1. Data analysis was conducted on the conceptions and misconceptions regarding hybrid learning for those faculty who taught in traditional classroom settings. An Independent samples t-test was performed to determine the difference between the misconceptions and conceptions of those faculty that utilized a course management system and those who did not use course management systems. Frequency tables were run to examine whether faculty conceptions or misconceptions regarding the use of hybrid instruction differ between faculty teaching in a traditional classroom setting who utilize CMS and faculty teaching in traditional classroom settings who do not utilize CMS. Cross tabulations were performed to evaluate whether a statistical relationship existed between faculty utilizing a course management system and their interest in adopting hybrid learning. The purpose of this study was to examine whether faculty conceptions or misconceptions regarding the use of hybrid instruction differ between faculty teaching in traditional classroom settings who utilize course management systems (CMS) and faculty teaching in traditional classroom settings who do not utilize course management systems. In addition, this study examines whether faculty who are utilizing a course management system are more willing/and or likely to develop a hybrid course. Faculty misconceptions regarding hybrid instruction may prevent educators from utilizing new technologies in course development. One hundred and twenty nine faculty at four independent institutions of higher education in New York State responded to an on-line survey. In addition to basic demographic information, the survey contained 13 conceptual questions, which required either a true, false or no basis for knowing response, regarding hybrid learning. Ninety of the respondents taught in a traditional classroom setting. Forty-nine of those faculty teaching in traditional classroom settings utilized Course Management Systems. Data from this survey was analyzed by performing independent samples t-test, frequencies and cross tabulation. Data analysis indicated faculty who teach in traditional classroom settings utilizing course management systems have less misconceptions in regard to hybrid learning than faculty who teach in traditional classroom settings who do not utilize course management systems. Abstract Course Management Systems: Implication for Hybrid Course Development Maureen Tsokris, RDH, MPS Maureen Capone, RDH, MS, Farmingdale State College, Helen C. Wittmann, Ed.D, Elsa-Sofia Morote, Ed.D., Dowling College Data Sources Methodology Data utilized was taken from a study conducted by Wittmann (2006) at Dowling College in Oakdale, New York. The original study was entitled “Faculty Perceptions, Conceptions and Misconceptions, of Factors Contributing to the Adoption of Hybrid Education at Independent Institutions of Higher Education in New York.” One hundred and twenty nine faculty at four independent institutions of higher education in New York responded to an on-line survey. Two of the institutions use on-line distance learning and two do not. For the purpose of this study only the responses of those who taught in a traditional classroom setting were selected (90 professors). Furthermore, all respondents who taught online courses were excluded from the data base. This study focused on information related to course management systems and their use or non-use by faculty who teach in a traditional classroom setting. Table 1 shows the number of respondents who taught in a traditional setting and utilized course management systems. Discussions Results An independent- samples t test was conducted to evaluate the hypothesis that faculty who teach in traditional classroom settings and have utilized a course management system have less misconceptions regarding hybrid learning than those faculty who have taught in traditional classroom settings and have not utilized a course management system. Table 2 indicates that there is significance, t(88)= -2.19, p=.03. The eta square index indicated a medium effect size. Conceptions and score did not show any statistical significance. This indicates those faculty members who utilize CMS have fewer misconceptions regarding hybrid learning than faculty who do not utilize CMS. Table 1 M2M2 Is the level of faculty misconceptions/conceptions less regarding the use of hybrid course instruction? Do misconceptions differ from faculty who utilize CMS and faculty who do not? More specifically, faculty teaching in traditional settings who utilize CMS responded correctly more often to the following survey items: Question 3-hybrid delivery of instruction is not as effective as teaching students face to face (correct response, False), question 4-hybrid teaching lacks a cohesive sense of community (correct response, False), question 8-cheating in a hybrid course is a common threat to the quality of hybrid courses (correct response, False), and question 9-teacher student interaction is difficult when using hybrid learning technology to deliver instruction (correct response, False). Table 3 Differ Utilize Course Management System Do Not Use Course Management System FrequencyValid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid Yes4954.4% 54.4 No4145.6% 100.0 Total90100.0% Table 2 Independent Samples t-Test: Misconceptions Mean yes Mean No SD- yes SD- no t dfpEffect size misconceptions7.127.851.491.67-2.19880.030.051684 concept6.165.782.73 0.66880.510.004926 Score7.547.342.071.70.49880.620.002721 Question % Correct % Incorrect % No Basis For Knowing % Correct % Incorrect % No Basis For Knowing 9. Teacher student interaction is difficult when using hybrid learning technology to deliver instruction 53.130.616.329.346.324.4 3. Hybrid delivery is not as effective as teaching students face to face 46.926.5 43.931.724.4 4. Hybrid teaching lacks a cohesive sense of community 44.930.624.539.041.519.5 8. Cheating in a hybrid course is a common threat to the quality of hybrid courses 37.529.233.320.047.532.5 Table 4 Similar Utilize Course Management System Do Not Use Course Management System Concept Misconception Concept Misconception Question % Correct % Incorrect % No Basis for Knowing % Correct % Incorrect % No Basis for Knowing 6. Content is better in a hybrid course 8.269.422.412.557.530.0 13. Students need a home computer with access to the internet 27.168.84.22067.512.5 2. Faculty members do not have complete control of his/her intellectual property 30.640.828.636.639.024.4 1. Faculty time commitment is greater for hybrid learning preparation, delivery, and revision 53.118.328.656.022.0 11. Problems with equipment are a major concern to faculty delivering hybrid courses 67.314.3 18.4 68.312.219.5 5. Hybrid teaching is not appropriate for all courses 81.312.56.385.44.99.8 7. Students taught with hybrid learning perform at least as well or better than those taught in a traditional face to face classroom 30.612.2 57.1 25.015.060.0 12. Adequate technical support systems are a major concern to faculty delivering hybrid courses 83.76.110.278.04.917.1 As seen in Table 4 faculty utilizing CMS had several similar misconceptions regarding hybrid learning. In the future would you use hybrid learning to deliver instruction? Total No ResponseYesNo0 Do you use a CMS (Course Management Systems such as Blackboard or WebCT which allows users access to materials, lectu Yes2 44 (89.7%)3 (6.1%)49 No 0 31 (75 %)10 (24.4%)41 Total2751390 A one sample Chi Square test was conducted to assess whether faculty who utilized a course management system were more likely to utilize hybrid learning to deliver instruction in the future. The results of the test were significant, x2(2, N=90) =7.37, p<.02. Discussion The results of this study show faculty who teach in traditional classroom settings utilizing CMS have fewer misconceptions relating to the delivery of hybrid learning than those faculty members who do not use a CMS. Faculty misconceptions were less regarding some very important aspects of hybrid learning particularly; in the area of effectiveness of hybrid learning, cohesiveness of the learning community, teacher student interaction and cheating in hybrid courses. However, faculty who taught utilizing CMS had several similar misconceptions regarding hybrid learning, of major significance is the misconceptions regarding course content and control of one’s intellectual property. Based on the findings of this study, institutions looking to implement hybrid courses as part of their academic curriculum may best serve their students by beginning with a course management system, as the research indicates faculty who utilized a course management system had fewer misconceptions regarding hybrid learning. The perceptions that faculty bring to the classroom will have an impact on how effective their mode of instruction is in enhancing student learning. Do you use a CMS (Course Management System?) This study evaluated whether faculty who utilized a CMS were more likely to utilize hybrid learning to deliver instruction in the future. Data indicated faculty who utilized a CMS were more likely to use hybrid learning to deliver instruction than faculty who did not use CMS, 89.7% of faculty who used CMS responded they would use hybrid learning, as compared to 75% of those who did not use CMS. Table 6 demonstrates the number and percentage of faculty who use Course Management Systems, and are likely to develop a hybrid course in the future. Table 3 provides an overview of the specific misconceptions, and conceptions held by both faculty who utilize CMS and those faculty members who do not utilize CMS in regard to hybrid learning. Table 5