This is an interesting question, but loaded with assumptions - I work in an environment where Technology Enhanced Learning is embedded in most sessions, and has been for 10+ years. There are lots of reasons "why" academics do not adopt technology, these include:

• Unfamiliarity of new technologies themselves,
• Lack of steadfast technological infrastructure (wifi dropping out for example)
• Reliance on students to bring their own devices (which can disadvantage the less affluent)
• Technology can (and does) detract from the content /knowledge part of the session you are delivering

However, I would also argue that there is a huge, and significant difference between Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL) and Technology Enhanced Teaching (TET). The former necessitating learning by means of technological interaction and the latter where content is delivered using technology but learners do not require any form of technological engagement to learn /participate /interact. From my observations It is the former which poses greater challenges to academics.

The learning methodology can be used to speed up the process and add excitement and excitement

Some teachers especially in developing countries don't know how to use modern technologies. They need training.

Good question

An addition to David's reasons:

- It is very expensive (in teacher hours) to make it work. So there is a budget issue.

- Students like to sit back in the chair and get the material (again) with the teacher highlighting the most important stuff as opposed to search it for yourself.

- Lest but very much not least: constraints of the systems (availability of laptops & wifi, guidelines on software, guidelines on assessments, ....).

And a link to a video that sums up all the assumptions on technology in teaching:

https://youtu.be/GEmuEWjHr5c

The cost involved in procurement of teaching technology devices is one of the reasons. Another reason is the comptence level of most of the teachers in utilising the devices. Remember also it is time consuming when compared with the use of lecture method.

My perspective is that (1) most of higher education teachers lack ICT-pedagogy skills while a good number out of this are apathetic about technology skills acquisition and use (2) Most institutions are yet to provide adequate technology-based teaching/learning environment (3) High cost of procurement of technology kits, among others.

Two points:

• There is a lot of work involved in the preparation of good technology-based teaching or learning material. It is so much easier to simply appear in front of a class and do a chalk & talk lecture. In most tertiary institutions, teaching is widely seen as a burden that takes time out of your (far more important) research. Hence the appeal of the "lecture" from the lecturer's point of view.
• Secondly, there is an implicit assumption in phrases such as "technology enhanced . . ." - i.e. the assumption that just because it is technology, it does in fact actually enhance the learning or the teaching. What if it doesn't?

This is an interesting question and apparently more applicable to higher institutions in developing nations. Underpinning the myriad of reasons as already highlighted by others above, is the problem that some of the teachers in higher institutions lack adequate fundamental knowledge about essential pedagogic practices which further compounds their inability to adopt ICTs during teaching-learning. Moreover, there are no explicit administrative and professional regulations to actually monitor, evaluate and hold lecturers accountable for failing to adopt essential ICTs to enhance teaching and learning in higher institutions especially developing communities of the world. As such, the lecturers are not under any significant "obligation" to use ICTs which partly accounts for their reluctance to take upon the extra responsibility to make sure relevant ICTs are used to facilitate teaching-learning processes.

So many factors influence no using technology in the higher learning institution:

1. Resistance on change in teaching and learning

2. Inadequate infrastructure on new technology used in learning and teaching like smartboard

3. Institutional budget

4. Lecturers non skilled in new teaching learning materials

5. Social economic level of students in development countries

6. Etc

HI!. I use both teaching strategies. I conduct lectures because of time constraints. However, I also use digital spaces and apps to supplement instruction. I am competent in tech use for instruction, however, many of my colleagues are not. That may be a reason why they shy away from using tech for instruction.

Learning depends on environment, some of the lecture rooms are not automated, they lack technology equipment, that was why most teachers prefer lecture method of teaching rather than technology based learning, because students that are not familiar with a technology devices will find it difficult to cope with teaching learning process in that kind of environment.

Technology in pedagogy adopters are more in young teachers .In my opinion both are required in class room teaching. Classical teaching with chalk and talk is generally pursued by senior profs. who are not well conversant with ICT tools. Any deduction or on the spot analysis is often done by blackboard system. In ICT mode teaching coverage will be more but the focus is narrow i,e, just to complete the prefixed lesson within the allotted period.

I recently completed my doctoral research on the digital literacy practices of higher education practitioners. While higher ed practitioners have the theoretical understanding of why technology is relevant in 21st Century classrooms, they may be inhibited by personal fears, preferences which may be linked to age or prior experiences, infrastructural challenges or a belief system which downplays the impact which technology may have on learning experiences in the classroom. A belief that students are more engaged with technology for social networking and gossiping, for example, as opposed to for "real learning" may influence a reticence in higher ed practitioners to use Web 2.0 technologies in their classes. In other words, they may read the literature, they may be aware of the hype surrounding technology but may doubt its usefulness and value. While many developing countries do have access to technology as was the case in my study, attitudes, prior experiences, belief systems and even something like institutional press, seemed greater determinants of how pervasive that use would be.

Very interesting,Denise. Is it possible to share your Doctoral thesis or synopsis on this topic?

Thank you. Yes I will share a summary of my research here.