Özet:

This paper is based on an in-progress project to detect challenges in the early stages of courseware development. An understanding of the perceptions and factors that motivate or impede faculty in the development of online course materials for their various undergraduate and diploma courses is to address and strengthen courseware development. The initiatives have been taken in the area of open courseware development for all undergraduate studies and the postgraduate diploma in education, PDDE at the University of Ilorin, Nigeria that is a pioneer in this regard in the country. A pure quantitative method using descriptive survey approach was adopted. Questionnaire was used for data collection. A test-retest reliability was embarked upon to determine the reliability of the questionnaire.  A statistical package for social sciences (SPSS) was used to analyze the data and method of analysis included: percentages and frequency count. The findings reveal factors hindering faculty contribution to courseware development to include: lack of experience or orientation on courseware development, lack of motivation for faculty, lack of familiarity with courseware, etcetera. Adequate technical support is necessary for the lecturers to continue courseware development smoothly. Keywords: open access; open courseware; institutional repositories; courseware development; developing countries; Africa; Nigeria References         Allen, I. E. & Seaman, J.(2003). Sizing the Opportunity: The Quality and Extent of Online Education in the United States, 2002–2003. Needham, Mass.: Sloan Center for Online Education. Retrieved 23 December, 2011 from http://www.sloan-c.org Antelman, K. (2004). Do open-access articles have a greater research impact? College & Research Libraries, 65(5), 372-382. Association of American Universities (AAU). (1999). AAU Intellectual property task force report on intellectual property and new media technologies. Retrieved 5 December, 2011 http://www.tulane.edu/~aau/IPNewMediaReport.html.Association of Research Libraries. (2004) Framing the issue: open access. Available at: www.arl.org/bm~doc/ framing_issue_may04.pdf/ Accessed on 4 August 2011. Avraamidou, Lucy & Zembal-Saul, C. Exploring the Influence of Web-based Portfolio Development on learning to Teach Elementary Science. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education 11(3,: 415-442. Bauer, W. & Dunn, R. (2003). Digital Reflection: The Electronic Portfolio in Music Teacher Education .Journal of Music Teacher Education 13 (1), 7-20. Barkley, E. (2001).From Bach to Tupac: Using an Electronic Course Portfolio to Analyze a Curricular Transformation.” Electronic Portfolios: Emerging Practices in Student, Faculty, and Institutional Learning. Ed. Barbara Cambridge, Susan Kahn, Daniel Thompkins, and Kathleen Blake Yancey. Washington, DC: American Association of Higher Education, 117-123. Beng, S. T.& Seh, L. S (2007). Achieving incremental successes in courseware development through prototyping, Ascilite, Learning Academy. Pp. 1-6. Budapest Open Access Initiative. (2002) Available at: http://www.soros.org/openaccess/read.shtml Accessed on 2 May 2011. Carnevale, D. & Young, J. (1999). Who owns online courses? Colleges and professors start to sort it out. Chronicle of Higher Education. pp. A45. Chavez, R., Crane, G., Sauer, A., Babeu, A., Packel, A. and Weaver, G. (2007) Services make the repository. Journal of Digital Information, 8(2). Available: http://journals.tdl.org/jodi/article/view/195/179 Retrieved on 25 August 2011 Cho, Y, Brown, G. (2007).Inter/National Coalition for Electronic Portfolio Research: Final Report from Washington State University, July DeVellis, R.F. (1991) Scale development, Sage Publications, Newbury Park. Georgiadou, E. & Higgett, N. (1998). The Design of Web Based Hypermedia Courseware in Higher Education. International Conference Graphicon, Russia http://www.graphicon.ru/ Accessed on 4 August 2011. Ghosh, S. B.& Das, A. K. (2007). Open Access and Institutional Repositories – A developing Country Perspective: a case study of India. IFLA Journal (33:229), 229-251. Gustafson, K.L. & Branch, R.M. (1997). Survey of instructional development models. Syracuse, New York: ERIC Clearinghouse on Information & Technology. Hardin, J.,  Cañero, A. (2010). Faculty and Student Perspectives Toward Open Courseware, and Open Access Publishing: Some Comparisons Between European and North American Populations. In Open ED 2010 Proceedings. Barcelona: UOC, OU, BYU. Retrieved from: http://hdl.handle.net/10609/5261/ Accessed on 2 May 2011. Hickey, A. M. & Davis, A. M. (2003). Elicitation Technique Selection: How Do Experts Do it? Proceedings of the 11th International Requirements Engineering Conference, pp. 169-180. Israel G. (2003). Determining Sample Size, Program Evaluation and Organizational Development, IFAS. PEOD-6. Florida (FL): University of Florida. Kasirun, Z., (2005). A survey on the requirements elicitation practices among courseware developers. Malaysian Journal of Computer Science, (18:1) 70-77 Kelly, K. B. (2000). Courseware Development for Distance Education: Issues and Policy Models for Faculty Ownership, University of Maryland, University College Leshin, C., Pollock, J. & Reigeluth, C. (1992). Instructional design: Strategies and tactics for improving learning and performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications Menyhart, A. 2008. teachers or lecturers? The motivational profile of university teachers of english, WoPaLP, 2, 2-4. Na Liu, Cheng Yi, John Lim (2009). A Multiple-Case Study of The Instructor's Roles in Courseware Development, HICSS, pp.1-10, 42nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Pinfield, S., Gardner, M.,  & MacColl, J. (2002) Setting up an institutional e-print archive. Available at: www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue31/eprintarchives/ Accessed on 2 May 2011. Seels, B. & Richey, R. (1994). Instructional Technology: The definitions and domains of the field. Washington, DC: Association for Educational Communications and Technology Shavelson, R. J., & Stern, P. (1981). Research on teachers’ pedagogical thoughts, judgments, decision and behavior. Review of Educational Research, 51, 455-498. Teo, T., Chai, C. S., Hung, D. & Lee, C. B. (2008). Beliefs about teaching and uses of technology among pre-service teachers. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 36 (2) 163–17 The Node Learning Technologies Network. (1999). The rights stuff: Ownership in the digital academy (Learning Technologies Report), Fall. St. Catharines, ON Canada: Author. (http://theNode.org). Tripp, S. & Bichelmeyer, B. (1990). Rapid prototyping: An alternative instructional design strategy. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 38(1), 31-44. van Westrienen, G., & Lynch, C. A. (2005). Academic institutional repositories: Deployment status in 13 nations as of mid 2005. D-Lib Magazine, 11(9), 1-12. Windschitl, M. & Sahl, K. (2002). Tracing Teachers' Use of Technology in a Laptop Computer School:  The Interplay of Teacher Beliefs, Social Dynamics, and Institutional  Culture. American Educational Research Journal. 39 (1), 165-205. Yiotis, K. (2005). The open access initiative: A new paradigm for scholarly communications. Information Technology & Libraries, 24(4), 157-162.

Anahtar Kelimeler: