This study investigated the affects of faculty attitudes on their intention to instruct courses using distance learning technology. A quantitative and qualitative study was conducted using the methodology established under the Theory of Planned Behavior to determine if the theory would predict a faculty member's intention to instruct a course using distance learning technology. Approximately 600 faculty, representing all ten universities of the State University System, were surveyed as to their intentions to instruct a course using distance learning technology. The survey explored their attitudes regarding certain issues concerning distance learning, their perceptions as to what their peers believe regarding distance learning, and their feelings as to whether they would be successful at distance learning instruction. Qualitative interviews were conducted to further explore the survey results. Findings revealed that the Theory of Planned Behavior could correctly predict a faculty member's intention to instruct a distance learning course 83 percent of the time. Additionally, such factors as previous distance instructional experience, gender, and tenure status were statistically significant in determining whether a faculty member intended to instruct a course using distance learning technology. Peer attitudes and departmental chairs also played significant roles in determining a faculty member's intention to participate in distance learning. Age was not statistically significant. Recommendations for future research were suggested in the following areas: the role of the chair in determining positive/ negative attitudes toward distance learning; further investigation into the effect of gender on distance learning instruction; and, the effect of peer pressure in determining a faculty member's attitudes toward distance learning instruction.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

This study examined the relationship between proficiency of speech and writing of four non-native college-bound students at the Center for Multilingual Multicultural Studies (CMMS) at the University of Central Florida. The students were selected for this case study based on their initial writing samples in the beginning of Fall 1992. Using a participatory research approach, data were collected during the Fall semester of 1992. Selected written samples evaluated by the Diederich scale and results of SPEAK and TOEFL tests were analyzed to determine what relationships could be inferred from the data collected. Two 30-minute in-class written assignments, and two four-page-long journal assignments were used to determine written proficiency. The Speaking Proficiency English Assessment Kit (SPEAK) test was administered twice during the semester, and scores from the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) were analyzed to evaluate students' proficiency in the different skill areas. The in-class written assignments showed lower quality for most students when compared to the out-of-class assignments. The first and second SPEAK-test results were similar for each student. Their TOEFL test results improved the most toward the end of the semester. In comparing the different skills using the data from the three different areas, for two students the scores for the oral tests showed higher levels than their scores for writing, whereas for the two other students the written scores were higher than their oral scores. Comparisons of oral and written scores with the TOEFL results did not show consistency, thus predictions of oral and written proficiency from the TOEFL scores would not be accurate in the case of these four students. The subscores compared from the SPEAK and TOEFL tests and the written assignments did not lead to consistency either. The grammar components in the three areas, SPEAK, TOEFL, and writing, reflected overall scores more than they did a relationship of knowledge of grammar across the different skills. Where the overall score was strong, the grammar subscore was also strong. However, if the. overall score was weak, the grammar subscore was also weak. The results of this study suggest that the proficiency of writing does not guarantee the proficiency of speaking on the same level. Also, the TOEFL test scores are not predictive for the proficiency of speaking or writing.

No description available.

No description available.