Engagement, Satisfaction, and Time Managements Skills of Online

Instructors

J. X Seaton; R. A. Schwier; & G. McCalla

University of Saskatchewan

Research Story

• Completed Master’s of Arts Online• Less than satisfactory experience

• Experience not congruent with the research

• WHY??

Case Study

• 12 online instructors at the University of Saskatchewan followed over a year

• A lot of variation between instructors• In demographics• In style of online teaching

• Generally the online course was thrust upon them

What did I learn?

• My experiences mirrored those of my participants.

• When online education goes well it is awesome

• When it doesn’t go well everyone dreads it

• Seemed to be related to research• And linked to time management

Questions

• Are we expecting too much from online instructors?

• If student engagement predicts the student satisfaction in the course, can instructor engagement predict instructor satisfaction?• Follow up: Will student presence increase

instructor engagement?

• Can time management techniques help instructors manage the stress of online courses?

Quantitative Study: Design

• Survey Instruments• Engagement – Schaufeli (2001)

• Schaufeli’s Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES)• Opposite of burnout• Assesses: Vigor, Dedication, and Absorbtion

• Satisfaction - Bolliger and Wasilik’s (2008)• Online Faculty Satisfaction Survey (OFSS)

• Assesses: Student, Instructor, and Institution Satisfaction

• Time Management - Hoff Macan (1994)• Hoff Macan’s Time Management Behaviours Scale

• Assesses Setting Goals and Priorities, Scheduling & Planning, and Preference for Organization

Preliminary Results

• Collected results from 28 University of Regina Online Instructors from a variety of departments• Good to understand local trends at the

university

• Purpose of the data to show what you can learn from a similar study• More data from other institutions can allow

meta-analysis

Schaufeli’s Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES)

• Vigor• Avg. 3.52 (SD = 0.88)

• Absorption• Avg. 3.60 (SD = 0.72)

• Dedication• Avg. 4.64 (SD = 0.56)

Feelings of Flow

Pride

Online Faculty Satisfaction Survey (OFSS)

• Student Subscale • avg. 3.71 (sd = 0.59)

• Instructor Subscale • avg. 3.52 (sd = 0.49)

• Institution Subscale • avg. 2.99 (sd = 0.68)

Institution Subscale Questions

Question Avg. SD

I have a higher workload when teaching an online course as compared to the traditional one

4.04 0.96

It takes me longer to prepare for an online course on a weekly basis than for a face-to-face course

3.46 1.37

I receive fair compensation for online teaching 4.07 1.25

I am concerned about receiving lower course evaluations in the online course as compared to the traditional one

2.61 1.45

Hoff Macan’s Time Management Behaviours Scale

• Goal Setting• Avg. 4.29 (SD = 0.62)

• Mechanics• Avg. 3.91 (SD = 0.68)

Analysis by DepartmentFaculty Dedication Score Mechanics Score

Arts 4.25 4.04

Business 4.68 3.82

Continuing Education 4.83 4.68

Fine Arts 4.67 3.81

Kinesiology 3.67 4.5

Nursing 3.46 3.66

Science 4.44 4.24

Social Work 4.33 2.88

Analysis by Technological Confidence

Technological Confidence Dedication Score

Early Adopter 4.75

Comfortable 3.88

Adequate 4.33

Early AdopterVery comfortable with technology and enjoys technology. Early adopters enjoy incorporating new technologies into their lives and try to stay up to date with the latest developments.

ComfortableComfortable with technology but do not go out of their way to be up to date with the latest technology. People in this category are comfortable with technology and tend to see technical problems as fun puzzles to solve.

AdequateKnow just enough about technology to do their job. People in this category can use technology to complete the tasks that they need to, but rely on tech support to handle technical problems that they come across.

UnfamiliarIntimidated by technology. People in this category not only rely on tech support to help them with technical issues, but they also tend to rely on co-workers/friends to help them with daily use of technology.

Analysis by Employment Level

Employment Outside the University Satisfaction - Student Subscale

General Engagement

None 3.73 3.59

Occasional Part-time 3.59 3.98

Part-time 3.18 3.69

Full-time 4.51 4.67

Any Employment Dedication Score

None 4.01

Some 4.58

Question that Surface

• Does the University Support best practices for online education?

Correlations Among TestsStudent SS Instructor SS Satisfaction Vigor Absorption Dedication

Instructor SS 0.635

Satisfaction 0.939 0.804

Vigor 0.7890.0000006

0.6470.0002

0.7900.0000006

Absorption 0.4860.009

0.3630.058

0.4410.02

0.685

Dedication 0.5840.001

0.7760.000001

0.6800.00007

0.595 0.553

Engagement 0.7300.00001

0.6840.00006

0.7470.000005

0.910 0.863 0.802

Institution SS

Concluding Thoughts

• There is a lot of research that suggests that instructor presences is important for student engagement.

• But what if instructor engagement is dependent upon student presence?

• More information is needed. Similar studies are useful for the institutions• Meta-analysis would give us information about

how these factors relate to university characteristics

Thank you

Questions?

University of Regina talk available upon request.