An Experimental Study on College Teacher’s Adoption of Instructional Technology

Full Text (PDF, 187KB), PP.47-54

Views: 0 Downloads: 0


Du Chuntao 1,*

1. Computer Center, North China University of Technology, Beijing 100144, China

* Corresponding author.


Received: 20 Mar. 2011 / Revised: 12 Apr. 2011 / Accepted: 2 May 2011 / Published: 8 Jun. 2011

Index Terms

Experimental study, college teache, adoption, instructional technology


Instructional technology can make teachers do their jobs easier, better, faster and more effectively. Students can also benefit from its application. However, some college teachers do not adopt instructional technologies in their teaching as we expected. They like to teach the way they were taught as students before. Why and what factors really influence their adoption of instructional technology? This study offered a model suggestiong instructional technology adoption by college teachers depends on: the student, the teacher, the technology and the surroundings. An experiment was designed to verify the model. Samples were selected from teachers at a mid-sized university. Experimental data was collected by interviewing fifteen teachers (samples). Those interviewed represented five high-level users, five medium-level users, and five low-level users of instructional technology. Quantitative methods such as frequency counting were used to analyze and sort the data. Finally, conclusions can be drawn that different components in the model had different influential degree to the different levels of users of instructional technology.

Cite This Paper

Du Chuntao, "An Experimental Study on College Teacher's Adoption of Instructional Technology", International Journal of Modern Education and Computer Science(IJMECS), vol.3, no.3, pp.47-54, 2011. DOI:10.5815/ijmecs.2011.03.07


[1]Boettcher, J., 101 success stories of information technology in higher education, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1993.
[2]Knapper, C., “Technology and College teaching,” New directions for teaching and learning, 1988, pp. 31-46. San Francisco: Tossey-Bass.
[3]Kozma, R. B., Johnston, J., “The technological revolution comes to the classroom,” Change, 23 (1), 1991, pp. 10-23.
[4]Guskin, A. E., “Reconstructuring the role of faculty,” Change, 26 (5), 1994, pp. 16-25.
[5]Cross, K. P., “A proposal to improve teaching or what taking teaching seriously should mean,” AAHE Bulletin, 39 (9), 1986, pp. 10-11.
[6]King, A., “Making a transition from “sage on the stage” to “guide on the side.”, ” College teaching, 41, 1993, pp. 30-35.
[7]Pence, J. L., “Transforming campus culture through resource-based learning,” in D. W. Farmer and T. F. Mech (Eds.), Information literacy: Developing students as independent learners. New Directions for High Education, No. 78, 1992, pp. 113-122. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[8]American Library Association, presidential committee on information literacy: final report. Chicago, IL, American Library Association, 1992.
[9]Farmer, D. W., “Information literacy: Overcoming barriers to implementation,” in D. W. Farmer and T. F. Mech (Eds.), “Information literacy: Developing students as independent learners,” New Directions for Higher Education, No. 78, 1992, pp. 103-112. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[10]Boyer, E. “Prologue and major recommendations of Carnegie Foundation’s report on colleges,” Chronicle of Higher Education, Nov. 5, 1986, pp. 16-22.
[11]Farmer, D. W., and Mech, T. F., “Information literacy: Developing students as independent learners,” New Directions for Higher Education, No. 78, 1992, pp. 103-112, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[12]Zimmerman, B. J., Bandura, A., Martinez-Pons, M., “Self-motivation for academic attainment: The role of self-efficacy beliefs and personal goal setting,” American Educational Research Journal, 29(3), 1992, pp. 663-676.
[13]Moore, G., Crossing the chasm: Marketing and selling technology products to mainstream customers, New York: Harperbusiness, 1991.
[14]Kozma, R. B., and Johnston, J., “The technological revolution comes to the classroom,” Change, 23 (1), 1991, pp. 10-23.
[15]Seels, B., “Taxonomic Issues and the development of theory in instructional technology,” Educational Technology, 37 (1), 1997, pp. 12-21.
[16]Heinich, R., Molenda, M., and Russel, J. D., Instructional media and the new technologies of instruction (4th ed.), New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.
[17]Dick, W., and Carey, L., The Systematic Design of Instruction (2nd ed.). Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman and Company.