Understanding the experiences of instructors as they adopt a course management system

Educational Technology Research and Development

Volumn 55, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 1-26

  West, Richard E ^a   Waddoups, Greg ^b   Graham, Charles R ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

^b MN   (United States)

^c BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Adoption; Blackboard; CMS; Course management system; Evaluation; Integration

Indexed keywords

EID: 34347214743     PISSN: 10421629     EISSN: 15566501     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11423-006-9018-1     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Ali, A. (2003). Faculty adoption of technology: Training comes first. Educational Technology, 43(2), 51-53.
2. Arnone, M. (2002). Course-management outfits still seek elusive profits. The Chronicle of Higher Education, July 12, 2002.
3. Bennett, J., & Bennett, L. (2003). A review of factors that influence the diffusion of innovation when structuring a faculty training program. Internet and Higher Education, 6(1), 53-63.
4. Dexter, R. R. (2005). Instructional leadership for systemic change: The story of San Diego's reform. School Administrator, 62(9), 57-57.
5. Dutton, W. H., Cheong, P. H., & Park, N. (2004). The social shaping of a virtual learning environment: The case of a university-wide course management system. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 2(1), 69-80.
6. Ellsworth, J. B. (2000). Surviving change: A survey of educational change models. Syracuse, NY: ERIC Clearinghouse on Information and Technology.
7. Ellis, C. (2004). Benchmarking blackboard: From champions to transformers. Retrieved March 29, 2006, from http://www.bbmatters.net/ bbmattersproject/Articles/article_item.asp?SubmitArticleID=50
8. Ely, D. P. (1990). Conditions that facilitate the implementation of educational technology innovations. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 23(1), 298-305.
9. Ely, D. P. (1999). Conditions that facilitate the implementation of educational technology innovations. Educational Technology, 39(6), 23-27.
10. Farquhar, J. D., & Surry, D. W. (1994). Adoptional analysis: An additional tool for instructional developers. Educational and Training Technology International, 31(1), 19-25.
11. Fitzgibbon, K. M., & Jones, N. (2004). Jumping the hurdles: Challenges of staff development delivered in a blended learning environment. Journal of Educational Media, 29(1), 25-35.
12. Fleming, J., & Love, M. (2003). A systemic change model for leadership, inclusion, and mentoring (SLIM). Early Childhood Education Journal, 31(1), 53.
13. Glaser, B. G. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity: Advances in the methodology of grounded theory. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
14. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
15. Hall, G., & Hord, S. (1987). Change in schools: Facilitating the process. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
16. Havelock, R., & Zlotolow, S. (1995). The change agent's guide. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
17. Herrington, J., Reeves, T. C., & Oliver, R. (2005). Online learning as information delivery: Digital myopia. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 16(4), 353-367.
18. Hutchins, H. M. (2001). Enhancing the business communication course through WebCT. Business Communications Quarterly, 64(3), 87-95.
19. Irani, T., & Telg, R. (2001). Planning for the next wave: Assessing current faculty distance education training and development needs. Journal of Applied Communications, 85(4), 7-18.
20. Joseph, R., & Reigeluth, C. M. (2005). Formative research on an early stage of the systemic change process in a small school district. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(6), 937-956.
21. Kagima, L. K., & Hausafus, C. O. (2001). Faculty: The central element in instructional technology integration. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences: From Research to Practice, 93(4), 33-36.
22. Klecker, B. M. (2002). Evaluation of electronic Blackboard enhancement of a graduate course in school counseling. Paper presented at the conference for the Mid-South Educational Research Association, held at Chattanooga, TN.
23. Massimo, V. S. (2003). Integrating the WebCT discussion feature into social work courses: An assessment focused on pedagogy and practicality. Journal of Technology in Human Services, 22(1), 49-64.
24. McCarney, J. (2004). Effective models of staff development in ICT. European Journal of Teacher Education, 27(1), 61-72.
25. Miller, D. N., George, M. P., & Fogt, J. B. (2005). Establishing and sustaining research-based practices at Centennial School: A descriptive case study of systemic change. Psychology in the Schools, 42(5), 553-567.
26. Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
27. Moersch, C. (1995). Levels of technology implementation (LoTi): A framework for measuring classroom technology use. Learning and Leading with Technology, 23(3), 40-42.
28. Moersch, C. (1996). Computer efficiency: Measuring the instructional use of technology. Learning and Leading with Technology, 24(4), 52-56.
29. Morgan, G. (2003). Faculty use of course management systems. Denver: Educause Center for Applied Research.
30. Pollack, T. A. (2003). Using a course management system to improve instruction. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Association of Small Computer Users in Education, held at Myrtle Beach, South Carolina.
31. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th edn.). New York: The Free Press.
32. Reigeluth, C. M. (1994). Introduction: The imperative for systemic change. In C. M. Reigeluth, & R. J. Garfinkle (Eds.), Systemic change in education. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
33. Reigeluth, C., & Garfinkle, R. (1994). Systemic change in education. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
34. Surry, D. W. & Ensminger, D. C. (2002, April). Perceived importance of conditions that facilitate implementation. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
35. Vessell, D. C. (2001). Comparing the WWW and WebCT to traditional methods of supporting an undergraduate psychology course: Is it effective? Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Missouri-Columbia.
36. Yaskin, D., & Everhart, D. (2002). Blackboard learning system (Release 6) product overview white paper. Retrieved March 20, 2006, from http://products.blackboard.com/cp/release6/LSR6WP.pdf
37. Yaskin, D., & Gilfus, S. (2001). Blackboard 5: Introducing the blackboard 5: Community portal system. Retrieved March 20, 2006, from http://company.blackboard.com/docs/cp/orientation/CommunityPortalWhitePaper.pdf
38. Yaskin, D., & Gilfus, S. (2002). Blackboard 5: Introducing the blackboard 5: Learning system. Retrieved March 20, 2006, from http://company.blackboard.com/docs/cp/orientation/EnterpriseLearningWhitePaper. pdf
39. Yip, M. C. W. (2004). Using WebCT to teach courses online. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(4), 497-501.
40. Zaltman, G., & Duncan, R. (1977). Strategies for planned change. New York: John Wiley and Sons.