Technology Utilization among Graduate Assistants and Faculty

Lindsay Ann Parvin, Ashley Ryals, Dr. Paige Vitulli, & Dr. John StrangeCollege of Education

Literature Review

Changing Face of EducationToday’s students are evolving in that they are

able to access a wide array of material and are behaviorally different from any other

generation. Digital Natives have spent their lives

surrounded by the media of the Digital Age—first it was video games, then cell phones, and finally Internet access. Such students are said to be “native speakers” of those digital languages.The challenge exists for instructors to make

material relevant and engaging. Source: (Prensky, 2001).

Shift in Technology “The modern academic workplace is characterized

by student diversity, new technologies, changing societal expectations, a shift in emphasis toward the learner, expanding faculty work loads, and a new labor market for faculty,” which indicates a major shift in higher education.

With the incorporation of virtual education into degree programs, faculty will be expected to use technology-mediated teaching and learning strategies. At many institutions, faculty are encouraged to participate in curricular development that draws on delivery or learning options made available through new technologies.

Source: (Austin, 2002).

“New” Technologies Web 2.0 encompasses web-based technologies that allow for a

“read/write” approach to the web and enables the learner to be both a consumer and producer of content and services, thereby enhancing opportunities for collaboration and the generation of new knowledge (Buchan, 2007).

Based on constructivist learning theory—that learning is made more effective when it is social, engaged, and relevant (relating to students’ concerns); provides formative assessment; and offers learners multiple paths (Brown, 2007).

Characteristics of Web 1.0 and Web 2.0Web 1.0 Web 2.0

Publishing ParticipationContent management, presentation Content reappropriation (e.g., “mashups”)

Individual, are scale web sites Blogs, wikisDirectories TaggingUsers observe, “listen to” web sites Users add value, co-createControl CooperationExample: Encyclopedia Britannica Example: Wikipedia

Source: (Brown, 2007. Retrieved from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/erm0725.pdf).

Collaboration among Faculty and Graduate Assistants Research has shown that faculty-graduate student (F-

GS) relationships play an important role in shaping graduate students’ research training, their professional identity, and career dedication, in addition to providing socialization into academe.

Mutual support and comprehensive relationships (those extending beyond the academic environment) are two of the most essential factors contributing to successful graduate student mentoring.

The roles and responsibilities associated with F-GS relationships have been documented to be broadly perceived, as faculty can serve as advisors, instructors, employers, and/or agents of socialization.

Source: (Lechuga, 2011).

Current Practices Graduate assistants serve as mentors and post-

training support to faculty. Attend introductory training sessions on technology

components to aid in the mentoring of faculty who also receive training.

Graduate assistants serve as mentors to faculty through a program requiring their participation in a technology course as a condition of their assistanceship. Assistants are paired with professors on the basis of

their skills, experience, and schedules and undergo 40 hours of training to support their mentoring relationship with faculty members.

Source: (Smith & O’Bannon, 1999).

Data Collection

USA Faculty Case Studies Four professors in the Department of

Leadership and Teacher Education (LTE) were interviewed for the case studies. Dr. David Gray, Associate Professor

Instructional Leadership and Planning Dr. Harold Dodge, Associate Professor

and LTE Chairman Instructional Leadership and Planning

Dr. Susan Santoli, Associate Professor Social Studies Education

Dr. Rebecca Giles, Professor Early Childhood Education

Source: (http://qrstuff.com)

USA Faculty Case Studies, cnt’d. Two professors remarked that time was an issue in their utilization of technology. One professor reported using social media, mainly for nonacademic purposes. Cited as most promising in the field of higher education, professors listed Macbooks, video

streaming sites (YouTube, TeacherTube, etc.), iPads, and laptops. When seeking help with technology, 3 professors reported going to other faculty and

colleagues first. The technology components with which the professors reported seeking the most help from

graduate students included Sakai and PowerPoint. All 4 professors explained that the current relationship between graduate assistants and

faculty could be improved upon. Cited as potential benefits from the relationships between faculty and graduate assistants, the

professors reported graduate assistants as being more knowledgeable about technology. To be incorporated as part of a mentoring program for graduate assistants, two professors

cited a training experience. As factors and trends considered the driving force in educational technology adoption, the

professors named greater accessibility, cost, and efficiency. As barriers to university adoption of new technology, the professors listed possible social

media misuse and cost. Cited as their role in preparing graduate assistants for future career endeavors, the professors

mentioned helping students with research, writing, and networking. To improve upon the current faculty-graduate assistant relationship, the professors suggested

ensuring faculty and assistants are abreast of each person’s interests, mentoring assistants with research, and making faculty aware of students’ competencies and strengths.

USA Graduate Assistant Survey Survey was

disseminated to graduate students in the College of Education; the 7 respondents represent the graduate programs in counseling and exercise science, with a mean age of 27.5 years. Majority were

females (71.4%) enrolled in graduate school at USA for 3-4 semesters (42.9%) who have been working as graduate assistants for 1-2 semesters, assigned to 1-2 professors (57.1%).

Source: (http://www.surveymonkey.com)

USA Graduate Assistant Survey, cnt’d. Meeting the demands of the shift in technology has not been seen as difficult. (5

participants) There does not exist an established, effective mentoring program between graduate

assistants and faculty (4 participants), with shortage of time and guidance being deterring factors.

Technologies listed as promising in the field of higher education included online academic journals, smart phones, eBooks, tablets, and project management programs (Dropbox, Basecamp, etc.).

Technological tools reported in use within the department that are expected to remain in use within five years included SMART boards (interactive white boards), handheld devices, Dropbox, Sakai (course management software), email, word processing software, presentation software, computers, and printers.

Technology components cited as those with which faculty most often seek help included Sakai (course management program), Facetime, Microsoft Office Suite, online academic journal research.

Benefits listed as perceived in the relationships between faculty and graduate assistants included more comfort to the difficulties in technical usage, technology integration, and sharing of new information.

To improve upon the collaboration between faculty and graduate assistants, participants cited additional time/patience, regular meetings, rotating mentorships, and additional interaction/communication.

Discussion

Recommendations To more appropriately use Information and Communication Technology (ICT)

tools in higher education, such tools must be infused into daily activities for teaching and learning, e.g. as more than for administrative and research purposes.

Faculty must be helped to see the perceived ease of use and usefulness of ICT tools in their teaching practices, as faculty who are not confident in their ability or competence to handle ICT tools are reluctant to integrate them into their teaching practices.

Organization support, leadership, effective training, and development programs emerge as factors of faculty willingness to adopt various ICT tools into their instruction. Organization support: Administration should support and encouraged the faculty by

removing barriers to technology adoption. Leadership: Leaders must think about keeping universities and faculty well-

informed and trained in the effective use of technology for educational purposes. Training and development: Involve all stakeholders (including students); extend

resources to the continuous process of professional development. Resources: Provide faculty with relevant and current technological tools and best

practices; instructional design support personnel and timely assistance; and funding to support faculty adoption of ICT tools.

Source: (Keengwe, Kidd, & Kyei-Blankson, 2008).

Conclusion There needs to be further research into what

other universities are doing to help ease the strain of today’s shift in technology.

Our current survey for graduate assistants is still open, and a survey for faculty adapted from the case study questions and graduate assistant survey has been created to study the needs of both professors and graduate assistants. By opening the surveys to faculty and graduate

assistants at other universities, more definitive ways to help foster the collaboration process between faculty and graduate assistants can be developed in the utilization of today’s new technology.

Additional Materials

Please, take our faculty survey:

Follow our journey on the blog:

The iSchool Initiative:

Source: (http://qrstuff.com)

Scan the QR codes with your smart phone or device to be directed to the links.

http://behindthedoorsofacademiasouthalabama.blogspot.com/

References

Austin, A. E. (2002). Preparing the next generation of faculty: Graduate School as Socialization to the academic career. The Journal of Higher Education, 73 (1).

Brown, M. (2007). Mashing up the once and future CMS. Educase Review, 42(2).

Buchan, J. (2007). Web 2.0: The dawning of the Interaction Age. Retrieved from http://csusap.csu.edu.au/~jbuchan/documents/Web%202.0_theDawning_of_the_interaction_age.pdf

Keengwe, J. Kidd, T., & Kyei-Blankson, L. (2008). Faculty and technology: Implications for faculty training and technology leadership. Journal of Science and Educational Technology, 18, p. 23-28. doi: 10.1007/s10956-008-9126-2

Lechuga, V. M. (2011). Faculty-graduate student mentoring relationships: Mentors’ perceived roles and responsibilities. Higher Education, 62, p. 757-771. doi: 10.1007/s10734-011-9416-0

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5). Smith, S. J. & O’Bannon, B. (1999). Faculty members infusing technology

across teacher education: A mentorship model. Teacher Education and Special Education: The Journal of the Teacher Education Division of the Council for Exceptional Children, 22(123). doi: 10.1177/088840649902200206