koo - implementation of a curriculum innovation final
TRANSCRIPT
University of Wollongong Thesis Collections
University of Wollongong Thesis Collection
University of Wollongong Year
The implementation of a curriculum
innovation: a study of using IT for
teaching and learning in the Hong Kong
institute of vocational education
Chung NA KooUniversity of Wollongong
Koo, Chung NA, The implementation of a curriculum innovation: a study of us-ing IT for teaching and learning in the Hong Kong institute of vocational education,Doctor of Philosophy thesis, Faculty of Education, University of Wollongong, 2009.http://ro.uow.edu.au/theses/3044
This paper is posted at Research Online.
THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A CURRICULUM INNOVATION:
A STUDY OF USING IT FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING IN
THE HONG KONG INSTITUTE OF VOCATIONAL EDUCATION
A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the
requirements for the award of the degree
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
from
UNIVERSITY OF WOLLONGONG
by
KOO, CHUNG NGAN ALFRED BA(Loughborough), MPhil(CUHK)
FACULTY OF EDUCATION
2009
CERTIFICATION
I, KOO, Chung Ngan Alfred, declare that this thesis, submitted in partial fulfilment
of the requirements for the award of Doctor of Philosophy, in the Faculty of
Education, University of Wollongong, is wholly my own work unless otherwise
referenced or acknowledged. The document has not been submitted for qualifications
at any other academic institution.
KOO, Chung Ngan Alfred
12 October 2009
CONTENTS A LIST OF TABLES, FIGURES AND APPENDICES ………………………….i ABSTRACT ………………………………………………………………………...ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT…………………………………………………………..iv
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION .................................................................... 1
1.1 Background to the Study.......................................................................... 1 1.2 Aim and Purpose of the Study ................................................................. 2 1.3 The Research Questions ........................................................................... 2 1.4 Significance of the Study .......................................................................... 3 1.5 Limitations of the Study........................................................................... 4 1.6 A Summary of the Structure of this Thesis.............................................. 7 1.7 Definition of Terms................................................................................... 9
CHAPTER TWO THE CURRICULUM INNOVATION ...................................13
2.1 Background to the Change......................................................................13 2.2 Characteristics of the Innovation ...........................................................15
2.2.1 IT for teaching and learning .........................................................15 2.2.2 Changing roles of teachers in adopting IT for teaching and learning
....................................................................................................17 2.3 Nature of the Innovation .........................................................................18
2.3.1 Goals for using IT for teaching and learning ................................19 2.3.2 IT competency for IVE teachers...................................................20 2.3.4 Benchmarking for IVE teachers ...................................................23
2.4 Scale of the Innovation ............................................................................23
CHAPTER THREE LITERATURE REVIEW ...................................................24
3.1 Implementation as a Process of Change .................................................24 3.2 Approaches to Curriculum Implementation ..........................................24
3.2.1 Fidelity perspective......................................................................25 3.2.2 Mutual adaptation........................................................................31 3.2.3 Curriculum enactment..................................................................31
3.3 Factors Affecting Implementation ..........................................................34 3.3.1 Characteristics of change .............................................................34 3.3.2 Local characteristics ....................................................................35 3.3.3 External factors............................................................................38
3.4 Implementation of IT for Teaching and Learning .................................40 3.4.1 Dimensions in using Web-based instruction .................................40 3.4.2 Levels of Web use in education....................................................41 3.4.3 Web usage levels for module delivery..........................................44 3.4.4 Framework for online courses......................................................45 3.4.5 Models for delivering e-learning ..................................................47
3.5 Implementation of IT for Teaching and Learning in Hong Kong .........49 3.5.1 Implementation of IT for teaching and learning in Hong Kong ....49 3.5.2 Implementation of IT for teaching and learning in IVE ................53
3.6 Factors Affecting the Use of IT for Teaching and Learning ..................58 3.6.1 Barriers against the implementation of IT in education ................58 3.6.2 Resistance to technological change ..............................................59 3.6.3 Factors affecting the use of the Web for education .......................60 3.6.4 Factors affecting the implementation of Virtual Learning
Environments ..............................................................................60 3.6.5 Factors inhibiting innovation in ICT education ............................62 3.6.6 Barriers to the adoption of technology .........................................63 3.6.7 Factors influencing vocational teachers’ use of online
functionalities ..............................................................................64 3.6.8 Other research into factors affecting the use of IT in teaching and
learning .......................................................................................65 3.6.9 Factors affecting the use of IT for teaching and learning: a
summary......................................................................................66
CHAPTER FOUR RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .........................................68
4.1 Introduction.............................................................................................68 4.2 Research Framework ..............................................................................70 4.3 Implementation Rubric...........................................................................71
4.3.1 Dimensions of implementation ....................................................72 4.3.2 Policy in context ..........................................................................73 4.3.3 Perceptions of teaching and learning............................................73 4.3.4 Teachers’ practice in using IT for teaching and learning ...............75
4.4 Pilot the Protocol .....................................................................................76 4.5 Survey ......................................................................................................79
4.5.1 Purpose of survey ........................................................................79 4.5.2 Population and sample .................................................................79
4.5.3 Data gathering instrument............................................................80 4.5.4 Data gathering procedures ...........................................................80 4.5.5 Data analysis ...............................................................................81
4.6 Interview ..................................................................................................82 4.6.1 Purpose of interview....................................................................82 4.6.2 Types of interview .......................................................................83 4.6.3 Selection of interviewees .............................................................83 4.6.4 Data gathering procedures ...........................................................85 4.6.5 Data analysis ...............................................................................86
4.7 Document Analysis ..................................................................................87 4.7.1 Purpose of document analysis ......................................................87 4.7.2 Related documents collected and analysed...................................87 4.7.3 Minutes of meetings collected and analysed.................................91
4.8 Conclusion of Research Methodology ....................................................92
CHAPTER FIVE RESULTS ................................................................................93
5.1 Introduction.............................................................................................93 5.2 Characteristics of Teachers .....................................................................93
5.2.1 Rank of teachers ..........................................................................95 5.2.2 Teaching experience of teachers...................................................96 5.2.3 Place of work...............................................................................97 5.2.4 Posting of teachers.......................................................................98 5.2.5 Level of course taught by teachers ...............................................99 5.2.6 IT training received by teachers ...................................................99 5.2.7 Training in IT for teaching and learning received by teachers.....100
5.3 Degree of Implementation of the Innovation........................................102 5.3.1 Introduction ...............................................................................102 5.3.2 Reliability of survey questions...................................................103 5.3.3 Distribution of teachers’ Level of Use........................................104 5.3.4 Relationship between teachers’ LoU and their background.........105
5.4 Factors Affecting Teachers Putting the Innovation into Practice ........123 5.4.1 Factors identified by Factor Analysis .........................................123 5.4.2 Factors collected from open-ended questions .............................128
5.5 Issues Encountered by Teachers during the Implementation..............130 5.5.1 Lack of support given to teachers...............................................132 5.5.2 Heavy workload faced by teachers.............................................134
5.5.3 Students’ academic ability and motivation .................................135 5.5.4 Teachers’ knowledge of using IT................................................136 5.5.5 Teachers’ incentives for using IT for teaching and learning ........136 5.5.6 Students’ access to IT at home ...................................................137 5.5.7 Copyright issues ........................................................................137 5.5.8 Management’s discouragement ..................................................137 5.5.9 Lacking a well-defined policy....................................................138 5.5.10 Module not appropriate to be delivered by IT ............................138
5.6 Overcoming the Issues...........................................................................138 5.6.1 Reducing heavy workload and allowing sufficient time for
implementation..........................................................................139 5.6.2 Attending appropriate training ...................................................139 5.6.3 Seeking assistance for technical problems..................................140 5.6.4 Changing students’ attitudes ......................................................141 5.6.5 Resolving copyright issues.........................................................141
5.7 Conclusion of Results ............................................................................141
CHAPTER SIX DISCUSSION...........................................................................148
6.1 Introduction...........................................................................................148 6.2 Degree of Implementation of the Curriculum Innovation ...................148 6.3 Factors that Hindered the Implementation..........................................155
6.3.1 Incentives for using IT...............................................................156 6.3.2 Teachers’ knowledge of using IT................................................157 6.3.3 Support for teachers in using IT.................................................158 6.3.4 Extra workload when using IT ...................................................160 6.3.5 Teachers’ attitudes .....................................................................162 6.3.6 Student background ...................................................................163 6.3.7 Intellectual property concerns ....................................................164 6.3.8 Availability of a well-defined policy ..........................................165
6.4 Issues Encountered by Teachers During the Implementation .............167 6.4.1 System-related issues.................................................................168 6.4.2 Teacher-related issues ................................................................169 6.4.3 Student-related issues ................................................................171
6.5 Ways by which Teachers Overcame the Issues.....................................172 6.6 Conclusion .............................................................................................174
CHAPTER SEVEN CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............177
7.1 Introduction...........................................................................................177 7.2 Overview of the Research......................................................................177 7.3 Implications of the Results ....................................................................179
7.3.1 Implications for implementation studies.....................................180 7.3.2 Implications for policy and practice ...........................................182
7.4 Recommendations for Improving Current Practice ............................187 7.4.1 Review the current policy and redefine new policy in IT for
teaching and learning.................................................................188 7.4.2 Set up channels for disseminating new policy ............................190 7.4.3 Empower teachers with professional development activities ......191 7.4.4 Cultivate collaboration among teachers......................................192 7.4.5 Enhance teachers’ incentives in using IT....................................194 7.4.6 Support to teachers from IVE management ................................195 7.4.7 Sharing of good practice and resources ......................................196
7.5 Suggestions for Further Research.........................................................198 7.5.1 Use of implementation rubric.....................................................198 7.5.2 Implementation of the innovation by other stakeholders.............199 7.5.3 Implementation of the innovation at classroom level..................200 7.5.4 Interaction between the factors that hindered the implementation
..................................................................................................200 7.6 Concluding Remarks.............................................................................201
REFERENCES APPENDICES
p. i
A LIST OF TABLES, FIGURES AND APPENDICES Table 2.1 Goals for Using IT for Teaching and Learning in IVE Table 2.2 Three Levels of IT Competence for VTC Teachers Table 3.1 A List of Different Levels of a ‘LoU’ Chart Table 3.2 Factors and Levels of Web-based Instruction (WBI) Table 4.1 Questions for Focus Group Table 4.2 A List of Proposed Interviewees with Different Scores across
Different LoU Dimensions Table 4.3 Implementation Target for the Use of WebCT for IVE Course
Delivery Table 5.1 Distribution of Teachers’ Ranks and their Campuses Table 5.2 Distribution of Teachers’ Ranks and their Departments Table 5.3 Rank held by Teachers Table 5.4 Teaching Experience of Teachers Table 5.5 Place of Work of Teachers Table 5.6 Posting of Teachers Table 5.7 Level of Course Taught by Teachers Table 5.8 IT Training Received by Teachers Table 5.9 IT for Teaching and Learning Training Received by Teachers Table 5.10 Distribution of Overall LoU Scored by 329 Teachers Table 5.11 Cronbach Alpha for the Three Dimensions of LoU Table 5.12 A Summary of LoU of the Respondents Table 5.13 A Summary of Correlation between Teachers’ Background and their
LoUs Using ANOVA Table 5.14 IT Tools Used by Teachers Table 5.15 A Summary of Results of Exploratory Factor Analysis Table 5.16 Factors Identified by Confirmatory Factor Analysis and their
Reliabilities Table 5.17 A List of Factors Affecting Implementation as Expressed by 149 IVE
Teachers Table 5.18 A List of Issues Encountered by 168 IVE Teachers as Revealed from
the Survey Figure 5.1 Confirmatory Factor Analysis Model Describing the Factors Affecting
the Implementation Appendix I Implementation Rubric Used in this Study Appendix II Questionnaires Used in this Study Appendix III IT Capability Enhancement Plan for Benchmarking IVE Teachers’ IT
Competencies
p. ii
ABSTRACT
The rapid development of technology and explosion of information on the Internet
had lead to a surge of using IT for teaching and learning among different education
sectors. In the light of this, many education institutions had developed policy in
implementing IT for teaching and learning to improve and enhance the quality of the
courses they provided.
This thesis reports a study of using IT for teaching and learning by teachers in the
Hong Kong Institute of Vocational Education (IVE), as an implementation of a
curriculum innovation. The aim of this study was to investigate how teachers acted in
the implementation process rather than to investigate the effectiveness of IT brought
to teaching and learning.
Different research methods were used to answer the research questions posed for the
study. An “Implementation Rubric” was established to find out how the innovation
was implemented by IVE teachers. Both qualitative and quantitative methods were
used to identify the factors that hindered and enhanced the implementation.
Document analysis was also adopted to triangulate the evidence gathered from
surveys and interviews.
Results of this research indicated that, in general, the innovation was implemented by
IVE teachers, although the degree of implementation of individual dimensions and
sub-dimensions varied. This study identified eight critical factors that hindered the
implementation of the innovation. Although some of the factors have been
p. iii
commonly mentioned in the literature, the study adds additional perspectives to it, in
particular in the context of vocational education in Hong Kong. Each of these factors
is discussed in detail and compared with the literature for better interpretation. This
study also investigated the issues IVE teachers encountered during the
implementation of the innovation and the ways they resolved these issues.
The implications of the findings are discussed, and finally eight recommendations for
improving the current practices and four suggestions for further research are
proposed.
p. iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Acknowledgement and sincere thanks are extended to the following people for their
assistance and support tendered to me for this study:
— my colleagues of the Teaching and Learning Centre of the VTC for their
valuable comments given for the establishment of the ‘Implementation
Rubric’;
— the teaching staff of the VTC for their participation in the focus group
interview, the survey and the in-depth interviews;
— my friends and colleagues of the VTC for their continuous
encouragement during my study;
— my thesis supervisors, Professor Barry Harper and Professor Brian Ferry,
for their patience and timely guidance that assisted me through different
stages of my study to the completion of the thesis; and
— my wife, Donna, for her understanding and caring of me throughout the
whole period of my study.
Without them, I could hardly have completed this study and finished this thesis.
p. 1
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the Study
The advancement of technology, in particular information technology (IT), in the
past decade has brought fundamental changes to our daily life. To meet the demand
of bringing Hong Kong to a knowledge-based society, the Government of the Hong
Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR Govt.) launched a five-year strategic
plan to enhance the quality of education by including IT in the school curriculum
(HKSAR Govt., 1997).
In 1998, the Vocational Training Council of Hong Kong (VTC), as the major
provider of vocational education, established a policy that IT would be the vehicle
for the enhancement of teaching and learning (VTC, 1998). Such initiatives had
brought new challenges to all VTC teachers and eventually, these would have
impacts on their roles and practice.
The Hong Kong Institute of Vocational Education (IVE), was the major arm of the
VTC, providing vocational education, and employed more than 1,200 teachers in
varied disciplines across different campuses located in Hong Kong. The mandated
policy, implemented in 1998, was expected to have an impact on IVE teaching
practice.
p. 2
1.2 Aim and Purpose of the Study
This study regarded ‘using IT for teaching and learning’ as an aspect of curriculum
innovation and change. It involved an investigation of teachers’ practice of using IT
in teaching and learning in the IVE. It examined this context at a particular time,
namely at a stage where the use of IT for teaching and learning was adopted and
implemented, i.e. from 1998 to 2004. The aim of this study was to explore the
process of change and innovation in action rather than effectiveness, and focuses on
relevant activities that happened during the period mentioned above. How and why
IVE teachers acted as the innovation was actually being implemented were studied.
Deriving from the aim of this study, the purpose of the study can be broken down as:
(i) to evaluate the degree of implementation of an innovation; (ii) to document the
factors that affected the implementation; and (iii) to recommend solutions that
teachers adopted during the implementation. Based on these purposes, the research
questions of this study were then defined.
1.3 The Research Questions
The present study intended to investigate the following research questions:
i. To what degree has the innovation been implemented?
ii. What were the factors that affected teachers putting the innovation
into practice?
p. 3
The first question attempted to determine the state of implementation between 1998
and 2004, how teachers acted and what caused these behaviours during the
implementation process.
The second question looked into the factors that hindered the implementation. Issues
which individual teachers encountered in their daily teaching when implementing the
innovation and the ways they overcame the issues were investigated.
1.4 Significance of the Study
Hong Kong has been undergoing a rapid change in its socio-economic situation in
recent years. As a result, education systems needed to change to meet a rapidly
changing socio-economic context (Education Commission, 2000). Among several
different education sectors, vocational education was an example of one that needed
to be more responsive to meet the changing needs in the knowledge-based economy
of Hong Kong. To enhance the quality of vocational education, it was suggested that
the application of IT might be one promising approach (VTC, 1998). As Caldwell
(1997) acknowledged “technology enriches and supports the work of teachers and
students in ways previously unimagined” (p. 67). However, there was then no
agreement on the best model or framework for adopting and implementing ‘IT for
education’ (Harper et al., 2000; Zhao & Frank, 2003). It is hoped that the findings
and recommendations from this study will be of value for policy makers as they
create necessary support measures to encourage and facilitate the use of IT in
p. 4
teaching and learning in VET institutions. Specifically, this study would:
i. provide a picture of how Hong Kong VET teachers apply IT for
teaching and learning;
ii. find out the issues that teachers encountered during the
implementation;
iii. suggest ways of improving the application of IT for teaching and
learning in IVE; and
iv. contribute to the literature in ‘applying IT for teaching’ as a
curriculum innovation, in vocational education in particular.
This study focused on one vocational institution’s approach towards using IT in
teaching and learning in a Chinese-dominated society, therefore, caution is needed in
extrapolating the findings from this study to other educational settings. However, it is
believed that the experiences of teachers of IVE will have relevance to other
vocational education institutions that have either begun introducing IT in teaching
and learning or are contemplating doing so.
1.5 Limitations of the Study
This research studied the implementation of IT in teaching and learning in a
vocational education institution in Hong Kong. Given such a wide topic, there were
many choices for the researcher to determine what research could be done and how it
should be conducted, as “these are not choices between good or bad, but choices
p. 5
among alternatives, all of which have merit” (Patton, 1990. p. 166).
During the implementation process, different stakeholders, such as government
officials, management of the institute, teachers, students and parents, were involved.
Among different stakeholders, teachers were considered indispensable in the process
in using IT for teaching and learning (Fullan & Smith, 1999). The researcher has
finally chosen the IVE teachers as the subjects for this study.
This study investigated the ‘what’ and ‘how’ of the IT that should be adopted by
teachers and the factors affecting the implementation, as well as the issues
encountered by teachers during the process. No attempt was made to study the
effectiveness of their teaching or the quality of teaching when IT was adopted.
The time frame of this study was also confined to the period between 1998 and 2004,
i.e. the first stage of the implementation. Whether an innovation would be firmly
established in the system or fade out of the system, would partly depend on how it
was implemented (Koo, 1995), and the first stage of the implementation would be of
paramount importance. The researcher had chosen this period for studying as this
period would affect the continuation of the innovation.
Some limitations existed in this study and they are mainly concerned with the
research framework and the methods used.
First, the implementation rubric used to measure the implementation of the
p. 6
innovation by IVE teachers was derived from different researchers and writers at
different stages. The rubric had not been used in any prior research, and further
verification and testing might be required.
Second, the rubric was designed to measure different aspects of the implementation
using different dimensions and sub-dimensions. Therefore, it might be possible to
identify a teacher’s specific Level of Use (LoU) under one dimension or
sub-dimension of the rubric. However, it might not be possible to precisely identify
and conclude to what degree the innovation was implemented by individual teachers,
i.e. to identify a teacher’s overall LoU.
Third, for the interviews conducted, it was expected that different ranks of teaching
staff with similar scores at a particular LoU could be selected. However, after careful
investigation, only one senior lecturer met the criteria and agreed to participate in the
interview. Therefore, the subjects of the interviews were mainly teachers below the
rank of senior lecturer.
Fourth, the study investigated the factors that might affect the implementation of the
innovation. Factor analysis techniques were used to identify these factors and
correlation analysis was used to calculate the correlations between some of the
factors. While it may be worthwhile to study the causal relationships between these
factors, time constraints precluded this.
Last, the study investigated how the innovation was implemented by only one group
p. 7
of the stakeholders, the teachers. Studying one group of stakeholders, without the
participation of other important stakeholders such as the students, might reveal only
part of the true picture of the implementation.
Bounded by the limitations, the findings yielded from this study might only apply to
similar educational institutions of similar nature and size in Hong Kong.
Generalising the findings to other institutions outside Hong Kong or other
institutions elsewhere might not be appropriate, as this study was conducted uniquely
with Chinese teaching staff in a Chinese-dominated society.
It was recognised that the limitations might affect the quality and outcomes of the
study. However sometimes tradeoffs are considerable, as Patton (1990) reminded:
It is crucial to maintain a balance between design strategies and trade-offs… that there are no perfect research design… trade-offs are necessitated by limited resources, limited time, and limits on the human ability to grasp the complex nature of reality (p. 162).
1.6 A Summary of the Structure of this Thesis
The thesis has been organised into seven chapters, namely Chapter One Introduction,
Chapter Two The Curriculum Innovation, Chapter Three Literature Review, Chapter
Four Research Methodology, Chapter Five Results, Chapter Six Discussion, and
Chapter Seven Conclusions and Recommendations.
p. 8
Chapter One introduces the rationale of the study, the aims and purpose of the study
as well as the research questions. The significance of the study is also described and
its limitations are listed. A structure of the thesis and a section on the definition of
terms is also provided for easy referencing. The structure of each chapter of the
thesis is described as follows.
In Chapter Two, the context of the curriculum innovation, which is the focus of this
study, is explained in detail. The background to the change and the characteristics of
the innovation that included IT for teaching and learning and the roles for the
teachers in the innovation are discussed. The nature of the innovation that was driven
by establishment of a VTC-wide policy is provided. The scale of the innovation at
different levels, namely, the institutional level, as well as the departmental and
classroom levels, is also explained.
Chapter Three reviews the literature on curriculum implementation and factors
affecting implementation. The implementation of IT in teaching and learning as well
as the situation of Hong Kong is also reviewed. Drawing from the conclusions of
different researchers from different parts of the world, this chapter also discusses,
compares and summarises the factors that affect the use of IT in teaching and
learning.
Chapter Four outlines the theoretical framework that the study was based upon, the
research methods and instruments adopted, and the procedures and manner in which
the data is analysed.
p. 9
The quantitative data collected from the survey and the descriptive data gathered
from interviews are discussed, analysed and presented in Chapter Five. The analysis
has been arranged and presented in accordance with the research questions set in
Chapter One.
Chapter Six presents the overall results of this study in terms of the degree of
implementation of the innovation, the factors that affected the implementation, and
the issues encountered by IVE teachers in using IT for teaching and learning in their
daily practice. The comparisons between the findings of this study and previous
studies conducted elsewhere are also discussed and concluded.
Finally, Chapter Seven outlines the implications of the results yielded from this study
and proposed recommendations for IVE management to improve its teachers’
practice in using IT for teaching and learning and suggested areas for further
research.
1.7 Definition of Terms
Different terminologies had different meanings to different people in different
institutions, therefore, it was important to define the meanings of the terminologies
used in this study.
Change refers to any alteration in the aspects of education or curriculum which
p. 10
encompassed educational philosophy, values, objectives, organizational structures,
materials, teaching strategies, student experiences, assessment and learning outcomes
(Leithwood, 1981). Concerning curriculum change, the term had been used very
broadly in different contexts and senses. It was then a generic term which subsumed
a whole set of concepts such as ‘innovation’, ‘development’ and ‘adoption’ (Marsh,
1992).
Implementation is the actual use of an innovation and what an innovation consists of
in practice (Fullan & Pomfret, 1997). Focusing on teaching and learning,
implementation consisted of (i) using new materials (or technologies), (ii) engaging
in new teaching behaviours and practices, and (iii) incorporating new beliefs (Fullan,
2001b).
Information Technology (IT) is used interchangeably with the terms Information and
Communication Technology (ICT) and Communication and Information Technology
(CIT) in this study. These terminologies focused on the access to information and
technology and connectivity between different systems or networks. Building upon
this idea, the terminologies such as Web-based instruction, Web-based teaching and
learning, and e-learning could also be put under the umbrella of IT.
Innovation is any process, product, idea or practice that requires new behaviours of
the user (Loucks & Lieberman, 1983). As products, it could be computers,
curriculum texts, assessment techniques, and as processes, it could be constructive
teaching techniques, student teamwork, etc (Hall & Hord, 2006).
p. 11
IT in Teaching and Learning, in the VTC context, refers to the use of computer
networks, application software or the Intranet/Internet to prepare course materials,
present lecture materials, communicate with students or colleagues, and develop and
manage learning environments to enhance student learning (VTC, 1999a).
IVE refers to the Hong Kong Institute of Vocational Education, a member of the
Vocational Training Council of Hong Kong (VTC), which provided an alternative
route of education for Post-secondary Seven, Five and Three students in Hong Kong.
Its courses covered nine academic disciplines including: Applied Science; Business
Administration; Child Education and Community Services; Construction; Design,
Printing, Textiles and Clothing; Hotel, Service and Tourism Studies; Information
Technology; Electrical and Electronic Engineering; and Mechanical, Manufacturing
and Industrial Engineering. The nine IVE campuses ran all these courses.
Level of Use (LoU) refers to teachers’ behaviours of an innovation through various
stages of an innovation. These fixed sets of stages helped to define the various stages
of implementation of an innovation and analyse the discrepancies between current
practices and desired end-points.
VTC refers to the Vocational Training Council of Hong Kong. Established in 1982,
the VTC had been the largest vocational education, training and professional
development group in Hong Kong. VTC provided valuable credentials for over
180,000 students each year through a full range of pre-employment and in-service
p. 12
programmes with internationally-recognised qualifications.
WebCT is a Web-based platform that provides an e-learning environment for students.
It allowed teachers to disseminate their teaching schedules, teaching materials,
on-line learning activities, and on-line assessments to their students. Different
communications tools such as e-mail and discussion tools were also available.
Teachers could also embed external resources or links to WebCT to facilitate student
learning.
p. 13
CHAPTER TWO THE CURRICULUM INNOVATION
2.1 Background to the Change
Hong Kong could be regarded as a Chinese society as more than 90 percent of its
inhabitants are ethnic Chinese (Redding, 1990). Although Hong Kong had been a
British colony for more than 100 years and had adopted a British system in terms of
constitution and structure, it has preserved a ‘traditional’ Chinese culture strongly
influenced by Confucian values (Chen, 2001).
When China resumed its sovereignty of Hong Kong in 1997, the new government of
Hong Kong (the government) decided education would be one of the major areas that
deserved investment, so that Hong Kong would move into a knowledge-based
economy and a regional information and transport hub in the Asia Pacific region.
While most low-skilled jobs in Hong Kong had moved to China’s Mainland, where
salaries were lower, in more recent years, jobs requiring a higher level of education,
and the ability to adapt to the rapidly-changing economic and social circumstances
were in demand and were essential for the long-term viability of the workforce of
Hong Kong (Hayhoe, 2001).
To meet such challenges and demands, significant sums were set aside to transform
Hong Kong into an Internet hub for the Asia Pacific Region (VTC, 2000a). One of
the initiatives was the launching of a five-year strategic plan, namely “Information
Technology for Learning in a New Era”, to equip students in schools with sufficient
p. 14
knowledge and skills in using IT for their learning as well as their daily life (HKSAR
Govt., 1997; Education & Manpower Bureau, 1998).
In the higher education sector, Hong Kong universities also encouraged academics to
make use of IT for teaching enhancement. The University Grants Committee (UGC)
had reserved funding, through the Teaching Development Grants, for academics to
develop IT-enabled resources to improve their teaching (UGC, 2000 & 2002).
In the vocational education sector, The Hong Kong Institute of Vocational Education
(IVE), operating under the Vocational Training Council (VTC), had been the largest
government-funded vocational education provider in Hong Kong, consisting of nine
campuses with more than 1,200 teachers and 20,000 full-time students. To cope with
the changing demand of society and to maintain its leading position in the vocational
education and training (VET) section in Hong Kong, an IT Strategic Plan was
formulated to direct the intensive use of IT to enhance its competitiveness in the
region (VTC, 1998). One of the important aspects of the plan had been to enhance
teaching and learning via IT.
From the beginning of 1998, policies and requirements regarding using IT for
teaching and learning had been set up and imposed gradually (VTC, 1998; VTC,
1999a; VTC, 1999e; VTC, 1999f; VTC, 1999g; VTC, 1999h; VTC, 1999i).
p. 15
2.2 Characteristics of the Innovation
Using IT for Teaching and Learning is an innovation in curriculum delivery in IVE
and studying the characteristics of the innovation in context would deepen the
understanding of the nature and the implementation of the innovation. The following
sections explore the characteristics of the innovation in context. ‘IT for teaching and
learning’ and ‘the changing roles of teachers in using IT for teaching and learning’
were important features that reflected the characteristics of the innovation.
2.2.1 IT for teaching and learning
The emergence of Information Technology (IT) has brought changes to many aspects
of life such as business, entertainment, and education. In education, IT has not only
changed how courses are designed and delivered, but also how teachers teach as well
as how students learn. Bates (1997) suggests that IT helps to improve access to
education, the quality of learning and the cost-effectiveness of education. It “has
become a force for a new form of education, creating a paradigm shift: a change to a
new model and a set of expectations and rules for how to function successfully
within a new learning environment” (Harasim et al., 1998). Morrison (2003)
acknowledges the power of IT as it helps to “create learner-centred learning which is
personalized, fresh, just-in-time, authentic, solution-centred, relevant, rich,
interactive…” (p. 29).
IT for teaching and learning was such a generic term that different users and
p. 16
institutions had different interpretations at different times. Like every technology, IT
had developmental stages. In the eighties, Computer-Mediated Communication
(CMC) technologies such as e-mail, bulletin boards and computer conferencing for
teaching and learning (Harasim et al., 1998, Paulsen, 1998) played a significant role
in education.
Some educators used Information Communication Technology (ICT) to represent the
use of IT for teaching, learning and communications (Mason, 1998; Law et al., 2000).
Harasim et al. (1998) adopted the term Network Learning to represent the use of
Computer-Mediated Communication (CMC) technologies such as e-mail, bulletin
boards and computer conferencing for teaching and learning.
The adoption of the Internet and the World Wide Web (the Web) in the early nineties
has expanded and extended the capability of IT and thus created a ‘knowledge
network’. Such a network enabled “the use of electronic linkages among different
teaching and learning communities to facilitate information acquisition and
knowledge building” (Harasim et al., 1998; p. 10). Khan (1997) described the use of
the Web for teaching and learning as Web-based Instruction (WBI). He defined WBI
as “a hypermedia-based instructional program that utilizes the attributes and
resources of the World Wide Web to create a meaningful learning environment where
learning is fostered and supported” (Khan, 1997, p. 6).
Recently, the term ‘e-Learning’ or ‘on-line Learning’ has becoming more popular
among educational institutions. E-Learning could be regarded as “taking a course…
p. 17
via the Internet” (ComputerUse.comInc, 2001) or “learning via the use of technology
tools” (E-Learning Working Group 2000) or the “use of information and
communication technologies (ICTs) to deliver content (learning, knowledge and
skills) on a one-way (asynchronous) or two-way (synchronous) basis” (Murray, 2001,
p.3).
Since this study explored how teachers use IT for teaching and learning in the IVE,
the term IT for teaching and learning has been used as a generic term throughout this
study and has been used interchangeably with terms such as ICT, CMC, WBI and
e-learning to represent the provision of learning experiences to students using IT.
In the VTC, IT for teaching and learning referred to “the use of computer network,
application software or the Intranet/ Internet to: (i) prepare/deliver course materials;
(ii) present lecture materials; (iii) communicate with students or colleagues; and (iv)
develop and manage the learning environment to enhance student learning” (VTC,
1999a). In this study, the use of IT for teaching and learning is regarded as a
component of curriculum innovation.
2.2.2 Changing roles of teachers in adopting IT for teaching and learning
The introduction of IT for teaching and learning in IVE brought new challenges to
IVE teachers. Teachers, amongst the most significant stakeholders in such a process,
are given enormous responsibilities “in the moulding of the characters and minds of
the new generation” (Delors, 1996). Therefore, the roles of teachers as well as the
p. 18
skills demand on them would be changed accordingly. As Fullan (1993) comments,
“Teachers’ jobs are more complex than ever before. They must respond to the needs
of a diverse and changing student population, a rapidly changing technology in the
workplace, and demands for excellence from all segments of society” (p. 5).
Hargreaves and Fullan (1998) also remind, “teachers must become the pedagogical
experts of the future, where their values and know-how counterbalance the inane use
of computers” (p. 78). The changing roles of the teacher in using IT for teaching and
learning has become an interest of many researchers (Ehrmann, 1999; Gosper et al.,
1996; Harasim et al.; Harper & Hedberg 1997; 1998; Law et al., Lewis, 1999; 2000;
Yueng, Cheng, & Koo, 2000 & 2001).
2.3 Nature of the Innovation
The nature of the innovation initially was driven by the establishment of VTC-wide
policies. In 1999, in order to provide quality education to its students, VTC received
a lump sum of special grant of HK$ 176 million (about A$ 40 million) from the
government to upgrade its IT infrastructure, hardware and software, and an
indication of the percentage of how much IT should be used by teachers for teaching
was also formulated (VTC, 1998; VTC, 1999b; VTC, 1999c; VTC, 1999d). Coupled
with this, the senior management of VTC established a policy that IT would be the
vehicle for teaching and learning, goals for using IT for teaching and learning and
different levels of IT competency were identified, as well as provision of training to
up-date and up-grade the IT skills and knowledge of teachers to meet the demand of
p. 19
the innovation (VTC, 1999g; VTC, 1999h).
2.3.1 Goals for using IT for teaching and learning
As an initial step for leveraging valuable resources and facilitating human capital
development in VTC, goals for using IT for teaching and learning were set up in
early 1999 (VTC, 1999d). The target goals were to design and provide media-rich
courseware for 75% of the total curriculum provision at the end of five years to cover
50% of the class teaching materials. These goals were broken down in Table 2.1.
Table 2.1
Goals for Using IT for Teaching and Learning in IVE
Planned Provision Courseware
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Presentation courseware 20% 40% 45% 45% 45% IT-enable
Interactive courseware 5% 10% 20% 25% 30%
Non IT-enable 75% 50% 35% 30% 25%
(Extracted from VTC, 1999d)
Given that technology was changing rapidly, the original targets were reviewed and
revised, after organisation-wide consultation. The final goals were reported in the
‘Implementation of Web Based Management and Delivery of IVE Courses’ (VTC,
1999i). The breakdown of the final target is listed and discussed in Chapter Four (see
Table 4.3 for details).
p. 20
2.3.2 IT competency for IVE teachers
In late 1998, three levels of IT competency for teaching and learning that the VTC
expected of its teachers were identified (Koo, 2001). They were: the Awareness
Level; the Application Level; and the Advanced Level. The Awareness Level referred
to the stage at which teachers were aware of the use of IT for teaching and learning.
The Application Level expected that teachers became more knowledgeable about
using IT in their daily teaching. The Advanced Level referred to the stage at which
teachers became very skilful in using IT and were able to develop their own IT
resources for their teaching as well as helping others to work in teams to develop
teaching materials. The details of these levels were listed in Table 2.2.
p. 21
Table 2.2
Three Levels of IT Competency for VTC Teachers
(Extracted from VTC, 1999g, p. 6)
‘Please see print copy for image’
p. 22
2.3.3 Training provision for IVE teachers
Teachers’ professional development was an essential process in any educational
change (Bate, 1995; Fullan, 1991b; Harasim et al., 1998). Monteith (2004) stressed
that, to implement ICT successfully in school, training for teachers was a substantial
starter. To prepare IVE teachers in adopting IVE for teaching and learning, an IT
Enhancement Programme (ITEP) was planned for them to achieve the IT
competencies as required by the policy (VTC, 1999b). The training programme not
only introduced IT knowledge and skills, but also the rationale in using IT for
learning, on both the policy and the pedagogical side. For the first instance, 28
face-to-face courses in seven categories, which covered both pedagogy and
application of IT, were organised in September 1999 (Koo, 2001). Teachers were
encouraged to attend these courses according to their own needs.
Teachers who could not join the face-to-face courses, could either download the
course materials from the programme Website for reference, or enrol in the on-line
IT courses offered by VTC’s Continuous Learning Centre. It was expected that
teachers could participate in these training courses in any place, at any time and at
any pace. The number of courses, as well as modes of delivery, was progressively
increased to accommodate the demands of teachers. By February 2002, the number
of courses provided accumulated to 418, and 5548 attendances were made by 1381
IVE teachers (VTC, 2002a).
p. 23
2.3.4 Benchmarking for IVE teachers
Benchmarking of teachers’ progress and achievements was an important aspect in the
change process. An ‘IT Capability Enhancement Plan’ was designed and distributed
to all IVE teachers to assist them to identify their training needs and to record their
achievements after attending the ITEP (VTC, 1999a). Teachers could match the
different IT competencies with the courses they had or were going to attend.
Teachers were expected to negotiate with their supervisors for training priority,
teaching load re-allocation, time release, timetable arrangement and special funding
provision.
2.4 Scale of the Innovation
The scale of the innovation could be viewed from three levels: namely the institutional,
departmental and classroom levels. As the innovation was management driven, i.e. a
top down approach, the scale of the innovation at the institutional level actually could
be studied by investigating whether the policy was adopted by different IVE
Campuses. At the departmental level, the scale of the innovation focused on how
many teachers in each department had used IT for teaching and learning. At the
classroom level, studying how teachers used IT for teaching and learning would be
useful to explain the scale of the innovation at that level.
p. 24
CHAPTER THREE LITERATURE REVIEW
3.1 Implementation as a Process of Change
The idea of implementation seems simple, however, the concept had proven difficult
to define (Fullan, 1991a). Implementation was always regarded as “the actual use of
a new practice, what the practice looks like when certain characteristics are actually
used in a social system” (Loucks & Lieberman, 1983, p. 127), therefore, it “involves
reducing the differences between existing practices and practices suggested by the
innovation” (Leithwood, 1982, p. 253). Another interpretation referred to
implementation as: “the process of putting into practice an idea, programme, or set of
activities and structures new to the people attempting or expected to change” (Fullan,
1991a, p. 378). In summary, implementation was the process of carrying out what
was planned which consisted of using new materials, engaging in new behaviours
and practices and incorporating new beliefs (Fullan, 2001b).
3.2 Approaches to Curriculum Implementation
In the past three decades, different approaches have been used to study curriculum
implementation. The first approach, namely the fidelity perspective, investigated the
degree of faithful implementation of an innovation, and the criterion for success was
the faithful use of an innovation as intended by its developer (Snyder et al., 1992).
The initial and most extensively-documented approach to curriculum implementation
has been the fidelity perspective.
p. 25
The second approach was mutual adaptation (Berman & Pauley, 1975; McLaughlin,
1976), which emphasised how the innovation was adapted during the implementation
process, rather than measuring the degree of implementation of the innovation
against what was planned.
Enactment was another approach to studying curriculum implementation. It studied
how curriculum was enacted when actually experienced by teachers and students
during implementation.
3.2.1 Fidelity perspective
The majority of curriculum implementation has been studied from a fidelity
perspective (Snyder et al., 1992). The intent of this approach was to:
measure the degree to which a particular innovation is implemented as planned…[and to]…identify the factors which facilitate or hinder implementation as planned, assuming the desired outcome of curricular change is fidelity to the original plan (Snyder et al., p. 404).
This interpretation was in line with what Fullan and Pomfret (1977) suggested:
[this approach is to] determine the degree of implementation of an innovation in terms of the extent to which actual use of the innovation corresponds to intended or planned use and to determine factors which facilitate and inhibit such implementation (p. 340).
p. 26
Underlying this perspective, there were some assumptions about curriculum
knowledge, change and the role of the teacher. Curriculum knowledge was primarily
created by experts outside the school who designed and developed the curriculum
innovation. Change was seen as a linear procedure that happened when teachers
implemented the innovation in the classroom. The curriculum was evaluated to
determine whether the planned outcomes were achieved. It was expected that “an
already developed innovation exists and the task is to get individuals and groups of
individuals to implement it faithfully in practice” (Fullan, 2001b, p. 40). Therefore,
when teachers executed the curricular change as planned, the implementation was
regarded as successful.
To determine whether curriculum innovation was really implemented, the properties
of the innovation needed to be concisely identified so that researchers could
determine to what degree the innovation was being implemented. Hall et al. (1975)
suggested it would be helpful to determine the level of use of an innovation using a
‘Level of Use of an Innovation’ framework.
A ‘Level of Use’ (LoU) chart was developed to investigate the level of use of the
innovation by teachers in the classroom (Hall et al., 1975). It helped “to understand
and predict what is likely to occur with people in change” (Hall & Hord, 2006, p.
159). The LoU chart defined the elements of curriculum innovation and different
degrees or levels of use that people adopted for a particular innovation. Measuring
these levels helped to facilitate greater implementation. It was assumed that “the
variation in use by individual practitioners must be behaviourally described and
p. 27
systematically accounted for if innovations are to be used with maximum
effectiveness” (Hall & Loucks, 1982; Hall et al., 1975). The analysis was based upon
the use of a fixed set of stages called ‘Level of Use’, between current practices and
desired outcomes. Each stage was defined by a particular set of teacher concerns.
The different levels of a LoU chart is shown in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1
A List of Different Levels of a ‘LoU’ Chart
(Extracted from Hall & Loucks, 1982, p. 145)
The ‘Level of Use of the Innovation’ (LoU) was developed based on the concept of
Concerns-Based Adoption Model (CBAM). ‘Concerns’ referred to describing
individuals’ perceptions, feelings, motivations, frustration and satisfaction as they
‘Please see print copy for image’
p. 28
progress through different stages in the process of implementing an innovation (Hall
et al., 1975). Mulford (2005) stated that “LoU focuses on the individual’s behaviour
and performance when facing something new” (p. 341) which might include
orienting oneself to the change, seeking and reviewing new materials, attending
training, examining the change and considering its use. According to Hall and his
associates (1975), there were seven stages of concerns in the Concerns- Based
Adoption Model which progressed from unrelated concerns, to self-concerns, then to
impact concerns. This model has been verified to be useful in different curriculum
implementation studies (e.g. Bridge, 1995; Koo, 1995 and Koon, 1995).
The LoU described the users’ behaviours of an innovation through various stages:
from spending most effort in orienting, to managing and finally, to integrating use of
the innovation. The model did not attempt to explain causality, but to define,
operationally, various stages of implementation. Each of these levels could be further
defined in terms of seven subparts or categories, as: knowledge, acquiring
information, sharing, assessing, planning, status reporting and performing. These
categories were presented, with the levels, in the form of a matrix. Hall et al. (1975)
defined them as:
Knowledge refers to that which the user knows about characteristics of the innovation, how to use it, and consequences of its use. Acquiring information means soliciting information about the innovation in a variety of ways, including questioning resource persons, corresponding with resource agencies, reviewing printed materials and making visits. Sharing is the sharing of plans, ideas, resources, outcomes, and problems related to use of the innovation. Assessing is the examination of the potential or actual use of the innovation or some aspect of it. Planning includes aligning resources, scheduling activities,
p. 29
meeting with others to organize and/or coordinating use of the innovation. Status reporting is the act that describes the personal stand at the present time in relation to use of the innovation. Performing is the actual actions carried out and activities entailed in operationalizing the innovation (pp. 54-55).
The ‘LoU’ chart was useful in planning and for facilitating the change process and in
conducting evaluation on the degree and level of use among people using a particular
innovation (Hall & Hord, 2006). One of the criticisms of the ‘LoU’ chart was its
‘fixed set of stages’. Prescribing the degree of use of a category or innovation with
hypothetical, discrete levels may be too mechanical, and thus might not be
appropriate and applicable to all situations.
Leithwood (1981) introduced an alternative to the ‘Level of Use’ model to evaluate
the nature and degree of implementation of programme innovations. He and his
associate developed a framework for planned change, as an alternative to LoU,
which they called ‘innovation profiles’ (Leithwood & Montgomery, 1987).
Innovation profiles provided a framework for addressing four important aspects of an
innovation:
i. Identifying critical dimensions of growth;
ii. Defining preferred status in terms of these dimensions;
iii. Determining current status; and
iv. Identifying manageable stages of growth between the current and
preferred status.
p. 30
An Innovation Profile was not a direct replacement of the LoU system, although the
system “has been extensively used in North America and part of Europe” (Leithwood
& Montgomery, 1987, p. 12). However, the dimensions of an innovation profile
shared the advantage of those categories used in the LoU Chart.
Leithwood and Montgomery (1987) clarified that an innovation profile was an
alternative that “is likely to provide a set of dimensions most consistent with the
explicit characteristics of the innovation. When implementing the innovation was the
primary goal, this seems the best alternative” (p.13). As implementation was a
process in which all activities in the process were actually occurring as a continuum,
classification of the degree of implementation of these activities using a discrete
level might not be sufficient to reflect how an innovation was actually implemented.
The innovation profile had an advantage over the LoU, as it described explicitly the
characteristics of the activities or elements of an innovation in a very flexible manner
because all activities happening in the implementation could be recorded directly
under the dimensions of the profile. Instead of using the fixed categories of ‘LoU’,
the innovation profile allowed the researchers to assign appropriate dimensions to be
studied according to the context of an innovation. Without the constraints of being
limited by fixed levels and categories, the innovation profile could precisely describe
how an innovation was implemented in reality.
p. 31
3.2.2 Mutual adaptation
The mutual adaptation perspective was also known as the mutually adaptive or
adaptive approach (Fullan, 1991b). Berman and McLaughlin (1974), who first used
the term ‘mutual adaptation’ in the Rand Study, were interested in studying practices
that were based on different assumptions about children, teachers and learning rather
than those practices studied by fidelity researchers (McLaughlin, 1976).
The assumption underlying this perspective was that implementation was a mutual
modification that includes modification of needs, interests and skills of the users and
organisation, as well as goals and methods during implementation. Fullan (1991a)
explained that “the adaptation approach assumes that the exact nature of
implementation cannot and/or should not be pre-specified, but rather should evolve
as different groups of users decide what is best and most appropriate for their
situation” (p.379). As Snyder et al. (1992) remarked:
the definition of mutual adaptation suggests the notion of points along a continuum of implementation. Mutual adaptation is seen as that process thereby adjustments in a curriculum are made by the central agencies and those who actually use it in the school or classroom context. This implies a certain amount of negotiation and flexibility on the part of both designers and practitioners (p. 140).
3.2.3 Curriculum enactment
Another approach, curriculum enactment, emphasised “how curriculum is shaped
p. 32
through the evolving constructs of teachers and students” (Snyder et al., 1992, p.
404). The enactment perspective defined curriculum as the experience jointly created
by students and teachers and curricular materials and strategies were only tools to
construct the enacted experience of the classroom (Snyder et al., 1992). The concerns
of this perspective were:
i. What are the enacted experiences and how do students and teachers
create them?
ii. What effect do outside factors have on the curriculum as enacted?
iii. What are the effects on students of the curriculum as actually enacted?
(Snyder et al., 1992, p. 418).
The curriculum enactment perspective assumed that
curriculum knowledge is a personal construct which must reflect personal and external standards. Change is a development process for both teachers and students, rather than only change in observable behaviour. The role of the teacher is a curriculum developer who grows ever more competent with his or her students in constructing positive educational experiences (Snyder et al., 1992).
Among the three approaches, the fidelity approach was the most popular approach
adopted by curriculum researchers, as Marsh and Morris (1991) point out “although
there is always some slippage between curriculum plans and implementation
practices, the fidelity of use perspective prevails in most subject areas rather than
mutual adaptation” (p. 29). Hall (1995) reported that the fidelity approach was
p. 33
commonly used by researchers both in the US and other nations. Examples of using
this approach could also be found from research conducted by Bridge (1995) and
Koon (1995), as cited by Hall and Hord (2006, p. 129) and Koo (1995).
Recent research conducted using the fidelity approach could also be found. The
research conducted by the International Association for the Evaluation of
Educational Achievement (IEA) on pedagogy and ICT use in schools (Law, Pelgrum
& Plomo, 2008) used this model. This research (the Second Information Technology
in Education Study – SITES), covering 28 national systems and using 174 case
studies, (i) investigated the extent of and ways in which countries around the world
adopted ICT in their classroom practices, and (ii) identified the factors that most
contributed to the effective use if ICT in learning and teaching.
In sum, the three approaches had different assumptions and focuses. The fidelity
approach assumed that if the planned curriculum designed by experts was carried out
by teachers, the curriculum was regarded as implemented successfully. The mutual
adoption approach assumed implementation was an evolving process and the needs
and interested of different stakeholders would change in different stages of the
implementation. The curriculum enactment perspective focused on the experience
gained by teachers and students during implementation rather than the curriculum
materials and strategies. The effect on students when the curriculum was
implemented was the major concern.
Given the different characteristics of these approaches, their emphasis and the tools
p. 34
used by these approaches in studying curriculum implementation are different.
3.3 Factors Affecting Implementation
Terms such as factors, barriers, components or elements had been used to present
matters that influenced the implementation of an innovation (Fullan, 1991b; Fullan &
Pomfret, 1977; Fullan & Park, 1977; Lieberman & Miller, 1984; Morris, 1990; Nias,
Southworth & Campbell, 1992; Pratt, 1994). Fullan (1991b) suggested nine factors
which influence implementation under three broad categories, namely: the
Characteristics of Change; Local Characteristics; and External Factors.
3.3.1 Characteristics of change
The four factors associated with this category were: need and relevance of the change;
clarity; complexity; and quality and practicality of the programme.
Need and relevance referred to the perceived need of the people who implement the
change (Snyder et al., 1992). If teachers perceived that the innovation was relevant to
them or if they saw the need for change, the degree of implementation would be
greater (Fullan, 2001b).
Clarity meant users’ understanding of goals and means of an innovation. Unclear and
unspecified goals and means could cause great anxiety and frustration to teachers
who try to implement the innovation (Fullan, 1982). Fullan (2001b) emphasised that
p. 35
“lack of clarity… represents a major problem at the implementation stage; teachers
and others find that the change is simply not very clear as to what it means” (p. 77).
Therefore, the better the understanding of goals and what was to be gained from their
adoption, the greater the degree of implementation (Snyder et al., 1992, p. 416).
Fullan (1982) defined complexity as “the difficulty and extent of change required of
the individuals responsible for implementation” (p. 58). “The greater the complexity
of innovation, the greater the degree of implementation” (Snyder et al., 1992, p. 416).
Moreover, Fullan (1991a) believed that “while complexity creates more problems, it
may result in greater change as more is being attempted” (p. 380).
Quality and practicality of the programme referred to the quality and availability of
resources that may include teaching materials and technologies (Fullan, 2007). The
resources available should meet important needs of teachers and students as well as
be practical and usable. Lacking sufficient and appropriate resources, successful
implementation would hardly occur (Nias et al., 1992).
3.3.2 Local characteristics
Four factors connected with the local characteristics were: school district
characteristics; board and community characteristics; the role of the principal; and
teacher characteristics and orientations. In the context of this research, the school
district could be referred to as a department of an IVE campus or an IVE campus and
p. 36
board, and community could be referred as the 1Academic Board and VTC’s
Headquarters respectively.
Fullan (1991b) argued that “the more the teachers or others have had negative
experiences with previous implementation attempts in the district…, the more
cynical or apathetic they will be about the next stage presented regardless of the
merit of the new idea” (p. 74). Moreover, central and direct support from the central
administrators (of that district) was a critical factor for district-wide change since
they led the development and execution of the change and knew exactly the
expectation of the change’ (Fullan, 1991a). However, Pratt (1994) believed that “the
support of central administrators will not be sufficient to ensure implementation; but
without it, failure is almost certain” (p. 332).
In IVE, the Headquarters of the VTC was responsible for providing the infrastructure
support and teacher training programmes for the innovation. Therefore, its roles were
of paramount importance to the implementation of IT in teaching and learning in
IVE.
Although “most school communities are not directly involved in implementation,
they can become aroused against certain innovation” (Fullan, 1982, p. 70). Riley
(1990) argued that there existed a strong relationship between the community support
1 The Academic Board is the highest governing board on VTC's academic matters. Its major roles are to formulate and endorse academic and training policies and regulations, to formulate strategies for the development of its academic institutions, to translate the relevant decisions of the Council into implementation guidelines, to decide on academic and training issues, and to review the systems and processes of these academic institutions for ensuring the quality of their programmes.
p. 37
of the school and the innovativeness. Therefore, “the greater the board and
community interest and support without controversy, the greater the degree of
implementation” (Snyder et al., 1992, p. 417).
Similar to a school, an academic department of an IVE campus or a campus provided
physical support such as computer laboratories, hardware and software as well as
peripherals, and local technical support to the implementation. Hence, the better the
support provided by the department and the campus, the greater the chance the
implementation would take place.
The role of the principal was vital in any educational change or implementation
(Fullan & Hargreaves, 1996; Hargreaves & Fullan, 1992; Senge et al., 1999). “The
support of the principal is almost invariably essential for successful innovation to
take place” (Pratt, 1994, p. 323). Active support from the principal enhanced
implementation since “principals have strong influences on the likelihood of change”
(Fullan, 1982, p. 171). However, “it is often the head teacher who is critical in
resistance to change, … he can effectively block, stifle, dissuade or ignore groups in
school who advocate change” (Ball, 1987, p. 79). IVE principals and heads of
departments’ support of the new policy right from the outset was necessary, but this
would not be sufficient. They needed to continue to support the innovation so that it
was sustainable.
Some teachers, as Fullan (1991a) commented: “[who] have a greater sense of
efficacy, … leads them to take action and persist in the effort required to bring about
p. 38
successful implementation” (p. 77). Teachers were the most significant agent in any
educational change (Hargreaves & Evans 1997). Teacher commitment was a vital
factor for successful implementation, and if they had been involved in the designing
and planning of a curriculum, they were more likely to be committed. “If a teacher
can’t or won’t do it, it simply can’t be done” (Hargreaves & Evans, 1997, p. 3).
Therefore, a greater sense of teacher efficacy might yield a greater degree of
implementation (Snyder et al., 1992, p. 417).
3.3.3 External factors
The last factor was the influence of the government and other external organisations.
Lacking role clarity and ambiguity, and with an absence of regular interpersonal
forums of communication, such bodies could affect the degree of implementation to
a certain extent. However, establishing a procedural relationship between local
schools and government agencies was substantial. Therefore “the better the
congruence between local needs and the reform and the greater the awareness of
subjective realities, the greater the degree of implementation” (Snyder et al., 1992, p.
417).
The factors discussed above seemed to be comprehensive in explaining the
influences on the implementation of an innovation as far as people, events and
resources were concerned. Many curriculum theorists (e.g. Fullan, 1991a; Nias et al.,
1992; Riley, 1990) stressed that these factors could not be understood in isolation,
since they formed a system of variables that interacted. It was a combination of
p. 39
characteristics occurring in specific settings that determined the implementation
outcomes. The complexity of the reality could only be explored through the study of
the interactions between these factors affecting change.
However, among these factors, ‘teacher-teacher relationships’ seemed to be amongst
the most essential elements affecting the success of the implementation of an
innovation, as Pratt (1994) commented: “curriculum improvement is most likely to
come about in an institution that has developed an ethos of collegial support” (p.
332). Snyder et al. (1992) called these relationships ‘collaboration and cooperation
between teachers’. Collaboration implied and created stronger interdependence,
shared responsibility, collective commitment and improvement, and greater readiness
to participate in the difficult business of review and critique (Hargreaves & Fullan,
1992).
Understanding how teachers collaborate helped to explain why the implementation
of an innovation occurred in the way it did and enabled us to identify how the
relationships between these teachers could affect the implementation. Teachers’
collaboration “provides the mechanism for problems to be identified, solutions to be
tested, and professional growth to take place” (Griffin, 1991, p. 142). “Unfortunately,
existing research suggests that the culture of collaboration is a rarity. That culture has
been difficult to create and even more difficult to sustain” (Hargreaves, 1992, p.
227).
p. 40
3.4 Implementation of IT for Teaching and Learning
Many educators suggested that IT would be incredibly valuable for teaching and
learning if used appropriately (Bartolic-Zlomislic & Bates, 1999; Bates, 1996;
Ehrmann, 2000; Fullan & Smith, 1999; Harasim et al., 1998; Hargreaves & Fullan,
1998; Harmon & Jones, 1999; Koper, 2000; Prendergast, 2001). Whether IT was
valuable to teaching and learning partly depended on how it was implemented.
Harmon and Jones (1999) suggested that educators should first identify their own
needs and resources and then decide whether to adapt IT for use in education. To
address if IT was appropriate for teaching and learning and how IT is to be
implemented, different researchers and institutions had advocated their own
frameworks (Centre for Instructional Technology, 2000; Harmon & Jones, 1999;
Mason, 1998; Reeves & Reeves, 1997; VTC, 1999b).
3.4.1 Dimensions in using Web-based instruction
Reeves and Reeves (1997) suggests ten critical dimensions for guiding programme
development, implementation and evaluation of Web-based Instruction (WBI). These
dimensions are: pedagogical philosophy; learning theory; goal orientation; task
orientation; source of motivation; teacher role; metacognitive support; collaborative
learning; cultural sensitivity; and structural flexibility. Each dimension of this model
is presented as a ‘two-end continuum’ with contrasting values at either end.
This model focuses on the instructional design of WBI. It helps to differentiate the
p. 41
various forms of WBI and their characteristics. However, the world is seldom
dichotomous and, in reality, there is more complexity involved than this model might
be able to fully represent. Therefore, modification would be required if an individual
programme or institution needed to adopt this model.
3.4.2 Levels of Web use in education
Harmon and Jones (1999) advocate ‘Five Levels of Web Use in Education’ and
factors that should be considered to determine which level was appropriate for a
particular context. The five levels of Web use are: (i) informational; (ii) supplemental;
(iii) essential; (iv) communal; and (v) immersive. These levels lie on a continuum
from basic occasional use (informational) to advanced use (immersive) continual.
To illustrate no use of the Web, the model offers a definitional level of zero. Harmon
and Jones suggest that this level would eventually become not common as the using
of the Web in education is growing in popularity. Level one of the model suggests
that stable information is provided to the student via the Web. This informational
level of Web use typically contains ‘placing items’ such as syllabus, course schedules
and content information for student review. Information of this type is of an
administrative nature rather than direct course delivery. However, this information is
easy to create, requires little maintenance, and utilises minimum storage and
bandwidth.
The supplemental level of Web use is more common than the informational level.
p. 42
This level (level two), features course content information such as teacher placing
handouts or course notes on the Web and presentation materials provided to students
as a supplement to core content. Students could access this information as frequently
as they wished. This would supplement the main part of a student’s learning
experience normally provided in the classroom. Compared with level one, Level two
requires more technical skill by the teacher, more regular maintenance, and more
storage and bandwidth for the materials demanded.
Level three of the model refers to Essential Web Use. At this level, most of the
course content is provided to students via the Web although classes still meet
face-to-face. Students are expected to be productive members of the class and access
the Web on a regular basis so as to use the Web-based course materials extensively.
This level also demands teachers have skills in HTML scripting, instructional design,
graphic design and generic IT literacy. Besides, ample course development time is
also required for the teacher to create or compile the desired course materials.
Level four of the model suggests the Communal Use of the Web. At this level, course
materials are provided in a traditional classroom or on-line environment and classes
are conducted both face-to-face and on-line. It is expected that students would
generate much of the course content through interaction with their peers and the
teacher, in addition to the materials created by the teacher. Therefore, both the
teacher and students are required to have good HTML skills and are able to use other
on-line tools such as chatrooms and bulletin boards.
p. 43
The highest level of the model, Immersive Web Use, is uncommon at present. At this
level, classes are conducted on-line only, therefore, all course content and course
interaction occur on the Web. This level could be regarded as a virtual learning
community that demands a high level of technical expertise and sophisticated
teaching and learning strategies from both the teachers and students. Harmon and
Jones (1999) argue that the higher level of Web use requires more of a conceptual
shift among faculty and students, as well as longer time.
In addition to the continuum, they also identify 11 factors that help to determine
whether and at which level to use WBI. Table 3.2 illustrates how the levels and
factors function and interact.
Table 3.2
Factors and Levels of Web-based instruction (WBI)
(Extracted from Harmon & Jones, 1999, p. 30)
‘Please see print copy for image’
p. 44
This model has advantages over the ‘Dimensions of using WBI’ advocated by
Reeves and Reeves (1997), as a particular LoU could be identified based on the
status or value of the factors. Although this model appears to be more comprehensive
and easier to use, its actual usage and effectiveness are subject to confirmation. As
Harmon and Jones (1999) comment:
Real conclusions [of this model] may not be possible yet; what we have to say is based on experiment, research and analysis, but…we are still experimenting and learning (p. 32)
It is expected that these levels and factors will be changing as technology keeps on
advancing.
3.4.3 Web usage levels for module delivery
Based on Harmon and Jones’ model, the National University of Singapore
established its own ‘Web Usage Levels’ for module delivery using on-line
technology (Centre for Instructional Technology, 2000). The Web Usage Levels are:
(i) Administrative; (ii) Supplemental; (iii) Comprehensive; and (iv) Immersive.
The Administrative Web Use level focuses on providing the most basic information
needed for delivery. Course document, handouts and notes, and urgent
announcements are recommended. Level two, the Supplemental Level, built upon the
Administrative Level, includes all the components of level one. The focus at this
p. 45
level is to support and supplement the traditional classroom with on-line technologies.
Besides the components identified in level one, it is recommended that individualised
lesson plans and discussion forums should be created.
The Comprehensive Web Use Level, level three, expects students to be productive
members of the class and have regular access to the on-line module by downloading
course materials, participating in discussion forums and eventually taking part in
on-line assessment. At the Immersive Level, the module is completely on-line and all
learning activities are conducted using technologies. At this level, both the teacher
and students need to be fully proficient with on-line technologies so as to achieve the
expectations.
The university suggests that its teachers start with level one, the easiest to manage,
and encourages them to achieve level two so as to maximise the potential of the
module. Level three is recommended to be the ideal level for module delivery. In
summary, this incremental model minimises the LoU to four levels, which users
might find simpler and easier to use.
3.4.4 Framework for online courses
Mason (1998) suggests a three-model framework for planning and implementing
on-line courses. Mason (1998) argues that ‘asynchronous groups’ and ‘individual
messaging, access to course materials’, and ‘real-time interactive events’ are the
three elements that constitute the backbone of an on-line course.
p. 46
Among the three models, the ‘Content + Support Model’ is the most extensive
category of on-line courses. This model relies on the separation between course
content on the Web and tutorial support delivered by e-mail or alternately by
computer conferencing. Under this model, the on-line components or activities
represent no more than 20% of the students’ study time in a course. Therefore,
support to students and interaction among them are mainly in the classroom. This
model is similar to Harmon and Jones’ Supplemental Level of Use.
Mason’s second model for on-line courses is the Wrap Around Model. This model
defines courses composed of custom-designed on-line materials such as study guide,
activities and discussion wrapped around existing materials. This 50/50 model
supplements the classroom activities by offering on-line interactions and discussions
that occupy about half of the students’ study time. This model allows more freedom
and responsibility to students to interpret the course for themselves. However, this
model demands a more extensive role by the teacher and students as more materials
are to be created each time the course is delivered, via discussions and on-line
activities. By comparison, this 50/50 model is close to Harmon and Jones’ Essential
Web Use and Communal Web Use as it involves a lot of on-line activities to
supplement and support learning and teaching activities.
The third model of on-line course is the Integrated Model. This model relies on the
opposite end of the ‘Content + Support Model’ spectrum. Courses of this type consist
of collaborative activities, learning resources and assessment tasks on-line. Therefore,
p. 47
course content becomes fluid and dynamic as it is largely determined by individual
students and group activities. On the whole, the model demands more than 50% of
the students’ study time to occur on-line. This model anticipates most teaching and
learning activities to be conducted on-line, similar to the virtual learning community
as suggested by Harmon and Jones (1999) in their Immersive Web Use.
One of the disadvantages of Mason’s model is that it assumes that content materials
are stable and could be tutored by any teachers, not only the content developers.
However, in reality, teachers are the centre of teaching and learning and most
teachers would prefer their teaching materials to be tailored for their students. This
model might not be welcome by frontline teachers.
3.4.5 Models for delivering e-learning
Based on Mason’s framework, Koo (2002) suggests a framework for delivering
e-learning in the VTC. Three models for e-learning are identified: (i) Content/
information on-line; (ii) On-line learning to supplement classroom teaching; and (iii)
Learning and assessment on-line.
The ‘Content/information on-line’ model suggests that content /information of a
course be put on-line to give students unlimited access and minimal on-line support
via e-mail. Other support to students and interaction among students would be
mainly in the classroom. This model also proposes the on-line component should be
less than 20% of study time with a class size of 20 to 40.
p. 48
The ‘On-line learning to supplement classroom teaching’ model defines courses
composed of custom-designed on-line materials with more interactive components,
with activities supplementing existing content and classroom activities. Similar to the
‘Content/information on-line’ model, this model would provide students with
unlimited access to materials and activities, but with on-line support and interaction
to accommodate class sizes of only 10 to 20. This model suggests that on-line
components and activities would be up to about 50% of study time.
The last model, ‘Learning and assessment on-line’, expects courses to be delivered
with on-line collaborative activities. Students’ access to course materials would be
unlimited and assessment tasks would be conducted on-line with appropriate support
and interaction. Depending upon the amount of on-line component, class size for this
type could go down to 10 and the online component could contribute more than 50%
of students’ study time.
In summary, this framework concentrates on how different models of e-learning
should be applied in different situations for different class sizes. It minimises the
levels of use to three simple, yet precise, levels. Users could easily apply this model
to their own situation according to the nature of their different levels of use.
p. 49
3.5 Implementation of IT for Teaching and Learning in Hong Kong
3.5.1 Implementation of IT for teaching and learning in Hong Kong
In Hong Kong, there were a number of studies, of different scales, conducted in
relation to the implementation of IT for teaching and learning after the announcement
of the strategic policy on the Information Technology for Learning, as imposed by
the government.
Li and Poon (2000), from the perspective of software companies, studied the
feasibility of implementing Information Technology in Education (ITE) in a small
sample of Hong Kong secondary schools and the attitudes of teachers towards
teaching through networks. The findings of this study suggested that: the policy of
ITE by the government was not compatible with the local secondary schools; most
schools had faced difficulties when implementing ITE; and most educational
software used was outdated and not suitable for schools for implementing ITE. Since
the sample of this study was relatively small (only eight teachers participated in
interviews and 104 teachers participated in the survey), the findings might not be
representative of the real situation of all secondary schools in Hong Kong.
The Centre for IT in School and Teacher Education, the University of Hong Kong
(CITE) conducted the preliminary review on implementing IT in primary and
secondary schools (the ITEd Project) as a result of the inception of the government’s
strategic policy, the Information Technology for Learning in a New Era: Five-Year
p. 50
Strategy 1998/99 to 2002/03, in 1998 (CITE, 2001). This was the first Hong
Kong-wide study on the implementation of IT in education in which 206 secondary,
primary and special schools were involved. The findings from this study concluded
that:
i. Progress had been made in three major aspects, namely, infrastructure,
teacher professional development, and curriculum and resource
support;
ii. In both the primary and secondary schools, the longer exposure and
engagement in computer usage, the more helpful to students in
establishing a habit of using IT in school and life;
iii. The majority of teachers and students expressed confidence in basic
IT skills, but they were less certain about advanced skills such as
multimedia design and Webpage production;
iv. Although the majority of teachers have acquired IT skills in teaching,
they still perceived themselves as content providers rather than
facilitators of learning, and left little room for students to engage in
their own learning;
v. The most popular activities in schools were those using IT as an
expository tool for the teacher; and
vi. Schools that had a history and background in curriculum innovation
with a stronger leadership were able to describe a much wider range of
plans for teaching and learning activities using IT, and these schools
tend to have a better IT setup to support student learning (CITE,
p. 51
2001).
Pearson (2001) studied the policy and provision of IT in education among Hong
Kong schools. He reviewed the Hong Kong-wide policy of IT in education, the Five
Year Strategy 1998/99 to 2002/03 (Education & Manpower Bureau,1998) and its
implementation in the early stage. He commented that, although the infrastructure
was in place, professional development for teachers was planned, and resources were
provided to schools, such provisions were not sufficient to promote IT education in
schools. He concluded that ‘initiatives presented would have been difficult to
implement fully without more far-reaching changes in education policy and school
practices’ (Pearson, 2001).
Following the preliminary study conducted by CITE in 2001, the Hong Kong
Polytechnic University (HKPU) conducted the final study for the ITEd Project
(HKPU, 2005). This final study involved 684 primary schools, 413 secondary
schools and 72 special schools. Most findings from this study were consistent with
the preliminary study conducted in 2001. The study also reviewed the progress of the
projects in different school sectors: primary schools; secondary schools; and schools
that offered special education services.
The progress on the infrastructure, teacher professional development, factors
affecting the IT culture in schools and related issues were reported. The barriers that
hindered the implementation of the projects were also discussed. The study finally
concluded that ‘significant progress has been made in the infrastructure, teacher
p. 52
professional training, and curriculum support for ITEd in the five-year period
1998/2003.
Yip (2008) examined the factors and various issues that influenced the introduction
and implementation of WBI from the perspectives of different stakeholders in one of
the teacher education institutions in Hong Kong. Conclusions drawn from Yip’s
study were:
i. The benefits of using WBI for teaching and learning were ascertained
and the promotion of WBI as a supplement to classroom teaching was
found worthwhile;
ii. Teaching and learning with WBI was different from the traditional
approach and it had increased teachers’ workload and students’
loading in participating in on-line activities, although they found WBI
had many advantages;
iii. The interest and motivation of students in using WBI for their study
was highly dependent upon teachers’ perception, pedagogical
knowledge, and degree of involvement towards WBI;
iv. Institution-wide policy should be in place so that privacy, intellectual
property rights and ownership of course materials were protected;
v. Collegial support from experienced teachers who could share their
experiences with novice teachers, in addition to clerical and
administrative support, was necessary for successful implementation
of WBI;
p. 53
vi. Teaching with WBI could force teachers to adopt new pedagogical
approaches and instructional technologies;
vii. Reliability and stability of technology were crucial for WBI to be
successfully implemented; and
v. A simple and user-friendly interface for WBI would enhance the use
of WBI by users.
3.5.2 Implementation of IT for teaching and learning in IVE
Although IT has been used in IVE for teaching and learning for a number of years,
not many systematic or large-scale research studies have been conducted. The
following paragraphs describe the studies conducted by VTC or IVE staff on IT in
teaching and learning in the past few years, after the policy was imposed.
Brinkley (2001) examined the implementation of Web-based teaching and learning in
IVE. The study focused on: (i) the perception of senior and middle management of a
campus and teaching staff of the Language Centre about the advantages and
disadvantages of Web-based teaching and learning; (ii) the key elements of IVE’s
Web-based teaching and learning strategy; and (iii) the practices which supported or
impeded the introduction of technological change in IVE.
The conclusions drawn from Brinkely’s study indicated that Web-based teaching and
learning provided opportunities for IVE to maintain a strong position in the
vocational education market and it also enabled Language teachers to experience a
p. 54
paradigm shift in teaching English via Web-based teaching. In addition, the
institutional goals of Web-based teaching and learning had created a sense of
ill-defined pressure that had resulted, according to some, in poor quality materials, a
sense of pressure and inadequacy or scepticism. Such a hierarchical approach had
caused teachers’ inactivity in using Web-based teaching as they held an attitude of
‘waiting for direction’.
Given that the study only involved four senior staff of the Campus and 11 Language
teachers (at middle level), the results generated from this study might only be
applicable to other Language Centres of IVE, but might not be applicable to other
departments of the same campus or other IVE campuses.
Yeung, Cheng and Koo (2001) studied the changes that happened in IVE and the
changing roles of IVE teachers when facing the challenges brought by IT. About 300
students from six departments of two IVE campuses were surveyed on their
perceptions of an ideal learning environment and their application of IT. About 91
teachers from two IVE campuses were surveyed on their IT competencies with
reference to competency levels identified by the policy set in 1999. Structured
interviews were also conducted with a small group of students and teachers to
complement the surveys.
The study suggested that, to cope with the changes happening in IVE, the roles of
IVE teachers should be redefined and their skill set should be identified so that they
would be able to design and deliver a better curriculum to cater for the needs of their
p. 55
students. To meet the demands arising from adopting IT for teaching and learning,
teachers with different expertise should be teamed up to design new teaching
packages in a more efficient and effective manner. Without appropriate hardware and
software support, teachers could hardly use IT to design and deliver their teaching.
Therefore, the study also suggested that better IT provision should be made available
to teachers before IT in teaching and learning was fully implemented in IVE.
The study conducted by Yeung and his team had involved both students and teachers.
However, the study was limited to two departments with a relatively small sample
size and the findings might not be appropriate for generalisation. Yeung and his
associates’ findings on teachers’ IT competencies and students’ perceptions of an
ideal learning environment might only reflect part of IT capabilities that some
teachers possessed and part of the expectations that students would seek. Therefore
further investigation and sharing on the same topic were encouraged (Yeung, Cheng
& Koo, 2001).
Tang and Wong (2002) studied the perception of a group of 97 IVE students from
one department of IVE on their views of using WebCT after they received two-hours
of WebCT training. The study revealed that students had a very positive view of the
usefulness of the WebCT features and more than half of them regarded the use of
WebCT as a valuable supplement to face-to-face learning. Although students had a
positive perception of WebCT, they actually did not have experience in using WebCT
for their learning. Therefore a more in-depth study was suggested to verify the results
before it could be generalised.
p. 56
Wong (2002) conducted a case study on ‘Web-based Curriculum’ (WBC) in a
computing department in one of the campuses of IVE. He studied how the flexibility
offered by WBC affected teaching and learning; how various forms of interactivity
influenced teaching and learning, and how IVE teachers and students managed to
cope with the changes. The case study indicated how different virtual interactions
were affecting student performance and illustrated how flexibility, interactivities and
technology drove each other, highlighting the significance of managing change in
technology for WBC. The study also indentified some barriers in implementing
WBC in IVE’s context.
Although this was the first study of WBC in the context of vocational education in
Hong Kong, it only focused on one special cohort of students (One cohort of
computing students in one IVE campus). The finding might not be applicable to
other levels of students who studied other courses in IVE.
To monitor the utilisation of IT in teaching and learning in IVE, a large-scale survey
was conducted in early 2004, as directed by IVE’s Management Committee (VTC,
2005c). Through the Chairmen of 2Course Boards, 5859 subject modules across IVE
were investigated. It was found that:
i. 60% of the modules had their own Websites included in WebCT;
2 IVE Course Boards’ major roles are to set academic standards and maintain the quality of the courses, establish procedures for the effective management of the courses and oversee their implementation.
p. 57
ii. About 47 to 48% of them had ‘Syllabus’ and ‘Content’ embedded in
WebCT;
iii. About 21 to 28% of them had ‘Calendar’, ‘Assignment’ and
‘Discussion’ included in WebCT; and
iv. About 10 to 18% of them had external resources or links, e-mail
features and ‘Quizzes’ embedded in WebCT.
This survey revealed the overall utilization of IT in teaching and learning in IVE.
The figures collected and presented only represented the IT features registered in the
WebCT platform. However, whether teachers had used these features or how they
had used them were not investigated. Moreover, since the provision of ITEP in 1999,
no review has been conducted on teachers’ achievements in their IT competencies.
Therefore, a more thorough and in-depth study should be conducted, if the actual
implementation of the innovation is to be determined.
In summary, the research mentioned in sections 3.5.1 to 3.5.2 and their results were
either confined to a particular context or subjected to further test. Hence, it was not
easy or appropriate to simply compare their findings with the current study: a
relatively large-scale study with more than 300 VET teachers in the largest VET
institution in Hong Kong. However, the studies did offer some insights into student
perceptions and teacher development.
p. 58
3.6 Factors Affecting the Use of IT for Teaching and Learning
Researchers have identified different factors or barriers that affected the use of IT for
teaching and learning (Barajas & Owen, 2000; Butler & Sellbom, 2002; Gosper et al.,
1996; Harasim et al., 1998; Harmon & Jones, 1999; Lynch & Collins, 2001;
Robertson, 2006 & 2007; Wong 2002).
3.6.1 Barriers against the implementation of IT in education
Gosper, Hesketh, Andrews and Sabaz (1996) studied the time required for computer
technology to effectively penetrate traditional instruction among Australian
universities. Among 25 possible items, they identified five strong barriers that
affected the implementation of IT in education.
i. Lack of time and expertise in preparing material for teaching in new
formats;
ii. Lack of time to attend information technology training;
iii. Promotions and reward systems that emphasize research rather than
innovative teaching;
iv. Increase in workload in offering units in several modes; and
v. Inadequate technical support available to teaching staff.
The study for the ITEd Project conducted by HKPU (2005), as mentioned in section
3.5.1, identified five barriers that affected the implementation of the project. These
p. 59
included: (i) the access, connectivity and usage of IT; (ii) teacher IT competencies;
(iii) teachers’ beliefs of pedagogy and the availability of resources; (iv) school and
wider community culture; and (v) student learning approach.
In IVE, Wong (2002) also identified two barriers in implementing IT for teaching
and learning. They were: (i) Language (English) deficiencies and common language
curriculum undermine student participation in WBC and (ii) sufficient bandwidth and
compatible browser for better Internet communication.
3.6.2 Resistance to technological change
In her reviews of different uses of network technology for teaching and learning in
North America, Harasim and her team (1998) identified six related factors that create
resistance to technological change. These factors were:
i. Teachers lacked the time needed to learn the technology and to rethink
and rework the method of teaching and the resources for teaching, in
addition to the existing loading;
ii. Low wages and bureaucracy drained the willingness of some teachers
to deal with change;
iii. Peer pressure might be exerted against an innovator who was willing
to adopt technology or new approaches for teaching and learning;
vi. During innovation implementation, problems and changes of
administrative policies and practice have the potential to prolong the
p. 60
time taken to effect the implementation;
v. Teachers who had had bad experiences in using ‘older’ technology in
the past might be reluctant to use the latest technology for education;
and
vi. Teachers who had the perception that the computer was dehumanising
sometimes had doubts about the promises made about the use of
technology in teaching and learning.
3.6.3 Factors affecting the use of the Web for education
As discussed in 3.4.2, in addition to the Levels of Web Use, Harmon and Jones (1999)
identified 11 factors that affected the desirability of using the Web for education.
These factors helped teachers or educational institutions in the decision-making
process about which the level of Web use was appropriate in a specific context. They
were: (i) Distance; (ii) Stability of material; (iii) Need for multimedia; (iv) Need for
student tracking; (v) Number of students; (vi) Amount of interaction; (vii) Social
pressure to use the Web; (viii) Need for offline reference; (ix) Infrastructure; (x)
Comfort levels ; and (xi) Access.
3.6.4 Factors affecting the implementation of Virtual Learning Environments
Barajas and Owen (2000) investigated the institutional, cultural and learning issues
involved in the implementation of innovative Virtual Learning Environments (VLEs)
implemented in nine European universities. They studied what VLEs were, the need
p. 61
for implementing VLEs (from the perspectives of different stakeholders at different
levels), strategies for implementing VLEs and the factors affecting the
implementation of VLEs in these universities. Ten factors that affected the
implementation were described. These were:
i. The challenge faced by teachers as a result of the emergence of new
educational paradigms when using new technology and new concepts
of teaching and learning;
ii. The changing teaching and learning practices (from the traditional
classroom to a virtual learning environment) faced by teachers and
students;
iii. The availability of appropriate learning materials for the new mode of
learning;
iv. The prescribed and standardised learning materials designed for VLEs
might reduce pedagogical functions (which could require teachers’
compromises);
v. More complex preparation (both skills and processes) demanded of
teachers in designing and delivering virtual learning;
vi. The demand on teachers to shift from being content providers to
mentors guiding and supporting their students in the learning process;
vii. The degree of commitment of institutions to adopt VLEs to enhance
learning processes and outcomes;
viii. The scale of implementation (too small-scale would inhibit
institutions’ ability to implement VLEs in the long run);
p. 62
ix. The management and governance (including rules, regulations,
organisation and financial structure) of institutions; and
x. Cross-cultural issues concerning linguistic and/or cultural diversity
among European universities.
3.6.5 Factors inhibiting innovation in ICT education
Lynch and Collins (2001) reported 11 factors inhibiting innovation in ICT education
amongst the universities in Australia. Factors reported as inhibiting innovation were:
i. Teachers’ initiatives in taking risks to adopt ICT strategies that might
not be valued;
ii. Lack of recognition for teachers’ efforts in adopting ICT;
iii. Lack of documentation to support the argument that ICT could
enhance learning;
iv. Scepticism about the financial and pedagogical benefits of ICT;
v. Lack of support from management;
vi. Changing scale of teaching — increasing workload, increased class
sizes and reduced contact hours;
vii. Changing student population — more diverse educational background,
skills and experience of students;
viii. Effects of new teaching mode demanding heavier workload and new
work practices;
ix. New format of teaching and learning materials subject to higher levels
p. 63
of scrutiny might diminish academic freedom;
x. Intellectual property concerns; and
xi. Unreliable technology.
3.6.6 Barriers to the adoption of technology
Butler and Sellbom (2002) reported on studies in the USA and identified the general
categories of barriers to adopting technology include reliability, lack of time to learn
new technology, uncertainty that using technology matters, and lack of support. The
categories were further broken down into eight factors:
i. Technology not reliable;
ii. Lack of knowledge to use technology;
iii. Scepticism about the function of technology in improving/enhancing
learning;
iv. Difficult to use technology;
v. Lack of support for using technology;
vi. Difficult in learning to use technology;
vii. Prior experience in using technology;
viii. Scepticism as to whether technology can facilitate thinking and
planning; and
ix. Expectation as to whether technology could save time.
p. 64
3.6.7 Factors influencing vocational teachers’ use of online functionalities
Robertson (2006) surveyed 138 Australian vocational, education and training (VET)
teachers among public Technical and Further Education (TAFE) institutions and
private vocational education providers and identified four factors which influence the
adoption of technologies. He further tested and refined these propositions with 500
vocational practitioners from the Australian Flexible Learning Framework’s 2005
Networks Community Forum (Robertson, 2007). The four influential factors were: (i)
newness; (ii) complexity; (iii) compatibility; and (iv) locus of control.
‘Newness’ referred to the use of new technology, the use of an existing technology
for a new purpose, or within a new context. ‘Complexity’ was associated with the
difficulty that a teacher experienced in using that technology. ‘Compatibility’ was
related to how the technology could be used successfully in teachers’ practice and to
meet their needs. While these three factors were associated with VET teachers’
perception of technology, the fourth factor, ‘locus of control’ was related to the
pedagogic relationship between the teacher and the learner.
He concluded that, in general: (i) the longer that a particular technology had been
available for use, the more it would be used by vocational teachers irrespective of the
delivery approach; (ii) if a technology lacked complexity, it would be used by VET
teachers on a more regular basis; (iii) if the use of a technology was compatible with
a teacher’s practices and needs, it would be adopted and used more frequently by
VET teachers; and (iv) if a technology could situate the control of pedagogic
p. 65
decisions with the teacher, it was more likely that it would be used by teachers
regularly.
3.6.8 Other research into factors affecting the use of IT in teaching and learning
Chen (2003) studied how faculty members integrate Web-based Instruction in
regular teaching among faculties at the University of South Carolina. The major
findings of his study were: (i) faculty members were integrating or had integrated
WBI in their regular teaching practice, and a large percentage of the courses that they
taught, using WBI was offered at the graduate level; (ii) faculties’ attitudes towards
and beliefs in WBI, their access to technology, support and training as well as their
technology expertise, also affected them in the integration of WBI; (iii) faculty
members’ preferences in acquiring new skills; and (iv) the most important barriers in
their actual experience with WBI. The top three barriers identified in Chen’s study
were: (i) time and workload; (ii) technology availability and reliability; and (iii)
technical support and expertise.
Gammill (2004) at the Mississippi State University (MSU) surveyed 975 faculty
academics and determined their use of Web-based technologies and their perceptions
regarding factors related to Web-based Instruction (WBI). She found that most
faculty members at MSU were not using WBI and concluded that MSU was an
institution in the beginning stages of WBI.
Based on Martin’s framework (2003), Gammill investigated the factors related to
p. 66
WBI under three categories, i.e. technologica1, pedagogical, and faculty-centred. Of
the technological factors, faculty members believed that ‘the reliability of
technology’, ‘technical support’, and ‘course development/revision time’ are of most
importance. Of the pedagogical factors, they regarded ‘nature of course content’ as
most important and, ‘depersonalization of instruction’ as least important. Of the
faculty-centred factors, the highest levels of importance factors were ‘level of
administrative support’ and ‘faculty load or release time’. The lowest-ranking factor
was ‘intellectual property ownership/rights’.
Fehn (2005) studied nursing educators’ perceptions of the barriers and obstacles to
integrating Web-based instruction (WBI) into the associate degree programmes in
two departments of a community college in the USA. Fehn’s major findings
indicated that the major obstacles encountered by faculty members on integrating
WBI into their programmes were: (i) lacking knowledge and skill with using new
technology for teaching and (ii) not having enough time to learn how to use the
technology.
3.6.9 Factors affecting the use of IT for teaching and learning: a summary
The factors suggested by different writers as described in sections 3.6.1 to 3.6.8,
although not identical, had some commonality. The most popular factors affecting
the implementation of IT in teaching and learning, as reviewed from the literature,
were:
p. 67
i. Teachers’ time for learning new IT technology, attending training and
preparing teaching and learning resources;
ii. The reliability of IT technology;
iii. Support provided to teachers from their management;
iv. Increased workload faced by teachers as a result of using new IT
technology;
v. Teachers’ perception of teaching and learning;
vi. Availability of and access to appropriate teaching and learning
resources;
vii. New skills demand on teachers when adopting IT;
viii. Students’ diverse background and ability;
ix. Technical support provided to teachers; and
x. Teachers’ expertise and experience in using IT technology.
The factors affecting the innovation, identified from the literature, were useful and
helped the researcher to establish the theoretical framework for this study.
p. 68
CHAPTER FOUR RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
4.1 Introduction
This research studied the implementation process of an innovation at the institute
level. The study intended to find out how the innovation was actually implemented in
the nine IVE campuses in comparison with the management’s expectations.
Data required for this study covered a wide range of areas. In order to collect the
fullest possible data from different sources, different approaches, both qualitative and
quantitative were required. By combining different methods in one study, it was
possible to understand the same event from various perspectives. Gathering data
from the teachers involved in the innovation helped to develop a better understanding
of the innovation, and thus to portray a comprehensive picture of the implementation
of the innovation. Using different approaches, the following types of information
were collected: related documents from different committees and working parties of
the VTC; perceptions and opinions of different teachers about the implementation;
and teachers’ behaviours during the implementation process.
The ‘rich’ data collected from this study allowed the researcher to explore the ‘real
world’ of the curriculum innovation in IVE campuses by gathering rich data with
different methods but without manipulating the setting artificially. It was an approach
suggested for evaluating programme implementation, especially those where
different stakeholders were concerned (Best & Kahn, 1989; Cohen & Manion, 1989;
p. 69
Dorr-Bremme, 1990; Guba & Lincoln, 1982; Patton, 1990). The advantages of such
an approach were that it “is a strong approach … to examine the implementation or
adoption in particular localities … It provides richly detailed description and holistic
explication of … processes and outcomes as they occur amidst the complexity of the
real world” (Dorr- Bremme, 1990, pp. 67-68).
Fullan argues that “educational change is technically simple and socially complex”
(Fullan, 1991b, p.65). The IVE (with different campuses and teaching departments),
like a school, as a complex organisation, was complicated by many conflicting values
over what they were for, different history and backgrounds, different personalities (of
teachers), different abilities (among teachers), and the constraints and possibilities of
different contexts (Liebeiman & Miller, 1984). Hence the perceptions of these
influential actors, i.e. the teachers, towards the implementation was essential data to
be collected for this study. Similar to implementing a new subject in schools, whether
an innovation could be successfully implemented was dependent upon the perception
of individual actors of the innovation, as Goodson argues (1988). To reveal the
perceptions of these individuals, an in-depth study using different methods rather
than document analysis alone, was necessary.
Both Ball (1987) and Goodson (1988) agree that data gathered from different people
could be triangulated to help the interpretation of the reality and the complex
relationship between the actors. By examining the evidence from different sources,
researchers can ‘triangulate different date sources of information’ (Creswell, 2003).
Therefore, data gathered from this study were triangulated so that a credible and
p. 70
valid picture of the implementation process could be developed for interpretation.
The instruments used to gather information for this study included questionnaire
surveys and semi-structured interviews with teachers at different ranks across
different IVE campuses, as well as document analysis.
4.2 Research Framework
The research reported here studied the implementation of IT in teaching and learning
in IVE. After the management of VTC imposed the policy, it was expected that, if the
policy was established and the resources were available, teachers would follow the
policy and implement the innovation. This research intended to study how IVE
teachers implemented the innovation in accordance with the mandated policy.
The general theoretical framework that guided this study centred on how changes, i.e.
the curriculum innovation, occurred in a particular organisational context. This
involved a focus on general literature concerning: the implementation of education
innovation and change as advocated by Loucks and Lieberman (1983), Hall et al.
(1975) and Leithwood (1981) and the factors affecting the implementation of
educational change based on Michael Fullan’s change theory (1982, 1991b, 2001a,
2001b & 2007); the barriers in implementing IT in teaching and learning identified
by different researchers in the field (e.g. Gosper et al. 1996); and the use of a specific
theoretical approach to the use of ‘Different Levels of Use of Web Teaching’ as
proposed by Harmon and Jones (1999).
p. 71
As mentioned in section 3.2, the fidelity approach was a popular approach adopted
by many curriculum researchers to study how a curriculum was implemented as
planned. Therefore, a fidelity approach was adopted by this study. In addition, the
fidelity was an ideal approach which enabled the researcher to identify factors
affecting the implementation of IT in teaching and learning. This was another
reason why the fidelity approached was chosen.
The approach guided the researcher to establish a new framework, the
Implementation Rubric (at listed in Appendix I), which set the context for the
development of survey questions and interview guide to determine the level of use of
IT in teaching and learning by IVE teachers.
4.3 Implementation Rubric
To investigate the implementation of the innovation, an ‘Implementation Rubric’ was
employed for this study. References were made according to different researchers
and writers in establishing similar tools (Harmon & Jones, 1999; Jenning & Dirksen,
1996; Leithwood & Montgomery, 1987). Jonassen, Peck, and Wilson (1998) defined
a rubric as “a set of codes designed to govern action” (p. 221). It was a representation
of a set of scales that provide rich information and display certain important
characteristics of the actions to be governed. The dimensions and the descriptions for
the levels of use were developed based on the concept of ‘Innovation profile’
established by Leithwood and Montgomery (1987). The innovation profile was an
alternative to the ‘Level of Use’ that helped to describe, explicitly, the characteristics
p. 72
of an innovation.
The purpose of the implementation rubric was to provide a set of dimensions that
reflected the events happening during the process of the implementation. Each
dimension represented an aspect of the implementation process and these dimensions
were further divided into different sub-dimensions. Each sub-dimension was
described by its particular level of use, ranging from level zero (non-use) to level
four (constructive use). These reflected how teachers actually used the innovation
and described what the innovation consisted of in practice (Fullan & Pomfret, 1977;
Hall & Hord, 2006; Loucks & Lieberman, 1983).
The different levels of use assigned in the rubric were not discrete measures of a
particular dimension. Since all the events in the implementation process occurred as
a continuum, the level assigned should be regarded as an indicator of how a
dimension was implemented.
4.3.1 Dimensions of implementation
Under the ‘Implementation rubric’, three dimensions of implementation were derived,
namely: ‘Policy in context’; ‘Perceptions of teaching and learning’; and ‘Teachers’
practice’.
p. 73
4.3.2 Policy in context
Teachers’ perception of the innovation was one of the crucial factors influencing the
success of an innovation (Goodson, 1988). Policy was important to the
implementation of an innovation since it set the direction and goals. If teachers were
clear about and understood the goals, the degree of uptake of the implementation
would be higher (Snyder et al., 1992). After reviewing a number of projects and
research reports on using IT for education, Haddad (1998) concluded “in developing
public policy and strategies for making more effective use of these technologies, it is
important to develop broad understanding of these objectives and to expect
outcomes” (p. 26).
In IVE (the institution in which this study is conducted), the objectives and
expectations of teachers in using IT for teaching and learning were documented as
policy and were disseminated to teachers at the beginning of the implementation. The
policy focused on four aspects: (i) IT competencies of IVE teachers; (ii) requirements
for curriculum delivery using IT; (iii) IT skill acquisition (training for teaching); and
(iv) benchmarking for teachers’ competencies.
4.3.3 Perceptions of teaching and learning
Information technology “has become a force for a new form of education, creating a
paradigm shift: a change to a new model and a set of expectations and rules for how
to function successfully within a new learning environment” (Harasim et al., 1998).
p. 74
As a result, the changing role of the teacher in using IT for teaching and learning
became the focus in many studies (Gosper et al., 1996; Ehrmann, 1999; Lewis, 1999;
Harper & Hedberg 1997; Harasim et al., 1998; Law et al., 2000; Yueng, Cheng &
Koo, 2000 & 2001).
The role of IT in the teaching and learning process also affected how learning is
delivered. As Haddad (1998) comments:
Technology is not an educational activity; it is a tool — a means to an end. Technologies can be effective if they are designed and implemented deliberately to enhance students’ engaged learning and collaboration” (p. 24). [Technology] can be powerful in driving new approaches to learning that involve more student interaction, more connections among schools, more collaboration among teachers and students, more involvement of teachers as facilitators and more emphasis on the skills of information seeking and assessment, exploration of open questions, problem-solving, critical thinking, design and construction of new knowledge and understandings” (pp. 25-26).
Implementing teaching using technology needed competency in technological and
organisational aspects as well as new skills in applying relevant didactical methods
(Barajas & Owen, 2000). These methods could be characterised by the shift from
traditional teaching as a content provider and ‘transmitter’ of knowledge towards a
mentor or facilitator guiding and supporting learners through the process of
knowledge construction. They suggested that:
using technologies requires fundamental changes in the role of academic and technical staff. Academics have to acquire or develop new knowledge and skills to
p. 75
become teaching materials designers, tutors, facilitators, etc. … and more importantly, they have to cope with essential changes in the conception of time and space introduced by these technologies” (p. 40).
When proposing a framework in using IT for education and training, Harasim (1998)
reminds us that, in order to (make the framework) work well, teachers should attend
to new pedagogies design. This new pedagogical design reflects the changing role of
the teacher. In discussing the use of networks for teaching and learning, Harasim et
al. (1998) comments “teaching online requires a different set of skills to help
students to navigate, to foster learning interactions, and to moderate group work”
(p.71). Such new requirements have changed the role of the teacher from a traditional
instructor to a facilitator. This new role represents a fundamental change to the
dominant teacher-centred lecture model. Therefore, teachers’ perceptions about the
use of IT for teaching and learning and their beliefs about their roles in using IT for
teaching and learning had significant impact on the implementation process.
4.3.4 Teachers’ practice in using IT for teaching and learning
As discussed in the previous paragraphs, IVE established a set of policies to guide its
teachers in the use of IT for teaching and learning. It was assumed that, by
undergoing appropriate training, teachers would achieve some IT competencies
(ranging from using IT for lecture preparation, to using IT for presentation and using
technologies for on-line delivery) and would use these newly-acquired technologies
and skills in the teaching and learning process. Two major aspects on how teachers
use IT for teaching and learning were selected for this study. They were: (i) the use of
p. 76
IT for classroom teaching and (ii) online teaching. The use of IT for classroom
teaching referred to the use IT for lecture presentation and applying other IT
resources in the classroom setting. Online teaching consisted of communication
online, conducting teaching and learning activities online and online assessment.
The details of each dimension and their levels of implementation are listed in the
implementation rubric in Appendix I. The statements contained in each dimension
and sub-dimension were finally converted to questions for the survey and they are
listed in Appendix II.
4.4 Pilot the Protocol
The elements of the implementation rubric were used as the protocol in this study.
Before the protocol was applied to different samples in the survey and interviews, a
focus group was conducted in June 2003 to ensure that the protocol was valid. The
protocol used in the focus group was developed based on the ‘Dimensions of
Innovation’ as identified in the implementation rubric established for this study. As
suggested by Morgan (1988) focus groups are useful for “developing interview
schedules and questionnaires” (p.11). A group of four IVE teachers were invited to
participate in a focus group interview. These teachers were selected from the
Business Services and Management Department of an IVE campus and were at
different ranks. Their teaching experience ranged from 3 months to 16 years.
The interview lasted for about one and half hours and teachers were asked to discuss
p. 77
14 questions, which were categorised into three major aspects:
i. Teachers’ knowledge about VTC’s policy in using IT for teaching and
learning;
ii. Their perceptions of teaching and learning using IT and their roles;
and
iii. Their practice in using IT for teaching and learning.
In addition, teachers were asked about the issues they encountered when using IT for
their daily teaching or student learning. How they tackled and resolved these issues
was also investigated. During the interview, teachers were encouraged to discuss the
questions and interact with each other. It was expected that, through discussion,
teachers would be providing different perspectives about the dimensions of the
innovation, as well as the degree of implementation of the innovation. The 14
questions are listed in Table 4.1.
p. 78
Table 4.1
Questions for Focus Group
No. Question
1. Have you heard about IVE’s IT competencies for teaching and learning? What are they?
2. Can you describe IVE’s policy for using IT to deliver IVE courses?
3. What are the channels for IVE teachers to acquire IT skills for teaching and learning? Have you heard of the IT Enhancement Programme for VTC teachers (ITEP)?
4. How do IVE teachers know that they have acquired the IT competencies they are expected to acquire?
5. What is your belief about using IT for teaching and learning?
6. What are your roles, as an IVE teacher, in using IT for teaching and learning?
7. What IT tools do you use for lecture presentation? How do you use them?
8. What are the IT tools you use to communicate with your colleagues and students?
9. How do you use the Internet/Web for on-line teaching?
10. Do you use IT to assess student learning? How?
11. What are the issues you encounter in using IT for teaching and learning?
12. How did you overcome these issues?
13. Can you suggest some ways to improve the use of IT for teaching and learning in IVE?
14. What is your view about the use of IT for teaching and learning in IVE in the future?
An expert review on the protocol was also conducted in September 2003 with the
professional staff of the Teaching and Learning Centre of the VTC. All the experts
had more than 15 years of educational development experience with sound
knowledge of using different approaches and media for teaching and learning
enhancement.
After the focus group interview and the expert review, the implementation rubric was
revised. The revised elements in the profile, as well as the factors affecting
implementation (as identified from the literature in Chapter Three), then formed the
basis for the survey and the interviews.
p. 79
4.5 Survey
4.5.1 Purpose of survey
A survey is a method that “provides a quantitative or numerical description of trends,
attitudes, or opinions of a population by studying a sample of that population”
(Creswell, 2003, p.153). To gather IVE teachers’ opinions about how they used IT for
teaching and learning, i.e. the degree of the implementation of the innovation, a
survey that aimed “to gather data at a particular point in time with the intention of
describing the nature of existing conditions, or identifying standards against which
existing conditions can be compared, or determining the relationships that exist
between specific events” (Cohen & Manion, 1989, p. 97) was conducted.
4.5.2 Population and sample
There were about 1200 teachers in IVE who carried different ranks: Assistant
Lecturer; Lecturer; Senior Lecturer; Principal Lecturer. Among these ranks, the
Assistant Lecturers, the Lecturers and the Senior Lecturers were front line teachers
who were responsible for delivering IVE courses as their major duty. These front line
teachers, totalling 1096 teachers, formed the population of this study. The rationale
for such selection was to ensure that all front line teachers from different disciplines,
at different ranks and across different IVE campuses who had major roles in teaching
were selected so that the findings yielded could represent the ‘big picture’ of the
innovation happening in IVE.
p. 80
4.5.3 Data gathering instrument
A postal questionnaire was chosen as the instrument for this survey because of the
advantages of economy and time-saving (Cohen & Manion, 1989). Postal
questionnaires also had the advantages that: questions were easier to present when
compared with other methods, since no special visual aids were required; and
respondents had time to give thoughtful answers, to look up records, or to consult
with others (Fowler, 1988).
4.5.4 Data gathering procedures
A set of ‘self-administered questionnaires’, as suggested by Fink (1995), was posted
to 1096 IVE frontline teachers in early February 2004. The complete set of
questionnaire, which consists of 48 questions, is listed in Appendix II. For teachers
who had not responded one month after the questionnaire was first sent, a reminder
accompanying the same set of questions was sent to them.
All questionnaires collected were carefully inspected, and incomplete and unusable
questionnaires rejected. Of the questionnaires sent, 355 returns were received by late
March 2004. The returns accounted for 32.4% of the total population being surveyed.
Of these returns, 26 were found to be incomplete and therefore discarded.
Questionnaires returned by teachers who had been in IVE for less than one year were
also excluded since those respondents might not have had sufficient knowledge about
p. 81
VTC’s policy in using IT for teaching and learning.
As a result, 329 (30.0%) records were used for preliminary analysis. The analysis of
the data collected was divided into five parts, namely: Teachers’ Characteristics;
Reliability of the Questionnaire; Level of Use of the Innovation; Factors Affecting
the Innovation; and Issues Encountered during the Implementation.
4.5.5 Data analysis
Data analysis is a process of making sense of a massive amount of data through
careful examination of raw data, reduction of data, identification of patterns
(categories) so that meaningful conclusions on the findings could be drawn (Miles &
Huberman, 1984a & 1984b; Patton 1990; Yin, 1994).
Usable questionnaires collected from the survey were then grouped for further
analysis. Demographic data of the teachers being survey was compiled and compared.
The Level of Use (LoU) of the teachers was measured and compared using the
implementation rubric. Coefficient Alpha (Cronbach Alpha) advocated by Cronbach
(1951), was adopted to test the reliability of the results. Cronbach alpha was a
commonly used index of test reliability and was one of the most important and
pervasive statistics in research (Cortina, 1993; Miller, 1995). The relationship
between teachers’ LoU and their demographic background was investigated with the
aid of Analysis of Variance (ANOVA).
p. 82
A series of 20 questions on the factors affecting the implementation were asked in the
survey. Responses to these questions were extracted to some meaningful factors for
better interpretation using factor analysis. Factor analysis is a common technique
employed in research to reduce many variables into small sets of factors (Byrne,
2006; Henson, Capraro & Capraro, 2001). All these results were used to triangulate
with those obtained from the interviews described in the next stage.
4.6 Interview
4.6.1 Purpose of interview
Best and Kahn (1989) pointed out that data for research could be gathered by
“observation, interviews, questionnaires and recorded data (document)” (p. 92). In
order to gain a better picture about how IVE teachers used IT for teaching and
learning, face-to-face interviews with IVE teachers were conducted to gather
information additional to that gathered in the survey.
Interview “is a strategy for getting people to talk about what they know” (Spradely,
1979, p. 9). There were many reasons for using interview in this study. People were
usually more willing to talk than to write and they were willing to give more
information if the interviewer has successfully built rapport with the interviewee
(LeCompte & Preissle, 1993). Moreover, the interviewer could explain more
explicitly the investigation’s purpose and what information was required for the
study and he/she could also clarify the questions (Best & Kahn, 1989).
p. 83
4.6.2 Types of interview
There are different types of interviews. Cohen and Manion (1989), Parlett and
Hamilton (1972), Powney and Watts (1984 & 1987) categorised interviews according
to their structure: structured interview, unstructured interview and semi-structured
interview. However, Denzin (1978a) classified three kinds of interviews, according to
their degree of structure: the scheduled standardized interview; the non-scheduled
standardized interview; and the non-standardized interview. Patton (1990)
categorised interviews using the nature of their approaches: the informal
conversational interview; the general interview guide approach; and the standardized
open-ended interview.
The interview method used in this study was a semi-structured non-scheduled
standardized one. The same questions and probes were used for all respondents, but
the order in which they were posed might be changed according to how individuals
reacted (Denzin, 1978b). This interview arrangement had the advantage of being
flexible in question order. It allowed the interview to flow more naturally. The
interviewees would also be more at ease and responsive.
4.6.3 Selection of interviewees
Miles and Hubermans’ (1984a) suggested that qualitative researchers usually work
with smaller samples of people selected in a more purposeful manner rather than by
random means. In view of time and resource constraints, it was impossible for the
p. 84
researcher to interview the whole population. Therefore, a number of teachers who
had participated in the survey and who had no objection to further contributing to the
study were invited to take part in the interview according to their levels of use of the
innovation (LoU), as identified in the survey.
Among the 329 returns, ten of the respondents had incomplete items submitted and
19 of them indicated that they were not interested in participating in the next stage of
this study (including the one that had incomplete items submitted) and, therefore, the
scores from these 29 respondents on LoU were discarded and were not used for
analysis. Finally, 300 respondents remained in the population.
It was expected that the survey would provide a general picture of individual
teachers’ LoU so that selection of teachers on a particular LoU could be done for the
interviews. However, in reality, teachers’ responses reflected that their LoU across
each dimension was not consistent. Only three teachers who scored consistently
across each dimension could be identified and all of them agreed to attend the
interview.
It was noted that a sample size of three might not be good enough for gathering rich
data for portraying the ‘big picture’. As a result, teachers with heterogeneous scores
across different LoU dimensions were invited in addition to the original three
teachers. Due to resource limitation, 11 additional teachers were invited, and of those,
9 accepted an invitation to participate in the interviews. In sum, a total of 12 teachers
participated in interviews and their LoU scores are listed in Table 4.2
p. 85
Table 4.2
A List of Proposed Interviewees with Different Scores across Different LoU Dimensions
LoU of Specific Dimensions
Ref. No. Nature of scores across dimensions Policy knowledge Teaching and
learning perception IT practice
274 Very close to Level 0 (1,2,1,1)
Level 0 (1,1)
Close to Level 0 (1,1,3,1,1)
79 Level 2 (3,3,3,3)
Level 2 (3,3)
Very close to Level 2 (3,3,3,3,1)
11
Homogeneous
Close to Level 3 (4,3,4,3)
Close to Level 3 (5,4)
Level 3 (4,4,4,4,4)
186 Level 0 (1,1,1,1)
Level 4 (5,5)
Close Level 3 (5,5,3,5,2)
337 Very close to Level 1 (2,2,2,1)
Level 3 (4,4)
Very close to Level 3 (4,4,4,3,4)
192 Very close to Level 1 (2,2,3,2)
Level 4 (5,5)
Very close to Level 1 (2,2,3,2,2)
203 Close to Level 1 (1,3,3,1)
Level 4 (5,5)
Level 2 (3,3,3,3,3)
104 Close to Level 1 (1,2,2,1)
Level 4 (5,5)
Close to Level 3 (4,4,4,3,3)
293 Close to Level 1 (1,2,2,1)
Level 4 (5,5)
Close to Level 3 (4,4,3,4,2)
233 Close to Level 1 (1,1,3,1)
Close to Level 4 (4,5)
Level 4 (5,3,5,5,5)
127 Very close to Level 2 (3,3,3,4)
Level 4 (5,5)
Level 2 (3,3,3,3,3)
187
Heterogeneous
Close to Level 2 (4,3,4,2)
Level 4 (5,5)
Level 4 (5,5,5,5,5)
4.6.4 Data gathering procedures
Before the researcher could enter each individual campus for interviews, individual
teachers who were being selected were contacted by telephone so that the purpose of
the interview was clarified and the details of the interview were explained. A
convenient place and time for these interviews was selected after negotiation with
individual teachers. The duration of each interview was about one hour so that
sufficient time was allowed for establishing rapport for the interview, and
questioning and answering were conducted in a timely manner.
The interview questions were planned in May 2004 according to an interview guide
p. 86
with a set of issues, developed before the interview takes place, as suggested by
Patton (1980) and issues might be addressed at any time in the conversation; the
guide was a checklist to ensure that “the same information is obtained from
informants by covering the same materials” (Patton 1990, p. 283). The interview
guide used in this study was based on the ‘dimensions’ as identified in the
Implementation Rubric. Using the rubric as a framework, questions related to the
degree of the implementation, issues met by teachers during implementation, and
how issues were resolved were formulated.
The interviews were conducted between June and September 2004 using Cantonese,
as preferred by the interviewees. During the interviews, the whole process was
tape-recorded with the permission of the interviewees. All interview data were
converted and translated to English scripts. All these scripts were returned to the
interviewees for validation.
4.6.5 Data analysis
After validation, all the scripts were converted to stories of individual teachers.
Pseudonyms were used to represent these teachers so that they would not be
identified. Each story was examined and coded with marginal remarks for
clarification purposes (Miles & Huberman, 1984a). Coded data was then grouped
under three major categories, namely, implementation of the innovation in IVE
campuses, issues met by teachers during implementation, and the ways that teachers
overcame these issues.
p. 87
4.7 Document Analysis
4.7.1 Purpose of document analysis
Documents were a crucial source of data in many areas of research. The analysis of
documents “is concerned with the explanation of the status of some phenomenon at a
particular time or its development over a period of time. It serves a useful purpose in
adding knowledge to fields of inquiry and in explaining certain social events” (Best
& Kahn, 1989, p.90). The purpose of including document analysis in this study was
to triangulate the evidence gathered from different sources other than the survey and
the interviews. Different types of documents from two main sources were reviewed.
These included different VTC proposals and reports on IT development and minutes
of meetings of various working parties and committees.
4.7.2 Related documents collected and analysed
Different proposals on IT development in VTC and using IT for teaching and
learning as well as a number of progress reports were collected and reviewed. These
include:
i. IT Strategic Plan (Enhancement of IT Infrastructure in VTC Project)
proposed by the Information Technology Steering Committee (ITSC)
(VTC, 1998);
ii. Proposal: IT Enhancement Programme for VTC Teachers (VTC,
p. 88
1999c);
iii. Guidelines on software requirements for IVE course delivery (VTC,
1999e);
iii. Proposal: Setting-up a Working Group on Course Management and
Delivery Platform (VTC, 1999f);
iv. The adoption of WebCT as the platform for Web-based delivery for
IVE starting from 2000 and the percentage of IVE curriculum to be
put on the Web (VTC, 1999i); and
v. Five progress reports of the Working Party on IT Enhancement
Programme for VTC Teachers (VTC, 1999h; VTC, 2000b; VTC,
2001a; VTC, 2001b; VTC, 2002a).
The ‘IT Strategic Plan’ set the direction and strategies for IVE in the development of
IT for teaching and learning as well as administration (VTC, 1998). The plan covered
four aspects, namely: (i) establishment of a high-performance network infrastructure;
(ii) provision of e-services to students; (iii) upgrading of MIS and user services; (iv)
development of e-courseware; and (v) the provision of intensive IT training for
teachers.
Concerning the training of teachers in using IT for teaching and learning, a policy
was established (VTC, 1999c). The policy set up a framework for preparing IVE
teachers for using IT for teaching and learning (Koo, 2001). It identified three levels
of IT competency required by teachers of different backgrounds, and for using IT for
different delivery contexts. Through an IT Capability Enhancement Plan, a
p. 89
mechanism was also set up for benchmarking IVE teachers’ needs and their progress
in acquiring different IT skills for their teacher and student learning. A copy of the
plan is provided in Appendix III.
The ‘Guidelines on software requirements for IVE course delivery’ (VTC, 1999e)
suggested some components that Course Boards should consider when using
software for curriculum development and course delivery and assessment. These
components included: functionality; performance; user-friendliness; availability;
compatibility with operating system, hardware, software; security; ease of
administration; open standard; initial and maintenance cost; training opportunity and
time; and user support and assistance.
The ‘Proposal of setting-up a Working Group on Course Management and Delivery
Platform’ aimed to investigate what course management and delivery platform the
IVE should adopt so as to enhance the delivery quality of IVE courses via the Web
(VTC, 1999f). The working group finally suggested WebCT would be the formal
platform in delivery for IVE e-learning materials in the future.
After the adoption of WebCT as an official platform, a policy on the implementation
of using IT via the Web was announced (VTC, 1999i). The policy set the basic
direction for Course Boards to implement the use of IT for IVE course delivery. The
implementation targets are indicated in Table 4.3.
p. 90
Table 4.3
Implementation Target for the Use of WebCT for IVE Course Delivery
(Extracted from VTC, 1999i)
Five progress reports, which outlined the detailed progress of the Working Party on
IT Enhancement Programme for VTC Teachers at different stages of the
implementation, were reviewed (VTC, 1999h; VTC, 2000b; VTC, 2001a; VTC,
2001b; VTC, 2002a). The reports presented the progress of the work of the working
party and provided statistics about the courses provided and their attendance made by
IVE teachers. From September 1999 to February 2002, 418 courses on seven
categories were offered. A total of 5548 attendances made by 1381 IVE teachers was
recorded (VTC, 2002a).
The documents reviewed and analysed presented the brief history of how IVE
established the policy of using IT for teaching and learning, the roles of different
stakeholders, the implementation targets and training requirements. All these helped
to set the context of the research and served as reference for the implementation of
the curriculum innovation in accordance with the research questions set for this
study.
‘Please see print copy for image’
p. 91
They also contributed to the framing of research tools for this study. The research
tools, namely the survey questions and interview guide, were contextually designed
based on the documents collected.
4.7.3 Minutes of meetings collected and analysed
Minutes of meetings of different committees and working parties were also gathered
and reviewed. These included:
i. Minutes of meetings of the Information Technology Steering
Committee (VTC, 1998; VTC, 1999c; VTC, 1999e; VTC, 1999f; VTC,
2000c; VTC, 2001a; VTC, 2002b);
ii. Minutes of meetings of and memos from the Working Party on IT
Enhancement Programme for VTC Teachers (VTC, 1999b; VTC,
1999h; VTC, 2001b); and
iii. Minutes of meetings of the Teaching and Learning Steering
Committee (VTC, 2005a; VTC, 2005b).
The minutes of different meetings collected, as listed above, described how the use
of IT was introduced in VTC, in aligning with the Hong Kong government’s policy
in promoting IT in education among different education sectors of Hong Kong. In
summary, these documents recorded:
p. 92
i. Funding application procedures made by VTC to enhance its course
delivery using IT;
ii. How the funding was used to upgrade the infrastructure and services;
iii. The identification of different IT competencies for different teachers
for different teaching and learning purposes;
iv. The setting-up of a training programme to empower teachers’
knowledge and skills in using IT for teaching and learning;
v. The establishment of a benchmarking mechanism for teachers to plan
and record their acquisition of IT knowledge and skills; and
vi. The progress of the implementation at different intervals.
4.8 Conclusion of Research Methodology
This study used a combination of methods — survey, interviews, and document
analysis. A vast amount of data was required and collected. The data collected
included questionnaire scores, interview scripts, reports and minutes of meetings.
This data was then grouped, further reduced and compared. Data triangulation
(Patton, 1990) was carried out for comparing survey data with documents collected
and validated with ‘face-to-face interview’ scripts. This allowed the researcher to
compare the results and to draw up meaningful conclusions for this study.
p. 93
CHAPTER FIVE RESULTS
5.1 Introduction
This chapter reports the results of the research obtained from different methods,
namely survey, interviews and document analysis. The document analysis enabled
the researchers to set the context of the study and explained how different
stakeholders acted over a period of time, i.e. from 1998 to 2004.
The results of this research will be discussed in the following sections under five
major sub-topics. These include: (i) characteristics of teachers; (ii) degree of
implementation of the innovation: (iii) factors affecting teachers’ implementation of
the innovation into practice; (iv) issues encountered by teachers during the
implementation; and (v) ways to address the issues raised.
5.2 Characteristics of Teachers
As reported in Section 4.5, there were about 1200 teachers in IVE. Among them,
1096 of them were front line teachers. They formed the population for this study. The
distribution of their campus, department and rank is listed in Tables 5.1 and 5.2.
p. 94
Table 5.1 Distribution of Teachers’ Ranks and their Campuses
Rank
Campus Senior
Lecturer Lecturer
Assistant
Lecturer
Total
Billion Plaza Centre 1 17 0 18
Chai Wan 37 80 9 126
Haking Wong 18 72 28 118
Kwai Chung 11 39 20 70
Kwun Tong 13 70 11 94
Kennedy Town Centre 3 22 5 30
Lee Wai Lee 17 70 46 133
Morrison Hill 21 63 11 95
Sha Tin 29 94 16 139
Tuen Mun 17 51 43 111
Tsing Yi 45 110 7 162
Total 212 688 196 1096
Table 5.2 Distribution of Teachers’ Ranks and their Departments
Rank
Department Senior
Lecturer Lecturer
Assistant
Lecturer
Total
Applied Science 13 29 3 45
Business Administration / Business Services & Management 35 143 36 214
Child Education and Services 2 11 11 24
Construction 13 31 14 58
Design / Printing & Digital Media / Fashion & Textiles 16 53 16 85
Engineering related 51 127 43 221
Foundation Studies Section 3 8 12 23
Hotel, Service & Tourism Studies 9 24 4 37
IT related 49 137 21 207
Language Centre 21 125 36 182
Total 212 688 196 1096
p. 95
These 1096 teachers were surveyed and 329 of them completed and returned survey.
Data on characteristics of these teachers were collected by a survey. The first section
of the survey form returned recorded the demographic characteristics of the teachers
being survey. Teachers’ teaching experience, their posting, the 3level of course and
subject they taught and the training they received will be discussed in the following
paragraphs.
5.2.1 Rank of teachers
The 329 respondents held different ranks ranging from Senior Lecturer, Lecturer to
Supplied Lecturer. The distribution of these ranks is listed in Table 5.3.
Table 5.3 Rank held by Teachers
Rank No. %
Senior Lecturer 70 21
Lecturer 204 62
Assistant Lecturer 38 12
Cannot be defined 17 5
Total 329 100
Among them, 21% of them were Senior Lecturers, 62% of them held the position of
Lecturer, 12% were Assistant Lecturers and the rank of the remaining 5% could not
3 Level of course refers to the exit award that a student achieved at the end of studies. E.g. Higher Diploma course, Diploma course and Certificate course are courses at different levels.
p. 96
be defined from the returns.
5.2.2 Teaching experience of teachers
The 329 teachers had different years of teaching experience ranging from less than
five years to more than 15 years. Their teaching experience in IVE also varied. The
distribution of their years of teaching experience and their years with IVE is showed
in Table 5.4.
Table 5.4 Teaching Experience of Teachers
Elsewhere including IVE In IVE Only Years of Teaching Experience No. of teachers (%) No. of teachers (%)
Less than 5 years 29 (9%) 49 (15%)
5-10 years 101 (31%) 136 (41%)
11-15 years 70 (21%) 68 (21%)
More than 15 years 129 (39%) 76 (23%)
Total 329 329
Among them, 39% had a total teaching experience of more than 15 years, 21% had a
total teaching experience of between 11 and 15 years, 31% had between five and 10
years, and 9% had a total teaching experience of fewer than five years. For their
experience in IVE, 23% of them had been teaching in IVE more than 15 years, 21%
had been teaching in IVE between 11 and 15 years, 41% had been teaching in IVE
between five and 10 years, and 15% had been teaching in IVE for fewer than five
years.
p. 97
5.2.3 Place of work
The respondents taught in different campuses over different localities of Hong Kong.
The distribution of their place of work is recorded in Table 5.5. Among the 329
respondents, 13% worked in Haking Wong, 13% worked in Tuen Mun, 12% worked
in Lee Wai Lee, 11% worked in Sha Tin, 10% worked in Kwai Chung, 9% worked in
Morrison Hill, 9% worked in Tsing Yi, 8% worked in Chai Wan, 7% worked in
Kwun Tong, 5% worked in Kennedy Town Centre, and 2% worked in Billion Plaza
Centre.
Table 5.5 Place of Work of Teachers
Place of Work (by campus) No. %
Haking Wong 44 13
Tuen Mun 43 13
Lee Wai Lee 41 12
Sha Tin 36 11
Kwai Chung 33 10
Morrison Hill 31 9
Tsing Yi 30 9
Chai Wan 25 8
Kwun Tong 23 7
Kennedy Town Centre 15 5
Billion Plaza Centre 8 2
Total 329 100
p. 98
5.2.4 Posting of teachers
The teachers being surveyed came from different teaching departments of IVE. The
details of their distribution are listed in Table 5.6.
Table 5.6 Posting of Teachers
Posting (by Department) No. %
Business Administration / Business Services & Management 83 25
Engineering related 61 19
Language Centre 59 18
IT related 54 16
Design / Printing & Digital Media / Fashion & Textiles 23 7
Hotel, Service & Tourism Studies 13 4
Applied Science 12 4
Foundation Studies Section 11 3
Construction 9 3
Child Education and Services 4 1
Total 329 100
Among these teachers, 25% were from Business Administration / Business Services
and Management, 19% belonged to Engineering-related departments, 18% were from
Language Centre, 16% belonged to IT-related departments, 7% were from Design /
Printing and Digital Media / Fashion and Textiles, 4% belonged to Hotel, Service and
Tourism Studies, 4% were from Applied Science, 3% belonged to Foundation Studies
Section, 3% were from Construction, and 1% were from Child Education and
Services.
p. 99
5.2.5 Level of course taught by teachers
The 329 teachers also taught different courses at different levels and 32 of them
taught more than one course. The distribution of the level of course taught by these
teachers is showed on Table 5.7.
Table 5.7 Level of Course Taught by Teachers
Level of Course Taught No.
Higher Diploma 126
Diploma 132
Foundation Diploma 61
Certificate of Vocational Studies 33
Others 9
Total *361
* Among the 329 teachers, 32 of them taught more than one course
Among these teachers, 126 taught Higher Diploma courses, 132 taught Diploma
courses, 61 taught Foundation Diploma courses, 33 taught Certificate of Vocational
Studies courses, and nine of them taught other courses.
5.2.6 IT training received by teachers
The teachers being surveyed had received different levels and types of IT training.
The distribution of their IT training is showed in Table 5.8.
p. 100
Table 5.8 IT Training Received by Teachers
IT Training Received by Teachers No. %
No training received 30 9
Postgraduate course in IT 54 16
Undergraduate course in IT 46 14
Diploma/Certificate course in IT 25 8
Short IT course(s)/workshop(s) 236 72
Others 13 4
Total *374 —
* Among the 329 teachers, some had attended more than one course
Among the 329 respondents, only 9% had not received any IT training. For those
who had received IT training, 16% possessed a postgraduate qualification in IT, 14%
received IT training in their undergraduate studies, 8% attended IT training at a
diploma or certificate level, 72% attended short IT courses, and 4% received IT
training other than the course mentioned above.
5.2.7 Training in IT for teaching and learning received by teachers
Training in IT for teaching and learning received by IVE teachers was also surveyed.
The details of the responses are illustrated in Table 5.9.
p. 101
Table 5.9 Training in IT for Teaching and Learning Received by Teachers
Training in IT for Teaching and Learning Received by Teachers No. %
No IT for Teaching and Learning training received 89 27
Postgraduate course in education 16 5
Undergraduate course in education 5 2
Diploma/Certificate course 11 3
Short course(s)/workshop(s) outside of VTC 57 17
Short course(s)/workshop(s) run by the Teaching and Learning Centre (TLC) 84 26
Short course(s)/workshops run by VTC unit(s) other than TLC 185 56
Others 1 ≈ 0
Total 359 —
* Among the 329 teachers, some had attended more than one course
Among the 329 respondents, 27% of them had not received any training in IT for
Teaching and Learning. For those who had received training, 5% possessed a
postgraduate qualification in IT, 2% received IT training in their undergraduate
studies, 3% attended IT training at diploma or certificate level, 17% attended short
courses outside VTC, 26% attended short courses or workshop run by VTC’s
Teaching and Learning Centre (TLC), and 56% participated in short courses or
workshops run by training units other than TLC.
p. 102
5.3 Degree of Implementation of the Innovation
5.3.1 Introduction
The degree of implementation of the innovation was measured by an Implementation
Rubric established for this study. The implementation rubric was framed based on the
fidelity approach and was made reference to the document analysed (e.g. VTC,
1999c; VTC, 1999f; VTC 1999i). The rubric was used to measure the ‘Level of Use’
of the innovation (LoU) which was divided into three dimensions, namely Teachers’
Knowledge of VTC’s Policy in Using IT, Teachers’ Perceptions of Teaching and
Learning, and Teachers’ Practice in Using IT. The three dimensions were divided into
11 sub-items (Questions eight to 18) and the overall distribution of the LoU scores of
each sub-item are shown in Table 5.8.
Referring to Table 5.10, the scores indicate a general pattern about the innovation
used by the teachers. For the dimension of Teachers’ Knowledge of VTC’s Policy in
Using IT, most teachers scored level zero (Non Use) and level one (Informational
Use). The degree of implementation of this dimension would be discussed in Chapter
6 and reference would be made to the document collected (VTC, 1999d & VTC,
1999g). For the dimensions of Teachers’ Perceptions of using IT, the majority scored
either level two (Supplemental Use) or level four (Constructive Use).
For the last dimension, Teachers’ Practice in Using IT, the respondents scored
differently in two sub-dimensions. The majority scored level three (Intensive Use)
p. 103
for using IT for classroom teaching and scored level two (Supplemental Use) for
using IT for online teaching. The degree of implementation of this dimension would
be discussed in Chapter 6 and reference would be made to the related document
collected (VTC, 1999c & VTC, 1999e).
Table 5.10 Distribution of Overall LoU Scored by 329 Teachers
Dimension of Innovation Non Use (Level 0)
Informational Use
(Level 1)
Supplemental Use
(Level 2)
Intensive Use
(Level 3)
Constructive Use
(Level 4)
Missing Case
1. Policy in context: teachers’ knowledge of VTC’s policy expected of them 1.1 IT competencies 123 102 40 61 2 1 1.2 Course delivery 59 171 94 4 1 - 1.3. IT skill acquisition 50 84 149 36 9 2 1.4 Benchmarking 173 91 57 5 3 - 2. Teachers’ perceptions of teaching and learning: teachers’ perception of teaching and learning and their roles in
the innovation 2.1 Teachers’ perception of
using IT for teaching and learning
9 50 98 50 122 -
2.2 Teachers’ belief about their roles in using IT for teaching and learning
19 55 115 34 106 -
3. Teachers’ practice: expectations of teachers’ practice in using IT for teaching and learning Classroom teaching
3.1 Lecture presentation 10 42 85 165 25 2 3.2 Applying other IT
resources 22 57 90 133 22 5
Online teaching 3.3 Communication 8 23 259 29 10 - 3.4 Teaching and learning
online 55 64 172 26 12 -
3.5 Assessment online 134 120 60 8 6 1
5.3.2 Reliability of survey questions
To test if the questions used in the survey were reliable, a reliability test, using
Cronbach alpha (Cronbach, 1951), was conducted for the 11 items related to LoU.
p. 104
The Cronbach alpha indexes for the three dimensions were obtained and are listed in
Table 5.11.
Table 5.11 Cronbach Alpha for the Three Dimensions of LoU
Dimension No. of Item/Question No. Alpha Value
Teachers’ Knowledge of VTC’s Policy in Using IT 4 /(Questions 8 – 11) 0.7352
Teachers’ Perceptions of Teaching and Learning 2/(Questions 12 – 13) 0.7467
Teachers’ Practice in Using IT 5/(Questions 14 – 18) 0.7680
5.3.3 Distribution of teachers’ Level of Use
All the alpha values were greater than 0.7 and this indicated that the dimensions were
reliable for the sample (Cortina, 1993). Hence, it was valid to compute scores for
each of the three dimensions by averaging the scores of their corresponding items
with ‘a’ scored one up to ‘e’ scored five. By averaging the scores of each dimension,
the typical LoU of individual teachers could then be identified. Respondents with
different mean scores for the 11 items were categorised into different LoUs. The
distribution of mean scores and LoUs for the 329 respondents are recorded in Table
5.12.
p. 105
Table 5.12
A Summary of LoU of the Respondents
LoU Category Identified Mean Score No. of Respondents (%)
Level 0 teacher (Non Use) < 1.4 5 (1.5%)
Level 1 teacher (Informational Use) 1.5 – 2.4 98 (29.8%)
Level 2 teacher (Supplemental Use) 2.5 – 3.4 202 (61.4%)
Level 3 teacher (Intensive Use) 3.5 – 4.4 24 (7.3%)
Level 4 teacher (Constructive Use) > 4.5 0
After averaging the score of the three dimensions, distributions of the five levels of
teachers were identified. As indicated in Table 5.10, the majority of the respondents
were level two (Supplemental Use) and level one (Informational Use) teachers – of
these, more than 60% were level two teachers and about 30% were level one teachers.
Among the 329 respondents, 7% were level three (Intensive Use) teachers, and 5%
were level zero (Non Use) teachers.
5.3.4 Relationship between teachers’ LoU and their background
Information provided by Tables 5.8 to 5.10 portrayed an overall picture about the
implementation of the innovation; however, it did not explain its relationship with
the backgrounds of the teachers. To investigate such relationships, Analysis of
Variance (ANOVA) tests were conducted to test if there were significant differences
between teachers’ LoUs (the three dimensions) and their backgrounds such as rank,
teaching experience and level taught. A summary of these tests and the correlations
between teachers’ characteristics and their LoUs are listed in Table 5.13.
p. 106
Table 5.13
A Summary of Correlation between Teachers’ Backgrounds and their LoUs Using ANOVA
Dimensions of LoU
Teachers’ Characteristics Knowledge of policy Perception about
teaching and learning Practice in using IT
for teaching and learning
^Rank -0.087* (F=2.164)
-0.117* (F=1.614)
-0.060* (F=2.756)
Teaching experience 0.212** (F=8.873)
-0.055* (F=0.730)
Not significant
Teaching experience in IVE 0.239** (F=11.269)
-0.111* (F=2.286)
-0.039* (F=1.866)
Level taught 0.011* (F=2.530)
Not significant 0.173** (F=4.996)
IT training received 0.177** (F=10.596)
0.143** (F=6.794)
0.168** (F=9.532)
IT in teaching and learning training received
0.175** (F=10.371)
0.183** (F=11.338)
0.153** (F=7.869)
Notes: ^ The ranks were arranged in reverse order *p < 0.05 and **p < 0.01
Although the correlations were not statistically high, Table 5.11, shows that some
relationship did exist between teachers’ characteristics and some of their LoUs of the
innovation.
The following sections will discuss the three major dimensions used by teachers
according to the ANOVA tests and the information gathered from the interviews. The
three dimensions were: (i) policy in context; (ii) teachers’ perception of teaching and
learning and (iii) teachers’ practice in using IT for teaching and learning.
p. 107
5.3.4.1 Policy in context
One of the dimensions of the innovation being studied was ‘Policy in Context’, i.e.
Teachers’ Knowledge of VTC’s Policy expected of them in the innovation (see VTC,
1999d & VTC, 1999g for examples ). This policy focused on four aspects: (i) IT
competencies for teachers; (ii) requirements of curriculum delivery; (iii) IT skill
acquisition; and (iv) benchmarking for teachers’ competencies.
The survey revealed that some teachers’ characteristics had a positive correlation
with their understanding of the policy.
i. Teachers holding higher ranks had better knowledge than those who
held lower ranks.
ii. Teachers with more teaching experience had a better understanding of
the policy.
iii. The longer the time they taught in IVE, the better knowledge of the
policy they had.
iv. Teachers who taught higher-level courses also had a better knowledge
of the policy.
v. Teachers who had received more IT training had a better knowledge
of the policy.
vi. The more pedagogy of IT training they had received, the better
knowledge of the policy they had.
p. 108
In addition to the survey, the interviews also revealed aspects of some behaviours of
the teachers during the implementation. Among the 12 teachers interviewed, their
knowledge of the policy varied, i.e. ranging from close to level zero to very close to
level three. Ten of the teachers interviewed had LoU scores that were consistent with
the scores achieved from the survey. Their behaviours are discussed in the following
sections.
First, there existed a common belief that ‘teachers were asked to use more IT for
teaching and learning’, regardless of the scores of their LoU achievements. However,
most teachers, including the one who claimed that his LoU was close to level three,
had limited knowledge of the policy; they could state that there was a policy in place,
but could not explain the details. For example, they could only describe one or two
aspects of the policy, but not all aspects of the policy. Further, some could briefly
describe aspects of the policy or how the policy was disseminated. These responses
are illustrated by the following interview transcripts:
… about five years ago, there was a policy like “certain percentages of IT for teaching”… there are three levels of IT competencies (Betty). … our department had requested us to use more IT tools and facilities for teaching, e.g. PowerPoint. … [We were asked] to gradually increase the use of WebCT… I know that there were documents for such requirements… (Bob). I have seen such document [on IT competencies] before, … we had to reach a certain level of competency (Ann). I found one set of information which mentioned various levels and a list of IT skills that a teacher should possess… it basically requires every teacher to possess these skills. … (Alex).
p. 109
Second, two interviewees who were at level zero did not attend any training on IT for
teaching and learning. Teachers who scored between levels one and two had attended
some training (ranging from two workshops to 11 workshops). The teacher who had
the highest score (very close to level three) attended 25 workshops on IT for teaching
and learning. Such observation revealed that teachers who had attended more
training tended to have better knowledge of the policy.
Third, most teachers indicated that they had little knowledge of benchmarking
requirements that the policy expected of them. However they admitted that they
would need to use these requirements to guide their own professional development.
Fourth, there existed some misconceptions on the nature of the policy and issue of
exemption. Some teachers thought that, as illustrated in the following quotes, the
policy was voluntary:
[On the curriculum delivery requirement,] the percentage was not mandatory. … [on IT acquisition which requires teachers to attend training], there was such a request or encouragement, but not compulsory. (Mary). … it only liked encouragement. And if the encouragement is only about [using] PowerPoint, I think most of them (teachers) could do … [if it is mandatory] it’s really a hard work (Steve).
Most IT teachers believed that they were exempted from the policy. Such
misconception was due to expertise that the subject demanded of them. They claimed
that IT teachers were already competent; therefore, they did not need to attend extra
p. 110
training. The following quotes verified such belief:
In our discipline, … teachers’ IT competencies are very high, therefore, there was no requirement on us … We were only encouraged [to follow the requirements]. We teach computing, we were encouraged to update our knowledge in computing … [but not] in "IT for teaching and learning" training (Chris). Our department did not require us to do [attend training] so. It might [be] because we are ICT … Our HoD (Head of Department) did not require us to attend particular training or impose any policy (Fred).
Fifth, teachers’ acceptance of the policy was also part of their knowledge of the
policy. All teachers who participated in the interviews agreed with and supported the
policy. However, some of them supported the policy with conditions. These teachers
requested that facilities, training opportunities and teaching and learning packages
should be available before teachers were asked to implement the policy. These
teachers also had concerns about their ability and workload being increased. IT
teachers also suggested that they should be the pioneers in implementing the policy
and teachers who were believed to be less IT literate, should be given a different
option. The IT teachers offered the following statements:
… they (non-IT teachers) were incapable of doing … (developing IT resources). No one would help them; [not] even the students, thus, the workload would be really harsh and time-consuming (Steve). IT teachers would act as a pioneer to implement this policy while other teachers, who were not as professional as IT teachers, would just follow ... [The management] had to consider teachers’ expertise (discipline), capability and their workload; they did not have enough time to take training and adapt to the reform. Thus, we have to tolerate them, but not push them (Peter).
p. 111
However, most interviewees agreed that the policy was useful, because it provided
opportunities for teachers to learn and upgrade themselves in facing the changing
world. This was reflected in the transcripts:
[The policy] does help to a certain extent’ … [and help teachers] to meet the changing world especially after the handover (Ann). [The policies] were quite helpful, especially training. I attended many training courses. They were some workshops of short durations (Mary). It is reasonable for teachers to attain a certain level to master basic (IT) skills … (Cathy).
The policy also alerted teachers to the requirements of their future needs, in
particular where continuous professional development (CPD) was concerned. Two of
them commented:
[The policy] helped teachers in continuous development. Without the policies, we might not acquire the techniques for daily teaching needs … IT actually relaxed teachers’ workload (Fred). It did help us to know the trend, alerting teachers to take training. (Steve)
One teacher pointed out that the policy helped to save consumable materials such as
paper and transparencies, because electronic resources could be amended easily. He
quoted:
And it also save the environment, lots of OHTs and papers could be saved. And
p. 112
for PowerPoint, it’s much easier to edit (Steve).
Last, although most teachers supported the policy, they were unlikely to discuss the
policy with their colleagues, as teachers believed that there were no incentives for
them to discuss the policy, which they saw as the role of the Head of Department
(HoD). As one of the teachers commented:
… this might not have added bonus … not mandatory at all. Our HoD wouldn’t request us to do that (Fred).
The interview data suggested that there was no evidence to support the view that
teachers’ knowledge level of the policy was related to teachers’ teaching experience
not their academic background.
5.3.4.2 Teachers’ perceptions of teaching and learning
This dimension of the LoU referred to the role of the teacher and IT in the teaching
and learning process. This policy focused on two aspects: (i) teachers’ perception of
using IT for teaching and learning; and (ii) teachers’ beliefs about their roles in using
IT for teaching and learning.
Results from the survey indicated that, as measured by the LoU implementation
rubric, the dimension of teachers’ perception about teaching and learning had some
relationships with their rank, teaching experience and the training they received.
These relationships are listed below:
p. 113
i. Rank: Higher ranking teachers tended to have higher perceptions of
the role of IT in teaching and learning.
ii. Teaching experience: Teachers with more teaching experience tended
to have lower perceptions of the role of IT in teaching and learning.
iii. Teaching experience in IVE: Teachers with more teaching experience
in IVE tended to have lower perceptions of the role of IT in teaching
and learning.
iv. IT training received: Teachers with more IT training tended to have
higher perceptions of the role of IT in teaching and learning.
v. Pedagogy of IT training received: Teachers with more pedagogy of IT
training tended to have higher perceptions of the role of IT in teaching
and learning.
Data from the interview scripts highlighted similar relationships identified from the
survey. Among the 12 interviewees, their overall perception of teaching and learning
differed, ranging from level one to level four. However, eight of them had LoU
scores consistent with the scores they achieved from the survey. The interviews also
revealed some characteristics of how teachers perceived teaching and learning and
their roles as teachers, as well as the role of IT in the teaching and learning process.
Examples are reported in the following paragraphs.
First, interviewees held different views on teaching and learning. One third of the
interviewees had very traditional views of teaching, i.e. passing information of their
p. 114
trade to students, as illustrated by the following interview transcripts:
[My role is to] pass knowledge to students, [teach them] how to be a good man, be polite’ ... I gave them information, explained the information, students jotted down notes … I also photocopied other information for them, to arouse their interest in this subject … Eventually I visited the suppliers on Saturdays, asked them for some information and data … (Ted). We have to teach them to master knowledge. We followed the TLP (the prescribed Teaching and Learning Package) … most teachers followed… I used the whiteboard… I prefer they copy and fill in while I am writing (on the whiteboard). When I wrote and explained, they would be more concentrated (John).
The majority of interviewees believed that ‘teaching should be student-centred’, as
indicated by the following transcripts:
If you teach them something which are not related to their daily life, they will resist… I just want them to think, learn how to brainstorm their ideas… (Ann). [For better students], I’d let them have self-learning … I’d not give them the final answer immediately. I’d guide them think first. If they really couldn’t solve, I’d give them more hints then (Steve). … student-centred is the goal … The teacher became a facilitator with the role of providing advice and facilitating their (students’) work (Cathy).
Although these teachers supported a student-centred approach towards teaching and
learning, the reality had prohibited them from adopting such an approach, as
suggested from the following quotes:
p. 115
[Teachers] were restricted by the syllabus … [they] couldn’t spend much time on games (those regarded as student-centred approach) since there were a lot to teach (Mary). We normally adopt the traditional teacher-centred approach rather than student-centred approach. Student-centred approach is relatively a new idea [in IVE] (Fred).
Teachers teaching lower level courses tended to hold a more traditional view of
teaching and learning, whereas teachers who taught higher-level courses had a more
student-centred view of teaching and learning.
Some teachers believed that face-to-face teaching was most important and IT’s role
was as a supplement, as illustrated by the following excerpts from the interview
transcripts:
[IT] couldn’t replace lecture, it could just act as a supplement … Because all students would listen to the teachers during lecture … (Steve). Supplementary mainly. It provided varieties and increased learning incentives. It also motivated students (Mary).
By way of contrast, some interviewees who achieved LoU scores at level three or
above held a different view. They believed that IT had its value in the teaching and
learning and was helpful to teachers, as indicated by the following excerpts from the
interview scripts:
It's a tool for deliver message more effectively … students can learn more easily and more efficiently… [WebCT] facilitated better communication between
p. 116
teachers and the students … we could share teaching materials … in an efficient manner. It’s convenient ... Students used it (ICQ) … it's a good tool for establishing our relationship ... (Bob). … students accessing to the Internet, even if the teachers was absent, students could learn on their own… sharing learning materials ... teachers could monitor students’ results through online quizzes. At least, teachers would know more about students’ performance, how much they did and learned … IT creates “variety” in education, makes delivery more interesting. (Cathy).
One IT teacher stated that:
Students gain benefit because IT provides a way for students to think in the learning process via e-learning or WebCT (Alex).
However another interviewee reminded that IT should be used according to the
nature of the subject. She commented that:
we should not use IT for the sake of using it. We should use it appropriately according to the context (Betty).
It was also observed that teachers who taught lower level courses, e.g. craft level
Engineering subjects and FD Mathematics, achieved the lowest score (level one)
compared with other interviewees. In contrast, teachers who achieved the higher
scores (level four) were those teaching IT or Language subjects.
p. 117
5.3.4.3 Teachers’ practice in using IT for teaching and learning
Another dimension of the implementation was teachers’ practice in using IT. This
dimension focused on: (i) lecture presentation; (ii) applying other IT resources; (iii)
using IT to communicate with students and colleagues; (iv) teaching and learning
online; and (v) assessment online.
The survey revealed that, as measured by the LoU implementation rubric, teachers’
practice in using IT for teaching and learning differed in relation to teachers’
background; for example their rank, teaching experience and the training they had
received. These relationships included:
i. Rank: Higher ranked teachers used more IT for teaching and learning
than those who held lower ranks.
ii. Teaching experience in IVE: Teachers with more teaching experience
in IVE used less IT for teaching and learning than those who had less
teaching experience in IVE.
iii. Level of course taught: Teachers teaching higher level courses used
more IT for teaching and learning than those who taught lower level
courses.
iv. IT training received: The more IT training they received, the more IT
they used for teaching and learning.
v. Pedagogy of IT training received: Teachers who received more
pedagogy of IT training used more IT for teaching and learning.
p. 118
Based on the IT tools available to IVE teachers, as indicated in the documents
reviewed (see VTC, 1999c & VTC, 1999e for expamles), the survey also
investigated not only what IT tools teachers used for the innovation, but also what IT
tools were most popular among teachers. A summary of the usage is listed in Table
5.14.
Table 5.14 IT Tools Used by Teachers
Tool Used the Most by Teachers (by rank) IT Tool
*1 2 3 4 **5
Lecture presentation tools 221 47 17 13 3
Communication tools 73 155 37 14 3
Web tools for teaching and learning 35 54 135 21 3
Web tools for assessment 5 10 29 132 17
Other IT tools for teaching and learning 7 4 10 8 37
*1 = used by teachers the most **5 = used by teachers the least
As revealed from the survey, the popularity of the IT tools used by teachers, in rank
order, were Lecture Presentation Tools (ranked number one by 221 teachers),
Communication Tools (ranked number two by 155 teachers), Web tools for Teaching
and Learning (ranked number three by 135 teachers), and Web tools for Assessment
(ranked number four by 132 teachers).
Teachers’ practice in using IT was also revealed from the interviews. Among these 12
interviewees, their practices of using IT for teaching and learning varied. While all
p. 119
interviewees used IT for their teaching, different groups of teachers had different
levels of implementation.
Teachers who taught lower level courses, e.g. Foundation Diploma courses or Craft
courses, tended to use only common software such as MS Office® to prepare their
teaching materials and deliver their teaching. This might be due to the fact that the
delivery of lower courses only required teachers to deliver skill-based content.
Among the 12 teachers interviewed, five of them had their actual LoU scores at level
two or above. These teachers used a variety of IT tools, not only for their daily
teaching, but also for enhancing student learning. Communicating with students
using e-mails or ICQ was a common practice of these teachers, as revealed from the
interview data:
I used e-mails for communication between myself and colleagues, students … I let students have access to my Website (Betty). [I chatted] with students via ICQ … for establishing our relationship… (Bob). [I also use] e-mail and sometimes ICQ ... [for] student individual problems… (Chris). … students sent me e-mails when they had problems (Mary).
Requiring students to search information from the Web was also very popular among
these teachers, as illustrated by the following examples:
p. 120
We need to keep a closed eye on the Government’s information. For example, the homepage of Government’s Water Supplies Department and information on gases (Ted). [I] required students to conduct information searching and to answer questions… They were required to get information via the Web … In most assignments, I required them to search information and to manage the information (Alex).
As WebCT was the official platform, most of these teachers had made use of WebCT
to enhance their teaching and student learning. Some examples quoted by these
teachers were:
I would upload the notes… [and] the [tutorial] answers onto the WebCT … I used Hot Potato [with WebCT] to design MCs, fill in the blanks and matching (Fred). … exercises, relevant topics, which were uploaded to WebCT, I would ask them to do it in class ... I suggested them to search past papers on WebCT or ask them to check whether they required re-exam via WebCT (Mary).
Language teachers also used IT extensively for their teaching and student learning, as
illustrated by the following examples:
[I also] use IT to test them, to force them to write essay or use it to prepare the presentation materials instead of using the tradition transparency … there is some software helping us in teaching … for writing, there's software in English helping us to check the grammar and spelling… I [encourage them] to type the words by listening to the syllables. When they hear the syllables in Mandarin, they can type it out and learn Mandarin as well… [with an] e-dictionary, …[they can] speak and learn the syllables because
p. 121
when you speak wrongly, the word won't show… (Ann).
They also indicated that they had provided quizzes for their students via WebCT.
They quoted in the interviews:
In WebCT, we have online quiz and the TLP (Cathy). I used calendar management tool to track students’ progress and quiz most the time… (Mary). We've put quiz and tests on WebCT … I would e-mail the attached link to them, provide individual service to them… [and] send notice to students, answer or solve their problems (Ann).
Teachers who are more competent in IT had created their own packages to enhance
learning, as illustrated by the following quotes:
Recently, I made an e-book… it had audio and explained things in steps in it, so that students could see the demonstration. (Steve). [For] teaching JAVA programming, I developed a package to help my teaching. (Chris).
Two interviewees also reported that they had used IT to collect student assignments,
as indicated by the following examples:
[I] put my notes and exercises in it (WebCT), so that students could download them for reference. [Students] could submit their assignments privately… (Peter). All assignments were submitted through e-mail… and I could… check students’
p. 122
results and effort. We collected these statistics for continuous assessment instead of tests… (Alex).
Of the 12 interviewees, Alex was the one who was the most enthusiastic pioneer of
using IT for teaching and learning. He mentioned that he had participated in a
WebCT pilot project some years ago and he had voluntarily initiated an interest
group in which he not only shared his experience in using IT for teaching, but also
offered his assistance to other teachers who wanted to use more IT for their teaching.
He also submitted a proposal to his campus principal on measures to improve
e-learning in his campus.
On the other hand, one mathematics teacher used little IT for his teaching. He used
e-mails to answer student questions when it was required. He perceived that drill and
practice was more important in learning mathematics and IT was only a supplement,
but not an essential, as his comment indicated:
I seldom used it (PowerPoint) ... If students sent me an e-mail, I would response using e-mail… If you want students’ to achieve better in mathematics, what you have to do is giving them more practice. IT can’t help much. Learning mathematics requires practice … IT can only arouse a bit of interest (John).
When teachers were asked what extra IT tools they would be using next academic
year, most of them responded that they had no intention of using any as they had
very heavy workloads. Only one teacher considered that, if time allowed, she would
“design something which can be shared by teachers across nine IVE campuses”
(Betty).
p. 123
According to the interviews, there was no evidence to suggest that teachers’ practice
in using IT for teaching and learning was related to their teaching experience and
their academic background. However, it was observed that teachers who taught
higher-level courses had used more IT tools than those who taught lower-level
courses.
5.4 Factors Affecting Teachers Putting the Innovation into Practice
Factors affecting teachers putting the innovation into practice were explored using
the survey data. Factor analysis technique was applied to find out the major factors
from 27 questions in the survey. In addition, an open-ended question was designed to
collect teachers’ views on the factors that affected the implementation.
5.4.1 Factors identified by Factor Analysis
This section reports the factors that affected teachers putting the innovation into
practice. The results obtained from the survey and the interviews were used for
discussion. Questions 20 to 46 of the survey form were designed to determine the
factors that affected the innovation and its implementation. Factor analysis was
conducted so that major factors would be extracted from the 27 questions for
meaningful and concise interpretation of the survey results. Different factor analysis
techniques were adopted for this analysis.
p. 124
5.4.1.1 Exploratory Factor Analysis
Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) with maximum likelihood and Direct Oblimin
Rotation with Kaiser Normalization were used for the first instant. EFA was an
exploratory method for finding factors that best reproduce the variables under the
maximum likelihood conditions for generating theory (Henson, Capraro & Capraro,
2001). Three iterations for different factors were attempted and the summary of these
iterations is recorded in Table 5.15.
Table 5.15
A Summary of Results of Exploratory Factor Analysis
No. of Factors Extracted Percentage of Variations Explained
8 44.4%
7 40.8%
6 38.2% Remarks: eigen-values > 1
Although the analysis showed that these factors gave a reasonable percentage of
explanation, after further observation, some of the factors extracted did not fall into
categories of the same nature, as suggested by the literature. Another factor analysis
method, Confirmatory Factor Analysis, was used to explore whether the 27 questions
could be grouped into some meaningful factors.
5.4.1.2. Confirmatory Factor Analysis
Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) is a useful technique to extract and confirm
p. 125
meaningful factors when some factors had been predefined or proven by previous
research literature (Henson, Capraro & Capraro, 2001; Stevens, 2002). Based on the
literature review conducted for this study, five factors that affect the implementation
of the innovation were identified. These five factors were: (i) support for the teacher
in using IT; (ii) the teacher’s knowledge of using IT; (iii) extra workload when using
IT; (iv) incentives for using IT; and (v) uncertainty after using IT.
It was hypothesised that a model with five factors could fit the co-variations of the 27
items with CFA. The goodness-of-fit indexes: (i) Comparative Fit Index (CFI), (ii)
Standardized Root Mean Squared Residuals (SRMR), and (iii) Root Mean Squared
Errors of Approximation (RMSEA), were used to check the goodness-of-fit of the
model to the data. A good fit to the data could be claimed if CFI > 0.9, SRMR < 0.08
and RMSEA < 0.08 (Prosser & Trigwell, 2006). The results for the fit for this CFA
were: CFI=0.73, SRMR=0.089 and RMSEA=0.07 which suggested the model did
not fit the data well.
Since the model did not fit the data well, the number of factors and their
corresponding items was regrouped and nine items that carried lighter loading were
discarded. Finally, a second model with five factors was obtained. These factors were:
(i) support for the teacher in using IT; (ii) the teacher’s knowledge of using IT; (iii)
intellectual property concerns, (iv) extra workload when using IT; and (v) incentives
for using IT.
The factors identified from questions in the survey questionnaire, using Confirmatory
p. 126
Factor Analysis, are shown in Figure 5.1. The fit of the model to the data, as shown
in Figure 5.1, improved with CFI=0.92, SRMR=0.058 and RMSEA=0.05, which
indicated a good fit of the data to the model.
Five factors emerged from the CFA:
i. support for the teacher in using IT;
ii. the teacher’s knowledge of using IT;
iii. intellectual property concerns;
iv. extra workload when using IT; and
v. incentives for using IT.
Figure 5.1
Confirmatory Factor Analysis Model Describing the Factors Affecting the Implementation
Support in using IT
Q22
Q23
Q24
Q25
Q27
Knowledge of using of IT
Q33
Q34
Intellectual property concerns
Q41
Q42
Extra workload when using IT
Q21
Q38
Q39
Q40
Incentives of using IT
Q37
Q43
Q44
Q45
0.58
- 0.19 - 0.23
0.43
0.26
0.47
0.54
0.48
0.49
0.57
0.61
0.57
0.44
0.62
0.74
0.85
0.83
0.54
0.68
0.84
0.81
0.48
Support in using IT
Q22
Q23
Q24
Q25
Q27
Knowledge of using of IT
Q33
Q34
Intellectual property concerns
Q41
Q42
Extra workload when using IT
Q21
Q38
Q39
Q40
Incentives of using IT
Q37
Q43
Q44
Q45
Support in using IT
Q22
Q23
Q24
Q25
Q27
Support in using IT
Support in using IT
Q22
Q23
Q24
Q25
Q27
Q22
Q23
Q24
Q25
Q27
Knowledge of using of IT
Q33
Q34
Knowledge of using of ITKnowledge
of using of IT
Q33
Q34
Intellectual property concerns
Q41
Q42
Intellectual property concerns
Intellectual property concerns
Q41
Q42
Extra workload when using IT
Q21
Q38
Q39
Q40
Extra workload when using ITExtra workload when using IT
Q21
Q38
Q39
Q40
Q21
Q38
Q39
Q40
Incentives of using IT
Q37
Q43
Q44
Q45
Incentives of using ITIncentives of using IT
Q37
Q43
Q44
Q45
Q37
Q43
Q44
Q45
0.58
- 0.19 - 0.23
0.43
0.26
0.58
- 0.19 - 0.23
0.43
0.26
0.47
0.54
0.48
0.49
0.47
0.54
0.48
0.49
0.57
0.61
0.57
0.44
0.57
0.61
0.57
0.44
0.62
0.74
0.62
0.74
0.85
0.83
0.85
0.83
0.54
0.68
0.84
0.81
0.48
0.54
0.68
0.84
0.81
0.48
p. 127
These five factors, as listed in Table 5.16, displayed an acceptable reliability with
Cronbach’s alpha ranging from 0.8 to 0.65.
The five factors identified by CFA not only carried high Cronbach’s alpha values, but
also each factor fitted the corresponding items, in terms of their nature and
characteristics.
Table 5.16
Factors Identified by Confirmatory Factor Analysis and their Reliabilities
Factor Identified Cronbach’s alpha Items (questions) from Questionnaire
1. Support for teacher in using IT
0.80 Teachers received suitable training (Question 22) Infrastructure reliable and supports IT teaching (Question 23) Hardware, software and teaching resources are readily available
(Question 24) Support from Dept/Campus/Headquarters is readily available
(Question 25) A supportive HoD/Principal encourages using IT (Question 27)
2. Teacher’s knowledge of using IT
0.69 Teachers do not have knowledge and skills to prepare and deliver, using IT (Questions 33 and 34)
3. Intellectual property concerns
0.64 Teachers worried they might infringe copyright when using others’ materials (Question 41)
Teachers worried their materials will be plagiarised by others (Question 42)
4. Extra workload when using IT
0.63 Daily work getting more complex after IT was introduced (Question 21)
Teachers use more IT resulting in higher workload (Question 38) Teachers had to revise material more frequently (Question 39) Teacher has to attend more training (Question 40)
5. Incentives for using IT
0.65 Management encourages and rewards teachers who use IT (Question 37)
IT results in better teaching (Question 43) IT is not suitable for teaching some modules (Question 44) Teachers have sufficient time to implement change (Question 45)
p. 128
5.4.2 Factors collected from open-ended questions
In addition to Questions 20 to 46, an open-ended question was designed (Question 47)
to collect teachers’ opinions about the factors affecting the implementation. Among
the 329 respondents, 149 of them had suggested 15 factors affecting the
implementation; these factors were shown in Table 5.17.
Table 5.17
A List of Factors Affecting Implementation as Expressed by 149 IVE Teachers
Item Factors Affecting Implementation No. of
Responses
1. Student background 45
2. Availability of hardware, software and teaching resources 28
3. Lack of time 21
4. Teachers’ attitudes 20
5. Support from department/campus/the Headquarters 17
6. Heavy workload (existing) 15
7. Teachers’ IT knowledge 11
8. Reliable infrastructure and support 10
9. Management’s encouragement 8
10. Extra workload 7
11. IT is not suitable for teaching some modules 7
12. Availability of training 7
13. A supportive Head of Department/Principal 6
14. High student-teacher ratio 5
15. Availability of a well-defined policy 4
Of the factors suggested by the respondents, some were consistent with those defined
p. 129
by the confirmatory factor analysis after regrouping. These included: (i) extra
workload (item 10); (ii) teachers’ IT knowledge (item seven); (iii) incentives for
using IT (items three, nine and 11); (iv) support for teachers using IT (items two, five,
eight, 12 and 13).
Apart from these four factors, the respondents had suggested another four factors that
affected the implementation. They were: (i) heavy workload (items three, six and 14);
(ii) availability of a well-defined policy (item 15); (iii) student background (item
one); and (iv) teachers’ attitudes (item four).
5.4.2.1 Heavy workload
Heavy workload was one of the factors suggested by the teachers. The high
student-teacher ratio faced by teachers had discouraged the use of IT for teaching and
learning. In addition, teachers had long face-to-face teaching hours on top of their
administrative duties. As the life cycle of a course/module was shortened, teachers
had to prepare new teaching materials more frequently. All these limited the
opportunity for teachers to attend training, practising the IT skills they learned,
preparing resources and using IT for teaching outside school hours.
5.4.2.2 Availability of a well-defined policy
Some respondents believed that a well-defined policy that set the priority and
strategy was another factor that affected the implementation. One teacher responded
p. 130
to the open-ended questions and pointed out that the policy was problematic as he
believed that the arrangement of the implementation was not appropriate. Another
teacher responded that the policy was not clear and he was not sure whether it was
mandatory, as he stated in the questionnaire: “If it is mandatory, of course, teachers
have to comply with [it]”.
5.4.2.3 Student background
Student background was a significant factor that affected the implementation. A total
of 45 of the 179 respondents believed that students’ academic quality, their attitude
towards learning, their competency in using IT for learning, and their preference and
the availability of IT facility and equipment at home would affect the
implementation.
5.4.2.4 Teachers’ attitudes
A total of 20 of the 179 respondents commented that teachers’ attitudes in accepting
new technology affected how the innovation was implemented. This included their
willingness in using IT for teaching and learning and their beliefs about the role of IT
in the teaching and learning process.
5.5 Issues Encountered by Teachers during the Implementation
The issues encountered by teachers during the implementation were revealed from
p. 131
the survey and the interviews. In the survey form, an open-ended question was
designed (Question 48) to solicit teachers’ views on the issues they encountered
during the implementation. Among the 329 respondents, 168 of them had pointed out
the issues they encountered. Theses issues were grouped and are listed in Table 5.18.
Table 5.18
A List of Issues Encountered by 168 IVE Teachers as Revealed from the Survey
Issues Encountered by Teachers No. of Responses
1. Lack of support given to teachers Lack of hardware, software and teaching resources (26) Lack of technical support (25) Poor infrastructure (22) Insufficient training (7)
80
2. Insufficient time / heavy workload 64
3. Students’ low academic ability and motivation 21
4. Teachers’ knowledge in using IT 18
5. Teachers’ incentives for using IT 7
6. Students’ access to IT at home 6
7. Copyright concerns 5
8. Management’s discouragement 4
9. Lacking a well-defined policy 2
10. Subject not appropriate to be delivered by IT 2
Some of the issues teachers encountered were similar to the factors affecting the
implementation as suggested by the respondents (as in Question 47). Some of these
issues could also be grouped under the factors identified by the confirmatory factor
analysis. They were: (i) support for teachers in using IT (issue one); (ii) teachers’ IT
knowledge (issue four); (iii) incentives for using IT (issue five); and (iv) intellectual
property concerns (issue seven).
p. 132
Besides the above issues, the respondents also encountered issues that could be
grouped into: (i) insufficient time/ heavy workload (issue two); (ii) students’ low
academic ability and motivation (issue three); (iii) students’ access to IT at home
(issue six); (iv) management’s discouragement (issue seven); (v) availability of a
well-defined policy (issue nine); and (vi) subject not appropriate to be delivered by
IT (issue 10).
The interviewees had outlined a lot of issues in implementing IT in teaching and
learning that could be grouped into five categories. They were: (i) heavy workload
faced by teachers; (ii) teachers’ knowledge in using IT; (iii) teachers’ incentives for
using IT for teaching and learning; and (iv) support given to teachers in using IT for
teaching and learning.
The issues identified by the survey and interviews were simplified and regrouped and
are discussed in the following paragraphs.
5.5.1 Lack of support given to teachers
A total of 80 of the 168 respondents reported that there was a lack of support given to
teachers for the innovation. This was consistent with the results as revealed from the
interviews. First, 26 respondents suggested that the support on the provision of
hardware, software and teaching resources was inadequate. This inadequacy was also
claimed by teachers who attended the interviews (Ann, Fred & Ted). Language
p. 133
teachers reported that computers were not equipped in every language laboratory and
CD-ROM drives were not installed in every computer (Ann & Mary). For Chinese
Language teaching, quality resources were not available and the Chinese software
being used was not compatible with the operating system (Ann).
Second, a lack of technical support to teachers was reported by 25 respondents. Some
teachers, as revealed from the interviews, always encountered technical issues such
as access to computers was not always available or the computers ran out of memory
and the system crashed (Alex, Ann & Cathy).
Third, a lack of technical support was reported by 25 respondents. The interviews
revealed similar results. Some teachers being interviewed attempted to develop their
own IT resources for their teaching, however, no technical support was available
(Fred & Mary).
Fourth, 22 respondents stated that the poor infrastructure had hindered their use of IT
for teaching. The interviews also reveal similar findings as some interviewees
pointed out that the infrastructure was not in place, e.g. Internet access failed,
WebCT traffic was slow (Cathy & Mary).
Last, seven respondents reported that the training provided by the organization was
insufficient. The interviews supported this as one teacher claimed that the training
provided to teachers before and during the implementation did not meet their needs
(Mary).
p. 134
5.5.2 Heavy workload faced by teachers
Some 52 respondents complained that they lacked the time to be as professional as
they would like. They stated that they need time for learning IT skills, practising the
skills they learned, developing IT resources and using these resources to deliver their
teaching. However, 12 of them claimed that, given teachers’ teaching loads (about 18
hours per week) and administrative and pastoral care duties, learning new IT skills
had increased their workload. Some interviewees expressed that they were not able to
attend training because they had to finish the ‘packed’ curriculum within the
prescribed timetabled hours (Betty, Cathy, Chris & Fred). After attending training,
many teachers had to spend their time practising what they had learned before they
felt competent in using IT for teaching and learning (Mary, Peter, Steve & Ted).
Developing IT-based resources for teaching and learning was time-consuming. Some
teachers, who were asked to develop IT-based resources or to revise existing
Teaching and Learning Packages (4TLPs), had to spend a huge amount of time on
this area during school hours and some of them had to work extra using their own
time (Alex, Ann & Cathy).
In addition to the implementation of IT in teaching and learning, a number of new
initiatives were introduced in recent years within the institution (Betty). Given the
unfavourable financial situation, every teacher had to share more workload with
4 TLPs are Teaching and Learning Packages developed by teachers for their teaching.
p. 135
fewer resources so that the initiatives could be successfully implemented (Cathy).
Some 12 respondents from the survey reported that their increased workload was the
result of frequent changes of curriculum. Therefore, they had to spend more time to
revise their teaching materials, making it difficult for them to “cope with the
ever-changing technology”.
In addition, some interviewees indicated that they had to work with the computers
for longer hours than before. They believed that this was not healthy, especially for
their eyes (Alex & Ann). Therefore they would try to avoid using IT and preferred
using traditional print materials.
5.5.3 Students’ academic ability and motivation
Some 21 respondents claimed that the poor academic ability of their students had
made their teaching difficult. This included their IT competency, their English ability
and their independent learning skills. Moreover, students’ resistance to using IT for
learning had forced teachers “to reduce the amount of IT used in class” (as suggested
by one of the respondents). These claims were also supported by the interviews:
“students with poor IT competency and a passive attitude in using IT for learning had
affected the effectiveness of learning Chinese via IT” (Ann & Ted). Thus the survey
and interviews indicated that the passive attitudes of some students impacted
negatively on their ability to effectively use IT for learning. Further, this was
reported across different disciplines.
p. 136
5.5.4 Teachers’ knowledge of using IT
A lack of IT competency was one of the issues teachers faced. The survey revealed
that 18 respondents stated that teachers lacked knowledge in using IT for their
teaching. This was also supported by the interviews. Some interviewees reflected that
they had to build up their confidence before they were competent in using IT to
deliver their teaching (Fred, Mary, Peter & Ted). For more complicated packages,
one teacher believed that it would require more knowledge and skills to develop and
revise (Steve).
5.5.5 Teachers’ incentives for using IT for teaching and learning
Teachers’ incentives and their attitudes towards using IT for teaching and learning
are motivators for making an implementation successful. However, the survey
revealed that some teachers (seven respondents) had a negative view about IT that
had made IT teaching difficult. Some teachers feared that technology failure would
affect their teaching while some worried that they would be “replaced by IT”. The
results of the interviews further supported this view. Some interviewees observed
that colleagues were often reluctant to take on ‘new things’ and did not want to use
IT for teaching and learning. They would not participate in the implementation
(Chris, Fred & Peter).
p. 137
5.5.6 Students’ access to IT at home
Students’ access to IT at home was another issue encountered by teachers. Six
respondents stated that students had difficulties in accessing ‘appropriate
hardware/software facilities’ at home. This, they believed, had made IT for teaching
and learning difficult.
5.5.7 Copyright issues
Among the respondents, five had concerns over copyright issues. One stated that
teachers had a “lack of knowledge of copyright laws”. In the interview, another
teacher pointed out that “we have to consider copyright, we can’t put the full version
of the books into WebCT” (Ann).
5.5.8 Management’s discouragement
Four respondents stated that teachers’ involvement in implementing IT in teaching
and learning was not appreciated by the management. During the interviews, some
teachers pointed out that the implementation was not supported by their management
(Head of department): some management had failed to coordinate the
implementation at the departmental level; workload within the department was not
evenly distributed; teachers who were willing to contribute to the implementation
were not rewarded and were given more work; and those who were not willing to
participate were exempted (Betty & Chris).
p. 138
5.5.9 Lacking a well-defined policy
Two respondents pointed out that the institution had no strategy in place: “no-one
knows what’s going on and why [teachers] do it, who’s responsible for what …” This
might be an indication of the lack of clear policy. The result revealed from the
interviews was consistent with what was indicated in the survey: “Non-mandatory
policy discouraged teachers in pushing students to use IT for learning” (Ann). As a
result, “teachers would not use it, if the use of IT was not a requirement of the
course” (Steve).
5.5.10 Module not appropriate to be delivered by IT
Another two respondents stated that the subjects they taught were not appropriate to
be delivered by IT. This view was also expressed in one of the interviews: “IT might
not be suitable for teaching some modules” (Ann).
5.6 Overcoming the Issues
Both in the survey and in interviews, respondents and interviewees not only
explained the issues they encountered during the implementation, but also proposed
some suggestions to resolve the issues. The suggestions they proposed are reported in
the paragraphs below.
p. 139
5.6.1 Reducing heavy workload and allowing sufficient time for implementation
To deal with the lack of time in implementing IT for teaching and learning, teachers
reported in the survey that they had to use their own spare time to learn the new skills
and practise them. Therefore, as pointed out by one interviewee, “more time should
be allowed for teachers to learn the skills, as different people had different learning
curves” (Cathy). “For teachers who were competent, their teaching load should be
reduced so that they would be able to spend more time in developing IT-based
resources” (Chris).
If the workload could not be reduced, some respondents suggested that more support
from technicians would be required or they would only use traditional media or third
party materials. Some stated that they would not use IT for teaching, if they did not
have extra time.
5.6.2 Attending appropriate training
Among the teachers being surveyed, 14 responded that they lacked IT knowledge
and skills. Attending training was one way to equip teachers with improved IT
competency. Four respondents indicated that they would attend more training to
upgrade their skills.
Seven respondents pointed out that they had encountered issues in attending the
p. 140
training, and the training provided by the institute did not meet their needs. They also
suggested that the training content should be revised and enriched. They further
suggested that teachers should be released to attend training and the training should
be provided during the term rather than in the summer break.
Those who were not able to attend training said that they would seek assistance from
others. Three of them suggested that they would seek assistance from the supporting
units if they encountered technical problems that they could not resolve. Five stated
that they would ask for assistance from colleagues or spend more of their own time
to sort out the technical problems.
5.6.3 Seeking assistance for technical problems
In the survey, 13 teachers reported that they had encountered issues with the
hardware and software. Some 15 respondents had encountered technical problems
when applying IT for teaching and learning. When facing these issues, 20
respondents indicated that they would seek assistance from their friends, colleagues,
technicians and experts from other supporting units to resolve these. This measure
aligned with the views expressed by some interviewees: seeking support from their
peers or sharing experience and resources among teachers (Cathy, Chris, Peter &
Ted).
One indicated that he would seek help from his students. Some interviewees also
suggested that technical staff should be hired to assist and support them in using IT
p. 141
for teaching and developing IT resources (Alex, Betty, Cathy & Mary).
5.6.4 Changing students’ attitudes
Given that some students were reluctant to use IT for learning, some respondents
suggested that students should be encouraged ‘to submit assignments via WebCT’.
5.6.5 Resolving copyright issues
Five respondents from the survey reported that copyright issues were their concerns.
To deal with copyright issues, one of them suggested that he would “spend more time
and pay more attention”.
5.7 Conclusion of Results
The chapter reported the findings yielded from the study that addressed the two
major research questions posed in section 1.4. The findings from the survey and
interviews, together with those from documentary analysis, enabled individual
perceptions of the curriculum innovation to be revealed, leading to some tentative
conclusions. The results presented in this chapter helped to explain:
i. the degree of implementation of IT for teaching and learning (the
innovation) by IVE teachers between late 1998 and 2004;
ii. the factors that hindered the implementation;
p. 142
iii. the issues encountered by teachers; and
iv. the ways in which they overcame the issues.
The degree of implementation of the innovation was measured by the LoU using the
Implementation Rubric established for this study as discussed in chapter four. The
findings indicated a general pattern of the innovation used by IVE teachers: about
30% of the teachers were at Informational Use Level (level one); about 60% of them
were at Supplemental Use Level (level two); about 7% of them were at Intensive Use
Level (level three); 1.5% of them were at Non Use Level (level zero); but none was
at Constructive Use Level (level four).
The LoU was different for each individual dimension of the implementation. The
majority of teachers were at Informational Use and Supplemental Use Levels for the
first dimension, i.e. Teachers’ Knowledge of VTC’s Policy in Using IT. The majority
of teachers were at either Supplemental Use Level or Constructive Use Level for the
dimension of teachers’ perception of teaching and learning. The last dimension
focused on teachers’ practice in using IT for teaching and learning. The majority of
teachers were at Intensive Use Level in using IT for their classroom teaching and
they were at Supplemental Use Level in using IT for online teaching.
The relationship between teachers’ LoU and their background was investigated using
a postal survey and interviews. The survey result indicated that teachers’ knowledge
of VTC’s policy in using IT, was used more by:
p. 143
i. teachers who held higher ranks than those who held lower ranks;
ii. teachers with more teaching experience than those who had less
teaching experience;
iii. teachers who had longer service in IVE than those who had shorter
service in IVE;
iv. teachers teaching higher level courses than those who taught lower
level courses;
v. teachers who had more IT training than those who received less IT
training; and
vi. teachers who had more pedagogy of IT training than those who
received less pedagogy of IT training.
The findings from the interviews also supported that teachers who received more IT
training as well as those who received more pedagogy of IT had a higher level of use
of this dimension than teachers who had less training.
According to the survey, the result showed that the second dimension, teachers’
perception of teaching and learning, was used more by teachers holding higher ranks
than those who held lower ranks. This was consistent with the result revealed from
the interviews. The survey result also indicated that teachers who had more IT
training, as well as those who received more pedagogy of IT, had a higher level of
use of the dimension than those who had received less training. However, teachers
with more teaching experience and those who had longer service in IVE had a lower
level of use of this dimension than those who had less teaching experience.
p. 144
The survey also indicated that the last dimension, teachers’ practice in using IT, was
used more by:
i. teachers holding higher ranks than those who held lower ranks;
ii. teachers teaching higher level courses than those who taught lower
level courses;
iii. teachers who had more IT training than those who received less
training; and
iv. teachers who had more pedagogy of IT training than those who
received less training.
These findings were also supported by the interviews. However, teachers who had
longer service in IVE had a lower LoU of this dimension than those who had shorter
service in IVE, i.e. they used less IT for their teaching.
As well as this, the preferred IT tools used by IVE teachers, as revealed from both
the survey and the interviews, was consistent. Lecture presentation tools such as MS
PowerPoint® were the most popular tools used by teachers, and communication tools
such as e-mail were the second most popular tools. Other Web tools for teaching and
learning were the third most popular tools among teachers, and Web tools for
assessment were the least preferred by teachers.
Teachers’ behaviours other than LoU were another aspect of this study. Teachers
p. 145
participating in the interviews indicated that their experiences during the
implementation reflected how they performed during the process.
First, there existed a common belief among the teachers that the policy required them
to use more IT for their teaching. However, most of them were not clear about the
details of the policy. Even teachers who had a high LoU, could only describe one or
two aspects of the policy and it appeared they lacked knowledge of the
benchmarking and professional development requirements. Some IT teachers even
believed that they were exempted from the policy due to the expertise they had
(which was required by the subject they taught). Teachers agreed that the policy was
useful, but they seldom discussed the policy with their colleagues. In addition,
teachers believed that the implementation of the policy had increased their workload.
Second, teachers who had a more traditional perception of teaching and learning
adopted a more teacher-centred approach towards teaching. By contrast, teachers
who favoured a more student-centred approach tended to use more IT for their
teaching. However, these teachers faced constraints that inhibited them from using
more IT, e.g. their teaching was bounded by the packed syllabus. Further issues will
be discussed in the section on Issues Encountered by Teachers.
Another major focus of this study was the factors affecting teachers putting the
innovation into practice. Five factors that affected the implementation were extracted
from a set of pre-set questions (27 questions from the survey) using Factor Analysis.
An open-ended question was also posted in the survey that allowed teachers to
p. 146
suggest additional factors affecting the implementation. Responses from the
open-ended question were grouped with those identified by factor analysis. Finally,
the following eight factors were identified:
i. Availability of a well-defined policy;
ii. Incentives for using IT;
iii. Teachers’ knowledge of using IT;
iv. Support for teachers when using IT;
v. Extra workload when using IT;
vi. Teachers’ attitudes;
vii. Student background; and
viii. Intellectual property concerns.
The implementation of the innovation was accompanied by a lot of issues faced by
IVE teachers. These issues were revealed in response to an open-ended question in
the survey. The interview transcripts also indicated further issues teachers faced
during the implementation of the innovation. In all, ten issues were identified. Some
of these issues were similar to the factors identified previously. The ten issues are
listed below:
i. Lack of support given to teachers;
ii. Heavy workload faced by teachers;
iii. Students’ academic ability and motivation;
iv. Teachers’ knowledge of using IT;
p. 147
v. Teachers’ incentives for using IT for teaching and learning;
vi. Students’ access to IT at home;
vii. Copyright issues;
viii. Management’s discouragement;
ix. Lacking a well-defined policy; and
x. Module not appropriate to be delivered by IT.
Teachers not only identified issues they encountered, but they also proposed some
solutions, both from the survey and from the interviews. They proposed the
following measures to resolve the issues they encountered:
i. Reducing heavy workload and allowing sufficient time for
implementation;
ii. Attending appropriate training;
iii. Seeking assistance for technical problems;
iv. Changing students’ attitudes; and
v. Resolving copyright issues.
In summary, this study enables the writer to reveal, from the perspectives of
individual teachers, the state of the curriculum innovation, the factors affecting the
implementation of the innovation, the issues encountered by the teachers during the
implementation, and finally the way that teachers resolved the issues. The next
chapter will discuss these findings as reported in this chapter.
p. 148
CHAPTER SIX DISCUSSION
6.1 Introduction
Bringing together the different types of evidence gathered from the survey,
interviews and documents presented in Chapter Five, allowed the writer to depict a
detailed and comprehensive picture of the implementation of IT in teaching and
learning (the innovation) in IVE. This chapter therefore focuses on comparison and
interpretation of the findings. It compares, analyses, and interprets the results with
reference to the research questions formulated in Chapter One, the background, the
literature reviewed in Chapters Two and Three, and the results yielded from this
study as presented in Chapter Five. The emerging patterns and differences between
this study and previous research have been elucidated. The discussion has been
divided into the following four sections:
i. Degree of implementation of the curriculum innovation;
ii. Factors that hindered the implementation;
iii. Issues encountered by teachers during the implementation; and
v. Ways by which teachers overcame these issues.
6.2 Degree of Implementation of the Curriculum Innovation
The degree of implementation of the curriculum innovation referred to the level of
use (LoU) of IT in teaching and learning by IVE teachers between 1998 and 2004. To
p. 149
measure the LoU, an implementation rubric was employed (see section 4.4 of
Chapter Four).
The IVE had set-up goals in using IT for teaching and learning for its teachers at
different stages. The original goal was that within five years, IT-enabled media would
be provided for IVE teachers to use in 75% of the curriculum (see section 2.3.1 of
Chapter Two). With the advancement of technology, the goal was revised and stated
that within five years, 75% of IVE curriculum would be on the Web for teachers and
students’ use, but the goal did not explain directly how IT would be used by teachers.
However, both goals were based on the assumption that if the policy and resources
were in place, teachers would follow and use the resources for their teaching.
Chapter Five concluded that, in general, IVE teachers had used IT for teaching and
learning, 1.5% were at Non Use Level (level zero); about 30% were at Informational
Use Level (level one); about 60% were at Supplemental Use Level (level two); about
7% were at Intensive Use Level (level three); but none were at Constructive Use
Level (level four).
When comparing the expectation of using IT in teaching and learning set by the
institution (75% of IVE curriculum on the Web used by teachers) with the findings
presented in Chapter Five (all teachers are using IT for their teaching at different
LoUs), it could be claimed that, in general, the LoU of the innovation was high.
However, this finding only reflected the overall picture of the innovation.
p. 150
Based on the implementation rubric, the researcher was able to investigate different
aspects of the use of the innovation, i.e. (i) Teachers’ Knowledge of VTC’s Policy in
Using IT; (ii) Teachers’ Perceptions of Teaching and Learning; and (iii) Teachers’
Practice in Using IT for Teaching and Learning. It was found that, as presented in
Chapter Five,
i. for the first dimension, i.e. Teachers’ Knowledge of VTC’s Policy
in Using IT, the majority of teachers were at Informational Use and
Supplemental Use Level;
ii. for the second dimension of Teachers’ Perceptions of Teaching and
Learning, the majority of teachers were at either Supplemental Use
Level or Constructive Use Level; and
iii. for the last dimension, Teachers’ Practice in Using IT for Teaching
and Learning, the majority of teachers were at Intensive Use Level
in using IT for their classroom teaching and at Supplemental Use
level in using IT for online teaching.
It should be noted that (i) Teachers who received more IT training as well as
pedagogy of IT training tended to have better knowledge of VTC’s policy in using IT
for teaching and learning; (ii) Teachers who held a higher rank in IVE had a better
perception of teaching and learning; and (iii) Teachers who held a higher rank, those
who taught a higher level course, and those who received more IT training as well as
those who received more pedagogy of IT training may have displayed more
knowledge. One explanation is that these teachers’ prior knowledge and experience
p. 151
prepared them so they could more easily understand and apply the content, and as a
result, they had a better use of the dimensions.
For the first two dimensions, very little literature and research findings were
available for comparison. However, for the last dimension, a similar study was
conducted in Hong Kong by the University of Hong Kong (CITE, 2001). The study
that investigated the implementing of IT in primary and secondary schools concluded
that over 70% of the teachers indicated that their use of computers in teaching is
mainly for preparing teaching notes and course materials (CITE, 2001). Comparing
this figure with the practice in IVE, it seemed that the use of IT for teaching and
learning among IVE teachers was more popular in terms of the rate of use and the
variety of IT being used.
This study also attempted to determine the relationship between teachers’ LoU and
their background. It was revealed that, from the survey and interviews, two
categories of teachers had better knowledge of VTC’s policy in using IT. They were
those who received more IT training and who received more pedagogy of IT training.
This was not difficult to understand because the training designed for these teachers
had been aligned with the policy so that teachers were equipped with the knowledge
and skills needed to implement the policy. This reflected that appropriate training
would enhance the knowledge and skills of teachers.
Findings from the survey and interviews indicated that teachers who held higher
ranks had a better perception of teaching and learning. These teachers were more
p. 152
aware of using IT for teaching and learning and their roles in using IT for teaching
and learning. Since the policy of using IT for teachers was cascaded from the senior
management to front line teachers through heads of departments and their middle
managers, it was reasonable to assume that teachers who held higher ranks had a
better understanding of using IT for teaching and learning and their roles in the
process of the implementation.
In terms of the practice of using IT for teaching and learning, both the survey and the
interviews revealed that four categories of teachers used more IT and more advanced
IT tools for their teaching. These four categories of teachers were: (i) teachers who
held higher ranks; (ii) those who taught higher-level courses; (iii) those who received
more IT training; and (iv) those who received more pedagogy of IT training.
Teachers who held higher ranks normally were responsible for course and module
development. To fulfil these roles, they were expected to have better IT knowledge
and skills. In addition, they were given the role to promote the use of IT to their
subordinates in their courses and departments. These teachers were perceived as role
models and therefore it could be expected that they would be more likely to use more
IT than other teachers.
Teachers teaching higher-level courses also used more IT than others. Higher-level
courses demanded more use of IT, as students enrolled in these courses would be
entering the industry sooner than those studying lower-level courses. Modern
industries require a workforce competent in trade knowledge with the latest IT skills,
p. 153
and this demand has been placed on students who are in higher-level courses (the
potential future workforce of industry). This demand was reflected in a recent appeal
by a VTC Council member (who was a representative of the industry) in urging that
more IT should be adopted in teaching and learning (VTC, 2008). These
circumstances seem to provide one explanation of why those teaching higher-level
courses use more IT than teachers in lower-level courses.
Furthermore, normally students would become more experienced in using IT
throughout their progression, and it would be expected that they would use more IT
in higher-level courses. This also would provide teachers with more opportunities to
use IT in their teaching. Given such conditions, those teaching higher-level courses
would be more likely to use more IT.
In addition, this study also investigated what IT tools were used by IVE teachers to
enhance their teaching. Five types of IT tools, namely, lecture presentation tools,
communication tools, Web tools for teaching and learning, Web tools for assessment
and other IT tools for teaching and learning, were identified.
Among these five types of IT tools, presentation software was the most popular tool
used by teachers. Communication tools, such as e-mail, were ranked as the second
most popular among teachers. The third most popular IT tools used by teachers were
the Web-based tools (those with multimedia capability). Web-based assessment tools
were the fourth most popular IT tools among IVE teachers. Such patterns of use were
similar to those used by primary and secondary teachers in Hong Kong (see CITE,
p. 154
2001 for example).
There were a number of reasons that IVE teachers had such preferences. First, IT
presentation tools were the first IT tools introduced to teachers at the early stage of
the innovation, therefore, they had a longer history of use in IVE and more teachers
were familiar with them. Besides, through course teams, presentation materials were
provided to all IVE teachers so that they could present these materials to their
students during lectures and tutorials. As a result, presentation tools became the most
comfortable and popular IT tools used by IVE teachers.
Second, communication tools were ranked the second most popular among IVE
teachers. These tools were introduced to teachers after the presentation software.
Teachers mainly used these tools for receiving information such as circulars and
memos and communicating with their colleagues. Not all teachers used these tools
for their teaching or for enhancing student learning because they had to use their
spare time to respond to students’ emails.
Third, Web tools for teaching and learning were less popular than communication
tools. Web authoring tools and the e-learning platform (WebCT) were introduced to
teachers at a later stage of the innovation. To use these tools effectively, teachers had
to spend more time to attend training and in practising them in order to use them
competently. This required a commitment outside normal work hours. More
importantly, to use these tools more effectively, teachers also required better
knowledge and skills in instructional design.
p. 155
Last, Web tools for assessment were ranked the fourth most popular among teachers.
Some IVE teachers had used Web-based assessment tools for formative assessment.
However, using the Web for summative assessment was not possible for the time
being. All the assessment procedures were governed by the academic regulations of
IVE. Under the principles of fairness and security, no Course Board had attempted to
suggest using the Web for summative assessment. This was reflected in a teacher’s
explanation:
we do not ask them to do a test via a computer. We won’t ask students [to complete a test at home and ask them] to send it back to us via e-mail. There are no such guidelines … so we [do not] not do it. And … say a student submitted an assignment via the computer, but you don’t know whether it was his/her work. No way that you can confirm if the submission was the student’s original work (John).
6.3 Factors that Hindered the Implementation
This research also studied the factors that hindered the implementation of the
innovation. Identifying the factors that influenced the implementation was important
to the innovation: “if one or more factors are working against implementation, the
process will be less effective” (Fullan, 2001a, p.88). Through a survey with more
than 300 IVE teachers and interviews with 12 of them, a total of eight factors that
hindered the implementation were identified. These factors were:
i. Incentives for using IT;
p. 156
ii. Teachers’ knowledge of using IT;
iii. Support for teachers when using IT;
iv. Extra workload when using IT;
v. Teachers’ attitudes;
vi. Student background;
vii. Intellectual property concerns; and
viii. Availability of a well-defined policy.
6.3.1 Incentives for using IT
The first factor identified from this study was Incentives for using IT. One of the
incentives for using IT by IVE teachers was the recognition by their management of
teachers’ efforts in using IT for teaching. Teachers believed that without
management’s encouragement and appropriate reward for those who make effective
use of IT for teaching and learning, implementation of the innovation could not
succeed. The findings reported by Gosper and his associates (1996) supported this
belief.
Besides, if teachers believed IT would result in better teaching, they would have
better incentives in implementing the innovation. Changing from traditional teaching
to using IT to supplement teaching and learning, extra demands were exerted on
teachers. To deal with this change, sufficient time would be required by teachers. As
Hall and Carter (1995 ) pointed out “change is a process which takes time and effort
and necessarily demands on human and material resources” (p. 183).
p. 157
In addition, due to the nature of some practical subjects, using IT to teach these
subjects might not be appropriate. Learning a practical subject requires a lot of
hands-on experiences and IT might not be the best tool or method for such learning.
This claim was also supported by other studies (e.g. Gammill, 2004).
6.3.2 Teachers’ knowledge of using IT
Teachers’ knowledge of using IT was the second factor that affected the
implementation, as identified by this study. This factor had been discussed by
researchers in different studies (e.g. Butler & Sellbom, 2002; Pelgrum, 2008;
Robertson, 2006; Zhao et al., 2002). Zhao et al. (2002) argued that teachers’
proficiency with technology played a major role in the classroom technology
innovation. Without sufficient IT knowledge and skills, teachers could hardly prepare
their materials in electronic format for teaching and deliver these materials in a
proper manner. For front-line teachers, IT skills and knowledge were necessary, in
particular, in the early stage of the innovation, but not sufficient for teachers to put
the innovation into full implementation. To implement IT for teaching and learning,
other factors should also be considered.
p. 158
6.3.3 Support for teachers in using IT
Another factor identified by this study was the support provided to teachers. Teachers
using IT for teaching and learning required a lot of support from their campus and
department, as well as from their Headquarters. As Fullan and Smith (1999)
suggested “innovation examples … will not last if the infrastructure is not supporting
them” (p. 13).
First, the findings of this study suggested that a reliable infrastructure was a must for
implementing IT for teaching and learning. Such findings are consistent with other
recent studies (e.g. Pelgrum, 2008; Selim, 2007; Zhao & Frank, 2003). A
high-performance network which enabled a large number of students and teachers
access to the Internet, Intranet and local network at any time provided by the
Headquarters helped to facilitate the implementation of using IT for teaching and
learning.
Second, appropriate hardware, software and teaching resources were essential to the
successful implementation of the innovation (Pelgrum, 2008; Redmann & Kotrlik,
2004). Computers with suitable speed and capacity as well as compatible peripherals
were the basis for preparing, storing and delivering IT-based resources. In addition,
appropriate software such as communication software, presentation packages,
authoring tools and learning management systems were also required. Moreover, to
make teaching and learning more interactive, high quality multimedia resources
were expected. However, not all teachers were competent enough to develop
p. 159
multimedia resources by themselves. Therefore, a better provision of interactive
multimedia resources should be available.
Third, adopting IT for teaching and learning required teachers to change their roles,
which demanded new skill sets from teachers (Yeung et al., 2000 & 2001).
Therefore, teachers would need to undergo training to be able to use IT effectively
and efficiently for their teaching. Training on using different application software
packages and systems was essential, but not sufficient. To make IT for teaching and
learning successful and effective, teachers’ knowledge and skills in pedagogical
design was the key (Fullan, 2000; Harasim et al., 1998; Mitchem, Wells & Wells,
2003). Fullan (2000) suggested that “teachers must become experts in pedagogy
design … [and] use the power of technology, both in the classroom and in sharing
with other teachers what they are learning” (p. 582). Therefore, training in the
pedagogical use of IT would be required. In addition, to cater for the needs of
teachers, training should be organised at a time and place of convenience to the
teachers.
Fourth, a sympathetic Head of Department or Principal who encouraged the use of
IT for teaching and learning served as good support to teachers. Hall (1995)
reminded that “ongoing support, encouragement, and day-to-day sanctioning that is
so essential for change to be successful” (p. 116). Heads who understood and valued
the educational benefits of IT for teaching and learning set good conditions for
implementing ICT successfully (Pelgrum, 2008). “Recognizing and praising positive
implementation efforts is both good psychology and an impactful tactic … leaders
p. 160
support staff’s efforts and press forward to improved implementation” (Hord, 1995,
p. 98).
To use IT effectively, teachers would require to learn how to use appropriate
hardware and software, and a flexible timetable arrangement for training would be
required so that they would be able to attend training as much as possible. Only
Heads of Department could make these arrangements to accommodate these teacher
needs. In addition, implementing innovation required risk-taking. Using IT for
teaching and learning, in particular in the fist stage, might lead to failure. Research
showed that teachers’ past negative experiences would affect their confidence in
implementing change (Harasim et al., 1998). Therefore, a sympathetic head who
accepted that teachers may not always be successful at the start of the innovation,
and who provided ongoing support for teachers would be likely to enhance success.
Last, incompatible software and hardware, as well as computer failure, were
examples of technical problems encountered by the IVE teachers reported in this
study. The availability of technical support for teachers such as emergency technical
support and in-house maintenance support would be essential (Brinkerhoff &
Koroghlanian, 2005; Pelgrum, 2008).
6.3.4 Extra workload when using IT
Findings of this study suggested that introducing IT into teachers’ teaching practice
shouldered extra workload on teachers. It was well recognised that adopting an
p. 161
innovation would increase teachers’ workloads (Aldrich, 1995; Fink & Stoll, 2005;
Fullan, 2001b; Pelgrum, 2008; Richards, 2002).
Before teachers could use IT competently and confidently for their teaching, they
needed to acquire different types of IT skills for presenting their teaching,
communicating with their students and assessing student learning. They also needed
to acquire skills for facilitating e-learning, using a Learning and Management
Platform and designing interactive multimedia resources, as well as the pedagogy of
using IT. To acquire these skills, teachers had to spend a lot of time attending training
sessions. In addition, they had to practise the IT skills they acquired during these
sessions before they could master these skills well enough to independently and
effectively use them in the preparation and delivery of their teaching. Therefore, time
will be required for them to learn the technology prior to their using IT for teaching.
To assume that they could pick up the skills and use them with little or no training
was not reasonable.
Once IT was adopted for teaching and learning, teachers had to convert their existing
materials to digital format so as to cope with the change of teaching media. This
would be a very-time consuming process, especially for teachers who were not
familiar with technologies. In addition, teachers had to spend more set-up time for
getting equipment and electronic materials ready before they could use them for
delivery in the classroom. In order to make use of IT for better communication with
students, teachers were also required to spend more time interacting with their
students, both synchronised and asynchronised.
p. 162
In response to the rapid changing requirements of the industry, the life cycle of the
vocational curriculum would be shortened. As a result, the curriculum and the
teaching resources had to be changed frequently. Coupled with this was the fast
advancement of technology, which also forced teachers to update and revise their
materials more frequently so as to catch up with the latest technological development
for better delivery.
6.3.5 Teachers’ attitudes
This study also identified teachers’ attitudes as one of the factors that hindered the
implementation. Teachers’ attitudes referred to teachers’ acceptance of IT and their
willingness in using it for teaching and learning as well as beliefs about the role of IT
in the teaching process. Jonassen, Peck, and Wilson (1998) emphasised that the role
of technology in teaching and learning was to assist the learner to construct their own
meaning of knowledge. To serve such a role, the use of technology included: (i) tools
to support knowledge construction; (ii) information vehicles for exploring knowledge;
(iii) contexts to support learning-by-doing; (iv) social media to support learning; and
(v) intellectual partners to support learning-by-reflecting.
Teachers’ attitudes were significant in making IT for teaching and learning successful
(Selim, 2007; Zhao & Frank, 2003). Teachers’ scepticism towards the benefits of IT
hindered their use of IT in teaching and learning (Butler & Sellbom, 2002; Richards,
2002). Redmann and Kotrlik (2004) reminded that teachers’ beliefs in the teaching
p. 163
effectiveness of IT was crucial in integrating IT into teaching. Therefore “unless a
teacher holds a positive attitude toward [using IT for] teaching, it is not likely that he
or she will use it in teaching” (Zhao & Frank, 2003, p. 809).
If teachers could not see the benefits of IT, and did not believe IT could serve the role
for knowledge construction, it was unreasonable to expect them to use IT
comfortably in their teaching. Even when they believed that IT could help to enhance
teaching and learning, they might not be willing to use IT due to other reasons (e.g.
those factors as described in other sub-sections of this chapter).
6.3.6 Student background
Student background formed another factor that affected teachers’ use of IT in the
teaching and learning process. This study revealed that students’ preferences in using
IT for learning also affected their teachers’ adoption of IT, which was consistent with
other studies conducted both elsewhere (e.g. Selim, 2007) and in Hong Kong (e.g.
Tang & Wong 2002; Wong 2002). As explained by some IVE teachers in this study,
their students preferred face-to-face teaching to IT-based teaching and learning.
As most packages and resources used in IVE, in particular those for language
learning, were written in English, teachers participating in this study believed that the
poor language standard of their students had affected their use of IT for their learning.
Using a language which students were not competent in would make the
implementation difficult. Cummins (2005) referred to the language that students used
p. 164
for their prior learning as prior experience. He reminded that “failure to activate
students’ prior experience in the instructional process is akin to teaching in a
vacuum” (Cummnis, 2005, p. 177).
IVE students’ access to IT facilities and equipment at home also hindered their use of
IT for learning, if self-learning or e-learning was expected. Law and Chow (2008)
regarded this as student-related obstacles experienced by teachers when
implementing ICT. Free access to IT facilities was provided for IVE students in all
IVE campuses both during class hours and after hours. However, some students
might prefer to work at home with their own computers. These students would not be
able to make effective use of IT for their learning if they did not have appropriate IT
facilities and equipment at home.
6.3.7 Intellectual property concerns
Intellectual property concerns were also regarded as a factor that hindered the
implementation of IT for teaching and learning in IVE. There were a lot of resources
available on the Internet and teachers might make use of these resources in their
teaching, either embedding these resources into their teaching packages or using
them directly in their teaching. IVE teachers participating in this study worried that
they might infringe copyright laws when using other people’s IT resources for their
teaching. Such concern was consistent with the findings from other studies (e.g.
Lynch & Collins, 2001; Yip, 2008).
p. 165
As well as this, using IT for teaching and learning might require teachers to develop
their own teaching resources and these resources might be accessed publicly in
addition to their colleagues and students. Teachers from this study worried that the
intellectual property developed, either for themselves or for the institute, would be
used or plagiarised by unauthorised parties without their consent. This finding was
also supported by other studies (e.g. Lynch & Collins, 2001; Gammill, 2004).
6.3.8 Availability of a well-defined policy
This study also identified availability of a well-defined policy as another factor that
hindered the implementation of the innovation. Pelgrum and Law (2008) concluded
that policies were important to the success of many implementations of innovation
projects. Hall (1995) pointed out that “the lack of clear definition is a contributor to
the uncertainty and confusion that so often is observed around the efforts [put into
the implementation] … When there is no clear agreement about what the innovation
looks like in use, then there can be no certainty about determining implementation
success, attaining outcomes, or measuring the right things” ( p. 112). This echoed
with what Hall and Hord (2006) claimed: “problems begin when the detail of how to
do it are not made clear” (p. 113) … “even when training and materials are provided”
(p. 111).
Fullan (2001a) suggested that unclear and unspecified goals and means could cause
great anxiety and frustration to teachers who tried to implement an innovation.
Teachers participating in this study believed and expected that a well-defined policy
p. 166
that set the priority and strategy of the implementing should be in place before the
innovation was implemented.
As discussed in Chapter Five, most teachers involved in this study seemed to be
unfamiliar with the VTC-imposed policy. This might have been due to their lack of
understanding of the policy, or the policy was not clearly defined or properly
disseminated. Brinkley (2001) commented that IVE teachers remained sceptical
about the policy. As a result, teachers were either inactive in following the policy or
waiting for a clearer direction. In fact this had hindered the implementation of the
innovation.
Hall (1995) reminded that when policy was too tightly defined, teachers would not
have the flexibility to customise the innovation and change it to accommodate their
specific situation. However, “when the top is overly vague and general, teachers …
are unable to receive sufficient guidance and structure to understand what the change
effort is really about” (Hall, 1995, pp. 115-116).
This section discussed the factors that hindered the implementation of using IT for
teaching and learning as identified by IVE teachers. It compared the findings yielded
from this study with the literature reviewed and analysed the rationale about why the
factors appeared as they were. However, it should be acknowledged that, in reality,
the implementation process was dynamic and therefore, these factors were interactive
and interrelated. To illustrate the relationship between these factors, Zhao and Frank
(2003) regarded them as “biotic components” (p. 186) and they concluded that “most
p. 167
factors [that hinder implementation] do not directly influence technology uses in a
linear fashion” (p. 817).
6.4 Issues Encountered by Teachers During the Implementation
“The use of technology was important but was only the tip of the implementation
iceberg” (Fullan & Smith, 1999, p. 8). Issues arising from implementing IT for
teaching and learning was not always about technology itself, but rather “how best to
use the new technologies as practical, educationally and cost effective tools, and how
to assist … to change … educational strategies, staff skills, and infrastructure to
accommodate the wider range of choices available in education and training … [that
institutions] provide” (Moran, 1995, p. 8).
In addition to the factors hindering the implementation, IVE teachers also brought up
ten issues they encountered during the implementation. However, some of the issues
were similar to the factors identified. It should be noted that the issues identified
from this study were consistent with those found from an international study
conducted by IEA (Law & Chow, 2008). Using the classification of Law and Chow,
these issues could be divided into three major categories, namely, system-related
issues, teacher-related issues, and student-related issues.
p. 168
6.4.1 System-related issues
IVE teachers who participated in this study identified some issues at the system level,
both from the survey and interviews. First, teachers expected that a well-defined
policy was available prior to their implementation of the innovation. Unfortunately,
some teachers who participated in this study were dissatisfied with the unclear policy
being imposed on them. They expected that a well-defined and clear policy should be
in place before the innovation was implemented (see Section 6.3.8 for more detailed
discussion). Without a clear policy, uncertainty might arise, and as a result, “teachers
do not have clear images and descriptions about what the use of the innovation can
look like” (Hall & Hord, 2006, p. 115). This issue made teachers become sceptical
and less active in implementing the innovation.
Second, a large number of teachers raised the issue about the insufficient support
provided by the management. Examples included inadequacy of hardware and
software provision, low speed of computers and the network, and insufficient
technical support for developing IT resources as well as on-site support when
technical failure occurred. The issue of support was also reported in other studies (e.g.
Pelgrum, 2008; Zhao & Frank, 2003). Pelgrum (2008) regarded this support as the
availability of hardware and software, sufficient access to the Internet, and suitable
location of computers.
Third, some teachers also complained that their effort invested in IT teaching was not
recognised by their management. Such discouragement had caused teachers to
p. 169
minimise participation in or withdrawal from using IT for their teaching.
Management’s support was essential, not only at the start-up of the implementation,
but also for the whole implementation process. Pelgrum and Law (2008) suggested
that an innovation is likely to continue if there is support from the school, external
resources and supportive policies and plans.
Fourth, a number of teachers raised the concern of copyright matters. They worried
that, due to their lack of knowledge, they might breach copyright laws when using
other people’s materials in developing their own materials. This may indicate that the
training provided by the institution was not sufficient to enhance teachers’
knowledge in handling intellectual property matters.
Last, a number of teachers pointed out that some modules that appeared in the
curriculum were not appropriate to be delivered by IT due to the nature of the content.
This issue was also regarded by IVE as one of the factors that hindered the
implementation and was discussed in Section 6.3.7.
6.4.2 Teacher-related issues
Technologies are tools for learning, but not an end in themselves (Moran, 1995).
Palloff and Pratt (2000) claimed that “technology does not teach the students;
effective teachers do” (p. 4) and teachers were indispensable as they could use
technology to deepen student learning (Hargreaves & Fullan, 1998). Therefore,
resolving the issues faced by teachers would be of paramount importance for the
p. 170
implementation.
IVE teachers participating in this study also encountered some issues that were
directly related to themselves. The findings of this study indicated that some teachers
had little incentive to use IT for their teaching. Their low motivation and negative
views about IT had affected their willingness to use IT for teaching and learning.
Hargreaves and Evans (1997) commented that ‘reluctant rather than enthusiastic
compliance among teachers has been one widely-reported pattern of response’ (p. 1).
Therefore, “The most difficult part [of the implementation] related to whether
teachers developed new skills, behaviours, and practices associated with the change;
and acquired new beliefs and understandings about the change” (Fullan & Smith,
1999, p. 8).
Moreover, lack of knowledge and skills of IT was another issue faced by IVE
teachers. Teachers required appropriate knowledge and skills in using IT, not only for
delivery, but also for preparation of resources and communication with students as
well as for assessing student learning outcomes. To accommodate these requirements,
IVE teachers should be equipped with appropriate knowledge and skills before they
could use IT for their teaching in a comfortable manner (Pelgrum, 2008).
Furthermore, a large number of teachers being interviewed complained that they
were facing a heavy workload everyday. The heavy workload included: (i) time and
effort in learning and practising new IT skills in designing, revising and developing
as well as delivering their teaching materials; and (ii) time spent on teaching (given
p. 171
the dense timetable) and effort spent on administrative work and student pastoral
care.
As discussed in section 5.4.2.1, the life cycle of IVE’s curriculum has been shortened
in response to the industry’s demand, therefore, teachers had to spend more of their
time in revising the curriculum and teaching materials as a result of the frequent
revision or change of the curriculum.
6.4.3 Student-related issues
Another major issue encountered by IVE teachers related to their students. Hall and
Hord (2006) have suggested that students’ adaptation to change could be a barrier to
the change process. The lowering academic standard and motivation of students also
had an impact on teachers’ use of IT. As a result, teachers had to spend more time to
guide students through their learning when IT was used, or to give up using IT for
their teaching. However, as students had more opportunities in using IT in their daily
life and learning than before, it was expected that this issue would eventually be
minimised in the future. Hargreaves and Fullan (1998) have already anticipated:
“students often know more about technology than their teachers and are able to
access learning more easily through IT” (p. 9). A local study on IT in teaching and
learning among Hong Kong teachers and students also reported such trends (Law et
al., 1999).
As some students had difficulties in accessing IT facilities and equipment at home,
p. 172
teachers were not able to make use of IT and IT-based materials to enhance the
learning of their students. This issue was also discussed in details in Section 6.3.6.
6.5 Ways by which Teachers Overcame the Issues
Fullan (1993) suggested that “it is no longer sufficient to study factors associated
with the success or failure of the latest innovation … it is not possible to solve ‘the
change problem’, but we can learn to live with it more proactively and more
productively” (p. vii). Teachers who participated in this study believed that issues
they encountered could be resolved if appropriate measures were taken. These
measures were consistent with those suggested by recent literature: “accomplished
learning and teaching depend on the provision of adequate resources such as … staff
development, curriculum and associated materials … additional personnel,
computers, physical space, etc.” (Shulman & Shulman, 2004, p. 267).
First, as reported in Chapter Five, teachers explained that they had very heavy
workloads that included daily teaching activities, administrative duties and pastoral
roles. To ensure they had sufficient room for managing the implementation such as
attending training, practising the IT skills they learned and designing IT-based
resources for their teaching, teachers participating in this study suggested that their
workload should be reduced so that more time could be spared for their preparation
for the implementation.
Second, some teachers believed that attending appropriate training was one of the
p. 173
measures that helped better implementation of the innovation. Although a range of
training workshops were provided for IVE teachers to empower them in using IT for
teaching and learning, some teachers pointed out that some of the workshops did not
suit their needs. Some of them also commented that the time and venue of the
training workshops did not match with their timetable that had prohibited them from
attending these workshops.
As the training had been provided for a couple of years, most teachers had acquired
reasonable competencies in using IT for their teaching. Therefore they should spend
their efforts in the pedagogy of IT. The findings of this study indicated that about one
third of the teachers participating in this study had not attended training in the
pedagogy of IT (see Table 5.1 for example). This implied that more training in the
pedagogy of IT would be essential (Harisim, 1998). In addition, attending training
might not guarantee that teachers could apply their skills learned confidently,
therefore, “teachers must not only attend workshops, conferences … but they must
also engage in self-directed learning to stay current with the use of technology in the
teaching-learning process” (Redmann & Kotrlik, 2004, p. 21).
Third, teachers had encountered technical problems in using IT to deliver their
teaching, in particular when they had technical problems in the classrooms. They
suggested that essential technical support should be available for them to seek
assistance when equipment and computer failure occurred. Hiring of IT technicians
to support their teaching would be useful to facilitate teachers’ teaching using IT.
p. 174
Fourth, some teachers raised the issue that their students had a negative attitude
towards learning as well as using IT. These teachers suggested that there was a need
to change students’ attitudes so that they would be more active in their learning and
would accept more IT for course delivery as well as their own learning.
Last, copyright issues had hindered the use of third party electronic resources by IVE
teachers for their teaching. They suggested that this issue should be resolved and
could only be resolved by IVE’s management.
6.6 Conclusion
This chapter compared, analysed and interpreted the findings with references to the
research questions set and the literature studied. First, the state of the curriculum
innovation (using IT in teaching and learning) during the implementation was
investigated and compared with other research. Using the implementation rubric, the
level of use (LoU) of the innovation by IVE teachers was described. In general, the
LoU was very high as all the teachers had used IT for their teaching, although the
LoU of the different dimensions was different.
The different dimensions defined for this study, as presented in Chapter Four, were:
(i) Teachers’ knowledge of VTC’s policy in using IT, (ii) Teachers’ perception of
teaching and learning, and (iii) Teachers’ practice in using IT for teaching.
This study found that most IVE Teachers’ knowledge of VTC’s policy in using IT
p. 175
was at the informational use level and supplemental use level, i.e. level one and level
two of the five-level scale (from level zero to level five). For the dimension of
Teachers’ perception of teaching and learning, most teachers were at the
supplemental level or constructive level. Due to limited literature available, the
writer was not able to compare these two dimensions with recent literature and
research. This might be regarded as the gap between the literature and this study.
However, the relationship between teachers’ backgrounds and these two dimensions
were revealed and discussed.
The dimension of Teachers’ practice in using IT for teaching and learning was found
to be at a very high level, the intensive level. The pattern of use of the IT tools by
IVE teachers was also revealed, and why it appeared like that was discussed.
This study identified eight factors that hindered the implementation of the innovation
by IVE teachers. The factors identified were similar to those found from other
research, although the context was different. The reasons that these eight factors
appeared were also discussed.
In order to better understand the behaviours of IVE teachers during the
implementation, the issues encountered by them were also studied. Three major
categories of issues, namely, system-related issues, teacher-related issues, and
student-related issues were identified. The consequences, i.e. how these issues
affected the implementation, were also discussed.
p. 176
In addition to the issues faced by IVE teachers, this study also sought teachers’
opinions on how to resolve these issues. Five measures proposed by teachers were
discussed and compared with the literature wherever applicable.
In conclusion, the results of this study supported much of the recent literature on IT
in teaching and learning, as discussed in the previous chapters. Drawing upon the
discussion presented in previous sections of this chapter, conclusions could then be
reached and recommendations for improving current practice as well as suggestions
for further research could be proposed. These are addressed in Chapter Seven.
p. 177
CHAPTER SEVEN CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 Introduction
This final chapter provides conclusions to the research questions posed in this study
(as in Chapter One), based on the literature reviewed (as in Chapters Two and Three)
and the findings yielded in Chapter Five, as well as the discussion conducted in
Chapter Six. Implications of the results are further discussed in this chapter and
recommendations are then proposed. Finally, a section outlining recommendations
for improving current practice follows, and the chapter finishes with a section on
suggestions for further research.
7.2 Overview of the Research
This research was designed to explore the implementation of using IT in
teaching and learning, as a curriculum innovation, by teachers from IVE. Using a
combination of quantitative and qualitative methods, the study attempted to depict a
picture, as comprehensive as possible, about how the innovation was implemented.
The major research questions are reiterated below:
i. To what degree has the curriculum innovation been implemented?
and
ii. What were the factors that hindered IVE teachers putting the
implementation into practice?
p. 178
The findings from this research indicate how the innovation was implemented by
IVE teachers, the factors they believed hindered the implementation, the issues they
encountered during the implementation, and how they overcame the issues. These
findings, reported in Chapter Five, are recapitulated below:
i. In general, the degree of implementation (represented by LoU) of
the curriculum innovation was very high among IVE teachers;
ii. Regarding Teachers’ knowledge of VTC’s policy in using IT for
teaching and learning, the LoU was between levels one (the
second-lower level) and two. Teachers who received more IT
training as well as pedagogy of IT training tended to have better
knowledge of VTC’s policy in using IT for teaching and learning;
iii. Concerning Teachers’ perceptions of teaching and learning, the
LoUs for most teachers were either at level two or level five (the
highest level). Teachers who held a higher rank in IVE had a better
perception of teaching and learning;
iv. In terms of Teachers’ practice in using IT for teaching and learning,
the LoU was found to be at level four (the second-highest level).
Four types of teachers had a better practice in using IT for their
teaching. These teachers were those holding higher ranks, those
who taught higher-level courses, those who received more IT
training and those who received more pedagogy of IT training ;
v. The IT tools used by IVE teachers for enhancing their teaching
p. 179
were also investigated. Among the five types of tools, presentation
tools was the most popular one used by IVE teachers. Other tools,
in terms of their popularity were communication tools, Web-based
tools and assessment tools;
vi. Eight factors that hindered the implementation were identified from
this study. These factors were Incentives for using IT, Teachers’
knowledge of using IT, Support for teachers in using IT, Extra
workload when using IT, Teachers’ attitudes, Student background,
Intellectual property concerns, and Availability of a well-defined
policy;
vii. Three categories of issues encountered by teachers during the
implementation were identified from this study. These included
system-related issues, teacher-related issues and student-related
issues; and
viii. Five measures were proposed by teachers that they believed could
help to resolve the issues they encountered.
7.3 Implications of the Results
Previous studies in western countries and Hong Kong reported on barriers
encountered by teachers when implementing IT for teaching and learning. The
research-based recommendations on how to resolve these barriers and issues are not
always in agreement. The results reported from this study have implications for
people who are interested in studying curriculum implementation, in particular, the
p. 180
implementation of IT in teaching and learning in the vocational education context as
a curriculum innovation. They also have implications for the management of
vocational education institutions that are interested in formulating policy in
implementing an innovation and improving teachers’ practices. These implications
are discussed in the following sections.
7.3.1 Implications for implementation studies
This research studied the implementation of a curriculum innovation by teachers of
the IVE. The framework adopted and the methods used for this study have
implications in the field of curriculum implementation studies. These implications
are discussed in the sections below.
7.3.1.1 Use of implementation rubric
Based on the work of Hall et al. (1975), Leithwood and Montgomery (1987), and
other recent studies conducted (e.g. Harmon & Jones, 1999; Mason 1998; Reeves &
Reeves, 1997), a framework was established and adopted for this research to study
the implementation of the innovation. The framework was represented by an
‘Implementation Rubric’. This framework provides a model emphasising different
aspects of IT in teaching and learning using a set of dimensions and sub-dimensions
which reflect the different behaviours of teachers during the implementation (more
details of the rubric can be found in section 4.4 and Appendix I).
p. 181
The rubric developed was found useful to this research in formulating questions for
the survey and interviews as well as in setting directions in reporting, analysing and
concluding the research results in a systematic way. However, the rubric needs to be
trialled in other contexts before generalisations can be made about whether the rubric
is appropriate for more general evaluating of curriculum implementation. As
Jonassen, Peck and Wilson (1998) reminded us that “[developing] rubrics is a
complex task … there is no single right answer” (p. 229).
When establishing a rubric, such as the one used in this study, it is important for the
researcher to link and align related literature to the context of institution and its
stakeholders. This will help identify the dimensions and sub-dimensions to be
included ensuring that the rubric can achieve its function as a valid research tool.
7.3.1.2 Methods for identifying factors that hindered the implementation of an
innovation
One of the aims of this research was to identify the factors that hindered the
implementation. According to the literature reviewed, most studies adopted
quantitative methods to investigate the factors affecting the implementation of an
innovation (see for examples, Brinkerhoff & Koroghlanian, 2005; Law, Pelgrum &
Plomo, 2008; Selim, 2004; Volery, 2001). To gather appropriate and rich data, this
study used a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods. Such an approach
allowed a comprehensive picture of the implementation of the innovation to be
developed.
p. 182
Based on the implementation rubric established, survey questions and interview
guides were developed. An interview guide and interview questions were then used
for gathering qualitative data from IVE teachers. Survey questions were also
formulated to gather quantitative data from teachers on the implementation.
Quantitative methods were also adopted for analysing the data gathered. It was
revealed from this research that such an approach helped to triangulate the data
collected from different sources (using different methods), thus to increase the
credibility and validity of the results so that the most accurate picture of the
implementation was portrayed. This approach makes a good reference for those who
are interested in investigating the factors that hindered the implementation of an
innovation, whether it is related to IT for teaching and learning or other areas in
education.
7.3.2 Implications for policy and practice
The results from this study suggest several implications for those who are interested
in formulating policy and improving practices in implementing IT in teaching and
learning. These implications are discussed in the following paragraphs.
7.3.2.1 Policy for IT for teaching and learning
Law (2008) emphasised that policy on ICT education should be clearly defined for
teacher practices, therefore, establishing a clear policy was essential prior to the
p. 183
implementation. The findings of this study suggest that a clear policy was expected
by IVE teachers. It also indicated that the policy imposed by VTC’s management has
been implemented in general. However, in terms of the dimensions and
sub-dimensions of the innovation as implemented by individual IVE teachers, the
results varied (see Section 7.2 for summary of the results). Such findings were
similar to other studies, as Hall (1995) concluded “use of innovation is an individual
practice and use has an array of levels, rather then simply being there or not there”
(pp. 119-120).
Hord (1995) stated that “policy implementation, like all change efforts, never
proceeds as planned, no matter how well the planning is done” (p. 98) and
“innovators often want their idea to be implemented or replicated faithfully by others,
but changes or variations on the idea are inevitable” (Zhao and Frank, 2003, p. 815).
Given that the current policy has been implemented for several years, it will be
appropriate for the institute to review and revise the policy so that the innovation can
be continued. In addition, the social and economic situation keeps on changing and
so do the needs of IVE teachers. Therefore, a review and revision of IVE’s policy of
IT for teaching and learning will be essential. The revised policy should cover
different aspects of the innovation such as teachers’ competencies, benchmarking and
training for teachers, provision of facilities and technical support, all of which are
essential to the implementation of the innovation.
p. 184
7.3.2.2 Pedagogy of IT
“The new challenges and demands [brought by the explosion of knowledge and the
rapid pace of technological change] require new capacities and knowledge on the
part of the teachers” (Darling-Hammond, 2005, p. 363). To implement IT for
teaching and learning successfully, teachers need to acquire IT skills, but it is also
necessary to change the teaching approach they use as past approaches may no
longer apply.
However, in reality, such change might not happen among teachers as Fullan (2001b)
reminded us “a teacher could use new curriculum materials or technologies without
altering the teaching approach. Or a teacher could use the materials and alter some
teaching behaviours without coming to grips with the conceptions or beliefs
underlying the change” (p. 39). The comment by Fullan supports the findings related
to teachers’ perceptions of teaching and learning (one of the dimensions of
innovation (LoU) implemented by IVE teachers).
The findings of this research suggest that, in general, about 50% of IVE teachers
only achieved level two or below in the perception of teaching and learning aspect of
the innovation. This implies that teachers might use IT for teaching, but they have
not made the transformation from the traditional approach to teaching to a more
‘shifted paradigm’ towards teaching (Mason, 1988).
Many researchers suggested that, in the technology era, adopting a new approach in
p. 185
teaching and learning using IT demanded teachers take up a new role as learning
facilitator or student coach rather than content provider (e.g. Harasim et al. 1998;
Jonassen, Peck & Wilson, 1998). Teachers were required to “assume new roles with
different beliefs than they have traditionally pursued” (Jonassen, Peck & Wilson,
1998, p. 220). In order to enable teachers to acquire the desired skills for their new
roles, Darling-Hammond (2005) suggested that policy makers should allow “time
and opportunities for teachers to reconstruct their practices through intensive study
and experimentation” (p. 374).
Therefore, policy of IT for teaching and learning should include the training of
teachers on pedagogy of IT (HKPU, 2005; Law, 2008). Only by adopting this
approach, can teachers “use technology to deepen, extend and invigorate students’
learning” (Hargreaves & Fullan, 1998, p. 76), and as a result, the quality of a course
can be enhanced.
7.3.2.3 Teachers’ workload
Heavy workload faced by IVE teachers was one of the issues revealed from this
study. Heavy workload shouldered on teachers prevents teachers from attending
training, practising the skills they learned and developing resources for their teaching
(see Section 5.5.2 for details). This has affected teachers in implementing the
innovation in an effective manner (HKPU, 2005).
It appears that this is a common phenomenon as reported in different studies.
p. 186
Teachers are given a heavy workload, but little time for planning, constructive
discussion and reflection: “teachers all over the world are feeling beleaguered”
(Fullan, 2001b, p. 117).
Fink and Stoll (2005) believed that “teachers who have been bombarded by an
unrelenting plethora of changes over a short period of time tend to be exhausted, and
find it hard to keep up their energy, enthusiasm and, ultimately, willingness for
change” (p. 19). Therefore, measures to release teachers’ workload so that the
innovation can be effectively implemented will be required.
7.3.2.4 Support for teachers
The findings of this research suggest that support of teachers during the
implementation was essential and this finding concurred with the outcomes of other
studies (Fullan, 2001b; HKPU, 2005). Support for teachers can include the
availability of hardware and software, infrastructure, technical support during
equipment failure and for developing resources as well as appropriate training that
prepares teachers to implement the innovation smoothly.
The importance of support or help for teachers has been acknowledged by different
writers. Fullan (2001b) explains “the main reason that change fails to occur in the
first place on any scale, and does not get sustained when it does, is that the
infrastructure is weak, unhelpful, or working across purposes” (p. 18). “More
importantly, people will need help in changing their practices and aligning them with
p. 187
new policies” (Hord, 1995, p. 98).
Support needs to be provided to teachers at the first stage of the implementation. In
addition, continued support is also required as Hall reminds us: “two to four years of
implementation effort, without the necessary support, will lead to implementation
failure” (Hall, 1995. p. 120).
As well as physical and material support, teachers may need psychological support
(Hall, 1995; Pelgrum, 2008). Therefore measures taken by IVE management to
encourage and recognise teachers’ use IT for teaching and learning should be
considered.
7.4 Recommendations for Improving Current Practice
This study shows that, in general, the policy imposed by VTC management which
required IVE teachers to adopt IT for teaching and learning has been implemented.
However, there existed some inadequacies, as reported by the IVE teachers being
surveyed and interviewed, which affected better implementation of different
dimensions and sub-dimensions of the innovation.
While change cannot be mandated, it can be fostered. Drawing upon the literature
reviewed, the findings yielded from the survey and interviews and the discussion,
this section attempts to make constructive and practical recommendations so that the
current practice in using IT for teaching and learning in IVE could be improved.
p. 188
Altogether eight recommendations are made. They are discussed in sections 7.4.1 to
7.4.7 and marked in italics in the paragraphs below.
These recommendations focus on critical issues concerning the policy which
facilitates the implementation and teachers’ empowerment for sustaining the
innovation. When the change has been implemented for a few years and “the change
fades, and everyone leaves discouraged and disillusioned about the possibilities for
successful change” (Hall, 1995, p. 116). Therefore measures that foster and sustain
the innovation are required.
These recommendations are not only useful within the context of IVE or to the VET
sector of Hong Kong, but also serve a good reference for management, curriculum
developers and teachers in formulating policy and strategies for delivering quality
VET programmes with new technology, in particular in a Chinese ethnic community
or a context in which a large number of Chinese teachers are involved.
7.4.1 Review the current policy and redefine new policy in IT for teaching and
learning
While technologies continually expand the opportunities for design and delivery of
teaching and learning, teachers’ IT skills and expectations changed overtime.
Therefore reviewing and revising the current policy including a thorough assessment
of the IT skills required by IVE teachers from different disciplines as well as setting
new targets for IVE teachers are reasonable expectations. Based on the outcomes of
p. 189
the assessment, a set of well-defined policies can then be formulated. The importance
of a well-defined policy has been discussed in previous chapters. As Twining (2004)
reminds us: “making effective use of computers in education is a complex process,
which requires a clear vision about why we are using computers and the impact we
want them to have on the curriculum” ( p. 53).
While setting policy is important, “simultaneous top-down/bottom-up strategies must
co-exist and reinforce each other” (Fullan, 1993, p. 99). Therefore frontline teachers
should be involved in setting the new policy. They can act as the bridge between their
discipline and management. The new policy should cover different aspects of the
innovation which may include: (i) clear vision of why IT should be used for teaching
and learning; (ii) new sets of IT competencies as well as pedagogical skills for
teachers from different disciplines; (iii) a new benchmarking system; (iv)
professional development programmes; (v) a rewards system which encourages and
recognises teachers’ contribution and participation in developing and using IT for
teaching and learning; and (vi) provision of appropriate infrastructure, resources and
technical support for teachers which enables them to implement and sustain the
implementation.
When devising new targets for the policy, the one-single plan for all will not be
sufficient to cater for the needs of teachers and students from different disciplines,
therefore, flexibility should be allowed for individual disciplines to design
discipline-based IT plans for learning enhancement.
p. 190
It is recommended that different aspects of the policy be reviewed and redefined so
that teachers can make the most of IT for better teaching and learning
(Recommendation One).
7.4.2 Set up channels for disseminating new policy
“Problems related to clarity appear in virtually every study of change” (Fullan, 2001a,
p. 89). Good policy requires appropriate dissemination to stakeholders at different
levels, otherwise the policy becomes unclear or uncertain to the potential adopters.
“Effective implementation is a process of clarification” (Fullan, 2001b, p. 108).
Therefore clarification on why, what and how the implementation looks like through
proper channels will be required throughout the dissemination of the policy.
Formulating a well-defined policy is necessary but not sufficient for successful
implementation of an innovation. Success in introducing an innovation requires a
shared philosophical vision (Postle, 2003). If teachers are not clear about the vision
and they do not share it, the innovation will be far more difficult to implement.
Therefore, to ensure teachers understand and share the vision and requirements of the
innovation, proper channels at different levels using different media should be set up
across IVE for effective dissemination.
It is recommended that appropriate dissemination channels at different levels be set
up so that the expectations of the innovation are clearly understood by teachers
(Recommendation Two).
p. 191
7.4.3 Empower teachers with professional development activities
Lack of confidence among teachers limits the use of technology and the
incorporation of it into teaching and learning. “Teachers need to increase their
capacity for dealing with change because if they don’t they are going to continue to
be victimized by the relentless intrusion of external change forces” (Fullan, 2001b, p.
123). The successful implementation of IT in teaching and learning does not solely
rely on the strength of IT per se, but rather on how teachers could make use of such
strength effectively. Therefore, professional development for teachers in IT for
teaching and learning should focus, not only on IT skills, but also on “the
pedagogical understanding to be able to choose the most appropriate ITs for the
purpose, … and to help students using it” (Moran, p. 24). To develop teachers’
capacity and capability requires investing in continuing professional development of
teachers (Day, 1997).
As technology is advancing to its next generation every several months, teachers who
use IT for their teaching should always keep abreast of their IT knowledge and skills.
Therefore teacher training on the latest IT technology that aligns with IVE’s context
is required. This places an expectation on teachers to adopt a different approach to
their teaching and recent literature suggests that teacher training should focus on
pedagogical design (e.g. Harasim et al., 1998; Hargreaves & Fullan, 1998; HKPU,
2005; Oliver, 2004). When revising and setting new policy for the future use of IT
for teaching and learning, teacher training, in particular, needs to have a stronger
p. 192
focus on pedagogy rather than merely on technical expertise.
It is recommended that teacher development activities, both on the latest IT
competency required by individual course and on the pedagogy of IT, be organised
and that these activities are available in different delivery formats which could suit
the needs of IVE teachers (Recommendation Three).
7.4.4 Cultivate collaboration among teachers
“One-shot workshops will not have much carryover effect. There needs to be
continuous assistance … which teachers can learn from and receive network or
hands-on support to apply the ideas” (Fullan & Smith, 1999, pp. 8-9). It has been
reported that setting up teams of teachers to work together and share ideas helps to
facilitate the use of IT for teaching and learning (Kennewell, Parkinson & Tanner,
2000). This study supports the work of Kennewell et al as the findings showed that
one-off teacher development workshops were useful, but teachers easily forgot what
they had learned as there were not many opportunities for them to practise and use
the skills in their teaching. They seldom discussed what they had learned or the
issues of using IT for teaching with their peers. Fullan reminds us that “change
involves learning to do something new, and interaction is the primary basis for social
learning … The quality of working relationships among teachers is strongly related
to implementation” (Fullan, 2001a, p. 97).
“As teachers face up to rising and widening expectations in their work and to
p. 193
increasing overload of innovation and reforms, it is important that they work and
plan more with their colleagues, sharing and developing their expertise together,
instead of trying to cope with the demands alone” (Fullan & Hargreaves, 1996, p. 4).
IVE teachers as well as the institute have gone through the early stage of
implementation in the past few years. To proceed to the next stage, new strategies
should be considered. The ‘one solution as the best practice for all’ approach should
be revisited in light of the current and future needs of individual disciplines. This
would allow each discipline to most effectively utilise the resources over time.
Further, each discipline should have a discipline-based approach toward IT for
teaching and learning, supported by discipline-based resource development teams
that specifically cater for the needs of the students of their disciplines. This would
require a team approach, by which teachers work in collaboration with their peers
and are supported with instructional designers, graphic and multimedia designers and
IT programmers, in the development of e-learning resources. It is likely that such an
approach would better serve the needs of the industries that students enter after their
graduation.
It is recommended that discipline-based IT teaching and learning development teams
be set up, led by subject experts working with a group of teachers with instructional
and technical support from the Headquarters, for the development of contextual
teaching and learning resources (Recommendation Four).
p. 194
7.4.5 Enhance teachers’ incentives in using IT
This study also identified teachers’ incentives in using IT as one of the factors that
hindered the implementation. It was reported that IVE management’s encouragement
and appropriate rewards could boost teachers ‘incentives in using IT’ by teachers (see
section 6.3.1). Hughes, Hewson and Nightingale (1997) commented that “to expect
the adoption of new roles and the development of new professional skills by what
many consider to be already overworked staff, begs the question of incentives’ (p.
76). If the use of IT for teaching and learning is recognised by IVE management and
is made relevant to teachers’ career development (Senge et al., 1999), teachers will
adopt it.
Incentives can be direct or indirect. Direct incentives can be better pay, set as
requirement for probation, promotion, or financial reward. As Fullan (2008)
suggested “setting targets and providing financial rewards” (p. 61) are important in
building capacity for change. Indirect incentives can be recognition of one’s
contribution, acknowledging excellent teaching using IT, relaxation of timetable for
attending training and practice, or providing extra resources for developing teaching
and learning resources. A scheme for recognising teachers’ contributions as well as
incentives for using IT for teaching and learning should be considered.
It is recommended that a reward scheme be in place to recognise the contributions of
IVE teachers in making the most of IT for teaching and learning. The scheme should
provide financial reward such as pay rises and recognition (Recommendation Five).
p. 195
7.4.6 Support to teachers from IVE management
Lack of support provided to teachers from management for implementing the
innovation was one of the factors that hindered implementation and it was also
consistently raised by IVE teachers. Support such as the availability of a reliable
infrastructure, up-to-date software and hardware, appropriate training for teachers,
sympathy from middle management (principals and heads of departments who
understand the policy, allow favourable timetable to teachers, accept risk-taking), and
on-site technical support were identified by the teachers in this study.
Alexander (1995) pointed out that one of the reasons using IT for teaching and
learning failed was the lack of an appropriate level of infrastructure and support for
successful innovation. In addition to a reliable infrastructure, due to the rapid
advancement of technology, the availability of up-to-date software and hardware
could not be ignored. Pelgrum (2008) regarded appropriate infrastructure that
included the availability of hardware and software, sufficient access to the Internet,
suitable location of computers as a necessary condition in making ICT in teaching
and learning successful.
It is recommended that a reliable infrastructure, up-to-date software and hardware
as well as on-site technical support be available to teachers. Reporting mechanisms
at the institutional, campus and departmental levels should also be in place to ensure
that the support to teachers is available, appropriate and sufficient
(Recommendation Six).
p. 196
7.4.7 Sharing of good practice and resources
In the past few years, some IVE teachers have gained experience in making use of
the IT skills and knowledge to develop resources (teaching and learning packages
and e-learning packages) for their teaching at departmental level and campus level.
However, teachers’ experiences and the resources developed are seldom shared by
teachers across different campuses. The benefits of sharing teachers’ successful
experiences in working in teams helps to demonstrate their team effort and provides
examples of the use of IT to support teaching and learning and “convinced [other
teachers] that technology will improve the quality of their instruction and ultimately,
student learning” (Redmann & Kotrlik, 2004, p. 22). Fullan (1993) also
acknowledged the good practice caused by team effort: “teachers working with other
teachers at the school and classroom levels is a necessary condition for improving
practice” (p. 128).
In addition, the resources developed by IVE teachers are only used by themselves or
by colleagues from their course. However, some of these resources can be used by
other teachers teaching similar courses after minor modifications. Unfortunately,
there is no channel to inform other IVE teachers about the availability of these
resources and no platform for them to share these resources among other IVE
teachers.
Moreover, most of the resources developed are software dependent. As IVE has
p. 197
already adopted WebCT as the common learning management and delivery platform,
the packages developed in one department might not be used by other teachers via
WebCT. Therefore, the development and use of ‘open source’ resources and ‘learning
objects’ should be encouraged so that the cost effectiveness of and effort and
resources are maximised. Actually this will be beneficial to IVE teachers and
students who would have more choice of suitable teaching and learning resource
options.
It is recommended that a centralised committee (e.g. the IT Steering Committee or the Teaching and Learning Steering Committee) to stock-take the e-teaching/learning resources developed by IVE teachers in the past years and to place these resources on a common platform (e.g. the WebCT) so that all IVE teachers can have access to these resources as required (Recommendation Seven). It is also recommended that regular demonstration seminars be organised by the Teaching and Learning Centre to showcase the quality e-teaching/learning packages developed by IVE teachers to their colleagues from other IVE campuses so that the best practice in developing and using IT resources can be shared (Recommendation Eight).
In summary, the recommendations suggested in the previous sections are interrelated
and they should be considered as a whole rather than in isolation. If the
recommendations suggested are accepted by IVE management and are put into action,
it is likely that the use of IT for teaching and learning in IVE will be fostered and
sustained.
p. 198
7.5 Suggestions for Further Research
There is no perfect research design to solve all questions or all issues in one design
and there are some areas that the study does not cover or issues that this study could
not resolve. Therefore, this study makes four suggestions for further research so that
the gaps between this study and previous literature are addressed. These suggestions
are proposed in the following sections and they are formatted in italics for easy
referencing.
7.5.1 Use of implementation rubric
This is the first research conducted, on this scale, into the adoption of IT in teaching
and learning by teachers in the IVE’s context, based on the implementation rubric
devised from the literature. The rubric provides a comprehensive framework for
research in relation to using IT in teaching and learning by teachers. It was found that
this framework was useful in investigating the level of use of an innovation in the
IVE’s context. Since this framework has not been used by any researchers before, the
validity and reliability might be queried and whether it can be generalised to other
contexts might also be questioned.
It is suggested that this framework be used (or after modification) in other
educational settings so that the usability of this framework is evaluated and verified.
This will inform researchers about its potential use by others in a broader context
(Suggestion One).
p. 199
7.5.2 Implementation of the innovation by other stakeholders
This research studied the degree of implementation of an innovation by teachers in
IVE. During the implementation process, IVE teachers were not the only party
involved; other stakeholders such as principals, heads of department and students
were also involved as Fullan (2001b) suggested: “educational change is a learning
experience for the adults involved (teachers, administrators, parents, etc.) as well as
for children” (p. 70).
Recent literature suggests that the leading role of the principals has significant
impact on the success of any educational change (e.g. Fink & Stoll, 2005; Fullan,
2007; Hall & Hord, 2006; Kennewell, Parkinson & Tanner, 2000; Pelgrum, 2008;
Senge et al., 2000). Therefore, to enable the innovation to be deeply implemented,
the views and behaviours of principals (and heads of department in IVE’s context)
and students are important and should be considered.
The ultimate aim of using IT for teaching and learning is to improve and enhance
student learning. Fullan (2003) states “no matter how promising a new idea may be,
it cannot impact students learning if it is superficially implemented” (p. 31).
Involving students in this implementation study will make the study more significant
since students are the primary users of the innovation and every change has direct
impact on them and their learning.
p. 200
It is suggested that a study similar to the present study be conducted from the
perspectives of principals, heads of department and students so that the most
complete picture of the implementation of the innovation is revealed (Suggestion
Two).
7.5.3 Implementation of the innovation at classroom level
This study used questionnaire survey and interviews to seek IVE teachers’ opinions
about how they implemented the curriculum innovation. However, how they actually
behaved in the classroom could not be revealed by the methods used in this study.
Monteith (2004) suggests that studying teachers’ actual behaviours “helps us see how
we cope with change and even, perhaps, the inevitability of change, [as ICT in
education is concerned]” (p. 20). Therefore, using other methods such as classroom
observation might help to reveal the actual behaviours of IVE teachers in how they
implement the innovation in the classroom.
It is suggested that, in addition to the methodologies currently used, a different
research methodology, such as classroom observation or participant observation, be
used to investigate how IVE teachers implement the use of IT for teaching and
learning in the classroom with their students (Suggestion Three).
7.5.4 Interaction between the factors that hindered the implementation
Using Confirmatory Factor Analysis, this study identified five factors that affected
IVE teachers putting the innovation into practice. The analysis also exhibited that
p. 201
correlations existed among some of the factors (see Section 5.4.1.2 and Figure 5.1 for
details). However, the model did not inform the researcher if there was any causal
relationship existing among these factors. Finding out the causal relationships among
these factors, if there are any, could help to further explain how these factors interact,
thus creating a better understanding of how these factors might affect the
implementation and in what ways.
It is suggested that a further investigation of the causal relationships between the
factors identified, using more advanced statistical methods, will be useful to explain
how the factors hinder the implementation (Suggestion Four).
7.6 Concluding Remarks
This chapter concludes the research questions established in Chapter One. It
summarises the results gained when different research methodologies were used to
answer the research questions. Implications of the results are discussed under
different topics of concern. Based on the implications discussed, eight
recommendations for improving current practices and four suggestions for further
research are proposed.
It should be noted that the recommendations and suggestions proposed by the
researcher are based on the results of this study that is focused on a particular
timeline under a particular setting with a specific group of people. The propositions
made by the researcher do not and cannot cover all aspects of using IT for teaching
p. 202
and learning by VET teachers. Therefore, more detailed research into these or related
areas should provide valuable information and insight, and shed further
enlightenment on the complexity of implementing an innovation in the VET setting.
It is the wish of the researcher that more research of this type be conducted so that
the literature on the study of curriculum implementation can be enriched, and in turn,
more frameworks developed, so that the effectiveness and efficiency of studying the
implementation of curriculum innovation might be enhanced.
p. 203
REFERENCES
Aldrich, R. (1995). Educational Reform and Curriculum Implementation in England: An Historical Perspective. In D. Carter & M. O’Neill (Eds.). International Perspectives on Educational Reform and Policy Implementation. London: The Falmer Press.
Alexander, S. (1995). Learning with Technology: Keeping the Focus on Learning. Paper presented at the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE) 95 Conference, Melbourne, Australia.
Ball, S. (1987). The Micro-politics of the School. London: Methuen. Barajas, M. & Owen, M. (2000). Implementing Virtual Learning Environments:
Looking for Holistic Approach. Educational Technology & Society, 3(3), 2000. Bartolic-Zlomislic, S. & Bates, A. (1999). Investing in Online Learning: Potential
Benefits and Limitations. Canadian Journal of Communication, 3 June 1999. Bates, A. (1995). The Future of Learning. Canada, Alberta: Minister’s Forum on
Adult Learning. Retrieved 3 March 2000 from http://bates.cstudies.ubc.ca/learning.html.
Bates, A. (1996). The Impact of Technological Change on Open and Distance Learning. Paper presented in the Queensland Open Learning Network Conference: Open Learning – Your Future Depends on It. Brisbane, Australia. Retrieved 23 January 2001 from http://bates.cstudies.ubc.ca/brisbane.html.
Bates, A. (1997). Reconstructing the University for Technological Change. Canada: The University of British Columbia. Retrieved 2 May 1999 from http://bates.cstudies.ubc.ca/carnegie/carnegie.html.
Berman, P. & McLaughlin, M. (1974). Federal Programs Supporting Educational Change, Vol. I: The Findings in Review. California: Rand Corporation.
Berman, P. & Pauley, E. (1975). Federal Programs Supporting Educational Change. Volume II: Factors Affecting Change Agent Projects. California: Rand Corporation.
Best, J. & Kahn, J. (1989). Research in Education. (6th Ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Bridge, C. (1995). The progress of implementation of the K-3 primary program in Kentucky’s elementary schools. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Education Research Association, San Francisco.
Brinkerhoff, J. & Koroghlanian, C. (2005). Student Computer Skills and Attitudes Towards Internet-delivery Instruction: an assessment of stability over time and place. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32(1), 27-56.
Brinkley, R. (2001). Opportunities and Obstacles: Implementing a Web-based Teaching and Learning Strategy in a Vocational Education Institute. Unpublished Master of Science in Information Technology in Education dissertation. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University.
Butler, D. & Sellbom, M. (2002). Barriers to Adopting Technology for Teaching and Learning. EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY, No. 2, 2002.
Byrne, B. (2006). Structural Equation Modeling with EQS. New Jersey: Lawrence
p. 204
Erlbaum Associates. Caldwell, B. (1997). The impact of self-management and self-government on
professional teaching: a strategic analysis for the twenty-first century. In A. Hargreaves & R. Evans (Eds.) Beyond Educational Reform: bringing teachers back in (pp. 62-76). Buckingham: Open University Press.
Carter, D. & O’Neill, M. (1995). International Perspectives on Educational Reform and Policy Implementation. London: The Falmer Press.
Castro, D. (1998). Education in the Information Age: What Works and What Doesn’t. New York: Inter-American Development Bank.
Centre for Instructional Technology. (2000). Web Usage Levels for Module Delivery. Singapore: National University of Singapore.
Chen, L. (2003). A study of how selected faculty and teaching staff members integrate Web-based Instruction in regular teaching. Unpublished Doctor of Education dissertation. University of South Carolina.
Chen, M. (2001). Asian Management Systems. London: Thomson. CITE. (2001). Preliminary Study on Reviewing the Progress and Evaluating the
Information Technology in Education (ITEd) Projects 1998/2003. Hong Kong: the University of Hong Kong.
Cohen, L. & Manion, L. (1989). Research Methods in Education. (3rd Ed.). London: Routledge.
ComputerUser.com Inc. (2001). ComputerUser High-Tech Dictionary, ComputerUser.com Inc. 2001.
Cortina, J. (1993). What Is Coefficient Alpha? An Examination of Theory and Applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1), 98-104.
Creswell, J. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method approaches. (2nd Ed.). California: Sage Publications.
Cronbach, L. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297-334.
Cummins, J. (2005). Language Issues and Educational Change. In A. Hargreaves (Ed.). Extending Educational Change. New York: Springer.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2005). Policy and Change: Getting Beyond Bureaucracy. In A. Hargreaves (Ed.). Extending Educational Change. New York: Springer.
Day, C. (1997). Teachers in the twenty-first century: time to renew the vision. In A. Hargreaves & R. Evans (Eds.). Beyond Educational Reform: bringing teachers back in, pp. 44-61. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Delors, J. (1996). The Treasure Within: Report of the International Commission on Education for the 21st Century. Paris: UNESCO.
Denzin, N. (1978a). The Logic of Naturalistic Inquiry. In N. Denzin (Ed.). Sociological Methods: A sourcebook. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Denzin, N. (1978b). The Research Act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Dorr-Bremme, D. (1990). Naturalistic Evaluation. In H. Walberg & G. Haertel (Eds.). The International Encyclopaedia of Educational Evaluation, pp. 66-67. New York: Pergamon Press.
p. 205
Education & Manpower Bureau. (1998). Information Technology for Quality Education: Five-Year Strategy 1998/99 to 2002/03. Hong Kong: Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.
Education Commission. (2000). Reform Proposal for the Education System in Hong Kong. Hong Kong: Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.
Ehrmann, S. (1999). Access and/or Quality? Redefining Choices in the Third Revolution. EduCom Review (1999).
Ehrmann, S. (2000). Technology and Revolution in Education: Ending the Cycle of Failure. Liberal Education Fall: 40-49.
E-Learning Working Group (2001). E-learning, The National Information Technology. Council of Malaysia.
Fehn, M. (2005). An Exploratory Case Study: Faculty Perceptions of the Barriers and Obstacles to Integrating Web-based Instruction into the Associate Degree Nursing Program. Unpublished Doctor of Philosophy dissertation. Minnesota: Capella University.
Fink, A. (1995). The Survey Handbook (vol. 1). California: Sage Publications. Fink, D. & Stoll, L. (2005). Educational Change: Easier Said than Done. In A.
Hargreaves (Ed.). Extending Educational Change. New York: Springer. Fowler, F. (1988). Survey Research Methods. London: Sage Publications. Fullan, M. (1982). The Meaning of Educational Change. London: Cassell
Educational. Fullan, M. (1991a). Curriculum Implementation. In A. Lewy (Ed.). The International
Encyclopedia of Curriculum. New York: Pergamon Press. Fullan, M. (1991b). The New Meaning of Educational Change. (2nd Ed.). London:
Cassell. Fullan, M. (1993). Change Forces: Probing the Depths of Educational Reform.
London: Falmer Press. Fullan, M. (2000). The Three Stories of Education Reform, Phi Delta Kappan, April
2000, pp. 581-584. Fullan, M. (2001a). Leading in a Culture of Change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Fullan, M. (2001b). The New Meaning of Educational Change. (3rd Ed.). New York:
Teachers College Press. Fullan, M. (2003). Implementing Change at the Building Level. In W. Owings & L.
Kaplan (Eds.). Best Practices, Best Thinking, and Emerging Issues in School Leadership. California: Corwin Press.
Fullan, M. (2007). The New Meaning of Educational Change. (4th Ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.
Fullan, M. (2008). The Six Secrets of Change: what the best leaders do to help their organizations survive and thrive. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Fullan, M. & Hargreaves, A. (1996). What’s Worth Fighting for in Your School? New York: Teachers College Press.
Fullan, M. & Park, P. (1977). Curriculum Implementation. Ontario: Ministry of Education and Ministry of Colleges and Universities.
p. 206
Fullan, M. & Pomfret, A. (1977). Research on Curriculum and Instruction Implementation. Review of Educational Research Winter, 47(1): 335-397.
Fullan, M. & Smith, G. (1999). Technology and the Problem of Change. Canada: University of Toronto.
Gammill, T. (2004). Factors Associated with Faculty Participation in Developing and Teaching Web-based courses. Unpublished Doctor of Education dissertation. Mississippi: Mississippi State University.
Goodson, I. (1988). The Making of Curriculum. London: Falmer Press. Gosper, M., Hesketh, B., Andrews, J. & Sabaz, M. (1996). Electronic communication
in university teaching: expectations and implications over the next five years. Paper presented at the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE) 96 Conference, Adelaide, Australia.
Griffin, G. (1991). Teacher Education and Curriculum. In M. Klein (Ed.). The Politics of Curriculum Decision-Making. New York: State University Press.
Guba, E. & Lincoln, Y. (1982). Epistemological and Methodological Bases of Naturalistic Inquiry. Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 4(30).
Haddad, W. (1998). Education for all in the age of globalization: the role of information technology. In D. Castro (Ed.). Education in the Information Age: What Works and What Doesn’t. New York: Inter-American Development Bank.
Hall, G. (1995). The Local Educational Change Process and Policy Implementation. In D. Carter, & M. O’Neill (Eds.). International Perspectives on Educational Reform and Policy Implementation. London: The Falmer Press.
Hall, G. & Carter, D. (1995). Epilogue: Implementing Change in the 1990s: Paradigms, Practices and Possibilities. In D. Carter, & M. O’Neill (Eds.). International Perspectives on Educational Reform and Policy Implementation. London: The Falmer Press.
Hall, G. & Hord, S. (2006). Implementing Change: Patterns, Principles and Potholes. New York: Pearson Education.
Hall, G. & Loucks, S. (1982). Bridging the Gap: Policy Research Rooted in Practice. In A. Lieberman & M. McLaughlin (Eds.). Policy Making in Education. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Hall, G., Loucks, S., Rutherford, W. & Newlove, B. (1975). Levels of Use of the Innovation: A Framework for Analyzing Innovation Adoption. Journal of Teacher Education, 26(1): 52-56.
Harasim, L. (1998). The Internet and Intranets for Education and Training. In D.M. Castro (Ed.). Education in the Information Age: What Works and What Doesn’t. New York: Inter-American Development Bank.
Harasim, L., Hiltz, S., Teles, L. & Turoff, M. (1998). Learning Networks: A Field Guide to Teaching and Learning on-line. Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
Hargreaves, A. (1992). Cultures of Teaching: a focus of change. In A. Hargreaves & M. Fullan (Eds.). Understanding Teacher Education (pp. 216-240). New York: Cassell.
Hargreaves, A. & Evans, R. (1997). Teachers and Educational Reform, in A. Hargreaves & R. Evans (Eds.). Beyond Educational Reform: bringing teachers back in. (pp. 1-18). Buckingham: Open University Press.
p. 207
Hargreaves, A. & Fullan, M. (1992). What’s Worth Fighting for in Your Schools? Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Hargreaves, A. & Fullan, M. (1998). What’s Worth Fighting for Out There? New York: Teachers College Press.
Harmon, S. & Jones, M. (1999). The Five Levels of Web Use in Education: Factors to Consider in Planning Online Courses. Educational Technology, December 1999: 28-32.
Harper, B. & Hedberg, J. (1997). Creating Motivating Interactive learning Environments: a constructivist view. 14th Proceedings of Australian Society for Computers in Tertiary Education. Academic Computing Services, Curtin, University of Technology, Perth, Western Australia.
Harper, B., Hedberg, J., Bennett, S. & Lockyer, L. (2000). The on-line experience: The state of Australian on-line education and training practices - Review of research. Adelaide: National Council for Vocational Education Research. Retrieved 5 November 2001 from http://www.ncver.edu.au/research/proj/nr9007.pdf.
Hayhoe, R. (2001). Educational Reform and Higher Education in Hong Kong. International Higher Education, Spring 2001. Boston College: Center for International Higher Education.
Henson, R., Capraro, R. & Capraro, M. (2001). Reporting Practice and Use of Exploratory Factor Analysis in Educational Research Journals. Paper presented in the Annual Meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association. AR: Little Rock.
HKPU. (2005). Overall Study on Reviewing the Progress and Evaluating the Information Technology in Education (ITEd) Projects 1998/2003. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Polytechnic University.
HKSAR Govt. (1997). The Chief Executive’s 1997 Policy Address. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Government.
Hord, S. (1995). From Policy to Classroom Practice: Beyond the Mandates. In D. Carter, & M. O’Neill (Eds.). International Perspectives on Educational Reform and Policy Implementation (Eds.). London: The Falmer Press.
Hughes, C., Hewson, L. & Nightingale, P. (1997). Developing New Roles and Skills. In Yetton, P. & Associates. Managing the Introduction of Technology in the Delivery and Administration of Higher Education. Fujitsu Centre, Australian Graduate School of Management, The University of New South Wales.
Jennings, M. & Dirksen, D. (1996). Facilitating Change: A Process for Adoption of Web-Based Instruction. In Khan. B. (Ed.). Web-Based Instruction. New Jersey: Educational Technology Publications, 111-116.
Jonassen, D., Peck, K. & Wilson. B. (1998). Learning with Technology: a constructive perspective. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Kennewell, S., Parkinson, J. & Tanner, H. (2000). Developing the ICT-Capable School. London: Routledge Falmer.
Khan, B. (1997). Web-based Instruction. New Jersey: Educational Technology Publications.
Koo, A. (1995). The Implementation of Design & Technology in the Sixth Form Curriculum. Unpublished MPhil thesis, The Chinese University of Hong Kong.
p. 208
Koo, A. (2001). Empowering VET Teachers to Use IT for Teaching. Paper presented in the poster session of the 10th International WWW Conference, Hong Kong.
Koo, A. (2002). Models for Delivering e-Learning. Hong Kong: Institute of Vocational Education of Hong Kong.
Koon, S. (1995). The relationship of implementation of an entrepreneurial development innovation to student outcomes. Doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri-Kansas City.
Koper, R. (2000). From Change to renewal: Educational technology foundations of electronic environments. Open Universiteit Nederland.
Law, N. (2008). In Search of Explanation. In N. Law, W. Pelgrum & T. Plomo (Eds.). Pedagogy and ICT Use in Schools Around the World: Findings from the IEA SITES 2006 Study. Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research Centre, the University of Hong Kong.
Law, N. & Chow, A. (2008). Teacher Characteristics, Contextual Factors, and How These Affect the Pedagogical Use of ICT. In N. Law, W. Pelgrum & T. Plomo (Eds.). Pedagogy and ICT Use in Schools Around the World: Findings from the IEA SITES 2006 Study. Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research Centre, the University of Hong Kong.
Law, N., Pelgrum, W. & Plomo, T. (2008). Pedagogy and ICT Use in Schools Around the World: Findings from the IEA SITES 2006 Study (Eds.). Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research Centre, the University of Hong Kong.
Law, N., Yuen, H., Ki, W., Li, S. & Lee, Y. (1999). Second International Information Technology in Education Study: Hong Kong SAR Report. Hong Kong: Centre for IT in School and Teacher Education, University of Hong Kong.
Law, N., Yuen, H., Ki, W., Li, S., Lee, Y. & Chow, Y. (2000). Changing Classrooms and Changing Schools: A Study of Good Practices in Using ICT in Hong Kong Schools. Hong Kong: Centre for IT in School and Teacher Education, University of Hong Kong.
LeCompte, M. & Preissle, L. (1993). Ethnography and Qualitative Design in Educational Research. California: Academic Press.
Leithwood, K. (1981). The Dimensions of Curriculum Innovation. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 13(1): 25-36.
Leithwood, K. (1982). Studies in Curriculum Decision Making. Toronto: The Ontario Institution for Studies in Education.
Leithwood, K. & Montgomery, D. (1987). Improving Classroom Practice Using Innovation Profiles. Toronto: The Ontario Institution for Studies in Education.
Lewis, R. (1999). The role of Technology in Learning: managing to achieve a vision. British Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 30, No. 2, April 1999.
Li, Y. & Poon, P. (2000). Information Technology in Education in Hong Kong Secondary Schools. Unpublished project report for the degree of Master of Business Administration. The Chinese University of Hong Kong.
Lieberman, A. & Miller, L. (1984). Teachers: their world and their work - Implications for School Improvement. Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Loucks, S. & Lieberman, A. (1983). Curriculum Implementation. In F. English. (Ed.) Fundamental Curriculum Decisions. Virginia, Association for Supervision and
p. 209
Curriculum Development. Lynch, J. & Collins, F. (2001) From the horse’s mouth: Factors inhibiting and
driving innovation in ICT education, Paper presented at the Australian Association for Research in Education’s International Education Research Conference 2001, Melbourne, Australia.
Marsh, C. (1992). Key Concepts for Understanding Curriculum. London: Falmer Press.
Marsh, C. & Morris, P. (1991). Curriculum Development in East Asia. London: Falmer Press.
Martin, M. (2003). Factors influencing faculty adoption of Web-based courses in teacher education programs within the State University of New York. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.
Mason, R. (1998). Models of Online Courses. ALN Magazine, 2(2), October 1998. McLaughlin, M. (1976). Implementation of ESEA Title I: A problem of compliance.
Teachers’ College Record, 80(1): 64-94. Miles, M. & Huberman, A. (1984a). Qualitative Date Analysis: A Sourcebook of New
Methods. California: Sage Publications. Miles, M. & Huberman, A. (1984b). Drawing Valid Meaning from Qualitative Data:
Towards a Shared Craft. Educational Researcher, 13(5), 20-30. Miller, M. (1995). Coefficient Alpha: A Basic Introduction from the Perspectives of
Class Test Theory and Structural Equation Modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 29(3), 255-273.
Mitchem, K., Wells, D. & Wells, J. (2003). Effective Integration of Instructional Technologies (IT): Evaluating Professional Development and Instructional Change. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 11(3), 397-414.
Monteith, M. (2004). ICT for Curriculum Enhancement. Bristol: Intellect Books. Moran, L. (1995). “National policy frameworks to support the integration of
information technologies into university teaching/learning.” Report of a Search Conference Commissioned by the Department of Employment, Education & Training. Australia.
Morgan, D. (1988). Focus Groups As Qualitative Research. California: Sage Publications.
Morris, P. (1990). Curriculum Development in Hong Kong (Education Papers No. 7). University of Hong Kong Faculty of Education.
Morrison, D. (2003). E-learning strategies: how to get implementation and delivery right first time. England: John Wiley & Sons.
Mulford, B. (2005). Organizational Learning and Educational Change. In A. Hargreaves (Ed.). Extending Educational Change. New York: Springer.
Murray, D. (2001). E-learning for the Workplace. The Conference Board of Canada. Nias, J., Southworth, G. & Campbell, P. (1992). Whole School Curriculum
Development in Primary Schools. London: Falmer Press. Oliver, M. (2004). What can we do to help academics start using e-learning?
Educational Developments, Issue 5.4, 17-18. UK: the Staff and Educational Development Association (SEDA).
p. 210
Owings, W. & Kaplan, L. (2003). Best Practices, Best Thinking, and Emerging Issues in School Leadership. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press.
Palloff, R. & Pratt, K. (2000). Making the transition: Helping teachers to teach online. Paper presented at EDUCAUSE: Thinking it through. Nashville: Tennessee. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 452 806).
Parlett, M. & Hamilton, D. (1972). Evaluation as Illumination: A New approach to the Study of Innovatory Programmes. Occasional Paper No. 9. Edinburgh: Centre for Research in the Educational Sciences.
Patton, M. (1980). Qualitative Evaluation Methods. California: Sage Publications. Patton, M. (1990). Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. California: Sage
Publications. Paulsen, M. (1998). The Online Report on Pedagogical Techniques for
Computer-Mediated Communication. Oslo: NKI Department of Distance Education.
Pearson, J. (2001). Information Technology in Education: policy and provision in Hong Kong schools. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, Vol. 10, No. 3, 2001.
Pelgrum, W. (2008). School Practices and Conditions for Pedagogy and ICT. In N. Law, W. Pelgrum & T. Plomo (Eds.). Pedagogy and ICT Use in Schools Around the World: Findings from the IEA SITES 2006 Study. Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research Centre, the University of Hong Kong.
Pelgrum, W. & Law, N. (2008). Introduction to SITES 2006. In N. Law, W. Pelgrum & T. Plomo (Eds.). Pedagogy and ICT Use in Schools Around the World: Findings from the IEA SITES 2006 Study. Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research Centre, the University of Hong Kong.
Postle, G. (2003). Online Teaching and Learning in Higher Education: A Case Study. Canberra: Department of Education, Science and Training, Australian Government.
Powney, J. & Watts, M. (1984). Reporting Interviews: a code of good practice. Research Intelligence, 17.
Powney, J. & Watts, M. (1987). Interviewing in Educational Research. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Pratt, D. (1994). Curriculum Planning: A Handbook for Professionals. Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace College Publishers.
Prendergast, G. (2001). Creating Effective Blended Collaborative Learning Educators. London: Institute of Education.
Prosser, M. & Trigwell, K. (2006). Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Approaches to Teaching Inventory. British Journal of Psychology, 76, 405-419.
Redding, G. (1990). The Spirit of Chinese Capitalism. New York: Walter de Gruyter. Redmann, D. & Kotrlik, J. (2004). Analysis of Technology Integration in the
Teaching-Learning Process in Selected Career and Technical Education Programs. Journal of Vocational Education Research, 29(1), 3-25.
Reeves, T. & Reeves, P. (1997). Effective Dimensions of Interactive Learning on the World Wide Web. In B. Khan (Ed.). Web-based Instruction. New Jersey: Educational Technology Publications.
p. 211
Richards, J. (2002). Why Teachers Resist Change. Principal, 81(4), March, 2002. Riley, D. (1990). Implementing and Evaluating the Curriculum. Australia: Armidale
College of Advanced Education Publications. Robertson, I. (2006). Surveying online technology: A matter of design. The
Knowledge Tree, May, 38-49. Robertson, I. (2007). Factors influencing vocational teacher’s use of online
functionalities in Australia, Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 2007, 23(3), 371-389.
Selim, H. (2007). Critical success factors for e-learning acceptance: Confirmatory factor models. Computer and Education, 49(2), 396-413.
Senge, P., Kleiner, A., Roberts, C., Ross, R., Roth, G. & Smith, B. (1999). The Dance of Change: the challenges of sustaining momentum in learning organizations. New York: Doubleday Dell Publishing Group.
Senge, P., McCabe, N., Lucas, T., Kleiner, A., Dutton, J. & Smith, B. (2000). Schools That Learn. London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing.
Shulman, L. & Shulman, J. (2004). How and what teachers learn: a shifting perspective, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 36(2), pp. 257- 271.
Snyder, J., Bolin, F. & Zumwalt, K. (1992). Curriculum Implementation. In P. Jackson (Ed.). Handbook of Research on Curriculum. New York: Macmillan.
Spradely, J. P. (1979). The ethnographic interview. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Wanston.
Stevens, J. (2002). Applied Multivariate Statistics for The Social Sciences. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Tang, F. & Wong, S. (2002). Learning with WebCT: A Student Perspective. Paper presented at the Symposium on Higher Vocational Education in Hong Kong and Guangdong. China: Panyu Polytechnic.
Twining, P. (2004). The Computer Practice Framework: a tool to enhance curriculum development relating to ICT. In M. Monteith, ICT for Curriculum Enhancement. Bristol: Intellect Books.
UGC (2000). Report on the 1995-98 Triennium. Hong Kong: University Grants Committee.
UGC (2002). Higher Education in Hong Kong - Report of the University Grants Committee. Hong Kong: University Grants Committee.
Volery, T. (2001). Online Education: An Exploratory Study into Success Factors. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 24(1), 77-92.
VTC (1998). Minutes of the 9th Meeting of the Information Technology Steering Committee. Hong Kong: Vocational Train Council.
VTC (1999a). The adoption of the IT Capability Plan. Memo from the Chairman of the Working Party on IT Enhancement Programme for VTC Teachers (ITEP) to all VTC teachers. Hong Kong: Vocational Training Council.
VTC (1999b). Minutes of 1st Meeting of the Working Party on IT Enhancement Programme for VTC Teachers. Hong Kong: Vocational Training Council.
VTC (1999c). Minutes of the 12th Meeting of the Information Technology Steering Committee. Hong Kong: Vocational Training Council.
p. 212
VTC (1999d). Information Technology Steering Committee Updated Document. Memo from the Secretary of ITSC to members dated 27 April 1999. Hong Kong: Vocational Training Council.
VTC (1999e). Minutes of the 13th Meeting of the Information Technology Steering Committee. Hong Kong: Vocational Training Council.
VTC (1999f). Minutes of the 14th Meeting of the Information Technology Steering Committee. Hong Kong: Vocational Training Council.
VTC (1999g). The Implementation of Web Based Management and Delivery of IVE courses. Memo from the Deputy Executive Director to all IVE Principals dated 24 July 1999. Hong Kong: Vocational Training Council.
VTC (1999h). Minutes of 6th Meeting of the Working Party on IT Enhancement Programme for VTC Teachers. Hong Kong: Vocational Training Council.
VTC (1999i). Implementation of Web Based Management and Delivery of IVE Courses Using WebCT and the Percentage of IVE Curriculum to Be Put on the Web. Memo from the Deputy Executive Director to all IVE Principals dated 23 December 1999. Hong Kong: Vocational Training Council.
VTC (2000a). Job Specifications of Information Technology. Hong Kong: Vocational Training Council, Committee on IT Training and Development.
VTC (2000b). Progress Report to Academic Services Committee: Working Party on IT Enhancement Programme for VTC Teachers. Hong Kong: Vocational Training Council.
VTC (2000c). Minutes of the 15th Meeting of the Information Technology Steering Committee. Hong Kong: Vocational Training Council.
VTC (2001a). Minutes of the 17th Meeting of the Information Technology Steering Committee. Hong Kong: Vocational Training Council.
VTC (2001b). Minutes of 11th Meeting of the Working Party on IT Enhancement Programme for VTC Teachers. Hong Kong: Vocational Training Council.
VTC (2002a). Working Party on IT Enhancement Programme for VTC Teachers Progress Report to the Information Technology Steering Committee. Hong Kong: Vocational Training Council.
VTC (2002b). Minutes of the 18th Meeting of the Information Technology Steering Committee. Hong Kong: Vocational Training Council.
VTC (2005a). Minutes of 2nd meeting of the Teaching and Learning Steering Committee (TLSC). Hong Kong: Vocational Training Council.
VTC (2005b). Minutes of the 3rd meeting of the Teaching and Learning Steering Committee (TLSC). Hong Kong: Vocational Training Council.
VTC (2005c). Utilization of IT in Teaching and Learning in IVE. Memo from IVE’s Management Committee to Chairman of ITSC. Hong Kong: Vocational Training Council.
VTC (2008). Minutes of 12th Meeting of the Vocational Education and Training Academic Board. Hong Kong: Vocational Training Council.
VTC (2008, November). VTC Calendar 2008-2009. Hong Kong: Vocational Training Council.
Wong, M. (2002). Flexibility and Interactivity in the Context of Web-based Curriculum: Managing Change. Unpublished Doctor of Education thesis,
p. 213
University of Leicester. UK: Leicester. Yeung, C.K., Cheng, C.F. & Koo, A. (2000). New Roles of Vocational Teachers for
Technological Change: A Case Study of the Institute of Vocational Education of Hong Kong. Paper presented at the IVETA 2000 Conference, the International Vocational Education and Training Association and the Vocational Training Council of Hong Kong.
Yeung, C.K., Cheng, C.F. & Koo, A. (2001). Enabling Vocational Teachers for Knowledge-based Society: A Case Study of Roles of the Teachers in the Institute of Vocational Education of Hong Kong. Paper presented at the Hong Kong Association for Educational Communications and Technology Conference 2001, The Hong Kong Institute of Education, Hong Kong.
Yin, R. (1994). Case Study Research: design and methods. California: Sage Publications.
Yip, W. (2008). Web-based instruction as a supplement to face-to-face teaching in higher education in Hong Kong. Unpublished Doctoral thesis. University of Western Australia.
Zhao, Y. & Frank, K. (2003). Factors Affecting Technology Uses in Schools: an Ecological Perspective. American Educational Research Journal, Winter 2003, 40(4), 807-840.
Zhao, Y., Pugh, K., Sheldon, S. & Byers, J. (2002). Conditions for Classroom Technology Innovations. Teachers College Record, 104(3), April 2002, 482-515.
p. 214
APPENDIX I
Implementation Rubric Used in this Study Non Use: State in which the user (teacher) has no or little knowledge of the innovation,
no involvement with the innovation, and is doing nothing towards becoming involved.
Informational Use: State in which the user has limited knowledge of the innovation, and little or limited involvement with the innovation.
Supplemental Use: State in which the user has some knowledge of the innovation, and has applied the innovation as supplement to his daily teaching.
Intensive Use: State in which the user has ‘rich’ knowledge of the innovation, and has integrated the innovation into his/her daily teaching.
Constructive Use: State in which the user constructs his/her own knowledge about using IT for teaching and learning, and is able to provide advice to other teachers in using IT for teaching and learning.
Dimension of Innovation Non Use Informational Use Supplemental Use Intensive Use Constructive Use
1. Policy in Context: Teachers’ knowledge of VTC’s policy that VTC expects of them
1.1 IT competencies Teachers have no knowledge about IT competencies identified by VTC
Teachers have talked about the three levels of IT competency
Teachers can explain some details about the three levels of IT competency
Teachers can identify their own competencies and match them with the three levels of IT competency
Teachers are able to criticise the existing competencies and are able to propose new competencies
1.2 Curriculum delivery
Teachers have no idea about the policy of curriculum to be delivered by IT
Teachers can explain there is a policy in place
Teachers can explain some details of the policy
Teachers can explain the requirements of the policy
Teachers are able to criticise the existing delivery of the policy and suggest a new policy
1.3. IT skill acquisition
Teachers have no knowledge about the IT Enhancement Programme (ITEP)
Teachers have seen information about the ITEP
Teachers have attended some ITEP workshops
Teachers have attended a variety of ITEP workshops
Teachers have attended a variety of ITEP workshops and provided training to other teachers
1.4 Benchmarking Teachers have no idea about the IT Capability Enhancement Plan
Teachers can explain there is a Plan in place, but do not use it
Teachers can explain some details of the Plan for reference
Teachers actually use the Plan as part of their own professional development plan and record
Teachers modified the Plan to suit their own need for professional development purposes
2. Teachers’ perceptions of teaching and learning: Teachers’ perception of teaching and learning and their roles in the innovation
2.1 Teachers’ perception of using IT for teaching and learning
Teachers have no idea about the roles of IT in teaching and learning
Teachers believe that IT is a tool to transmit information
Teachers believe that IT is a tool to supplement teaching
Teachers believe that IT is a tool to resource-based teaching and learning
Teachers believe that IT is a tool for collaborative learning and knowledge construction
2.2 Teachers’ belief about their roles in IT for teaching and learning
Teachers have no idea about their roles in using IT for teaching and learning
Teachers believe that their role is to provide information via IT
Teachers believe that their role is to provide content via IT
Teachers believe that their role is to provide content, activity and assessment via IT
Teachers believe that their role is to facilitate student learning via IT
p. 215
APPENDIX I (cont’d) Non Use: State in which the user (teacher) has no or little knowledge of the innovation,
no involvement with the innovation, and is doing nothing towards becoming involved.
Informational Use: State in which the user has limited knowledge of the innovation, and little or limited involvement with the innovation.
Supplemental Use: State in which the user has some knowledge of the innovation, and has applied the innovation as supplement to his daily teaching.
Intensive Use: State in which the user has ‘rich’ knowledge of the innovation, and has integrated the innovation into his/her daily teaching.
Constructive Use: State in which the user constructs his/her own knowledge about using IT for teaching and learning, and is able to provide advice to other teachers in using IT for teaching and learning.
Dimension of Innovation Non Use Informational Use Supplemental Use Intensive Use Constructive Use
3. Teachers’ Practice: Expectations of teachers’ practice in using IT for teaching and learning
Classroom teaching 3.1 Lecture
presentation
Teachers do not use any IT to present their lectures
Teachers use pre-designed IT resources to present a lecture
Teachers create simple IT resources to present a lecture
Teachers create multimedia resources to present a lecture
Teachers assist or advise other teachers to create IT resources for lecture presentation
3.2 Communication Teachers do not use any IT to communicate with their colleagues or/and students
Teachers have knowledge of electronic communication, but they do not use it
Teachers use simple facilities for basic asynchronized communication with their colleagues or/and students
Teachers use a variety of facilities for asynchronized and synchronized communication with their colleagues or/and students
Teachers assist or advise other teachers to use asynchronized and synchronized tools
Online teaching
3.3 Teaching and learning online
Teachers do not do any online teaching
Teachers put content /information online with minimal online support, e.g. e-mails and online component occupied less than 20% of teaching/study time
Teachers develop and use custom-designed online materials and activities to supplement existing content and classroom activities and that online component contributed up to 50% of teaching/ study time
Teachers provide learning resources and facilitate collaborative activities online and that online component contributed more than 50% of teaching/study time
Teachers assist or advise other teachers to provide learning resources and facilitate collaborative activities online and that online component contributed to most teaching/ study time
3.4 Assessment online
Teachers do not use any IT to conduct assessment
Teachers use online assessment tools available to them to conduct formative assessment
Teachers create and use on-line assessment tools to conduct formative assessment
Teachers create and use on-line assessment tools to conduct summative assessment
Teachers assist or advise other teachers to create & use on-line tools for assessment
p. 216
APPENDIX II
Questionnaire Used in this Study
Survey: Use of IT for Teaching and Learning by IVE Teachers For Questions 1 to 5, please select only ONE choice.
1. How many years have you been teaching?
a. Less than 5 years b. 5-10 years c. 11-15 years d. More than 15 years
2. How many years have you been teaching in IVE?
a. Less than 5 years b. 5-10 years c. 11-15 years d. More than 15 years
3. Which IVE Department do you currently belong to?
a. Applied Science
b. Business Administration / Business Services & Management
c. Child Education and Services
d. Computing / Computing & Information Management / Information & Communications Technology / Multimedia & Internet Technology
e. Construction
f. Design / Printing & Digital Media / Fashion & Textiles
g. Automotive Engin’g / Engin’g / Electrical Engin’g / Electronic & Inform. Engin’g / Engin’g Management & Technology / Industrial Engin’g & Management / Real Estate & Facilities Management
h. Hotel, Service & Tourism Studies
i. Language Centre
j. Foundation Studies Section
4. Which IVE Campus do you currently belong to?
a. Billion Plaza Centre d. Kennedy Town Centre g. Lee Wai Lee j. Tuen Mun
b. Chai Wan e. Kwai Chung h. Morrison Hill k. Tsing Yi
c. Haking Wong f. Kwun Tong i. Sha Tin
5. Which level of full-time course are you teaching most of the time? (i.e. the most hours you teach in your
timetable)
a. Certificate of Vocational Studies b. Foundation Diploma
c. Diploma d. Higher Diploma e. Others (please specify _______________________________)
p. 217
APPENDIX II (cont’d)
For Questions 6 and 7, please select all of the appropriate choice(s) that apply to you.
6. Have you received any IT training? (or similar discipline such as computing studies) a. No b. Yes. What type of IT training did you receive?
i. Postgraduate course in IT iii. Diploma / Certificate course in IT ii. Undergraduate course in IT iv. Short IT course(s) / workshop(s) v. Others (please specify _________________________)
7. Have you received any training on ‘IT for teaching and learning’ (i.e. training on the pedagogy of using
IT)? a. No b. Yes. At what course level?
i. Postgraduate course in education ii. Undergraduate course in education iii. Diploma / Certificate course iv. Short course(s) / workshop(s) outside VTC v. Short course(s) / workshop(s) run by the Teaching & Learning Centre (TLC) vi. Short course(s) / workshops run by VTC unit(s) other than TLC vii. Others (please specify _________________________)
Questions 8 to 11 are about your ‘Knowledge of VTC’s Policy on the Use of IT for Teaching and Learning’. In each question,
please select only ONE choice that best describes your situation.
8. About VTC’s expectation of teachers’ IT competencies (as those listed in Appendix I).
a. I am not aware of the IT competencies identified by VTC
b. I know of the three levels of IT competency identified by VTC but do not know their details
c. I can explain some details of the three levels of IT competency
d. I can identify my own competencies and match them with the three levels of IT competency
e. I have critiqued the existing competencies identified by VTC and have provided feedback to the management
9. About VTC’s requirements on the use of IT for teaching and learning.
a. I am not aware of VTC’s requirements on the use of IT for teaching and learning
b. I know that VTC has requirements on the use of IT for teaching and learning but do not know the details
c. I can explain some details of the requirements
d. I can explain all the details of the requirements (e.g. detailed percentage and timeline)
e. I have critiqued the existing requirements and have provided feedback to the management
p. 218
APPENDIX II (cont’d) 10. About VTC’s policy of training teachers on the use of IT for teaching and learning.
a. I am not aware of the IT Enhancement Programme (ITEP) (e.g. workshops offered by TLC or other provider/s)
b. I have seen information (either in print or on the Web) about the ITEP but have not attended any workshops
c. I have attended a few ITEP workshops d. I have attended a variety of ITEP workshops e. I have attended a variety of ITEP workshops and have provided support to other teachers
11. About benchmarking VTC teachers’ IT competencies for teaching and learning.
a. I am not aware of the IT Capability Enhancement Plan (as shown in Appendix II) b. I have seen the Plan (either in print or on the Web), but I do not use it c. I can explain some details of the Plan d. I actually use the Plan as part of my own professional development plan and record e. I have modified the Plan to suit my own need for professional development purposes
Questions 12 to 13 are about your ‘Perceptions of Using IT for Teaching and Learning.
In each question, please select only ONE choice that best describes your situation. 12. About your belief in the role of IT for teaching and learning.
a. I am not sure of the role that IT plays in teaching and learning b. I believe that IT is a tool for transmitting information c. I believe that IT is a tool for transmitting information and supplementing face-to-face teaching d. I believe that IT is a tool that provides rich resources for enhancing individual learning e. I believe that IT is not only a tool for enhancing individual learning, but also for facilitating
learning among students 13. About your belief in your role when using IT for teaching and learning.
a. I am not sure of my role when using IT for teaching and learning b. I believe that my role is to provide information / content to students via IT c. I believe that my role is to provide information / content and learning activities to students via IT d. I believe that my role is not only to provide information / content and learning activities, but also
to provide assessment to students via IT e. I believe that, in additional to those mentioned in (d), my role is to assist and facilitate student
learning via IT Questions 14 to 18 are about your Practice when Using IT for Teaching and Learning.
In each question, please select only ONE choice that best describes your situation. 14. About using IT for lecture presentation.
a. I am not familiar with any IT presentation tools b. I am familiar with some IT presentation tools, but I do not use them c. I use pre-designed IT resources (those from the Teaching & Learning Packages or textbooks)
for lecture presentations d. In addition to (c), I have also modified pre-designed IT resources or created my own resources
for lecture presentations e. In addition to (d), I also assist or advise other teachers in creating IT resources for their lecture
presentations
p. 219
APPENDIX II (cont’d) 15. About using IT tools for other teaching and learning activities (those other than lecture presentations).
a. I am not familiar with any IT tools for teaching and learning activities b. I am familiar with some IT tools for teaching and learning activities, but I do not use them c. I use pre-designed IT resources (those from the Teaching & Learning Packages or textbooks) for
other classroom activities d. In addition to (c), I have also modified pre-designed IT resources or created my own resources to
facilitate other classroom teaching and learning activities e. In addition to (d), I also advise or assist other teachers to develop IT resources for enhancing other
classroom teaching and learning activities 16. About using IT tools for communication (e-mail, discussion forum, etc).
a. I am not familiar with any IT communication tools b. I am familiar with the use of IT tools for communication, but I do not use them c. I use basic asynchronous tools (e-mail, discussion forum, etc.) to communicate with my colleagues
and/or students d. I use a variety of asynchronous tools and synchronous tools (ICQ, computer conferencing, etc.) for
communication with my colleagues and/or students e. In addition to (c) and (d), I also advise or assist other teachers in the use of asynchronous and
synchronous tools for communication with colleagues and/or students 17. About using the Web for teaching and learning.
a. I am not familiar with any Web-based teaching and learning tools b. I am familiar with some Web-based teaching and learning tools (e.g. those provided by WebCT), but I
do not use them c. I use a few Web-based teaching and learning tools (e.g. those provided by WebCT) to post content /
information, to communicate with students, etc. These Web components occupy less than 50% of my teaching or students’ study time
d. I use a variety of Web-based teaching and learning tools (e.g. those provided by WebCT) to supplement face-to-face teaching and learning activities. These Web components contribute more than 50% of my teaching or students’ study time
e. In addition to (d), I also advise / assist other teachers in using the Web to supplement face-to-face teaching and learning activities
18. About using the Web for assessment.
a. I am not familiar with any Web assessment b. I am familiar with some Web assessment tools (e.g. quiz or test tools provided by WebCT), but I do not
use them c. I use a few Web tools to assess students d. I use a variety of Web tools to assess students e. In addition to (d), I also advise / assist other teachers in using the Web for assessment
19. Among the IT tools mentioned in Questions 14 to 18, which tools do you use the most for teaching and learning?
Please rank them according to your percentage of usage (1 = the highest and so on). ( ) Lecture presentation tool(s) ( ) Communication tool(s) ( ) Web tool(s) for teaching and learning ( ) Web tool(s) for assessment ( ) Other IT tool(s) for teaching and learning (please specify: _________________)
p. 220
APPENDIX II (cont’d)
Questions 20 to 46 are about Factors that affect the success of implementing IT for Teaching and Learning in IVE. In each
question, please select only ONE choice that best describes you situation.
How far do you agree with the following statements? Please tick the appropriate answer:
SA=Strongly Agree A=Agree N=Not Sure D=Disagree SD=Strongly Disagree 20. All IVE teachers need to use IT for teaching and learning.
SA A N D SD 21. Teachers’ daily work is more complex since IT has been introduced into teaching and learning.
SA A N D SD 22. VTC teachers receive suitable training in the use of IT for teaching and learning.
SA A N D SD
23. VTC’s IT infrastructure is reliable and supports IT teaching, in particular Web-based teaching.
SA A N D SD
24. Hardware, software and teaching resources are readily available.
SA A N D SD
25. Support from the department / campus / Headquarters is readily available.
SA A N D SD
26. Support offered by VTC’s IT personnel (e.g. people from ITSD, Computer Centre ...) does not meet teachers’
needs.
SA A N D SD
27. A supportive Head of Department / Campus Principal encourages teachers to use IT for teaching and learning.
SA A N D SD
28. All teachers that I work with are committed to the use of IT for teaching and learning.
SA A N D SD
29. Some teachers that I work with have ‘Techno fear’ about using IT for teaching and learning (because they are unfamiliar with or fear new technology).
SA A N D SD
30. IT is threatening my job security because IT may replace face-to-face teaching.
SA A N D SD
31. Teaching staff at my work place support each other in the use of IT for teaching and learning.
SA A N D SD
p. 221
APPENDIX II (cont’d)
32. There is not enough time for teachers to prepare materials in various new (electronic) formats.
SA A N D SD
33. Teachers do not have the knowledge and skills needed to prepare materials for teaching in various new (electronic) formats.
SA A N D SD
34. Teachers do not have the knowledge and skills to effectively use IT for teaching and learning.
SA A N D SD
35. It is not easy for teachers to attend training sessions (IT skills and the pedagogy of using IT).
SA A N D SD
36. Teachers’ workloads have not increased since they started using IT for teaching and learning.
SA A N D SD
37. VTC’ management encourages and rewards teachers who make effective use of IT for teaching and learning.
SA A N D SD
38. Teachers who make extensive use of IT for teaching and learning have a higher workload.
SA A N D SD
39. Teachers who use IT for teaching and learning have to frequently revise their teaching materials so as to cope with the advancement of IT.
SA A N D SD
40. Teachers will have to attend more training sessions because IT is continually changing.
SA A N D SD
41. Teachers’ worry about their infringement of copyright when using other people’s IT resources for their own teaching.
SA A N D SD
42. Teachers’ worry about the IT resources they developed (in particular those that have been posted on the Web) will be plagiarised by other people.
SA A N D SD
43. Web-based teaching and learning will result in better interaction between the teacher and students and among students.
SA A N D SD
p. 222
APPENDIX II (cont’d)
44. IT is not suitable for teaching and learning of some course(s) / module(s).
SA A N D SD If you agree with 44, please specify which subject(s): ________________________
45. Teachers have sufficient time to implement the change from face-to-face teaching to Web-based
teaching.
SA A N D SD
46. The change in delivery method from face-to-face teaching to Web-based teaching has not resulted in a change in the teachers’ role.
SA A N D SD
47. Besides those listed in Questions 20-46, what are factors that you think will affect the implementation of IT for teaching and learning?
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
48. What difficulties have you encountered when using IT for teaching and learning? How did you resolve these difficulties?
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
THANK YOU VERY MUCH AGAIN FOR COMPLETING THIS QUESTIONNAIRE!
Please flip and staple this questionnaire and send it back to me by internal mail.
p. 223
APPENDIX III
IT Capability Enhancement Plan for benchmarking IVE teachers IT Competencies
ITEP courses attended (with dates) Note: 1. ITEP = IT Enhancement Programme 2. FTP = File Transfer Protocol 3. ICQ = Abbreviation for “I seek you” How to fill in this plan:
1. In the grey column, tick (ü) the boxes that indicate your IT skills / levels before you participated in ITEP.
2. Enter the names and dates of ITEP courses attended in the columns on the right, after attending such courses.
3. Enter ticks (ü) in the boxes to indicate the levels of competencies you developed after attending each course.
4. It is the responsibility of each teacher to review his / her IT competencies with his / her supervisor regularly.
IT sk
ills /
levels
bef
ore
parti
cipat
ing in
ITEP
Competency Awareness Level Use a common computer Operating System’s standard functions (e.g. Windows 98/NT/2000/ME/XP) Use a local network to transfer / retrieve / save teaching and learning materials and to share them among teachers and / or students
Operate basic computer peripheral equipment to output simple teaching materials Identify and evaluate common desktop software to be used to assist teaching and learning activities Identify discipline-specific software packages that can be used to enhance teaching and learning effectiveness
Operate a computer-based projection system to deliver presentations for teaching Recognise the applications of typical file formats (e.g. .doc, .txt, .gif, .jpg, ...) Access the World Wide Web (the Web) with a Web browser to search, retrieve information and download teaching and learning resources
Basic understanding of the implications of, and the roles of the teacher in, using IT Application Level Develop course materials (e.g. curriculum documents, lecture notes, lab sheets etc.) using a word processing application software
Use spreadsheet / database applications to handle teaching-related tasks including course scheduling, student assessment, etc.
Prepare presentations for teaching using presentation software Use FTP to share and retrieve teaching and learning resources Use e-mail (with attachments, if necessary) to communicate with colleagues and students Create text-based Web pages to supplement classroom teaching Use graphic application software to create simple graphics for educational illustrations Understand the basic concepts and principles of Web-based instructions and the Course Management and Delivery Platforms
Understand the applications of Web-based Course Management and Delivery Platforms (e.g. WebCT) Understand the educational principles of using IT for planning teaching and learning materials / activities Advanced Level Create a multimedia presentation Create a simple interactive program for student learning on a specific topic with presentation software and/or authoring tools
Provide support such as advice, production assistance, training to colleagues in using IT in teaching and learning activities
Use asynchronous communication tools on the Web such as mailing lists, newsgroups and discussion forums to enhance teaching effectiveness
Use synchronous communications on the Web such as chat rooms, ICQ, NetMeeting, etc. to enhance teaching effectiveness
Develop a ‘tutor-led’ Web-based course / module using a Course Management and Delivery Platform (e.g. WebCT)
Manage a Web-based course / module using a Course Management and Delivery Platform (e.g. WebCT) Communicate with students using a Course Management and Delivery Platform (e.g. WebCT) Create and manage on-line assessment using a Course Management and Delivery Platform (e.g. WebCT) Publish Web-based teaching and learning materials such as Web pages / Websites to supplement classroom teaching
Apply educational principles to enhance the quality of e-Teaching and e-Learning materials Apply project-management skills to develop e-Teaching and e-Learning materials with a team of staff