This powerpoint was used in the presentation at the Online Learning Consortium's Annual Conference in 2015. The presentation was based on a survey conducted of faculty governance leaders in American colleges and universities.

1. Faculty Governance Leaders’ Perceptions
of Online and Blended Learning:
A Preliminary Analysis
Elizabeth Ciabocchi, Ed.D.
Amy P. Ginsberg, Ph.D.
Anthony G. Picciano, Ph.D.
October 15, 2015

2. Introduction
“…the faculty are not employees of the University – they are the University.”
(I.I. Rabi), in response to Dwight D.Eisenhower, then President of Columbia University, 1948 )
2015 ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ONLINE LEARNING

3. Rationale for the Study
The purpose of this study was to examine the attitudes and perceptions of
faculty governance leaders regarding online education including fully online
courses, blended/hybrid learning, and MOOC-developed courseware.
2015 ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ONLINE LEARNING

4. Literature Review: Online Learning
• > 7 million students, or 1/3 of the college
population, enrolled in at least 1 fully
online course in any given year (Allen &
Seaman, 2015)
• Millions enrolled in blended/hybrid
courses and Web-enhanced courses
• MOOC providers offered more than 1200
courses (Sturgis, 2015)
2015 ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ONLINE LEARNING

5. Literature Review: Faculty Governance
• Forms of Faculty Governance
- Faculty councils
- Collective bargaining organizations and unions
- Academic departmental bodies (in by-laws)
2015 ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ONLINE LEARNING

6. Literature Review: Faculty Governance
• Large body of faculty governance literature, but few studies on its relationship
to online education and governance leaders’ attitudes
• Numerous surveys of other leaders including presidents, chief academic
officers, CIO’s, students & faculty re: perceptions of developments in online
education
• No broad studies of opinions/perceptions of faculty governance leaders re:
online learning; limited to descriptive accounts and case studies of faculty
governance issues, online education in specific settings
2015 ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ONLINE LEARNING

7. Literature Review: Faculty Governance
•Faculty governance bodies have been active in responding to development of
online education since its inception in the 1990’s:
- CUNY (1997)
- Theresa Sullivan, President, University of Virginia, 2012
- San Jose State University (2013)
2015 ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ONLINE LEARNING

8. Methodology of Study
•Participants - faculty governance leaders at 144 colleges & universities identified
through chapter websites of the American Association of University Professors
• Requests for participation were emailed to 717 faculty governance leaders
• 129 surveys were returned (response rate = 18%)
- 74% of respondents affiliated with public, non-profit higher education institutions
- 25% affiliated with private, non-profit higher education institutions
- <2% affiliated with private, for-profit institutions
2015 ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ONLINE LEARNING

9. Survey Results
2015 ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ONLINE LEARNING
74%
23%
3%
Q2. To better prepare for the future, American higher
education needs:
Continue to evolve in carefully
planned manner
Major transformation
No major change

10. Survey Results
2015 ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ONLINE LEARNING
Q3. The institution with which you are primarily affiliated offers:
Traditional degree and/or
certificate programs (87.9%)
Blended/hybrid courses in
traditional degree/cert programs
(78.23%)
Blended/hybrid degree/cert
programs (60.48%)
Fully online courses in traditional
degree/cert programs (58.06%)
Fully online degree/cert programs
(45.16%)
MOOCs (8.06%)

11. Survey Results
2015 ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ONLINE LEARNING
Department (78%)
College or university (71%)
School (56%)
Q4. The development and approval of blended (hybrid) and online courses at your institution requires
the approval of (check all that apply):

12. Survey Results
2015 ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ONLINE LEARNING
Traditional (95%)
Blended (hybrid) (51%)
Fully online (39%)
MOOC (0%)
Q5. Which of the following types of courses have you personally taught or developed (check
all that apply):

13. Survey Results
2015 ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ONLINE LEARNING
Weighted Average Scores
Traditional Courses 4.29
Hybrid Courses 3.26
Online Courses 2.71
MOOCs 1.79
Q6. On a scale of 1-5 (5 = highest score), what is your perception
of the overall quality of the following types of courses offered by
your institution?

14. Survey Results
2015 ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ONLINE LEARNING
Q7. On a scale of 1-5 (5 = highest score), please rate your level of concern
about each of the following considerations for the development and
implementation of online courses at your institution.
Top Five Concerns
1. Time required to develop & deliver course
2. Perceived academic quality of course/Overuse of adjunct faculty
3. Compensation for course design & development
4. Student learning outcomes
5. Time & effort required for faculty development

15. Survey Results
Q8. On a scale of 1-5 (5 = highest), please rate your level of concern about each
of the following considerations for development and implementation of
blended courses at your institution.
Top Five Concerns
1. Time required to develop & deliver course
2. Time & efforts required for faculty development
3. Overuse of adjunct faculty
4. Compensation for course design & development
5. Student learning outcomes
2015 ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ONLINE LEARNING

16. Survey Results
Crosstab Q5 by Q3: Perception of overall quality of course types offered at
institution who have taught in blended/online formats vs. only traditional
formats (% of respondents who rated courses Satisfactory to Excellent)
Online Courses:
Blended/Online Instructors = 55%
Traditional-only Instructors = 30%
Blended Courses:
Blended/Online Instructors = 68%
Traditional-only Instructors = 55%
Traditional Courses:
Blended/Online Instructors = 93%
Traditional-only Instructors = 98%
2015 ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ONLINE LEARNING

17. Survey Results
Crosstab Q7/8 by Q3: Level of concern re: considerations for various course types by
respondents who have taught in blended/online formats vs. traditional format only (% of
respondents with Moderate to Very High Levels of Concern)
Online Courses:
Traditional-only instructors are more concerned about:
• Compensation
• Perceived academic quality
• Student attrition
Blended/online instructors are more concerned about:
• Time required to develop/deliver courses
• Intellectual property rights
• Instructional design support
• Technical support for faculty/students
2015 ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ONLINE LEARNING

18. Survey Results
Crosstab Q7/8 by Q3: Level of concern re: considerations for various course types by
respondents who have taught in blended/online formats vs. traditional format only (% of
respondents with Moderate to Very High Levels of Concern)
Blended Courses:
Traditional-only instructors are more concerned about:
• Student learning outcomes
• Student attrition
Blended/online instructors are more concerned about:
• Intellectual property rights
• Instructional design support
• Technical support for faculty/students
• Overuse of adjunct faculty
2015 ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ONLINE LEARNING

19. Interview Response Themes
Theme 1: American higher education needs to focus on teaching to
better prepare for the future.
Theme 2: The development/review of blended or online programs
appears to go through the same faculty review process (i.e.,
curriculum committees at various levels) as traditional programs.
2015 ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ONLINE LEARNING

20. Interview Response Themes
Theme 3: The perception that online & blended courses are of
lower quality than traditional, face-to-face courses appears to stem
from the perception that there is not enough attention to faculty
development and clear assessment of outcomes in the online
environment.
Theme 4: There is overuse of adjunct faculty, which is particularly
problematic in online/blended environments, where there is
insufficient training in online teaching.
2015 ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ONLINE LEARNING

21. Discussion & Questions
1) Substantial number of faculty leaders in sample were well familiar with teaching in fully online
(nearly 40%) and blended (50%) learning environments, which gives them direct experience with
issues.
2) Concerns of faculty governance leaders were consistent with other stakeholders in higher
education re:
- Need for greater focus on teaching
- Over-reliance on adjunct faculty
- Perceptions of quality of various teaching formats, with MOOCs ranked lowest and face-to-
face teaching highest
3) Study of governance leaders is important area of research in understanding dynamics of
development of online/blended learning in higher education
2015 ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ONLINE LEARNING

22. References
Allen, I.E. & Seaman, J. (2015). Grade level: Tracking online education in the
United States. Babson Park, MA: Babson Survey Research Group and Quahog
Research Group, LLC.
Sturgis, I. (2015). MOOCs: More hype than hope. Convergence: Diversity and
Inclusion. Supplement to The Chronicle of Higher Education.
2015 ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ONLINE LEARNING

23. Contact Information
Elizabeth (Liz) Ciabocchi, Ed.D.
Vice Provost for Digital Learning
St. John’s University
ciabocce@stjohns.edu
Skype: drlizc
Twitter: @drlizc
2015 ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ONLINE LEARNING
Anthony Picciano, Ph.D.
Professor & Executive Officer
Ph.D. Program in Urban
Education
Graduate Center - City
University of New York
Picciano, Anthony
APicciano@gc.cuny.edu
Amy P. Ginsberg, Ph.D.
Acting Dean, School of Education
LIU Brooklyn
amy.ginsberg@liu.edu

24. Session Evaluations Contest
• Open OLC Conferences Mobile App
• Navigate to session to evaluate
• Click on "Rate this Session“
• Complete Session Evaluation*
(As part of our "green" initiatives, OLC is no longer using paper forms for session evaluations.)
*Contact information required for contest entry but will not be shared with the presenters.
Winners will be contacted post-conference.
Each session evaluation completed (limited to one per session) = one contest entry
Five (5) $25 gift cards will be awarded to five (5) individuals
Must submit evals using the OLC Conferences mobile app
Session Evaluations Contest
Session Evaluations Contest