Aarhus University Seal

Drivers for effective redesign of courses with technology

Research output: Contribution to conferenceConference abstract for conferenceCommunication

In the context of a large-scale university-wide initiative to enhance learning with technology at Aarhus University 2018–2020, the qualitative midway evaluation and analysis of 21 purposefully sampled cases among 440 course redesigns identified a series of widespread barriers and drivers among the educators for an effective redesign of courses with educational technology (see Andersen et al., 2021). The identified barriers and drivers provide valuable insight into the educators’ perspective on educational technology and pointers to how senior management can support a more sustainable educational development practice. The 21 cases were sampled from a total of 440 self-reported, organised, or identified redesigns. Redesigns that were not fully completed, insignificant in the scale of technology or effects, or did not comply with the institutional purposes of integrating technology were excluded. From the remaining sample, 21 diverse high-impact cases were selected that collectively represented the various overarching subject areas of the university, modalities, effects and purposes, educational levels, and technologies (Patton, 2015). The 21 cases and their underlying development process were analysed and described in-depth using interviews on design, drivers, and barriers with the responsible educators, and observation of their online learning design and review of course evaluations. The identified barriers and drivers were grouped and analysed according to Ertmer’s (1999) distinction between educator intrinsic and extrinsic barriers and their origin (i.e., institutional/administrative, course-related, or educational support-related). 17 first-order barriers and eight first-order drivers related to conditions external to the individual educator were identified. The first-order drivers included funding, time for development, support from management, technical support, pedagogical support, media production support, and support from peers, whereas the first-order barriers included labor-intensive updates of course material and other time commitments, lack of coordination or authority to redesign courses, limited access to relevant technology, lack of support for knowledge sharing, and limited managerial support. 11 second-order barriers and nine second-order drivers related to the educator’s territory were identified. The second-order drivers included motivation, technical skills, teaching awareness, teacher training, and positive feedback from students, whereas the second-order barriers included lack of pedagogical know-how on ICED 2022 Conference Sustainable Educational Development designing and delivering teaching with technology, peer buy-in, low self-efficacy related to (teaching with) technology, and limited access to tutorials. The paper argues that identifying first and second-order drivers and barriers seen from the educators’ perspective provides a powerful basis for establishing an effective and potentially also more durable redesign of courses with educational technology.
Original languageEnglish
Publication year1 May 2022
Number of pages2
Publication statusPublished - 1 May 2022
EventICED 2022 - International Consortium for Educational Development - Aarhus, Denmark
Duration: 31 May 20223 Jun 2022

Conference

ConferenceICED 2022 - International Consortium for Educational Development
CountryDenmark
CityAarhus
Period31/05/202203/06/2022

    Research areas

  • educational it, educational technology, technology-enhanced learning

See relations at Aarhus University Citationformats

ID: 268965180