Course-embedded advising can positively impact student satisfaction and retention by creating regular engaging interactions between students and instructors. This presentation discusses the development, implementation and evaluation of a course-embedded advising model and its impact on student engagement, satisfaction, and retention in an online MA degree program.
Implementation and Evaluation of a Course-embedded Faculty Advising Model
Dennis, M., Fornero, S., Snelling, J., Thom, S., Surles, J. and McPheters, E.
Low student retention in online higher education programs can result in a significant loss of revenue to an institution, jeopardizing its financial health and potentially, survival (Faculty Focus, n.d.). Although research shows that faculty advising, instructor presence, community, the incorporation of synchronous sessions and the use of web-conferencing software have a significant positive impact on student outcomes (Allen & Seaman, 2014; Bailey & Brown, Craft, Augustine-Shaw, Fairbanks & Adams-Wright, 2016; King & Alperstein, 2015; Richardson, Besser, Koehler, Lim, & Strait, 2016; Stewart, Harlow & DeBacco, 2011), facilitating effective interaction continues to remain a challenge in the online format. By creating regular engaging interactions between students and instructors, course-embedded advising can positively impact student satisfaction and retention.
This presentation introduces a study on the development, implementation, and evaluation of a course-embedded advising model, within the online programs of a mid-sized University that emphasizes the preparation of socially responsible practitioners, as a strategy for increasing student engagement, satisfaction, and retention. The course-embedded advising model consists of structured, individual synchronous faculty advising sessions built into 4 courses of an online MA degree program. A sample of 13 students completed a student experience survey. Results and future directions are discussed in the context of relevant theories and best practices.
References
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2014). Grade change: Tracking online education in the United States. Retrieved from http://sloanconsortium.org/publications/survey/gradechange2013
Bailey, T. & Brown, A. (2016). Online student services: Current practices and recommendations for implementation. Journal of Educational Technology, 44(4), 450-462.
Craft, C., Augustine-Shaw, D., Fairbanks, A. & Adams-Wright, G. (2016). Advising doctoral students in education programs. NACADA Journal, 36(1), 54-66.
Gallo, C. (2018, July 23). 7 presentation tips that will turn your presentation into a competitive advantage. Retrieved from https://www.carminegallo.com/7-presentation-tips-will-turn-presentation-...
Faculty Focus. (n.d.). Strategies for increasing online student retention and satisfaction. Retrieved from Magna website: http://mnabe-distancelearning.org/sites/default/files/strategies-for-inc...
King, E. & Alperstein, N. (2015). Best Practices in Online Program Development: Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. New York, NY: Routledge.
Richardson, J., Besser, E., Koehler, A., Lim, J. & Strait, M. (2016). Instructors perceptions of instructor presence in online learning environments. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(4), 82-105.
Stewart, A., Harlow, D. & DeBacco, K. (2011). Students experience of synchronous learning in distributed environments. Distance Education, 32(3), 357-381.