Obstacles and supports related to the use of educational technologies: The role of technological expertise, gender, and age

Journal of Computing in Higher Education

Volumn 23, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 38-59

  Lane, Cara A ^a   Lyle III, Henry F ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

Educational technology adoption; Obstacles to technology use; Supports for technology use; Technological expertise; User traits

Indexed keywords

EID: 84874019282     PISSN: 10421726     EISSN: 18671233     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s12528-010-9034-3     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Anderson, T., Varnhagen, S., & Campbell, K. (1998). Faculty adoption of teaching and learning technologies: Contrasting earlier adopters and mainstream faculty. The Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 28, 71-98.
2. Chandler, D. (2000). Technological or media determinism. Retrieved from http://www. aber. ac. uk/media/Documents/tecdet/tecdet. htm.
3. Hagner, P. R., & Schneebeck, C. A. (2001). Engaging the faculty. In C. A. Barone & P. R. Hagner (Eds.), Technology-enhanced teaching and learning: Leading and supporting the transformation on your campus (pp. 1-12). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
4. Lane, C. A., & Lyle, H. (2009). The differing technology support needs of beginner and expert users: Survey findings from the University of Washington. ED-MEDIA 2009 World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications.
5. Lane, C. A., Lyle, H., Fournier, J., & Connell, C. (2009). Learning and scholarly technologies at the University of Washington: Report on the 2008 faculty, teaching assistant, and student surveys. Retrieved from (http://www. washington. edu/lst/research_development/research_projects/LSTsurvey. html).
6. Lane, C. A., & Yamashiro, G. (2006). Educational technology at the University of Washington: Report on the 2005 instructor and student surveys. Retrieved from http://catalyst. washington. edu/research_development/papers/2006/edtech_2005report. html.
7. Leggett, W. P., & Persichitte, K. A. (1998). Blood, sweat, and tears: 50 years of technology implementation obstacles. Tech Trends, 43(3), 33-36.
8. Lofstrom, E., & Nevgi, A. (2007). From strategic planning to meaningful learning: Diverse perspectives on the development of web-based teaching and learning in higher education. British Journal of Educational Technologies, 38, 312-324.
9. Miller, J. W., Martineau, L. P., & Clark, R. C. (2000). Technology infusion and higher education: Changing teaching and learning. Innovative Higher Education, 24(3), 227-241.
10. Muilenburg, L., & Berge, Z. L. (2001). Barriers to distance education: A factor-analytic study. The American Journal of Distance Education, 15(2), 7-22.
11. Oblinger, D., & Oblinger, J. (2005). Is it age or IT: First steps toward understanding the net generation. In D. Oblinger & J. Oblinger (Eds.), Educating the Net Generation (pp. 2. 1-2. 20). Washington, DC: EDUCAUSE E-book.
12. Pajo, K., & Wallace, C. (2001). Barriers to the uptake of web-based technology by university teachers. The Journal of Distance Education, 16, 70-84.
13. Peluchette, J. V., & Rust, K. A. (2005). Technology use in the classroom: Preferences of management faculty members. Journal of Education for Business, 80(4), 200-205.
14. Perkins, D. N. (1985). The fingertip effect: How information processing technology shapes thinking. Educational Researcher, 14(7), 11-17.
15. Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York: The Free Press.
16. Rogers, D. L. (2000a). A paradigm shift: Technology integration for higher education in the new millennium. Educational Technology Review, 33(13), 19-27.
17. Rogers, P. (2000b). Barriers to adopting emerging technologies in education. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 22(4), 455-472.
18. Rousseau, G. K., & Rogers, W. A. (1998). Computer usage patterns of university faculty members across the life span. Computers in Human Behavior, 14(3), 417-428.
19. Sahin, I., & Thompson, A. (2007). Analysis of factors that influence faculty members' technology adoption level. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 15(2), 167-190.
20. Sax, L. (2000). An overview of the 1998-99 faculty norms. Graduate School of Education and Information Studies at UCLA.
21. Spodark, E. (2003). Five obstacles to technology integration at a small Liberal Arts college. THE Journal, 30(3), 14-24.
22. Spotts, T. (1999). Discriminating factors in faculty use of instructional technology in higher education. Educational Technology & Society, 2(4), 92-99.
23. Spotts, T., Bowman, M., & Mertz, C. (1997). Gender and use of instructional technologies: A study of university faculty. Higher Education, 34, 421-436.
24. Surry, D. W., & Land, S. M. (2000). Strategies for motivating higher education faculty to use technology. Innovations in Education and Training International, 37, 145-153.
25. Vodanovich, S. J., & Piotrowski, C. (2005). Faculty attitudes towards web-based instruction: Limited use and obstacles to implementation. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 33(3), 309-318.
26. Zhou, G., & Xu, J. (2007). Adoption of educational technology: How does gender matter? International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 19, 140-153.