�������� ����� ��

Using Bourdieu’s theory of practice to understand ICT use amongst nurseeducators

Odessa Petit-dit-Dariel, Heather Wharrad, Richard Windle

PII: S0260-6917(14)00046-XDOI: doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2014.02.005Reference: YNEDT 2681

To appear in: Nurse Education Today

Accepted date: 12 February 2014

Please cite this article as: Petit-dit-Dariel, Odessa, Wharrad, Heather, Windle, Richard,Using Bourdieu’s theory of practice to understand ICT use amongst nurse educators,Nurse Education Today (2014), doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2014.02.005

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication.As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript.The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proofbefore it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production processerrors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers thatapply to the journal pertain.

ACC

EPTE

D M

ANU

SCR

IPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Title: USING BOURDIEU’S THEORY OF PRACTICE TO UNDERSTAND ICT USE

AMONGST NURSE EDUCATORS

Authors:

Petit-dit-Dariel, Odessa, RN, Ph.D

Associate Professor, Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Santé Publique, Département des Sciences

Infirmières et Paramédicales, Paris, France

odessa.petitditdariel@ehesp.fr

Wharrad, Heather, Ph.D

Chair in e-Learning and Health Informatics, School of Nursing, Midwifery and

Physiotherapy, University of Nottingham, Nottingham,UK

Room B52 Queen's Medical Centre, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham, NG7 2UH

heather.wharrad@nottingham.ac.uk

Windle, Richard, Ph.D

Senior Lecturer, School of Nursing, Midwifery and Physiotherapy, University of Nottingham,

Nottingham,UK

Room B52 Queen's Medical Centre, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham, NG7 2UH

richard.windle@nottingham.ac.uk

Corresponding author:

Odessa Petit dit Dariel, Ph.D (Present address and affiliation)

Associate Professor, Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Santé Publique, Département des Sciences

Infirmières et Paramédicales, Paris, France

75 rue du Chevaleret, Paris, 75013 France

Tel: 00 33(0)7 86 44 93 84

odessa.petitditdariel@ehesp.fr

No conflict of interest

No external funding

Word count: 4991

ACC

EPTE

D M

ANU

SCR

IPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Using Bourdieu’s Theory of Practice to understand ICT use amongst nurse educators

ABSTRACT

Background: Implementing changes in practice in either clinical or educational settings

remains challenging. In the context of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT)

adoption, the literature either focuses on organisational factors influencing its implementation,

or individual factors influencing its adoption into practice. Separately both fail to examine the

issue holistically. Bourdieu’s Theory of Practice provides a method for reconciling the two.

Objective: To provide a practical example of how Bourdieu’s theory of practice can be

employed to better understand nurse educators’ responses to ICT.

Design: Exploratory descriptive design, using a Bourdieusian case-study to guide

documentary analysis.

Methods: In 2009 a two-part study was conducted within a department of nursing (DON) in

higher education (HE) in England. First Bourdieu’s Theory of Practice was used to develop a

case-study; then nurse educators were recruited for a Q-methodology (Q) study. This paper

focuses exclusively on the case study and the use of the Theory of Practice to interpret the

findings from the Q-study.

Results: Nursing’s transition into academia, promotions criteria in HE and the value placed

on research over teaching have influenced educators’ responses to technology.

Conclusion: The use of Bourdieu’s framework provides a rich and contextual backdrop for

understanding how organisational factors interact to influence individuals’ responses to

technology adoption.

Keywords: Theory of Practice, Bourdieu, technology adoption, nursing, change management,

higher education, e-learning

ACC

EPTE

D M

ANU

SCR

IPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Using Bourdieu’s Theory of Practice to understand ICT use amongst nurse educators

INTRODUCTION

Implementing new and better ways of practicing in clinical or educational settings remains a

challenge across the globe. It requires a holistic analysis of different factors at macro, meso

and micro levels. When it comes to adopting new technologies, there is a plethora of literature

reporting on either the critical success factors (CSF) (Selim, 2007) required when

implementing technology across institutions, or those related to its integration into practice.

Yet both are two critical phases of the same multifaceted process.

The macro and meso-levels demand an examination of the political-economic and

institutional context required to implement an e-learning strategy (see Selim, 2007; Bruner,

2007; Legris et al., 2003; McPherson and Nunes 2008); whilst the micro level looks at

academics’ intentions to use technology in their courses (see Walker and Johnson, 2008; Liaw

et al, 2007; Mahdizadeh et al., 2008). Neither approach alone, however, provides a holistic

view of how these different levels of analysis interact.

In 2009, a research study addressed this by examining technology adoption through the lens

of Pierre Bourdieu’s socio-cultural framework (Theory of Practice). Bourdieu’s three main

concepts (habitus, capital and field) were operationalized for data collection and analysis. A

case-study was developed to examine the field surrounding e-learning adoption in higher

education (HE), and to identify the recognised forms of capital. The third concept, habitus,

was operationalized using Q-methodology, the results of which are described fully elsewhere

(xx 2010; xx 2012). The advantage of using Bourdieu’s (1977) theory is that it challenges the

dichotomy noted in the literature between the institutional factors and the individual factors

offering a model for reconciling these two perspectives. This paper focuses on the use of

ACC

EPTE

D M

ANU

SCR

IPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Bourdieu’s framework to develop a case-study for the analysis of the Q-study findings and

post-sort interviews.

BACKGROUND

ICT adoption in HE

Understanding ICT adoption in teaching practice remains complex. Many studies have

employed university-wide, cross-disciplinary surveys (such as in Mahdizadeh et al., 2008 and

Zhen et al., 2008) that identified a number of generic factors (e.g.. lack of time, training and

limited infrastructure). Yet most fail to examine the underlying issues causing these generic

factors to influence some groups of educators but not others, and more importantly, do not

recognise the impact of disciplines on these choices. Other studies approach technology

adoption only from an individual perspective, focusing primarily on internal factors (e.g.

computer competence, perceived usefulness), without taking into consideration the

organizational factors. This paper seeks to provide a practical model for combining both

external and internal factors by examining the influence of socio-cultural structures on

individual behaviour using Bourdieu’s Theory of Practice.

BOURDIEU’S THEORY OF PRACTICE

When exploring social systems, both social psychology and sociology are useful to examine

behaviour within structural constraints. Yet these two approaches tend to focus on either

macro or micro-levels of analysis. Bourdieu argued that analysing objective structures at the

macro-level inevitably carried over into the analysis of subjective micro-level responses, thus

destroying this artificial division (Bourdieu and de St. Martin, 1982). Bourdieu’s Theory of

Practice thus enables this dualism to co-exist by linking behaviour to social structures through

three main concepts (Vaughan, 2008) that are central to understanding practice: habitus, field

and capital (Figure 1):

ACC

EPTE

D M

ANU

SCR

IPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Field

When exploring social phenomena Bourdieu argued that it was insufficient to look only at

what was said or what had happened. To understand behaviour, or practice, it was necessary

to examine the social space in which it took place (Bourdieu, 2005). Developing the field is

therefore a significant area of investigation in research projects underpinned by Bourdieu’s

theory as it helps explain the behaviour of the actors within it.

The field is often described as a “game” defined by rules or forces exerted by actors playing it

(James, 1998). All actors bring capital to the game providing them with more, or less, power

to influence these rules. The game results in a fluid and shifting mix of alliances, negotiations,

agreements and conflicts between the actors. The field is never static but changes over time as

power dynamics challenge its boundaries and the recognised forms of capital. Bourdieu

describes the interactions occurring within the field as “struggles,” in which actors

strategically operate to maximise their positions. This is not always necessarily for financial

gain (economic capital), but can include any attempt to improve their acquisition of different

forms of capital.

Capital

Bourdieu field is described as highly competitive, with actors competing to maintain or

improve their position. At stake is the accumulation of capital, which is found in four

different forms: 1) economic (salary, tuition); 2) social (peers, networks); 3) cultural

(education, socio-demographic); and 4) symbolic (reputation, respect, status). The volume and

composition of capital that actors possess, and the degree of valuation of that capital within

the field, allows different actors to “wield power, or influence, and thus to exist, in the field

under consideration” (Bourdieu and Wacquant, 1992, p.98). Differences in actors’ acquisition

of capital equate to differences in power, which is itself dependent on the structure of the

ACC

EPTE

D M

ANU

SCR

IPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

field, their specific location within it, and on the personal, social and career trajectories

(habitus) by which they have arrived in the field (Vaughn, 2008).

Habitus

Habitus is Bourdieu’s solution for incorporating culture and tradition into his theoretical

framework and explain features of social life that are not always explicit (Thompson, 2008).

Habitus is defined as the set of dispositions embodied as a result of personal experiences,

backgrounds, professions and circumstances, and manifested as the interplay between the

individual and the collective. As such, habitus is seen as underlying actions as dictated by the

unconscious relationship between capital and field.

When employing Bourdieu’s theory, the field should not be perceived as a single structure but

rather as a series of smaller fields of social practice. Figure 2 illustrates how a collective of

individuals within a subculture (H – for habitus), in this case nurse academics, operates within

layered fields each conferring different levels of influence on the collective within them. The

first field is a department within a university system, which itself is contained within a wider

field, influenced by external forces, such as regulatory bodies like the Nursing and Midwifery

Council (NMC) and the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE). At the

macro-level the capitalist system influences the socio-economic and political fields which

exert a global influence on the internal fields. The smaller circles (H) are seen as being

influenced both by subjective and collective factors and the external influences of the wider

fields.

THE STUDY

ACC

EPTE

D M

ANU

SCR

IPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Objective

The aim of this paper is to provide a practical example of how Bourdieu’s theory was

employed to provide greater insight into the interaction between context and behaviour, using

technology adoption amongst nurse educators as an example.

Design

The two-part study adopted an exploratory descriptive design, combining a Bourdieusian

case-study with Q-methodology (Table 2 for Q-statements). The case study offered a

backdrop from which to analyse the Q-data and explore how the context (field and capital)

had influenced nurse educators’ responses (habitus) to ICT. It is this application of

Bourdieu’s theoretical framework that is the focus of this paper.

Setting/Population

One institution of HE in the UK (renamed Hillgate University or HU) and its Division of

Nursing (DON) was used to develop this in-depth case-study.

Data collection

This Bourdieusian case study was guided by Vaughan (1996; 2008) who reconstructed the

events leading up to the launch and explosion of the Space Shuttle Challenger in1986. This

tragic event occurred despite protests by engineers over the Solid Rocket Boosters and

demonstrated a clear case of managerial neglect, poor judgment and flawed decision-making

in a culture of high-risk technology. Using Bourdieu’s theory Vaughan examined the context

surrounding this event and revealed how and why, despite being repeatedly faced with

evidence that something was wrong, NASA managers normalized the deviance so that it

became acceptable to them. To conduct her analysis, Vaughan included a combination of

secondary data sources as well as interviews with key participants to illuminate the micro-

dynamics of conflict and the social reproduction of capital.

ACC

EPTE

D M

ANU

SCR

IPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Similarly, in this current study, a wide lens sought to identify the external issues forming the

macro-level field through a comprehensive review of the literature in nursing, higher

education, healthcare and government policy. Next the lens was narrowed to the meso-level

field to examine the artefacts from the institution of HE and the DON in which the study took

place (Table 1). The artefacts chosen were internal documents, such as formal strategies,

policies, minutes from meetings, contributions to online discussion forums by the DON’s e-

learning community and internal newsletters, specifically selected to identify the tensions

existing within the organization-as-field (Vaughan, 2008) in terms of the valued forms of

capital.

(NB: Titles of documents and publications produced by HU are modified to maintain

anonymity but can be provided on request).

Ethical considerations

Ethical clearance was granted by the University Medical School ethics committee (Ethics

Reference No: D/2/2009, Medical School Research Ethics Committee), ensuring that all

physical data would be stored in a locked office with no identifiable characteristics and that

all data would be on a password-protected file on an office computer.

Data analysis

Of primary interest when developing the field is the relationship, or tension, within and across

the different structures that might influence practice. This was thus the focus when examining

the literature and the documents selected as artefacts to develop the case-study. These were

examined for evidence of valued forms of capital in terms of how they influenced responses

to technology adoption. Following Vaughan’s (1996) method, the artefacts were analysed

using inductive analogical comparison. This allowed the technique to become more

ACC

EPTE

D M

ANU

SCR

IPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

systematic over time as differences and analogies were noted between the existing repertoires

of theories and concepts and the artefacts and the wider literature from the macro-level field.

Some examples of tensions were issues surrounding the “essence” of nursing; academic

versus clinical skills; the value of research versus teaching in academia; the changing role and

image of nursing; and the debate between degree versus non-degree nurses. As a specific

example, one of the tensions identified between academia and nursing practice concerned the

types of skills (cultural capital) that should be developed in nursing students: should the

curriculum focus on developing transferrable academic competencies (e.g. critical thinking)

or technical nursing interventions (e.g. dressing changes)? Such a choice ultimately influences

the curriculum and subsequent pedagogical strategies, and thus was considered relevant.

Artefacts were also examined for evidence of differences between explicit and implicit levels

of power and influence on what was recognized as capital. Questions guiding the analysis of

artefacts included: Do certain academic activities garner more rewards and recognition than

others? What is the level of support for ICT use across HU and the DON? What is the rhetoric

surrounding ICT in teaching across HU and the DON? What are the various forms of valued

capital (degrees, grants, teaching, job titles, clinical competence, reputation, links with other

disciplines)? Is there a struggle over different forms of capital (cultural, symbolic, social or

economic) or between different species of the same capital (level of educational degrees;

number or value of grants received)?

FINDINGS

Macro-level

Understanding behaviour requires an examination of both the current field and its historical

development, thus highlighting its dynamic ever-changing process (Bourdieu, 1990). Indeed,

it is not only the volume and composition of capital within a field that is important, but also

ACC

EPTE

D M

ANU

SCR

IPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

its trajectory over time. Nursing’s journey from vocational to academic points to the changing

nature of nursing and its shifting forms of capital. Before entering academia, nurse tutors in

England working within the National Health Service (NHS) teaching colleges valued forms of

capital related to hospital reputation, clinical competence and pedagogical skills (Caldwell,

1997). It was the role modelling of the “essence” of nursing as defined by hands-on patient

care that was considered of primary importance (Caldwell, 1997). Once in HE these forms of

capital were no longer valued since prestige and honour in academia were associated with

other activities, such as those surrounding research, publications and grants (James, 1998).

In HE the reputation of an academic is a form of symbolic capital and is related to and

converted back into other forms of capital, such as social and economic capital. Nurses’

move to HE from hospital training colleges was not a smooth transition. Fulton (1996, p.157)

has described academia as being stratified into “noble” and less noble disciplines; ancient and

new universities; and professors and lesser staff. As a new academic discipline, nursing was

not recognised as holding equal status compared to the more established disciplines (Luker et

al., 1995). This inequality is described as the “bedpans and brooms” repertoire (McNamara,

2008) with nursing perceived as a Trojan horse smuggled into academia, thus diminishing the

status of traditional forms of capital (Watson and Thompson, 2004; McNamara, 2008).

Nurse educators found themselves required to earn HE’s valued forms of capital. Justifiably,

concerns abounded among nurse tutors about integrating a system that would not understand

the complexity of their role and the importance of their teaching remit (Miers, 2002). While

the move to HE was considered by some as an opportunity for nursing to gain a new form of

capital (academic recognition), the coveted capital was also perceived as conflicting with

their own professional habitus (O’Connor, 2007).

ACC

EPTE

D M

ANU

SCR

IPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

This brief exploration into the forms of capital making up the currency within HE

demonstrates the journey nursing has had to make since arriving in academia. This, as will be

further described below, influenced the time educators were willing to make to experiment

with new forms of teaching, such as developing e-learning, since they perceived valued forms

of capital in other academic activities.

Meso-level

Recognised as a member of the “Russell Group”1, HU is located in the dominant sector of the

HE field. Promotional materials present HU as one of the world's best universities, known for

its commitment to learning and research, with high results in past Quality Assurance Agency

(QAA) assessments, Research Assessment Exercises and international league tables (HU

website; HU brochure; HU Plan 2007-2010). According to its University Plan 2007-2010, its

mission was to become the world’s greatest university, distinguished for its international

reach, its commitment to learning and its research.

As a member of the Russell Group, HU’s core emphasis on research can be expected and is

promoted as a means for providing the context for excellent teaching (HU website and

prospectus 2011; HU Plan 2007-2010). Whilst HU points to the complementary relationship

between the activities of research and teaching, James (1998) identified a conflict between the

two. In his study academics experienced tension when focusing on teaching, as this activity

was seen as systematically undervalued by superiors and colleagues who saw teaching-

focused staff as unlikely to gain promotion (James, 1998).

1 The Russell Group represents twenty-four UK universities committed to “maintaining the best research,

outstanding teaching and learning experiences and unrivalled links with business and the public sector”

(http://www.russellgroup.ac.uk/about-russell-group/)

ACC

EPTE

D M

ANU

SCR

IPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Similarly, Fox (1992) investigated publication productivity amongst academics from four

different disciplines, looking at their declared interests and time commitments. He found a

strain between research and teaching because in practice “good”, or at least productive

researchers, had less classroom contact with students, spent fewer hours preparing for courses

and considered teaching much less important than research (Fox, 1992, p.301). Whilst these

are both dated studies recent reports continue to identify similar tensions between research

and teaching (Hughes, 2009; OLTF, 2011).

There are signs, however, that the value placed on research over teaching might be changing

across HE and this was reflected at HU, even if the reasons were not clearly pedagogical.

Economic constraints have moved students to being perceived as “consumers”, with greater

interest placed on widening participation to balance the significant budget cuts expected from

the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) (Learning, Teaching &

Assessment Strategy 2009-2012). Attempts to increase tuition revenue by widening

participation has demanded that Hillgate explore more flexible learning options and focus on

the needs of their student-consumers (Learning, Teaching & Assessment Strategy 2009-

2012). This catering to students’ needs led to investments in IT totalling more than £13

million (Strategic ICT toolkit 2010; Widening participation strategic assessment 2009-2012).

Such substantial investments can suggest a strong commitment to improving teaching through

ICT, with added attempts at creating a supportive and encouraging platform for staff to

experiment with technologies in their teaching. This can be seen as a means of adding

teaching and e-learning as new forms of valued capital. Yet, change is slow and traditional

forms of capital continue to be highly prized due to the macro fields of power still exerting

influence on HE, as seen in the criteria set by the Research Excellence Framework (REF2014

“Weighting of research impact confirmed” 2011). Additional evidence of traditional forms of

valued capital at HU were the promotions to chair during 2009-2010, which showed that only

ACC

EPTE

D M

ANU

SCR

IPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

two out of the twenty promotions were based on a strong teaching portfolio, while the rest

were promoted on their research achievements (HU website “Academic promotions for

2010”).

In HU’s DON these tensions were similarly reflected. An examination of the externally-facing

image of the DON showed an emphasis on the value placed on research. The DON’s website

clearly markets the strengths of the Division as measured by their research activities,

commenting that “staff are active in research, pursuing academic excellence together with

clinical relevance with the aim of becoming one of the leading research units in healthcare

sciences within the UK” (DON website, 2011). There is no text that speaks to teaching,

pedagogy or e-learning.

Micro-level

The use of Q to operationalize habitus sought to explore how nurse educators within the DON

at HU had responded to ICT within their field (xx, 2012). Table 3 briefly outlines the four

Factors (groups) found in this Q-study. This section highlights participants’ comments from

the Factors and links them to the case-study to explore how the micro-level reveals a

reflection of the macro and meso-level fields.

Despite significant investments made in promoting ICT at HU, the nurse educators in three of

the four Q-Factors did not think enough had been done to support staff. This points to the

different interpretations that can be made of institutional “support” and what constitutes

appropriate “incentives”. HU perceived support as infrastructure, equipment and training

(implementation) whilst staff interpreted the concept more ambiguously, relating it to

institutionally-recognised and valued forms of capital.

Indeed while three of the four Factors expected their organisation to support and provide

adequate incentives, they did not necessarily agree on the form these external drivers might

ACC

EPTE

D M

ANU

SCR

IPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

take. Q-statement #46: There are adequate incentives to use e-learning in the division of

nursing was placed in the negative columns by Factors A, B and C, pointing to the difficulty

institutions have when both defining and implementing “adequate incentives” and show that

these can be interpreted differently by educators and strategic and operational managers.

For Factor A, incentives were the benefits they perceived for their students, “small pots of

money,” but also increased capital value: “…across HE where it’s becoming more focused

around integrating technology within your teaching, so not money, but kind of raising the

profile and saying this isn’t going away and it’s important part of what you do” (Factor

A/Sta2). For Factor C, unmotivated by ICT, incentives took the form of mandates: “…they

could just make it mandatory…and then you have to do it, you have no choice.” (Factor

C/Sta5). Not surprisingly, Factor B who had not spent any time exploring the use of ICT, had

not noticed any incentives, “I don’t think there are really any incentives. I mean you don’t

necessarily get anything more out of doing an e-learning session than you would if you were

actually teaching the session.” Factor D placed statement #46 in the middle column because

incentives, like time, were something intrinsically driven, noting it was “about this internal

stuff again, that you’re a self-driver...” (Factor D/Ops27).

Thus for academics to take advantage of institutional support and incentives they need to

recognise it and feel motivated to do so. As noted by Factor A, “if it’s something you agree

with then it’s something you make time for” (Sta6). Even for those in Factor D who did not

engage deeply with technology, a lack of time was recognised as an excuse: “ “I do not have

enough time” is the same as “I do not make enough time” because I’m using my time to do

other things…we’re all given, on paper, one day of professional development. You choose

what you do in that day and people will prioritise what it is they want to develop” (Ops#27).

This concept was supported by Factor B who took responsibility for their non-engagement

with ICT. Indeed, both Factors B and D acknowledged that “lack of time” and “lack of

ACC

EPTE

D M

ANU

SCR

IPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

training” were not organisational issues, but rather personal ones: “I suppose emails come

around (about available training) and I just press the delete button. So from my own

resistance and it’s not to new technology but...I’ve got a massive workload, so training on

new technology is just way down on my priorities …” (Factor B/Sta#33). Even Factor C

acknowledged that training was available: “Yeah, it’s all there, if I really want to learn about

podcasting, I know where to go. I just haven’t been.” (Sta#24).

Underlying these responses are tensions about where time is considered to be most valued in

terms of recognised forms of capital in HE (both explicitly and implicitly), as noted in the

following comment:

There are two arms within the school, they should have equal weighting, but I

think the reality of it is that they don’t. So the rhetoric and the reality I think are

quite different. For instance, we’ve had a lot of emails around recently saying well

done, so and so has pulled in research funding... I’m thinking somebody else has

just brought in about 50K for doing a short course that is innovative and offering

a different way of teaching, it’s going to reach out to a lot of people. We didn’t get

an email about that. So I do feel that it’s biased, it’s unfairly weighted and that’s

probably because we’re a Russell group university and that’s where the kudos is.

(Factor A/Sta #23)

This highlights the influence of perceived capital on choices academics make on how they

choose to spend their time and suggests that providing staff with more time or training will

unlikely lead to increased use of ICT in teaching. If capital is attributed primarily to research

activities, this creates little incentive for staff not intrinsically motivated to take time out to

rethink teaching practices. It is noteworthy that while three of the four Q-Factors identified a

“lack of time and training” as significantly interfering with their choice not to engage with

ICT, deeper exploration showed that it was actually an underlying lack of motivation that

prevented them from doing so. Thus whilst organisational support is considered important for

all four Factors it is also clearly insufficient.

DISCUSSION

ACC

EPTE

D M

ANU

SCR

IPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Zhen et al. (2008) examined technology adoption and found that self-efficacy and

pedagogical beliefs were most influential on academics’ decisions to use technology, and that

“lack of time” was not a significant factor. Similarly Mahdizadeh et al.’s (2008) found that

issues of “time” did not influence academics’ intention to use e-learning in their study. The

authors suggested that time constraints were instead related to motivation, and they concluded

that if academics were motivated to use e-learning that they would make time (Mahdizadeh et

al., 2008). Russell’s (2009) study also revealed that barriers to technology adoption were

more about priorities than lack of time, and that academics could find time for activities that

were important to them (and their careers) and those they perceived would be rewarded

(valued capital). White (2007) concluded that the real question was how institutions could

alter academics’ perceptions of a lack of time, thus echoing Bourdieu’s notion of perceived

valuation of capital.

The findings from this Bourdieusian case-study reveal that technology adoption is not

influenced so much by the technology itself, or even by the organisational structures in place,

but rather by a mismatch between representations (habitus) of the perceived value of

technology (capital) within the field. Unlike the majority of studies that have extrinsic factors

as barriers to e-learning adoption, this study points to the influence of underlying issues

influencing nurse educators’ responses towards ICT. Motivation is a construct playing a

significant role in most types of behavioural change, including technology adoption. While

motivation alone was not the emphasis of this study, what emerged were those issues

influencing individuals’ motivation to engage with ICT, as explored through the interaction

between the valued forms of capital in the field of HE. Motivation to act (as in making time to

access training to learn how to integrate technology in teaching) is often driven by the extent

to which this behaviour is expected to result in a desired outcome (in terms of valued forms of

capital).

ACC

EPTE

D M

ANU

SCR

IPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

For some academics, influenced by the interplay between their personal and collective

habitus, time is deliberately made (even out of official working hours) to promote,

experiment, find mentors or access formal training. Yet for others this motivation to act

remains absent. As noted, extra time to access training does not necessarily lead to changes in

practice since there is no value seen in taking time to engage with technology given the lack

of capital associated such an activity. Thus properly identifying the perceived forms of

capital allows for more appropriate strategies to be put in place, such as awards and

recognition programs, grants for innovative e-learning projects, campaigns and seminars, that

indicate to staff the value and priority placed by the organisation on innovative teaching and

the development of e-learning.

Limitations

This study presents a small intensive look at one large and complex institution. The scale and

nature of such an exercise inevitably results in some distortions and omissions. The reality of

a social institution as varied as a DON within a larger university, itself operating within a

wider field, is multi-faceted and is not able to be represented through any one method. It is

also limited in its concentrated look at one institution in one part of England and thus would

need to be replicated in other contexts to examine its relevance to nurse educators in other

universities and other countries.

CONCLUSION

This study is the first to the researcher’s knowledge to have employed Q as a means of

operationalizing Bourdieu’s concept of habitus. Using a new approach, this paper has

demonstrated how this combination can elicit unique insights into the socio-cultural factors

influencing technology adoption within a nurse education context. The findings identified

four different responses to e-learning, thus broadening our repertoire and deepening our

ACC

EPTE

D M

ANU

SCR

IPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

knowledge of responses and behaviours toward ICT adoption. Such findings offer empirical

evidence to inform the design of more focused staff development programmes and policy

documents in future change management strategies.

ACC

EPTE

D M

ANU

SCR

IPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

REFERENCES

Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bourdieu, P. (1990). The logic of practice. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Bourdieu, P. (2005). The social structures of the economy. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Bourdieu, P. & de Saint Martin, M (1982). La sainte famille. Actes de la recherche en

sciences sociales, 44(1), 2-53.

Bourdieu, P. & Wacquant, L. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. Chicago: University

of Chicago Press.

Bruner, J. (2007). Factors motivating and inhibiting faculty in offering their courses via

distance education. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 10. Retrieved July

1, 2012 from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/summer102/bruner102.htm.

Caldwell, K. (1997). Ideological influences on curriculum development in nurse education.

Nurse Education Today, 17(2), 140-144.

Fox, M. F. (1992). Research, teaching and publication productivity: Mutuality versus

competition in academia. Sociology of Education, 65(4), 293-305.

Fulton, O. (1996). Which academic profession are you in? In R. Cuthbert, Working in Higher

Education (pp. 157-169). Buckingham: SRHE/Open University Press.

Hughes, A. (2009). Higher education in a Web 2.0 world: Report of an Independent

committee of Inquiry into the impact on higher education of students‟ widespread use of Web

2.0 technologies. Bristol, The Committee of Inquiry into the Changing Learner Experience

(CLEX). Retrieved July 7, 2012 from

http://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/generalpublications/2009/heweb2.aspx

James, D. (1998). Higher education field-work: The interdependence of teaching, research

and student experience. In M. Grenfell, Bourdieu and education: Acts of practical theory (pp.

104-120). Florence, KY: Taylor and Francis, Inc.

Legris, P., Ingham, J. & Collerette, P. (2003). Why do people use information technology? A

critical review of the technology acceptance model. Information and Management, 40(3),

191-204.

Liaw, S.S., Huang, H.M., & Chen, G.D. (2007). Surveying instructor and learner attitudes

toward e-learning. Computers & Education, 49(4), 1066-1080.

Luker, K., Carlisle, C., & Kirk, S. (1995). The evolving role of the nurse teacher in the light of

education reforms. London: English National Board.

ACC

EPTE

D M

ANU

SCR

IPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Mahdizadeh, H., Biemans, H. & Mulder, M. (2008). Determining factors of the use of e-

learning environments by university teachers. Computers & Education, 51(1), 142-154.

McNamara, M.S. (2008). Of bedpans and ivory towers? Nurse academics' identities and the

sacred and profane: A Bernsteinian analysis and discussion paper. International Journal of

Nursing Studies, 45(3), 458-470.

McPherson, M.A. & Nunes, J.M. (2008). Critical issues for e-learning delivery: What may

seem obvious is not always put into practice. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(5),

433-445.

Miers, M. (2002). Nurse education in higher education: Understanding cultural barriers to

progress. Nurse Education Today, 22(3), 212-219.

O’Connor, S. (2007). Developing professional habitus: A Bernsteinian analysis of the modern

nurse apprenticeship. Nurse Education Today, 27(7), 748-754.

Online Learning Task Force (OLTF). (2011). Collaborate to compete: Seizing the opportunity

of online learning. Report to HEFCE. Retrieved January 28, 2012 from

http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/hefce/2011/11_01/.

Russell, C. (2009). A systematic framework for managing e-learning adoption in campus

universities: Individual strategies in context. ALT-J Research in Learning Technology, 17(1),

3-19.

Selim, H.M. (2007). Critical success factors for e-learning acceptance: Confirmatory factor

models. Computers & Education, 49(2), 396-413.

Thompson, P. (2008). Field. In M.Grenfell, Pierre Bourdieu: Key concepts. Acumen:

Stocksfield.

Vaughan, D. (1996). The Challenger launch decision: Risky technology, culture, and

deviance at NASA. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Vaughan, D. (2008). Bourdieu and organizations: The empirical challenge. Theory and

Society, 37(1), 65-81.

Walker, G & Johnson, N. (2008). Faculty intentions to use components for web-enhanced

instruction. International Journal on E-learning, 7(1), 133-152.

Watson, R. & Thompson, D. (2004). The trojan horse of nurse education. Nurse Education

Today, 24(2), 76-78.

White, S. (2007). Critical success factors for e-learning and institutional change—some

organisational perspectives on campus-wide e-learning. British Journal of Educational

Technology, 38(5), 840-850.

Zhen, Y., Garthwait, A. & Pratt, P. (2008). Factors affecting faculty members' decision to

teach or not to teach online in higher education. Online Journal of Distance Learning

ACC

EPTE

D M

ANU

SCR

IPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Administration, 11(3). Retrieved May 25, 2013 from

http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/fall113/zhen113.html.

ACC

EPTE

D M

ANU

SCR

IPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Figure 1: The relationship between habitus, field and capital in influencing practice (Bourdieu, 1984, p.101)

Figure 2: Representation of micro level habitus influenced by meso and macro level field

ACC

EPTE

D M

ANU

SCR

IPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table 1: Primary sources used to develop meso-level field

Policies and strategies Websites

Hillgate’s E-learning and E-knowledge

strategy (2006-2009)

Hillgate website (2009-2011)

Hillgate s Learning, Teaching &

Assessment Strategy (2009-2012)

‘E-learning at Hillgate’ webpage (provides

tutorials, resources, links etc. for staff and

students)

Hillgate University’s Plan 2007-2010 HillOCW (open courseware initiative)

Hillgate’s Widening participation strategic

assessment (2009-2012)

Hillgate’s E-learning Community website

(2008-2010)

Hillgate’s Research and Teaching Job

Family document (2005)

Hillgate’s ‘Teaching at Hillgate’ website

(resources include case studies and staff videos

discussing innovative teaching strategies)

Hillgate’s Strategic ICT toolkit (2010) ‘Teaching and Learning’ Hillgate website page

(2009-2011)

DON strategy Towards 2012 (2008-2012) DON website (2009-2011)

DON’s E-learning strategy (2001-2005),

(2005-2008) and (2008-2013)

DON Educational Technology Special Interest

Group’s website (2008-2011)

Publications and brochures Meeting minutes and emails

‘The Focus’ Hillgate’s teaching and

learning newsletter (biannual publication

Spring – Autumn 2008-2011)

Hillgate’s E-learning Community meetings

(2008-2010)

‘The Voice’ - Student Union Magazine

(monthly publication 2008-2011)

DON Research Group minutes (1997)

‘Toolkits to encourage academic adoption

of e-learning by reducing technological

barriers’ Internal paper (2009)

DON Educational Technology Special Interest

Group quarterly meeting minutes (2008-2011)

Hillgate undergraduate prospectus (2008-

2010)

DON Research Knowledge and Transfer

Committee minutes and emails (2009-2011)

ACC

EPTE

D M

ANU

SCR

IPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table 2: Q-statements

1 Innovative teaching is recognised at the division of nursing

2 I prefer a traditional lecture format

3 It is my university’s responsibility to provide training on how to use e-learning

4 I do not have enough time to experiment with e-learning

5 It is the lecturer’s primary responsibility to cover all the module content

6 Students should take responsibility for their own learning

7 The quality of all my modules would improve with the use of e-learning

8 It is the lecturer’s responsibility to learn how to integrate e-learning into their modules

9 The use of e-learning in my modules has wasted valuable time

10 The most important barrier preventing use of e-learning is a lack of training

11 The decision to use e-learning should rest with the lecturer

12 When I am trying something new, I need an opportunity to test out my ideas without worrying about making mistakes

13 E-learning provides increased opportunities for social interaction

14 E-learning is just a fad

15 There is no evidence that e-learning improves learning outcomes

16 Communication is better in person than online

17 There should be little difference between face-to-face and e-learning teaching strategies

18 E-learning is contributing to the commercialization of education

19 I’m simply not interested in e-learning

20 The best way for students to learn is by finding things out for themselves

21 A student-centred design cannot work in my class, it is too time consuming

22 Lecturers’ should talk and students should listen

23 It is unrealistic to expect students to take control of their own learning

24 Learning how to use knowledge is more important than accumulating it

25 Effective teaching should be about giving learners more control

26 Students won’t bother coming to class if materials are placed on WebCT

27 WebCT is useful for posting lecture notes in order to free up class contact time for more hands-on activities

28 The essence of nursing is lost in an e-learning environment

29 E-learning is a problem, not a solution

30 Making lecture podcasts available on the web decreases the value of the lecturer

31 E-learning’ is driven by economics, not by learning

32 Face-to-face contact between students and lecturers is the most crucial element in the learning process

33 Mentoring and peer support are essential to the learning process

34 It is time to re-think how learning happens

35 E-learning threatens the existence of traditional educational institutions

36 In e-learning the role of the lecturer is not less important, it’s just different

37 Reflection should be designed into all learning activities

38 My university gives me sufficient time to learn how to use e-learning

39 My university provides me with reliable access to technology

40 Nurses in the 21st century are required to know how to use technology

41 Technology is frustrating and confusing and detracts from learning

42 I feel as though I have ownership over my modules

43 Watching peers use e-learning successfully has inspired me to experiment with it

44 I learn best when working in groups with my peers

45 Requiring students to use e-learning creates a disadvantage for those who struggle financially

46 There are adequate incentives to use e-learning at the division of nursing

47 There is an active knowledge sharing community in my school

48 Students should be required to have basic IT skills prior to enrolling in the nursing programme

49 Students can only learn nursing through hands-on experiences

50 Module assignments should place greater emphasis on social learning between students

51 My subject area cannot be translated into an e-learning environment

52 I use e-learning because it’s expected

53 Innovative teaching techniques are frequently used in my courses

ACC

EPTE

D M

ANU

SCR

IPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table 3: Q-Factor monikers and descriptions

Factor

A

The e-

advocate

E-learning can transform nurse education and

develop contemporary professional nurses

Factor

B

The humanist E-learning hinders communication and prevents the

development of person-centred nursing

Factor

C

The sceptic E-learning does not improve nurse education and

cannot develop clinically competent nurses

Factor

D

The

pragmatic

E-learning can reinforce what is covered in class

but socialisation into nursing requires face-to-face

contact

ACC

EPTE

D M

ANU

SCR

IPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Figure 1: The relationship between habitus, field and capital in influencing practice (Bourdieu, 1984,

p.101)

Figure 2: Representation of micro level habitus influenced by meso and macro level field