Skip to main content
Log in

Understanding the experiences of instructors as they adopt a course management system

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Educational Technology Research and Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this study, we used qualitative methods to help us better understand the experiences of instructors as they are persuaded to adopt a course management system and integrate it into their teaching. We discuss several patterns explaining how instructors implemented Blackboard, a CMS, by experimenting with individual features, facing both technical and integration challenges, and attempting to adapt Blackboard features to match their goals and practices. We also give explanations for why instructors either (a) embraced the tool and grew more dependent on it, (b) reduced their use of the tool to only some features, or (c) discontinued the tool and actively sought replacement options. In this paper we explain why instructors fell into any one of these three areas and what implications this may have for training and support needs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ali, A. (2003). Faculty adoption of technology: Training comes first. Educational Technology, 43(2), 51–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnone, M. (2002). Course-management outfits still seek elusive profits. The Chronicle of Higher Education, July 12, 2002.

  • Bennett, J., & Bennett, L. (2003). A review of factors that influence the diffusion of innovation when structuring a faculty training program. Internet and Higher Education, 6(1), 53–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dexter, R. R. (2005). Instructional leadership for systemic change: The story of San Diego’s reform. School Administrator, 62(9), 57–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dutton, W. H., Cheong, P. H., & Park, N. (2004). The social shaping of a virtual learning environment: The case of a university-wide course management system. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 2(1), 69–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellsworth, J. B. (2000). Surviving change: A survey of educational change models. Syracuse, NY: ERIC Clearinghouse on Information and Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, C. (2004). Benchmarking blackboard: From champions to transformers. Retrieved March 29, 2006, from http://www.bbmatters.net/bbmattersproject/Articles/article_item.asp?SubmitArticleID=50

  • Ely, D. P. (1990). Conditions that facilitate the implementation of educational technology innovations. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 23(2), 298–305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ely, D. P. (1999). Conditions that facilitate the implementation of educational technology innovations. Educational Technology, 39(6), 23–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farquhar, J. D., & Surry, D. W. (1994). Adoptional analysis: An additional tool for instructional developers. Educational and Training Technology International, 31(1), 19–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzgibbon, K. M., & Jones, N. (2004). Jumping the hurdles: Challenges of staff development delivered in a blended learning environment. Journal of Educational Media, 29(1), 25–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleming, J., & Love, M. (2003). A systemic change model for leadership, inclusion, and mentoring (SLIM). Early Childhood Education Journal, 31(1), 53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity: Advances in the methodology of grounded theory. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, G., & Hord, S. (1987). Change in schools: Facilitating the process. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Havelock, R., & Zlotolow, S. (1995). The change agent’s guide. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrington, J., Reeves, T. C., & Oliver, R. (2005). Online learning as information delivery: Digital myopia. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 16(4), 353–367.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchins, H. M. (2001). Enhancing the business communication course through WebCT. Business Communications Quarterly, 64(3), 87–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Irani, T., & Telg, R. (2001). Planning for the next wave: Assessing current faculty distance education training and development needs. Journal of Applied Communications, 85(4), 7–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joseph, R., & Reigeluth, C. M. (2005). Formative research on an early stage of the systemic change process in a small school district. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(6), 937–956.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kagima, L. K., & Hausafus, C. O. (2001). Faculty: The central element in instructional technology integration. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences: From Research to Practice, 93(4), 33–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klecker, B. M. (2002). Evaluation of electronic Blackboard enhancement of a graduate course in school counseling. Paper presented at the conference for the Mid-South Educational Research Association, held at Chattanooga, TN.

  • Massimo, V. S. (2003). Integrating the WebCT discussion feature into social work courses: An assessment focused on pedagogy and practicality. Journal of Technology in Human Services, 22(1), 49–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCarney, J. (2004). Effective models of staff development in ICT. European Journal of Teacher Education, 27(1), 61–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D. N., George, M. P., & Fogt, J. B. (2005). Establishing and sustaining research-based practices at Centennial School: A descriptive case study of systemic change. Psychology in the Schools, 42(5), 553–567.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moersch, C. (1995). Levels of technology implementation (LoTi): A framework for measuring classroom technology use. Learning and Leading with Technology, 23(3), 40–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moersch, C. (1996). Computer efficiency: Measuring the instructional use of technology. Learning and Leading with Technology, 24(4), 52–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, G. (2003). Faculty use of course management systems. Denver: Educause Center for Applied Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollack, T. A. (2003). Using a course management system to improve instruction. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Association of Small Computer Users in Education, held at Myrtle Beach, South Carolina.

  • Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th edn.). New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reigeluth, C. M. (1994). Introduction: The imperative for systemic change. In C. M. Reigeluth, & R. J. Garfinkle (Eds.), Systemic change in education. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reigeluth, C., & Garfinkle, R. (1994). Systemic change in education. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Surry, D. W. & Ensminger, D. C. (2002, April). Perceived importance of conditions that facilitate implementation. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.

  • Vessell, D. C. (2001). Comparing the WWW and WebCT to traditional methods of supporting an undergraduate psychology course: Is it effective? Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Missouri-Columbia.

  • Yaskin, D., & Everhart, D. (2002). Blackboard learning system (Release 6) product overview white paper. Retrieved March 20, 2006, from http://products.blackboard.com/cp/release6/LSR6WP.pdf

  • Yaskin, D., & Gilfus, S. (2001). Blackboard 5: Introducing the blackboard 5: Community portal system. Retrieved March 20, 2006, from http://company.blackboard.com/docs/cp/orientation/CommunityPortalWhitePaper.pdf

  • Yaskin, D., & Gilfus, S. (2002). Blackboard 5: Introducing the blackboard 5: Learning system. Retrieved March 20, 2006, from http://company.blackboard.com/docs/cp/orientation/EnterpriseLearningWhitePaper.pdf

  • Yip, M. C. W. (2004). Using WebCT to teach courses online. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(4), 497–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zaltman, G., & Duncan, R. (1977). Strategies for planned change. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Richard E. West.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

West, R.E., Waddoups, G. & Graham, C.R. Understanding the experiences of instructors as they adopt a course management system. Education Tech Research Dev 55, 1–26 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-006-9018-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-006-9018-1

Keywords

Navigation