400 likes | 408 Views
This report presents the findings and discussions from the 2018 MCO Distance Education Administrators Survey, highlighting the organizational structure, decision-making processes, program enrollments, course quality, course development, and challenges faced in distance education programs.
E N D
2018 MCO Distance Education Administrators Survey Results & Discussion June 21, 2018
Who • Alpena Community College • Bay College • Glen Oaks Community College • Grand Rapids Community College • Gogebic Community College • Henry Ford Community College • Jackson College • Kalamazoo Valley CommCollege • Kellogg Community College • Kirtland Community College • Lake Michigan College • Lansing Community College • Macomb Community College • Mid‐Michigan Community College • Monroe County Community College • Montcalm Community College • Mott Community College • Muskegon Community College • North Central Michigan College • Northwestern Michigan College • Oakland Community College • Schoolcraft College • St. Clair County Community College • Wayne County Comm College District • West Shore Community College
Organization Structure Reporting Line • 48% report to Chief Academic Officer • 2012 - 37% • 2014 – 40% • 2016 – 54% • 12% report to Academic Dean • 2012 - 30% • 2014 – 24% • 2016 – 13% • 4% report to Non-Academic Administrator • 2012–4% • 2014 – 12% • 2016 – 13% • 20% report to President • 2014 – 16% • 2016 – 13% • ITC National Survey: 75% (up from 72% in 2014) of respondents indicated they reported to the vice-president of academic affairs or to an academic dean.
Organizational Structure - Review • In 2018: Centralized – 24%/Decentralized – 24%/Mix – 52% • In 2016: Centralized – 21%/Decentalized – 21%/ Mix – 58% • In 2014: Centralized – 24%/Decentralized – 32%/Mix – 44% • In 2013: Centralized – 37%/Decentralized – 21%/Mix – 42% • In 2012: Centralized – 33%/Decentralized – 26%/Mix – 33% • In 2011: Centralized – 33%/Decentralized – 17%/Mix – 46% • In 2010: Centralized – 48%/Decentralized – 19%/Mix – 33% • In 2008: Centralized – 48%/Decentralized – 22%/ Mix – 30% • In 2006: Centralized – 48%/Decentralized – 26%/ Mix – 26%
Program • Online competency-based courses
Program • Online remedial classes
Completion Rates Nationally – 36% claim retention is comparable to on-campus rates; 62% said retention is lower for online classes ITC – 2017 Study
Program Enrollments • Demand for online courses • Factors that stunt growth?
Student Authentication • Nationally - 100% of respondents require authentic username/passcode access to course
Program Percentage of total enrollment
Programs • Assessment of course prior to offering • 76% have some assessment (2012 – 52%)(2014 – 76%)(2016 – 75%) • Assessment of course after offering • 68% report having assessment practices at some point after course is first offered (2012 – 46%)(2014 – 45%)(2016 – 54%) • 20% (5 colleges) report working on a review process
Course Quality • Regarding course content and rigor – online courses compared to face-to-face traditional courses: • Superior to face-to-face traditional courses • MCO Study – 4 responses, 16% (2016 – 1 response) • ITC Study – 9.9% • Equivalent to face-to-face traditional courses • MCO Study – 17 responses, 68% (2016 – 18 responses) • ITC Study – 85% • In need of improvement • MCO Study – 4 responses, 16% (2016 – 4 responses) • ITC Study – 5.1%
Course Development • More colleges using a team development model • 9 colleges use extensively/5 colleges use sometime • Master/template courses • 6 colleges employ master templates for all courses/6 colleges use them sometimes • Average length of time to develop online course • 3 – 6 months – 62% of colleges • 1 – 3 months – 21% of colleges • 6 – 9 months – 13% of colleges • Average # of courses developed last year – 10 • Total # of courses developed last year among all – 144 (confirmed)
Open Educational Resources • Impact on institutions • 32% - Very Little (27.1% - Nationally) • 36% - Significant (69.5% - Nationally) • 32% - Not Sure • Roadblocks to adoption • Faculty reluctance to use (19) • Lack of faculty awareness (14) • Time needed to locate/evaluate resources (19) • Credibility of sources (8) • Lack of ancillary materials (14) • Resistance from administration (3)
Greatest Challenges • Other Challenges • ADA/Accessibility • Resources for new initiatives • Adequate evaluation of the effectiveness of online programs • Lack of vision by upper administration • Data to support online course development • Student success rates • Public Policy Issues • ADA compliance • Authentication/Security
Faculty • Teaching Ratios for online course • Full time average – 66% (2014 - 68%) (2016 – 57%) • Nationally – 56% • Part time average – 32% (for 2014 - 34%)(2016 – 43%) • Nationally – 44% • Everyone continues to have a hard time finding qualified faculty • Limiting number of classes taught • 54% do not limit (for 2014 - 40%) (2016 – 54%)
Faculty • Interaction with students requirement Nationally – 79% require some type of faculty/student engagement
Faculty • Mandatory training to teach online For those responding, 25% (six colleges) reported that training for faculty is not mandatory for faculty to teach an online course. This is an increase from 2016 when only 3 colleges reported no mandatory training for faculty. Eighteen colleges reported that they did require faculty to be trained before teaching online. Nationally, 77% require initial training of online faculty.
Faculty • Mandatory training to teach online
Faculty • Re-certification for seasoned online faculty Nationally, 70% have no required recurring training of online faculty
Required Student Orientation Ten (10) colleges provide orientation online and one college offers the orientation both on-campus and online.
Top Strategies to Improve Student Success From – ITC Annual National eLearning Report, 2017 Survey Results
2018 MCO Distance Education Administrators Survey Ronda Edwards redwards@mcca.org