Content provided in partnership with
Learning About Technology and Student Affairs: Outcomes of an Online Immersion
Journal of College Student Development, Sep/Oct 2005 by Renn, Kristen A, Zeligman, Dawn M
The topics of technology in higher education and online teaching/learning have for many years received increased attention among higher education researchers. Research on student learning abounds with examples of the ways in which technology is influencing teaching and learning in higher education (e.g., Lewis, Coursol, & Khan, 2001; Twigg, 2004). Ways that computers, in particular, have changed faculty and student attitudes, behaviors, and identities have received increasing attention (e.g., Arabasz, Pirani, & Fawcett, 2003; Tapscott, 1998), and a parallel body of research has emerged on how higher education administrators are responding to these changes (e.g., Distance Learning Task Force [DLTF], 2000; Green, 2003). It seems clear that whether students earn degrees completely online, participate in a combination of face-to-face (F2F) and online courses, or take courses that are hybrid F2F/online formats, they will continue to require an array of student services (Barratt, 2001; Broughton, 2000; Schwitzer, Ancis, & Brown, 2001; WCET, 2003).
- Most Popular Articles in Reference
- The importance of understanding organizational culture
- Credit card attitudes and behaviors of college students
- What factors attract foreign direct investment?
- Libraries Need Relationship Marketing - mutual interest marketing concept, ...
- How to set performance goals: employee reviews are more than annual critiques
- More »
Recent research (Bowman & Cuyjet, 1999; Kretovics, 2003) has shown, however, that the individuals charged with providing student services in face-to-face settings-typically student affairs professionals-are not being well prepared to deal with the challenges of integrating technology and online learners into their work. Although scholars and practitioners have called for increased attention to technology in preparation programs (Baier, 1994; Bowman & Cuyjet; DLTF, 2000; Engstrom, 1997; Kretovics, 2002, 2003), the standards guiding graduate preparation program curricula (Council for the Advancement of Standards, 2003) pay relatively scant attention to technology and computer-related competencies. While many student affairs specialties have moved ahead to incorporate internet use and task-specific software into daily operations, student affairs graduate preparation programs themselves lag behind in addressing technology and the needs of online learners (Bowman & Cuyjet; Engstrom; Kretovics, 2002).
In spring 2004, we attempted to address this issue in the curriculum of a required course in a student affairs administration graduate program through a hybrid F2F/ online course designed to teach student affairs master's students about technology in higher education. The study we report here was designed to examine the experiential and learning outcomes of this intervention. We address the following questions related to the course immersion:
1. What is the experience of student affairs master's students immersed in an online course format where the focus of the instruction is technology and student affairs?
2. Does this immersion experience influence the attitudes of student affairs master's students toward online teaching, learning, and student services?
3. Does this immersion influence their self-reported skill level with regard to technology and student affairs?
STUDY CONTEXT AND METHOD
Site and Sample
Data for the study were generated throughout and immediately following a one-semester course that is second in a pair of required courses that introduce first-year students in Student Affairs Administration (SAA) to the profession. The course took place at a public research extensive institution with an SAA master's program that draws a national student body and selects about half of applicants annually. The 19 students enrolled in spring 2004 participated in the study. It is important to note that the course instructors are also the co-authors of this article, the implications of which we discuss below.
The course was taught in three loosely linked units of five weeks each: assessment, technology, and multicultural education in student affairs. The assessment and multicultural units were taught in traditional classroom format, with minimal integration of technology or course software. During the first five F2F weeks of the course, instructors provided tutorials on technology-related skills (e.g., creating newsletters, PowerPoint presentations, and personal web pages). The middle unit-on technology and student affairs-was taught entirely online using the commercial courseware to which the university subscribes.
Data Collection
Data for the study consist of pre-, midsemester, and post-surveys of student attitudes and skills in relation to technology and student affairs, transcripts of asynchronous online discussion, and student assignments (e.g., case study solutions, reflective essays, and sample projects). Data relevant to this article are the student surveys; scaled survey items and possible responses are included in Table 1. Data analyses included descriptive statistics and analyses of variance generated from Likert-scaled items on the surveys, as well as thematic analyses (see Boyatzis, 1998) of open-ended survey responses.
Limitations
Our study is limited in two ways that bear noting. We (the authors) were instructors in the course under investigation, and we did not intend at the outset to study the teaching/ learning experience in the course. After beginning the online course immersion, we became interested in better understanding the phenomenon of online teaching/learning in this context. A consequent limitation is that we did not design the course assignments, surveys, and online discussions with the purpose of data collection in mind; an advantage is that data more accurately represent a "naturalistic" approach to the scholarship of teaching-students did not move through the course with the idea that everything they wrote or uploaded would become data. (We obtained human subjects permission from our institution, all data have been reviewed by the students who posted them, and affirmative consent was obtained for all data used in study.) Another limitation to note is the nature of the sample. One graduate course at one institution cannot represent the universe of higher education and student affairs master's programs. In many ways, this sample reflects the student affairs profession (majority white, majority female), but the particularities of the group prevent simple generalizations beyond the sample.
Find Research Guides for:
Find Featured Titles for: Autos
Most Popular Articles in Reference
- The importance of understanding organizational culture
- Credit card attitudes and behaviors of college students
- What factors attract foreign direct investment?
- Libraries Need Relationship Marketing - mutual interest marketing concept, ...
- How to set performance goals: employee reviews are more than annual critiques
- More »