Barriers and Motivating Factors for Staff e-learning Engagement at Sheffield Hallam University
Brian Irwin
MSc in E-learning
University of Edinburgh
2010
Abstract
Over the last decade, e-learning has been promoted as a way of transforming higher education in the UK. At Sheffield Hallam University it is now a central part of the student experience. However, there is wide variation in levels of engagement between different subjects and individuals, with some engaging fully and others not at all. This research explored why staff do or do not engage with e-learning at Sheffield Hallam University to better understand how to advance such engagement.
A literature review was undertaken to identify barriers to staff adoption of e-learning at other institutions. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with staff of various levels of engagement with e-learning at the university, using questions based on the themes identified in the literature review. An analysis of the interview data found three main kinds of barriers. Organisational barriers were those due to institutional priorities and resources, including ineffective technology, a lack of support, and conflicting priorities. Extrinsic personal barriers were based on the actions and skills of staff members, and included time, information and communication technology (ICT) skills, and online teaching skills. Intrinsic personal barriers focused on the emotions, attitudes and beliefs of staff.
Organisational barriers which were technical in nature, such as having reliable technology and appropriate support, were addressed early in the adoption process at Sheffield Hallam. However, this did not mean staff always know the best way to use the technology to meet their teaching needs and goals. Extrinsic personal barriers seemed to play a role mostly where staff were being asked to learn new skills, and needed the time to do so. However, staff member attitudes towards their ability to develop the new skills needed and embarrassment over admitting a lack of understanding were often underlying barriers preventing engagement with the development of new skills. These and other intrinsic personal characteristics were found to be powerful enablers and barriers in terms of engagement with e-learning. Staff who did not see the benefits, or saw e-learning as a conflict to their values, normally avoided engaging, while those that did see the benefits said they were able to overcome other barriers due to their motivation.
Based on the identified barriers, a series of five recommendations were generated. These were building a subject-based culture, improving pedagogical support and examples, providing non-engaging staff with a chance to experience e-learning, clarifying expectations for incoming staff, and giving recognition to the importance of changing and supporting internal values, attitudes and emotions. The findings and recommendations are specific to Sheffield Hallam University, but may be helpful to other institutions examining their own levels of e-learning engagement.
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank the research participants who volunteered their time for the interviews, as your cooperation was key to the success of the study. Those colleagues and fellow students that took the time to read my dissertation and give feedback, your help was especially appreciated. Also, thanks to my supervisor for his advice and guidance during the research design, implementation and writing processes, as well as my past tutors during the programme.
Table of contents
Page 1 of 67
1. Introduction
2. Background
2.1 Context
2.2 Literature Review
3. Methodology
3.1 Choosing a method......
3.2 Selecting participants
3.2.1 Identifying by faculty
3.2.2 Identifying by level
3.2.3 Chosen participants
3.3 Interview structure
3.4 Analysing the data
4. Findings and Discussion
4.1 Organisational Barriers
4.1.1 Effective technology
4.1.2 Institutional vision and leadership
4.1.3 Technical support
4.1.4 Pedagogical support
4.1.5 Institutional priorities that conflict with teaching and learning
4.1.6 Other change initiatives, teaching and learning priorities
4.1.7 Lack of grants and other funding opportunities
Incentives to encourage engagement
4.1.8 Not preparing staff for e-learning institutionally
4.2. Extrinsic Personal Barriers
4.2.1 Time
Time for developing skills
Time for developing materials and innovations
Time to facilitate teaching activities
4.2.2 Skills with technology
4.2.3 Online teaching skills
4.2.4 Age
4.3 Intrinsic Personal Barriers
4.3.1 Enthusiasm for e-learning and the use of technology in education
Designing into the curriculum
Benefits for staff
Importance of face-to-face communication
Effect on students
Summary of enthusiasm for e-learning
4.3.2 Perspectives on technology and society in general
4.3.3 Fear/confidence with technology
4.3.4 Personal theories of teaching and learning
4.3.5 Relevance to the discipline
4.3.6 Not knowing what is possible with e-learning
4.3.7 Perception of academic roles
4.3.8 Self-conceptions and preferences
4.4 Summary of key barriers and motivators
4.4.1 Barriers by engagement level
5 Recommendations
Table 1 – Summary of barriers and recommendations
5.1 Building a subject culture of e-learning
5.2 Improved pedagogical support
5.3 Ensuring opportunities to experience e-learning
5.4 Clarifying expectations for incoming staff members
5.5 Recognition of internal values, attitudes and emotions
6 Conclusion
References
Appendix A: Interview prompts
Page 1 of 6
1. Introduction
In the last decade e-learning and, more generally, the use of technology in education, have been strongly encouraged in higher education institutions in the UK and around the world. In the UK, the government has promoted e-learning changes in higher education through organisations such as the Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) and the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE). JISC defines e-learning as “learning facilitated and supported through the use of information and communications technology” (2010), a broad definition which highlights that the technology must enhance the learning without specifying the exact technologies to be used.
Many institutions, including Sheffield Hallam University, use a virtual learning environment (VLE) to help achieve its e-learning goals. Sheffield Hallam took an opt-in approach to staff use of its VLE, Blackboard, and achieved high rates of adoption over the eight year period from 2001 to 2009. Analysis of VLE use indicated 98% of students had at least one module supported by a Blackboard site and about 75% of all modules were directly supported by a Blackboard site (Irwin, 2009). As these numbers show, adoption of Blackboard has not been universal however, and the high adoption rates still exclude a minority of staff members who do not regularly engage with e-learning. Some other staff only engage in minimal ways, even where e-learning enhancements could benefit their curriculum.
This research project was formed to explore the factors that influence staff members' level of engagement at Sheffield Hallam University, in an attempt to explain the variation between staff engagement levels and identify recommendations for increasing engagement. A literature review was undertaken to highlight factors identified in previous research at other institutions. Based on this literature review interview prompts were created. Staff members at Sheffield Hallam were recruited based on a diversity of levels of experience with e-learning and representation from different subject areas at the university. Semi-structured interviews were used to explore staff perceptions of e-learning and reasons for and against engaging with it. Through a thematic analysis of the interview data, barriers for e-learning were identified in three main categories: organisational, extrinsic personal and intrinsic personal barriers. Lastly, recommendations, based on the context of Sheffield Hallam University, were made on strategies for eliminating the identified barriers and encouraging additional e-learning adoption.
2. Background
2.1 Context
Sheffield Hallam University began encouraging use of e-learning through an institution-wide VLE (Blackboard) to enhance learning and teaching in 2001, with a project called e-learning@shu. The implementation plan for the e-learning@shu project was informed by research commissioned to identify core barriers to staff engagement based on past technology-based learning initiatives. The primary barriers identified were the need for allocated time to engage with training, spaces to discuss and share e-learning ideas, and recognition and incentivisation of good teaching (Hanson and Wan, 2002). This research helped the university to reduce barriers for academics to initial engagement with e-learning.
Over the last eight years the university has been successful in involving most academics in e-learning to at least a minimal level. Though few academics do not engage with e-learning at all, a substantial number are thought to engage in only minimal ways such as uploading files and sending emails via Blackboard. Some of the differences in adoption seem to run along subject area lines, with some areas having almost all modules supported by e-learning with an expectation that all staff members engage, while other subject areas only have pockets of e-learning adoption at any significant level. It is currently unclear what influences staff members' engagement levels in e-learning, and if the barriers originally identified in 2001-2 are still applicable today. As a result, it was decided that re-examining these barriers in the current institutional context would help identify issues and suggest strategies for improving e-learning engagement.
2.2 Literature Review
A literature review was conducted at the start of the research project to determine what barriers had previously been identified in other research. Much of the literature focused on barriers that prevented early adoption in e-learning, with less of it focusing on barriers to expanding existing provision of e-learning and changing the nature of staff engagement with e-learning. Some of the early research investigated the barriers for learner engagement, particularly focusing on non-traditional learners (e.g. Miller and Lu, 2002 and Mungania, 2003). This study focuses solely on staff barriers to engaging with e-learning instead, meaning this body of literature was not examined in detail in the review.
There were three main themes to the barriers for staff engagement with e-learning identified in the literature review: organisational barriers, extrinsic personal barriers, and intrinsic personal barriers. Much of the literature cut across the themes, touching on at least two of them.
Early research tended to focus on technology-centred organisational barriers. Marshall (2000) found that a lack of effective and reliable technology, along with a dearth of technical support meant that staff did not engage with e-learning. A review of health education found a lack of appropriate and reliable hardware and software, along with technical support for that software, were key barriers preventing successful adoption (Childs et al., 2005). Naidu (2004) looked at barriers to adoption at Manchester Metropolitan University and found a lack of technical support as a core reason given by staff for not engaging with e-learning. However he also found that many of the staff members had not engaged with e-learning at all, meaning the barriers may not be relevant to an institution with higher levels of engagement. Newton (2003) also mentions that a lack of technical support and training opportunities were barriers. Ineffective or badly supported technology seemed to be an early barrier that prevented engagement.
However, one institution found that after eliminating technological barriers, other organisational barriers remained:
The removal of technological barriers alone is insufficient for an institution to develop its e-learning capability. There is also a need to examine policy and other organisational barriers that discourage staff engagement in e-learning rather than e-administration. (Marshall et al. 2003, p. 11)
These other organisational barriers, many of which were defined by a lack of leadership or strategy, also had a role in preventing the adoption of e-learning. For instance, Jordan and Jameson (2001) found a lack of senior leadership, shared institutional vision for e-learning, and staff skills as the strongest institutional barriers to the development of e-learning at the University of Greenwich. Fox (2007) also found that multiple e-learning software packages being used across one university created an institutional barrier in terms of non-streamlined processes causing duplicate effort. A lack of shared institutional vision for e-learning can lead to distrust of e-learning by academics (Goolnik, 2006). Other organisational barriers identified by Newton (2003) include a lack of institutional support in terms of setting aside staff time for development and delivery, and recognition/reward for innovative teaching.
A cross-institutional research study of e-learning managers about their perceptions of helpful and harmful factors to engagement with e-learning at their institutions supported some but not all of these institutional barriers. It agreed with the need for a shared vision but also found that institutional power structures, existing processes/policies and the amount of top-down support for e-learning were perceived to be determining factors for e-learning engagement levels rather than a system of recognition and reward (Nichols, 2008). A few other organisational barriers were found such as poor communication between technical and teaching staff, an absence of strategies for staff development and poor quality processes for online programmes (Childs et al., 2005). Overall, organisational barriers seemed to prevent engagement primarily by giving the impression that the activity was not supported or valued by the institution. This includes not properly supporting or resourcing e-learning, setting and rewarding conflicting priorities and a lack of leadership support and vision.
Much of the literature identified personal barriers to engagement as well as organisational ones, recognising the independent nature of teaching practice within the institutional context. These personal barriers could be divided into extrinsic and intrinsic barriers, with extrinsic ones dealing with external practicalities and behaviours, and intrinsic barriers relating to emotions, values and attitudes.
Extrinsic barriers included time, technical skills and teaching skills. Newton (2003) and Naidu (2004) found that poor technical skills prevented staff from effectively engaging with e-learning, and a lack of time meant they did not engage with developing those skills. Necessary technical skills included the ability to use provided educational software, but also the basic ICT skills needed to use computers in an effective and efficient fashion (Childs et al., 2005). Academics start with different levels of technical skills that can affect their ability to engage with e-learning. Time was identified as a barrier in several of the studies (Newton, 2003; Childs et al., 2005; Fox, 2007; Samors et al., 2009), with time for developing materials and improving skills both being highlighted. Academics often have a good deal of autonomy in setting their work patterns and priorities outside of scheduled classes, so time cannot be seen as a strictly organisational barrier.
Other literature focused on the intrinsic personal barriers to e-learning engagement, staff attitudes, emotions and beliefs. Elgort (2005) suggests that internal motivation is the most important barrier or enabler for e-learning engagement. Strong motivation to engage with e-learning can help overcome organisational barriers such as a lack of support or institutional priority, as staff find the time and make their own priorities, succeeding because of their motivation (Newton, 2003). Similarly poor motivation, or worse distrust and cynicism, results in staff not engaging with e-learning (Keengwe et al., 2008).
Some of the literature suggests that the motivation to engage or not often comes from recognising the benefits of e-learning. For instance recent research into attitudes about e-learning in arts and sciences disciplines found the reason many did not engage was that they were unaware of the possible e-learning pedagogies for their discipline and their potential benefits (Rolfe et al., 2008). Albirini examined if Syrian teachers were making use of technology in education generally, finding that many teachers could not relate the potential benefits to their own theories of teaching and learning and concluding that "teachers' attitudes have been found to be a major predictor of the use of new technologies in instructional settings" (2006, p. 375). Another study of university teachers found that staff engagement was linked with their past experience with technology and seeing the potential added value it provides (Mahdizadeh et al., 2008). Mac Keogh and Fox (2008) used a questionnaire to determine that staff were motivated by the possible new pedagogies of e-learning, though demotivated by other issues such as concerns about the quality of online teaching.
Emotional barriers were also part of the intrinsic personal barriers mentioned in the literature. Albirini (2006) found a lack of confidence in teachers to try new ways of teaching with technology. Some tutors lacked confidence in their ability to teach students at a distance, and feared that e-learning may eliminate the need for teachers (Newton, 2003). Fear of working outside of their comfort zone stopped some academics from engaging (Rolfe et al., 2008), while fear of technology and a lack of confidence with ICT in general were significant barriers according to Childs et al. (2005).
These categories of barriers have been used in this research for conceptual purposes, and are not as clearly separated in the literature. There are connections between them, such as where staff need time or new skills, then opportunities can be provided by the institution. Where academics do not see the value of e-learning, the university can try to highlight benefits and persuade academics. Those staff with higher technical skills may be more confident with e-learning (Albirini, 2006), or naturally disposed to see the benefits of technology in general. Academics often have the responsibility for and choice about what skills they improve and how they use time allocated by the institution. So in these ways the identified organisational, extrinsic personal and intrinsic barriers are interrelated. However, dividing them helps create a framework from which to start to examine the different barriers and enablers that effect staff engagement with e-learning and identify their importance. These barriers and their relevant literature are also addressed in the context of the appropriate section of the findings below.
3. Methodology
The chosen research design needed to be flexible and primarily qualitative in nature, as the research was open-ended without a hypothesis to test. As a case study it focused on the barriers specific to Sheffield Hallam University's institutional context and its academics, though some of the findings may relate to other contexts or academics more generally. The methods chosen to explore this included a literature review and semi-structured interviews.