English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

By 2012, most universities in the United States and some European universities have greatly augmented their online course offerings; those courses increasingly have been taught by adjunct (also called contingent or part-time) instructors. In view of the fact that it costs less for universities to hire adjunct instructors since they receive no benefits beyond a small salary per course, it would seem that faculty would be leaping at the opportunity to teach online and be recognized for their online contributions to offset this increased use of adjunct instructors. Indeed, according to a number of universities’ chief academic officers, almost 50% of faculty accepted the value and legitimacy of online education (Allen and Seaman, 2008). Yet, almost ten years after the author’s first research study on this subject (GannonCook, 2003), the researcher found that faculty, both tenured and untenured, were still demurring from teaching online; she was stunned to discover that the rates of faculty teaching online remained low, particularly in the United States. During that same timeframe, ten years, there had been dramatic growth of students taking online courses (one in six students in the U.S. taking online courses as of 2006 [Pope, 2006, 1]). Data gathered from the researcher’s university, as well as from a number of universities in the United States and Europe, indicated that faculty online participation percentages, despite growing numbers of online courses, averaged around twenty-five to twenty-eight percent (Ansah, and Johnson, 2003; Beggs, 2002: Bender, Wood, and Vredevoogd, 2004; Brabazon, 2001; Brookfield, 1995; Cavanaugh, 2005; Chang, 2008; Elaine and Seaman, 2006; Huffman and Miller & 2001; Jones and Johnson–Yale, 2005; Kosak, Manning, Dobson, Rogerson, Cotnam, Colaric, and McFadden, 2004;Lazarus, 2002; Lin, 2003; Maguire, 2002, 2006; Murphy, 2011; Offer, Barth, Lev, and Sheintok, 2003: O’Quinn and Corry, 2003; Paloff and Pratt, 2001; Zhen, Garthwait, & Pratt, 2008). So, a question remained that, if the numbers of online courses were burgeoning and almost 50% of faculty acknowledged the value and legitimacy of online education, why were so few of the faculty teaching online?

Facts and Fiction: Lessons from Research on Faculty Motivators and Incentives to Teach Online