LibermanLEDU7001-8

Faculty Participation and Interest in Faculty Development Programs

Leila Liberman
Northcentral University
May 2015

LibermanLEDU7001-8
Faculty Participation and Interest in Faculty Development Programs
Faculty development is defined as ongoing professional development for
educators at all levels in education and is offered by the employer in many settings
(Wikipedia, 2013). This is the era in which the digital native students are entering the
educational world, both primary and higher educational. Faculty must be trained to
provide engaged and supportive learning environments to promote learning. Moore and
Kearsley (2012) discuss three platforms for a faculty member to secure a professional
development program; (1) Face-to-face (f2f) learning is held in a formal classroom
setting, (2) Online learning is held over Web 2.0 in a digital fashion by many possible
forms of technologic delivery, and (3) blended learning, where both f2f and online
learning are melded together to create a positive learning program.
Face-to-face learning, traditional classroom courses, are fabricated by one
instructor who needs to complete all the research and perform the presentations
(Liberman, 2011). There is more autonomy in course development. Instructors not fluent
in multiple languages will have problems when considering the non-English speaking
student (Nagar, 2010). A DE administrator, compared to a traditional classroom director,
must have more effective group management skills to guarantee a well-planned DE
course (Liberman, 2011).
A DE course requires significantly more planning than traditional classroom
courses (Liberman, 2011). Consideration from day one to the end of the class must be
completely thought out (Liberman, 2011). There are many specialized persons involved
in the course development and organization of a DE course thus, high labour
responsibility (Peters, 2000 p, 114). Time constraints and availabilities of each

LibermanLEDU7001-8
specialist must be considered because everyone works on their own time schedule
(Liberman, 2011). Dependency on multiple specialists will make this disadvantageous,
thus the responsibility of the administrator to have this coordinated (Liberman, 2011).
Blending learning is the combination of asynchronous and synchronous
delivery methods. This type of learning involves on site classroom learning combined
with Web 2.0 learning. In this form of learning, the faculty is teaching in their known
comfortable platform as well as embracing the use of technology (Moore & Kearsley,
2012).
Faculty have many different perspectives when considering the need for
any form of support to teach online. There are three levels of support; (1) initial training,
(2) technology training, and (3) continued support. Helen Keller said, Security is mostly
a superstition. It does not exist in nature, nor do the children of men as a whole
experience it. Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. Life is
either a daring adventure, or nothing. Similarly, faculty will be faced with challenges
associated with their digital technology knowledge, willingness to embrace new ideas,
and understanding the need for community within the online arena.
The purpose of this paper is to examine how faculty development
programs are offered, how faculty perspectives relate to the support they receive, and
how faculty deal with the challenges of development programs. A review of current
literature will support and explain the importance of ongoing advanced faculty
development programs associated with online teaching and learning.
Type of Faculty Development Programs

LibermanLEDU7001-8
Face-to-Face Faculty Development Programs
The fas-paced digital life style affects everyone in every aspect of life. Jerome
Isaac Friedman states, While it was a very interesting period in my life, I was happy to
get back to more direct contact with students in the classroom and in my research
projects. This statement can be related to f-2-f faculty development programs. Herman
(2012) says, faculty most strongly preferred workshops and individual consultations
with faculty development staff as modes of training (p. 96). Elliott, Rhoades, Jackson,
and Mandernach, (2015) observed that an institution which taught mainly f-2-f was
embracing online teaching and learning and saw the need for the initial training initiative
to be conducted as synchronous workshops. Adnan and Boz (2015) state that informal
learning environments that are in a structured f-2-f format are offered at many higher
educational facilities.
Online Faculty Development Programs
Elliot Masie said, We need to bring learning to people instead of people to
learning. His words speak volumes to teaching and learning online as well as
accessibility. By offering online faculty development courses, online learning will
offer opportunities for faculty to attend courses on their schedule (Lowenthal, 2008).
Lowenthal (2008) states directly that online learning has been the main platform for
training faculty in the use of digital technology. The flexible learning opportunity
created by advances in online technologies has been considered as a promising
delivery method for higher education institutions (Adnan & Boz. 2015, p. 24). Elliott
et al. (2015) write, modern interactive technologies (i.e., video conferencing,
webinars, etc.) allow for synchronous interaction and discussion of geographically-

LibermanLEDU7001-8
dispersed faculty (p. 165). Likewise, the creation and use of online learning units
for faculty to begin to systemize faculty development and minimize individual
technical staff time needed to support the faculty (Fetters & Duby, 2011, p. 83).
Herman (2012) reviews quality assurance of online classes and states that professional
development associated with online teaching and learning is one component of the
delivery process. The most successful programs are flexible and allow faculty to
complete development activities at their own pace and schedule (Elliott et al., 2015,
p. 165).
Blended Faculty Development Programs
One approach to teacher professional development is to build virtual learning
communities, relying on more accessible and functional Internet-based resources that
allow participation from colleagues off-site, both synchronously and asynchronously
(Roth, 2014, p. 211). Adnan and Boz (2015) study a university in Turkey where online
educators must participate in a faculty development program which combines
synchronous and asynchronous technologies prior to authorization to teach a course
online. Herman (2012) suggests that the strongest form of faculty development, for the
online instructor, is through self-teaching courses (asynchronous) and peer mentoring (f2-f).
Faculty Perceptions on Support Needed
Initial Training
In order for faculty to present interactive and engaging online course, they must
first have such courses modeled for them in their own development. Adnan and Boz
(2015) conducted a study supporting faculty development training which helps instructors

LibermanLEDU7001-8
produce and understand online course preparation and implementation. Initial online
professional development courses offer faculty members confidence and teaching
methods (Baran and Correia, 2014). Fetters and Duby (2011) support initial training with
technology importance by stating it is especially important as future generations of
students become increasingly at ease with technology and more importantly learn through
technology faculty members must keep up. Initial training is also supported when most
programs take faculty through a step-by-step training process (McQuiggan, 2012).
Mentors. Developing a program where an online experienced faculty member is
paired with a faculty trainee will foster a positive and supportive learning environment
(Baran & Correia, 2014). Peer observation, peer evaluation, and formal and informal
networks can help teachers adapt to the online teaching environment more easily (Baran
& Correia, 2014).
Technology Training
There is no end to the advancement of digital technology, even when it comes to
course delivery for faculty members. Understanding the implementation of technology in
an online course is pertinent to its success. Less successful faculty members are those
which did not take the opportunity to sit in a classroom or participate in an online class to
increase their knowledge of online teaching (Lowenthal, 2008). Having faculty members
share stories of their experiences with online teaching is an innovative way to help other
faculty members understand how technology is incorporated into an online class
(Lowenthal, 2008).
Adnan and Boz (2015) highlight the positive comments of faculty members, once
they gain the understanding of a specific technology, and learn how to integrate it into the

LibermanLEDU7001-8
classroom. By providing faculty with a better understanding of specific types of
technology, they will be more confident in incorporating it into the online classroom
(Baran & Correia, 2014). Fetters and Duby (2011) speak strongly that digital curricular
design is essential to improving student learning and faculty members must be properly
trained. In order for faculty to be successful online educators they need to be matched
with an information specialist (Fetters & Duby, 2011).
Acceptance of digital technology use in education is required by all educators.
Gu, Zhu, and Gua (2013) study reports, users acceptance of technology was predicted
from their internal beliefs and attitudes on their usage (p. 394). Only when the
I n f o r m a t i o n T e c h n o l o g y ( IT) application meets the task requirements of users
will it have a positive impact on their performance (Gu, Zhu, & Gua, 2013, p. 394).
Herman (2012) states that the need for online instructors to be fluent with
technology best. The purpose of professional development programs for faculty
members transitioning to online course development and delivery is not to alleviate
faculty workload, but rather provide the support that they need to develop higher-quality
online courses. (Herman, 2012, p. 90). Herman (2012) cites a Sorcinelli et al. 2001-2002
survey where one result states faculty developers reported that integrating technology
into instruction was the most frequently offered service by teaching and learning centers
(p.92).
Continued Training Support
An information technologists job is to keep up with the new trends in technology.
Professional development courses must be offered to help faculty understand how and
when to supplement online courses with advanced technology. Faculty members who are

LibermanLEDU7001-8
embracing online learning, must have ongoing help as and when required (Baran &
Correia, 2014, p. 102). Herman (2012) discuss that faculty development does not need to
be within the educational setting where the faculty member resides. Support programs
can be run within the institution where the faculty is employed, or they may seek
continued support from outside agencies (Herman, 2012). In order for faculty to maintain
a positive and enthusiastic attitude when embracing online course development and
instruction, it is paramount that their direct administrators are supportive (Roth, 2014).
Student assistants are an invaluable asset to any online classroom (Fetters &
Duby, 2011).
Frequently an inhibitor to curriculum innovation is the fear the technology
will not work in the classroom and the faculty cannot efficiently fix itan
embarrassing situation. Having students trained in the technology and driving
the classroom applications has been an excellent support for our faculty.
(Fetters & Duby, 2011, p. 83)
Types of continued training. Baran and Correia (2014) discuss two types of
ongoing training; (1) collegial learning groups and (2) organized networks which are
either formal or informal. When faculty members participate in these forms of support,
they will ultimately become a more confident online educator (Baran & Correia, 2014).
Challenges with Online Faculty Development
Knowledge Level of Faculty Members
L. Frank Baum once said, No thief, however skillful, can rob one of knowledge,
and that is why knowledge is the best and safest treasure to acquire. Every person has a
different level of comfort/knowledge with the use of digital technology in the educational

LibermanLEDU7001-8
arena therefore embracing faculty development programs will be helpful. Many faculty
members are reluctant to embrace and use digital technology in the classroom as well as
stepping out of the box and tackling the teaching of an online class (Adana & Boz, 2015).
To guide digitally hesitant faculty members, online faculty development programs must
exist at their institution (Adana & Boz, 2015).
Faculty members within one department will have a different skill level associated
with digital learning. Baran and Correia (2014) describe this concept as faculty having
many different layers to their understanding of online teaching and learning. As long as
an educational institution has a support program either on site or contracted outside the
faculty, faculty members will be able to develop new roles and skills to become fluent
and confident in online teaching and learning by attending faculty development programs
(Baran & Correia, 2014).
Budgetary constraints within an educational institution will push department
heads to hire more adjunct faculty which will cost the department less money. Elliott et
al. (2015) clearly state, Adjunct faculty have training in their professional field, but may
lack the experience or expertise to effectively teach online (p. 167). These faculty
members will be thrown into the online teaching arena with little to no prepatory training
(Elliot et al., 2015). When instructors are not properly trained in online course
development and instruction, the end product will not be engaging the student learner
(Moore & Kearsley, 2012). Thus the importance of having faculty participate in online
faculty development programs.
All faculty members receive a yearly review. Adding curriculum innovation to the
faculty members yearly review will allow them to see the educational institution is

LibermanLEDU7001-8
embracing the digital native student and expects their faculty to do the same (Fetters &
Duby, 2011). This review process will allow the course directors to see which faculty
members are ready to take on the challenge of new technology associated with online
teaching and learning (Fetters & Duby, 2011). On the contrary, those faculty with less
digital knowledge will be less likely to attempt the design and implementation of an
online course (Herman, 2012). This shows, once again, the need for faculty to attend
online faculty development courses.
Willingness of Faculty Members
Deborah Day once said, Flexibility requires an open mind and a welcoming of
new alternatives. This quote is very powerful when we examine faculty members
willingness to take on the learning practices. In this era of generation X and Y entering
the formal education world (primary and higher education), it is imperative that faculty
members are willing to use some form of technology in their f-2-f class, as well as
embracing the online teaching concept and will need to participate in faculty
development (Adnan & Boz, 2015).
In order to increase the faculty views of online teaching, we must consider their
schedules. The amount of time it takes to produce and support an online course is time
consuming and it is imperative it fits into the facultys schedule, let alone having faculty
attend and participate in faculty development programs (Baran & Correia, 2014).
Elliott et al. (2015) revealed that if, in fact, faculty commit to an online
faculty development program they do complete it. Faculty members must attend
development initiatives to receive their benefits. (Elliott et al, 2015, p. 174). Elliott et
al. (2015) also state, Faculty are more likely to select asynchronous development

LibermanLEDU7001-8
opportunities over synchronous development opportunities due to scheduling
constraints (p. 174). A faculty members choice to attend (or not attend) optional
professional development programming is driven by two primary issues: 1) interest in
the topic; and 2) scheduling availability (Elliott et al., 2015, p. 163).
Fetters and Duby (2011) have the best view of the need for faculty to be
willing to take the time to embrace faculty development programs related to online
teaching and learning saying, The willingness of the individual to experiment with
new technologies, they do not have to be technology wizards but neither can
they be technology phobic (p. 82). Some institutions will offer incentives to their
faculty to embrace online teaching. These enticements will vary depending on the
individuals and where the curriculum initiatives fit in the overall strategy of the
institution (Fetter & Duby, 2011, p. 82). Again, adding online teaching to ones
yearly evaluation will push faculty members to attend online faculty development
programs (Fetter & Duby, 2011).
Higher educational institutions are striving for faculty members to
embrace service, research and teaching. When a faculty member can show
evidence in each of the three areas, they will be applicable for promotion. Faculty
do not question the need to interact with their colleagues and engage in critical
discussions of each others scholarly work, while also reflecting on their own work and
experimenting with new ideas and testing the outcomes of those ideas (Roth, 2014).
However, institutions which are heavier on the research side will find that the
researchers are not willing to participate in faculty development programs (Roth,
2014).

LibermanLEDU7001-8
Sense of Community among Faculty Members
Dorothy Day once said, We have all known the long loneliness and we have
learned that the only solution is love and that love comes with community. This phase
relates to online education by pointing out the need to embrace others in the development
and teaching online classes, thus the need for faculty to have proper training.
Online teaching can be an intellectually and socially isolated activity for faculty
members if they are not provided with necessary community support (Baran & Correia,
2014, p. 99). When faculty members interact with one another, they will not be isolated
and will then embrace online education and attend faculty development programs to
better understand how to succeed. Peer support is essential to faculty members gaining a
community. This can be achieved by faculty properly trained in how teamwork and
collaboration are involved in online teaching and learning (Baran & Correia, 2014).
The academic community, at all levels, needs to support faculty development
related to online teaching and learning (Elliott et al., 2015). To have a student who is
engaged in an online class, a faculty member must have participated in online faculty
development program to learn the best practice (Elliott et al., 2015). Forming a sense of
community, in the online classroom, can come when properly trained and successful
online educators work with other faculty, less trained, in supporting and collaboration of
online course (Elliott et al., 2015).
Herman (2012) discusses the community which exists within the review system of
Quality Matters. Quality Matters is a program in which other educators will review your
course and provide feedback. Quality Matters focuses on course design with the goal of
course improvement, and is part of a faculty-driven, peer review process of existing

LibermanLEDU7001-8
online courses (Herman, 2012). This review process will foster a sense of community
for the course developer.
Faculty communities provide a good success rate for sharing knowledge, helping
and learning from other faculty members (Roth, 2014). It is essential for all members of
the community to be committed to participate for a successful community (Roth, 2014).
When faculty members actively participate in communities, they will gain professional
and self-growth as well as have ongoing motivation (Roth, 2014). Faculty members who
are active within their community will show fewer signs of burnout (Roth, 2014). Interprofessionalism can play an active supportive role. Communities from one professional
school can support other professional schools by branching out and gaining knowledge as
well as support (Roth, 2014).
Conclusion
Institutions of higher learning and their faculty will benefit from faculty
development online teaching programs. A faculty member who attends such programs
will learn how to create an active engaged classroom, attain successful student learning
results and learn how to not feel isolated. Faculty development programs can be held in
an f-2-f platform, online learning platform or a combination of both, a blended leaning
environment.
There are three areas of faculty development which needs to be addressed for all
online courses to be successful; (1) initial training, (2) technology support, and (3)
continued support. Initial training is essential so that the faculty member is not
overwhelmed and shuts down when being exposed to digital technology. Educational
institutions must offer internal or external technological support for its faculty to be

LibermanLEDU7001-8
successful. Ongoing support is essential for all faculty members who teach and especially
those who teach online.
Communities can be set up to help faculty embrace, share ideas and support each
other with teaching online courses. Establishing communities will promote open
communication among faculty members. Expanding the communities to associate with
other professional communities on campus will allow professional and person growth.
These communities will give the faculty members enough support in the hopes of
preventing frustration and burnout. More research is needed on faculty development in
two areas, primary school educators and inter-professional communities.

LibermanLEDU7001-8
References
Adnan, M., & Boz, B. (2015). Faculty members' perspectives on teaching mathematics
online: Does prior online learning experience count? Turkish Online Journal Of
Qualitative Inquiry, 6(1), 21-38.
Baran, E., & Correia, A. (2014). A professional development framework for online
teaching. Linking Research & Practice To Improve Learning, 58(5), 95-101. doi:
doi:10.1007/s11528-014-0791-0
Brainy Quote. (2001-2015). Retrieved from
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/j/jeromeisaa257822.html#0jrjVhse3G
RvmOtz.99
eLearning. (2011-2015). Retrieved from http://elearningindustry.com/inspirationalelearning-quotes-for-elearning-professionals
Elliott, M., Rhoades, N., Jackson, C. M., & Mandernach, B. J. (2015). Professional
development: Designing initiatives to meet the needs of online faculty. Journal Of
Educators Online, 12(1), 160-188.
Fetters, M. L., & Duby, T. (2011). Faculty development: A stage model matched to
blended learning maturation. Journal Of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 15(1),
81-86.
Goodreads. (n.d.). retrieved from http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/knowledge
Goodreads. (n.d.). retrieved from http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/open-mind
Goodreads. (n.d.). retrieved from http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/community

LibermanLEDU7001-8

Gu, X., Zhu, Y., & Guo, X. (2013). Meeting the digital natives: Understanding the
acceptance of technology in classrooms. Educational Technology & Society,
16(1), 392-402.
Herman, J. H. (2012). Faculty development programs: The frequency and variety of
professional development programs available to online instructors. Journal Of
Asynchronous Learning Networks, 16(5), 87-106.
Liberman, L. (2011). Describe and explain the advantages and drawbacks of highly
industrialized systems of learning and teaching. (Unpublished masters paper).
University Maryland University College, Adelphia, Maryland.
Lowenthal, P. R. (2008). Online faculty development and storytelling: An unlikely
solution to improving teacher quality. Journal Of Online Learning and Teaching,
4(3), 349-356.
Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (2012). Distance Education: A Systems View of Online
Learning (6th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
Nagar, S. (2010). Comparison of Major Advantages and Shortcomings of Distance
Education. International Journal of Educational Administration, 2(2), 329-333.
Peters, O. (2001). Learning and teaching in distance education: Analyses and
interpretations from an international perspective (2nd ed.). London : Kogan Page.
Roth, S. M. (2014). Improving teaching effectiveness and student learning through the
use of faculty learning communities. Kinesiology Review, 3(4), 209-216.
Wikipedia The Free Encyclopedia. (2013, November 29). Faculty development.
Retrieved form https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faculty_development