discussion between them and students. For example, at some medical colleges students are able to watch live surgery via satellite videoconferencing. At other colleges, art students are able to travel to museums around the world to see three-dimensional representations of famous works of art. Professors are able to craft complex lesson plans and keep them online so they only require slight modification when the time comes to change them. For many years instructors were ambivalent, resistant or outright opposed to the use of technology in higher learning. However, the nature of resistance has changed due to the increased use of technology at institutions of higher learning around the world. Whereas resistance from instructors used to be aimed at the technology itself, todayĂs resistance deals more with administration support and issues like copyright protection. As Rickard notes in Educom Review, ˘Where once faculty resistance could be characterized by Šplain old fear ű This is a fad; it may go away; IĂd like to retire before I have to confront it,Ă today the resistance can be characterized by a lack of faith that institutions are supporting faculty in their efforts to transform learning through information technology÷ (42-43).
Rickard, W. Technology, higher education, and the changing nature of resistance. Educom Review, 34(1), Jan/Feb 1999:
Piotrowski, C. and Vodanovich, S. J. Are the reported barriers to Internet-based instruction warranted? Education, 121(1), Fall 2000: 48-53.
Despite the numerous benefits that can accrue to instructors and students from the use of technology, there are definite obstacles, challenges, and even negatives that result from its use. In a comprehensive study of higher education instruction relying on Internet use, Piotrowski and Vodanovich argue that