Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Influence of Online Teaching on Faculty Productivity

  • Published:
Innovative Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Ten faculty members with experience teaching online were interviewed about their motivation for teaching online and the effect of teaching online on their teaching and research productivity. They represented nine different states and 13 different fields, and all were tenured or tenure-track at master’s or doctoral institutions. All ten mentioned personal motivations for teaching online; eight mentioned professional motivations. Based on analysis of the interviews, several professors felt their teaching productivity had increased as a result of design choices and an increase in workload. Several had freed up time which was spent on service or research although this was modified by the stage of the faculty member’s career.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aronowitz, S. (2001). The last good job in America. Lanham, MA: Bowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Betsey, C. L. (2007). Faculty research productivity: Institutional and personal determinants of faculty publications. The Review of Black Political Economy, 34(1/2), 53–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Betts, K.S. (1998). An institutional overview: Factors influencing faculty participation in distance education in postsecondary education in the United States: An institutional study. The Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 1(3). Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/betts13.html

  • Bland, C. J., Center, B. A., Finstad, D. A., Risbey, K. R., & Staples, J. G. (2005). A theoretical, practical, predictive model of faculty and department research productivity. Academic Medicine, 80(3), 225–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bland, C. J., Center, B. A., Finstad, D. A., Risbey, K. R., & Staples, J. (2006). The impact of appointment type on the productivity and commitment of full-time faculty in research and doctoral institutions. The Journal of Higher Education, 77(1), 89–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyer, E. L. (1997). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (1994). Research design: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fairweather, J. S. (2002). The mythologies of faculty productivity. The Journal of Higher Education, 73(1), 26–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fox, M. F. (2005). Family characteristics, and publication productivity among scientists. Social Studies of Science, 35(1), 131–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fredericksen, E., Pickett, A., Shea, P., Pelz, W., & Swan, K. (2000). Factors influencing faculty satisfaction with asynchronous teaching and learning in the SUNY learning network. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 4(3), 245–278.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glenn, D. (2009, December 16). Scholars seek better metrics for assessing research productivity. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/Scholars-Seek-Better-Metrics/62618/

  • Gose, B. (2010, July 25). Goodbye to those overpaid professors in their cushy jobs. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/Goodbye-to-Those-Overpaid/123633

  • Green, K.C. (2007). The 2007 Campus Computing Survey. Encino, CA: Author.

  • Hines, E.R., Higham, J.R. III. (1996, November). Faculty workload and state policy. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education, Memphis, TN.

  • June, A.W. (2009, November 4). Personal and professional factors affect researchers’ productivity, study finds. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/PersonalProfessional/49051/

  • Kaya, N., & Weber, M. J. (2003). Faculty research productivity: Gender and discipline differences. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, 95(4), 46–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mamiseishvili, K., & Rosser, V. (2010). International and citizen faculty in the United States: An examination of their productivity at research universities. Research in Higher Education, 51(1), 88–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maxwell, J. A. (1996). Qualitative research design. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, K.A. (1998). Faculty workload studies: Perspectives, needs, and future directions. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report Series, 26(1).

  • Meyer, K. A. (2005). Planning for cost-efficiencies in online learning. Planning for Higher Education, 33(3), 19–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, K.A. (2006). Cost-efficiencies of online learning. ASHE Higher Education Report Series, 32(1). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

  • Meyer, K. A. (2008). Online program capacity: Limited, static, elastic, or infinite? Planning for Higher Education, 36(2), 52–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, K. A., & Xu, Y. J. (2009). A causal model of factors influencing faculty use of technology. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 13(2), 58–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, K. A., Bruwelheide, J., & Poulin, R. (2009). Planning for the sustainability of online programs: The development of financial principles. Planning for Higher Education, 37(3), 36–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Middaugh, M. F. (2001). Understanding faculty productivity. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Center for Education Statistics. (2002). Distance education instruction by postsecondary faculty and staff: Fall 1998. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2002155

  • National Education Association. (2000). Quality on the line. Washington, DC: Institute for Higher Education Policy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noble, D. F. (2002). Digital diploma mills: The automation of higher education. New York, NY: Monthly Review Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhoads, G. (2007, November). Virtual values: Information technology, on-campus instruction, and the changing social relations of the academy. Presentation at 2007 ASHE conference, Louisville, KY.

  • Rockwell, S.K., Schauer, J., Fritz, S.M., Marx, D.B. (1999). Incentives and obstacles influencing higher education faculty and administrators to teach via distance. The Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 2(4). Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/rockwell24.html

  • Schifter, C.C. (2000). Factors influencing faculty participation in distance education: A factor analysis. ED at a Distance, 13(1). Retrieved from http://www.usdla.org/ED_magazine/illuminactive/JAN00_Issue/Factors.htm

  • Schifter, C. (2002). Perception differences about participating in distance education. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 5(1). Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/spring51/schifter51.html

  • Schulte, M. (2010). Faculty perceptions of technology distance education transactions: Qualitative outcomes to inform teaching practices. The Journal of Educators Online, 7(2), 1–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Serow, R. C. (2000). Research and teaching at a research university. Higher Education, 40(4), 449–463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tabata, L. N., & Johnsrud, L. K. (2008). The impact of faculty attitudes toward technology, distance education, and innovation. Research in Higher Education, 49(7), 625–646.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teodorescu, D. (2000). Correlates of faculty publication productivity: A cross-national analysis. Higher Education, 39(2), 201–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Townsend, B. K., & Rosser, V. J. (2007). Workload issues and measures of faculty productivity. Thought & Action, 23, 7–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Twigg, C.A. (2002). Improving learning and reducing costs: Lessons learned from round I of the Pew Grant Program in Course Redesign. Retrieved from http://center.rpi.edu/PewGrant/Rd1intro.html

  • Twigg, C. A. (2003a). Improving quality and reducing costs: Designs for effective learning. Change, 35(4), 23–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Twigg, C.A. (2003b). Improving quality and reducing costs: New models for online learning. Educause Review, 38(5), 28–38. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/erm0352.pdf

  • Twigg, C.A. (2005). Improving quality and reducing costs: The case for redesign. In Course Corrections (pp. 32–49). Retrieved from http://www.collegecost.info/pdfs/solution_papers/Collegecosts_Oct2005.pdf

  • Wasilik, O., & Bolliger, D. U. (2009). Faculty satisfaction in the online environment: An institutional study. Internet and Higher Education, 12(3–4), 173–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, R. (2010, July 25). The ivory sweatshop: Academe is no longer a convivial refuge. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/The-Ivory-Sweatshop/123641

  • Wolcott, L.L. (2001, November). Faculty beliefs scale. Presentation at the 2001 Annual Conference of the Western Cooperative for Educational Telecommunications, Coeur d’Alene, ID.

  • Xu, Y., & Meyer, K. A. (2007). Factors explaining faculty technology use and productivity. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(1), 41–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

This research was funded by a Faculty Research Grant from the University of Memphis.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Higher and Adult Education Program, Department of Leadership, University of Memphis, 310 Browning Hall, Memphis, TN, 38152-3570, USA

    Katrina A. Meyer

Authors
  1. Katrina A. Meyer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Katrina A. Meyer.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Meyer, K.A. The Influence of Online Teaching on Faculty Productivity. Innov High Educ 37, 37–52 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-011-9183-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-011-9183-y

Key words

Search

Navigation