Key Factors Affecting Online Degree Program Success

Tonight I watched the session QM conference session by Amy M. Grincewicz, the Director of Instructional Design at Kent State University. The title of this session was “Unwrapping the Dimensions of Quality in Online Degree Programs.” Grincewicz has been interested in online degree programs (ODP) and research on their quality. Grincewicz used a live poll with Microsoft Forms. I haven’t seen this done live and will try it! ODPs, Grincewicz emphasized, depend on alignment. Gincewicz shared statistics on the growth of exclusively online degree programs. With a colleague, they conducted a literature review and noted several themes. These themes included administrative motivations, student persistence, and program design challenges. Research by Ozcan and Yildrim 2018 noted that administrators’ motivations are student demand, faculty support, and financial viability. Hardy et al. 2024 and Robinson 2024 explained that strategic marketing decisions for online degrees are important. Grincewicz emphasized that student persistence in online programs is a challenge. Their literature review uncovered that Yang, Baldwin, and Snelson (2017) found that factors influencing persistence include individual attributes (motivation, self-discipline, and a sense of accomplishment) and program attributes (institutional support, engaging coursework, and alignment with professional goals.). Hakkarainen et al. 2024 found that student perceptions and performance were supported by career development opportunities, community belonging and engagement, and self-efficacy and regular feedback. Baker and Tukhvatulina 2023 noted challenges such as lack of human connection and navigating independent learning. They highlighted the need for constructive feedback and support. Grincewicz also found studies such as Ortagus et al. 2023 that online students face lower completion rates than traditional students… particularly for low-income students. This brings up important ethical considerations: are institutions supporting students enough? Grincewicz then explained that program design, community building, and institutional approaches that promote engagement are critical. A holistic approach is needed to build effective online programs, said Grincewicz. This consists of comprehensive support, importance of community, enhance engagement, maintain academic rigor, and holistic integration of these components. When asked “What aspect of online education do you feel most needs improvement?” attendees mostly agreed that faculty training is needed. Key elements for online degree program success are: administrative strategy and student engagement, instructor presence and digital quality, and a holistic design approach. Grincewicz is framing the research using two theoretical frameworks: institutional theory: motivations and strategic planning and Tinto’s Theory of Student Retention: Academic and social integration. Grincewicz stated research questions they are seeking to address using quantitative (surveys and institutional data on enrollment and completion rates) and qualitative (interviews with administrators and focus groups with students) methods. This mixed-methods approach will hopefully provide deeper insights. One question an attendee asked was if face-to-face and online courses should be taught by the same instructor. There was a good bit of discussion, and Grincewicz noted that they believe that both the online and in-person courses should have the same learning objectives. Another attendee shared that at their institution online learnings were more likely to require financial aid. Several other questions were asked and discussed!

What factors influence the quality of online degree programs and student persistence? AI-generated image.