A Case Study of Faculty Development Needs in Distance Education; presented at the International Council for Open and Distance Education, Santo Domingo, DO.

The ICDE conference was held in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic and involved just over 400 participants. The conference was hosted by the Universidad del Caribe. About 90% of the attendees were faculty and administrators from the Latin American university community and the rest were from Canada, United States, Korea, Australia, and New Zeeland. On Sunday November 23, I attended convocation for 930 University de Caribe students at the invitation of the conference organizers. It was a very moving experience. Not only have these students faced and persevered in terms of academic achievements, but they live in a developing country where residents face severe socioeconomic challenges as well. The conference itself took place from Nov 24-26, 2008. Key note speakers included: • Dr. Michael Moore (Pennsylvania State University). His presentation was on his classic work on transaction distance in distance education • Dr. Lalita Rajasingham (University of Wellington, New Zeeland. Her presentation was on her research and related projects on virtual reality, hyper reality and IT in terms of human communications. • Several other key note speakers were from the Latin American countries. Each day, after the key note sessions and panel presentations, we were able to attend several conference tracks. My presentation was on Monday November 24 and it was well received. It was very interesting to discuss with the participants, the challenges we face in terms of faculty development and to hear that they also face similar challenges. The paper I presented was one that Dr. Heather Kanuka and I had written. It was a final paper from the work we did on faculty development in our roles in the Take Time for Good Instructional Fun committee. Prior to the conference, I had a more insular perspective of faculty development and distance education because my research and teaching experiences have been in North American universities. I tended to think of the cost, access, and quality issues in terms of what we face on a daily basis. I came away from the conference with a deeper appreciation of how issues in distance education go much further than cost, access, and quality, when we take the challenges that developing countries face into consideration. I was also very moved by the level of commitment that the attendees have towards improving distance education for their students. For example, one colleague spoke about his regular trips involving long commutes to remote villages in Colombia to meet with students taking distance education courses. Another discussed the need to offer university programs that would help graduates get meaningful work that would help improve the countries and their economic challenges. Still another spoke about telemedicine programs being offered through partnerships with Canadian and American universities using their old technology. On Monday evening, we went to the Uiversidad del Caribe for a book signing session that Dr. Marta Mena (ICDE Vice President for the Latin America and the Caribbean) had edited with a number of colleagues. This was followed by a festive Dominican dinner. Throughout the conference, we were able to network with many colleagues. It was very interesting to discuss distance education topics with them and to hear about the research they are doing. I also had the opportunity to talk to several students about their programs of study. In addition to my Power Point presentation, I am attaching a summary of the conference that was shared with us after the conference. I have uploaded my conference paper on my AUSPACE website. I received a conference CD at the conference and my paper and presentation is on the CD. Our university especially benefited because we were represented by Dr. Frits Pannekoek at the conference as the President of the ICDE (Canada) and Dr. Rory McGreal was in attendance and also presented a paper on learning objects. Athabasca University was well known to participants. When Dr. Michael Moore used a slide from his presentation on noted academics who have conducted research on distance education using related theories, I was able to recognize at least 5 names of Athabasca University faculty. It was a privilege to have been able to attend this conference. In addition to the conference value, I was able to make additional academic contacts and learn/practice a bit of Spanish. I truly appreciate the funding support from the A&PDF Committee.As distance education practices continue to evolve, so do the needs for effective faculty development practices. Faculty development needs can be somewhat unique in distance education. Faculty concerns relate to centralized service delivery, technology, course development time, concerns over the lack of autonomy, a sense of isolation, and feeling overworked. Such issues, if not addressed or clarified in the context of how distance education courses are delivered, can further isolate and disillusion faculty. In light of these challenges, we were interested in assessing our own university’s faculty development needs. In this paper, we present an overview of the scope of faculty development programs, related issues in distance education, and critical success factors. Thereafter, we discuss our university’s experience with faculty development. We conducted an online survey of our faculty that included open-ended questions (n=182, 31% response rate). The open-ended responses from participants focused on the need for a mentoring program, concerns over course development processes, issues related to information technology (IT), feelings of isolation, and the importance of collegial social interactions. The most striking and positive finding is that a majority of respondents believe their contributions to the teaching process to be important; there is a deep desire for good relationships with colleagues and the development of an effective teaching environment. The desire to develop teaching skills is an essential foundation to improving teaching practices. The results of the survey indicate that the preferred delivery methods for learning activities include both digitally based Web-spaces and face-to-face workshops facilitated by invited experts (outside of the institution). The findings confirmed a four-factor model for faculty development: (a) Technical (Internet / Web resources); (b) Social (interpersonal); (c) Moderating (cognitive / pedagogical); and (d) Management (teaching). The commitment to faculty development warrants more attention. As supported by the literature, effective faculty development programs involve needs assessments, responsiveness to faculty concerns, meaningful incentives, and faculty involvement. Continuing learning opportunities can reduce feelings of isolation, provide social interaction, and help improve teaching practices. New faculty that feel engaged and well supported in terms of teaching effectiveness and instructional support will be essential to our ability to achieve our strategic goals.Academic & Professional Development Fund (A&PDF