Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 277

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Institutional drivers and barriers to faculty adoption of blended learning in higher education

Porter, Wendy W., Graham, Charles R.·2016·British Journal of Educational Technology

Abstract

Relatively little research on blended learning ( BL ) addresses institutional adoption, although such research would benefit institutions of higher education in strategically adopting and implementing BL . In a prior study, the authors proposed a framework for institutional BL adoption, identifying three stages: (1) awareness/exploration, (2) adoption/early implementation, and (3) mature implementation/growth. The framework also identified key strategy, structure and support issues universities may address at each stage. The current study applies that framework as well as Rogers' diffusion of innovations theory to determine the degree to which institutional strategy, structure and support decisions facilitate or impede BL adoption among higher education faculty. The authors also explore whether faculty members' innovation adoption category (innovator, early adopter, early majority, late majority or laggard) affects which decisions facilitate or impede BL adoption. To achieve these objectives, the authors surveyed 214 faculty members at a university in the adoption/early implementation stage, Brigham Young University‐Idaho. We found that the availability of sufficient infrastructure, technological support, pedagogical support, evaluation data and an institution's purpose for adopting BL would most significantly influence faculty adoption. We also identified a wide range of factors that would influence each category of innovation adopters.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/bjet.12269

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 16 references

Cited by

See all 277

Metadata

Authors
Porter, W. W., & Graham, C. R.
Venue
British Journal of Educational Technology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-04-08
Volume
47
Issue
4
Pages
748-762
ISSN
  • 0007-1013 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-8535
OpenAlex
W1606183485
Cited by
277
References
16
FWCI
61.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Institutional drivers and barriers to faculty adoption of blended learning in higher education. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/bjet.12269
The paper
Porter, W. W., & Graham, C. R. (2016). Institutional drivers and barriers to faculty adoption of blended learning in higher education. British Journal of Educational Technology. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12269

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.