Using Rogers’ theory to interpret instructional computer use by COE faculty

Journal of Research on Technology in Education

Volumn 39, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 81-104

  Sahin, Ismail ^a   Thompson, Ann ^b  

^a SELCUK UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

^b IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

College of education; Computer; Diffusion of innovations; Instruction

Indexed keywords

EID: 84865033754     PISSN: 15391523     EISSN: 19450818     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/15391523.2006.10782474     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Anderson, T., Yarnhagen, S., & Campbell, K. (1998). Faculty adoption of teaching and learning technologies: Contrasting earlier adopters and main-stream faculty. The Canadian Journal of Higher Education 28(23), 71-78.
2. Asan, A. (2002). Preservice teachers use of technology to create instructional materials: A school-college partnership. Journal of information Technology for Teacher Education 11(2), 217-232.
3. Ashley, D.W. (1996). A canonical correlation procedure for spreadsheets. Annual meeting of the Decision Sciences Institute. Retrieved February 25, 2005, from http://www.sunflower.com/dashley/Canon.html
4. Aust, R., Newberry, B., O’Brien, J., & Thomas, J. (2005). Learning generation: Fostering innovation with tomorrow’s teachers and technology. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(2), 167-196.
5. Beisser, S. (2000). Technology mentorships in higher education: An optimal match for expanding educational computing skills. In C. Crawford, D. A. Willis, R. Carlsen, I. Gibson, K. McFerrin, J. Price, R. Weber, (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 441-447). Chesapeake, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.
6. Blankenship, S. E. (1998). Factors related to computer use by teachers in classroom instruction (Doctoral Dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 1998), ProQuest DigitalDissertations. (UMI No. AAT 9831651).
7. Braak, J.V. (2001). Individual characteristics influencing teachers’ class use of computers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 25(2), 141-157.
8. Cagle, A.B., & Hornik, S. (2001). Faculty development and educational technology. T.H.E. Journal 29(3), 92-96.
9. Carter, C. W. (1998). An assessment of the status of the diffusion and adoption of computer-based technology in Appalachian College Association colleges and universities (Doctoral Dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 1998). ProQuest DigitalDissertations. (UMI No. AAT 9905169).
10. Casmar S.P. (2001). The adoption of computer technology by faculty in a college of education: an analysis of administrative planning issues (Doctoral dissertation, Washington State University, 2001). ProQuest DigitalDissertations. (UMI No. AAT 3025011).
11. Cavanaugh, C. (2002). Faculty development in educational technology. In C. Crawford, D. A. Willis, R. Carlsen, I. Gibson, K. McFerrin, J. Price, & R. Weber, (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 621-622). Chesapeake, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.
12. Chuang, H., Thompson, A., & Schmidt, D. (2003). Issues and barriers to advanced faculty use of technology In C. Crawford, D. A. Willis, R. Carlsen, I. Gibson, K. McFerrin, J. Price, R. Weber, (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 3449-3452). Chesapeake, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.
13. Dexter, S., Anderson, R. E., & Ronnkvist, A. M. (2002). Quality technology support: What is it? Who has it? and What difference does it make? Journal of Educational Computing Research 26(3), 265-285.
14. Fisher, C. N. (2002). Walking the talk: Faculty development and technology integration (Doctoral dissertation, The University of New Mexico, 2002). ProQuest DigitalDissertations. (UMI No. AAT 3056903).
15. Gardner, B. & Clarke, N. (2001). Helping faculty make technology a part of the curriculum. SIGUCCS Proceedings, 44-48. New York: Association for Computing Machinery.
16. Hagenson, L., & Castle, D. (2003). The integration of technology into teaching by university college of education faculty. In C. Crawford, D. A. Willis, R. Carlsen, I. Gibson, K. McFerrin, J. Price, & R. Weber, (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 947-952). Chesapeake, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.
17. Hoerup, S. L. (2001). Diffusion of an innovation: computer technology integration and the role of collaboration (Doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 2001). ProQuest DigitalDissertations. (UMI No. AAT 3031436).
18. Howland, J., & Wedman, J. (2004). A process model for faculty development: Individualizing technology learning. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 12(2), 239-264.
19. Isleem, M I. (2003). Relationships of selected factors and the level of computer use for instructional purposes by technology education teachers in Ohio public schools: a statewide survey (Doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University, 2002). ProQuest DigitalDissertations. (UMI No. AAT 3124087).
20. Jenson, J., Lewis, B., & Smith, R. (2002). No one way: Working models for teachers’ professional development. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education 10(A), 481-496.
21. Less, K. H. (2003). Faculty adoption of computer technology for instruction in the North Carolina Community College System (Doctoral dissertation, East Tennessee State University, 2003). ProQuest DigitalDissertations. (UMI No. AAT 3097072).
22. Marquardt, M. J., & Kearsley, G. (1999). Technology-based learning: Maximizing human performance and corporate success. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
23. McKenzie, J. (2001). How teacher learn technology best. From Now On: The Educational Technology Journal, 10(6). Retrieved March 01, 2005, from http://www.fno.org/mar01/howlearn.html
24. Medlin, B.D. (2001). The factors that may influence a faculty member’s decision to adopt electronic technologies in instruction (Doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 2001). ProQuest DigitalDis-sertations. (UMI No. AAT 3095210).
25. Mertler, C. A., & Vannatta, R. A. (2002). Advanced and multivariate statistical methods: Practical applications and interpretation (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Pyrczak.
26. Odabasi, H. F. (2000). Faculty use of technological resources in Turkey. Innovations in Education and Training International 37(2), 103-107.
27. Odabasi, H. F. (2003). Faculty point of view on faculty development. Hacettepe Universitesi Egitim Fakultesi Dergisi 24, 86-89.
28. Parisot, A. H. (1995). Technology and teaching: The adoption and diffusion of technological innovations by a community college faculty (Doctoral dissertation, Montana State University, 1995). ProQuest DigitalDissertations. (UMI No. AAT 9542260).
29. Parisot, A. H. (1997). Distance education as a catalyst for changing teaching in the community college: Implications for institutional policy. New Directions for Community Colleges, 99, 5-13.
30. Pope, M., Hare, D., & Howard, E. (2002). Technology integration: Closing the gap between what preservice teachers are taught to do and what they can do. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education 10(2), 191-203.
31. Quick, D., & Davies, T. G. (1999). Community college faculty development: Bringing technology into instruction. Community College Journal of Research and Practice 23(7), 641-653.
32. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Free Press.
33. Rogers, E. M., Geoghehan, W. H., Marcus, J., & Johnson, L. (1996). In response: Four viewpoints. Change 28(2), 29-31.
34. Sahin, I., & Thompson, A. (in press). Understanding faculty use of technology with the Learning/Adoption Trajectory Model. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education.
35. Schrum, L., Skeele, R., & Grant, M. (2002). One college of educations effort to infuse technology: A systemic approach to revisioning teaching and learning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 35(2), 256-271.
36. Seemann, K. (2003). Basic principles in holistic technology education. Journal of Technology Education, 14(2), 28-39.
37. Smith, S. J., & O’Bannon, B. (1999). Faculty members infusing technology across teacher education: A mentorship model. Teacher Education and Special Education, 22(2), 123-135.
38. Spotts, T.H. (1999). Discriminating factors in faculty use of instructional technology in higher education. Educational Technology & Society, 2(4), 92-99.
39. Surendra, S. S. (2001). Acceptance of Web technology-based education by professors and administrators of a college of applied arts and technology in Ontario (Doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto, 2001). ProQuest DigitalDissertations. (UMI No. AAT NQ58603).
40. The Campus Computing Project. (2001). The 2001 national survey of information technology in U.S. higher education. Encino, CA: Green, K. C.
41. Yaghi, H. M. & Ghaith, G. M. (2002). Correlates of computing confidence among teachers in an international setting. Computers in the Schools, 19(1/2), 81-94.
42. Yildirim, S. (2000). Effects of an educational computing course on preservice and inservice teachers: A discussion and analysis of attitudes and use. Journal of Research on Computing in Education 32(4), 479-495.
43. Zhao, Y., & Cziko, G. A. (2001). Teacher adoption of technology: A perceptual-control-theory perspective. Technology and Teacher Education 9(1), 5-30.