Faculty Survey Data: Online Teaching at CSUF (Spring 2026)
Faculty Survey Data: Online Teaching at CSUF (Spring 2026)
This new survey was developed by Dr. Shelli Wynants (Faculty Development Center) to learn how CSUF faculty design and teach online courses, what they most want to improve, and what support would help. Dr. Sinjini Mitra formatted the survey in Qualtrics for distribution and analyzed the survey results. Dr. Wynants and Dr. Mitra worked together with the Faculty Development Center to promote faculty participation. The survey was distributed to all faculty in Spring 2026 through the weekly FDC newsletter, with additional direct outreach across campus. It builds on a pilot version fielded the previous year and was substantially revised for this administration.
A total of 104 faculty responded as of May 1, 2026. Because respondents could skip questions, the number answering each item ranges from 85 to 101; percentages below reflect those who answered each question.
• 104 faculty responded, representing all eight CSUF colleges
• 76% currently teach online, most commonly one or two sections; 65% of online courses are fully asynchronous
• Experienced group: 57% have taught online at CSUF for seven or more years; only 7% for less than a year
• 68% participated in professional development related to online or hybrid teaching in the past 12 months
Respondents came from every college, with the largest groups from Health and Human Development (35%) and Humanities and Social Sciences (28%). Engineering and Computer Science, the Arts, and Communications had the smallest representation, so results for those areas should be read with care.
Faculty rated 19 research-based online teaching practices, indicating whether they use each in all or most of their online courses, in some courses, or not currently. The overall picture is strong: for 15 of the 19 practices, at least three-quarters of faculty report consistent use. Course organization, communication, assessment variety, and navigation are near-universal strengths.
Three practices stand out as campus-wide growth areas: structured student-to-student interaction (68.5%), routine accessibility checks such as captioning and document readability (71.9%), and weekly module-level learning goals (73.0%). Notably, instructor-to-student interaction is well established (93.3%), so the interaction gap is specifically about peer connection, a finding echoed in the student survey, where Student Interaction and Community received the lowest ratings.
Full response breakdown (“Not applicable” responses, 1–9% per item, omitted for readability):
Asked to pick up to three areas to improve, faculty converged on engagement: increasing student engagement with course content was the top priority by a wide margin, followed by designing effective assignments and assessments, and increasing student interaction with peers. Faculty priorities align closely with the practice gaps above, suggesting faculty know where their courses need work.
The support faculty want is concrete and time-efficient: examples of effective course materials, short how-to videos, and ready-to-use templates top the list. Time is the dominant constraint. It was the most-cited barrier to making course changes (60 selections, more than the next three barriers combined) and 43 faculty flagged time or workload as their main obstacle even when choosing supports.
Open comments added texture to these numbers: requests for guidance on fostering student AI literacy while discouraging unauthorized AI use, frustration with academic dishonesty, the impact of large class sizes, limited design control for non-full-time faculty and course leads, and clearer pathways to institutional help. Several respondents specifically praised individualized instructional design coaching as central to their success in online teaching.
Two-thirds of respondents (68%) participated in professional development related to online or hybrid teaching in the past year. Self-paced modules are the preferred format, followed by live workshops and one-on-one coaching.
Confidence is trending up: 63% of faculty feel slightly or much more confident that their online course design supports student success than they did two years ago, while 27% feel about the same and 10% feel less confident.
Faculty also reported concrete improvements in their courses over the past year, led by fewer student questions about logistics and expectations, a practical signal that clearer course design is paying off.
An optional open-ended question drew 57 responses (some touched multiple themes; theme synthesis was AI-assisted). Generative AI and academic integrity dominated, cited in more than a quarter of comments, followed by professional development logistics and technology infrastructure.
• CSUF online faculty report strong, intentional course design, especially in organization, communication, assessment clarity, and navigation.
• The clearest growth areas are peer-to-peer interaction, routine accessibility checks, and weekly learning goals, and faculty priorities match these gaps.
• Faculty want practical, low-time-cost support: examples, templates, and short videos, with time and competing responsibilities as the binding constraints.
• Generative AI and assessment integrity are the most urgent unmet needs, calling for clearer institutional policy and assessment redesign support.