next.generation.learning

Enrollment Management Committee

Couldn't "TWU" be inserted for "MU" in all 7 statements below? Glad to see we aren't the only one dealing with this, but then again we knew that.

Enrollment Management Committee: "The key recommendations of the subcommittee related to the charge

1. 2. The ultimate size of MU�s distance learning program must be determined by the aggregation of the efforts of the divisions. Departments/divisions must assess their individual programs, opportunities, needs, resources, incentives and ability to deliver a quality product consistent with on-campus offerings and campus expectations. All distance learning degree programs and for credit courses work must have an academic home in an appropriate academic department or division with the curriculum controlled by the faculty of the area offering the program. The MU infrastructure which supports distance learning must be improved to be more student friendly with better and more consistent services, if growth is desired.
3. Ways to remove barriers that exist for nontraditional and distance students must be identified. These barriers include admissions and registration procedures and the provision of advising and financial aid services, among others.
4. The funding model for distance learning should be reexamined to assure the provision of appropriate shared infrastructure with minimal redundancy, high quality student services, and departmental incentives for distance learning efforts.
5. Assessment and program review efforts should be enlarged to include distance learning programs.
6. It is essential to address the CDIS enrollment issues. Reduction of barriers to the use of CDIS credits would allow more aggressive marketing of the evening BGS program and other on-line degree completion programs. This would increase participation of students in CDIS.
7. Registration and admission procedures must be developed to allow the inclusion of all distance learning, CDIS, and other non-traditional enrollments to be included as part of MU�s student counts."

NACADA Standards for Advising Distance Learners

NACADA Standards for Advising Distance Learners: "NACADA Standards for Advising Distance Learners"

Student Evaluation of Distance Learning Courses

The American Journal of Distance Education: "The Development of an Instrument to Evaluate Distance Education Courses
Using Student Attitudes
T. Grady Roberts
Department of Agricultural Education
Texas A & M University
Tracy A. Irani, Ricky W. Telg, and Lisa K. Lundy
Department of Agricultural Education and Communication
University of Florida

This study sought to adapt and test a methodological framework designed to produce a course evaluation that addresses the unique aspects of distance education while maintaining consistency with current evaluation instruments commonly used to evaluate an institution's on-campus courses. Using the four-step process adapted from Biner (1993), twenty items were identified for inclusion in the instrument. The authors concluded that the four-step process yielded an instrument for the evaluation of distance education courses that provides both functionality and flexibility to be used across a variety of courses."

Predicting Retention in Online General Education Courses

The American Journal of Distance Education: "Predicting Retention in Online General Education Courses
Libby V. Morris and Sz-Shyan Wu
Institute of Higher Education
University of Georgia
Catherine L. Finnegan
Advanced Learning Technologies
Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia

A classification rule was developed to predict undergraduate students' withdrawal from or completion of fully online general education courses. A multivariate technique, predictive discriminant analysis (PDA), was used. High school grade point average and SAT mathematics score were shown to be related to retention in the online university courses. Locus of control and financial aid were able to identify dropout and completion with 74.5% accuracy."