FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W236012572> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W236012572 startingPage "3" @default.
• W236012572 abstract "Fifty-two US. colleges and universities were surveyed to gather data on potential success factors related to distance learning (DL) programs Major results suggest that the compatibility of the major to the DL format and the level of centralization of the DL program within the university setting was significantly related to program longevity In addition, student completion rates were significantly related to students from specific majors but not to student enrollment These findings suggest that current DL programs may draw from the same students who normally take courses in a traditional classroom Student GPAs were significantly positively related to institutions that started their DL programs because of DL offerings given by competitors Additional results involving reasons for DL implementation, institutional size, public or profit status, and DL admission criteria are also discussed Distance learning (DL) is an organizational education program that utilizes one or more media tools to deliver instruction to students, who for various reasons, are either unable to utilize the on-campus traditional style of education or have a preference for this high tech instructional format (Steiner, 1997)Educational courses taken through audio and video conferencing, computer-assisted methods, and the information superhighway have paved the way for distance learning in the late 20`'' century (Sherry, 1996). Today, most educational institutions either have added or will add a technology-based distance learning component to their course offerings as a way to offer more class options, increase enrollment, and/or raise revenue (Olsen 1999)Little empirical research exists on potential strategic success factors that may make one DL program more successful than another A search of the literature revealed many prescriptive articles and case studies (Merisotis and Phipps 1999), but few empirical studies providing guidance on choosing DL success factors or their effect on strategic outcomes ln addition, the quality of the existing research is in question and no studies were found that addressed broad strategic program issues (Phipps and Merisotis, 1999) Traditional measures of success in a college or university setting often include the longevity of the program, grade point averages of students, student completion rates, and enrollment levels The purpose of this exploratory study is to assess these traditional measures of academic success against a set of major DL program differences which were discovered during an initial pilot study for this research This research should serve as an initial basis for future studies on DL strategic factorsDL program differences were organized into the following dominant categories: original reasons for DL implementation, the level of DL program centralization, the existence of a DL admission criteria for students, the perception of program major compatibility within the DL curriculum, the size of the institution, and whether the institution was public/private, or for-profit/non-profit. Method A sample of 58 higher education institutions were chosen randomly from 233 colleges and universities listed in the Bear's Guide to Earning College Degrees Nontraditionally (Bear and Bear, 1995)Each participant was the director of his or her DL program at an accredited institution with a nontraditional educational program component The data were gathered through telephone interviews Participants were asked a total of 11 questions relating to the DL program at their schools Each telephone interview lasted from 15 to 30 minutes Respondents were assured of confidentiality and anonymity and were offered summaries of the aggregated results of the study Six schools were immediately excluded from the telephone survey because their DL programs were in a very early stage of development A total of 52 higher education institutions actually participated in the survey which resulted in a 100% response rate Our sample consisted of 18 small-sized colleges or universities (less than 2,000 students) representing 34. …" @default.
• W236012572 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W236012572 creator A5024181877 @default.
• W236012572 creator A5034137974 @default.
• W236012572 creator A5058097070 @default.
• W236012572 creator A5069767556 @default.
• W236012572 date "2001-03-01" @default.
• W236012572 modified "2023-09-24" @default.
• W236012572 title "An Empirical Investigation of Strategic Success Factors in Distance Learning Programs" @default.
• W236012572 hasPublicationYear "2001" @default.
• W236012572 type Work @default.
• W236012572 sameAs 236012572 @default.
• W236012572 citedByCount "4" @default.
• W236012572 countsByYear W2360125722016 @default.
• W236012572 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W236012572 hasAuthorship W236012572A5024181877 @default.
• W236012572 hasAuthorship W236012572A5034137974 @default.
• W236012572 hasAuthorship W236012572A5058097070 @default.
• W236012572 hasAuthorship W236012572A5069767556 @default.
• W236012572 hasConcept C10138342 @default.
• W236012572 hasConcept C105795698 @default.
• W236012572 hasConcept C120912362 @default.
• W236012572 hasConcept C120936955 @default.
• W236012572 hasConcept C127576917 @default.
• W236012572 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W236012572 hasConcept C145420912 @default.
• W236012572 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W236012572 hasConcept C162853370 @default.
• W236012572 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W236012572 hasConcept C195487862 @default.
• W236012572 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W236012572 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W236012572 hasConcept C503872463 @default.
• W236012572 hasConceptScore W236012572C10138342 @default.
• W236012572 hasConceptScore W236012572C105795698 @default.
• W236012572 hasConceptScore W236012572C120912362 @default.
• W236012572 hasConceptScore W236012572C120936955 @default.
• W236012572 hasConceptScore W236012572C127576917 @default.
• W236012572 hasConceptScore W236012572C144133560 @default.
• W236012572 hasConceptScore W236012572C145420912 @default.
• W236012572 hasConceptScore W236012572C15744967 @default.
• W236012572 hasConceptScore W236012572C162853370 @default.
• W236012572 hasConceptScore W236012572C17744445 @default.
• W236012572 hasConceptScore W236012572C195487862 @default.
• W236012572 hasConceptScore W236012572C199539241 @default.
• W236012572 hasConceptScore W236012572C33923547 @default.
• W236012572 hasConceptScore W236012572C503872463 @default.
• W236012572 hasIssue "3" @default.
• W236012572 hasLocation W2360125721 @default.
• W236012572 hasOpenAccess W236012572 @default.
• W236012572 hasPrimaryLocation W2360125721 @default.
• W236012572 hasRelatedWork W1517154141 @default.
• W236012572 hasRelatedWork W1525794835 @default.
• W236012572 hasRelatedWork W155588308 @default.
• W236012572 hasRelatedWork W174782954 @default.
• W236012572 hasRelatedWork W1850769839 @default.
• W236012572 hasRelatedWork W1906734467 @default.
• W236012572 hasRelatedWork W198647924 @default.
• W236012572 hasRelatedWork W1989262798 @default.
• W236012572 hasRelatedWork W2001346244 @default.
• W236012572 hasRelatedWork W2109438415 @default.
• W236012572 hasRelatedWork W2124174225 @default.
• W236012572 hasRelatedWork W2413603933 @default.
• W236012572 hasRelatedWork W24393639 @default.
• W236012572 hasRelatedWork W2747513305 @default.
• W236012572 hasRelatedWork W2752036089 @default.
• W236012572 hasRelatedWork W2760415564 @default.
• W236012572 hasRelatedWork W2787893442 @default.
• W236012572 hasRelatedWork W288970560 @default.
• W236012572 hasRelatedWork W2914031902 @default.
• W236012572 hasRelatedWork W746472761 @default.
• W236012572 hasVolume "24" @default.
• W236012572 isParatext "false" @default.
• W236012572 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W236012572 magId "236012572" @default.
• W236012572 workType "article" @default.