Desired and Experienced Levels of Connectivity to an Asynchronous, Online, Distance Degree Program

Abstract

This study examined graduate students’ desired and experienced levels of connectivity in an online, asynchronous distance degree program. Graduate students enrolled in the Masters of Science in Special Education distance degree program at a Midwest university were surveyed on both desired and experienced connectivity to their program, students, instructors, and advisors. Overall, student’s desired and experienced high connectivity to the program, their advisors, and their instructors; experiencing and wanting less connectivity to their fellow students. Specifically, three significant findings were noted: (1) students wanted high connectivity overall, with greatest connectivity desired with advisors and less connectivity wanted with other students; (2) there was variation among age cohorts and wanted connectivity with peers, advisors, instructors, and the program with statistically significant differences with regard to instructors, and other students; and (3) students experienced high connectivity. The relationships between graduate online learners and their instructors and advisors were correlated with the level of connectivity students experienced with their program. It was not as important to foster high connectivity among peers in the online learning environment. Further study should compare desired and wanted connectivity between departments, and across other universities to determine variables that may influence connectivity, and to identify best practices.

Master’s Students’ Perceptions and Expectations of Good Tutors and Advisors in Distance Education

“…Participants desired quality interaction with their tutors and advisors (Schroeder et al, 2016) and perceived them as primary sources of academic support (Cain et al, 2007). They perceived that providing feedback is the most important characteristic of a good DE tutor (Cain at al., 2007;Edwards et al, 2011;Howland & Moore, 2002;Lessing & Schulze, 2002) and expected quality and individualised feedback.…”

“…Students had negative attitudes toward inadequate online discussion durations (Risner & Kumar, 2016). While they expected advisors to promote peer interaction (Lessing & Schulze, 2002), their need to communicate with tutors and advisors was higher than their desire to connect with other students (Schroeder et al, 2016).…”

Student engagement in a fully online accounting module: An action research study

“…There is agreement in literature that sending regular announcements or email reminders is an important engagement strategy (Martin and Bolliger 2018) and continuous prompting throughout a module will lead to improvements in self-regulation, learning and retention (Wandler and Imbriale 2017). However, not all students desire connection with the instructor or other learners and some might not respond to any engagement activities (Schroeder et al 2016). Where student numbers are small, educators can get to know their students and will therefore sense when to prod and remind and when to pull back.…”

A Review on the Efficacy of Immediacy Factors towards Achieving Communication Satisfaction via Email among Academic Staff

“…Additionally, adequate enlightenment on why the respondents should consider it useful for partaking in the study should equally be given much attention. Schroeder, Baker, Terras, Mahar and Chiasson (2016) also demonstrated that approachability for immediacy effect towards communication satisfaction on asynchronous mediated communication can be enriched by increasing social presence via the degree of connectivity among the interacting entities. Though this was realized via a quantitative study conducted among teachers and distant masters' degree learners, the numbers of the respondents who willingly participated in the study seemed inadequate to generalize the outcome.…”