TABLE 4 Summary of the Findings... | Emerald Publishing

TABLE 4

Summary of the Findings

Participants	Themes		Findings
Administrators (5 interviewees)	Purposes of offering the DM program		Maintaining and increasing the department reputation Providing educational opportunities for those who could not take the residential program Increasing the revenue stream Offering research opportunities for the faculty and students of the department
	Program models		Using a cohort model in 2000 and 2001 Not admitting new students in 2002 Changing to a non-cohort model in 2003
	Strengths of the program		Equivalent to the residential program in terms of quality, admission, and evaluation criteria Beneficial for the residential programs of the department in many ways Hiring qualified adjunct faculty Project-oriented design of the program and emphasizing pedagogy
	Areas for improvement		Technology still hindering the program in many aspects Building online community, decreasing students’ feelings of isolation in learning online Helping students have appropriate expectations of the program
Faculty (6 interviewees)	Teaching online	Advantages	Flexibility for instructors and students
	Teaching online	Disadvantages	More difficult and time consuming in proving feedback and communication in general
	Administration		Adjunct faculty lacking of direct control of the courses Hoping to take into account the special design of online courses and how often the design was utilized for faculty merit reports
	Technology		Technology was not adequate for providing effective courses. Needing better course management system
Students (23 survey respondents)	Program choice		Overall quality reputation of the department and faculty Convenience and flexibility of the distance option
	Technology aspects		Students showed a high level of technological readiness. The technical support was rated as above average. Technology supporting learning needed to be further improved.
	Program management	Class registration	Students were relatively satisfied with the class registration.
		Learning support	Students were relatively satisfied with learning support and assistance from the faculty, graduate assistants, and administrative staff.
		Resources	The quality and quantity of the resources were agreeable to students, yet the reliability and timing needed to be improved.
		Orientations	Better advising was needed. Students’ responses to orientation varied.
		Sense of community	Students felt a lack of a sense of community.
	Course management	Instructional design factors	Students overall were satisfied with the design of the DM courses.
		Feedback	Timeliness issue was emphasized.
		Multiple evaluation methods	More variety of evaluation methods was expected.
	Overall quality		Overall, students rated favorably the quality of the DM program.

Participants	Themes		Findings
Administrators (5 interviewees)	Purposes of offering the DM program		Maintaining and increasing the department reputation Providing educational opportunities for those who could not take the residential program Increasing the revenue stream Offering research opportunities for the faculty and students of the department
	Program models		Using a cohort model in 2000 and 2001 Not admitting new students in 2002 Changing to a non-cohort model in 2003
	Strengths of the program		Equivalent to the residential program in terms of quality, admission, and evaluation criteria Beneficial for the residential programs of the department in many ways Hiring qualified adjunct faculty Project-oriented design of the program and emphasizing pedagogy
	Areas for improvement		Technology still hindering the program in many aspects Building online community, decreasing students’ feelings of isolation in learning online Helping students have appropriate expectations of the program
Faculty (6 interviewees)	Teaching online	Advantages	Flexibility for instructors and students
	Teaching online	Disadvantages	More difficult and time consuming in proving feedback and communication in general
	Administration		Adjunct faculty lacking of direct control of the courses Hoping to take into account the special design of online courses and how often the design was utilized for faculty merit reports
	Technology		Technology was not adequate for providing effective courses. Needing better course management system
Students (23 survey respondents)	Program choice		Overall quality reputation of the department and faculty Convenience and flexibility of the distance option
	Technology aspects		Students showed a high level of technological readiness. The technical support was rated as above average. Technology supporting learning needed to be further improved.
	Program management	Class registration	Students were relatively satisfied with the class registration.
		Learning support	Students were relatively satisfied with learning support and assistance from the faculty, graduate assistants, and administrative staff.
		Resources	The quality and quantity of the resources were agreeable to students, yet the reliability and timing needed to be improved.
		Orientations	Better advising was needed. Students’ responses to orientation varied.
		Sense of community	Students felt a lack of a sense of community.
	Course management	Instructional design factors	Students overall were satisfied with the design of the DM courses.
		Feedback	Timeliness issue was emphasized.
		Multiple evaluation methods	More variety of evaluation methods was expected.
	Overall quality		Overall, students rated favorably the quality of the DM program.