2011). For instance, Bartell
describes the cultural model in academia as paradoxical, a constant attempt to reconcile
tradition with ever-changing society, economy, and technological advances (2003). As
such, there tends to be resistance to change and pessimistic attitudes toward the
integration of online degree programs into institutes of higher education. On the other
hand, the cultural setting comprises the visible, concrete manifestations of the shared
mental schema present within the partner institutions (2011). Here, the policies and
practices of the organisation may influence the ability of faculty to effectively deliver
online instruction. Variables such as lack of reliable resources, conflicting institutional
goals, unreasonable time expectations, or ineffective incentives may constrain members
of faculty from effectively teaching in the online milieu.
Factors Facilitating or Inhibiting Online Instructional Effectiveness
A thorough review of the literature was performed in order to identify the
knowledge, motivation, and organisational factors facilitating or inhibiting effective
instruction of online courses by faculty. The findings are discussed in the sections that
follow.
Knowledge
The gap analysis methodology requires one to determine if the stakeholder –here,
the faculty – possesses the knowledge and skills required to attain the goal of interest
(e.g. effectively teach in the online environment). This section will examine the literature
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

33

to identify knowledge variables that may facilitate or inhibit online instructional
effectiveness.

Factual knowledge. Effective performance in online instruction requires that
members of faculty possess knowledge of the basic facts, information, and terminology
related to the topic – that is, factual knowledge. In other words, online instructors in
higher education need to have subject-matter knowledge or content expertise in the field
in which they are teaching (Kreber & Kanuka, 2006), as well as basic knowledge about
the technology being used (Bejerano, 2008; Georgina & Olsen, 2008). Kreber and
Kanuka assert that effective university teaching includes “a deep understanding of the
discipline or subject being taught” (Kreber & Kanuka, 2006, p. 116), which many
teachers acquire from years of post-graduate studying. Further, faculty need at the very
least a basic technological knowledge in order to incorporate multimedia and other
technologies into their online courses (Georgina & Olsen, 2008). During the set-up of an
online course, online instructors may be untrained or unfamiliar with the available tools
and technology, constraining their ability to effectively teach in this environment
(Bejerano, 2008).
Conceptual knowledge. As well as requiring basic content and technological
knowledge, effective online instruction demands conceptual knowledge of the underlying
principles and theories within the field of interest. Most academics enter the classroom
without any formal teaching preparation or experience, and therefore emulate professors
they admired during their studies in academia (Kreber & Kanuka, 2006). Additionally,
those who teach in the online setting have little, if any, prior experience from which to
draw upon. As such, ineffective or poor teaching practices may persist, both in the face-
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

34

to-face and online environments (2006). Teaching in the online environment requires the
development of new sets of pedagogies, rather than perpetuating “approaches that have
been proven to be ineffective in the face-to-face classroom” (Kreber & Kanuka, 2006,
p.42).
Effective teaching online also necessitates members of faculty to have
technological literacy, or the capacity to “design, develop, control, use and access
technological systems and processes” (Georgina & Olsen, 2008). Yet, a 2006 study
conducted by Clay of 235 faculty who instructed online determined that more than half of
the instructors received no formal training, and were made to self-prepare prior to
teaching online for the first time (Clay, 2006). As a result, online instructors often treat
technology and pedagogical inquiry as separate entities, in lieu of acknowledging the
“complex relationships between technologies, pedagogies, and the content in their online
teaching context” (Kreber & Kanuka, 2006, p.433). These studies demonstrate the
importance of training faculty before allowing them to teach online in order to enhance
the effectiveness of online instruction.
Metacognitive Knowledge. Also of importance to effective online teaching is
the ability of the instructors to perform critical reflection (Baran, Correia & Thompson,
2011). This capacity to reflect and make appropriate adjustments to their approach or
strategies in teaching online is a reflection of instructors’ metacognitive knowledge.
Baran et al. argue, “one of the threats to the growth of a distinct online pedagogy is the
limited focus on reflection” (Baran et al., 2011, p. 432). Consequently, faculty who teach
online tend to replicate the same course content every time it is taught, and fail to
incorporate new methods and technologies into the online learning environment (2011).
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

35

Metacognitive knowledge allows teachers to “become aware and critical of their own
assumptions towards online learning and teaching” (Baran et al., 2011, p. 431), and in
turn enable the exploration of new pedagogical approaches. Kreber and Kanuka believe
adoption of critical reflective practices by online instructors should be emphasised in
teacher preparation and development programs, as the potential for incorporating inquiry-
based social learning practices and other new pedagogies into online classes will be
enhanced (Kreber & Kanuka, 2006).
Motivation
Motivation involves instigating and sustaining goal-directed activities (Pintrich,
2003), and identifying facilitating or inhibiting motivational factors among faculty in the
partner sites may be important for improving upon online instructional effectiveness.
The following section examines the extant literature pertaining to faculty motivation in
online educational settings.
Task value: Extrinsic value. According to Expectancy-Value theory,
“motivation, learning and performance are enhanced if the person values the task” (Clark
& Estes, 2008). One type of task value involves those factors extrinsically motivating the
faculty. In their 2008 study, Bolliger and Wasilik explored factors influencing faculty
satisfaction with online teaching in higher education. Here, they defined satisfaction as
“the perception that teaching in the online environment is effective and professionally
beneficial” (2009, p.105) – that is, faculty find satisfaction if they value teaching online.
For instance, Bolliger and Wasilik found that faculty satisfaction was positively impacted
if faculty believe they can promote positive student outcomes, and if they perceive the
online environment as one in which students have increased opportunities for highly
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

36

interactive communication with their instructor and peers (Bolliger & Wasilik, 2009).
Faculty surveyed in the study also claimed to enjoy teaching online because it affords
greater access to higher education to a diversity of students (2009). Faculty have
additionally expressed satisfaction with other extrinsic factors such as autonomy and
flexibility in the workplace (Houston et al., 2006).
Task value: Intrinsic value. A second type of task value, intrinsic, has been
found to be more important to faculty than extrinsic motivators (Bolliger & Wasilik,
2009; Aguirre, 2000; Houston, Meyer & Paewai, 2006). Intrinsic motivators were also
reported in the Bolliger and Wasilik study, including self-gratification, intellectual
challenge, and an interest in incorporating technology into the curriculum (2009). These
may be even more motivating than extrinsic factors such as high student performance
(Bolliger & Wasilik, 2009), appreciation from one’s students and peer recognition
(Houston et al., 2006) rather than salary or administrative work (Aguirre, 2000; Houston
et al., 2006).
Task value: Cost value. Cost value, or the benefits faculty perceive from
teaching online, has been shown in the literature to be an important motivator for faculty
who teach online. Members of faculty are satisfied when they receive appropriate
recognition for the work they are doing in online instruction (Bolliger & Wasilik, 2009).
For instance, faulty may be more motivated to provide effective online instruction if the
organisation offers release time, adequate compensation, and equitable reward system for
promotion and tenure (Bolliger & Wasilik , 2009; Oliver & Herrington, 2001; Ruth,
Sammons & Poulin, 2007).
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

37

Self-efficacy. The belief that one has the capacity to accomplish a certain task, or
self-efficacy, may have implications for the effectiveness with which faculty members
deliver online instruction. An individual’s perceptions about their own ability to achieve
success have been found to influence whether or not a behavioural task is undertaken, the
amount of effort exerted to persist in the task, and the overall performance pertaining to
the task (Hayashi, Chen, Ruyan & Wu, 2004). In their 2004 study, Hayashi et al.
examined the relationship between self-efficacy and adoption of technology and
innovation, as well as performance in software training. They defined computer self-
efficacy as an “individual’s perceptions of his or her ability to use computers in the
accomplishment of a task, rather than reflecting simple component skills (Hayashi et al.,
2004, p. 141). The group further asserted that individuals who possess higher computer
self-efficacy may be more inclined to perceive online education as more useful than those
with low computer self-efficacy (2004).
Other studies have found that an individual’s computer self-efficacy has a positive
effect on the ability to search for information (Hannafin & Land, 1997), and higher levels
of computer self-efficacy lend to more positive attitudes towards and greater knowledge
of computers (Shih et al., 1998). Wang and Newlin (2002) demonstrated that
individual’s with self-efficacy for meeting the technological demands of an online course
positively impacted performance. While computer self-efficacy has not been explicitly
measured in online instructors, one can plausibly extrapolate and apply the findings in the
literature to members of faculty who teach online. That is, higher levels of computer and
technology self-efficacy may positively influence the effectiveness with which an
individual disseminates knowledge in an online environment.
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

38

Organisation
In addition to the knowledge and motivation factors that may facilitate or
constrain online teaching effectiveness, the cultural model and setting in which faculty
work may play an important role. The following section explores organisational
variables related to cultural models and settings in academia that may contribute to or
inhibit effective online instruction.
The Academic Cultural Model. The cultural model, or the beliefs and attitudes
of the organisation that are generally invisible and automated, have been identified as
important to shaping employee performance and effectiveness (Marcoulides & Heck,
1993). Hagedorn (1996) examined a number of work life variables on the perceived level
of stress and satisfaction of faculty members across various career stages. She found that
satisfaction and motivation of the faculty was enhanced when positive relationships with
administrators and colleagues were present. On the other hand, a large qualitative study
of early-career faculty revealed that these members felt isolated due to the lack of a
community and lack of an integrated life, decreasing their levels of satisfaction (Rice,
Sorcinelli, and Austin, 2000). Further, White et al. found that one of the strongest
predictors of faculty motivation and productivity was the perceived institutional support
and expectation of effort given to their role (2012). These studies suggest that the
academic cultural model strongly influences the satisfaction, motivation, and
performance of members of faculty.
According to Aguirre, academia is a “complex institution that uses its resources,
especially research and faculty, to compete with other organizations in society” (Aguirre,
2000). In the face of increasing global competition for students and rapidly changing
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

39

technological advances, there is an ongoing conflict within the distinct realm of academic
culture between the “accumulated heritage” and the “modern imperatives” of universities
(Bartell, 2003). As many institutions of education attempt to move traditional classes to
an online platform,
the complexity, high degree of differentiation, multiplicity of units and
standards, autonomy of professors, control and management philosophies
and mechanisms…are likely to be complicating and inhibiting factors
[concerning] pressures for institutional change. (Bartell, 2003, p. 53)

Further, surveyed members of faculty have reported continued resistance to online
education efforts (Allen & Seaman, 2014; Bolliger & Wasilik, 2009; Ruth, et al., 2007).
As of the fall of 2012, only 30.2 percent of faculty accept the value and legitimacy of
online education (Allen & Seaman, 2014). Such resistance to change and pessimistic
attitudes toward online education likely constrains the ability of faculty to teach
effectively in the online milieu.
The Academic Cultural Setting. The cultural setting describes the visible and
concrete manifestations of the cultural model, including the policies and practices of the
institution. In their 2001 study, Schell and Stock summarized the importance of the
cultural setting for the motivation of instructors:
The quality of education that teachers are able to provide students depends
on the integrally related conditions in which teachers are asked to work.
(p.28)

Faculty performance and effectiveness may be shaped by the elements of opportunity to
perform, including institutional policies and procedures, norms, and the behaviour of
academic leaders (Marcoulides & Heck, 1993). In particular, considerations for
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

40

dependable technology, as well as time requirements and efforts required for teaching
online have been examined in the literature.
In order to effectively deliver online instruction to students, members of faculty
expect the institution to provide reliable infrastructure and technology (Bolliger &
Wasilik, 2009). Faculty who were surveyed reported lower levels of satisfaction when
faced with technological difficulties, or when they did not have access to adequate
technology and tools to teach online (2008). The most frequently reported problems with
the integration of technology include lack of priority in the department, no departmental
support or impetus, feeling demoralised for being forced to use awkward tools, and a lack
of uniformity in available technology (Georgina & Olsen, 2008). Such factors stand to
negatively impact the ability of faculty to effectively teach online.
Effective online instruction has also been shown to be influenced by
organisational policies where time requirements are concerned. Bejerano reported that
“faculty may find online instruction too time-intensive and relationally unrewarding”
(Bejerano, 2008, p. 412). A great deal of time is spent setting up instruction online
(2008), and significant time differences between online and on-ground courses exist
(Oliver & Herrington, 2001). Additionally, student expectations of faculty availability
are significantly increased for online courses as compared to the traditional on-ground
courses (2001). Allen and Seaman reported that 44.6 percent of faculty surveyed
believed online teaching required more time and effort than on-ground courses (2014).
Bower further found that the majority of faculty who taught online courses found them to
be a lot of work, and that the hassle of the workload, time requirements, technological
issues as a major inhibitor (Bower, 2001). Houston et al. assert that “unless workloads
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

41

are managed well and…time is provided for…those things that are valued by academics
attracted to university careers – the lifestyle of an academic will be affected and the
original motivators for career choice may dissipate” (Houston et al., 2006, p. 28).
Faculty satisfaction is positively influenced when they are recognised for the
work they are doing, especially in terms of adequate compensation and an equitable
reward system for promotion (Bolliger & Wasilik, 2009). Houston et al. found that
faculty respondents were not satisfied with “extrinsic rewards from their work such as
their salary, chances for advancement, and the recognition received for good work”
(Houston et al., 2006, p. 24). If, as stated above, online instruction is more difficult and
time-consuming for faculty, the reward structure of the institution should be reflective of
this. However, Ruth, Sammons and Poulin reported that incremental salaries for online
education were in fact decreasing instead of increasing (2007). They further asserted that
faculty members who are asked to “do the same job for 20 percent or less of a
counterpart’s salary while enduring difficult working conditions and ostracism from the
academic unit’s decision-making apparatus” (p. 37) will likely lose motivation to provide
quality online instruction (2007).
Conclusion
This chapter served to outline what defines a quality member of faculty in higher
education, as well as delineate effective instructional practices in the on-ground and
online environments. Additionally, the presumed knowledge, motivation, and
organisational facilitators or inhibitors of effective online instruction as described in the
literature were reviewed. The following chapter will address how such presumed
variables will be validated in the current study.
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

42

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this study was to examine the effective delivery of online
instructional by faculty in online graduate programs. In particular, the analysis focused
upon online faculty assets in the areas of knowledge, motivation and organisational
resources by addressing the following questions:
1. What knowledge, skills, motivational and organizational factors facilitate or
inhibit effective online teaching from the perspective of the faculty?
2. For those factors perceived to be facilitating the successful support of online
teaching faculty, what promising practices could be adapted to and utilized by
other units in the same agency? For those factors perceived as inhibitors, what
solutions may be helpful for improving the support of faculty to teach online
within the organization or program?
3. How might those interventions, whether promising practices or solutions, be
evaluated for effectiveness?
Methodological Framework
The framework for this study was based on the promising practice model, adapted
from the gap analysis model as proposed by Clark and Estes (2008). As previously
discussed, the promising practice model, as pictured in Figure 3.1, assesses the
performance of an organisation via the desired goals that the organisation is attempting to
achieve. Using the ideal performance goal as the basis for the assessment, the promising
practice model identifies knowledge, motivational, and organisational assets and
constraints that are lending to or impeding upon the success of the organisation. A
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

43

detailed understanding of the facilitators and inhibitors enables the stakeholders and other
institutions to then implement solutions in hopes of improving the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational gaps to achieve ideal performance (2008). The promising
practice model is a cyclical processes that requires the constant assessment, evaluation,
and enhancement of intervention strategies in order to achieve the desired performance
goal. Survey and interview data was collected and analysed in order to evaluate if
members of faculty are effectively delivering online instruction for the partner site
programs.

Figure 3.1. Promising practice process (adapted from Clark & Estes, 2008).

Presumed Performance Needs and Assets
The promising practice model employed in this study was be used to assess the
presumed performance needs or assets required by the faculty for effectively
disseminating instruction online. Clark and Estes (2008) assert that organisations
frequently employ solutions prior to identifying the real or actual problem. This can
ultimately be counterproductive, and may result in squandered resources and decreased
performance (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011). Potential needs or assets for
organisational performance may arise from a) existing knowledge about the stakeholder
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

44

or setting based upon informal scanning interviews, b) review of the literature on the
topic at hand, and c) learning, motivation, and organisation/culture theories (Clark &
Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011). Once these assumed needs and assets have been validated,
congruent solutions are proposed (Rueda, 2011). In this study, scanning interviews were
not conducted and thus assumed facilitators and inhibitors for effectively teaching online
are based upon extensive review of literature as discussed in Chapter 2. These assumed
facilitators and inhibitors are also included in Tables 1 – 4.
Knowledge and skills
The promising practice methodology requires one to determine if the stakeholder
– here, the members of faculty who teach online – possesses the knowledge and skills
required to attain the goal of interest (e.g. effective online instruction). As discussed in
Chapter 2, the most relevant knowledge needs and assets perceived to impact effective
online instruction include conceptual and metacognitive knowledge. Conceptually,
knowledge about incorporating new pedagogies and methods of instruction in the online
learning environment was a common theme identified in the literature. Further, having
technological knowledge beyond a basic level – that is, technological literacy – may be
related to facilitating effective online teaching. The metacognitive knowledge asset
involves online faculty critically reflecting upon their online teaching practices to
appropriately adjust and incorporate new enhanced pedagogies into online instruction.
Motivation
Effectively teaching in an online milieu may be facilitated or inhibited by the
motivation of the faculty members. The most prevalent motivation assets recognised in
the literature are those concerned with task value and self-efficacy. In particular, faculty
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

45

may be motivated to teach effectively online if they extrinsically value the perceived
benefit of online education for students, autonomy and flexibility teaching online, or
receive appropriate recognition for online instruction from peers and students (Bolliger &
Wasilik, 2009). Intrinsic value of the intellectual challenge of teaching online, or an
interest in integrating technology into instruction may further motivate online instructors
(Bolliger & Wasilik, 2009; Aguirre, 2000; Houston, Meyer & Paewai, 2006). The cost
value of teaching online, including receiving adequate time to prepare and/or receiving
release time for teaching online courses, and being compensated appropriately may also
motivate faculty to effectively teach online (Allen & Seaman, 2014; Ruth, Sammons &
Poulin, 2007; Bejerano, 2008; Bolliger & Wasilik, 2009; Oliver & Herrington, 2001;
Bower, 2001; Houston et al., 2006). Finally, members of faculty with high computer and
technology self-efficacy may be more motivated to teach online than those with low self-
efficacy (Hayashi et al., 2004; Hannafin & Land, 1997; Shih et al., 1998; Wang &
Newlin, 2002).
Organisation
According to the promising practice model, the final area requiring assessment is
the organisation itself (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011). Here, the goal is to isolate
potential facilitators or inhibitors inherent to the organisation that may be influencing the
ability of the faculty to effectively deliver instruction for the online graduate programs.
When evaluating the institutional needs or assets present, one must consider both the
existing cultural model, as well as the cultural setting. The academic cultural model is
often defined by adherence to tradition and resistance to change. According to what has
been revealed in the literature, the belief in the value and legitimacy of online education
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

46

may influence the effectiveness of online instruction. In the cultural setting, sufficient
institutional support for the faculty, including access to reliable infrastructure and
technology, adequate time allowed for preparation to teach online, release time for
teaching online, and adequate compensation for online faculty, may facilitate effectively
delivery of online education (Allen & Seaman, 2014; Ruth, Sammons & Poulin, 2007;
Bejerano, 2008; Bolliger & Wasilik, 2009; Oliver & Herrington, 2001; Bower, 2001;
Houston et al., 2006).
Summary
Table 3.1 summarises the assumed knowledge, motivation, and organisational
needs and assets identified in the literature in Chapter 2.

EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

47

Table 3.1. Summary of assumed needs and assets for knowledge, motivation, and
organizational issues based on the literature.

Assets

Sources
Knowledge

Motivation

Organisational Processes

Related literature Knowledge & understanding of
subject matter (content
expertise) (F): Kreber &
Kanuka, 2006
Basic knowledge of technology
(F): Bejerano, 2008; Georgina
& Olsen, 2008
Knowledge of incorporating
new methods/pedagogies into
Online courses (C): Kreber &
Kanuka, 2006; Bejerano, 2008;
Georgina & Olsen, 2008
Technological literacy (C):
Clay, 2006; Georgina & Olsen,
2008
Knowledge of critical reflection
in order to incorporate new
methods/pedagogies into Online
courses (M): Baran, Correia &
Thompson, 2011; Kreber &
Kanuka, 2006
High student
performance/positive student
outcomes (EV): Bolliger &
Wasilik, 2009
Enjoyment due to perceived
benefit to students (EV): Bolliger
& Wasilik, 2009
Autonomy/flexibility in workplace
(EV): Houston et al., 2006
Peer & student recognition for
online instruction (EV): Bolliger
& Wasilik, 2009
Self-gratification (IV): Bolliger &
Wasilik, 2009; Aguirre, 2000;
Houston, Meyer & Paewai, 2006
Intellectual challenge (IV):
Bolliger & Wasilik, 2009;
Aguirre, 2000; Houston, Meyer &
Paewai, 2006
Interest in incorporating
technology (IV): Bolliger &
Wasilik, 2009; Aguirre, 2000;
Houston, Meyer & Paewai, 2006
Release time for teaching online
(CV): Bolliger & Wasilik , 2009;
Oliver & Herrington, 2001; Ruth,
Sammons & Poulin, 2007
Adequate compensation (CV):
Bolliger & Wasilik , 2009; Oliver
& Herrington, 2001; Ruth,
Sammons & Poulin, 2007
Equitable system of
promotion/tenure (CV): Bolliger
& Wasilik , 2009; Oliver &
Herrington, 2001; Ruth, Sammons
& Poulin, 2007
High computer/technology self-
efficacy (SE): Hayashi et al.,
2004; Hannafin & Land, 1997;
Shih et al., 1998; Wang & Newlin,
2002
Cultural model of clear &
positive institutional
expectation of role: Rice,
Sorcinelli, and Austin, 2000;
Hageburn, 1996; Blackburn
& Lawrence, 1995
Cultural model of
acceptance of value &
legitimacy of online
education:Allen & Seaman,
2014; Bolliger & Wasilik,
2009; Ruth, Sammons &
Poulin, 2007

Cultural setting of reliable
infrastructure & technology:
Bolliger & Wasilik, 2009;
Georgina & Olsen, 2008;
Bower, 2001

Cultural setting of access to
adequate technology:
Bolliger & Wasilik, 2009;
Oliver & Herrington, 2001;
Bower, 2001
Cultural setting of adequate
prep time/time release for
teaching online courses:
Allen & Seaman, 2014; Ruth,
Sammons & Poulin, 2007;
Bejerano, 2008; Bolliger &
Wasilik, 2009; Oliver &
Herrington, 2001; Bower,
2001; Houston et al., 2006

Cultural setting of adequate
compensation: Bolliger &
Wasilik, 2009; Ruth,
Sammons & Poulin, 2007;
Houston et al., 2006

Cultural setting of equitable
system of promotion/tenure:
Bolliger & Wasilik, 2009;
Ruth, Sammons & Poulin,
2007; Houston et al., 2006

EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

48

Validation of the Performance Assets
Having established an understanding of the knowledge, motivation, and
organization assets that contribute to or inhibit the achievement of a performance goal, it
is necessary to discuss the strategies that were used to assess the factors in the programs
that are included in this study. The remainder of the information in this chapter will
therefore focus on establishing a framework for assessing the performance indicators
discussed.
Validation of the Performance Assets: Knowledge
Anderson and Krathwohl (2002) provide a framework for analyzing the various
levels of knowledge. The authors propose a four-tiered level of knowledge and describes
the various components of each level (2002). The four levels of knowledge proposed by
Anderson and Krathwohl (2002) are factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive.
Using Anderson and Krathwohl’s (2002) level of knowledge, one can assess the
knowledge and skills required to effective teach in the online milieu. In the sections that
follow, a detailed understanding of the various forms of knowledge prominently
identified in the literature will be discussed, and corresponding validation questions are
provided.
Validation of factual knowledge assets. According to Anderson and Krathwohl
(2002), factual knowledge is defined as the information one requires in order to complete
a task/job. This knowledge can take the form of facts and terminologies. In order to
validate factual knowledge one can administer assessments that require participants to
answer questions in order to assess their level of knowledge or interview them in regards
to basic information. Though it is acknowledged in the literature that factual knowledge
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

49

of both the subject matter being taught and the technology being used is required,
research has not identified problems with faculty lacking such knowledge. As such,
factual knowledge assets were not validated in this study.
Validation of conceptual knowledge assets. Conceptual knowledge is related to
one’s ability to understand the principles or theories in place in order to function properly
or effectively (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2002). Conceptual knowledge can be examined
via surveys in which participants are asked to identify and categorize theories or compare
various concepts and via interviews in which they are asked to paraphrase key concepts
or operating procedures (2002). For the purposes of this study and in order to assess the
conceptual knowledge, online faculty were asked questions to validate their knowledge
about incorporating new instructional methods in the online learning environment and
about designing, developing, and controlling the technology used to teach online.
Examples of the assumed conceptual knowledge assets and corresponding validation
questions are provided in Table 3.2.
Validation of metacognitive knowledge assets. Awareness and knowledge
about one’s own cognition may lend to effective online instruction (Anderson &
Krathwohl, 2002). The ability of online instructors to evaluate their own strengths and
challenges with effectively teaching online may facilitate their ability to incorporate new
pedagogies and instructional methods in the online classroom. Validation of this
assumption was determined with interview questions that had the faculty reflect upon
their online teaching strengths and weaknesses. Table 3.2 illustrates questions to validate
the metacognitive knowledge of the members of faculty who teach online.

EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

50

Table 3.2. Summary of assumed knowledge assets and their validation.
Assumed Knowledge Need/Asset*

How Will It Be Validated?
Knowledge of incorporating new
methods/pedagogies into Online courses (C)
Interview question(s): “How do the instructional
methods or pedagogies you employ to teach
online differ from those used in the traditional
on-ground classroom setting?”
Technological literacy (C) Interview question(s): “How well or in what
ways do you feel the preparation you received to
teach online courses prepared you for delivering
online instruction to your students?”
Knowledge of critical reflection in order to
incorporate new methods/pedagogies into Online
courses (M)
Interview question(s): “Can you reflect upon
any of your perceived strengths or weaknesses
in teaching in the online environment?”

Validation of the Performance Assets: Motivation
Following assessment of the knowledge problems, it is essential to examine the
potential motivation needs or assets influencing effective online instruction (Clark &
Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011). The prevalent facets of motivation presumed to impact
faculty motivation to teach online include extrinsic value, intrinsic value, cost value, and
self-efficacy. The motivation needs and assets of the faculty were assessed via Likert-
scale survey questions, as well as interview questions. Table 3.3 summarises the
assumed motivational factors influencing instruction in the online environment along
with corresponding validation questions.

EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

51

Table 3.3. Summary of assumed motivation assets and their validation.
Assumed Motivational Need/Asset(s)* How Will It Be Validated?
Faculty enjoy teaching online due to perceived
benefit to students. (EV)
Written Likert-scale survey items (“strongly agree”
to “strongly disagree”). “It is valuable to me that
my students can access my online course from any
place in the world”, “Online teaching is gratifying
because it provides me with an opportunity to reach
students who otherwise would not be able to take
the course”, “I value that my students use a wider
range of resources in the online setting than in the
traditional one”
Faculty value autonomy/flexibility in teaching
online courses. (EV)
Written Likert-scale survey items (“strongly agree”
to “strongly disagree”). “The flexibility provided by
the online environment is important to me”
Faulty value peer & student recognition for online
instruction. (EV)
Interview question(s): “Do you receive any external
recognition or rewards from your peers and/or
students for teaching online? Please explain.”
Faculty value the intellectual challenge of
teaching online. (IV)
Written Likert-scale survey items (“strongly agree”
to “strongly disagree”). “Teaching online forces me
to have to be more creative in my instructional
delivery.”
Interview question(s): “How valuable is the
intellectual challenge of teaching online for you?
Please explain.”
Faculty is interested in incorporating technology
into instruction. (IV)
Written Likert-scale survey items (“strongly agree”
to “strongly disagree”). “I am more satisfied with
teaching online as compared to other delivery
methods”, “I have a strong interest in using
technology to teach”, “I value being able to
incorporate greater resources, such as discussion
boards, email, course walls, etc., when teaching an
online course as compared to traditional teaching.”
Faculty is provided with adequate prep
time/release time for teaching online. (CV)
Written Likert-scale survey items (“strongly agree”
to “strongly disagree”). “It is important to me that I
receive extra time to prepare for teaching my online
course the online courses I teach”
Faculty receives adequate compensation for
teaching online. (CV)
Written Likert-scale survey items (“strongly agree”
to “strongly disagree”). “The compensation I
receive for teaching online is important to me”
Faculty possess high computer/technology self-
efficacy. (SE)
Written Likert-scale survey items (“strongly agree”
to “strongly disagree”). “I am confident in my
ability to effectively navigate the Internet”, “I am
confident in my ability to effectively navigate the
Learning Management System (LMS)” “I feel
confident in my ability to communicate with groups
of students in an online synchronous classroom
setting.”, “I am confident in my ability to
communicate with my students asynchronously,
using discussion boards, email, course walls, etc…”

Validation of the Performance Assets: Organization/Culture/Context
Facilitators or inhibitors to teaching effectively online may be explained by
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

52

institutional variables. When evaluating the institutional needs and assets present, one
must consider both the existing cultural model, as well as the cultural setting (Rueda,
2011). The cultural model describes the shared behavioural, cognitive and affective
aspects of an organisation (2011). Within the partner sites, the shared values, beliefs and
attitudes are often invisible and imperceptible to those who hold them (2011). On the
other hand, the cultural setting comprises the visible, concrete manifestations of the
shared mental schema present in the department (2011). Likert-scale survey and
interview questions validating the assumed organisation cultural model and setting needs
and assets are summarized in Table 3.4.
Table 3.4. Summary of assumed organisational/culture needs/assets and their validation.
Assumed Organizational Need/Asset(s)* How Will it be Validated?
The institutional cultural model demonstrates
acceptance of value & legitimacy of online education.
Written Likert-scale survey items (“strongly agree” to
“strongly disagree”). “Faculty at my institution accept the
value an legitimacy of online education”
Faculty are provided with reliable infrastructure &
technology by the cultural setting.
Written Likert-scale survey items (“strongly agree” to
“strongly disagree”). “The technology I use for online
teaching is reliable”, “Technical problems do not frustrate
or discourage me in my online teaching. ”
Interview Question(s): “Have you ever encountered any
problems or challenges with using the available
technology? If so, please explain.”
Faculty are provided with adequate prep time/time
release for teaching online courses by the cultural
setting.
Written Likert-scale survey items (“strongly agree” to
“strongly disagree”). “I have a higher workload when
teaching an online course as compared to traditional
teaching”, “It takes me longer to prepare for an online
course on a weekly basis than for an on-ground course”
Interview question(s): “Please explain any differences in
workload between teaching online and on-ground
courses.”
Faculty receives adequate compensation for teaching
online from the cultural setting.
Written Likert-scale survey items (“strongly agree” to
“strongly disagree”). “I receive fair compensation for
teaching online”

Participating Stakeholders
The population for the gap analysis was drawn from the six partner schools that
utilise a common OPM provider for their online graduate programs. The purposive, non-
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

53

probability sample design is one of convenience (Merriam, 2009), whereby faculty from
the partner sites were studied. Members of faculty, including tenure and non-tenure
track, part- and full-time members, who teach online graduate programs for the
participating schools were contacted to determine their willingness to participate in the
study. Willing participants were emailed a survey, and follow-up interviews were
conducted in order to glean a deeper understanding of the facilitators and inhibitors of
effective online instruction.
Data Collection
Prior to conducting the study, permission was obtained from the University of
Southern California’s Institutional Review Board (IRB). In order to validate the
knowledge, motivation, and organizational causes that were assumed (as stated above),
data collection was employed via surveys and virtual interviews. This study was
structured to include two methods of data collection in order to triangulate the methods
and thereby “lessen the likelihood that [the] researcher will jump to conclusions based on
insubstantial evidence” (McEwan & McEwan, 2006, p. 80), as well as ensure the
trustworthiness of the data. The anonymity and confidentiality of respondents was of
utmost importance throughout the study. As a result, all surveys were conducted online
anonymously prior to the conducting of virtual interviews. No identifiable information
was collected in the anonymous surveys. Since anonymity is not possible in one-on-one
interviews and focus group settings, identifiable information was safeguarded via a
password protected document. Information regarding the participants was only shared
with my faculty advisors. Documents with identifiable information were destroyed at the
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

54

culmination of the study. Additionally, as the findings are reported, all identifiable
characteristics were removed to protect participants.
Surveys
Participating members of faculty who teach in the online graduate programs
within the partner sites were asked to partake in a self-administered online survey. An
online version of the survey was selected because all faculty have a reliable email address
and ready access to the Internet, and the privacy of the respondents can effectively be
maintained. Survey questions (Appendix A) addressing the assumed knowledge,
motivation, and organisational needs and assets of online instructors at the partner sites
were distributed to participants via Qualtrics. Survey responses were kept anonymous.
Interviews
Participating faculty members were interviewed individually, virtually through
synchronous audio and video connection. A semi-structured interview protocol
(Appendix B) was to learn the opinions, beliefs, and perceptions of the participating
members of faculty. An interview guide was developed in order to standardise the
questions asked of the subjects, and to minimize interviewer effects (Patton, 2002).
Further, using the same set of questions for all the respondents increases the ease of data
analysis as compared to an unstructured interview (2002). Using the semi-structured
approach allowed for probing during the interviews in order to gain a greater depth of
information from the faculty members. Further, the protocol was open-ended enough that
the respondents were still able to provide their own words, thoughts, and insights to
address the questions. During each of the interviews, copious notes were taken in order to
help formulate new questions or probes during the interviews, and to help facilitate later
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

55

analysis (2002). With permission of the participants, interviews were also recorded and
subsequently transcribed in preparation for analysis.
Trustworthiness of Data
Upon evaluating qualitative research, the transparency of the researcher’s
methodology is imperative for the credibility of the study (Miles, Huberman & Saldana,
2014). According to Miles et al. (2014), “when procedures are left so opaque, we have
only vague criteria for judging the goodness of the conclusions” (p.316). Transparency
was ensured here by providing the reader with detailed descriptions of the methodology
used in the current study. In order to ensure the credibility of this study, triangulation of
survey and interview data was used to increase the internal validity. Interview data
allows for the researcher to gain greater depth and understanding of the survey data
(2014). Additionally, reflective memos, analysing bias, looking for repetitive codes and
disconfirming evidence were also used to strengthen the credibility of the study (2014).
Upon analysis, discrepant themes were looked for in order to disconfirm any initial
researchers assertions, further strengthening the validity of the study (2014). Each of
these strategies serve to present the data collected in the most unbiased manner as
possible.
Though ethics play a vital role in any type of research, “ethical considerations should
accompany plans, thoughts, and discussions about each aspect of qualitative research”
(Glesne, 2011). To ensure ethical practice during this study, all of the participants were
informed that their participation in the study was strictly voluntary and, should they
choose to partake, their responses would remain anonymous. The participants were
assured that their anonymity and confidentiality was considered of utmost importance
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

56

when gathering and reporting data in order to encourage openness and honesty when
discussing their experiences. Further, permission to record interviews was obtained from
each of the participants.
Role of Investigator
I am a candidate for the Doctor of Education (Ed.D.) at the Rossier School of
education, part of the University of Southern California (USC). Additional, I am a full-
time, non-tenure track member of faculty in the department of Human and Evolutionary
Biology at USC. Two of the participating partner sites in this study are programs housed
within USC, including the Master in Teaching (MAT) and the Master of Social Work
programs. Despite being housed within the same university at which I am employed, I
have no affiliation with either of the participating programs.
Data Analysis
Survey and interview data was collected in the current study in order to glean a
deeper understanding of the knowledge, motivation and organisational assets facilitating
effective online instruction. To interpret survey data, frequency analysis was used to
illustrate similarities and differences in the answers provided by the respondents. A
general inductive approach to analysis of interview data was taken in order to derive
concepts and themes through interpretation of the raw data. Such concepts and themes,
which arise through coding, are the foundation for the analytic method (Harding, 2013).
The coding process is instrumental in identifying commonalities and differences in the
data corpus (2013). In the current study, a four-step analysis as described by Harding
(2013) was used to code and analyse the data. Following thorough reading of the
transcribed interview data, apriori codes were identified. Apriori codes pertaining to
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

57

knowledge, motivation, and organisational variables facilitating or inhibiting effective
online instruction by faculty were derived from the existing literature. Subsequent
reduction, selection, and interpretation of the data lent to the emergence of empirical
codes from the data. Reduction of the transcripts allowed for more succinct data, such
that themes were more readily identified (Harding, 2013). Next, selection of what should
and should not be coded occurred to in order to reduce extraneous data (2013). The code
list was then reviewed, revised as necessary, and then categorised. These categories were
subsequently be arranged into themes, and assertions and interpretations made based on
such themes (2013).
Conclusion
This chapter delineated the methodology for the study, including rationale for
sampling, instrumentation and data collection methods, and data analysis. Following data
collection, Chapter Four will provide the data and results of the study. Subsequently,
Chapter Five will provide recommendations for practice, as well as an implementation
and evaluation plan, based upon data analysed in the current study and the literature.

EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

58

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND FINDINGS
The purpose of this study was to elucidate the knowledge, motivational, and
organisational factors facilitating or inhibiting effective delivery of online graduate
instruction from the perspective of online teaching faculty. Using an adapted promising
practice version of the framework of the Clark and Estes gap analyses model (2008), data
were collected to validate the assumed knowledge, motivation, and organisation assets
across the partner sites involved in the study.
Sample Characteristics
The survey participants (n=40) were comprised of 55% part-time or adjunct
faculty, 38% full-time non-tenure track faculty, and 8% tenure-track members of faculty
(see Figure 2). All of the participants reported teaching online classes, with 40% of the
respondents teaching classes both online and on-ground. Six of the forty survey
respondents (15%) further participated in a follow-up interview. Of the six participating
partner sites, three were represented by interview participants.

Figure 4.1. Faculty position type of participating online instructional faculty.

Knowledge Assets
The current study sought to examine the conceptual and metacognitive knowledge
factors facilitating or inhibiting effective online instruction by participating members of
Tenured/Tenure-‐
Track

Full-‐Time
Non-‐
Tenure
Track

Part-‐Time/
Adjunct

EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

59

faculty. Assessment of conceptual knowledge focused upon the ability of online
instructional faculty to successfully incorporate the best pedagogical approach to
delivering online education (Baran et al., 2011). Metacognitive knowledge, or the ability
of members of faculty who teach online to reflect upon and monitor their progress and
adjust accordingly (2011), was also investigated.
Conceptual Knowledge
While online instructors tend to have a firm grasp on the content they are
disseminating, research has indicated that members of faculty often struggle to
incorporate new instructional methods in the online learning environment (Kreber &
Kanuka, 2006). Accordingly, interview participants all considered themselves
knowledgeable in their respective fields, reporting that they possessed “content
expertise,” many having “taught [the] subject matter before at other universities in
person.” One participant claimed to “have a whole lot of experience and a whole lot of
knowledge…in [the] field,” and began teaching in the online environment “with a great
deal of confidence in [her] knowledge.” However, Kreber and Kanuka emphasized the
importance the importance of learning both the technology as well as the appropriate
pedagogy for effectively teaching online education (2006). The following sections
discuss the findings from survey and interview data concerning the conceptual
knowledge of integrating technology and pedagogy in the participating online members
of faculty. Further, emergent data showed conceptual knowledge challenges with online
instruction in the absence of proximity to students.
Integrating technology and pedagogy in the online classroom. In their 2005
study, Koehler and Mishra insisted that online instructors cannot rely solely upon
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

60

comprehension of the online technologies, but need to employ pedagogical inquiry
integrating content, technology, and pedagogies into their virtual classrooms. When
interview participants were asked how the instructional methods or pedagogies they
employ to teach online differ from those used in the traditional on-ground classroom
setting, more than half of the responses given illustrated a lack of such integration. In
comparing pedagogical methods between on-ground and online milieus, interviewed
faculty admitted that they “try to mirror” what is done on-ground in the online learning
environment, that is, “be able to facilitate some of the things they did in a campus-based
[classroom], but do it in the [online] platform as much as possible.” One faculty member
said her instructional methods were “actually not too different”, further stating “I think
I’m pretty much the same whether you have me online or in a live class.” Yet another
instructor declared, “teaching is teaching.” The strategies – or lack thereof – of these
instructors for delivering online education points to a lack of comprehension for
incorporating novel – or adapting existing – instructional methods better suited for
teaching online material as compared to on-ground. Accordingly, Kreber and Kanuka
noted that persistent limited understanding in promoting higher-order thinking in the
virtual classroom stems from the tendency for instructors to transfer traditional classroom
practices into the online environment (2006).
Despite the seeming lack of conceptual knowledge demonstrated by these
respondents, two of the six interview participants reported making efforts to employ
various instructional methods in their virtual classrooms. One instructor managed to “re-
conceptualize some of the more complex and abstract concepts” from the traditional
classroom to better suit the online milieu. In particular, the respondent described her use
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

61

of “chalk-talk…which is a technique…where you set up a white board and put up a
prompt an let [the students] talk to each other by making connections between concepts.”
Another interview participant reported,
I’m using the flipped method…[The students] watch the lesson prior to
coming. They do some activities prior to coming….This means that they
time you are there, you can deepen. You can provide examples and
provide activities that help them to move from that surface knowledge to a
deeper place.

Taken together, these findings suggest that participating members have some conceptual
knowledge about the online learning environment, as demonstrated by their attempts to
apply new – or at least adapt traditional – teaching methods online.
Instructional challenges faced in absence of physical contact. Though it was
not directly asked of the interview participants, a common theme emerged with respect to
conceptual knowledge of interacting with students in the absence of physical contact.
The largest obstacle the study participants reported facing while teaching online was how
to compensate for this lack of physical contact with their students. For instance, one
interviewee “mourn[s] being able to be in a room where you can touch people” and
“feel[s] limited in [her] daily efforts to convey…messages as effectively online as [she]
could in a classroom.” For this instructor, the ability to connect with students and read
visual clues is important. To overcome this challenge, she reported asking her students
questions such as “Help me understand you, your facial expression just changed,” or
“Your facial expression or your body position just changed, how do I make meaning of
that?” She believed that in the traditional classroom, the engagement or disengagement
level of students is something she can sense – something she feels unable to do in the
online environment. Another online instructor was discouraged that she hasn’t “figured
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

62

out how to do fun, engaging but also challenging activities online.” For her,
incorporating food into the classroom is important as she feels it helps to engage the
students in the content, as well as build relationships with her students. Yet another
participant lamented that the meaningful exchanges he often had with students during
class breaks or after class in the on-ground setting “don’t happen and [he doesn’t] know
how to reproduce them online.” One interviewee summed up the experience of
interacting with students online:
You have to work harder and you have to be a much more active and
curious instructor. You can’t make any assumptions. You can’t assume
that you have any sense of what’s really going on and how people are
reacting because it could also become somewhat artificial.

These findings suggest that online instructors may benefit from improved conceptual
knowledge about overcoming lack of physical contact to build meaningful relationships
with their students.
Need for both technology and pedagogy training. Given the challenges faced
by online instructors in effectively adapting traditional pedagogical methods into the
online learning environment and interacting with students without the benefit of physical
proximity, interview participants were asked about the training they received to prepare
them for online instruction. All six participants seemed satisfied with their training
provided by the OPM, “who would teach you how to set up the classroom, how to allow
students in, how to record, how to manage your classroom, basically.” “They had
excellent one-on-one training,” said an interviewee describing his experience, “they
connected me with a training technician who stepped me through everything [technical]
point by point.” The online instructors felt such training “prepared [them] quite well,”
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

63

believing the training “prepare[d] [them] for the virtual environment.” However, all of
the participants agreed the training received prior to teaching was purely technological, in
lieu of pedagogical: “They didn’t teach you how to teach, but they taught you how to set
up the classroom online to facilitate the live learning” stated one interviewee. Another
subject asserted, “It was definitely tech training, not instructional method training.”
Conversely, one of the interview participants detailed how her partner site has attempted
to supplement the OPM technological training with some pedagogical training:
We need to think about using [the technology] with intentionality to
support learning. We have a course lead model…where each course has a
mentor or mentors…The other thing we do for faculty development
is…something called the Pedagogy Club [where]…I’ll [send] postings
from Faculty Focus, the Supply Network, the Teaching Professor Journals.

Though this partner site seems to be providing resources for online instructors to learn to
integrate new pedagogical methods online, the interviewee also noted that such resources
were available on a voluntary basis. Thus, it was not clear to what extent the online
members of faculty are using such resources.
Overall, according to the majority of interview participants, the training provided
for teaching in the online classroom setting is almost exclusively technological, not
pedagogical. Accordingly, the interviewees reported impediments in conceptual
knowledge of integrating content, technology and pedagogy into the online classroom
and building relationships with students in the absence of physical contact.
Metacognitive Knowledge
According to Anderson and Krathwohl (2002), metacognitive knowledge entails
awareness and knowledge of one’s own cognition and how to effectively manipulate
one’s cognitive processes. Baran et al. agree, asserting that reflection is imperative for
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

64

improving a teacher’s practice, and “one of the threats to the growth of a distinct online
pedagogy is the limited focus on reflection” (Baran et al., 2011, p.432). Interview data
was used to determine the metacognitive knowledge of participating online instructors.
Engaging in self-reflection for improved online instruction. In order to
validate the assumption that metacognitive knowledge facilitates the ability of online
instructors to effectively disseminate information in the virtual classroom, participating
members of faculty were asked to reflect upon their perceived strengths and weaknesses
in teaching online courses. The two respondents who described attempts to incorporate
new instructional methods in the online learning environment were the same interviewees
who seemed to possess metacognitive knowledge. Baran et al. stated that it is through
critical reflection “that personal empowerment is realized by challenging assumptions
rather than accepting them as they are” (2011, p.432). Accordingly, one instructor
reflected upon how her “conceptual framework has shifted because [her] students have
changed. [She’s] very much influenced by the theory of mattering and marginality,
[which she] conveys through [her] teaching.” She also stated that when disseminating
content to her students online, she searches for online instructional methods that “are as
good, or comparable, as opposed to replacement” for the traditional classroom
techniques. For instance, she has changed the way she provides her students with
feedback; in lieu of written comments, she provides feedback through video. Another
participant recounted:
I sense my own best practice level and wanted to add to that in terms
being so new to online teaching…I really wanted to be able to really
know what worked and be able to facilitate that as much as possible
in the online platform…Not only what was my own experience…I felt
that that was amendable, modifiable, I could adjust and do that and do
this as long as I’m doing the best practices online.
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

65

Additionally, a third respondent claimed she was “constantly trying to reflect on, can
[she] deliver this in a better way online?...Thinking about, how can [she] do this in the
best way possible given the platform or medium?” Through this critical reflection of
their own online teaching practices, the instructors effectively “identify the assumptions
governing their actions, question the meaning of such assumptions, and develop
alternative ways of acting” (2011, p.432). This metacognitive knowledge effectively
challenges the instructors to examine and improve upon their own online teaching
practices. The other three respondents provided perceived strengths in abilities to teach
online, though did not speak directly to metacognition or self-reflection in their online
instruction. For instance, one subject described how online teaching has “forced [him] to
be much more organized.” Another touted her ability to “communicate effectively” and
keep “the tone respectfully light,” while the third participant claimed “a whole lot of
experience and a whole lot of knowledge” were her strengths in teaching online.
Although these interviewees did not specifically address the concept of self-reflection,
their responses suggested a level of self-awareness in their own online instructional
practices. They have made adjustments in tone and style of teaching as compared to the
traditional classroom.
Given the responses of the participants, there seems to be a continuum in the level
of metacognitive knowledge among the members of faculty. Given the importance
placed on self-reflection for online teaching practices in the literature (Baran, et al., 2011;
Kreber & Kanuka, 2006), online instructors may benefit from greater emphasis on
metacognitive knowledge.

EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

66

Motivational Assets
According to Expectancy Value theory, valuing a task can lend to improved
motivation, learning, and performance (Clark & Estes, 2008). The assumed motivational
assets that were evaluated via survey and interview data included extrinsic, intrinsic, and
cost task value, as well as self-efficacy.
Task Value: Extrinsic Value
Bolliger and Wasilik (2009) found that faculty satisfaction in teaching online was
related to perceived external benefits such as positive student outcomes and external
recognition from their students and peers for teaching online. Further, online teaching
faculty have been shown to value the autonomy and flexibility of online instruction
(Houston et al., 2006). Interview data and the five survey questions addressing the
extrinsic motivation of online instructors in this project revealed that increased access and
opportunity for students, job flexibility, and perceived improvements in student
performance were all positive motivators for the study participants.
Online instructors value increased access and opportunity for students. Of
the total number of survey participants, 90% strongly agreed or agreed that they valued
their student’s ability to access their online course from any place in the world (Table
4.1).
Table 4.1. Faculty Extrinsically Value Ability of Students to Access Online Education
From Anywhere in the World.
Frequency Faculty Responses
(n=40)
Strongly Agree 31 (77.5%)
Agree 5 (12.5%)
Neither Agree or Disagree 3 (7.5%)
Disagree 1 (2.5%)
Strongly Disagree 0 (0%)

EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

67

Similarly, 95% strongly agreed or agreed that online teaching was gratifying to
them because it provides them with an opportunity to reach students who otherwise
would not be able to take the course (see Table 4.2).
Table 4.2. Faculty Extrinsically Value Increased Student Access to Online Education.
Frequency Faculty Responses
(n=40)
Strongly Agree 19 (47.5%)
Agree 19 (47.5%)
Neither Agree or Disagree 2 (5.1%)
Disagree 0 (0%)
Strongly Disagree 0 (0%)

The interview responses expanded on these survey results, with interviewees asserting,
for example, that they “are truly reaching students who would not have had access.” One
explained that they “have rural students…students who have come from underserved
communities…and now these students will achieve, will earn [a degree] from a highly
ranked, well respected program.” Another interviewee appreciated “the consistency for
the students to be able to attend no matter what their living situation,” and valued that
online learning programs “[allow] students to continue with their education despite
emotional or physical barriers that may be present in the traditional classroom setting.”
Further, one interviewed online instructor marveled how she had students “that are in
Singapore and…students who are all over the country.” All six of the interview
participants cited access and opportunity for students to achieve quality education as
valuable, thus validating this extrinsic motivation asset as a facilitator of effective online
instruction.
Online instructors value perceived positive outcomes for students. Another
factor that was assumed to extrinsically motivate the online instructors in this study was
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

68

academic performance of their students. When asked if developing their online teaching
abilities was important for improving upon student performance, around 93% strongly
agreed or agreed (Table 4.3).
Table 4.3. Faculty Extrinsically Value Developing Online Teaching Abilities to Improve
Upon Student Academic Performance.
Frequency Faculty Responses
(n=40)
Strongly Agree 25 (62.5%)
Agree 12 (30.8%)
Neither Agree or Disagree 2 (5.1%)
Disagree 0 (0%)
Strongly Disagree 1 (2.6%)

During an interview with an online member of faculty, the interviewee stated that with
online learning she “know[s] where they are at the beginning of a semester. [She]
know[s] where they’re at at the end. It’s amazing to [her] how much they learn.” A large
majority of survey participants, as well as one interview participant, found extrinsic
motivation in effectively delivering online education to develop the performance of their
students, thereby validating this as an asset to effective online instruction.
The ability for students to employ vast resources in the online classroom as
compared to in the on-ground setting as an extrinsic motivator for online faculty was also
assessed. Survey participants were asked if it was important to them that students could
employ the use of discussion boards, email, course walls, chat boxes, video lectures,
among other online resources, as compared to the traditional classroom. Here, 65% of
survey respondents strongly agreed or agreed that they value that their students use a
wider range of resources in the online setting than in the traditional one (Table 4.4).

EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

69

Table 4.4. Faculty Extrinsically Value Wider Range of Resources for Students Online.
Frequency Faculty Responses
(n=40)
Strongly Agree 14 (35%)
Agree 12 (30%)
Neither Agree or Disagree 9 (22.5%)
Disagree 4 (10%)
Strongly Disagree 1 (2.6%)

Survey results suggest that members of faculty who teach online are extrinsically
motivated to effectively teach online if they perceive improvements in the academic
performance of their students, and they believe their students have access to a greater
range of resources in the online classroom as compared to the traditional classroom
setting.
Online instructors value their job flexibility. The flexibility provided by the
online environment was another prominent extrinsic motivator, with 92.5% of
respondents strongly agreeing or agreeing to its importance (Table 4.5).
Table 4.5. Faculty Extrinsically Value the Flexibility Provided by Teaching Online.
Frequency Faculty Responses
(n=40)
Strongly Agree 27 (67.5%)
Agree 10 (25%)
Neither Agree or Disagree 2 (5%)
Disagree 0 (0%)
Strongly Disagree 1 (2.5%)

An online instructor noted during an interview that online learning “allows for flexibility
on both the instructor’s part and the student’s part.” In fact, one interviewee was initially
drawn to teaching online because it allowed her to “work more at the research during the
day and still teach, which is something [she] truly enjoy[s].” Again, all of the
interviewees valued the “convenience” and flexibility of teaching in the online
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

70

environment, with one instructor remarking, “there are no cancellations due to
weather…[and] you can still not really need to or have to worry about a parking spot.”
The value online instructors place on the flexibility of virtual education was validated as
facilitating online education in the survey and interview data.
Instructors are not extrinsically motivated by external recognition. Finally,
interview participants were asked if they received any recognition from students or peers
for teaching in the online environment. Research has demonstrated such recognition as a
positive extrinsic motivator for faculty who teach online courses (Bolliger & Wasilik,
2009). Such recognition may take various forms, including recognition of their work
through tenure and promotion processes, recognition by their peers – perhaps through
mentorship requests or awards – and positive feedback from students through student
opinion surveys (Rockwell, Schauer, Fritz, and Marx, 1999). In the current study, this
asset was not validated as one that facilitated effective online instruction. One instructor
said that any recognition she received for teaching online courses was not “explicit or
blatant…but [she] think[s] there is a sense in [her program] that the way forward is
online…it opens the door for [her] to teach in multiple programs.” This respondent
claimed that initially, “it’s not that [she] sought out the online classes. It was just that
there was a need.” Another respondent balked at the question, stating “No, no…teaching
is teaching…there’s no rewards or special anything for doing this…there’s no recognition
for positive work.” Similarly, this instructor emphasized, “I wasn’t seeking an online
position….I was assigned [to it].” One interviewee, however, did say that her program
will sometimes “send these nice little gifts every now and then…little tokens like
business card holders…Usually at the end of that semester as a thank you.” This member
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

71

of faculty felt that such gifts made her feel more connected with the program, as she
teaches online remotely in a location far away from the main university. Despite these
gifts received by one individual in the study, external recognition did not appear to
extrinsically motivate the participating instructors to teach online.
In summary, online instructors are extrinsically motivated to effectively teach
virtual courses due to perceived increased access and positive outcomes for students, as
well as by the flexibility provided by the job. However, faculty members may be more
extrinsically motivated to teach online courses if they received external recognition for
doing so.
Task Value: Intrinsic Value
Factors intrinsically motivating members of faculty to effectively teach online
were also investigated in this study. Previous studies demonstrated that online instructors
were intrinsically motivated to teach virtual courses due the intellectual and creative
challenge, as well as a genuine interest in incorporating technology into their teaching
practices (Bolliger & Wasilik, 2009; Aguirre, 2000; Houston et al., 2006). In the current
study, survey and interview data revealed that members of faculty value the intellectual
challenge and creativity required to teach online, and are driven by their interest in using
technology to teach.
Online instructors value the intellectual and creative challenge of online
instruction. When asked if teaching online encourages the instructors to be more
creative in their instructional delivery, 57.5% of respondents strongly agreed or agreed
(Table 4.6).

EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

72

Table 4.6. Faculty Intrinsically Value Being Creative When Teaching Online.
Frequency Faculty Responses
(n=40)
Strongly Agree 14 (35%)
Agree 9 (22.5%)
Neither Agree or Disagree 11 (27.5%)
Disagree 4 (10%)
Strongly Disagree 2 (5%)

Accordingly, one interviewee remarked, “I think there’s the piece that’s personal, that fun
part about stretching myself pedagogically.” She stated that she found disseminating
education in the online environment “incredibly intellectually stimulating.” Further, 75%
strongly agreed or agreed that they had a strong interest in using technology to teach
(Table 4.7).
Table 4.7. Faculty Intrinsically Value Using Technology to Teach.
Frequency Faculty Responses
(n=40)
Strongly Agree 15 (37.5%)
Agree 15 (37.5%)
Neither Agree or Disagree 5 (12.5%)
Disagree 3 (7.5%)
Strongly Disagree 2 (5%)

During an interview, one instructor expressed, “I’m an app person, I love gadgets, and so
I’m fascinated with the teaching modality in an online platform…One of the things I
loved doing this semester was being in the Twitterverse.” Another interview participant
shared what she believed motivated members of faculty to teach online: “I think we’re
drawn to it because it’s a way to stay active, stay current, stay relevant, share [our]
knowledge.” Correspondingly, Schifter (2000) found the primary motivator for faculty to
teach in the online environment was their personal desire to be innovative and use
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

73

technology. Thus, the intellectual challenge of online education and a personal interest in
using technology to teach was validated as facilitating effective online instruction.
Online instructors do not value online education more than on-ground.
Survey data, however, demonstrated that participating instructors do not necessarily value
teaching online more than the traditional classroom setting. The results revealed that
members of faculty are not necessary more satisfied teaching in the virtual environment
as compared to the traditional classroom, with only 30% of respondents agreeing or
strongly agreeing to such statements (Table 4.8).
Table 4.8. Faculty Intrinsically Value Teaching Online as Compared to On-ground.
Frequency Faculty Responses
(n=40)
Strongly Agree 5 (12.5%)
Agree 7 (17.5%)
Neither Agree or Disagree 17 (42.5%)
Disagree 7 (17.5%)
Strongly Disagree 4 (10%)

Thus, though the participants in this study find value in the intellectual challenge and are
interested in using the available technology for online instruction, they are not more
intrinsically motivated to teach virtually than to do so in the traditional classroom.
Task Value: Cost Value
The cost value of effectively teaching in the online environment was examined in
this study. Educators have previously been found to be motivated to teach online if they
value adequate compensation, release time, and an equitable system of promotion for
doing so (Bolliger & Wasilik, 2009; Oliver & Herrington, 2001; Ruth et al., 2007).
Online instructors value compensation and extra prep time for online
courses. Currently, it was found that participating survey respondents value adequate
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

74

compensation and extra time for online course preparation for online instruction. Survey
results revealed that 85% of online faculty strongly agreed or agreed that the
compensation they receive for teaching online is important to them (Table 4.9).
Table 4.9. Faculty Value Appropriate Compensation for Teaching Online.
Frequency Faculty Responses
(n=40)
Strongly Agree 23 (57.5%)
Agree 11 (27.5%)
Neither Agree or Disagree 6 (15%)
Disagree 0 (0%)
Strongly Disagree 0 (0%)

The majority of survey participants (57.5%) cited receiving extra time to prepare for
online instruction as valuable (Table 4.10). Interview data did not reflect the results of
the survey, though time and compensation were topics that arose when discussing the
cultural setting of the organisation, which will be discussed in a subsequent section.
Table 4.10. Faculty Value Receiving Extra Time to Prepare to Teach Online.
Frequency Faculty Responses
(n=40)
Strongly Agree 10 (25%)
Agree 13 (32.5%)
Neither Agree or Disagree 10 (25%)
Disagree 3 (7.5%)
Strongly Disagree 4 (10%)

Self-Efficacy
The computer and technology self-efficacy of online instructors was also assessed
through the survey instrument in this study. Research has shown that teachers with high
self-efficacy in these areas are more motivated to teach in the online classroom (Hayashi
et al., 2004; Hannafin & Land, 1997; Shih et al., 1998; Wang & Newlin, 2002).
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

75

Online instructors demonstrate high technology and computer efficacy.
According to the survey data, the respondents demonstrated great confidence in their
ability to navigate the internet, with 95% strongly agreeing or agreeing (Table 4.11).
Table 4.11. Faculty Self-Efficacy in Navigating the Internet.
Frequency Faculty Responses
(n=40)
Strongly Agree 26 (65%)
Agree 12 (30%)
Neither Agree or Disagree 1 (2.5%)
Disagree 1 (2.5%)
Strongly Disagree 0 (0%)

Faculty respondents were also very confident in their ability to communicate with
students in an online synchronous classroom setting, as 95% strongly agreed or agreed
with this statement (Table 4.12).
Table 4.12. Faculty Self-Efficacy in Communicating With Students in Online
Synchronous Classroom.
Frequency Faculty Responses
(n=40)
Strongly Agree 26 (65%)
Agree 14 (35%)
Neither Agree or Disagree 0 (0%)
Disagree 0 (0%)
Strongly Disagree 0 (0%)

Further, 90% of online faculty agreed or strongly agreed they were confident with their
ability to communicate with students asynchronously using the available technology
(Table 4.13).

EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

76

Table 4.13. Faculty Self-Efficacy in Communicating With Students Asynchronously.
Frequency Faculty Responses
(n=40)
Strongly Agree 22 (55%)
Agree 14 (35%)
Neither Agree or Disagree 2 (5%)
Disagree 2 (5%)
Strongly Disagree 0 (0%)

Finally, 82.5% of the respondents strongly agreed or agreed they were confident in their
ability to navigate the Learning Management System (Table 4.14).
Table 4.14. Faculty Self-Efficacy in Navigating the LMS.
Frequency Faculty Responses
(n=40)
Strongly Agree 13 (32.5%)
Agree 20 (50%)
Neither Agree or Disagree 5 (12.5%)
Disagree 2 (5%)
Strongly Disagree 0 (0%)

Overall, the survey data pointed to a relatively high computer and technology
self-efficacy amongst the participating members of faculty, thus validating this asset.
This concurs with results found in the previous sections discussing knowledge. Interview
participants all reported receiving thorough training by the OPM in the technology
requirements to teach in the LMS. As such, one might infer that the technology training
the online instructors received leant to improved technology self-efficacy while teaching
in the online environment.
Organisational Assets
This study additionally sought to examine assets or needs for effective online
instruction due to organisational factors. Under the lens of the cultural model and
cultural setting framework (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011), the acceptance of the
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

77

legitimacy of online education by the organisation was investigated. In addition,
organisational resources for online teaching faculty were also assessed, including reliable
infrastructure and technology, adequate prep time, release time and compensation for
teaching online courses.
Cultural Model
The cultural model describes the shared behavioural, cognitive and affective
aspects of an organisation. Within each of the partner sites, the shared values, beliefs and
attitudes are often invisible and imperceptible to those who hold them (Clark & Estes,
2008; Rueda, 2011). Bolliger and Wasilik found that faculty are more satisfied with their
work when they perceive their institution and peers to value online education (2009).
Online faculty perceive institutional acceptance and value of online
education. In response to the question of whether faculty in their institution value the
legitimacy of online education, the majority of instructors believed they did, as 72.5% of
respondents strongly agreed or agreed to this statement (Table 4.15).
Table 4.15. Faculty Peers Value Legitimacy of Online Education.
Frequency Faculty Responses
(n=40)
Strongly Agree 9 (22.5%)
Agree 20 (50%)
Neither Agree or Disagree 7 (17.5%)
Disagree 3 (7.5%)
Strongly Disagree 1 (2.5%)

The responses from interview participants were varied, however. One instructor
interviewed admitted that she was “one of the most vocally resistant members of the
faculty…the idea of [educating] at a distance, I think it was going to take away all that I
cherished about teaching.” At the time data was collected for this study, this particular
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

78

instructor had been teaching online for fifteen months. She reported she was no longer
reticent to instructing online, declaring that she “love[s] things about it…there are a lot of
things [she] can do online that [she] can’t do in a brick and mortar classroom.” She
further believed teaching online has forced her to “unsettle [her] assumptions of [her]
own pedagogy and learn new approaches to teaching that have been really fun and
exciting.” From the sentiments of this faculty respondent, one might infer that
experiencing online instruction, especially in a fully online program, may positively lend
to the legitimacy of online education for members of faculty. Another interviewee
recounted how he is constantly defending online education to his peers: “People don’t
know what online is, they think it’s just a website.” At one partner site, though, the
cultural model seems to emphasize the importance of online instruction. The faculty
participant at this site described, “The messages that we get, based on the kind of
programming that gets developed in our school, are that you can’t just teach on
ground…I think that there is an underlying message that if you don’t teach online, you
might be missing the boat.”
Taken together, the data reveal that the faculty involved with the participating
partner sites largely accept the value of online education. Correspondingly, Allen and
Seaman reported that while faculty acceptance of online education varies among
institutions, those with full online programs have the highest acceptance rates (2014).
Cultural Setting
The cultural setting comprises the visible, concrete manifestations of the shared
mental schema present in an organisation (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011). Research
has demonstrated online instructors are more satisfied and motivated to effectively
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

79

deliver online education when they are provided with reliable technology and
infrastructure, they are allowed extra time or release time to prepare for and they believe
they are fairly compensated for teaching online courses. (Bolliger & Wasalik, 2009;
Ruth, Sammons & Poulin, 2007; Houston et al., 2006).
Online faculty are provided with reliable infrastructure and technology.
Members of faculty who teach in the participating online graduate programs were asked
about the reliability of the infrastructure and technology they were provided for
instructing online courses. Nearly 82.5% strongly agreed or agreed that the technology
provided by the organisation was reliable (Table 4.16).
Table 4.16. Faculty are Provided Reliable Infrastructure and Technology.
Frequency Faculty Responses
(n=40)
Strongly Agree 19 (47.5%)
Agree 14 (35%)
Neither Agree or Disagree 3 7.(5%)
Disagree 2 (5%)
Strongly Disagree 2 (5%)

Interview respondents agreed, saying the “technology is pretty reliable, it does what it’s
supposed to do.” Prior research has demonstrated that faculty satisfaction is positively
influenced when they have access to adequate technology and tools (Bolliger & Wasilik,
2009). However, in the beginning of their online teaching experiences, all of the faculty
interview participants agreed that there “was a huge learning curve.” Every instructor
relayed stories of the technical difficulties they faced, including “lost internet
connection,” lack of “access to any [lecture] recordings,” delays in “getting grades to
students,” “everyone’s cameras freezing,” or inability to “get into [their] own classroom
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

80

for 25 minutes.” Yet, survey data revealed that over half of the respondent (57.5%) are
not frustrated or discouraged from teaching online due to technical issues (Table 4.17).
Table 4.17. Faculty Frustration With Technical Issues.
Frequency Faculty Responses
(n=40)
Strongly Agree 12 (30%)
Agree 11 (27.5%)
Neither Agree or Disagree 3 (7.5%)
Disagree 12 (30%)
Strongly Disagree 2 (5%)

Conversely, Bolliger and Wasilik reported faculty satisfaction with teaching online
courses is likely to decrease when faculty experience technology difficulties while
teaching (2009). It seems that participating members of faculty were adequately satisfied
with the available technology and infrastructure that they were still motivated to teach in
the face of technical difficulties.
Professional development opportunities for online instructors. Survey
participants largely agreed (70% strongly agreed, 22.5% agreed) that “professional
development in both technology and online instruction are essential to prepare faculty to
effectively teach online” (Table 4.18).
Table 4.18. Faculty Believe PD in Technology and Pedagogy are Essential to Prepare
For Online Teaching.
Frequency Faculty Responses
(n=40)
Strongly Agree 28 (70%)
Agree 9 (22.5%)
Neither Agree or Disagree 3 (7.5%)
Disagree 0 (0%)
Strongly Disagree 0 (0%)

EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

81

Fewer faculty respondents, though still a majority 67.5%, strongly agreed or agreed that
they “frequently use the online tools and resources provided on the program’s learning
management system (LMS)” (Table 4.19).
Table 4.19. Faculty Frequency Using Online Tools and Resources Provided by LMS.
Frequency Faculty Responses
(n=40)
Strongly Agree 5 (12.5%)
Agree 22 (55%)
Neither Agree or Disagree 7 (17.5%)
Disagree 6 (15%)
Strongly Disagree 0 (0%)

Further, 67.5% also strongly agreed or agreed they “utilize professional development
opportunities to help me improve my online instruction” (Table 4.20).
Table 4.20. Faculty Utilize PD Opportunities Provided.
Frequency Faculty Responses
(n=40)
Strongly Agree 5 (12.5%)
Agree 22 (55%)
Neither Agree or Disagree 5 (12.5%)
Disagree 7 (17.5%)
Strongly Disagree 2 (5%)

There is seemingly some incongruence here, as 92.5% of the online faculty survey
believe professional development to be imperative for effective online instruction, yet
only approximately 67.5% seem to take advantage of the professional development and
tools available to them. Though the data does not provide any information as to why this
is the case, one interview participant discussed his experience with faculty meetings:
The way these meetings are scheduled I already know I have no entry
point. When I say repeatedly I can’t make that meeting, I work during the
day time, it doesn’t even get a reply…I’m losing something and the school
is losing something.

EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

82

From this comment, one might surmise that professional development meetings may be
held at times that are not accommodating of all of the instructors’ schedules, especially
those instructing remotely from around the country. However, this assumption may not
be fair, as it is based only on the response of one online member of faculty. Nonetheless,
survey participants strongly agreed that professional development is crucial for effective
online instruction, though it is not clear that all participants are accessing professional
development resources available to them.
online faculty members.
Differences in workload between online and on-ground teaching. Members of
online faculty were asked about differences in workload between preparation for online
courses versus on-ground courses. Survey and interview data, yielded varying results, as
only approximately 22.5% of survey respondents strongly agreed or agreed that
preparation for online courses took longer to prepare than tradition on-ground classes on
a weekly basis (Table 4.21).
Table 4.21. Faculty Believe Preparation for Online Courses Requires More Time Than
On-ground Courses.
Frequency Faculty Responses
(n=40)
Strongly Agree 4 (10%)
Agree 5 (12.5%)
Neither Agree or Disagree 17 (42.5%)
Disagree 11 (27.5%)
Strongly Disagree 3 (7.5%)

However, 42.5% strongly agreed or agreed that the workload was higher for teaching
online as compared to teaching in a traditional classroom, while 27.5% strongly disagreed
or disagreed (Table 4.22).

EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

83

Table 4.22. Faculty Believe the Workload is Higher for Online Courses Compared to
On-ground.
Frequency Faculty Responses
(n=40)
Strongly Agree 6 (15%)
Agree 11 (27.5%)
Neither Agree or Disagree 12 (30%)
Disagree 9 (22.5%)
Strongly Disagree 2 (5%)

Interview responses suggested that members of faculty claim to spend “quite a bit more
time prepping for the class[es] for the online platform.” Another declared, “The
preparation is just out of this world! It’s so much more work and so much more
foresight.” The other interview respondents concurred, suggesting they “work really hard
online” and how “the workload is probably a little higher online.” Research suggests that
a majority of online instructors assert the workload for online education is more
demanding on their time than the traditional classroom (Allen & Seamen, 2014; Ruth,
Sammons & Poulin, 2007, Houston et al., 2006). Yet, when survey participants were
asked if they received extra time to prepare for teaching online courses, less than 20%
strongly agreed or agreed (Table 4.23).
Table 4.23. Faculty Receive Extra Time to Prepare for Teaching Online Courses.
Frequency Faculty Responses
(n=40)
Strongly Agree 2 (5%)
Agree 5 (12.5%)
Neither Agree or Disagree 12 (30%)
Disagree 14 (35%)
Strongly Disagree 7 (17.5%)

In all, though the responses varied, many of the participants perceived the
workload for teaching online courses to be higher than that of a traditional classroom, yet
most are not afforded extra time to accommodate the higher workload.
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

84

Compensation for teaching online graduate courses. Online instructional
members of faculty were also asked if they believed they were fairly compensated for
teaching online graduate programs. Survey responses found that 62% strongly agreed or
agreed that their organisation provided fair compensation (Table 4.24).
Table 4.24. Faculty Believe They Receive Fair Compensation.
Frequency Faculty Responses
(n=40)
Strongly Agree 7 (17.5%)
Agree 19 (47.5%)
Neither Agree or Disagree 6 (15%)
Disagree 6 (15%)
Strongly Disagree 2 (5%)

The perception of the instructors who were interviewed, though, suggested, “If I broke it
down to how much I was making an hour, it’d be pretty low,” while another reported
“We don’t get extra money.” Another participant joked, “monetarily it would probably
end up being ten cents an hour.” Yet another asserted that the compensation provided for
instructing online courses “should probably be just a bit higher. It’s not horrendous
though.” Accordingly, in her 2000 study, Schifter found that in organisations where
development and instruction of online courses is expected and part of the culture, the
compensation for teaching online is comparable to that of teaching on-ground (Schifter,
2000).
Considering all the cultural setting factors, the technology provided by the partner
sites was reported to be reliable, though the study participants all experienced initial
problems in using said technology. Further, the workload for teaching online courses
may be higher, though the compensation for the reported extra work is seemingly not
reflected by the organisations.
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

85

Summary
Through triangulation of survey and interview data, online faculty perceptions of
the assumed knowledge, motivation, and organisational assets for effective online
instruction were assessed for validation.
Conceptual and metacognitive knowledge amongst participating online instructors
was investigated to determine if the assumed knowledge assets facilitated effective online
education. The conceptual knowledge of online teaching faculty was evaluated through
interview. It was determined that this asset was considered to be a potentially facilitating
asset, as some participating members of faculty reported employing the same, or at least
similar, instructional techniques or pedagogies both in the online and on-ground
classroom environments. The others, however, challenged themselves to employ new
and different methods to the online education platform. Emergent interview data
illustrated how online instructors struggle to build relationships with their students online,
in the absence of physical contact. The interview participants asserted all of the training
they received prior to teaching online pertained to the technology, rather than focusing on
pedagogical methods. Incorporating more pedagogical training may help improve the
conceptual knowledge of integrating technology with new pedagogies and overcoming
the non-physical barrier for online instructors. The metacognitive knowledge of online
instructors was validated as a facilitator of effective online teaching, as the interviewees
reported using a continuum of self-reflective practices to evaluate and amend their online
teaching practices.
Extrinsic, intrinsic, cost value, and the self-efficacy of online instructors were
examined to determine what motivates members of faculty to effectively disseminate
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

86

information in the online milieu. Survey and interview data validated that members of
faculty who teach online value increased access to education for students in online
programs, perceived positive outcomes, such as increased academic performance, for
their students, and the flexibility and convenience of teaching online. Further, the
majority of survey respondents seemed to value the online classroom for the wider range
of resources available to their students as compared to the traditional classroom. As such,
this asset was validated as a facilitator of online instruction. Interview responses
suggested online instructors do not receive any external recognition for teaching online,
thereby rendering this extrinsic motivational factor as potentially inhibiting of effective
online education. Intrinsically, survey and interview respondents reported valuing the
intellectual and creative challenge of teaching online. Further, online instructors have a
genuine interest in using technology to teach. However, they did not express greater
value for online education than traditional on-ground teaching, thus invalidating this as
an intrinsic motivator. Survey responses revealed that most online instructors value
adequate compensation for teaching online courses, though only about half reported
valuing extra time or release time for teaching such courses. Further, participating online
instructors validated their computer and technology self-efficacy, stating they are
confident in their ability to utilise the technology needed to teach online.
Finally, the organisational assets were assessed, including the cultural model and
settings of the participating partner sites. According to survey and interview data, faculty
members who teach online perceived their peers to accept the legitimacy and value of
online education. Some interviewees even felt that it was expected of them by their
respective programs to teach online, though they had never been expressly told as much.
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

87

Upon examination of the cultural setting, online faculty members largely believed their
organisations to provide reliable infrastructure and technology to teach online. Interview
data revealed, however, that many of the instructors struggle with the technology when
they first begin teaching online. Nonetheless, survey data further revealed that members
of faculty who teach online are not discouraged by issues with the technology while
teaching. It was also found that, while most survey respondents believe professional
development training to be important, it is unclear to what extent the online instructors
are accessing the professional development resources available to them. Survey
responses showed that slightly less than half of online instructors felt that the workload
for online teaching is higher than that for on-ground classes. Similarly, interview
participants insisted the workload for teaching online courses was much higher than for
on-ground. Finally, survey respondents reported being fairly compensated for teaching
online, though interview responses suggested that the compensation provided for
teaching online did not reflect the higher online workload. As such, both of these
organisational assets were found to be potential facilitators of online instruction by the
data. Table 4.25 provides a summary of the validated facilitating, potential facilitating,
and potential inhibiting factors examined in this study.
This chapter served to identify the knowledge, motivation, and organisational
assets facilitating or inhibiting effective online instruction. The following chapter will
provide evidence-based solutions addressing the identified assets.

EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

88

Table 4.25. Summary of validated knowledge, motivation, and organisational assets.

Asset
Validated
Facilitators
Potential
Facilitators
Potential
Inhibitors

Explanation
Knowledge Assets
Conceptual Knowledge
Online instructors demonstrate
knowledge about incorporating
new instructional methods in the
online learning environment.

✔

Half of the interview participants reported employing
same/similar teaching methods both online and on-ground.
Metacognitive Knowledge
Faculty possesses ability to assess
their own strengths/weaknesses
and adjust accordingly to
effectively teach online.

✔
50% of interview participants report reflecting upon their
teaching practices, and adjust appropriately for online
instruction.
Motivation Assets
Task Value: Extrinsic Value
Perceived value of faculty to
students.

✔
Majority of survey and interview participants value
increased access to education for students in online
programs.
Job flexibility for online
instructional faculty.

✔
Majority of survey and interview participants value the
convenience and flexibility of teaching online.
Perceived value of faculty to
improving academic performance
for students.

✔
Majority of survey respondents and 1 interviewee found it
valuable to develop their teaching skills in order to
improve student performance in online education.
Faculty value greater resources for
students in online education.

✔

Majority of survey respondents value their students using
a wider range of resources in the online versus on-ground
classroom setting.
Faculty receive external
recognition from peers/students
for teaching online.

✔
Interviewees claim they do not receive external
recognition for teaching online.
Task Value: Intrinsic Value
Faculty value the
intellectual/creative challenge of
teaching online.

✔

Majority of survey respondents and half of the interview
participants reported valuing the intellectual/creative
challenge of teaching online.
Faculty have a strong interest in
using technology to teach.

✔
Majority of survey respondents and one interview
participant reported valuing using technology to teach.
Faculty value teaching online
more so than teaching on-ground.

✔
Less than half of survey respondents reported valuing
online teaching more than on-ground instruction.
Task Value: Cost Value
Faculty value receiving adequate
compensation for teaching online.

✔

Majority of survey respondents reported valuing receiving
adequate compensation for teaching online.
Faculty value receiving release
time/adequate preparation time to
teach online.

✔
Approximately half of survey respondents reported
valuing receiving release time or adequate preparation
time for teaching online.
Self-Efficacy
Faculty possess
computer/technology self-
efficacy.

✔
Majority of survey respondents report being confident in
their ability to utilise the technology required to teach in
the online environment.
Organisational Assets
Cultural Model
The legitimacy of online
education is valued/accepted by
faculty in participants’
institutions.

✔
Majority of survey and interview participants reported that
faculty in their institutions valued/accepted the legitimacy
of online education.
Cultural Setting
Faculty believe their organisation
provides them with reliable
infrastructure/technology.

✔
Majority of survey and interview participants reported
their organisations provided reliable
infrastructure/technology for teaching online.
Faculty believe their organisation
provides them with adequate/fair
compensation for teaching online.

✔
Majority of survey respondents reported receiving
adequate compensation for teaching online. Interview
participants reported receiving less than adequate
compensation for teaching online.
Faculty perceive the workload for
preparing/teaching online to be
higher than that for teaching on-
ground.

✔
Slightly less than half of survey respondents reported
online instruction requiring more work than on-ground
teaching. All of interview participants reported the
workload for online instruction is greater than on-ground
teaching.
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

89

CHAPTER 5: RECOMMENDATIONS, IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION
The aim of this study was to identify and validate the knowledge, motivation, and
organisational aspects that either facilitate or inhibit members of faculty to effectively
deliver online graduate education using a promising practice model as delineated by
Clarke and Estes (2008). Chapter 4 discussed the previously identified assets, ten of
which were validated as facilitators to effective online instruction by the faculty.
Furthermore, four of the assets were identified by participating online instructors as
potentially facilitating, and two were potentially inhibiting of effective online instruction.
Two additional assets emerged in the survey and interview data. The current chapter will
provide evidence-based recommendations for improvement of these knowledge,
motivation, and organisational assets in order to better facilitate online teaching success
for members of faculty.
In the section to follow, the selection of validated, partially validated, and non-
exhibited assets will be rationalised. Subsequently, suggestions for enhancing these
assets will be provided, and an implementation and evaluation plan based upon
Kirkpatrick’s model (2006) presented. As such, this chapter will address the following
research questions:
• For those factors perceived to be facilitating the successful support of online
teaching faculty, what promising practices could be adapted to and utilized by
other units in the same agency? For those factors perceived as inhibitors, what
solutions may be helpful for improving the support of faculty to teach online
within the organization or program?
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

90

• How might those interventions, whether promising practices or solutions, be
evaluated for effectiveness?
Validated Assets Selection and Rationale
Survey and interview data examined sixteen previously identified knowledge,
motivation, and organisational assets facilitating teaching in the virtual classroom.
Though not all sixteen of the assets were validated as facilitators of effective online
instruction, recommendations will be provided for each asset in order to provide a
promising practice model for improvement of the participating online graduate programs.
Further, two emergent factors will be discussed. A summary of the assets that were
validated facilitators, potential validators, and potential inhibitors by participating
members of faculty are illustrated in Table 4.25.
Recommendations Based on Validated Assets
Following identification and validation of assets facilitating effective instruction
in the online environment, recommendations for improving upon the corresponding asset
may be made. The following sections will provide recommendations for the knowledge,
motivation, and organisational assets validated as facilitating, potentially facilitating, or
potentially inhibiting of success in teaching online courses by online instructional faculty.
Recommendations for Increasing Knowledge
This study examined the conceptual and metacognitive knowledge of faculty
members teaching online graduate courses. Recommendations for increasing the
conceptual and metacognitive knowledge of online faculty are supported by previous
studies, as well as the Social Cognitive Theory (Ambrose, 2010) as outlined in Clark and
Estes (2008) and Rueda (2011).
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

91

Recommendations for increasing conceptual knowledge of online instructors.
Conceptual knowledge comprises the interrelationships between and functionality of the
basic elements of the topic of interest (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2002). Research has
consistently demonstrated that members of faculty often fail to integrate content,
technology, and pedagogical methods when teaching online (Kreber & Kanuka, 2006;
Bejerano, 2008; Georgina & Olsen, 2008), and thus lack the conceptual knowledge to
effectively teach online courses. The data from this study partially validated this
presumption, as half of the participants who were interviewed reported replicating
teaching practices between the on-ground and online classroom environments. Koehler
and Mishra argue that effective online instruction requires a solid grasp of all three
elements – that is, content, technology, and pedagogy – as well as the “dynamic,
transactional relationship between [them]” (2005, p. 741). In their study, Koehler and
Mishra define the understanding of the complex relationship between these three
elements as Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK), and is depicted in
Figure 5.1.

Figure 5.1. Pedagogical technological content knowledge (Koehler & Mishra, 2005).
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

92

Provide professional development in pedagogy. Half of the interview
participants in this study did report employing methods of instruction in the online
classroom that differed from that of their traditional classrooms. The online instructors
demonstrated an understanding of integrating the available technology and pedagogy that
best suited the content matter they were disseminating. However, the interview
participants in the study emphasised that the training they had received to teach online
had largely focused upon the technology, rather than pedagogy. In fact, many scholars
start their teaching careers without any formal teaching preparation or experience, and
thereby mirror the practices of their favourite professors in their own classrooms (Kreber
& Kanuka, 2006). Moreover, most instructors new to online education begin with
minimal training or preparation to teach online (Glynn Crawford-Ferre & Wiest, 2012).
As such, ineffective or poor teaching practices may persist, both in the face-to-face and
online environments (2006).
In order to promote conceptual knowledge of incorporating content,
technological, and pedagogical knowledge across the partner sites, it is recommended
that online instructors be trained to do so. Georgina and Olsen claimed that online
instructors prefer technology training that incorporates their pedagogy rather than solely
focusing on learning to use instructional tools (Georgina & Olsen, 2008). Koehler et al.
used an approach they coined “learning technology by design”, an approach similar to the
constructivist approach (2007, p. 744). Here, members of faculty who taught online
classes worked collaboratively and extensively to solve authentic problems pertaining to
pedagogical problems (2007). As a result, the instructors learned about technology and
pedagogy through use and design of educational teach specific content, effectively
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

93

improving upon their conceptual knowledge to teach their content in the online
environment (2007). Training faculty beyond the basic technological requirements for
teaching online will likely have positive implications for the ability of online instructors
to integrate their content, technology, and pedagogical knowledge.
Another strategy the programs might employ to promote the use of pedagogy in
the online classroom is to partner with other programs within the OPM. Here, colleagues
from the various partner sites can share successful teaching practices used in the virtual
classroom. Further, within the institutions, non-education programs, such as social work
or business, should take advantage of the schools of education to teach effective online
instruction.
Emphasise technology training for new online faculty members. Participants in
this study reported being very pleased with and feeling prepared to teach online courses
following the extensive technology training provided by the OPM. Other studies have
asserted that, while most newcomers to online instruction benefit greatly from
technological training, veteran online instructors find such training redundant and
unnecessary (Lewis & Abdul-Hamid, 2006; Orr, Williams & Pennington, 2009; Schifter,
2000). Instead, it is suggested, “the need for support will change as an instructor’s online
teaching matures” (Orr et al., 2009). Members of faculty who have had several years of
online teaching experience are well versed in the technical aspects of the virtual
classroom, and require more focus on pedagogical training (2009).
Develop peer mentoring program. Peer mentoring is effective for learning new
tasks because, according to the Social Cognitive theory, modeled behaviour is more
likely to be adopted if the model is credible, is similar to the learner in gender, culture, or
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

94

status, and the behaviour has functional value (Rueda, 2011). Howell et al. recommend
establishing a mentoring program pairing new online instructors with those who are
experienced in order to promote best online instructional practices (2009). Likewise,
Elzarka (2012) found that adoption of technology to teach online is more successful if the
trainee deems the trainer as similar in rank, status, or position. Further, Lackey (2011)
found that, while online faculty participants in her study were satisfied with the training
they received to teach online, the participants overwhelmingly expressed the desire for
more opportunities to “gather with colleagues informally through online or face-to-face
interaction to share ideas and learn more from one another” (p.21). Further, in a 2013
study conducted by Ferrario et al., participating online faculty shared strategies that had
proven effective in the virtual classroom, and claimed, “To build our pedagogical skills,
we watched each other teach, and practiced with each other, trying different approaches
to see what captured interest” (p.89). In the current study, one faculty participant has also
found the training of faculty by other faculty to be successful. At her partner site, the
“Pedagogy Club” is a social club in which members of faculty share teaching tips with
the other members of faculty.
An emerging theme from the interview responses was that online instructors
struggle to interact and build meaningful relationships with students in the absence of
physical contact. According to Lewis and Abdul-Hamid, this is a common challenge
online members of faculty work to overcome (2006). Likewise, Ferrario et al. (2013)
pointed out that since participants in the synchronous online classroom can only be seen
from the shoulders up, the ability to read body language or engage students one on one as
in the traditional classroom becomes more challenging.
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

95

Overcoming this challenge would best be addressed through professional
development or peer mentoring. Experienced online instructors have devised ways to
foster interactions with students, including course conferences, study groups, and group
projects (2006). Lackey suggested that “instructors who can become comfortable
engaging students to think critically through guided discussion and who can
communicate empathy will be the better online instructors” (Lackey, 2011, p. 23).
Ferrario et al. (2013) proffered several strategies for engaging students in discussion in
the virtual classroom, including using online polling and the chat box. The use of polling
in the online environment helps maintain anonymity, which may students to overcome
any reluctance to participate (2013). Polling can be used “as an icebreaker to a class
discussion, as an informal/formative assessment tool, and to gauge students’ stances on
certain issues related to [the course content]” (2013, p.90). The chat box, which can be
likened to instant messaging, was found to be useful for queuing up students’ questions,
posting links to websites, videos, articles, and other internet resources, and transcribing
the class discussion (2013). Providing new and continuing online instructors with such
strategies for overcoming feelings of isolation from their students may improve
instruction by faculty in their online courses.
Recommendations for increasing metacognitive knowledge of online
instructors. Similarly, it is recommended that online instructors be encouraged to
engage in critical self-reflection of their online teaching practices in order to increase
their metacognitive knowledge (Baran et al., 2011; Kreber & Kanuka, 2006). Critical
self-reflection forces the instructor to question “the integrity of assumptions and beliefs
based on prior experience” (Baran et al., 2011, p. 424) which is essential for transforming
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

96

how faculty approach online education. Instructors exhibiting strong metacognitive
knowledge have a desire to continually grow as online educators, and are able to
overcome the tendency to simply replicate the same class material, content, and
instructional methodology every time it is taught (Baran et al., 2011).
Promote critical self-reflection. The participants in the current study
demonstrated a continuum of metacognitive knowledge, as they all reported a desire to
continuously assess and improve upon their online teaching practices. In order to
promote continued enhancement of metacognitive knowledge among online teaching
faculty in the partner site programs, it is recommended that online training and
development programs focus upon encouraging critical reflective online teaching
practices among the instructors (Baran et al., 2011).
Another proposed solution would be to increase faculty metacognition by
implementing self-regulatory strategies and goal setting, as set forth by the Social
Cognitive theory (Ambrose et al., 2010). Participating partner programs can provide
training by experienced or senior members of the faculty to teach other faculty members
techniques for self-evaluation. Online faculty may learn to monitor their progress in
teaching online courses and evaluate their teaching methods (2010). Further, peer models
can demonstrate proper goal setting and effective pedagogical techniques, thereby
increasing the metacognitive knowledge of online instructors.
Recommendations for Increasing Motivation
The extrinsic, intrinsic, and cost value of online instructors were identified and
assessed in this study. In addition, the self-efficacy of the instructors was validated.
Recommendations for increasing faculty motivation to teach effectively in the online
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

97

environment will be addressed using the Expectancy Value theory, which places
emphasis on valuing the task at hand and self-efficacy (Ambrose et al., 2010).
Recommendations for increasing extrinsic motivation of online instructors.
According to the theory of Expectancy Value, the amount of effort an individual is
willing to expend on a task depends on the degree to which they believe the task is worth
pursuing (Eccles, 2006). For instance, Rockwell et al. found that members of faculty felt
incentive to teach online as a result of “extending educational opportunities beyond the
traditional institutional walls so place-bound students have access” and a reduction in
student travel time (Rockwell, Schauer, Fritz and Marx, 1999, p. 8).
Emphasise benefits to the students of online education. Extrinsically, the
respondents in the current study all valued a perceived increase in access to education and
resources for, as well as a perceived increase in academic performance of their online
students. Correspondingly, professional development training or peer mentoring of
online instructors should emphasise the importance and value of the access and
opportunities afforded to their students online as compared to the traditional classroom.
Further, instructors participating in this study valued their students’ increased use
of technology in the online environment as compared to the traditional classroom. This is
in line with previous research, which showed that the primary drive for faculty to
incorporate technology into their curriculum was to benefit their students (Ottenbreit-
Leftwich, Glazewski, Newby and Ertmer, 2010). Teachers in the Ottenbreit-Leftwich et
al. study valued the use of technology by their students, as they believed the technology
engaged and motivated students, facilitated technology skills development to help
prepare them for their future endeavors, and assisted in achieving higher-order thinking
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

98

skills (2010). Bolliger and Wasilik found that factors affecting students are the most
important to members of faculty (2009). Accordingly, during professional development
training or peer mentoring for online instructors, it is recommended to emphasise how the
use of technology could benefit the students.
Provide external recognition or incentives for teaching online. Interview
responses suggested that they do not receive external recognition for teaching online
courses by either peers or students. Though, as mentioned previously, members of
faculty are most concerned with perceived benefits to the students, they still value
recognition of their work (Rockwell et al., 1999). Such recognition could take various
forms, including monetary rewards, promotional incentives, or positive feedback from
students. However, Orr et al. insisted that, “a simple acknowledgement of [online
instructors’ work] on the part of departmental leadership could serve as a catalyst for
greater effort on the part of faculty along with improved faculty satisfaction” (2009, p.
264). Similarly, Clark and Estes (2008) suggest that intangible incentives – that is,
“catching people doing a good job” (p.97) – are effective because being acknowledged
for good work provides employees information about how to be successful at their job.
As such, departmental leaders may consider recognising online members of faculty for
the work they do using intangible incentives, such as sending individuals notes or emails,
creating an “instructor of the month/semester” recognition program, or simply
commending their efforts at faculty meetings. Such recognition may help faculty
maintain motivation to teach online courses within the programs.

EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

99

Recommendations for increasing intrinsic motivation of online instructors.
Examination of the intrinsic value of online instructional faculty revealed online
instructors value the intellectual and creative challenge of teaching online, and are
interested in incorporating technology into their teaching practices. However, they do not
necessarily value teaching online more than teaching in the tradition setting.
Promote integration of technology with instructor-specific content. Responses
from the interviewees suggest that much of the creativity they employ teaching online in
fact involves integrating technology with the content being taught. Thus, it can be
inferred online instructors are largely intrinsically motivated by using technology to
teach. Accordingly, Schifter (2000) found that personal desire to use technology and be
innovative were primary motivators for faculty to teach online education. Otteinbreit-
Leftwich et al. further asserted that, “teachers’ values and beliefs related to technology
are based on how they think technology can help them achieve the instructional goals
they perceive to be most important” (2010, p. 1330), thus they are more likely to
incorporate technology such that it aligns with their values. Further, Social Cognitive
theory asserts that connecting learning to the interests of the learner will promote
meaningfulness for the learner (Rueda, 2011). Instructors may value the use of
technology in online education if they believe it to improve upon their teaching
effectiveness. For instance, one interviewee in the current study discussed her framework
for teaching, which is rooted in the theory of marginality and mattering. In order for her
students to feel more connected with her, as well as with the course material, she
provided them with video – in lieu of written – feedback. Correspondingly, it is
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

100

recommended that professional development programs illustrate uses for technology that
best align with the value beliefs of the online instructors (2010).
Recommendations for increasing cost value of online instructors. Online
instructors surveyed in this study reported valuing appropriate compensation and
adequate preparation or release time for teaching online courses. This is consistent with
previous studies, which report that online members of faculty show higher satisfaction
when they feel they are fairly compensated for the work they do online (Bolliger &
Wasilik, 2009; Oliver & Herrington, 2001; Ruth et al., 2007). Further, Rockwell et al.
found that release time to prepare for to teach online courses was a primary incentive for
encouraging members of faculty to effectively teach online (1999).
Provide release time and compensation for online instructors.
Recommendations for enhancing the success of online instructors in their online courses
include providing incentives for teaching such courses. For instance, provision of release
time for online course development, support staff (Orr et al., 2009) – including graduate
assistants or instructional designers – stipends for online course development, faculty
fellowships for online education (2009), or funds for travel to professional conferences
(Howell et al., 2004) may increase the cost value motivation of instructors to teach online
courses. These incentives are discussed in more detail below.
Recommendations for increasing self-efficacy of online instructors. As well
how much value is placed on a task, Expectancy Value theory stipulates that an
individual’s motivation is determined by their perception of their ability to succeed in the
task (Eccles, 2006). Survey responses in this study indicated that participating online
instructors were confident in their ability to use the technology required to teach online
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

101

graduate courses. Interviewees reported that the extensive technological training the
OPM had provided them left them feeling well equipped to teach in the online
environment.
Provide professional development in technology. Participants in this study
claimed to receive ample training in the use of technology for teaching online through the
shared OPM. Continued use of such trainings in order to increase the self-efficacy of
online instructors is recommended, as dealing with new technologies in online teaching
may be overwhelming for inexperienced faculty. This is extremely important to consider,
as the motivation of people results from their experiences and beliefs in their abilities to
perform a task (Clark & Estes, 2008). Accordingly, one’s “motivation for work is
therefore controlled by whether [one] believe[s] the environment provides [the
employees] with work goals and resources that can result in a reasonable amount of
effectiveness” (2008, p.83). Thus, providing new members of faculty with proper
training in using and troubleshooting the required technology, including simulating
potential technology issues while live in the virtual classroom, may provide the faculty
with the confidence and belief that they are capable and can effectively use such
technology to teach online (2008). For instance, Ferrario et al. found that faculty
believed having technology experts sabotage their virtual classrooms aided to overcome
the cognitive overload of learning to teach online courses and increase the technology
self-efficacy of online instructors (2013).
Schrum (1999) also provided some useful considerations for technology training:
first, learning technology for the use of pedagogy requires far more time than learning a
new teaching model; second, reliable access to technology is required for the instructors;
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

102

third, many adults are afraid to learn new technology for fear of looking foolish; and
finally, incorporating technology into their reaching practices will often require members
of faculty to reconceptualise their traditional teaching methods. Addressing these issues
during technology training for online faculty may increase the technology self-efficacy of
the instructors, thereby motivating them to effectively teach in the online milieu.
Recommendations for Increasing Organisational Assets
Finally, this study identified and validated organisational assets lending to
effective online instruction as perceived by the online members of faculty. Assets based
upon the cultural model and cultural setting were examined. The cultural model
describes the shared behavioural, cognitive and affective aspects of an organisation –
here, the participating partner site programs (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011). Within
the individual programs, the shared values, beliefs and attitudes are often invisible and
imperceptible to those who hold them (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011). On the other
hand, the cultural setting comprises the visible, concrete manifestations of the shared
mental schema present in the institutions or programs (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda,
2011).
Recommendations for improving the cultural model for online education.
When considering the cultural model of the participating programs, online instructors
reported that faculty in their respective institutions accepted the legitimacy of online
education. Previous studies have found some conflicting results, showing that less than
half of polled members of faculty consider online education as legitimate (Allen &
Seamen, 2014). However, this number has been shown to be higher in members of
faculty who actually teach online as compared to those who do not (Allen & Seamen,
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

103

2014; Howell et al., 2004), and that teaching online improves the perceptions of
instructors towards online education (Howell et al., 2004). Presumably, since the faculty
polled in this study all teach in in programs that offer completely online degrees, it
follows that a majority of their peers would likely accept the legitimacy of this
educational delivery method. On an institutional scale, however, research has illustrated
that most members of faculty do not comprehend “how their individual or departmental
online educational efforts fit with the larger institutional plan for online learning” (Orr et
al., 2009, p. 263). Though faculty in Orr et al.’s study believed their departments to be
supportive of online education, they were unsure if such support extended beyond the
departments (2009). These faculty members expressed a desire to contribute to the larger
institutional context, and thus hoped online education was considered in the institutional
strategic plan (2009).
Align departmental and institutional online education goals. In order to
improve upon the attitudes toward the value of online education, it is recommended that
the departmental leadership involved with online program offerings communicate with
institutional leaders about the importance of incorporating online education into the
broader goals of the institution (Orr et al., 2009).
Elzarka (2012) discussed the importance of institutional policies in recruiting
faculty participation in online education, outlining a four-part model. First, the institution
must acknowledge the importance of online education, and require faculty ownership of
technology (2012). Second, awareness is the stage in which there is clarity about the
benefits and roles online education should have in institutional programs (2012). In the
third stage, acculturation, faculty are asked to take on facilitator and decision-making
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

104

roles in order to garner buy-in (2012). And, lastly, affirmation is when the decisions
made during acculturation are implemented and supported by institutional policy (2012).
Creating an institutional culture that centralises the importance of online education and
encourages faculty within departments to adopt leadership roles will help mitigate
“cyberphobia” in the institution (2012).
Promote scholarship and research. Another recommended approach to
improving the recognition of the value of online education is to encourage faculty
research in this realm. Howell et al. suggested that faculty attitudes toward online
education might improve if they “view their new distance education and technology
integration undertakings as innovations or research experiments” (2009, p. 45).
Incentives to promote online education research endeavors, including seed money,
graduate assistants, data, and support staff may further enhance the perceived value of
this educational platform (2009).
Similarly, another recommendation for increasing opportunities for online faculty
to receive recognition for their work is to hold an annual conference on online education,
which can serve to build community and share among the online educational instructors
(Howell et al., 2004). Here, online members of faculty can share successful teaching
strategies with their peers and gain recognition from their colleagues.
Provide support for part-time and adjunct faculty. In this study, one interviewee
expressed frustration that faculty meetings were held during times that conflicted with his
schedule. This may be a common theme for online educational programs, as many such
programs largely enlist the use of part-time or adjunct faculty to teach their online
courses. Accordingly, participating members of faculty in this study were comprised of
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

105

55% part-time or adjunct faculty, while another 38% were non-tenure track faculty.
Kezar (2014) reported that contingent members of faculty, including part-time, adjunct,
and non-tenure track faculty, are often excluded from meaningful governance and
professional development within their departments. A 2013 study performed by Kezar,
however, demonstrated that the willingness, capacity, and opportunity for contingent
faculty to provide quality teaching and learning environments is highly dependent upon
the departmental culture – that is, whether the department has policies and procedures in
place that are destructive, neutral, or inclusive for such members of faculty (Kezar,
2013). Kezar further asserted that the institutional culture is largely defined at the
departmental level, which, in turn, is typically influenced by the department chair – that
is, whether the chair is supportive of contingent faculty or not (2013). In departments
where the values, norms, and expectations of contingent faculty are largely supportive,
these members of faculty have been shown to enjoy their experience, in spite of being
“still generally exploited” (Kezar, 2013). Thus, the recommendation is that greater
awareness and acceptance of part-time and adjunct teaching in the online programs is
needed. This may entail greater flexibility with regards to scheduling class times, faculty
meetings, and professional development training. It is further suggested that training be
provided such that online instructors can access the resources at their avail in order to
circumvent time restraints.
Recommendations for improving the cultural setting for online education.
Upon consideration of the cultural setting, study participants believed their organisations
provided them with reliable technology and infrastructure. Many of the participants
believed they were adequately compensated, and that the workload in teaching online
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

106

was not significantly different than that of teaching on-ground. Yet, research has
demonstrated conflicting results, revealing that online instructors believe the online
workload is much higher compared to on-ground teaching, which is not reflected in the
way they are compensated (Bolliger & Wasilik, 2009; Houston et al., 2006; Howell et al.,
2004; Orr et al., 2009; Rockwell et al., 1999; Ruth et al., 2007; Schifter, 2000).
Provide reliable technology. Participating online faculty in this study believed
that their organisations provided them with reliable infrastructure and technology. As
mentioned previously, Schrum (1999) emphasized the need for reliable access to
technology is required for the instructors. Instructors teaching online courses largely
value using technology to teach, especially if they perceive the technology uses to align
with their values and beliefs (Ottenbreit-Leftwich et al., 2010). In fact, online instructors
value using instructional technology to the extent that they are not discouraged from
teaching online by technical issues (2010). The results of the current study are in line
with these findings. In order to continue encouraging effective online educational
practices, it is recommended that the organisation continue to support with dependable
technology and infrastructure. This may include covering Internet Service Provider (ISP)
costs, as well as software and computer equipment expenses (Schifter, 2000).
Provide fair compensation and/or incentives to teach online. Faculty
participants in this study also believed their organisations to provide them with fair
compensation for teaching online. However, many studies have found that there is no
clear understanding of how teaching online courses is compensated (Bolliger & Wasilik,
2009; Houston et al., 2006; Howell et al., 2004; Orr et al., 2009; Rockwell et al., 1999;
Ruth et al., 2007; Schifter, 2000). Schifter (2000) found a lack of standards for faculty
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

107

compensation or incentives. One reason for this may be the extensive use of part-time or
contingent faculty to teach online courses. Studies have shown that contingent members
of faculty are subject to inequitable compensation, job insecurity, exclusion from
meaningful governance and professional development (Kezar et al, 2014). In the current
study, 55% of the participants were reported to be part-time or adjunct faculty, while
another 38% were non-tenure track faculty. It is unclear how faculty who participated in
this study are rewarded or compensated for teaching online. However, results of this
study demonstrated that online instructors value appropriate compensation for teaching
online courses, as discussed earlier. Thus, it is recommended that departments and
institutions clearly outline a system of rewards, including well-defined expectations of
faculty for promotion and tenure.
Further, clearly defining a model for compensation may incentivise faculty
members to effectively teach online courses. Schifter’s 2000 study found that in
institutions or departments where online teaching is an expected part of the culture,
compensation for teaching online is comparable to that for teaching traditional classes
(2000). If this is this case, the organisation may consider alternative forms of rewarding
online instructors for their efforts. For instance, stipends could be provided for
developing new online courses (Rockwell et al., 1999). Howell et al. (2004) proposed
providing funds for travel to online education conferences, which would promote
scholarship and allow for the sharing of successful teaching practices among colleagues.
Further, Orr et al. (2009) suggested creating faculty fellowships aimed specifically at
online education. Inclusion of clearly defined expectations of and incentives for teaching
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

108

online courses by the organisation may promote and enhance the success of faculty
members with online instruction.
Provide adequate prep time or release time for online instructors. Slightly less
than half of the survey respondents believed the workload for online teaching to be
greater than that of teaching on-ground. Interview responses, however, suggested the
online workload to be much higher, which was not necessarily reflected in how they were
compensated. The largest reported barrier to teaching online courses is the amount of
work that is required to develop and deliver a successful online course (Allen & seamen,
2014; Bejerano, 2008; Bolliger & Wasilik, 2009; Bower, 2001; Herrington, 2001;
Houston et al., 2006; Howell et al., 2004; Orr et al., 2009; Rockwell et al., 1999; Ruth et
al., 2007; Schifter, 2000). Yet, Orr et al. (2009) revealed that departmental leadership
was often unaware of the amount of time required to successfully develop and deliver an
online course. It is thus recommended that a systematic evaluation of online instructional
workload be performed to determine if online teaching is, in fact, more time consuming
for instructors. If so, there are several strategies the organisation can employ to provide
support for online members of faculty.
The most commonly suggested solution is to offer release time from other
teaching duties in order to allow appropriate time for course development (Bolliger &
Wasilik, 2009; Howell et al., 2004; Orr et al., 2009; Rockwell et al., 1999; Ruth et al.,
2007; Schifter, 2000). Schifter (2000) pointed out, however, faculty release time may be
depended on the department’s access to replacement faculty. Where no replacement is
available, it is recommended faculty who are developing online courses be paid overload
(2000). Another recommended strategy would be to offer personnel support for those
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

109

members of faculty developing and teaching online courses (Orr et al., 2009; Schifter,
2000). Such support may come in the form of graduate assistants (Schifter, 2000), or
may involve increasing support staff, such as instructional designers, to share the
workload of creating online courses (Orr et al., 2009). Such strategies may alleviate the
barrier of the increased workload for online instructional faculty.
Implementation Plan
To enhance the success of faculty in teaching their online courses, appropriate
strategies should be employed to increase facilitators for effective teaching practices. It
is prudent to avoid applying a strategy that is misaligned with an asset such that it might
ultimately become inhibitory to the online instruction by faculty. Through the promising
practice framework used in this study, it was imperative that we address the potential
factors facilitating or inhibiting effective online education stemming from all three facets:
knowledge, motivation, and organisational (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011).
Although each facet was examined separately, the recommendations for
improving upon each are closely related, and should be integrated in their
implementation. Recommendations for improving upon the assets within the partner sites
can be unified into the following five overarching strategies:
1. Improve professional development programs and training for online faculty.
2. Implement peer mentoring program partnering experienced online instructors with
novice members of online faculty.
3. Provide strong incentives for faculty to teach online courses.
4. Promote scholarship and research in online education.
5. Align departmental and institutional online education goals.
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

110

Upon implementation of the strategies to the validated assets, the oganisational
facet of the cultural model should first be addressed. It would behoove the departmental
leadership in the partner sites to reach out to institutional administrators to emphasize the
importance of incorporating online education into the broader goals of the institution.
Aligning the online educational goals of the departments with the broader institutional
strategic plan may enhance the perception of the online instructors of their contributions
to the institution. This should take place on an ongoing basis as departments and
institutions strive to improve upon their online educational programs. Both at the
departmental and institutional level, there needs to be clearly defined expectations of
faculty for online teaching, and promotional and tenure guidelines set forth. Further,
departmental leaders can appeal to administrators to provide funding for scholarly and
research endeavours in the realm of online education should the departmental budget not
allow for such an undertaking. This funding may support travel to professional
conferences, graduate assistants, acquisition of data, or other resources for research,
which can promote scholarship and allow online members of faculty to receive
recognition from of their work from peers.
Within the department, incentives for members of faculty to teach online should
be provided. Where possible, release time should be provided for course development.
Where no replacement faculty is available, stipends, support staff, or instructional
designers should be provided to assist with online course development. This would
alleviate the reportedly high workload for the online instructors. Further, the department
should provide online members of faculty with reliable technology and infrastructure,
which may include paying for Internet Service Providers, software, or computers.
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

111

Professional development meetings should be held on a monthly basis in order to
provide knowledge and skills for best online teaching practices. Such meetings should
target the experience level of the instructors involved. For instance, novice instructors
will likely require greater focus on learning to use the technology. However, as the
instructors mature in the online classroom, professional development should integrate the
technology with pedagogy and content. These meetings should also emphasize and
remind online faculty about the benefits of online education to the students, including
increased access and increased use of technological resources, as well as teach faculty to
critically evaluate their own teaching practices. Meetings should also be provided in
asynchronous formats in order to circumvent time or location restraints for online
teaching faculty. Further, a peer-mentoring program would match senior, prestigious
members of online members of faculty in the department with junior and up-and-coming
faculty. The peer mentor would share their own successful experiences with instructing
online courses, including how to best incorporate pedagogy, overcome feelings of
isolation from students, and how to self-reflect upon their own instructional methods.
The senior faculty would also advise their junior peers on the value and benefit of online
education for the students in the online programs. This integration plan would effectively
improve the ability of online instructors to successfully teach in the online environment.
Evaluation Plan
Once the recommendations for increasing the knowledge, motivation, and
organisational assets have been implemented, the impact of the recommendations may be
assessed at four levels – reaction or awareness, instructor learning, implementation or use
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

112

of the new learning, and overall impact – using Kirkpatrick’s evaluation plan model
(2006).
Level 1: Evaluate Reaction/Awareness
The first level of evaluation aims to measure the reactions to the implemented
recommendations, or if the online members of faculty appreciate the implementations
(Kirkpatrick, 2006). For each strategy implemented, departmental leaders will need to
decide which metrics or indicators would be useful to determine the effectiveness of each
strategy. Further, the potential effectiveness of each strategy will take variable amounts
of time to occur – as such, the frequency with which each implementation is evaluated
will need to be defined by program leaders.
For instance, following each professional development training session, the
faculty might complete feedback surveys assessing their attitudes and reactions to the
intervention. When evaluating online instructors’ reactions to professional development
training, evaluators may want to know if instructors believe the training would be
essential for their success in teaching online courses. Surveys may include five-point
Likert scale questions or open-ended questions aimed at evaluating components of the
training. The effectiveness of the peer-mentor program can also be evaluated accordingly.
When evaluating strategies such as offering incentives to faculty for teaching
online courses, departmental leaders may wait a full year after implementation to assess
the effectiveness of the incentive. Here, faculty may be asked if a given incentive was
worthwhile, if it in fact facilitated greater success to faculty for teaching online courses.
Evaluation of the efficacy of the other strategies, including promoting online educational
research and scholarship and aligning departmental and institutional online education
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

113

goals can be evaluated similarly. Positive faculty reaction to the implemented strategies
may improve their chances of learning, as well as increase their interest and involvement
in improving upon their online teaching practices (Kirkpatrick, 2006).
Level 2: Evaluate Instructor Learning
The second level of evaluation serves to determine how much the online
instructors have learned from the implemented strategies. Effective strategies will result
in demonstrable improvements in skill, knowledge, or behavior (Kirkpatrick, 2006). This
level of evaluation best serves to assess the effectiveness of professional development
training and peer-mentoring programs.
To assess the learning of online instructors, Kirkpatrick (2006) recommends using
pre- and post-training surveys containing the same questions. Differences in knowledge
and attitude between the surveys will illuminate what the instructors have learned.
Surveys may include five-point Likert scale questions, multiple choice questions, or
open-ended short answer questions based on the specific training that gauge the depth of
learning of the online faculty. Further, peer observations of live virtual classrooms will
assist in assessing changes in instructor teaching practices and student performance. The
frequency of such observations can be determined by the individual department,
however, it is recommended that online instructors be observed twice each academic
year.
The effectiveness of the peer-mentor program may also be evaluated through
surveys. Members of the faculty can be asked to respond to five-point Likert-type
statements such as “Working with my peer mentor has increased my confidence to keep
my students engaged during synchronous classes” (1 = Strongly Agree, 5 = Strongly
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

114

Disagree). Using such surveys could determine effective increase of both knowledge and
motivation of online instructional faculty.
Level 3: Evaluate Full Implementation/Use of New Learning
If the proposed strategies are effective, it is expected at the third level that online
instructors apply what they have learned to their virtual classrooms. Online instructors
should be able to demonstrate how they have integrated the training provided into their
teaching methods online. Questions similar to those of level two may be asked of the
online faculty, as well as questions aimed at determining the extent to which they have
incorporated training material into their online teaching practices. Such evaluations are
recommended once every three to four months (or the end of each semester) to see if
faculty continue to employ newly learned strategies to their online instructional
techniques.
Level 4: Evaluate Impact
The expected outcome at the fourth level is an overall increase in the acceptance
and value of online education, at both a departmental and institutional level. Assuming
successful implementation of the recommended strategies, the perceptions of online
educational programs by all involved stakeholders would likely be enhanced, which in
turn would lend to increased efforts to improve upon such programs.
Since change cannot be expected to happen overnight, passage of time must be
allowed prior to evaluating changes in behaviour (Kirkpatrick, 2006). A suggested time
frame would be every six over a period of several years. This would allow for a
longitudinal examination of the lasting effects of the implementations and their impact on
online instructional effectiveness.
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

115

Limitations and Delimitations
Interpretation of the results of the current promising practice study is constrained
by the study design and methodology, including the instrumentation used and sampling
methods. For instance, the survey and interview questions developed for the study were
not validated for clarity or understanding. Thus, interpretation of the questions by study
participants may have varied, posing a threat to the trustworthiness of the data.
This study used a small, convenient sample of online instructional members of
faculty from seven partner sites that all employ the same online program management
(OPM) provider. While all of the partner sites are considered to be elite institutions who
attract high-performing students, the information obtained might not be generalisable to
other colleges and universities who cater to a different caliber of students or who utilise a
different internet-based modality. Such a sample limits the external validity, that is, the
ability of the results to be generalised to institutions beyond the participating partner sites
(Creswell, 2014). However, the promising practices of the partner sites revealed by the
current study may be useful to other institutions in order to improve upon effective
delivery of online instruction.
Further, it is unclear if the survey respondents were representative of all of the
participating partner sites, or if instructors from select programs partook in the survey.
Additionally, only six of the forty survey participants were interviewed, and were further
only representative of three of the partner sites. Therefore, the experiences of interview
participants were generally very similar. Thus, the data presented in this study only
represents a small portion of the potential population.
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

116

The study is also constrained by the use of only one stakeholder in the partner
sites, that is, the online instructional faculty. The perceptions held by these members of
faculty may not align with those of other stakeholders in the institution. Further research
would be needed to investigate the experiences of all involved stakeholders with online
education.
Future Directions for Study
As previously mentioned, the current study considered only the perceptions of the
members of faculty who teach online graduate courses at the partner sites. However,
their perceptions may differ from those of other stakeholders. For instance, a colleague
investigating administrator perceptions of online educational practices at the same partner
sites found that administrators reported that online instructors are trained extensively in
pedagogical methods (Vuong, n.d.). This finding contradicts the data in the current
study, where interviewees suggested the only online educational training they received
was technological. It would be valuable to assess the perceptions of all of the
stakeholders involved in online education to determine where any incongruence may
exist. Addressing such inconsistencies may improve upon the overall online education
program.
Conclusion
This study sought to identify factors facilitating the effective delivery of online
graduate instruction by faculty at a set of high-performing institutions of higher
education. Survey and interview data exploring the facets of knowledge, motivation, and
organisation revealed assets facilitating effective online instruction, and also illuminated
factors potentially inhibiting such practices. The following five recommendations were
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

117

proposed to improve upon all three facets: 1) Improve professional development
programs and training for online faculty; 2) Implement peer mentoring program
partnering experienced online instructors with novice members of online faculty; 3)
Provide strong incentives for faculty to teach online courses; 4) Promote scholarship and
research in online education; 5) Align departmental and institutional online education
goals. Implementation and subsequent evaluation plans for the recommended strategies
were also outlined. Thus, this promising practice study provides insights into the
knowledge, motivation, and organisational assets online members of faculty perceive to
be important facilitators of successful online education.

EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

118

REFERENCES
Aguirre, A. (2000). Women and minority faculty in the academic workplace:
Recruitment, retention, and academic culture. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Allen, I.E. and Seamen, J. (2014). Grade change: Tracking online education in the
United States. Retrieved February 10, 2015 from http://www.sloan-
c.org/publications/survey/survey11.asp
Allen, I.E. and Seamen, J. (2007). Making the grade: Online education in the United
States, 2006. Retrieved February 10, 2015, from http://www.sloan-
c.org/publications/survey/survey04.asp
Ambrose, S.A., Bridges, M.W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M.C. & Norman, M.K.
(2010). How learning works: 7 research-based principles for smart teaching. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
American Association of University Professors. (2014). Contingent Appointments and
the Academic Profession. Retrieved from https://www.aaup.org/report/
contingent-appointments-and-academic-profession.
Anderson, L.W. & Krathwohl, D.R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning,
teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational
objectives. NewYork, NY: Longman.
Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education.
Journal of College Student Personnel, 25, 297-808.
Baran, E., Copeia, A.P., and Thompson, A. (2011). Transforming online teaching
practice: critical analysis of the literature on the roles and competencies of online
teachers. Distance Education, 32(2), 421 – 439.
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

119

Bartell, M. (2003). Internationalization of universities: A university culture-based
framework. Higher Education, 45, 43 – 70.
Bejerano, A. (2008). Raising the question #11: The genesis and evolution of online
degree programs: Who are they for and what have we lost along the way?
Communication Education, 57(3), 408 – 414.
Benson, A. (2010). Dimensions of quality in online degree programs. American Journal
of Distance Education, 17(3), 145 – 159.
Best Colleges U.S. News Education. (2014). U.S. News and World Report.
Blackburn, R.T. and Lawrence J.H. (1995). Faculty at work: motivation, expectation,
satisfaction. Baltimore and London: The John Hopkins University Press.
Bland, C.J., Center, B.A., Finstad, D.A., Risbey, K.R., and Staples, J. (2006). The
impact of appointment type on the productivity and commitment of full-time
faculty in research and doctoral institutions. The Journal of Higher Education
77(1).
Bland, C.J., Center, B.A., Finstad, D.A., Risbey, K.R., and Staples, J. (2005). A
theoretical, practical, predictive model of faculty and department research
productivity. Academic Medicine: 80(3), 225-237.
Bolliger, D.U. and Wasilik, O. (2009). Factors influencing faculty satisfaction with
online teaching and learning in higher education. Distance Education, 30(1),
103 – 116.
Boud. D. & Prosser, M. (2002) Key principles for high quality student learning in higher
education: a framework for evaluation, Educational Media International, 39(3),
237–245.
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

120

Bower, B. (2001). Distance education: Facing the faculty challenge. Online Journals of
Distance Learning Administration, 4(2).
Boyer, E. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered. Washington, DC: The Carnegie Foundation.
Brooks, R.L. (2005). Measuring university quality. The Review of Higher Education,
29(1),1 – 21.
Bruce, P.A. (2010). Evidence-based practice in online higher education: An exploratory
study of the online policies and practices of United States Doctoral/Research-
extensive universities (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ERIC. (UMI
Number: 3412551)
Clark, R.E. & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the
right performance solutions. Atlanta, GA: CEP Press.
Clay, M. N. (2006). Training practices and participation of faculty preparing to teach
online in the university system of Georgia: A mixed methods study. (Ph.D., The
University of Nebraska - Lincoln).
Congressional Research Service. (2009). The U.S. science and technology workforce
(Order Code RL 34539). Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.
edu/key_workplace/644
Creswell, J.W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Dabbagh, N. and Kitsantas, A. (2005). Using web-based pedagogical tools as scaffolds
for self-regulating learning. Instructional Science, 33(5-6), 513 – 540.

EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

121

Dill, D. (2006). Convergence and diversity: The role and influence of university
rankings. Consortium of Higher Education Researchers 19
th
Annual Research
Conference.
Eccles, J. (2006). Expectancy value motivational theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/expectancy-value-motivational-
theory/
Elzarka, S. (2012). Technology use in higher education instruction. CGU Theses
& Dissertations, 39, 96 – 104.
Ferrario, K., Corinne, H., Martinex, B., and Sundt, M. (2013). An honest account of the
humbling experience of learning to teach online. LEARNing Landscapes 6(2), 85
– 95.
Figlio, D. N., Schapiro, M. O., & Soter, K. B. (2013). Are tenure track professors better
teachers? (NBER Working Paper 19406). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of
Economic Research.
Friedman, L.W. and Friedman, H.H. (2013). Using social media technologies to
enhance online learning. Journal of Educators Online, 10(1), 1 – 22.
Gamson, Z. (1995). Faculty and service. Change, 27(1), 4.
GAO Report to Congressional Committees (2002). Higher education: Activities
underway to improve teacher training, but reporting on these activities could be
enhanced. Washington, DC: United States General Accounting Office
Georgina, D. and Olsen, M. (2008). Integration of technology in higher education: A
review of faculty self-perceptions. The Internet and Higher Education, 11, 1
– 8.
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

122

Glesne, C. (2011). Chapter 6: But is it ethical? Considering what is “right.” In
Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (4
th
ed.). Boston: Pearson.
Glynn Crawford-Ferre, H. and Wiest, L. (2012). Effective online instruction in higher
education. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 13(1), 11 – 14.
Gomez-Mejia, L., and Balkin, D. (1992). Determinants of faculty pay: And agency
theory perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 35(5), 921 – 955.
Hagedorn, L. (1996). Wage equity and female faculty job satisfaction: The role of wage
differentials in a job satisfaction causal model. Research in Higher Education,
37(5), 569 – 598.
Hannafin, M. and Land, S. (1997). Cognitive strategies and learning form the World
Wide Web. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(4), 37 –
64.
Harding, J. (2013). Qualitative data analysis from start to finish. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Hayashi, A., Chen, C., Ryan, T. and Wu, J. (2004). Computer self-efficacy in predicting
usage of e-learning systems. Journal of Information Systems Education, 15,
139 – 154.
Herrington, A., Herrington, J., Oliver, R., Stoney, S. & Willis, J. (2001). Quality
guidelines for online courses: the development of an instrument to audit online
units. In G. Kennedy, M. Keppell, C. McNaught & T. Petrovic (Eds), Meeting at
the crossroads: proceedings of ASCILITE 2001. Melbourne: The University of
Melbourne, 263–270.

EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

123

Houston, D., Meyer, L., and Paewei, S. (2006). Academic staff workloads and job
satisfaction: Expectations and values in academe. Journal of Higher Education
Policy and Management, 28(1), 17 – 30.
Howell, S. L., Saba, F., Lindsay, N. K., & Williams, P. B. (2004). Seven strategies for
enabling faculty success in distance education. The Internet and Higher
Education, 7(1), 33-49.
Huss, J. and Eastep, S. (2015). Faculty expectations toward their online courses: Are
they the same on screen with their students? Journal of Inquiry & Action in
Education, 6(3), 15 – 41.
Jaeger, A. J. & Eagan, M. K. (2010). Examining retention and contingent faculty use in a
state system of public higher education. Educational Policy, 25(3), 507-537.
Kelly, A.P. and Hess, F.M. (2011). Beyond retrofitting: Innovation in higher education.
Hudson Institute Initiative on Future Innovation.
Kezar, A., Maxey, D., and Eaton, J. (2014). An examination of the changing faculty:
Ensuring institutional quality and achieving desired student-learning outcomes.
Council for Higher Education Accreditation Occasional Paper, January 2014.
Kezar, A. (2013). Departmental cultures and non-tenure-track faculty: Willingness,
capacity, and opportunity to perform at four-year institutions. The Journal of
Higher Education, 84(2), 153 – 188.
Kezar, A. & Sam. C. (2010). Understanding the new majority: Contingent faculty in
higher education, Volumes I & II. ASHE Higher Education Report Series. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

124

King, K. P. (2002). Identifying success in online teacher education and professional
development. The Internet and Higher Education, 5(3), 231-246.
Kirkpatrick, D.L. (2006). Seven keys to unlock the four levels of evaluation.
Performance Improvement, 45(7) 5-8.
Koehler, M.J. and Mishra, P. (2005). What happens when teachers design educational
technology? The development of technological pedagogical content knowledge.
Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32(2), 131 – 152.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into
Practice, 41(4), 212-218.
Kreber, C. and Kanuka, H. (2006). The scholarship of teaching and learning and the
online classroom. Canadian Journal of University Continuing Education, 32(2),
pp. 109 – 131.
Lackey, K. (2011). Faculty development: An analysis of current and effective training
strategies for preparing faculty to teach online. Online Journal of Distance
Learning Administration, 14(4).
Laurillard, D. (1993) Rethinking university teaching: a framework for the effective use of
educational technology (London, Routledge).
Lewis, C. C., & Abdul-Hamid, H. (2006). Implementing effective online teaching
practices: Voices of exemplary faculty. Innovative Higher Education, 31(2), 83-
98.
Lorenzo, J. and Moore, J. (2002). Five pillars of quality online education. The Sloan
Consortium Report to the Nation.

EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

125

Marcoulides, G.A and Heck, R.H. (1993). Organizational culture and performance:
Proposing and testing a model. Organization Science, 4(2), 209 – 225.
McEwan, E. K. & McEwan, P. J. (2006). Making Sense of Research. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications.
Merriam, S.B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Meyer, K.A. (1998). Faculty workload studies: Perspectives, needs, and future
directions. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, 26(1), 1 – 101.
Middaugh, M.F. (2001). Understanding Faculty Productivity: Standards and
Benchmarks for Colleges and Universities. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Publishers.
Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A
methods sourcebook, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, SAGE Publications Ltd.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2008). U.S. Department of Education.
Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/collegenavigator/
National Education Association Research Center. (2007). Part-time faculty: A look at
data and issues. NEA Higher Education Research Center, 11(3), 1 – 12.
Oliver, R., Herrington, A., Stoney, S. & Millar, J. (2006) Authentic teaching and learning
standards that assure quality higher education, in: A. Herrington & J. Herrington
(Eds) Authentic learning environments in higher education (Hershey, Idea
Group).

EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

126

Oliver, R. & Herrington, J. (2001). Teaching and learning online: a beginner’s guide to
e-learning and e-teaching in higher education. Western Australia: Centre for
Research in Information Technology and Communications, Edith Cowan
University.
Orr, R., Williams, M. R., & Pennington, K. (2009). Institutional efforts to support faculty
in online teaching. Innovative Higher Education, 34(4), 257-268.
Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A.T., Glazewski, K.D., Newby, T.J, and Ertmer, P.A. (2010).
Teacher value beliefs associated with using technology: Addressing professional
and student needs. Computers and Education, 55, 1321 – 1335.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Chapter 7: Qualitative Interviewing. In Qualitative research &
evaluation methods (3
rd
ed.) (pp. 339-415). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student
motivation in learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology,
95(4), 667 – 686.
Rice, R., Sorcinelli, M., and Austin, A. (2000). Heading new voices: Academic careers
for a new generation. New Pathways Inquiry #7. Washington, DC: American
Association for Higher Education.
Rockwell, S.K., Schauer, J., Fritz, S., and Marx, D.B. (1999). Faculty education,
assistance and support needed to deliver education via distance. Faculty
Publications: Agricultural Leadership, Education & Communication Department,
54, 1 – 11.
Rudd, D.P. II, and Rudd, D.P. (2014). The value of video in online instruction. Journal
of Instructional Pedagogies, 1 – 7.
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

127

Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance: Finding
the right solutions to the right problems. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Ruth, S., Sammons, M., and Poulin, L. (2007). E-learning at a crossroads – What price
quality? Educause Quarterly, 2, 32 – 39.
Schell, E., and Stock, P. (2001). (Eds.). Moving a mountain: Transforming the role of
non- tenure track faculty in composition studies and higher education. Urbana,
IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
Schifter, C. (2000). Compensation Models in Distance Education. Online Journal of
Distance Learning Administration, 3(1).
Schrum, L. (1999). Technology professional development for teachers. Educational
Technology Research & Development, 47(4), 83 – 90.
Sharobeam, M. and Howard, K. (2002). Teaching demands versus research productivity.
Journal of College Science Teaching, 31(7), 436 – 441.
Shih, C., Ingebritsen, T., Pleasants, J., Flickinger, K., and Brown, G. (1998). Learning
strategies and other factors influencing achievement via Web courses.
Proceedings of the 14
th
Annual Conference on Distance Teaching and Learning
(359 – 363). Madison, WI. (ED 422876)
Shulock, N., and Moore, C. (2002). An Accountability Framework for California Higher
Education: Informing Public Policy and Improving Outcomes. Sacramento:
Institute for Higher Education Leadership and Policy, California State University,
Sacramento, p.p. 1 – 73.

EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

128

U.S. Department of Education (2007). Eight regional accrediting commissions. Retrieved
February 11, 2015, from http://www.usdla.org/html/journal
/JUL02_Issue/article04.html
Vaill, A. L., & Testori, P. A. (2012). Orientation, mentoring and ongoing support: A
three-tiered approach to online faculty development. Journal of Asynchronous
Learning Networks, 16(2).
Vuong, P.M. (n.d.) Supporting faculty for successful online instruction: Factors for
effective onboarding and professional development. (Doctoral dissertation).
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological
processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wang, A. and Newlin, M. (2002). Predictors of web-student performance: The role of
self-efficacy and reasons for taking an online class. Computers in Human
Behavior, 18, 151 – 163.
White, C.S., James, K., Burke, L.A., and Allen, R.S. (2012). What makes a “research
star”? Factors influencing the research productivity of business faculty.
International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 61(6), 584 –
602.

EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

129

APPENDIX A
Survey Protocol
I am conducting a research study that seeks to examine the effective delivery of online
instruction by faculty in online graduate programs. In particular, I’m focusing on
understanding faculty assets and resources that facilitate effective online instruction. The
following survey contains 26 questions that should take no longer than 20
minutes. Additionally, willing participants will be invited to participate in a 30 – 60
minute follow-up interview. Please email Tamara Espinet at espinet@usc.edu if you are
willing to partake in a follow-up interview. What you share as part of this study will be
kept confidential and the information is intended for use in this study only. Your
voluntary participation in the interview may help to provide a better understanding of the
factors involved with effective teaching in the online environment. Thank you in advance
for your contribution to this study.

Background Questions
1. Which of the following best describes your faculty position?
a. Tenured/Tenure-track
b. Full-Time Non-tenure Track
c. Part-time/Adjunct

2. Which of the following best describes the type of courses you teach?
a. Online courses only.
b. On-ground courses only.
c. Both online and on-ground courses.

Survey Items
Please circle the number corresponding to your level of agreement/disagreement for
each of the following statements:
1=strongly agree; 2 =agree; 3=neutral/unsure; 4=disagree; 5=strongly disagree
1. It is valuable to me that my students can access my online course from any place
in the world.
2. Online teaching is gratifying because it provides me with an opportunity to reach
students who otherwise would not be able to take the course.
3. I value that my students use a wider range of resources in the online setting than
in the traditional one.
4. It is important to me that my online students are more enthusiastic about their
learning than their traditional counterparts.
5. The flexibility provided by the online environment is important to me.
6. I appreciate that I can access my online course any time at my convenience.
7. I value having to be more creative in terms of instructional delivery when
teaching online.
8. I am more satisfied with teaching online as compared to other delivery methods.
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

130

9. I have a strong interest in using technology to teach.
10. I value being able to incorporate greater resources when teaching an online course
as compared to traditional teaching.
11. It is important to me that I receive extra time to prepare the online courses I teach.
12. The compensation I receive for teaching online is important to me.
13. I am confident in my ability to effectively navigate the Internet.
14. I would feel confident in my ability to communicate with several students who are
online at the same time.
15. I know I am able to use email to communicate with my students.
16. I am confident in my ability to use an asynchronous conferencing system, such as
a discussion board, to communicate with my students.
17. Faculty at my institution accept the value an legitimacy of online education.
18. The technology I use for online teaching is reliable.
19. Online teaching is often frustrating because of technical problems.
20. Technical problems do not discourage me from teaching online.
21. I have a higher workload when teaching an online course as compared to
traditional teaching.
22. It takes me longer to prepare for an online course on a weekly basis than for an
on-ground course.
23. I receive fair compensation for teaching online.

EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

131

APPENDIX B
Interview Protocol
Research Questions
1. What knowledge, skills, motivational and organizational factors facilitate or
inhibit effective online teaching from the perspective of the faculty?

2. For those factors perceived to be facilitating the successful support of online
teaching faculty, what promising practices could be adapted to and utilized by
other units in the same agency? For those factors perceived as inhibitors, what
solutions may be helpful for improving the support of faculty to teach online
within the organization or program?

3. How might those interventions, whether promising practices or solutions, be
evaluated for effectiveness?

I greatly appreciate you taking time out of your schedule to speak with me. I am
conducting a research study that seeks to examine the effective delivery of online
instruction by faculty in online graduate programs. In particular, the analysis will focus
upon online faculty assets in the areas of knowledge, motivation and organisational
resources that facilitate effective online instruction. I am inviting faculty members who
teach online the graduate program to participate in an hour-long interview.
What you share as part of this study will be kept confidential as far as permitted by law.
The information is intended for use in this study. Your voluntary participation in the
interview may help to provide a better understanding of the variables involved with
effective teaching in the online environment. With your permission, I will audiotape and
take notes during the interview. The interview will take approximately 60 minutes to
complete.

I’d like to ask you some questions about your role as a member of faculty who teaches in
the online graduate program:
1. Please discuss the instructional methods or pedagogies you employ to teach
online.
2. Please describe the strategies you employ to design, develop, control, use, and/or
access the online technological systems used by your graduate program.
3. Can you reflect upon any of your perceived strengths or weaknesses in teaching in
the online environment?
4. How valuable is it for you to receive recognition from your peers and/or students
for teaching online? Please explain.
5. How valuable is the intellectual challenge of teaching online for you? Please
explain.
6. How do you feel that online education is currently viewed in your institution?
7. How do you feel about the technology you are provided with for teaching online?
8. Have you ever encountered any problems or challenges with using the available
technology? If so, please explain.
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
TEACHING

132

9. Please explain any differences in workload between teaching online and on-
ground courses.
10. How do you feel about the amount of time you are provided to prepare online
courses?
11. How do you feel about the compensation you receive for teaching online courses?

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This study examined the knowledge, motivation, and organisational variables facilitating effective delivery of online graduate education. Recent proliferation of online degree programs has highlighted the increasing need for institutions to define teaching quality standards in the new online teaching environment. Given the central role online members of faculty play in the success of online educational programs, it is important to understand from their perspective what factors lend to effective instruction in the online environment. Using a promising practice model—as adapted from Clark and Estes’ model of gap analysis—this study investigated factors that contribute to successful online teaching. A total of 40 members of faculty who teach across six different online graduate programs participated in the study. Data was collected through a survey (n = 40) and interviews (n = 6) to explore the knowledge, motivation, and organisational factors facilitating effective online instruction. Findings revealed assets facilitating effective online instruction, and also illuminated factors potentially inhibiting such practices. Based on these findings, recommendations were proposed to improve upon the facets of knowledge, motivation, and organisation lending to effective online instruction. Implementation and subsequent evaluation plans for the recommended strategies were also outlined.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Supporting faculty for successful online instruction: factors for effective onboarding and professional development

PDF

Implementing field-based online graduate professional programs: a promising practice study

PDF

Supporting administrators in successful online co-curriculum development: a promising practices study of contributing factors

PDF

Financial stability and sustainability in online education: a study of promising practice

PDF

Crisis intervention and mental health support services in online graduate degree programs: an evaluation study

PDF

Social work faculty practices in writing instruction: an exploratory study

PDF

Using data for continuous improvement: a promising practice study

PDF

Full-time distance education faculty perspectives on web accessibility in online instructional content in a California community college context: an evaluation study

PDF

Factors impacting faculty research productivity at a highly-ranked university

PDF

Closing the achievement gap for students with disabilities: a focus on instructional differentiation - an evaluation study

PDF

Improving pilot training by learning about learning: an innovation study

PDF

Theory-practice gap: MBA curricula as preparation for business practice in marketing

PDF

A gap analysis of course directors’ effective implementation of technology-enriched course designs: An innovation study

PDF

College and career readiness through independent study: an innovation study

PDF

Adjunct life in a full time world: evaluation of worklife experiences and risk for burnout in social work field faculty

PDF

Will school-based online faculty development be an effective tool for their professional growth?

PDF

Completion in online learning: graduate students' perspectives

PDF

What is the relationship between self-efficacy of community college mathematics faculty and effective instructional practice?

PDF

Recruiting and hiring online learning teachers for online high schools

PDF

A case study of technology-embedded instruction: a student-centered approach to enhance teaching and learning in a K-12 school

Asset Metadata

Creator Espinet, Tamara R. (author)

Core Title Ensuring faculty success in effective online instruction

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education

Publication Date 07/08/2016

Defense Date 05/02/2016

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag best teaching practices,classroom environment,educational technology,effective instruction,faculty,faculty support,faculty training,graduate studies,Higher education,OAI-PMH Harvest,online courses,online education

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Filback, Robert (committee chair), Ephraim, Ronni (committee member), Sundt, Melora (committee member)

Creator Email espinet@usc.edu,tamara.espinet@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-264648

Unique identifier UC11280609

Identifier etd-EspinetTam-4532.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-264648 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-EspinetTam-4532.pdf

Dmrecord 264648

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Espinet, Tamara R.

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA