Page 1 of 7

Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal – Vol. 10, No. 2

Publication Date: February 25, 2023

DOI:10.14738/assrj.102.14002. Alharbi, O. A., & Alshahrani, R. S. A. (2023). Instructors’ Perceptions of the Training Courses Related to Technology in Saudi

Universities. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 10(2). 241-247.

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

Instructors’ Perceptions of the Training Courses

Related to Technology in Saudi Universities

Omran Ammar Alharbi

Ministry of Education, Makkah city, Saudi Arabia

Razan Saad Ali Alshahrani

Ministry of Education, Najran, Saudi Arabia

Abstract

The focus of this paper in on the training that related to the adoption of technology

in teaching approaches by educators in one Saudi University. Currently, there are

several training courses have provided by institutions to their instructors in Saudi

Arabia universities, however, there is insufficient research was carried out by

researchers in order to investigate the stakeholders’ perceptions of this workshops.

As a result, this study came to examine teacher’s opinion of the raining that

provided to the them by one Saudi University as the results of this study might help

to address the issues that educators encounter when the attaining training courses.

This study used questionnaire for collecting the data from participants. The study

sample consisted of 60 participants. The study findings mentioned that educators

needs sufficient training courses and based on their needs. Also, The study findings

indicated that there is overlapping between the instructors schedules and the time

of the workshops.

Keywords: Saudi Arabia, Professional Development, Training and CPD.

INTRODUCTION

Professional development couniting training are considered to be the most crucial part in terms

of developing educators’ skills (Alharbi et all, 2017; Powell; FureyScott-Evans and Terrell,

2003). In addition to this, Alharb, 2020; Al-Ghonaim, 2005; Butler and Selbom, 2002; indicated

that the key factor for the successful of teaching in universities is CPD. Also, Alharbi and Lally,

2017 mentioned that the CPD can affect the quality of teaching and learning. Educators in Saudi

institutions have exposed to large numbers of training courses especially the workshops that

are regarding to the integration of technology in teaching style. These workshops should help

them to improve their knowledge and skills about the dealing of E-Learning tools that available

to them. Therefore, it is essential to ask instructors of the training courses that offer to them by

their university. This paper aimed to examine educators’ perceptions of CPD that related to the

use of E-Learning tools in their teaching methods in one Saudi university. The results of this

study will offer an important information to decision makers about the CPD that have been

offered to teachers in Saudi universities

RESEARCH QUESTION

What are educators’ perceptions of the training workshops that related to the adoption of

technology in teaching approach in Saudi universities?

Page 2 of 7

242

Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal (ASSRJ) Vol. 10, Issue 2, February-2023

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

LITERATURE REVIEW

In this section the previous research that conducted about the CPD will be presented.

The issue of the insufficient training was mentioned and reported by several studies. For

example, in 2017 Alharbi and Lally conducted a literature review aimed to find out the most

three factors that affected educator’s integration technology in teaching methods. The study

discovered that the poor training that offered to teachers was the most element for preventing

instructor’s integration of technology in their teaching style. The authors recommended that if

the universities planning to improve the quality of teaching and learning in their university,

they should provide effective CPD with high quality of content. Moreover, Johnson et al. (2015)

indicated that there is no compatibility between the software that is viable to educators and the

CPD that they attended. Keengwe et al. (2008) as well as mentioned that educators should

expose to incentive training in order to use the new technology in perfect way.

Mitchell and Geva-May (2009) carried out a study that aimed to investigate faculty members

perceptions of the training sessions that they attended. They discovered that that the

participants complained of the design of the training content which were not based on their

needs. Also, Aminudin,2012 conduced study that aimed to examine the teachers’ perceptions

of the CPD. The results revealed that participants were did not feel that training sessions

improve their technical skills and they indicated that the training session in general was burden

to them. As well as to this, Fathema, Shannon, and Ross (2015) reported that an adequate of

training restricted the implementation of LMSs in teaching methods.

According to Zershkian et al 2019, the CPD should be flexible on its times and should be based

on the educators’ requirements. Educators expect to expose to the CPD that make them more

knowledgeable about the continuing change in education system (Aminudin,2012).

Alharbi, 2020; Almulhem 2013; and Algahtani 2017 reported that more effective and practical

CPD are required for educators in order to adopt the technology in their activities days. Al- Asmari, 2011; Alshammari, 2015; Mirzajani , Mahmud Ayub, and Wong, 2015 indicated that the

principle obstacles to the integration of technology in Saudi education was the insufficient

training. It is essential for universities to understand the main issues that hindering the faculty

members from benefit of the CPD that offered to them since this will help to address or reduce

these issues ( Alharbi, 2020 and ; Mirzajani , Mahmud Ayub, and Wong, 2015).

McGill et all (2014) reported that successful adoption of E-Learning tools by educators in

teaching style are usually depends on an appropriate tanning that provided to them by their

institution.

METHODOLOGY

This paper adopted the questionnaire tool as main tool for collecting the data. The

questionnaire constructed based on the previous research and literature review. The tool

consisted of two sections. The first sections provide general information of the participants

such as their age, gender, qualifications and their college. The second sections of the

questionnaire presented seven questions that related to the research question answer.

Convenience sampling was utilized when distributed the questionnaire to participants. There

were only 62 % of educators who took part in this study. The sample of this study consisted of

Page 3 of 7

243

Alharbi, O. A., & Alshahrani, R. S. A. (2023). Instructors’ Perceptions of the Training Courses Related to Technology in Saudi Universities. Advances

in Social Sciences Research Journal, 10(2). 241-247.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/assrj.102.14002

60 participants who took part in this research from one Saudi university. For ethical

consideration the name of the university did not mention in this paper.

FINDINGS

In this section the findings of the study will be presented. The age, gender, qualification and the

colleges will be mentioned first and then the questions about the research study will be

indicated.

Table 1 bellow presented the participants ages. In more details, the statistics descriptive

conclude that 33.3 of participants were aged 25-35. Also, this percentage were given for 47-57

ages. The lowest number of the participants were in age 58 ang more. However; only 20

percentage of the members were in age between 36-46 year. (See Table 1).

Table 1

Age Group Number of Participants Percent (%)

25 - 35 20 33.3

36 - 46 12 20.0

47 - 57 20 33.3

58 + 8 13.3

Total 60 100

Table 2 bellow shown the participates gender. The table indicates that the educator

participants were 56.7% males and 43.3 % females. (See Table2)

Table 2

Gender Number of Participants Percent (%)

Male 34 56.7

Female 26 43.3

Total 60 100

Table 3 discovered the teacher participants qualifications. The descriptive statics shown that

participants who have doctoral degree was the large group of the study sample within 60 %

while instructors who have master and bachelor degree were 26.7 % and 13.3% respectively.

Table 3

Educational Level Number of Participants Percent (%)

Bachelor's 8 13.3

Master's 16 26.7

Doctoral 36 60

Total 60 100

The descriptive statistics in Table 4 report that educator participants from the school of

education were the largest number with 33.3%. However; the lowest number of participants

was from the Arabic Language, Law, Medicine and Nursing with only 3.3 % respectively. Only

13.3% of participants where from the English language and Business Colleges.

Page 4 of 7

244

Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal (ASSRJ) Vol. 10, Issue 2, February-2023

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

Table 4

College Number of Participants Percent (%)

Arabic Language 2 3.3

Business 8 13.3

Computer Science 4 6.7

Education 20 33.3

English Language 8 13.3

Islamic Studies 6 10.0

Law 2 3.3

Medicine 2 3.3

Nursing 2 3.3

Pharmacy 4 6.7

Others 2 3.3

Total 60 100

RESEARCH QUESTION: SUMMARY RESULTS

The results revealed that teacher participants in general were not satisfied with the training

courses that provided to them by their institutions in terms of the trainers qualified,

participating in the content, the content of the training courses and the time when the

workshops take place. For instance, on statement ''The trainers were highly qualified''

Only 36.7 % were agreed and strongly agreed about this statement while 43.3% disagreed and

strongly disagreed. And only 20% were undecided.

For statement '' There was no overlap between my lectures time and the time of the training

courses '' the total of 53.3 % of participants reported that they found difficulty to attend the

training workshop as it is overlapping with their schedule lectures whereas 33.3 % of the

participants did not find any problems for attending the workshops. Participants indicated that

the training courses did not construct based on their requirements as 73.3% of participants

were strongly disagree and disagree with the stamen '' The content of the training course was

based on my needs'' compared with inly 20 % agreed and 33.3% undecided.

For the statement '' I am able to participate in the design of the training courses'' almost half of

the faculty members (50%) did not agree with this stamen while 36.6% agreed.

For the stamen '' The training courses were burden to me'' only 33.3 % of participants were

strongly agree and the same percentage was given by them in terms of strongly disagree and

disagree. Also, 33.3 % of participants did not decide.

Page 5 of 7

245

Alharbi, O. A., & Alshahrani, R. S. A. (2023). Instructors’ Perceptions of the Training Courses Related to Technology in Saudi Universities. Advances

in Social Sciences Research Journal, 10(2). 241-247.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/assrj.102.14002

Table 5

Questions Strongly

Agree

Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly

Disagree

M SD

The training that has

provided to me by mu

university has assisted me

in terms of using

technology in my teaching

6 28 2 14 10 2.51 1.337

(10%) (46.7%) (3.3%) (23.3%) (16.7%)

The trainers were highly

qualified

6 16 12 12 14 2.80 1.338

(10%) (26.7%) (20%) (20%) (23.3%)

There was no overlap

between my lectures time

and the time of the

training courses.

0 32 2 12 14 2.87 1.295

(0%) (53.3%) (3.3%) (20%) (23.3%)

The content of the training

course was based on my

needs.

4 8 4 24 20 2.20 1.232

(6.7%) (13.3%) (6.7%) (40%) (33.3%)

I am able to participate in

the design of the training

courses.

8 14 8 14 16 2.73 1.425

(13.3%) (23.3%) (13.3%) (23.3%) (26.7%)

The training courses were

burden to me

6 14 20 14 6 3.00 1.135

(10%) (23.3%) (33.3%) (23.3%) (10%)

There was no benefit of

attending the training

courses

16 18 10 12 4 3.50 1.269

(26.7%) (30%) (16.7%) (20%) (6.7%)

DISCUSSION

Staff claimed that they were provided with very little training on the LMS, and any training that

did exist was of poor quality. The results from the questionnaire revealed that the participants

gave a relatively low score to the statement “the CPD provided by my university has helped me to

improve my skills using eLearning.” The average score on this statement was 2.51. Likewise,

previous research such as that conducted in the USA by Porter et al. (2014) reported a general

failure among institutions to deliver the training courses that teachers required in order to

improve their skills. Moreover, a study in Tanzania by Kisanga (2016) specifically highlighted

that CPD related to the use and knowledge of eLearning was an area that needed improvement.

Moreover, the questionnaire participants in this thesis scored relatively high on the statement,

“there was an overlap between scheduled lectures and CPD training courses.” The average score

on this statement was 3.72. Comparably, previous research carried out in the USA by Taylor

and McQuiggan (2008) pointed out the two issues that prevented academic staff from enrolling

on training courses: limited time and a lack of flexibility regarding how the training fitted in

with their existing schedules. Additionally, a study in the United Arab Emirates by Badri et al.

(2016) reported that 42.8% of educators indicated that professional development conflicted

with their work schedule. Also related to CPD, the questionnaire participants in this thesis on

average provided relatively low scores to the statement that CPD was provided based on

teachers’ demand. The average score on this statement was 2.40. Correspondingly, previous

research done in the UK by Hustler, McNamara, Jarvis, Londra, and Campbell (2003) asserted

Page 6 of 7

246

Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal (ASSRJ) Vol. 10, Issue 2, February-2023

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

that CPD should reflect educators’ requirements and their aspirations. The authors found that

the majority (63%) of teachers agreed that the CPD did not meet their needs. Porter et al. (2014)

stated that institutions should provide workshops based on the educators’ needs if they wanted

to improve the integration of ICT into the curriculum.

Finally, in relation to academics’ participation in the design of CPD courses, the questionnaire

participants on average assigned a low score of 2.13, suggesting that they did not participate in

designing CPD training courses . This result is in agreement with previous research. For

example, Taylor and McQuigga (2008) found that the people designing training courses made

assumptions about the needs of academic staff, rather than asking them directly what their

training needs were. Additionally, Sywelem and Witte (2013) found that 83% of teachers

agreed that they were not involved in determining the topics and content of CPD activities.

Moreover, Al-asmar (2009) stated that teachers were not asked for their perceptions about the

content of the courses they attended. And recently, a study conducted in Canada by Zershkian

et al. (2019) mentioned that educators were not involved in designing CPD courses. The authors

suggested that institutions should allow the participants to be involved in the design of CPD

courses, and that the barriers faced by educators to attending training courses should be

removed. This will improve the benefits derived from CPD courses.

CONCLUSION

This paper attempted to examine the educators’ perceptions of the CPD that regarding of the

adoption of technology in their teaching methods.

Perceptions of academic teaching staff of the CPD offered by their universities on eLearning.

They highlighted that CPD did not improve their skills in utilising eLearning as relevant work- based training on eLearning was limited and the trainers were largely unqualified. The

educators called for more effective CPD to improve the utilisation of eLearning in higher

education, such as work-based training that is pedagogically underpinned and provides

opportunities to learn about the theory and technical knowledge, in addition to the practical

application of knowledge and skills.

References

Al Mulhem, A. (2013) Developing an e-learning training package for academic staff in one university in Saudi

Arabia. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Plymouth.

Al-Asmari, A. (2011) Evaluating the prospects of integrating technology in pre-service EFL teacher training. Arab

world English journal, 2(2): 133-166.

Algahtani, M. (2017) Factors influencing the adoption of learning management systems in the Kingdom of Saudi

Arabian universities by female academic staff. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of RMIT

Al-Ghonaim, H. S. A. (2005). Attitudes, barriers and incentives of Saudi college instructors and administrators

toward implementation of online instruction. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Kansas.

Alharb, A.O.A. (2020). Improving the current use of eLearning in two newly established Saudi universities from

teaching staff and student perspectives.

Alharbi, O. and Lally, V., 2017. Adoption of e-learning in Saudi Arabian University education: Three factors

affecting educators. European Journal of Open Education and E-learning Studies.

Page 7 of 7

247

Alharbi, O. A., & Alshahrani, R. S. A. (2023). Instructors’ Perceptions of the Training Courses Related to Technology in Saudi Universities. Advances

in Social Sciences Research Journal, 10(2). 241-247.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/assrj.102.14002

Alharbi, O., Alotebi, H., Masmali, A. and Alreshidi, N., 2017. Instructor acceptance of Mobile learning in Saudi

Arabia: A case study of Hail University. International Journal of Business and Management, 12(5), pp.27-35.

Alshammari, M. S. (2015) Academics’ Adoption and Usage of Learning Management Systems in Saudi Arabia’s

Universities. Unpublished PhD Thesis, De Montfort University of Leicester.

Aminudin, N.A., 2012. Teachers’ perceptions of the impact of professional development on teaching practice: The

case of one primary school (Master's thesis).

Butler, D. L., and Sellbom, M. (2002) Barriers to adopting technology. Educause Quarterly, 2: 22-28.

Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Estrada, V., and Freeman, A. (2015) NMC Horizon Report: 2015 Library Edition.

Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.

Keengwe, J., Onchwari, G., and Wachira, P. (2008) Computer technology integration and student learning:

Barriers and promise. Journal of science education and technology, 17(6): 560-565.

McGill, T. J., Klobas, J. E., and Renzi, S. (2014) Critical success factors for the continuation of e-learning initiatives.

The Internet and Higher Education, 22: 24-36.

Mirzajani, H., Mahmud, R., Ayub, A. F. M., and Wong, S. L. (2015) A review of research literature on obstacles that

prevent use of ICT in pre-service teachers' educational courses. International Journal of Education and Literacy

Studies, 3(2): 25-35

Mitchell, B., and Geva-May, I. (2009) Attitudes affecting online learning implementation in higher education.

International Journal of E-Learning and Distance Education, 23(1): 71-88.

Powell, E.D., Furey, S., Scott-Evans, A. and Terrell, I., 2003. Teachers' perceptions of the impact of CPD: an

institutional case study ed. Journal of In-service Education, 29(3), pp.389-404.

Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Glasgow.