Valuing the Institution: An Expanded List of Factors Influencing Faculty Adoption of Online Education

We find that faculty consider their self-interests, those of their students, and the value to their institution when deciding whether to adopt online education. Our sample of business school faculty at a public urban university suggests that faculty who perceive online education as contributing to a desirable image for the business school, and that online education allows the school to meet changing market needs, are more likely to deliver one or more of their courses online. Because our study includes two populations of faculty—those who have taught online and those who have not—we are able to statistically measure the link between perception and behavior using multiple discriminant analysis (MDA). The statistically significant relationship between institutional considerations and adoption of online education provides university administrators with a new glimpse of what motivates faculty to participate in online education. Introduction This paper is concerned with the adoption of online MBA courses by faculty in a large publicly-funded university and AACSB-accredited business school. This general topic has been studied extensively (e.g., McKenzie, Mims, Bennett, & Waugh, 2000; Parker, 2003; Zhen, Garthwait, & Pratt, 2008), and several variables (e.g., time to deliver a course online, time and geographic flexibility) have been identified as influencers in the adoption decision (see especially Parker, 2003 and Maguire, 2005 for recent literature reviews). This exploratory study differs from much of the existing literature in two significant ways. We propose several new motivators/inhibitors of the faculty decision to adopt online education: perceived student misconduct and faculty concerns for the institution. Little empirical attention has been paid to the latter, perhaps because the literature has mostly concluded that intrinsic self-interests are the predominant factors influencing the adoption decision (e.g., Betts, 1998; Schifter, 2002). Even so, it is plausible, for example, that faculty may not adopt online education, despite its many perceived advantages to themselves and their students, if they believe that it doesn’t lend itself to the department, school, or institution’s long-term goals. Second, faculty attitudes towards online education adoption may not always converge with the actual decision to adopt online course delivery. This article studies the actual act of adoption of online education by faculty, as opposed to their attitudes towards such a decision, and identifies the variables that influence this actual decision. With few exceptions (e.g., Betts, 1998; Schifter, 2002) the vast majority of the literature in this field does not establish a direct empirical link between opinions and behavior (e.g., Black 1992; Dooley & Murphrey, 2000; Giannoni & Tesone, 2003; Bruner, 2007) and even fewer (Zhen, Garthwait, & Pratt, 2008 is a notable exception) use multivariate methods in which the strength of a particular independent variable must be proved against others in the model. We begin by intermingling our hypothesis development with a review of the recent literature. Next, we describe the data collection efforts, the method used, and the results. Lastly, in the discussion section, the implications and contributions of the study and its limitations are presented. Theory and Hypotheses When the opportunity to teach an online course presents itself to faculty, they likely consider several issues before determining the relative advantage of such a decision. Past research devoted to online education adoption has generally focused on intrinsic and extrinsic motivating (or inhibiting) factors (e.g., Betts, 1998; Schifter, 2002; Parker, 2003). For purposes of presentation, we categorize potential adoption factors into three groups: those related to the self-interests of the faculty, those related to faculty concerns for their students, and faculty concerns for their institutions. The variables, and direction of their influence on the adoption decision, are now considered in detail. Faculty-related factors Self-interest considerations are important to those who consider adopting a new service, in this instance, faculty adoption of online course delivery. Among the many factors that motivate faculty participation in online education, we focus on three that have received widespread scrutiny in the literature: instructor preparation time, class delivery issues, and schedule flexibility. Teacher Preparation Time This is time devoted to developing and maintaining materials required to teach the class effectively. Cavanaugh (2005), for example, finds that uploading materials to online platforms, changing dates of quizzes, communicating with students, updating multiple choice exams using web-based tools, and familiarizing students with an online course create additional time burdens for faculty teaching online. To the extent that a faculty member perceives there to be more class preparation required online (e.g., O’Quinn and Corry, 2002), she may be hesitant to adopt online classes. Hence: H1: Faculty members who perceive greater preparation time for online courses as opposed to on-campus courses will be less apt to adopt online education. Class Delivery Issues One key area where online and on-campus courses differ is in the actual delivery of the course. Interaction is often accomplished via online forums in which faculty read each student response and type appropriately, an activity that has generated faculty concern about the time needed to deliver a course online (White, 2000). Indeed, Lazarus (2003) found that the biggest time commitment to teaching online is participation and grading of online discussions. Because email is the primary form of communication between faculty and students in web-based courses, faculty have expressed concerns about the increased time commitment required of emailing individual students in online courses (White, 2000). The research that has addressed both the actual, measured increase in online class delivery time and faculty perceptions of it (e.g., Betts, 1998; Rockwell, Schauer, Fritz, & Marx, 1999; Schifter, 2002; Bender, Wood, & Vredevoogd, 2004; Cavanaugh, 2005), prompts the following hypothesis: H2: Faculty members who perceive greater course delivery burden in the online medium as opposed to the traditional classroom will be less apt to adopt online education. Teacher Schedule Flexibility The online medium affords greater flexibility for faculty than traditional teaching environments as faculty do not have to arrive at a certain time to a certain place to teach the class. The faculty member does not have to be in the same city, country, or for that matter, continent, as long as he is able to access the online platform. Flexibility in time is assured in that the faculty member is committed to teach at a given time only by design and at his convenience (e.g., synchronous chat room office hours). The time and place flexibility offered by the online medium is one of online education’s great advantages to faculty (e.g., McKenzie et al., 2000; Rahman, 2001; Schifter, 2002; Parker, 2003; Cavanaugh, 2005). Therefore, we propose that: H3: Faculty members who perceive online courses as affording greater schedule flexibility than on-campus courses will be more likely to adopt online education. Student-related factors Faculty may also consider student-related variables when making a decision to adopt online education. For example, faculty may be sensitive to the fact that online education provides students with greater scheduling flexibility, and yet they may be worried about whether quality of the education delivered to them can be maintained. Based on the literature, we identify three student-related variables and propose a new one.