The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Higher Education Culture and the Diffusion of Technology in Classroom Instruction
Abstract
The diffusion of an innovation takes, on an average, 25 years in an educational setting. Many factors contribute to this slow acceptance rate. Rogers’ (1995) theory on the diffusion of innovation and the influence of culture on such diffusion is used to shed light on the causes for this slow diffusion. While not a full explanation of this slow rate of change, this case study shows that the academic culture, within which faculty function, has a strong influence on the diffusion of the use of technology in classroom instruction. This case study provides a point of reference for further study of diffusion of technology in classroom instruction. This case focuses on a Research I institution in the Midwest that has made a number of commitments to the integration of technology into the curriculum and has channeled many resources into this campaign. While the institution has invested large sums of money in the development of the infrastructure, the rate at which faculty have adopted the use of technology in their teaching has remained low. In order to determine the perceptions of faculty and develop some framework for understanding why the infusion of technology into classroom instruction was so low, faculty members on the campus were interviewed, focus groups were conducted, and meetings between faculty and administrators concerning technology issues were observed. Because additional issues exist with distance education, the scope of this case study research was limited to on-campus classroom instruction and support.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Technology diffusion in universities can be a complex process involving issues of power, legitimacy, and identity.
“While HEIs contribute to AI governance at a societal level, technology diffusion in universities itself can also be a complex process involving issues of power, legitimacy, and identity [10].”
From AI Governance in Higher Education: Case Studies of Guidance at Big Ten Universities (2024) · cites this paper as [10]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
AI Governance in Higher Education: Case Studies of Guidance at Big Ten Universities
Wu, C., Zhang, H., & Carroll, J. M. (2024) · Future Internet · doi:10.3390/fi16100354 · Cited by 99
Nicolle, P. S., & Lou, Y. (2008) · Journal of Educational Computing Research · doi:10.2190/ec.39.3.c · Cited by 88
‘Sending Messages to a Machine’: Articulating Ethe-Real Selves in Blended Teaching (and Learning)
McShane, K. (2006) · E-Learning and Digital Media · doi:10.2304/elea.2006.3.1.88 · Cited by 15
Management of the Transition to e-Learning in Higher Education Based on Competence Quotient
Gedeon, P., & Khalil, L. J. (2015) · Procedia Computer Science · doi:10.1016/j.procs.2015.09.091 · Cited by 8
Metadata
- Authors
- Smith, K. M.
- Affiliations
- University of Missouri (US)
- Corresponding author
- Smith, Kandis M.
- Venue
- Case Studies on Information Technology in Higher Education
- Publisher
- IGI Global
- Published
- 2000
- Pages
- 144-156
- OpenAlex
- W4248529694
- Cited by
- 5
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- IGI Global eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Digital Transformation of Higher Education
- Social Sciences › Education › Education and Technology Integration
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
- Keywords
- diffusion of innovations, academic culture, educational technology adoption, classroom teaching, teacher perceptions, technology integration in curriculum, higher education, Rogers diffusion theory, faculty attitudes toward technology
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