Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Faculty’s Formal and Informal Learning Experiences During the Transition of a New Learning Management System at a Community College: A Case Study

  • Original research
  • Published:
Technology, Knowledge and Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Faculty members play a valuable role in the reputation of higher education institutions and adult learners’ academic success. It is imperative for faculty members to be adept at using the institution’s learning management system to maintain their instructional materials and teach using a technological system. The purpose of this study was to examine the learning experiences of faculty at a state technical college who were required to participate in a new technology adoption of the Blackboard Learning Management System (LMS). A qualitative case study design was used that consisted of semi-structured interviews with eight participants, document review, and observational memos. The findings revealed that the initial training meeting was basic, the training packet was burdensome to complete, the institution’s webinars and tutorials were underutilized, and participants designed their own training strategies to learn the system. Two conclusions emerged that indicated: (1) the formal learning methods were insufficient and sufficient and (2) faculty’s informal learning strategies created a process of self-directed and collaborative learning approaches that more directly served their needs.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

Data Availability

Not applicable.

References

  • Ahadi, S., & Jacobs, R. L. (2017). A review of the literature on structured on-the-job training and directions for future research. Human Resource Development Review, 16(4), 323–349

    Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211

    Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2016). Online report card: Tracking online education in the United States. Babson Park: Babson Survey Research Group and Quahog Research Group, LLC

    Google Scholar 

  • Altalib, H. (2002). HasanSituated Cognition: Describing the Theory.Educational Resources Information Center,1–17

  • Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. Inglewood Cliff: Prentice-Hall

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, B. G. (2014). Adapting informal and informal learning skills for success in the virtual learning environment. In S. Leone (Ed.), Synergic integration of formal and informal e-learning environments for adult lifelong learners (pp. 97–120). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference

    Google Scholar 

  • Baylen, D., Hancock, M., Mullen, C., & Coleman, M. A. (2012). Preparing faculty for a learning management system transition. In I. R. Association (Ed.), Virtual Learning Environment: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools and Applications (pp. 80–92). Contemporary Research in Information Science and Technology. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-0011-9.ch1.6

  • Bazeley, P., & Jackson, K. (2013). Qualitative data analysis with nvivo. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, LTD

    Google Scholar 

  • Betts, K., & Heatson, A. (2014). Build it but will they teach?: Strategies for increasing faculty participation & retention in online & blended education. Online Journal Of Distance Learning Administration, 17(2)

  • Bloomberg, L. D., & Volpe, M. F. (2016). Completing your qualitative dissertation: A road map from beginning to end. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications Inc

  • Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories and methods. Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boileau, T. (2017). Informal learning. In R. E. West (Ed.), Foundations of learning and instructional design technology. Creative Commons Attribution

  • Bolliger, D. U., & Wasilik, O. (2009). Factors influencing faculty satisfaction with online teaching and learning in higher education. Distance Education, 30(1), 103–116

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, T., Sainter, P., & Saunders, G. (2013). Factors affecting faculty use of learning technologies: implications for models of technology adoption. Journal of Computing High Education, 25, 1–11. DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-013-9066-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, R., & Harrison, J. L. (2012). The interrelatedness of formal, non-formal and informal learning: Evidence from labour market program participants. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 52(2), 277–309

    Google Scholar 

  • Caruth, G. D., & Caruth, D. L. (2013). Distance education in the united states: From correspondence courses to the internet.Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education,141–149

  • Coates, H., James, R., & Baldwin, G. (2005). A critical examination of the effects of learning management systems on university teaching and learning. Tertiary Education and Management, 11, 19–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc

    Google Scholar 

  • Crews, K. (2017). Distance Education and the TEACH Act. Retrieved from American Library Association: http://www.ala.org/advocacy/copyright/teachact/distanceeducation

  • Cross, J. (2007). Informal learning: Rediscovering the natural pathways that inspire innovation and performance. San Francisco: Pfeiffer

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, B., Carmean, C., & Wagner, E. D. (2009). The evolution of the LMS: From management to learning.The E-Learning Guild Research,1–24

  • Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dillenbourg, P. (1999). What do you mean by collaborative learning?. In P. Dillenbourg (Ed.), Collaborative learning: (pp. 1–19). Oxford: Elsevier

    Google Scholar 

  • Dittmann, M., Carson, C., & Nelson, M. (2017). Georgia Piedmont Technical College 2017 Fact Book. Clarkston, GA: Office of Institutional Effectiveness & Technology

    Google Scholar 

  • Ertmer, P., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 255–284

  • Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. http://people.umass.edu/aizen/f&a1975.html

    Google Scholar 

  • Gautreau, C. (2011). Motivational Factors Affecting the Integration of a Learning Management System by Faculty. The Journal of Educators Online, 8(1), 1–26

    Google Scholar 

  • Ge, X., Lubin, I. A., & Zhang, K. (2010). An investigation of faculty’s perceptions and experiences when transitioning to a new learning management system. Knowledge Management & E-Learning: An International Journal, 2(4), 433–447

    Google Scholar 

  • Georgina, D. A., & Olson, M. R. (2008). Integration of technology in higher education: A review of faculty self-perceptions. Internet and Higher Education, 11, 1–8

    Google Scholar 

  • Godoe, P., & Johansen, T. S. (2012). Understanding adoption of new technologies: Technology readiness and technology acceptance as an integrated concept. Journal of European Psychology Students, 3, 38–52

    Google Scholar 

  • Gomez, K., & Lee, U. S. (2015). Situated cognition and learning implications for teachers on- and offline in the new digital media age. Interactive Learning Environments, 23(5), 634–652

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, K. C. (2015). Great Faith in the Instructional Benefits of Digital Technologies; Great Expectations for the Rising Use of OER.The Campus Computing Project,1–22

  • Gregory, M. S. J., & Lodge, J. M. (2015). Academic workload: the silent barrier to the implementation of technology-enhanced learning strategies in higher education. Distance Education, 32(2), 210–230

    Google Scholar 

  • Gutman, D. (2012). Six barriers causing educators to resist teaching online, and how institutions can break them. Distance Learning, 9(3), 51–56

    Google Scholar 

  • Hager, P., & Halliday, J. (2006). Recovering informal learning: Wisdom, judgment, and community. Dordrecht: Springer

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansman, C. A., & Mott, V. W. (2010). Adult Learners. In C. E. Kasworm, A. D. Rose, & J. Ross-Gordon (Eds.), Handbook of Adult and continuing education (pp. 13–24). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications

    Google Scholar 

  • Holliday, A. (2016). Doing and writing qualitative research, Third Ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Ltd

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaschik, J. (2009, May 7). Blackboard buys angel. Retrieved from Inside Higher Ed: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/05/07/bb

  • Jones, K. P. (2015). Impacts on faculty workload during a learning management system transition. Walden University ScholarWorks, Dissertation, 1–145

  • Kasim, N. N., & Khalid, F. (2016). Choosing the right learning management system (LMS) for the higher education institution context: A system review. iJET – Volume, 11, 55–61

    Google Scholar 

  • Koul, S., & Eydgahi, A. (2017). A systematic review of technology adoption frameworks and their applications. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 12(4), 106–112

    Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J., & Wagner, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Leggett, W., & Persichitte, K. (1998). Blood, sweat, and tears: 50 years of technology Implementation obstacles. TechTrends, 43(3), 33–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Lezin, N. (2016, July 20). Theories & Approaches: Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA). Retrieved from Resource Center for Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention: http://recapp.etr.org/recapp/index.cfm?fuseaction=pages.TheoriesDetail&PageID=517

  • Leslie, B., Aring, M. K., & Brand, B. (2003). Informal learning: The new frontier of employee and organizational development. Economic Development Review, 15(4), 12–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Leone, S. (2014). Synergic integration of formal and informal e-learning environments for adult lifelong learning. Hershey: Information Science Reference

    Google Scholar 

  • Lokken, F. (2013). 2012 Distance education survey results. Retrieved from Vernon College: https://www.vernoncollege.edu/resources/college%20effectiveness/committees/de%20website/m8/exhibit%20b%20(4).pdf

  • MacFarland, T. (1998). Assessment of an Internet training program for distance education faculty. A Presentation at the National Adjunct Faculty Guild’s Fourth Annual Conference, 4th (pp. 1–33). Chicago, IL: Electronic Resources Information Center

  • McCarthy, Samors, S., & Samors, R. (2009). Online learning as a strategic asset: Volumn I a resource for campus leaders. Washington, DC: Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities

    Google Scholar 

  • Meloy, A. (2013). Legal watch: Who owns your moocs? Updating intellectual property for the modern era. Retrieved from American Council on Education: http://www.acenet.edu

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Milligan, C., Littlejohn, A., & Margaryan, A. (2014). Workplace learning in informal networks.Journal of Interactive Media in Education,1–11

  • Mocker, D. W., & Spear, G. E. (1982). Lifelong learning: Formal, nonformal, informal and self-directed. Columbus: ERIC

    Google Scholar 

  • Monett, D., & Elkina, M. (2015). E-Learning adoption in a higher education setting: An empirical study. Multidisciplinary Academic Conference (pp. 1–9). Czech Republic: MAC Praque Consulting s.r.o

  • Moore, M. G. (2007). Handbook of distance education 2. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

    Google Scholar 

  • Muilenburg, L., & Berge, Z. (2001). Barriers to distance education: A factor-analytic study.The American Journal of Distance Education,7–22

  • Nabavi, R. T. (2012). Bandura’s Social Learning Theory & Social Cognitive Learning Theory.Theories of Developmental Psychology,1–24

  • Nygren, H., Nissinen, K., Hämäläinen, R., & Wever, B. (2019). Lifelong learning: Formal, non-formal and informal learning in the context of the use of problem-solving skills in technology-rich environments. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(4), 1759–1770

    Google Scholar 

  • Padilla-Meléndez, A., Aguila-Obra, A. R., & Garrido-Moreno, A. (2013). Perceived playfulness, gender differences and technology acceptance model in a blended learning scenario. Computers & Education, 63, 306–317

    Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, Ca: SAGE Publications, Inc

    Google Scholar 

  • Quinney, K. L., Smith, S. D., & Galbraith, Q. (2010). Bridging the gap: Self-directed staff technology training.Information Technology and Libraries,205–213

  • Radaković, M., & Antonijević, S. (2013). Balance between formal and informal learning - experience and challenges of civil servants training in serbia. The 21st NISPAcee Annual Conference “Regionalisation and Inter-regional Cooperation” (pp. 1–6). Belgrade, Serbia: Group for the Central HR Registry and Information Systems

  • Reid, P. (2014). Categories for barriers to adoption of instructional technologies.Education and Information Technologies,383–407

  • Rucker, R. D., & Frass, L. R. (2017). Migrating learning management systems in higher education: faculty members’ perceptions of system usage and training when transitioning from blackboard vista to desire2learn. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 46(2), 259–277

    Google Scholar 

  • Rucker, R., & Downey, S. (2016). Faculty Technology usage resulting from institutional migration to a new learning management system. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 19, 1–17

    Google Scholar 

  • Saldaña, J. (2011). Fundamentals of qualitative research: Understanding qualitative research. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saldaña, J. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Inc

    Google Scholar 

  • Seaman, J. (2009). Online learning as a strategic asset: volume I: A resource for campus leaders. Washington, DC: Association of Public and Land-grant Universities

    Google Scholar 

  • Selim, H. (2007). Critical success factors for e-learning acceptance: Confirmatory factor models. Computers & Education, 49(2), 396–413

    Google Scholar 

  • Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York, NY: Random House, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Somekh, B. (2008). Factors affecting teachers’ pedagogical adoption of ICT. In J. Voogt, & G. Knezek (Eds.), International handbook of information technology in primary and secondary (pp. 449–460). New York: Springer US

    Google Scholar 

  • Spelke, K. A. (2011). Factors affecting selection of a learning management system in higher education institutions (Doctoral Dissertation). Urbana: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

  • Stake, R. (1998). Case study. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Strategies of qualitative inquiry (pp. 134–164). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications

    Google Scholar 

  • Sundaravej, T. (2010). Empirical Validation of Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology Model.Journal of Global Information Technology Management,1–16

  • Sutton, K. K., & DeSantis, J. (2017). Beyond change blindness: Embracing the technology revolution in higher education. Innovations in Education and Teaching, 54(3), 223–228

    Google Scholar 

  • Varnell, P. (2016). Transitioning to the learning management system moodle from blackboard: Impacts to faculty. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 19(2), 1–9

    Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh, V., Davis, F., & Morris, M. (2007). Dead or alive? The development, trajectory and future of technology adoption research. Journal of the Associations of Information Systems, 8(4)p), 267–286

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, W. T., & Wang, C. C. (2009). An empirical study of instructor adoption of web-based learning systems. Computers & Education, 53, 761–774

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. (2009). A social theory of learning. In K. Illeris (Ed.), Contemporary Theories of Learning: Learning theorists… in their own words (pp. 209–218). New York, NY: Routledge

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler, S. (2011). Teacher resistance to new technologies: How barriers to web enhanced learning can be overcome. In M. Repetto, & G. Trentin (Eds.), Faculty training for web enhanced learning (pp. 49–60). New York, NY: Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yancey, G. B. (2016). Self-efficacy. Salem Press Encyclopedia Of Health

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Stephen F Austin State University Athens, 75965, Nacogdoches, TX, United States

    Marice Kelly Jackson Ph.D.

Authors
  1. Marice Kelly Jackson Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marice Kelly Jackson Ph.D..

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Interview Questions.

• Tell me how you came to be a college educator and working at the technical college level?

• How long have you been teaching?

• What department do you work in?

• What method (face-to-face, hybrid, or online) of classes do you teach?

• Which method of teaching do you prefer?

o If you have a preferred method explain to me why?

• What prior experience did you have with any brand of an LMS as a student and/or faculty before learning the Blackboard system?

o If yes, tell me the brand?

o How did you learn to use that particular learning management system?

• What formal learning (training) did you complete here at STC before the launch of the Blackboard system?

• Explain how effective the formal learning sessions were in learning to manage the Blackboard system.

• How useful were the Blackboard learning webinars before the launch in 2016?

• How well prepared did you fell the first time in teaching a class using the Blackboard system in 2016?

• How often in your personal time, did you try to learn the Blackboard system before using it in 2016?

o If yes, what time in the day would you experiment with the Blackboard system?

• What assumptions did you have about the technology adoption process of the Blackboard system before the launch in 2016?

• How many formal Blackboard learning sessions did you attend in 2017?

• In what ways have the formal Blackboard learning sessions helped you?

• How many Blackboard learning webinars have you viewed in 2017?

o If yes, how the webinars were beneficial to you in learning the Blackboard system.

• In what ways did, the Blackboard learning management system webinars helped you.

• What support systems did you rely on when you encountered a problem when using the Blackboard system? Why?

• What challenges did you encounter in learning the Blackboard system?

• What recommendation(s) would you give to administrators before a technology adoption?

• Is there anything else that you would like to add that might help in understanding your experience in the technology adoption through the formal learning process?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kelly Jackson, M. Faculty’s Formal and Informal Learning Experiences During the Transition of a New Learning Management System at a Community College: A Case Study. Tech Know Learn 29, 135–161 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-022-09610-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-022-09610-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy