University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Retention rate of online students in the associate's degree program in addiction education counseling: a gap analysis

(USC Thesis Other)

Retention rate of online students in the associate's degree program in addiction education counseling: a gap analysis

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 1
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS IN THE ASSOCIATE’S DEGREE PROGRAM
IN ADDICTION EDUCATION COUNSELING: A GAP ANALYSIS

by

Geeta Bidasha Brown

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

August 2017

Copyright 2017 Geeta Bidasha Brown

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 2
Acknowledgments
I want to give special thanks to my dissertation chair, Dr. Mark Robison and my
committee members Dr. Cathy Krop and Dr. Tracy Tambascia for their guidance, motivation,
and constructive feedback throughout the writing of this dissertation. I want to also thank all of
my professors. I am grateful for your perspectives, ideas, and talents. I admire each of you very
much.
I would like to thank my incredible family for their absolute patience, love, and
understanding for over the past two years. Thank you to my husband Chris who encouraged me
to follow my dreams and for always believing in me. I know you made significant sacrifices so
that I could pursue this opportunity. None of this would have happened without your support and
love.
Finally, I want to give thanks to God for His guidance and loving kindness that endures
forever. You have never failed me. Your deeds are awesome and amazing.

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 3
Table of Contents
Acknowledgments 2
List of Tables 6
List of Figures 7
Abstract 8
Chapter One: Introduction 9
Background of the Problem 11
Purpose of the Study 16
Importance of Addressing the Problem 17
Organizational Context and Mission 18
Organizational Performance Status 19
Organizational Performance Goal 20
Organizational Mission 22
Organizational Performance Goal 22
Stakeholder 1 Goal 22
Students 22
Stakeholder 2 Goal 22
Faculty 22
Stakeholder 3 Goal 22
Administrators 22
Stakeholder 4 Goal 22
Advisory Board Members 22
Stakeholders for the Study and Stakeholder Performance Gap 22
Purpose of the Project and Questions 23
Conceptual and Methodological Framework 24
Definitions 24
Organization of the Dissertation 26
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature 28
Distance Education 28
History of Distance Education 28
Distance Learning Today 31
Benefits and Challenges of Online Education 32
Benefits of Online Education 32
Challenges of Students and Faculty in Online Education 33
Student Challenges 33
Faculty Challenges 35
Assumed Causes to Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization 38
Knowledge and Skills 40
Motivation 43
Organization 47
Chapter Summary and Conclusions 49
Chapter Three: Methodology 50
Purpose of the Study and Questions 50
Methodological Framework 50
Assumed Causes of the Performance Gap 52
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 4
Scanning Interviews 53
Participating Stakeholders 53
Data Collection 54
Interviews 54
Document Analysis 56
Validation Process of the Performance Gap 57
Trustworthiness of Data 58
Role of Investigator 58
Data Analysis 59
Limitations and Delimitations 60
Chapter Summary 61
Chapter Four: Findings 62
Participant Stakeholders 63
Research Design 64
Findings for Knowledge Causes 65
Summary of Knowledge Findings 71
Summary of Motivational Causes 80
Findings for Organizational Causes 81
Organizational Findings from Document Analysis 81
Summary of Organizational Causes 86
Chapter Summary 86
Chapter Five: Solutions, Implementation, and Evaluation 88
Validated Causes Selection and Rationale 89
The TEAM Approach to Solutions for Validated Causes 89
Implementation Plan 93
Organizational Environment for Implementation 93
TEAM Approach to Implementation 95
Expected Results 95
Technology 95
Engagement 96
Accountability 96
Mindset 96
Activities 96
Key Personnel Roles and Responsibilities 102
Evaluation Plan 104
TEAM Approach in Evaluation 106
Technology 106
Engagement 109
Accountability 111
Mindset 112
Limitations to the Study 115
Future Research 116
Chapter Summary 116
References 118
Appendix A: Expanded Solutions for Assumed Knowledge, Motivation And Organization
Causes 133
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 5
Appendix B: Summary Of Assumed Causes For Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization
Gaps by Source 153
Appendix C: Summary of Assumed Causes for Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization
Gaps by Source 154
Appendix D: Summary of Assumed Causes for Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization
Gaps by Source 155
Appendix E: Student Survey, Pre-Class Orientation Training (Level 1) 156
Appendix F: Faculty Survey, Online Technology Training (Level 1) 157
Appendix G: Student Survey, Online Technology Training (Level 2) 158
Appendix H: Faculty Survey, Online Technology Training (Level 2) 159
Appendix I: Interview Questions for Students and Faculty Technology, Level 3 160
Appendix J: Faculty Survey on Engagement Training, Level 3 161
Appendix K: Student Survey on Engagement Training, Level 3 162
Appendix L: Faculty Engagement Training Observation Checklist Level 2 163
Appendix M: Engagement Interview Questions for Students Level 3 164
Appendix N: Student and Faculty Interview Questions On Growth Mindset Level 1 165
Appendix O: Student Interview Questions on Growth Mindset Level 3 166
Appendix P: Faculty Interview Questions on Growth Mindset Level 3 167
Appendix Q: Validated Knowledge Causes, Solutions, and Implementation Plan 168
Appendix R: Validated Motivational Causes, Solutions, and Implementation Plan 169
Appendix S: Validated Organizational Causes, Solutions, and Implementation Plan 170
Appendix T: Organizational Chart Depicting Newly Created Positions 171
Appendix U: Non-Instructional Strategies to Support Online Students to Persist 172
Appendix V: Data Collection Process 174
Appendix W: Data Collection Instrument 176
Appendix X: Data Collection Instrument 177

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 6
List of Tables
Table 1: Organizational Mission, Global Goal, and Stakeholder Performance Goals 22
Table 2: Assumed Knowledge Causes and Method of Validation 66
Table 3: Assumed Motivational Causes and Method of Validation 72
Table 4: Assumed Organizational Causes and Method of Validation 82
Table 5: TEAM Gaps and Proposed Solutions 90

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 7
List of Figures
Figure 1. The gap analysis process, Clark and Estes (2008) 51
Figure 2. Conceptual Framework for Addressing the Inquiry Questions 57

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 8
Abstract
Using the gap analysis framework by Clark and Estes (2008), this qualitative study
examined the knowledge, motivation, and organization causes that contributed to the low
retention rate of the 18-month associate’s degree program in addiction education counseling at
Green Valley College (pseudonym). Green Valley College’s associate’s degree program is
offered both online and at a campus setting. The two programs are identical in length and
content, and both prepare students for CCAAP certification; however, the online completion rate
is 58 percent compared to the on-campus rate of 75%.
Assumed causes in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and organization were analyzed
from the literature, learning and motivational theories, document analysis, interviews, a focus
group, and personal knowledge of the institution. The analysis of the data in this improvement
study resulted in 23 recommended solutions from 12 validated causes. The recommended
solutions are categorized into four key areas, which were developed from the data: Technology,
Engagement, Accountability, and Mindset (referred to in this study as the TEAM approach).
These four themes were the common elements in the student and faculty participant interviews
and the faculty focus group discussion. Participants spoke definitively about the improvements
needed in these four areas. Chapter 5 provides solutions and implementation strategies for
improving the online completion rate to the same level as the institution’s campus based
program, using this TEAM Approach.

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 9
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
The topics associated with distance learning education and their corresponding attrition
rates have been studied extensively for over 30 years. Online education has become an
increasingly popular means of completing college coursework and earning complete online
degrees (Allen & Seaman, 2011). Online learning’s attractiveness has increased primarily
because of the benefits to students who participated in online education as well as to the
institutions that offer them. The benefits to the students have included scheduling convenience,
cost savings, time flexibility, and ability to enroll in courses and programs located throughout the
world. The benefits to the institutions have included the ability to offer more diverse course
offering to a worldwide audience, no longer limited to the number of physical classrooms
available at a campus site. Institutions increased their offerings of online programs to
accommodate the demand (Lee & Choi, 2011). For example, according to a report by the
Babson Survey Research Group (2016), there were 5.9 million people in the United States who
enrolled in at least one online course in 2014, which represented an increase of 3.9 percent over
the previous year (Allen & Seaman, 2016). At the same time, high attrition rates in online
programs have increased year after year (Lee and Choi, 2011). Online students who left without
completing their courses or programs impacted student self-confidence, institution’s budgets and
financial resources, and reputation (Lee & Choi, 2011). Higher education institutions must also
address the issue of high attrition rates to maintain regulatory approvals or licensing.
Accreditors are accountable to the United States Department of Education for the performance of
the institutions they accredit (Eaton, J. S. (2012). An Overview of US Accreditation--
Revised. Council for Higher Education Accreditation).
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 10
Government statistics that track the overall college persistence rates indicate that 30% of
college or university students, attending both online and traditional instruction, leave in the first
year. Approximately 37 million people in the United States have attended college but do not
possess a degree (Kirst & Stevens, 2015). Additionally, 70% of U.S. students enter college with
the intent of completing a 4-year degree, but less than two-thirds of them will graduate. Data
reported to the National Center for Educational Statistics showed that students who are required
to enroll in remedial courses to continue regular studies have an attrition rate of 75%.
Studies have indicated that there were even higher percentages of online students who
left college in comparison to those students who took classes in a traditional classroom setting
(Nash, 2005; Lee & Choi, 2011; Park & Choi, 2009; Pierrakeas, 2004). Attrition rates of online
students continued to be than those students who attend on-ground classes, by at approximately
20 percent (Ali & Leeds, 2009). Some online colleges who offered undergraduate and graduate
degrees reported attrition rates of 24% (Wojciechowski & Palmer, 2005) and attrition rates of up
to 50% are reported for all higher education degree levels (Pierrakeas, 2004). When students
failed to finish these online courses or programs, their degree completion was either delayed or
the students did not graduate all together (Bambara, Harbour, Davies, & Athey, 2009). The
students’ failure to complete affected the students’ self-esteem, motivation, and future interest in
the pursuit of a higher education degree. There was a social deficit with lower levels of
education. In fact, lower education rates could be correlated to higher prison rates (Belfield &
Levin, 2007).
To understand the reasons behind high college and university attrition rates, especially in
an online setting, a discussion of the history and background of distance learning was addressed.
Since its inception, distance education provided the opportunity for students to learn anywhere
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 11
by exchanging correspondence. Distance education changed from what was known as
correspondence education, with books and materials mailed to students and assignments and
tests returned. New technology expanded distance education from correspondence education to
today’s distance education utilizing computer technology and Internet. Distance education now
encompasses fully online coursework, blended education, and hybrid education. Fully online
students do not report to a classroom at any time. Blended students take some courses online and
others on-ground. And hybrid students attend courses that have a combination of attendance in
the traditional classroom as well as online activities for the same course. The type of student that
attends distance education programs rather than on-ground programs was an important factor in
investigating the online students and their decision to not complete their education.
This study examined the reasons underlying why students in the Addiction Education
Counseling Program (AEC) who attended online chose not to complete. Distance learning is not
a new concept, but the online structure and increase in enrollment in the 21
st
century was
consideration for conducting a study that addressed the problem of attrition.
Background of the Problem
Well before the development of Internet technology, a distance education correspondence
school began in 1857 at Oxford University and in 1858 at Cambridge University, and these two
universities developed programs for students as part of their university extension program. These
programs included all the course material and student assessments (Portman, 1978), but there
was no face-to-face learning. Instead, course materials were mailed to the student’s residence.
The student completed assigned work and returned it by mail to the institution. The first
correspondence course in the United States was offered at Pitman Shorthand, a training program
developed in 1852, whereby secretaries received their course materials through the U.S. Postal
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 12
Service from Pitman Shorthand, self-teach stenography skills, and then returned the completed
coursework through the mail. Once the materials were received and reviewed, the certificate was
mailed to the student (Matthews, 1999).
Correspondence education continued to expand in popularity and achieved academic
acknowledgment in 1892, when the first official college level distance education department was
established at the University of Chicago (Casey, 2008). As new training needs emerged in the
mining and railroad industries, distance education delivery was used to teach safety. By 1923,
there were more than 2.5 million people who received instruction in this method (Moore &
Kearsley, 2012).
Technology brought various distance education formats (Matthews, 1999), and other
distance education formats emerged. As early as 1923, radio became an efficient way to transmit
knowledge, and courses in various subject matters were soon offered through radio broadcasting
(Matthews, 1999). When the telephone became widely used in the early 1950s, classes were
offered in this format. Video technology in the 1970s increased distance learning education
participation (Casey, 2008).
As distance education advanced, new technology assisted in the development of video
streaming through televisions in the early 1970s (Moore & Kearsley, 2012), which were placed
in public places, including college classrooms and business centers. Networking of classrooms
from different regions provided students with the opportunity to watch live instruction, and
participate in discussions with their instructors in real time as well as engage in dialogue in the
presence of other students (Moore & Kearsley, 2012). The advantage of a live stream video for
classroom instruction extended classroom extension of learning in various disciplines (Moore &
Kearsley, 2012).
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 13
The evolution of distance education as it is known today was introduced in the 1980s,
when there was an emergence of Internet technology (Moore & Kearsley, 2012), and as that
technology expanded, so had the number of students attending online education programs. By
the 1980s, an estimated 300,000 students were enrolled in U.S. higher education distance
education courses utilizing either radio, video technology, telephone, or mail (Matthews, 1999).
Technology had allowed online education to be available in many developed countries.
Therefore, students could attend online classes from various geographical locations throughout
the world and could join in an online classroom community from the comfort of their own homes
(Moore & Kearsley, 2012).
Distance education had been transformed because of the availability of the personal
computer to use in an online educational environment. The online format improved affordability
and provided scheduling flexibility. The online presentation became a popular mode in which to
obtain a degree (Harasim, 2000). In fact, 6.7 million students representing 32 percent of the total
college and university student population in the United States attended one or more courses
online in 2011, representing an increase of 800,000 from the previous year (Allen & Seaman,
2013).
Online education continued to grow. According to data published by the National Center
for Education Statistics, there were approximately 5.5 million Title IV institutions with online
students. There are approximately 7.1 million students who attended at least one class online
(Allen & Seaman, 2013), which may indicate another 1.6 million students attending institutions
that do not participate in Title IV programs. In her book, Johnson (2003) described online
learning as “the most significant phenomenon occurring in higher education today” (p.7). All
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 14
Institutions who offered online education continued to include online course and program
offerings as an important component in their overall strategic plan (Allen & Seaman, 2011).
Students choose online education primarily for reasons of convenience and cost
effectiveness (Allen & Seaman, 2011). Typically, students could work from their homes at times
suitable to them, around other work and family responsibilities. Students were also able to
reduce their cost of education relating to travel and transportation, since a fully online course
required no presence at the college campus. However, online courses were often very
challenging to the student who was more familiar with a face-to-face environment.
Wojciechowski and Palmer (2005) conducted a quantitative study of students who took an online
business course over a 3-year period at a small rural community college in Michigan, examining
the characteristics of these students to online success. The data indicated students who had taken
online classes previously, who had a higher overall grade board average, had attended an
orientation, had not had withdrawn from previous classes, and had higher than average reading
and writing scores were more successful in online classes than those who did not have the
described characteristics.
A qualitative study of faculty’s belief of the issues that affected negatively or positively
the experience of the faculty who teach online was conducted to expand on previous research
done up through the early 2000s. The purpose of this study was to determine what changes may
have taken place over a period of time relating to faculty’s satisfaction or dissatisfaction with
online teaching and to get a more in-depth knowledge of barriers faced by online faculty. The
results of the study indicated some faculty were reluctant to participate in online teaching for a
number of reasons, including lack of institutional support, lack of student readiness, technical
and pedagogical skill needs, and academic honesty (Oomen-Early & Murphy, 2009). Some
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 15
faculty had taken the position that that the quality and overall experience of students in distance
education was inferior in comparison to that of students from a traditional classroom course or
program. Faculty reported that online courses were both time consuming and challenging to
teach (Oomen-Early and Murphy, 2009). If faculty believed the institution has satisfactorily
addressed issues of academic integrity and student online readiness, they would be more willing
to teach online courses and would be more engaged with their students (Oomen-Early and
Murphy, 2009). The impetus for faculty concerns is online course design and instruction
(Oomen-Early &Murphy, 2009). Fish and Wickersham (2009) identified best practices for online
faculty and reinforced the importance of faculty to think differently about teaching and learning,
and must develop be involved in faculty development in the areas of course design and
technology to minimize faculty resistance.
Educators remained concerned as they continued to report issues of attrition and failures
in online learning courses within their institutions, in higher numbers from those in traditional
classroom environments. Research data from several studies (Allen & Seaman, 2011; Lee &
Choi, 2011; Nash, 2005; Pierrakeas, 2004;) reported a wide range of concerns that college and
university students who enrolled in online courses were dropping out of their programs at a
record number, in comparison to on-ground students. Some studies indicated that nontraditional
students have had more difficulty learning online (Nash, 2005); however, other studies indicated
there was little correlation between certain student characteristics such as ethnicity, age, gender,
employment status and grade point average to high attrition rates (Nash, 2005; Packman et al.,
2004). Nonetheless, recent research, most of which had been quantitative studies, had focused on
identifying the at-risk student and methods in which to work with those students to improve their
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 16
success and retention (Hart, 2012). There was a gap in the literature regarding these types of
studies using qualitative methodology.
Study data indicated that retention was improved if the students had more face-to-face
time with faculty, and that the students received various forms of communication with their
faculty prior to starting online classes (Ali & Reeds, 2009). Students also felt that they were part
of the learning community in which they attended if they could engage in communication with
their peers (Ali & Reeds, 2009). Data also indicated that when faculty involved students in
shared learning, satisfaction was improved, resulting in improved retention (Beaudoin, 2002).
The problem to be addressed in this study was the attrition rate for an institution’s
Associate Degree program in AEC offered at Green Valley College (pseudonym) located in
Fullerton, California. Green Valley College (GVC), a for-profit educational institution, offered
both certificate and degree programs in allied health, business and the trades. Most GVC
programs were offered on-ground; however, students in the AEC field had the option of
attending the programs fully online, blended learning, or fully on campus. The AEC associate’s
degree program was an 18-month program. The on-ground program experienced at 75 percent
graduation rate, compared to 58 percent of the students who attended the fully online Addiction
Education Program. Therefore, the need to investigate the reasons for the low online completion
rate was warranted. Students and faculty were interviewed for this qualitative study, and they
provided data as to why the attrition rate was high, and solutions to resolve the problem.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to examine the reasons underlying why students, enrolled
in the AEC at GVC, chose to leave their online program. The attrition rate of online students was
much higher than for students who attended the face-to-face program. Students who attended
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 17
GVC’s online AEC program on-ground had an overall completion rate of 75 percent in
comparison to online students of the same program of 58% percent. The purpose of this study
was to investigate factors that contributed to the students’ decision to not complete their
education. The study data provided an opportunity to recommend alternatives relating to
knowledge, motivation and organization that could positively impact the online students’ ability
to complete their college education at a level proportionate with the graduation rate of on-ground
students of the same program.
Importance of Addressing the Problem
It was important to solve the problem of high attrition rates of online college courses for a
number of reasons. Students who failed or left the online courses without completing them
prolonged program graduation or never graduated. This attrition rate resulted in a lack of student
achievement and dissatisfaction with career goals, employment opportunities, and wages. In
addition, students who left the institution out may have issues with their self-confidence, self-
efficacy, and their motivation to fulfill any other long-term goals (Lee & Choi, 2010).
Students who did not complete their college degree were confronted with restricted
employment and lack of advancement opportunities in their lives (Day & Newburger, 2002).
Over a lifetime, these adults were likely to have earnings that are significantly less than those
who graduated from college (Day & Newburger, 2002). Reduced earnings over a lifetime have a
profound negative impact on the individual, his or her family, and the overall economy. From a
regulatory perspective, accredited and/or state approved institutions that failed to achieve
acceptable retention rates faced program probationary status, or lost accreditation or approval of
courses or programs. Students who left college were often faced with mounds of student loan
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 18
debt and did not have the income to pay back the debt. Consequently, students ended up
defaulting on the student loans, which resulted in damaging credit (Dynarski,1994).
Organizational Context and Mission
Green Valley College (GVC), a private postsecondary education institution with its main
campus located in Fullerton, California, offered certificate and degree programs in a variety of
disciplines. The mission of GVC was to provide associate’s degree level education in fields of
study that included business and addiction counseling degrees, with accounting, electrical,
HVAC technician, and dental assistant certificate programs. All the programs were designed to
assist their graduates in obtaining employment. The institution offered both classroom setting
and online education in most of the disciplines, including an associate’s degree program in AEC
that commenced in 2009. Students from this program range between the ages of 20 and 56, and
had undergone admissions testing and an interview prior to program admission. Students who
complete this program are eligible to sit for the IC&RC examination for certification through
CCAAP or other certifying bodies. Graduates join NAADAC, the largest organization
representing alcohol and drug addiction counselors.
At the time the study commenced, there were a total of 172 students taking coursework in
the Addiction Education Counseling Program, of which 71 students were attending AEC courses
fully online, and another 25 students who participated in a mix of online and face-to-face classes
in a blended learning format. There were 76 ground students who did not participate in any
online classes. Of the total 172 students, 58 percent of the students were female and 42 percent
male. Approximately 82% of the student body came from under-represented population with
approximately 52% Hispanic, 11% Black, 7% Asian, and 12% declined to state. The remaining
students identified themselves as Caucasian. Online and blended students had a similar gender
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 19
and ethnic mix. Of those 96 students, 52% of the students were female and 48% were male. The
ethnic population was comprised of 48% Hispanic, 9% Black, 7% Asian, 30% Caucasian, and
the remaining students declined to state their ethnicity. The institution employed four full-time
AEC program faculty, seven part-time AEC program faculty, seven general education faculty
(six of which were part-time), a program director, and two student services coordinators who
served the 96 online students. The 76 ground students were supported with three full-time and
four part-time faculty, in addition to the program director who provided leadership to both online
and on-campus students. There were two part-time and one full-time student services
coordinators who supported the on-ground students.
The primary roles of both on-ground and online faculty and staff were to provide
necessary academic and student services support to the student body. The program director
supervised AEC faculty. The director of education supervised the AEC program director and the
program director of the other programs offered at GVC. The curriculum was developed by the
program director in conjunction with the faculty and reviewed by the vice president of
academics. One of the advantages of attending GVC’s AEC program was the ability of students
to transfer their credits to select 4-year colleges that had an articulation agreement with GVC.
Organizational Performance Status
The basis of the organizational performance problem was the increase in the attrition rate
of the students who attended the online AEC program at GVC. The students who attended the
AEC program online in the 2014 cohort experienced a completion rate of 58%, in comparison to
those in the traditional classroom setting, with a completion rate of 75% for the same period.
This indicated a 42 percent attrition rate for online students in the AEC program, in comparison
to an attrition rate of 26 percent of the on-ground students of the same program. This problem
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 20
affected the institution’s overall goal to achieve and maintain an overall 75 percent retention of
all students in all programs. It was important for the organization to solve this problem, as the
institution must achieve an overall minimum retention rate of 70 percent for all programs to meet
the regulatory requirements (GVC annual report, 2014). Failure for an institution to achieve
benchmark retention rates could result in loss of program approval (Eaton, J. S., 2012). High
attrition rates represented a larger societal problem, which was the continued shortage of
qualified substance abuse counselors in California (http://bls.gov/).
Organizational Performance Goal
The goal of GVC was that, by December 2018, the institution would have achieved a
completion rate of 75 percent for its online associate’s degree program in AEC studies to the
level that was proportionate with the graduation rate of those students who attended the on-
ground program.
The GVC Executive Committee had established this goal as a key improvement area, as
the completion numbers for this program online had fallen below the standard determined by the
Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education (BPPE), the California state agency governing
private colleges. The GVC Executive Committee of the institution established that, to exceed the
minimum regulatory requirements for this program and achieve the institution’s program goal of
75 percent completion, the institution must focus on the completion rate for online AEC
program. The achievement of the completion rate for the online AEC program was reported in
combination with the on-ground completion rate as part of its annual reporting data to the BPPE.

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 21
Description of Stakeholder Groups
There were many stakeholder groups that provided support to the achievement of a
higher retention rate of online students at GVC, such as the students, families, faculty,
administration, student services staff, help groups, religious organizations, schools, clinical site
supervisors, and employers. There were several stakeholder groups that provided support and
received benefit from achieving of the organization’s performance goal: Students, faculty, and
administration. The administration included the online director of education, Vice President of
Operations and Campus President. Although they were important stakeholders, they were not
included as direct participants in the study.
This research study included the specific stakeholder groups of online faculty and online
students from the online AEC program that were purposefully chosen (Patton, 2005). The
student stakeholder group consisted of students that had left AEC program without completing.
Faculty were also purposefully chosen and included Addiction Education Program and general
education faculty that taught online in the program. These student and faculty groups who were
chosen to participate in the study were purposefully chosen because they knew the in-depth
knowledge and understanding of reasons underlying why students left the program and did not
complete their degree. The stakeholder groups identified detailed performance goals as described
below

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 22
Table 1
Organizational Mission, Global Goal, and Stakeholder Performance Goals
Organizational Mission
The mission of Green Valley College is to provide associate’s degree and certificate levels of
education in fields of study that would lead to employment in their chosen field of study.
Organizational Performance Goal
By December 2018, Green Valley College will increase the completion rate for its online
associate’s degree program in Addiction Education Counseling from 58% to 75%, to a level
proportionate with the graduation rate of those students attending the on-ground program.
Stakeholder 1 Goal
Students

Stakeholder 2 Goal
Faculty
Stakeholder 3 Goal
Administrators
Stakeholder 4 Goal
Advisory Board
Members
By December 2018,
students will become
fully engaged in the
online program as
evidenced through
their motivation,
commitment, and
participation in
coursework as well as
student support
services and student
advisement sessions
to assist students in
remaining in school.
By December 2018,
faculty will receive
additional training in
order to redesign the
online AEC
curriculum to include
the integration of
advanced technology
that provides online
community support
and increases student
engagement,
including face-to-face
sessions for program
participants.
By December 2018,
administrators will
invest in additional
resources such as
technology, time, and
training, and talent
dedicated to the AEC
program that provides
additional support for
faculty and students.
By December 2018, a
minimum of seven
advisory board
members will
participate in at least
five advisory board
meetings, to provide
input to
administrators and
education leaders at
the institution on the
revised industry
standards and
recommendations for
integrated technology
in the revised
curriculum.

Stakeholders for the Study and Stakeholder Performance Gap
While it was understood that all stakeholders would provide support as well as receive
benefit from this study, there were two stakeholders, students and faculty, who were participants
in the study to address the research questions regarding the factors underlying the increased
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 23
attrition rate for online classes in the associate’s degree program in AEC. The stakeholders
(students and faculty) answered the research questions and provided information that addressed
the performance gap. This gap related to the statistical difference in the rate of attrition for
students who enrolled in the AEC degree program, between the institution’s online and on-
campus AEC program. The purpose of addressing the attrition rate was to change the knowledge
base, the motivation, and organization of the delivery of the AEC program that could be a
consideration of the attrition rate (Clark &Estes, 2008).
Purpose of the Project and Questions
This gap analysis project was conducted to explore the impact of the knowledge,
motivation and organizational influences that had interfered with the organization’s goal of
increasing the completion rate for its online associate’s degree program in AEC from its the rate
of 58 percent to the 75 percent by December 2018. Full attention would normally be given to all
stakeholders in a comprehensive gap analysis; however, for practical purposes, the stakeholders’
focus for this study was faculty and students at the institution. The inquiry questions that directed
this study were the following:
1. What were the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that inhibited
increasing the completion rate for the online associate’s degree program in addiction
education counseling from 58 percent to the organizational goal of 75 percent retention
by December 2018?
2. What were the recommended knowledge, motivation, and organizational solutions
necessary to close this gap?

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 24
Conceptual and Methodological Framework
Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis model was applied as the conceptual framework to
assist in identifying the cause of the performance gap, and to determine how to close the gap
between the previously reported performance levels and the desired performance levels of the
organization. The primary purpose of this study was to identify the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational causes that prevented students from the online associate’s degree in AEC program
from completing their program of study. The case study research was a qualitative approach, and
various methods were used to gather data, including interviews, focus group and document
analyses, discussed more in Chapter Three. These aspects of qualitative methodology were
included for triangulation of the data. The research results were evaluated to make
recommendations on appropriate solutions.
Definitions
Accreditation: A peer review process of institutional quality review conducted by a non-profit
organization that accredits institutions of higher education and are recognized as the authority on
institutional quality. Accreditors undergo a review and approval process with the US Department
of Education for recognition with the federal agency.
Addiction Education Counseling (AEC): An associate’s degree offered by GVC over an 18-
month period of time in the field of addiction and counseling to provide students with
knowledge, skills, and a foundation for becoming counselors to help the addiction population.
Benchmark Completion Rates: Accredited institutions must maintain annual benchmark
completion rates, typically of 70%, to remain in good standing.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 25
Blended Learning: Students who participate in programs that offer some courses within a
program in a fully online format, and other courses in the same program as traditional on-ground
coursework.
BPPE: Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education, the state agency in California that approves
private postsecondary colleges. Institutions that are accredited are exempt from some of the
regulatory oversight.
CAPPS: California Association of Private Postsecondary Schools, a non-profit association that
represents private colleges and universities in California.
CCAAP: California Consortium of Addiction Programs and Professionals. This non-profit
organization is the largest statewide consortium of addiction education programs, community-
based treatment agencies, and addiction professionals in California. CCAAP is one of three
certifying bodies of addiction professionals in California.
Hybrid Courses: Coursework that encompasses both a face-to-face and online element to the
courses.
IC&RC: International Certification and Reciprocity Consortium. The organization supports
public safety in the field of addiction by offering credentials through experience, education, and
testing that are nationally and internationally recognized for addiction professionals.
Learning Management System: A software application for the administration and delivery of
online courses. The software will track student activity and provide reports on the student use of
the system. All grades, attendance, and other progress is maintained in the system.
NAADAC: It is the largest national association of addiction professionals in the United States,
representing approximately 85,000 professionals in the field of substance abuse and addiction.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 26
On-Campus or On-Ground: Courses taken at a physical location and delivered fully at location,
primarily face-to-face delivery method. On-Campus and On-ground are terms used
interchangeably.
Online: Courses with content is fully delivered through a web browser with no face-to-face
contact. Generally, there are no face-to-face sessions in this delivery method.
SARA: State Authorization Reciprocity Agreement. This organization is an agreement made
among states in the United States that creates a standard nationwide regarding how
postsecondary online learning programs should be governed. It was developed to establish a
simpler process for students who reside in one state who want to enroll in online classes in
another state. For an institution to join SARA, the state in which the institution is located must be
an approved state in the consortium. Otherwise, the institution may not offer an online program
in that state without obtaining state agency authorization.
State Authorization: The United States Department of Education Higher Education Act specifies
that all states must meet minimum authorization guidelines to regulate online student activity in
their respective states.
Traditional: Courses offered with no online technology. Course is delivered orally or in a
written format.
USDOE: United States Department of Education.
Organization of the Dissertation
There were five chapters in this research study. The first chapter presented the
background of the problem of the attrition rates in online Addiction Education Program at the
institution studied, as well as provided the initial presentation of the organization’s mission,
goals, and the stakeholders groups involved. The organization’s performance level, at the time
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 27
the study was commenced, was discussed in comparison to the preferred goals of the
organization. Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis was introduced in this chapter. Chapter Two
contained a literature review of online education, with discussion in addiction education.
Chapter Three, the methodology, specified the possible causes for the gap in performance,
looking at the three critical components affecting performance: Knowledge, motivation, and
organization. Chapter Three also detailed the practice used for research and analysis. In Chapter
Four, the data collection and data analysis of the research process were reviewed and the results
were presented. Chapter Five examined implications from the study and recommendations for
closing the performance gap and future research.

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 28
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
This chapter included an overall review of the history of distance learning, and the
reasons behind distance learning. The chapter also examined the benefits and challenges of
online education as well as associated student risk factors. The literature addressed online
programs and why student leave college and do not persist. Specific student and faculty
challenges related to the AEC program at GVC were also discussed. Finally, there was a review
of the literature that discussed reasons why students do not persist, using the gap analysis model,
developed by Clark and Estes (2008).
Distance Education
History of Distance Education
Although distance education is believed to have started in a simplistic form in the 1930s
in Sweden as a way of providing confirmation of knowledge through examination (Baath, 1981),
correspondence education is known to have its beginnings in 1840 when the inventor of
shorthand, Sir Isaac Pitman from the United Kingdom (Curran, 1997) decided to extend his
participants outside of the immediate geographical area. He expanded his stenography
coursework by sending the training materials by mail around the U.K and the world. Within 25
years, many similar programs were created in various countries, including Japan, Germany,
Australia and the United States (Curran, 1997). Correspondence teaching expanded first in the
U.S. at the University of Chicago in the early 1900s, where the pioneer correspondence teaching
department was developed (Miller, 1999).
College and university administrators embraced distance education because it provided
solutions to physical space limitations and expanded access for people in remote areas to learn
(Matthews, 1999). Distance education continued to expand and within 20 years educational
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 29
institutions began delivery of educational programming through radio by the early 1920s. The
Federal Communications Commission approved the first educational license to three universities
in the United States in 1921 (Casey, 2008). Radio had many benefits, including the ability to
deliver educational programming live through radio waves to the public for those who were
interested, and students could quickly hear the instructor’s lessons, and no longer had to rely on
the post office delivery of correspondence learning materials (Casey, 2008). In 1940, the first
college level programming was offered. By 1946, there were over 200 licenses issued to
educational institutions. Radio broadcasted accredited courses that fulfilled degree requirements
as well as personal development offerings to those who were interested in general learning
(Watkins, 1991). Radio broadcasted educational programs gave faculty the opportunity to
supplement their traditional curricula, similar to what is known today as hybrid learning (Barker
et. al, 1989).
Using radio to deliver educational programming was the impetus for the new video
technology through computer networking (Harasim, 2000) that would enhance educational
opportunities in the late 1960s and early 1970s through video streaming. These video monitors
provided live classroom feed to various locations, such as extension classrooms, military bases,
businesses, and other places that would attract college students. The video technology was the
first of its kind. Using video, the instructors provided a live lecture, following the same pedagogy
as traditional teaching (Harasim, 2000). This video technology allowed students to see and hear
their instructors from remote locations. Faculty and students had direct and immediate
interaction with each other, and college faculty had the ability to teach to a larger population
(Moore & Kearsley, 2012).
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 30
Television education channels provided another distance learning education option for
students in the early 70s. Coastline Community College was the first college to broadcast courses
(Moore & Kearsley, 1996). Students could watch a full class presentation, and instructors could
show their classroom creativity. Televised classes expanded access to education for more
students, and, unlike video technology, it was limited to the locations of installation. Television
could serve anyone who had a television and was interested in attending college (Miller, 1999;
Johnson, 2003). These courses were structured as telecourses, “…a coordinated learning system
based on a series of television programs” (Johnson, 2003, p.51).
Although distance learning still had its limitations, there were breakthroughs in a new
educational format to reach a larger population who wanted additional learning. Correspondence
education, radio, and televised broadcasts provided student access; however, attending college
through distance education still did not permit open discussion and collaboration between the
student and faculty, and many students still preferred on-site participation (Moore & Kearsley,
1996). Prior to the introduction of personal computers, the computer system was on a main
frame (Holmberg, 2005), and only used in large corporations. With the advent of personal
computers this technology became more affordable, convenient and available to the public.
Students who owned personal computers began taking online classes in the 1990s (Harasim,
2000), after the launch of the Internet in 1989. Online education developed on a grand scale in
1996 after the World Wide Web was developed (Harasim, 2000). Thereafter, the online
environment experienced its largest growth, and distance learning became popular and people
from many households enrolled.

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 31
Distance Learning Today
Online coursework was developed using a learning management system whereby faculty
could post objectives, learning materials, and administer testing to assess learning. Students
could log on at any time for asynchronous learning and could receive feedback via the online
system. Distance education faculty no longer depended on mail delivery to give or provide
student feedback (Li & Irby, 2008).
Today, online has increased in popularity due to the busy lifestyles of individuals who
cannot sacrifice their obligations to work and family to attend college. For many years, online
education had a stigma that correlated this method of education to lack of quality. Because of
demand, prominent universities have brought credibility to this delivery method, and these
institutions joined thousands of institutions across the country and added online degree programs
to accommodate the growing population of the high achieving students with low availability of
time.
Today, prominent universities are partnering with Coursera, edX, and others to offer
massive open online courses (MOOC) at no cost to the learner, but typically no credit (Pappano,
2012). Today, MIT and Harvard partner with edX and Coursera have conducted research into
student learning, the core mission for the development of MOOC classes. Through this
partnership, MIT and Harvard can identify, with precision detail, what helps students learn and
what stifles their learning abilities. EdX and Coursera have a combined enrollment of 4.5
million students through the MOOC. Students are getting a free education; however, there are
no credits or grades issued for course taken, and therefore, students do not earn credits toward
degree completion (Breslow, et al, 2013). The research of online through these MOOC’s will
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 32
provide important data about what helps and hinders student persistence in the online
environment, and will serve as important research for institution such as GVC.
The change in the federal regulations in 2006 permitted access to Title IV aid for distance
learning programs, which contributed to the increase in online enrollments in the United States.
Additionally, state regulations required institutions to obtain authorization to offer online courses
to residences of states without a physical location can now expand program offerings to other
states if their state participates in SARA, the State Authorization Reciprocity Agreement.
Institutions that are required to adhere to the state authorization regulation may join SARA to be
eligible to accept students from additional states beyond the home state. Currently, California,
Florida, and Massachusetts are not part of SARA.
Benefits and Challenges of Online Education
Benefits of Online Education
Online education has provided students benefits in the areas of access, choice, flexibility
and career prospects. Online education has grown in its availability and demand, due to the
development of technology, and because of its numerous benefits (Li & Irby, 2008). Online
education has become available to individuals who may not have been able to attend, such as
those living in remote locations, or having family and work commitments that prevent them from
committing to attend on-ground at a specific time. Instead, students have access to potentially
take classes from any college or university anywhere in the world (Johnson, 2003). In addition,
colleges and universities offer a wide range of coursework in their online schedules, thereby
providing ample courses and degrees for student consideration. This benefit of availability of
coursework outside the students’ typical geographical region provides new career opportunities.
Many students prefer online classes instead of on-ground classes because they have the
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 33
flexibility of completing assignments and testing at any location with no time restrictions, as
long as they have computer and Internet access (Lee & Choi, 2010). Students also have reported
the cost savings associated with online classes (Li, 2008), including saving money in
transportation costs and childcare.
Additionally, administrators and faculty of institutions of higher learning see some
advantages in online learning. The increase in populations at institutions offering online classes
has resulted in increased student numbers from a much larger geographical area, leading to a
substantial growth in revenues (Allen & Seaman, 2013). Institutions have been able to add
degree programs and courses online without expanding physical campus facilities such as
classrooms and dormitories (Allen & Seaman, 2013). Administrators have not been obligated to
invest those revenues from online students into campus classroom facilities, thereby making
online learning a financial benefit for colleges and universities (Allen & Seaman, 2013).
Challenges of Students and Faculty in Online Education
Student Challenges
Student challenges in the online learning environment may differ, depending on the
“ethnicity, gender, age, and non-traditional student characteristics” (Wladis, Conway, & Hachey,
2015, p. 147). Students reported that they consider online learning to be intimidating and
challenging. A quantitative study by Song, Singleton, Hill and Koh (2005) was conducted with
76 graduate students to better understand their perceptions of online learners, and found that
students felt challenged in the online environment by the time constraints and by technology
issues. They also felt they needed a better understanding of the course objectives and a stronger
sense of community. Sadera, Robertson, Song, and Mindon (2009) reported the findings of a
study that looked at engagement and sense of community in a study of undergraduate online
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 34
students in a university on the east coast of the United States. The results indicated the students
who do not believe they are part of a community are less likely to be successful online students.
Authors Conrad and Donaldson (2011) in their book, Engaging the Online Learner,
explained that students cannot be passive learners who depend on their instructors to simply
deliver the knowledge to them. They reinforced the importance of students being actively
engaged in their learning and providing input to their faculty if they are to be successful in the
online environment. They further stressed the need for the development of students to take the
initiative in contributing to generating knowledge to the learning community. Conrad and
Donaldson acknowledged that faculty need to learn how to be better facilitators of learning for
their students, and students need to be more self-directed to be more successful in the online
environment.
According to Poellhuber, Chomienne, and Karsenti (2008), online courses draw students
with a record of failed or repeated classes. Although these students wanted to attend online
classes, if they do not have the ability or desire to be self-directed and active in their learning,
they will not succeed in online education (Poellhuber, et al., 2008). Students must also be
persistent in their online learning for academic success. Student academic failure leads to low
self-esteem, low self-efficacy, and the likelihood that the student will leave school (Poellhuber et
al., 2008; Lee & Choi, 2010).
Online learning was challenging for many students because they did not receive face-to-
face time as they would if they reported to a campus building in a room with the instructor at the
helm of the classroom. Online students desired interaction with the faculty (Paul & Cochran,
2013). Data indicated that students need and want a sense that they belong to a community,
connect with their faculty, and receive support to succeed (Dawson, 2006; LaBarbera, 2013; Paul
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 35
& Cochran, 2013; Shea, Li, Swan, & Pickett, 2005). Students instead reported feelings of
isolation and loneliness during their experience with online education because they could not
connect with the other students, had lack of instructor interaction, and they expected a different
online experience (Bambara, et al., 2009). Feedback and immediate involvement in the online
environment is vital to the success of online programs (Paul & Cochran, 2013).
Students who are uncomfortable with online technology will be challenged and therefore
dissatisfied in their online learning experience. Students who have time limitations, who are not
self-regulated, and who do not comprehend the online course objectives also often do poorly
online (Song, et al, 2004). These students will only succeed if they have frequent and immediate
feedback and communication with their faculty and if they believe they can rely on other non-
faculty support to get them through the course (Jones, 2013).
Faculty Challenges
Paul and Cochran (2013) studied the interaction among the faculty, students, technology,
and institution and their roles in the creation of a successful online program. The study
explained that when these four components cross with each other, this is when the greatest
challenges and benefits happen. Paul and Cochran (2013) reported that each component needs
support from the other. Faculty needed support from the institution’s administration, technology,
and pedagogical support. Students need support from faculty, administration, other students and
technology, and so on. Faculty are faced with similar challenges as students, relating to the need
for strong interaction, presence, and feedback, to have a positive effect on learning and
motivation, and it is just as vital in the online learning environment. In the same manner that
students need the connection with their faculty ((Paul & Cochran, 2013), faculty desire the same.
Connection in the online community is challenging. Nearly half of all communication is
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 36
comprised of non-verbal language and voice quality (Oomen-Early & Murphy, 2009; Young &
Bruce, 2011; Paul & Cochran, 2013). Faculty are at a disadvantage when teaching online
courses, as they cannot rely on a first impression to substitute what they cannot see or hear (Paul
& Cochran, 2013).
Faculty also believe that online teaching requires a greater commitment than that of the
on-ground classroom delivery approach. Tomei (2006) studied the effect of replacing all face-to-
face activities of instruction, advisement and evaluation for one university’s program in
Instructional Technology. The students were given the option to change to the online delivery
method for one semester. Some students switched to the online while others remained on
campus. The study examined how the online delivery impacted the faculty workload. Tomei
(2006) found that the teaching and administrative duties of online faculty were greater than that
of on-campus faculty by 14 percent. The study data results indicated that faculty must commit to
the additional time and be immediately available to the students in an online teaching
environment, often at different times of the day and night, to be successful (Tomei, 2006).
A study conducted by Orr, Williams, and Pennington (2008) examined the faculty’s
perceptions relating to compensation, organization, technology, and support. The data indicated
that faculty believed they were not receiving the appropriate compensation for the planning and
delivering of online courses, and are often working additional hours without any support from
the administration (Orr, Williams, Pennington, 2008). Faculty also perceived the development of
new courses, revising existing course curriculum, and modifications to courses to meet industry
standards required technical skills, infrastructure and affirmation from the administration that
they did not receive consistently (Orr, Williams, Pennington, 2008). Oftentimes, faculty feel that,
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 37
even when they are flexible and give additional time to the students, they end up dropping from
the course anyway.
The faculty could be challenged with lack of support from administration. Often, faculty
believe they have failed when they experience high drops in their courses, and are unsure how to
resolve the problem. They frequently look to the administration for guidance on the dilemma.
Young and Duncan (2014) conducted a study, looking at ratings from students from online and
face-to-face courses to determine how faculty can strengthen their online teaching. The data
reviewed 172 online courses and 470 on-ground courses, and found that students from on-ground
courses rated higher than students online in the areas of communication, interaction, grading, and
methods of instruction. The study concluded that when the administration provides support and
guidance to faculty, including professional development, faculty are often more successful in
online instruction. Administrators also need to realize that faculty who teach online have a higher
workload and even with all their efforts, may get lower ratings from their students.
A qualitative study of two universities in North Carolina was conducted by Orr,
Williams, and Pennington (2008) relating to faculty’s perceptions of the administration’s efforts
to address the concerns relating to faculty’s ability to prepare and deliver the online courses. The
results of the study indicated that faculty desired direction from the administration on online
efforts, including greater communication and feedback on the development of courses,
technology tools utilized in the online platform, and long-term implementation plans. Faculty
found themselves creating short-term solutions that only required additional resources including
time to revise in the future. Faculty also desired a team-based approach, including support with
technology and availability of resources. Faculty believed they did not know what direction the
institution was going in, and did not know how they fit in to the overall direction.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 38
A quantitative study conducted by Lloyd, Byrne, and McCoy (2012) to examine the
perceived challenges of teaching online. There were 75 faculty from one state university in the
southeastern United States that responded to the survey. The results from the survey indicated
that faculty rated workload online as the greatest barrier, followed by time commitment, lack of
communication with students, and finally, issues related to technology. The faculty with less
experience indicated greater struggles with teaching online. Overall, the study supported less
work hours or reduced work load to address the faculty challenges to their online responsibilities.
Maguire (2005) looked at 13 studies about the attitude of faculty toward distance
education, and the conditions in which faculty were motivated or lacked motivation to teach
online. The study concluded that administrators impacted the motivation of faculty. If
administrators did not understand the motivation of faculty, it was difficult to develop create an
appropriate online program. Additionally, if faculty felt they were supported, they were more
effective. Keengwe and Kidd (2010) examined literature related to online teaching and learning,
specifically barriers faculty face. Faculty believed hardware and software issues and lack of
technology expertise were barriers to their ability to teach online. The faculty desired greater
support in these areas from the administration. The faculty desired a comfort level with the
technology so that they could transfer their knowledge to their students.
Assumed Causes to Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization
The knowledge, motivation, and organization (KMO) influences that may impact the
stakeholder’s goal are studied from a theoretical perspective. The stakeholders’ goal of
improving the retention of online students in the AEC program to 75 percent must first address
the knowledge of why students fail to complete school, and the reasons behind the high attrition
rates. The stakeholders’ motivation is to approach the barriers surrounding the lack of
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 39
persistence from the perspective of both the students and the faculty and, when the stakeholders
have approached this issue and the motivation behind the reason students leave, they can
influence how they provide guidance on changes within the organization and changes to increase
the retention of students to complete their education.
There are obstacles that prevent students from completing their courses online, and these
assumed causes can be characterized in three main groups, consistent with Clark and Estes
(2008) gap analysis framework: Knowledge, motivation, and organization. The framework of
Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) suggests four knowledge types: factual, conceptual, procedural
and metacognitive. The definition of factual knowledge is the understanding of definitions and
terms. Conceptual knowledge is knowledge pertaining to relationships, processes, and categories.
Procedural knowledge is "how to" steps and strategies. Metacognitive describes one’s action of
self-assessing or self-monitoring. Each type of knowledge that faculty may need will be
categorized into one of these knowledge types because each knowledge type is evaluated
differently.
Clark and Estes (2008) discuss three types of motivational processes: Active choice,
persistence, and mental effort. Active choice refers to taking action to work toward a goal.
Persistence describes the continued work toward that goal, regardless of distractions that may
occur. And, finally, mental effort means working smarter to find answers resulting in goals
achievement.
As it pertains to organizations, Gallimore and Goldenberg (2011) discuss the idea of
culture through two main concepts: Cultural model and cultural settings. Cultural models are
the values and beliefs that are automated in daily life. Cultural models include competitiveness,
resistance to change, lack of trust, feelings of hopelessness, social loafing, to name a few. The
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 40
cultural settings are those settings that are visible within organizations (Gallimore & Goldenberg,
2011). Examples of cultural settings include lack of role models, lack of resources, employee
turnover, poor instructors, restrictive rules, and lack of choice to name a few. The theories
associated with knowledge, motivation and organization were utilized as the framework to
identify problems that may exist at GVC.
Knowledge and Skills
Factual knowledge. In terms of factual knowledge, the faculty and students may lack
knowledge of technology for the online classroom. Specifically, faculty may not have the factual
knowledge of the updated features and supplemental communication software added to the
learning management system. The faculty need the requisite factual knowledge for technology to
be fully integrated (Ertmer, 2006) and resulting in the goal of a good online learning
environment for the students who remain in school. Additionally, the terminology used in the
online environment differ from that of the on-campus setting. The factual knowledge includes
understanding the features of the learning management system and the common terms associated
within the system. Faculty must understand these features to support the students in the online
classroom. With richer technology, students can gain a more enhanced and interactive
environment which they desire to remain in school (Kim & Bonk, 2006). Author Hannon (2009)
pointed out in his study on the use of technology that the key to the success of technology is
when the human translation is aligned with the system. In other words, selections and order of
actions must be clear to everyone, using the same language or terms.
In a study examining the obstacles to faculty participation in both developing coursework
and teaching online, Nkonge and Gueldenzoph (2006) cited lack of knowledge about technology
as one of the reasons faculty resisted teaching online. In another study by Allen and Seaman
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 41
(2008), faculty cited lack of knowledge of technology as a factor in their frustrations in teaching
online courses.
To intervene to make changes with the goal of retaining the online students to complete
their degrees, faculty must have the factual knowledge of why students leave the program, and
the reason behind the attrition. Faculty lacked the details of why students do not persist. Faculty
were unable to detect if the students were on the verge of leaving, and what constitutes this high-
risk or at-risk status. Factual knowledge must be an understanding of whether students dropped
out because of psychological impact, emotional impact, and to address the question of whether
students were able to meet the academic demands (Tinto, 2012). A study on online college
students who enrolled in a non-degree program indicated students leave because they did not
have time to study, they had personal problems, and college costs were unaffordable (Yukselturk
& Inan, 2006). Faculty need to be aware of the various reasons students left to assist future
students in overcoming similar challenges.
Conceptual knowledge. According to Tinto (2012), the conceptual knowledge for this
study included the various perspectives and definitions of dropouts or departure from college and
how those definitions of these words differed between students, faculty, and administration.
Tinto (2012) explained how the term dropout or departure is perceived and stated “……views of
departure share a common theme, namely that retention and departure are primarily the reflection
of individual actions and therefore are largely due to the ability or willingness of the individual
to successfully complete the tasks associated with college attendance” (p. 85). Institutions
usually framed the decision for students to depart from college as a deficiency or failure of the
student. Faculty may have determined that students had left school because they had difficulty
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 42
with the requirements and stresses of college life (Tinto, 2012). Tinto (2012) recognized that
there are various definitions and ways to approach the concept of what constitutes a dropout.
Procedural knowledge. Faculty needed to have knowledge of “how to do something”
which included knowledge of subject-specific skills, such as those required to fully use the LMS.
Faculty must have procedural knowledge of how to use group email, how to add or delete
activities and assignments, and knowledge of how to determine when certain procedures should
be implemented on the LMS. This knowledge was necessary to achieve the goal of increasing
the rate of retention for online students. Regardless of the education level, technology
integration cannot occur unless the faculty had the knowledge of how to use it effectively (Hew
& Brush, 2007).
There were a variety of factors that contributed to the knowledge barriers to teaching
online, specifically for AEC program faculty. For example, AEC faculty were not fully aware of
all the industry professional growth and development training available to the faculty to provide
to the students, specifically on burn-out, health and wellness, and various continuing education
opportunities for newly certified counselors. Additionally, the certification requirements for
AEC students had changed, and faculty did not have the knowledge to assist the students through
the process of certification. AEC faculty who previously taught on-ground courses, were not
knowledgeable on how to fully engage students in an online platform. If the faculty technology
knowledge is weak, it will impact the student’s ability to be successful as an online student,
thereby causing the student to leave school (Paul & Cochran, 2013).
Metacognition. Metacognition is defined as “thinking about thinking” (Flavell, 1979).
Learning involves self-regulation and students must include these self-regulation activities in
their daily college life to succeed, including actively work on learning new knowledge and skills,
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 43
planning, monitoring, and reflection (Azevedo, 2009). Students who exercise self-reflection can
constantly monitor if they are on track for achieving their goals. When students become aware
that they need to problem solve and actively seek strategies for this purpose, they can then assess
their own readiness and skill level for learning online. Students in the AEC program did not
know how to assess their own ability to and readiness for online learning, and therefore left the
program.
Motivation
Clark and Estes (2008) defined motivation as that which “gets us going, keeps us moving,
and tells us how much effort to spend on work tasks” (p. 80). The three methods in which to
engage motivation are choice, persistence, and mental effort. Choice is the action of actively
pursuing a goal. Persistence is when a person has many goals that may distract that individual
from focusing on one goal. Mental effort is defined by the energy one uses toward the
achievement of a selected goal.
Motivation is primarily a result of what people believe, primarily culturally based, that
they have control over as it relates to the obstacles, and how these barriers affect the established
goals. People must have motivation to accomplish tasks. Motivation is lost when performance
goals are unclear in organizations, when there is unclear or lack of communication, or if there are
burdensome and unnecessary rules (Clark & Estes, 2008). Employees lose motivation when
there is a lack of immediate feedback. There are several important variables underlying lack of
choice, persistence, and mental effort, such as expectancy value, self-efficacy, intrinsic value,
task value, and self-regulation and mindset.
Vroom’s expectancy value theory. Vroom (1964) stated that people’s performance will
be improved if they believe that the effort they exert will make a difference and their expected
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 44
outcome will be obtained. Therefore, the goal achievement is determined by the expectation for
success and the value one places on the outcome of the task. Employees varied in their levels of
confidence to achieve their goals, depending on variety of factors, including the personality,
skills, knowledge, experience, and abilities (Vroom, 1964). A positive expectation for success
will positively influence an employee’s ability to achieve the goal. Therefore, in an educational
setting, the ability for the students to know that if they will have success with what they are
doing, then they will expect a successful outcome. If they perceive they will not get what they
need, such as an immediate response to a question on an assignment, then their motivation level
will be decreased.
Self-Efficacy. Bandura’s self-efficacy (1994) defined how and why individuals feel,
think, act, and motivate themselves toward a given task. Outcome expectancies, perception of
success and perceived sources of struggles with the online system is examined under this model.
Eccles (2006) explained that one’s performance is enhanced if there is a positive expectation
about being able to achieve success. Therefore, learning is improved when the students believe
they can handle a task with competence.
Self-efficacy of faculty impacted the learning outcomes of students and affected the
attrition rates of online students. Faculty who originally taught on campus and transferred to
online teaching did not feel confident in using the online technology and managing their online
classrooms. They described their desire to return to on-campus assignments because they felt
positive about their experiences and knew they had achieved success in this environment.
Faculty lacked confidence because their perception and expectations of their success online was
not positive.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 45
Students may be motivated to reach the goal; however, there are other competing goals
relating to organization goal that may affect motivation. Motivation is guided by the size of the
college or classroom, the students’ comfort level, and social adaptability (Tinto, 2012). Students
can feel isolated and lonely if they are not able to develop a connection with other students or
their instructor, resulting in the lack of interest or desire to continue college (Bambara, et al.,
2009). Bandura’s (1994) theory of self-efficacy directly relates to students’ motivation for
taking online courses since students may feel they do not have the self-esteem or self-confidence
to participate in an online course format, feeling they need to be directed authoritatively by the
faculty. Therefore, students’ motivation becomes a barrier in completing an online course or
program.
Persistence (Kember’s model). Students have barriers to persistence in online
education, because they have many goals that may distract them from staying on task with one
goal (Muilenberg & Berge, 2005). These barriers to persistence include work, family
obligations, emotional challenges, and relationships. Students who have difficulty with
persistence in attending online classes lose motivation. Kember’s model (1995) explained
persistence for students attending online. Kember identified four key elements to persistence:
social and academic integration, external influences, and a mismatch of academic program or
school. Although personal characteristics influence student decision, he showed in his model
that students will choose between two paths of learning, and at the end, the student will decide to
continue or drop, based the cost of continuing and the student’s earned GPA.
Intrinsic and extrinsic value. Research indicates there is the need for both intrinsic and
extrinsic motivation since people have varied triggers that motivate them (Deci & Ryan, 2014).
Regarding students, intrinsic motivation refers to the performance based on the student’s own
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 46
achievement needs and gratifications. Students who enroll in school are initially motivated
intrinsically, because the education meets their career goals and satisfies their personal needs of
achievement. Students who are motivated intrinsically can lose their motivation due to the
external motivation factors that is seemingly controlled their environment and can get in the way
of their goals (Deci & Ryan, 2014). Although students can have intrinsic motivation to enroll
and complete a program, they can lose focus based on other competing external factors that are
challenging, impeding completion. Students may need extrinsic motivational triggers to help
them along the way (Deci & Ryan, 2014). These are defined as external motivational factors that
influence their performance and the way in which they are satisfied. These external motivational
factors for students may be extra credit, praise, and recognition.
Self-regulation. The theory of self-regulation is a social cognitive theory of self-
regulation, stemming from work of Bandura (1994). If a person believes they can achieve, they
will work toward that goal by regulating themselves through monitoring and self-reflection.
Students with weak self-regulated learning may do poorly in college, and perhaps do even more
poorly with an online platform (Artino & Stephens, 2009). The aspects of a person’s self-
regulation originates from the individual’s self-directed behavior, which is an integral part of the
theory from Bandura (1994). Students that may not be self-regulated, becomes a barrier to
motivation.
Growth mindset. The work of Carol Dweck (2016) focused on people’s ability to
change their outlook about their own lives so they can achieve their potential. Dweck has the
viewpoint that there are two mindsets, one that is fixed and one that can grow. She believed
everyone can growth their mindset if they have a passion for learning and have the proper
motivation. She reinforced the belief that all people have basic qualities that can be developed
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 47
through their own efforts and beliefs. They can develop strategies, and through support from
others, can have a growth mindset. The key to having a growth mindset was to put oneself in
situations where challenges could be overcome (Dweck, 2016). Students with a growth mindset
will thrive in a learning environment if they believe that their abilities can be developed and that
they learn how to take the opportunity to allow challenges to develop them into successful
graduates.
Organization
The culture of the organization, its employees, and the structure create barriers to
achieving the goal of retention. Faculty has organizational barriers that impact their ability to
achieve its goals, such as “…lack of quality program, lack of policies or standards for online
courses and lack of faculty involvement in course decision-making” (Lloyd, Byrne, & McCoy,
2012, p. 8). Faculty were lacking specific training in technology. Faculty lacked updated online
teaching guides that could have assisted them in overcoming online apprehension and issues of
self-efficacy. Faculty also lacked the training in technology and in how to make major revisions
to course content in the online course shell. Additionally, Faculty desired more involvement in
decisions relating to course revisions and were unable to make them on their own due to lack of
training.
Accountability. To accomplish the goal of redesigning the online curriculum, including
new technology, the faculty must have both the trust of those who will participate in this task,
but also each member of the team must be accountable to the task (Lencioni, 2006).
Additionally, sufficient resources must be allocated by the organization to the curriculum design
and its implementation and evaluation for faculty to take on the responsibilities of any new
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 48
design or redesign. Finally, performance goals must be clear, and the culture setting must
include a competent leader to assist students and faculty in their accountability.
Students can be considered to lack accountability if they do not communicate struggles
with their faculty or the institution or ask questions when they do not understand an assignment.
Online students are not accountable if they do not reach out to other students for help, which
might help them remain in school. Faculty communication could also contribute to lack of
accountability. If faculty provided students with clear expectations, students would be more
accountable (Elmore & Fuhrman, 2001).
Organizational policies, processes, resources. Clark and Estes (2008) explained that
organizational culture varies from organization type and group and that cultures may clash based
on differing cultural beliefs and expectations. For the faculty to achieve success in the goals of
curriculum revision, technology use, and other resources needed to increase student support, the
organization’s policies and procedures and allocation of resources must align with the needs of
the faculty to achieve the result of higher student retention.
Cultural models and settings. Cultural models describe the values, beliefs and attitudes
that exist in an organization. Cultural settings describe the visible appearances of cultural
models that exist within the settings. According to Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001) faculty
satisfaction is usually strong in a cultural setting where the organization and has developed
policies that are supportive of its faculty and the institution itself values online teaching. Faculty
are less satisfied when the workload associated with online teaching is heavy and no time is
allocated for this purpose.

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 49
Chapter Summary and Conclusions
This chapter presented research about distance education and focused on the history of
distance education. The chapter also presented, the specific knowledge, motivation, and
organization causes associated with why students leave school, the using Clark and Estes (2008)
theoretical framework. Bandura’s theory of self-efficacy is an important theory about why
students do not persist, because of the importance of students and faculty having the belief in
themselves to accomplish a task. Faculty may lack self-efficacy for teaching online; however,
they will more likely be fully engaged if they believed they could do well. Students may also
lack self-efficacy for their being able to accomplish their online tasks. A positive expectation for
success will positively influence students to persist. Kember’s Model of Persistence (1995)
indicated students will persist or not persist based on four factors: student integration, both
socially and academically in their school, selection of the right academic program and school,
and if external influences that affect their ability to persist are minimized. Finally, Dweck (2016)
discussed the importance of having a growth mindset. She reinforced that if people truly believe
that they can develop their own abilities, and they develop a growth mindset, they can achieve
success in school and persist.
The culture of the organization, resources, structure and other factors can impact student
retention. Lack of knowledge, skills and training in specific tasks can also impact retention.
These data from literature review and theories will result in discussion in Chapter Four on
findings from literature review, theory, interviews, focus group, and document analysis on why
students do not persist.

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 50
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
Purpose of the Study and Questions
This gap analysis was the impetus for knowledge, motivation and organization influences
that interfered with GVC goal of increasing the completion rate for its online associate’s degree
program in AEC. The questions that directed the study were as follows:
1. What were the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that inhibited
increasing the completion rate for the online associate’s degree program in addiction
education counseling from 58 percent to the organizational goal of 75 percent retention
by December 2018?
2. What were the recommended knowledge, motivation, and organizational solutions
needed to close this gap?
This chapter discussed the methodological framework used in this study, a description of the
gap analysis process (Clark & Estes, 2008), the assumed causes for performance-related issues,
identification of participating stakeholders, how the data was collected and analyzed, and finally,
how the instruments were used to validate the performance-related issues.
Methodological Framework
The gap analysis model by Clark and Estes (2008) was used in this study. The
framework provides a systematic way to solve performance problems related to three distinct
areas: knowledge, motivation and organization. The “gap” in the model (Figure 1) was
described as the difference between organizational goals and the level of achievement of those
goals at the time of the commencement of this study.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 51

Figure 1. The gap analysis process, Clark and Estes (2008).

The gap analysis process started with the identified organizational goals in which
performance was measured against. In the next step, the current level of achievement was
evaluated in relation to these organization’s goals, and the performance gap between the
organization’s goals and present level performance was identified as the “gaps”. There were
possible causes for the performance gap that resulted from three specific factors as shown in
Figure 1: knowledge, motivation and organization. Knowledge was defined as the level of
knowledge and skills of the people in the organization or influencing the organization.
Motivation referred to the people’s motivation to work toward achieving the goals. Organization
denoted any obstacles within an organization that may have gotten in the way of achieving the
goals. These barriers included organizational culture, work systems, as well as shortage of
resources such as people and training. Data collection such as interviews, focus group, and data
analysis were performed to determine the root cause of the problem. Finally, in this gap analysis
process, solutions were identified and implemented, and then an evaluation of those solutions
was conducted to determine success or value of the specific project or goal.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 52
In this improvement study, the gap analysis model was adapted for the purpose of
identifying and solving problems relating to the organization’s goal to increase the completion
rate of the online students that were enrolled in the associate’s degree program in the AEC
program from its current rate of 58 percent to its organizational goal of 75 percent. The
methodological framework for this study included qualitative instruments to evaluate the various
influences of KMO. These instruments included interviews, a focus group, document analysis,
and literature review. Solutions to improve organizational performance in the area of completion
rate were discussed and each possible resolution was carefully assessed.
Assumed Causes of the Performance Gap
Assumptions were frequently made about the role of performance-related issues in the
assessment of online success, but such assumptions generally remained unconfirmed. As a
result, people often eliminated the real issues when attempting to determine the causes of
performance inefficiencies. The gap analysis model by Clark and Estes (2008) provided a
systematic examination framework that included a thorough investigation of the current
performance of an organization’s goals in relation to its desired performance, and assessed the
gap between the two. According to Rueda (2011), gap analysis… “diagnoses the human causes
behind the performance gaps. But without a clear picture of the goals we are trying to achieve,
gap analysis is futile” (p. 21). The gap analysis model further ascertained whether students and
faculty possessed the knowledge, motivation, and organization necessary to reach organizational
goals and that these key factors were aligned in such a way that the goal could be realized.
To review all assumed causes for performance-related issues, three components were
included in this study: (a) scanning (informal) interviews with the stakeholder groups which
consist of AEC program faculty and general education faculty and students from the AEC
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 53
program (b) learning, motivation and organization/culture theory; and (c) a review of related
literature on the topic of online education. Related literature associated with causes for the
performance gaps on this topic was addressed in Chapter Two, and was also included in tables in
this Chapter 3. A detailed discussion of the knowledge, motivation, and organizational assumed
causes for the attrition rate of online students in the AEC, by source, is included in Appendix A.
Scanning Interviews
Information was obtained as a result of informal communication with faculty who teach
online the general education courses and required Associate Degree courses in the AEC program
and based on the program director’s 23 years of professional experience in addiction education.
The data was gathered through individual interviews with students and a faculty focus group.
Participating Stakeholders
The participating stakeholders for the gap analysis were faculty who taught the online
AEC courses, in addition to the faculty who taught the online general education courses. The
total number of faculty was 29. Additionally, fully online and blended students who left the
program for various reasons totaled 54 students for the last two years. The study interviewed
seven faculty participants and seven student participants, purposefully chosen, to equal 14
participants. Of the 29 faculty, seven of them were purposely chosen for interviews and focus
group because they had the knowledge base on the attrition rate as well as solutions that could be
considered a factor in increasing the retention rate of the student body in the AEC program at
GVC. Of the 54 withdrawn students from the online AEC program, seven students were
purposefully chosen because they had the knowledge on why they left the program as well as
they could propose solutions for increasing the retention rate in AEC’s online program at GVC.
According to Richards and Morse (2012), the number of people who participate in a qualitative
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 54
study is not as important as their lived experience and the depth of their knowledge that will
enable them to answer the research questions.
The online and blended learning faculty groups were suitable stakeholders because they
had direct communication with students from the AEC program. The had the depth of knowledge
to answer the research questions. These faculty groups were instrumental in identifying the
knowledge, motivation, and organizational performance issues and will be able to implement
identified solutions. The online and blended learning students of the AEC program were suitable
stakeholders because they had direct knowledge of reasons they dropped out, and were able to
answer the research questions. Questions included open-ended, semi-structured format, and
included participants’ demographics.
Data Collection
Permission was obtained from the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the University of
Southern California. The data collection methods used were in-person interviews, focus group,
and document analysis for purposes of validating the assumed causes related to knowledge,
motivation and organization. The individual interviews were tape recorded after obtaining
permission from the participants, and the data was transcribed.
Interviews
To obtain interview participants, individual calls were made to specific faculty and
student participants who met the criteria of having the experience of leaving the program. The
initial calls were to invite them to participate in the study. Calls were made to 15 students who
were purposefully chosen from those students who enrolled in the AEC program and were taking
courses online at the time the students left the program. Seven students agreed to participate in
the study. Nine faculty were contacted who taught the AEC program either online or both online
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 55
and on campus, and had the in-depth experience to answer the research questions. Seven faculty
agreed to participate. Since the student and faculty participants fit the purposeful sample (Patton,
2002), they were given the opportunity through the call to accept their request to participate.
Once they agreed to participate, they were sent an informed consent, presenting the details of the
study, the purpose, the confidentiality, and the understanding that they could withdraw their
participation without any penalty at any time. The researcher gathered the data that was needed
to understand why students left in the past and current students’ obstacles toward completion.
An interview protocol ensured the preparation of each interview. A Semi-structured
questionnaire with primarily open-ended questions pertaining to assumed causes relating to
knowledge, motivation and organization was provided. An audio recording of the interviews
allowed detailed content analysis and the use of exact quotes of the subject.
In addition to the individual faculty interviews which occurred first, a focus group was
then formed where the same faculty could offer additional information pertaining to why
students departed from the program. The literature supported the process of the formation group
of a focus group after the individual interviews, and that the same group of participants are used
in the focus group. Patton explained and specified the importance of adding a focus group of the
same participants. He stated:
Unlike a series of one-on-one interviews, in a focus group, participants get to hear each
other’s responses and to make additional comments beyond their own original responses
and to make additional comments beyond their own original responses as they hear what
other people have to say. The object is to get high-quality data in a social context where
people can consider their own views in the context of the views of others (p. 386).
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 56
Marshall and Rossman (2016) stressed the strength of the focus group interviews by stating…
“studying participants in an atmosphere more natural than artificial experimental circumstances
and often more relaxed than a one-to-one interview” (p. 154).
The focus group consisted of the seven faculty that were purposely selected, and were
the same people that participated in the individual faculty interviews. The focus group provided
an interaction between the faculty, and the provided clarification to answers to some previous
questions, thereby providing more in-depth data on the attrition rate and why students leave the
program. The focus group was part of the triangulation process of the data. The process of
member checking as described by Merriam (2009), is to verify the statements made by
participants from either the individual interviews or the focus group interview as to their
accuracy of information.
Document Analysis
Data was collected from the student records, including student status, date of completion
or withdrawal, if applicable, and academic progress and attendance while in school. Attendance
for this purpose referred to the recording of academic activity such as submission of tests,
assignments, participation in discussion forum, and other mandatory activities as required by
faculty. Data collection also included student transcripts, counseling and advisement
documentation, progress reports, and student journals, representing written forms of
communications pertaining to reasons for withdrawal and/or barriers to completion. Family
Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) require written permission from students to release
information contained in a student’s file. Consent, however, is not required when studies are
conducted for or on behalf of an institution; therefore, data collection for this purpose is not
subject to the FERPA regulations. Faculty documents included training documentation,
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 57
employee evaluations which contained goal setting exercises, curriculum review and revision
notes and meetings minutes, and faculty training evaluations.
Validation Process of the Performance Gap
The interviews, focus group and document analysis were used to validate the
performance issues. The summary figure below represented the conceptual framework that
addressed the inquiry questions.
Research Question Interviews Focus Group Document Analysis
What were the
knowledge, motivation,
and organizational
influences that inhibited
the increase in the
completion rates for the
online associate’s
degree program in
addiction education
counseling from 58% to
the organizational goal
of 75% retention by
December 2018?

X X X
What were the
recommended
knowledge, motivation,
and organizational
solutions necessary that
would close this gap?

X X X

Figure 2. Conceptual framework for addressing the inquiry questions.

The first column represented the research question in the knowledge, motivation and
organization areas of assumed issues. Across the top of the figure indicates how the assumed
causes were validated, either by interviews, focus group, and/or document reviews.

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 58
Trustworthiness of Data
The researcher ensured that the data was trustworthy by implementing the following
processes: 1) triangulation of data (Merriam, 2009) among the interviews, and observations, 2)
utilization of only valid and reliable research instruments. 3) confidentiality (Merriam, 2009)
was maintained of all interviewees 4) anonymity of each survey respondent was protected.
Procedures outlined herein were followed to ensure that research results emerged from the data
and not from researcher bias. By combining these approaches, the researcher ensured a valid
interpretation of the study and sufficient evidence from which to draw conclusions.
Researcher used the bracketing effect to reduce bias. (Marshall & Rossman, 2016)
Bracketing required the process of the researcher’s self-reflection to address the issue of
researcher bias. Once biases were written down, the researcher was to forget about them. The
process of bracketing required journal entries of the self-reflections that supported the
trustworthiness of the data by limiting the bias of the researcher.
Role of Investigator
During this study, I was the president of GVC. I oversaw the main campus and eight
branch locations, including distance education. I supervised an executive team consisting of the
vice president of operations, vice president of student affairs, vice president of admissions, and
vice president of compliance and academics. I worked closely with the campus presidents and
executive team in campus planning, policy development, and campus advisory board relations.
Additionally, I conducted the annual strategic planning meetings with the senior management
team to review budgets, institutional plans, and evaluate overall performance toward the 5-year
writing planning document. My position required direct communication with government
agencies for the purpose of regulatory compliance with program quality standards, including
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 59
education management of online and on-ground programs. My job also required that I monitor
the educational programs to insure they were meeting the expectations of all key stakeholders,
including faculty, administration, students and employers.
As principal investigator in this project, my role was to conduct a gap analysis of the
performance problem and propose solutions to help GVC achieve the completion rate of 75
percent for its online AEC program. Remaining compliant to the regulations helped the
organization establish and maintain a positive relationship with the students, community, faculty,
advisory board and employers, as well as insure compliance with regulatory agencies requiring
verified completion rates to fall at or above 70 percent.
Data Analysis
Interview results were transcribed, and codes were categorized in various sections
pertaining to knowledge, motivation and organization. All collected documents were studied to
further triangulate survey and interview outcomes, giving a detailed evaluation that accompanied
the findings. Individual phrases that were similar to all the participants were coded and
properties and categories of the data were created. The properties were double color coded for
organizational clarity. After the coding process, the categories were then coded to interrelate
with Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis. The Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis model
guided the analysis by analyzing the current level of organizational goals to the level of
performance needed to reach the goals. The Clark and Estes model further analyzed the cause of
the gap and the affirmation that was lacking in the organization. Solutions based on the research
were recommended and thoroughly evaluated to determine if they align with the overall goals of
the organization and would close the performance gap.

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 60
Limitations and Delimitations
There were some limitations relating to the design of this project. The interview contents
may not have been a true presentation of the experience of the participants. They may have
provided answers to the questions asked that represented what they believed to be socially
desirable, and therefore, the answers may have contained a social desirability and honesty bias.
Additionally, not all participants may have understood and interpreted the interview questions as
intended. The study was limited to faculty teaching the AEC program and students who had left
the program, but had been a part of the program at a particular time, and the study was limited to
the participants’ personal knowledge related to the interview questions.
The study is delimited to one particular private two-year and certificate programs college.
(GVC) has a 58 percent completion rate in the online Addiction Education Program. This project
is delimited to Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis to examine the root causes of the
organizational problem of high attrition rates of students who attended the AEC program. This
project is context specific to GVC and addressed this specific organization’s mission and
organizational goal and may not be widespread. However, other institutions may benefit from the
application of this project’s use of Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis process to bring about
improvement in the performance of low completion rates in online education.
The project also focused on the examination of two key stakeholder group’s experience
that may or may not represent other stakeholder groups. While the experiences of other
stakeholders’ groups cannot be ignored in the organization, a detailed examination of their roles
fell outside of the scope of the current project. Researcher bias could occur, particularly when
the investigator is employed in an executive capacity within the organization that was studied.
Although bias cannot be eliminated, the investigator could ensure that research results emerged
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 61
from the data and not from researcher bias by practicing critical self-reflection known as
bracketing relating to personal viewpoints, biases, and assumptions (Merriam, 2009). Merriam
further states that the creation of a detailed audit trail of all processes as well as a peer
examination of the data minimizes research bias (Merriam, 2009).
Chapter Summary
Chapter Three provided possible gaps in performance in the completion rate of online
students in the AEC program at GVC, specifically, in the areas of knowledge, motivation and
organization, utilizing the gap analysis framework by Clark and Estes (2008). Literature review,
learning and motivation theories, and personal knowledge together formed the foundation by
which the assumed causes for the performance gap were developed. Scanning interviews, focus
group and document analysis were utilized to validate these assumed causes. The findings of the
research are presented in Chapter Four.

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 62
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS
The purpose of this study was to examine why the online associate’s degree program in
AEC at GVC had a lower completion rate (58%) in comparison to the same program at the on-
ground campus (75%). More specifically, the reason of this study was to explore why the
students who attend this online program choose not to complete, and generate evidence-based
solutions that will increase the completion rate for the students attending the online program to a
level proportionate with the graduation rate of those students attending the on-ground program.
This chapter conveyed the findings resulting from data collection. Data were collected
through interviews, focus group, and document analysis. An interpretation of the data was
performed and triangulated to identify the barriers related to KMO faced by faculty and students
who participate in the online AEC program. The results of the data were evaluated against the
assumed KMO causes outlined in Chapter Three to decide if they were accurate KMO
influences, or if they were considered to be invalid. Those KMO assumed causes that were
determined to be invalid were removed as causes to the performance gap. All the KMO assumed
causes were determined to be valid and were included under “Results and Findings for
Knowledge”, “Results and Findings for Motivation” and “Results and Findings for
Organization” under this chapter. There were no new KMO causes that were identified in this
study.
This chapter is comprised of the following segments, and presented in the following
order. Participant Stakeholders were chosen using purposeful sampling to include faculty and
students in the AEC program. Research Design included a description of qualitative
methodology obtained through interviews, a focus group, and document analysis. Findings for
knowledge causes, motivation causes, and organization causes were paralleled to Clark and Estes
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 63
(2008). This chapter also included an explanation of how document analysis contributed to the
findings. A summary of this chapter highlights the important aspects of the methodology.
Participant Stakeholders
The participants in the study were the faculty who teach online and on-ground classes for
the AEC program at GVC, as well as students enrolled at GVC who attended online classes, but
chose to leave. This analysis concentrated on the knowledge, motivation and organizational
influences or causes associated with the stakeholders that may have inhibited the institution’s
goal of increasing its completion rate for the online program equal to that of the on-ground
program.
The data collected consisted of 14 interviews, one focus group, and document analysis.
Each participant was purposely chosen because they had the knowledge base and experience to
address the research questions. There were 14 participants, seven faculty, four of whom teach
both online and on-ground classes and three whom teach only online classes. Of the seven
online students selected, three had also attended on-ground AEC classes and had left the program
for various reasons.
All 14 participants were interviewed by telephone and recorded. Each participant was
given details about the purpose of the study as well as the confidentiality of their answers to the
interview questions. They were informed that their participation was voluntary, and that they
had the right to terminate their participation or refuse to answer some or all the questions.
Transcriptions were created for each participant and reviewed at least three times each. All
participants were given a numeric representation (Participant 1 through Participant 14) to protect
their confidentiality. Specific numbers identified participants, to avoid confusion about using the
same participant for every verifying comment. After reading the participants’ transcriptions, a
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 64
coding process was used to identify words and phrases that were commonalities among most or
all the participants, to create categories and properties, which became the data results.
Research Design
Qualitative data was obtained through interviews, focus group, and document analysis. A
summary of findings was developed through the answers from the semi-structured interview
guide utilized, as described in Chapter Three. There were 13 student interview questions and 18
faculty interview questions. Many of the questions were “open-ended”, to allow for open
dialogue sharing of attitudes and opinions.
The analysis of the interviews led to the evolutionary process of the development of the
categories and properties (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007). The key common words and phrases from
the data resulting from the interviews and focus group were used to create the categories and
subsequent properties. There were various points in the process that the categories became the
properties and the properties became the categories. Each category was developed not in any
specific order, but the result was that each category moved from Clark and Estes (2008) KMO
model, interwoven with the knowledge types.
Documents were reviewed to verify findings. Internal organizational sources of
documents included student academic files, faculty personnel files, accreditation reports,
organizational communication such as emails, memos and letters, student enrollment data, and
published data on the student utilization of available student support services. Government
reports such as IPEDS and annual reports were reviewed to confirm data on completion rates.
The gap analysis theoretical framework of Clark and Estes (2008) was used to determine
from the baseline of the AEC program online completion rate of 58 percent to the goal of 75
percent, parallel to the on-ground completion rate. The assumed causes were categorized into
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 65
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences for the purpose of investigating reasons
why students leave the online program. Although the knowledge framework comes from Clark
and Estes (2008), the findings for assumed knowledge causes are related to the theoretical
underpinnings of Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) of Factual, Conceptual, Procedural, and
Metacognitive.
Findings for Knowledge Causes
The interviews, focus group, and document analysis were utilized for the purpose of
validating or invalidating the assumed knowledge causes, related to the faculty and students’
views on why online students leave the AEC program at GVC. In the analysis, the data was
formulated within the Clark and Estes (2008) framework, within the context of Anderson and
Krathwhol (2001) Knowledge types. Each category and subsequent property was categorized in
the four knowledge types: Factual, conceptual, procedural, or metacognitive. Based on Clark and
Estes (2008) KMO framework, assumed knowledge causes were identified and the data was
interrelated to validate the assumed knowledge causes.
In addition, the literature was also identified as support for the relationship between the
assumed knowledge causes and the result of the data, which was characterized as categories, as
representative of qualitative methodology. The categories evolved from the participants’
transcriptions, focus groups, and document analysis, which resulted in data triangulation. The
participants’ response is verification for the relationship of the data to the Clark and Estes (2008)
model for each assumed knowledge cause. Table 2 shows the type of knowledge, the assumed
causes, and their method of validation.

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 66
Table 2
Assumed Knowledge Causes and Method of Validation
Category Assumed Knowledge Causes Method of
Validation
Findings
Factual
Procedural
New students and faculty do not know
how to use technology for the benefit of
online instruction. Students do not
know how to use technology to upload
documents and other tasks required of
them.

Faculty do not know how to fully
integrate advanced technology into their
online classrooms for the purpose of
creating a more interactive learning
environment for the students.
Interview Questions
Focus Group
Document Analysis
Validated
Procedural
Students do not know how to seek help,
including knowing when the help is
needed and where to go for assistance
when falling behind in their coursework
or when facing barriers.
Interview Questions
Focus Group
Document Analysis
Validated

Conceptual
Faculty have insufficient conceptual
knowledge for identifying the at-risk
student.
Interview Questions
Focus Group
Validated
Procedural
Metacognitive
Students do not have the ability to
assess their own skills as it relates to the
work and intense involvement that is
required in online learning, and often
they are unprepared to tackle what is
required.
Interview Questions
Focus Group
Document Analysis
Validated

Insufficient procedural knowledge about online technology classroom integration.
Although faculty described different levels of own their procedural knowledge of technology, all
faculty participants (seven out of seven) described their own need for additional knowledge
acquisition for online learning to provide greater learning opportunities for their students. One
faculty participant stated, “When I am having a problem, you know, I would like some guidance.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 67
I would like to have one-on-one time with another person who can show me all the navigation
tools available to me as an instructor”. This knowledge acquisition also included the faculty as
learners of technology to promote a greater understanding of students’ frustrations, which would
give faculty an opportunity to help students become comfortable in an online format. Therefore,
the faculty’s communication to the students was limited in helping the students navigate properly
in the online classroom, contributing to the students’ choosing to leave the program. The
assumed cause of lack of factual and procedural knowledge was confirmed.
Insufficient student procedural knowledge about technology and about where and
how to seek other assistance online. Of the seven students interviewed, five of the student
participants had taken on-ground classes previously at GVC. All five of these students who took
the online program reported they had difficulty shifting to online classes because, although they
participated in an online orientation, they were left navigating through the online system
independently and felt they had lost their understanding of how to seek assistance. Referring to
her online understanding, one student participant said she understood the basics of navigation,
but still had problems with where to go for guidance. She stated, “You know, it seems like just a
simple thing. Finding where to go, how do I look for an entire week to understand what is going
on. How do I submit an assignment; how do I make it a good post. I am having a problem, you
know, and I don’t know where to go.” The other two student participants believed they could
handle the basics to get by but often reached out for help when they ran into problems
completing their online work due to technology difficulties.
Faculty also believed there was insufficient student procedural knowledge and the
students needed to seek out support after their participation in orientation. A faculty participant
stated, “People are entering a program that’s online and they really don’t know how to navigate
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 68
within our program. They get scared. It moves so fast. You are going to have to be very
disciplined and very organized to do an online class because it is a lot different from on-ground.”
All faculty confirmed that students had varied abilities in technology, and that when students
reached out for help, they tried to help them when they could but were not always able to assist.
They reported asking students to submit their assignments via email when students were faced
with technology barriers. Students and faculty do not have appropriate procedural knowledge of
how to navigate through the online platform, it precipitates student frustration, resulting in
students leaving the AEC online program. Therefore, this assumed cause was validated.
Insufficient conceptual knowledge of how to identify an at-risk student. Both the
instructors and the students interviewed have indicated that they surmise that they have
insufficient conceptual knowledge for identifying the at-risk students. Students themselves do
not have the knowledge of when they themselves are at risk for facing the fact that it is difficult
to identify when they are on the verge of leaving the program. Student participants were asked,
“Describe how you know you are at risk for leaving the program.” Students answered why they
left the program, but they did not have the knowledge to share the specific factors that created
the circumstances that led them to leave. Therefore, number of students that lacked conceptual
knowledge of how they would identify when they themselves are at risk for leaving the program
was not available.
Faculty were asked, “Describe how you know the student is at risk for leaving the
program.” Faculty stated what they believed may have happened that caused the student to leave;
however, one faculty participant stated, “They lose interest, they may relapse, and they get
frustrated with the school and the school system. I really don’t know exactly what happened to
them.” Another faculty participant said, “I’ve had really good students disappear; I guess they
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 69
just get frustrated with things and just drop off.” Another faculty participant talked about timing
by stating, “If we can just get to the students before life gets in the way”, but could not define
what that time frame was that would be necessary before the students leave. These statements
confirm that faculty are unaware of what constitutes an at-risk student as many students have
difficulty articulating to the faculty the events that occur prior to leaving the program, and often
simply stop attending. Therefore, the faculty’s knowledge of the number of students that lacked
conceptual knowledge of how to identify when they are at risk for leaving the program was not
available. Faculty’s inability to identify the at-risk student were an unexpected finding. The
unawareness of the faculty not being able to identify the at-risk student was a factor in the data
that was a surprise. None of the faculty could describe events that occurred in their classroom
before the student departed from the program.
All seven faculty in the focus group confirmed that they have faced circumstances when
students unexpectedly leave the program with no warning. All faculty shared that they
encountered cases where students leave, if there were “warning signs”, they did not have the
conceptual knowledge to interpret them with certainty. Faculty also explained that often these
students who leave do not provide any vital forwarding information and student follow-up after
withdrawing is difficult. This information is the impetus for developing knowledge for
conceptual interpretation to save the student from leaving. This assumed cause was validated.
Metacognitive inability for online students to self-regulate. The third assumed cause
was that students do not have the metacognitive ability to assess their own skills as it relates to
the work and intense involvement that is required of online learning, and often, they feel
overstretched and worried, unprepared to tackle what is expected of them. Based on the faculty
interview question, “What do you believe students could have done to keep themselves on track
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 70
for graduation?” One faculty participant stated, “Our students get pressured very easily and don’t
know what to do.” Another faculty participant indicated, ““They don’t know how to push
through it or have the determination.” Still another faculty member stated, “I wish they wouldn’t
wait until it’s like you are drowning.” In the focus group discussions, faculty emphasized the
need for their online students to create their own structure and stay the course to that plan so that
their success was not hindered. All faculty interviewed reinforced that students generally had the
inability to self-regulate.
Students interviewed were asked the following questions, “Explain some of the factors
that resulted in your leaving school”, and “What do you think you could have done to keep
yourself on track that would have helped you stay in the program?” “Please give examples.”
One student interviewed responded by stating she did not have the ability to stay on top of what
was required on her own. She stated, “Online education requires self-discipline. Nobody’s there
to tell you to get it done.” Another student participant stated, “So I turn in my work and maybe
it’s not always on time, but as long as I turn it in and have my own accountability. If I get some
points off, it’s okay because I am working at my pace and hope that is good enough, and get the
work in before the end of class.” In the end, she was unable to keep up with the deadlines, and
subsequently left the program. The students’ in-depth statements were directly related to why
they left the program. They confirmed they did not know how to self-regulate, be more
disciplined and work autonomously to be successful in online coursework. All student
participants interviewed indicated they had challenges that interrupted their ability to maintain
control of their school obligations, resulting in their leaving the program. Consequently, the
assumed cause of inability of online students to self-regulate was confirmed.

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 71
Summary of Knowledge Findings
In conclusion of this section, seven out of seven faculty supported the insufficiency of
procedural knowledge about online technology classroom integration. Faculty had various levels
of procedural knowledge; however, all faculty reiterated the lack of procedural knowledge in this
area. In the area of student procedural knowledge of where and how to seek assistance online,
five of the five student participants who took classes on campus at GVC and transferred online
confirmed they did not know where to go for help or how to obtain that assistance. Finally,
faculty confirmed that students did not have the ability to properly self-reflect, often making it
difficult for the students to know when they are at risk of leaving the program.
Findings for Motivational Causes
Clark and Estes (2008) explains that motivation is one of three factors that affect the
achievement of goals. Clark and Estes (2008) described three motivational “indexes” that affect
performance: Choice, persistence, and mental effort. The assumed motivational causes in this
study were identified and assessed through student and faculty interviews, faculty focus group,
and document analysis. This data was then interrelated to validate these assumed causes. The
table below is representative of the assumed motivational causes and methods of validation, and
whether these causes were validated.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 72
Table 3
Assumed Motivational Causes and Method of Validation
Category Assumed Motivational Causes Method of
Validation
Findings
Intrinsic
Motivation
Students lose focus when faced
with both academic and non-
academic challenges
Interview Questions
Focus Group
Document Analysis

Validated
Social Exchange
Theory
Faculty and Students lack
consistent and immediate
communication
Interview Questions
Focus Group

Validated

Self-Efficacy
Faculty lack self-efficacy teaching
online
Interview Questions
Focus Group

Validated
Mental Effort
Online faculty do not want to put
in the mental effort to participate
in all of the in-service trainings
and other training opportunities
available to them to integrate
additional technology skills and
effective teaching methods online
Interview Questions
Focus Group
Document Analysis

Validated

Lack of intrinsic motivation: Students lose focus when faced with academic and
non-academic challenges. Based on the interview data, students had the desire to do well in the
online environment and possessed the common motivational “drivers” to succeed. The students
were intrinsically motivated (Deci & Ryan, 2013) to do well. Intrinsic motivation is defined as
performance based on an individual’s own achievement desires and satisfactions. Those who are
motivated intrinsically may lose motivation if there is an external motivation factor that is
perceived to control the situation or environment (Deci & Ryan, 2013).
The students began the program to help others in the field of AEC. When the
interferences occur, the students lose the intrinsic motivation, not deliberately, but because of
their challenges. It does not take away the fact that they wanted to enter the program for intrinsic
purpose. Their purpose was to help others in the industry. Therefore, they value their
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 73
commitment to enroll in the AEC program. However, when the students who saw an intrinsic
purpose, which becomes intrinsic motivation for enrolling in the program, they allowed other
situations or circumstances to get in the way of their intrinsic motivation to complete online
coursework.
The circumstances or challenges faced by the AEC students became an interference and
changed their priorities. One faculty member described some of these barriers faced by the
students. When asked, “Describe what you believe are some of the barriers that prevented the
students from completing school.” One faculty interviewed said, “And some of them are in
recovery and are super smart or are the brightest but their lives are so chaotic and they feel
overwhelmed. They are working to get their kids back or are getting divorces.” Another faculty
responded with, “You know these guys are coming through some crisis in their homes and it can
be very chaotic for them.” In the focus group, faculty reinforced that when students begin to
concentrate on challenges outside of school, the institution “loses” them. This same faculty
participant shared that, “Our students get pressured very easily and don’t know what to do”.
Students were impacted by academic challenges that contributed to their leaving college.
Student participants were asked to explain some of the factors that resulted in their reasons for
leaving school. One student participant described her personal challenges she faced while
attending GVC. “I had my boss die, my child get sick, and my husband relapsed, all while I
worked full-time, raised six kids, and attended school.” The student described her desire to
complete, however, she had a myriad of unexpected challenges that prevented her from
completing. Another student participant described her reality by her statement: “I know school is
going to be tough, but you don’t build confidence when things are easy.”
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 74
Faculty participants described how the students’ academic challenges contributed to
students leaving school. When asked, “Describe what you believe are some of the barriers that
prevented the students from completing school,” one faculty participant responded by stating,
“When the students aren’t able to turn in assignments and get docked, then they get discouraged.
When they get discouraged, the wheels fall off and then they get behind and eventually they like
feel like they just can’t do it. And even if you talk through it, you can’t talk them off the ledge.
They still feel it’s too big of a task. And they don’t know what they can do to overcome. They
think they need to quit.” Another faculty participant said, “I think many times it is their
justification of why they are leaving because the school itself has put in enough good product.
It’s just the students themselves have to be motivated.” A faculty participant generally reinforced
and agreed that if “we can get to the students before life gets in their way and show them that
they are helping others or learning on how to help someone they have to stay in school more.”
All seven members of faculty focus group described the importance of “keeping the passion
going for the students”, when students become disengaged, and intervene in an attempt to change
their motivation before their frustration takes over and the students take the action to leave.
Based upon the interviews and faculty focus group, it became imperative that the
motivation changed for the students due to the described personal circumstances. The students’
success of achieving the goals of completion were interrupted due to various challenges. All
seven of the students described that they were excited about their career choice when they began
school; however, they were faced with distractions that they were unable to overcome, resulting
in leaving school, in spite of their persistence to want to continue. Therefore, this assumed cause
was validated.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 75
Inadequate social exchange: Faculty and Students lack consistent and immediate
communication. Social Exchange Theorist Peter Michael Blau (1964) explained that two-way
communication is beneficial when the communication exchange is in the best interest of the
parties involved. The belief is that this type of interaction, if the focus is mutually beneficial, can
actually enhance communication. Students and faculty who improve their communication
through a mutually beneficial exchange develop trust to minimize confusion and frustration, and
disengagement when the parties in the exchange have communicated their positions
transparently.
During the faculty focus group session, all seven members of the faculty focus group
reinforced the need to communicate with the students through the online learning management
system; however, expressed concerns that the students did not always respond to this or other
communication methods. All faculty desired the improvement of communication with their
students, and viewed it as a mutually beneficial exchange. However, because of the real-time
delay, all seven faculty expressed the preference of connectivity with the students through other
means, such as text messaging, social media, and email, but understood the importance of
documentation of communication with students concerning academic activity. These faculty
emphasized that the responsibility of communication begins with the instructor, and needed to
expand the communication channels. In fact, all seven faculty in the focus group expressed their
own feelings of helplessness when there was a break or delay in student communication,
resulting in their perception of student disengagement.
All seven faculty focus group participants reinforced the importance of their role as
effective communicators. For example, one faculty participant said, “I get frustrated when they
don’t respond.” Another faculty participant said, “It is up to the teachers to motivate and
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 76
stimulate and communicate. Kind of like a counselor should be dedicated.” Another faculty
participant, responding to the question, “Describe what you believe are some of the barriers that
prevented the students from completing school”, the faculty participant emphasized the
importance of listening as part of an important communication exchange by stating, “Pay
attention to what the students are saying. I really think this is important.” Another faculty
participant explained that regular and transparent communication was crucial to the learning
process and helped minimize frustrations for the students and for himself: “I like it when they
challenge me as an instructor. It just keeps the fire going.” These statements are indicative of
what all faculty expressed.
Students expressed feelings of isolation and frustration when they were unable to connect
with their faculty. When discussing what would have helped the student stay in school, one
student participant said: “I believe I would be successful if I could communicate with my
instructors, with the staff anytime there is an issue or anytime you don’t understand. To utilize
the staff to your fullest ability.” Another student participant indicated she submitted her work
and the grading did not make sense to her. She stated, “The points did not add up and doesn’t
make sense. I know I already stopped attending, but I want to know why I got the grade I did.”
Based on the interview data, enhanced communication methods to minimize frustration,
confusion, and feelings of isolation from the student and faculty perspectives are an integral part
of online learning that should be shared between both faculty and students. All student and
faculty participants expressed their need for clear communication that was clear and consistent.
They supported the use of multiple methods of communication, which included the technology
of text messaging, to be engaged in real time. Using multiple methods can bridge the gap and
lack in communication. In summary, the findings from the interviews and focus group indicated
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 77
that all participants agreed that enhanced communication methods were needed to promote open
and immediate communication, which was an unexpected finding. Therefore, this finding was
validated.
Self-efficacy: Faculty lack self-efficacy teaching online. Bandura (1994) defined self-
efficacy as a person’s internal acceptance of their own ability to control the outcome of the way
he or she is experiencing situations, challenges, or events. When a person lacks self-efficacy, the
person has a lack of belief that he or she can finish a task, such as the ability to teach effectively
in the online platform. Faculty could believe that they can do the task, such as online teaching,
but challenges come up, causing the person to lose self-efficacy (Bandura, 1994).
The faculty questioned their ability to achieve the task, or their self-efficacy (Bandura,
1994), in part, because of the circumstances. Of the seven faculty participants, five had
transitioned from the on-campus teaching assignments to online teaching or hold both online and
on-campus teaching responsibilities did not feel confident about their ability to teach effectively
in the online platform. The faculty focus group addressed the following: “Describe what would
be helpful to you in support or resources now that you have transitioned to online teaching.”
Three of the faculty, in general, viewed their responsibilities in the on-ground classroom, among
other things, as imparting knowledge and providing immediate feedback. They stated they
enjoyed the benefit that face-to-face instruction provides, primarily being able to pick up on the
non-verbal cues of their students, and having immediate communication with those students.
Three of the five faculty in the focus group who have experience teaching on-ground indicated
they lacked self-efficacy because they cannot immediately gauge whether the students are
comprehending the material and whether they have questions or need assistance. One faculty
participant stated, “Teaching online is very different. I knew what the students needed. It was
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 78
obvious when they were with me almost every day. I don’t know all the time now.” Another
faculty participant stated, “I get frustrated when they don’t respond.” The third faculty
participant explained, “I love my job, but I need help.” The “help” the faculty participant
requested was referred to understanding the difference in how to engage the online learner in
comparison to on-ground instruction. The three faculty members confirmed they lacked
confidence in online delivery, primarily because of their lack of ability to know how to ensure
the students were getting what they need and suggested additional training on the difference in
the two delivery methods. In an interview, one faculty participant said, “I still would not feel
comfortable adding content to my class except for the minor changes I make. I think it would be
better if each staff could have help personally.”
Based on the faculty interviews and focus group, all five of the faculty who had taught
on-campus classes for GVC confirmed that they lacked their ability to know they could
accomplish or overcome frustration, and therefore, not acknowledging their internal sense of
self, or self-efficacy. She stated, “I don’t think our faculty feel good about how to make
changes, to post additional resources or change content if they want to. Another faculty
participant stated, “This is challenging me”, referring to adding or changing content and media in
the online course shell. This faculty participant indicated there was a need for the college to re-
examine their faculty support for the online faculty.
The faculty focus group described the experience online and on-ground to be “different”.
They questioned their experience of consistency in course content and student response between
online and on-site format. The faculty expressed their need to follow the rules while keeping the
content of the online course work in line with accreditation. They questioned themselves making
sure that they were teaching effectively online and wanted some guidance to maintain the
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 79
consistency and quality between online and on-ground content. Based on the interviews and
focus group, this assumed cause has been validated.
Lack of mental effort: Online faculty do not participate in some in-service
trainings. Cognitive Task Theorists define mental effort as the extent of the cognitive resources
that one uses toward a particular task (Sweller, 1989). Referencing the lack of mental effort as
reported by the faculty participants, that concept contributed to acknowledging that mental effort
was an assumed cause to begin to look at the process of improvement in training participation.
The assumed cause is that online faculty do not want to put in the mental effort to
participate in all the in-service trainings and other training opportunities available to them to
integrate additional technology skills and effective teaching methods online. During the focus
group session, all seven faculty confirmed that, although they had all attended various in-service
training sessions on online technology and on effective teaching methods, they had not
participated in all the internal training opportunities that were available to them, primarily
because they feel, with the knowledge they acquired, they were able to “get around” with what
they are using in their online courseroom shell. The interview question was asked, “What type of
training do you believe needs to be provided to assist in the integration of technology and
effective teaching methods? One faculty participant stated, “They have not embraced that and
are satisfied with the template we give them but we could they could be using it to their
advantage a bit more.” Three out of seven faculty even suggested that certain trainings should be
mandatory to ensure the best quality and available services are offered to students. The faculty
participant also stated that she believed those who choose to attend should be rewarded for their
participation. One faculty commented on this suggestion, “If the policy needs to be changed,
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 80
change the policy. Don’t be afraid. The administration doesn’t want to wrinkle the system.
Sometimes you have to.”
The focus group was asked, “What type of training and in-service sessions would you
like GVC to add to the schedule of trainings?” Many suggestions were made that pertain to
peer-to-peer support in technology, classroom observations via the learning management system,
and what to do to help the at-risk student. Two of the faculty focus group members confirmed
that all those training opportunities were made available by GVC in the past; however, they
would like to see them again and available more frequently. Although every participant in the
focus group could describe the training programs they participated in, none of them could
confirm their full participation in all sessions. Five of the participants agreed that they should
have taken advantage of the opportunities when available; however, they either had competing
events, or simply did not see the urgent need for their participation. All participants reiterated
that they saw a need for the trainings. Based on the interviews and focus group findings, this
cause has been validated.
Summary of Motivational Causes
There are many validated motivational causes for why students leave the AEC program.
Students lose focus when they have outside challenges that interfere with their concentration.
Academic barriers are created because non-academic challenges become a priority for the
students. Seven out of seven faculty participants reinforced their role to keep students motivated
and sustaining their progress for students to remain in the program. Additionally, faculty and
students addressed the need for stronger communication between them to reinforce the students’
progress and overcome feelings of isolation. All faculty participants described the need for
enhanced communication to improve student engagement so students do not leave the program.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 81
Faculty participants who also taught on campus lacked self-efficacy for teaching online as they
desired personal connectivity with their students and believed it was difficult to accomplish in an
online format. Finally, faculty do not participate in available in-service training offered by the
institution due to the lack of mental effort. All faculty participants indicated that they did not
participate in all available training programs applicable to their needs as faculty. Three out of
seven believed specific training should be mandatory to ensure their participation.
Findings for Organizational Causes
Performance gaps can be caused by inefficient and ineffective organizations. The
assumed causes have been categorized into the following areas: training and professional
development and support services and structures. Faculty teaching on-ground have a comfort
level for content and need additional training as to the delivery of that content in an online
format. The aspect of restructuring the student services is an important part of supporting the
online curriculum and course format.
Organizational Findings from Document Analysis
There were several documents that were reviewed to assist in validating the assumed
causes, and these analyses are related to the improvement model for retaining the students in the
AEC program. The student documentation included exit interviews that indicated reason
students left the program, communication notes in the student management system that
documented technology and other challenges that may have been reported by the student to the
institution, and written progress reports that addressed student academic challenges. The
institution provided 26 completed student exit documents, which outlined the students’ response
to a variety of questions pertaining to their experiences with the institution, particularly in the
area of rating their instructors, student services, financial aid, admissions, and education. The
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 82
comments included specific information about frustration with technology, their difficulty
shifting from on-ground to online classes, and comments about the desire to have one person to
go to for guidance in both their academic and non-academic challenges.
Faculty documentation that was reviewed included in-service training evaluations and
employee evaluations, which encompassed the goals the individual faculty had established as
part of their annual review process. Additionally, document analysis included minutes of faculty
meetings held monthly for a period of one year. The faculty concerns, noted in these documents,
indicated a desire for additional training in technology, with more specific ways to help students
in their frustrations with technology. Faculty’s request for additional training to help students in
the online format so that faculty can intercede so that students do not leave. Meeting minutes
revealed faculty’s frustration with students leaving school with no notice or no known
explanation. All assumed organizational causes were validated. Table 4 is representative of the
assumed organizational causes and methods of validation.
Table 4
Assumed Organizational Causes and Method of Validation
Category Assumed Organizational Causes Method of
Validation
Findings
Cultural
Settings:
Training
Faculty who transfer from on-campus
teaching assignments are not provided
with sufficient training and orientation
on how to teach effectively online.
Interview Questions
Focus Group
Document Analysis
Validated
Cultural
Settings:
Staffing
Students lack coordinated services
required to assist them in specific online
tasks.
Interview Questions
Focus Group
Document Analysis
Validated
Cultural
Settings:
Resources
Faculty lacked the time necessary to
create and revise course materials and
documents for online students.
Interview Questions
Focus Group
Document Analysis
Validated
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 83
Faculty who transfer from on-campus teaching assignments are not provided with
sufficient training and orientation on how to teach effectively online. Of the seven faculty
participants, five of them have taught in GVC’s on-campus AEC program. Document analysis
data from the employee files confirmed that all five participants received orientation and training
when they were hired to teach on campus. The orientation pertaining to the transition of online
teaching lacked the transferability of applicable skills and format that they needed to be
successful online. The faculty indicated their training for online instruction lacked knowledge
base of transfer for cohesive communication with students in executing the online class. Faculty
also confirmed that additional training in technology was necessary to facilitate student learning
in an online format.
All five of these faculty participants expressed the need to receive very specific training
for the online format. Faculty expressed self-efficacy as it related to teaching on-campus.
However, faculty reinforced the need for training on the difference between execution of
curriculum of online and on-campus delivery methods to maintain the same level of learning to
close the gap between the online and on-campus retention.
Students lack coordinated services required to assist them in specific online tasks.
Although GVC provides technical support services, tutoring, and academic support, those
services described herein are provided from different departments within the institution.
Students are often referred from one department to another, depending on the support needs of
the student. Individual interviews with faculty confirmed the need for student reinforcement and
support of specific tasks that students must perform to be successful online. The interview
question was asked, “What would you like to see in the way of collaboration among
administration, faculty, students, and other stakeholders that will help students to complete?”
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 84
Referring to computer technology, one faculty participant stated, “They don’t know how to
submit all assignments or they are lacking on computer skills. “There are some older students
who are struggling with the computer. I am kind of wondering, how can we help them be better
and keep up with work because they are lost.” The faculty participant was referring to a student
that had been in the program for three terms but was still not fully grasping the technology, and
suggested an “all-in” approach with other departments and individuals also providing direct
support to the students. This statement was supported by another faculty participant who said,
“It really took a village to get everyone involved and to save the student. There has to be a more
efficient way because some of their issues become bigger if we don’t respond.” Regarding
response time, three out of the seven students interviewed indicated calls made for support often
took up to 72 hours to return. The other four student participants described a return call time of
usually 24 hours, however, not all questions were always answered. Some faculty participants
suggested the development of a department or call center to respond to inquiries from online
students. Another faculty participant explained how it would be helpful if the students had
someone else to communicate with, in addition to the faculty, when struggling, with both with
academic and non-academic issues. This faculty participant stated, “Many of the students are
having difficulty and are not in a good place where they can accept responsibility for themselves
or for their actions and need help.” The faculty interviews reinforced the need for student support
services.
Student participants also suggested the enhancement of student support services. Students
were interviewed were asked, “What would you like to see in the way of collaboration among
administration, faculty, students, and other stakeholders that will help students to complete?”
One student participant expressed the need for more one-on-one support. She stated: “Find
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 85
someone, for example, to communicate with and have a communication goal for one person,
because I have talked with a lot of different people and I see they have been part of my problem.
To find just one solid person to talk to.” Another student participant responded, referring to her
need for quick answers to questions she had about uploading documents on her final assignment:
“There has to be an easier way to figure that out besides a call to my instructor.” A third student
participant talked about her need for immediate assistance with a question: “I just want a live
person when I call who can answer my question and then hang up.”
Based on the interview data, all the student participants emphasized the need for a more
task-specific and immediate response, such as a help desk or concierge that would serve as a
“lifeline” for support and reinforcement for the students. All the faculty focus group participants
reinforced that student support was vital to academic success, and indicated that structuring that
support through one department will not only provide prompt feedback to students, but also
improve efficiency and effectiveness of services. This unexpected finding was in the
interpretation of the data, which was the faculty and students’ communication of the need for
extensive additional support services for students. Based on the interview and focus group
results, this assumed cause has been validated.
Faculty lacked the time necessary to create and revise course materials and
documents for online students. Faculty indicated that not only they needed training to make
major revisions to course materials in the online shell, but that they lacked the time to complete
the tasks. One faculty participant said when asked, “Is there anything else you would like to
add?” She emphasized the need for an expert to help assist with the revisions that were
necessary. “I would like to learn how to do it, but I just don’t have the time”. Another faculty
member answered another question similarly. “What would you like to see in the way of
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 86
collaboration among administration, faculty, students, and other stakeholders that will help
students complete?” She responded, “Let me know what you want me to do, and teach me how
to do and then give me the time and I will do it.” She was referring to online course
development as well as technology. The faculty participant emphasized her love for teaching,
but wanted to get better so her students could benefit. “If I know what to do, I will do it”, she
stated. Although not all faculty described the need for more time to complete their
responsibilities as a member of the faculty, all seven faculty in the focus group described the
need for meetings and training to be scheduled during their available times. Part-time faculty
who had other responsibilities during the day requested time in the evening with assistance of
their supervisor to update course materials so there was a renewed presentation of materials for
their students.
Summary of Organizational Causes
Students require additional support and reinforcement of specific tasks. Faculty
expressed the need for the development of a more comprehensive training and orientation
program for faculty who have experience teaching on-campus classes at GVC but have not
taught online. All five faculty participants who taught on-ground reinforced the need to improve
training in technology, communication and motivation to help students remain in school.
Additionally, all of the student participants expressed the need for continuous and immediate
support to answer questions and provide guidance on all students’ needs, focusing mostly on
technology and academic support.
Chapter Summary
Chapter Four presented the findings of the study and analyzed those finding as they
related to the framework of Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis theory of knowledge, motivation
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 87
and organization. Additionally, the findings were categorized by each area as to whether they
were validated and which process of data collection helped in the validation of assumed causes.
Since the interviews, focus group and document analysis were used for this validation, the
process of triangulation of the data assisted in the (1986) development of the assumed causes and
the specification of validation. The data findings were then supported collectively by both faculty
and students as they related their need to see changes.
The literature by Bandura (1994) recognized that self-efficacy was a consideration for
students who believed that they lacked ability to feel confident taking online courses, while
Sweller’s (1989) cognitive task theory related to students lack of mental effort which added to
their frustration and reason for non-completion of the AEC program. Sweller’s theory also
related to faculty who were comfortable with their current skills for online teaching and didn’t
choose to further their skills for better communication. These findings contributed to the
establishment of solutions whereby both students and faculty would be more highly engaged in
the online courses and have better collaborative communication resulting in an increase of the
completion rate of the AEC program. Chapter Five identifies the solutions as they relate to Clark
and Estes (2008) Gap Analysis framework and specify how the solutions will be implemented to
address the recommended knowledge, motivation, and organizational solutions necessary to
close this gap.

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 88
CHAPTER FIVE: SOLUTIONS, IMPLEMENTATION, AND EVALUATION
This purpose of this chapter is to introduce solutions to the validated causes discussed in
Chapter Four that address the second research question, “What are the knowledge, motivation,
and organizational solutions that prevent students in the online associate’s degree program in
AEC at Green Valley College from completing?” GVC’s online program has a completion rate
of 58 percent in comparison to the same program at the on-ground campus of 75 percent. This
chapter presents solutions that are evidenced-based that will increase the completion rate, based
on the improvement model, for the students attending the online program to a level proportionate
with the graduation rate of those students attending the same program on-ground. The Clark and
Estes (2008) gap analysis framework is used.
This chapter is separated into four parts. The first section is a presentation of the
validated causes that are now identified as the root causes of the performance gaps. All the
validated causes presented in Chapter Four are presented as key knowledge, motivation, and
organizational causes. The rationale for incorporating all the assumed validated causes is
discussed under this section. The subsequent section introduced solutions to these validated
causes, based on the applicable research associated for the improvement model with knowledge,
motivation, and organizational theories and the data collected from the current study. The
solutions were presented with the introduction of a TEAM Approach, and grouped specifically
for Technology Training, Engagement, Accountability, and Mindset. The following section
provides an implementation plan to address the validated knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences. The evaluation plan is presented with the TEAM Approach, data that
emerged from the study, to implement the solutions that are presented.

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 89
Validated Causes Selection and Rationale
There were 12 validated causes identified through the research and presented in the
previous chapter. As part of the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis model, solutions are
developed to address the knowledge, motivation, and organizational validated causes to the
problem addressed with the lower completion rates of the online AEC program. Clark and Estes
(2008) describes that when knowledge, motivation and organizational barriers are identified and
validated, all “systems” must work together to address the events that transpire in the
organizational environment. If a focus on one “system” occurs such as knowledge, for example,
that one influence alone will only “capture part of the cause and provide only part of the
solution” (Clark & Estes, 2009, p.44). All three factors, knowledge, motivation, and
organization, are interwoven with each other, and, without addressing all of them together, only a
partial solution was provided. The rationale is supported by the interconnectedness of the data.
The TEAM Approach to Solutions for Validated Causes
The TEAM approach to addressing the solutions for validated causes consists of an
organized team approach, categorized into four distinct areas: Technology, Engagement,
Accountability, and Mindset (TEAM). Technology, under this study, refers to ways in which
students and faculty can increase their access to the online classroom. Engagement refers to
building relationships, participating in online community and academic activities, improving
communication exchanges, enhancing communication methods for more connectivity,
understanding the communication message, motivating others using praise, and learning how to
respond appropriately. Effective engagement minimizes frustrations and feelings of isolation
and embraces students and faculty as part of the online community. Accountability refers to
students taking responsibility for their part in their educational journey. Student participation
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 90
increases accountability. Accountability is the key to encouragement and confirmation of
accomplishments. And, finally, Mindset refers to the development of shared values and beliefs
from the understanding that skills, training, and new learning are accepted as part of the students
and faculty’s new knowledge. The benefits that derive from the action of learning those new
skills and training result in the collaboration of shared purpose.
Although there were 23 solutions for each of the validated causes, this chapter groups
those activities into four main solutions, one for each of the concepts of TEAM: Technology,
Engagement, Accountability, and Mindset. The table and discussion below review these four
main solution areas. In addition, the Appendix A contains a detailed discussion of each
individual gap and the 23 specific solutions associated with these gaps.
Table 5
TEAM Gaps and Proposed Solutions
TECHNOLOGY GAP
FACULTY: New faculty do not know
how to fully integrate advanced
technology into their classrooms for the
purpose of creating a more interactive
learning environment for the students.
STUDENTS: Students who are new to
the online delivery format often do not
know how to use technology, including
how to upload assignments and integrate
technology in their course work.

PROPOSED SOLUTION
FACULTY: Program Director and technology specialist to provide
orientation to newly hired faculty on how to incorporate the additional
technology into their classrooms, including orientation on how to
establish a growth mindset of learning technology. Faculty to
participate in ongoing in-service training and mentorship where they
will receive constructive feedback, and increase confidence through
praise. Provide ongoing in-service training and mentorship on
technology integration to course shell.
STUDENTS: Provide a mandatory pre-class orientation for all new
students on how to use technology, how to navigate through the
online LMS.
ENGAGEMENT GAP

STUDENTS AND FACULTY: Faculty
and students lack effective
communication methods and
engagement, causing frustration.

PROPOSED SOLUTION
FACULTY: Faculty will receive training by an outside party who
specializes in online communications (both verbal and written) who
will provide ideas on how to foster discussions both in and out of the
LMS and establish ways to encourage frequent response and critical
thinking. The initial training will be completed by March 2018.
Faculty to provide one-on-one feedback on all graded assignments.
STUDENTS: Students to receive extra credit for their participation in
Q&A, and other activities.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 91
Table 5, continued
ACCOUNTABILITY GAP
FACULTY: Faculty do not know how
to identify nor are aware of how to assist
students who are at risk for leaving.

STUDENTS: Students do not know how
to assess their own readiness and skill
level for online learning.

PROPOSED SOLUTIONS:
FACULTY: Faculty need to learn to identify student characteristics
by their interaction with others, their answers, and what they say that
represents their commitment to their education.

STUDENTS: Assign a Lifeline Liaison to each student to improve
student accountability and support engagement so that the student can
practice responsibility and take the action necessary to complete tasks
that will lead to completion.
MINDSET GAP
Students lack focus when they are faced
with academic and non-academic
challenges.
Some faculty who were transferred from
on-ground assignments to not believe
they have the ability to teach online.
PROPOSED SOLUTIONS:
Provide self-reflection exercises and journaling; teach students
techniques to work through challenges and self-regulate.
Provide opportunities for faculty to self-reflect through participation
in small group activities and peer-to-peer sessions.
These four solutions, grouped as the TEAM approach for brevity include a bigger
picture explanation that encompasses a practical method to address the gaps. Since the gaps
include both the students and faculty, each solution is directed to either student or faculty or
both.
Technology. A solution for the lack of knowledge of technology is to institute specific
faculty training in technology related to online class format, structure, and execution. Faculty
will participate in peer-to-peer mentorship, formal training programs, observations, corrective
feedback, small group activities, individual activities, formal and informal on-the-job learning –
all designed to improve learning so that employees can master their skills and contribute more
effectively in their work. Students will increase knowledge and skills in technology through
mandatory pre-class orientations with technology personnel to engage in step-by-step procedures
of their specific learning management system so that students can improve their ability to access
and move through their online classes.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 92
Engagement. A solution for the lack of faculty and student engagement is to institute
online course training to emphasize collaborative communication between faculty and students,
in both verbal and in written form. Faculty specific training will include methods in which they
can solicit consistent student responses on assignments and discussions. The technology
specialist will facilitate ice breakers so the faculty and students can be receptive to interaction
before the actual class requirements commence. After collaborative training sessions, faculty
will practice with the students Q&A sessions that emphasize critical thinking and will hold one-
to-one sessions with students on each graded assignment.
Accountability. A solution for the lack of accountability is to create a new position
called Lifeline Liaison to assist students in becoming accountable to their class by advocating for
them the positive encouragement that students have experienced in past classes. The reason that
the position is titled Lifeline Liaison is to enable students, who are prone to departure, another
opportunity to know that they are not alone in this education journey, but rather they truly have a
lifeline. Once that has been established, and students begin to see their positive progress, they
will tend to be more responsible. This responsibility results in their contribution with other
classmates in collaborative situations. By students participating responsibly in their group
projects, group discussions, and assignments, they take responsibility for their piece of the work
and contribute as part of the group so that everyone has an equal contribution. This activity
builds trust and cooperation among other students and their faculty. Faculty also need to
recognize and acknowledge their responsibility for helping the student to be more accountable.
When faculty learn to identify at-risk students, which may consist of certain behavior traits such
as non-participation in class, lack of submission of assignments, the faculty will note those
behaviors and help students be more accountable.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 93
Mindset. A solution to lack of confidence and lack of self-efficacy is to institute training
opportunities for faculty to self-reflect and receive mentorship guidance to build confidence in
their online teaching assignments. Through peer-to-peer sessions, self-reflection exercises,
practice, observations, and corrective feedback, faculty will have a growth mindset. They will
gain self-assurance to model that confidence to their students, with the intention that students
will gain that confidence and begin to embrace the growth mindset that they can learn how to
address their academic challenges despite the obstacles they are facing.
Implementation Plan
Based on the research findings presented in Chapter Four and the proposed solutions to the
knowledge, motivation and organizational needs presented earlier in this chapter, this section
will discuss the implementation plan for the proposed solution to improve of the retention rate of
students who attend the associates’ degree program in AEC at GVC in Fullerton, California.
GVC’s AEC program content is similar on-ground and online, yet the completion rates vary.
On-ground students experience a 75 percent completion rate versus the 58 percent completion
rate of the online program. Since GVC’s associate’s degree program in AEC is an 18-month
program, the timelines of implementation will encompass the 18-month period, up through three
years. The validated causes under knowledge, motivation and organization, and the solutions
recommended as well as the implementation plan of the solutions can be found in the
Appendices.
Organizational Environment for Implementation
A historical perspective is important to understanding the organization’s challenges to
implementing such a plan. The online program is somewhat new to the organization. The
institution obtained its approval to offer online classes in 2009; however, it did not fully
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 94
implement the online associate’s degree program until late 2011. Between the time of its initial
approval and the implementation date in 2011, new federal regulations were implemented,
requiring authorization be granted from each state that the institution recruited its students. The
regulations not only resulted in more complexity and ambiguity for the organization, but the cost
of doing business increased substantially, thus delaying the program start date.
The organization took on a life of its own after the online division was launched. The
structure appeared on surface as an old-fashioned organizational chart with boxes and lines
depicting titles and roles, a top down approach. The organization’s structure changed to fit the
circumstances: Increased regulatory oversight, online specialization, new technology, and human
resources matters. Specialists were hired in compliance and technology to address the goals and
objectives of the organization. Job descriptions were revised that more clearly defined the
allocation of duties. The institution experienced more than average turnover in 2012 and 2013,
resulting from the pressures brought about from the addition of online programs.
When online classes were launched, staff members from the residence programs were
assigned to assist online programs and students. AEC faculty from the on-ground programs who
had never taught online received online teaching assignments with little training. Curriculum
content was similar, so training provided was only on the learning management system. New
faculty was trained on how to load courses, grading, and troubleshooting. Limited training was
provided on how to handle the differences of on-ground and online teaching, including how to
conduct a good discussion online, how to address student concerns over lack of immediacy
online, and how to give constructive feedback to online students. The limitations, in part, were
due to lack of expertise in the organization. Online processes were developed to address the
differences between online and on-ground; but were so frequently revised, that they created
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 95
confusion among staff and students. Important duties and responsibilities often overlapped and
created conflict. Many of these circumstances have improved substantially over time, but still
exist today, and must be addressed to successfully implement the desired retention plan.
TEAM Approach to Implementation
The implementation plan using the TEAM Approach, as discussed above, will undergo a
full review and approval by the executive committee of GVC, consisting of the president, vice
president of operations, vice president of compliance, vice president of academics, and the vice
president of student affairs. The GVC Executive Committee can offer suggestions or
recommendations that may enhance the implementation plan. With the TEAM approach, the
implementation plan will come full circle as an objective in filling the gap for increasing the
retention rate of the AEC program.
Expected Results
The goal of the TEAM Program is to achieve a 75% retention rate of students attending
the online AEC program, which would be an increase of 17% over its current rate of 58%. This
TEAM approach is a collaborative effort to include the various aspects of how the solutions in
this study would be implemented. The results are expected to be achieved over a three-year
period
Technology
1. Increase faculty knowledge and expertise in technology the online course shell for the
AEC program.
2. Improve students’ understanding and abilities to be a successful student, navigating
through the online environment, and learning other technology skills.

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 96
Engagement
3. Increase faculty’s knowledge and expertise in identifying and helping online students
who are at risk.
4. Increase the frequency of student and faculty communication exchanges.
5. Recruit, hire and train a Lifeline Liaison to increase student engagement.
Accountability
6. Increase student commitment.
7. Increase the students’ ability to self-regulate.
8. Increases student and faculty confidence.
Mindset
9. Increase the students’ abilities to self-reflect, seek feedback, and get involved in new
learning opportunities. It includes understanding of the student’s own efforts on what it
takes to be an effective online student.
10. Promote the importance of embracing the challenges to develop a growth mindset.
11. Increase the students’ realization that their efforts are the foundation in which to master
their learning, including the importance of self-awareness and self-empowerment.
Activities
To obtain the expected results outlined above, the TEAM Approach (Technology,
Engagement, Accountability, Mindset) will include the following activities:
Technology. Technology is often a barrier for student and faculty in the online
environment. Because of the obstacles both stakeholders face, training is an integral part of
addressing how faculty and students will address these barriers. Training will be conducted with
faculty on technology, including key terms, and available technological resources within the
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 97
learning management system. Training will be conducted by the program director with the
assistance of the technology specialist. The initial training will be completed by March 2018.
Faculty guides to assist in the use of technology will be revised to include customizing course
sites, use of audio, video, and animations, and developing blogs. A new position of instructional
design specialist will be hired in June 2018, and this individual will provide course content
integration training by September 2018. After each training session is complete, faculty mentors
will be utilized to conduct follow-up training, observation, and corrective feedback to faculty.
Faculty training will be ongoing as changes in technology arise or as new materials are
developed.
There are situations in which online faculty are unavailable to attend professional
development or in-service training sessions. To increase participation, the program director,
with the assistance of the technology specialist will record all training sessions and upload them
to the LMS so that the videos can be viewed at the convenience of faculty. The training videos
will be created for immediate use to introduce new facts, concepts, and procedures or to promote
different opportunities. Video productions of these types will commence in March 2019, and
will be produced as needed.
Additional training opportunities will be provided to the faculty to assist them in
identifying students who are at risk for leaving the program. An expert who has knowledge and
expertise working with an at-risk population will be contracted for this purpose. The expert will
provide faculty knowledge and insight through training on how to identify at-risk students and
action to be taken once they are identified. Training for identifying at-risk students will include
characteristics that students who appear to be having difficulty based on their non-participation
or non-responsiveness to communication.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 98
The expert will also work hand-in-hand with the program director, technology specialist
and student affairs staff to create a questionnaire to be distributed to all students with the
objective of learning whether the student is at risk. The expert will train the faculty on how that
questionnaire is to be used. This questionnaire will initially be implemented as a tool by March
2018, and will be modified as needed for future classes. The development of future
questionnaires will continue to be a collaborative effort that will include the newly anticipated
Lifeline Liaison, which will be discussed in more detail under engagement.
An important aspect of training includes the opportunity for faculty to mentor with other
faculty who understand the challenges and the responsibilities related to the position. Faculty
mentors will be identified from the pool of current faculty by March 2018. The mentors
selected will continue to teach half-time and provide support to faculty for the remaining part of
the day. Mentors will be trained on how to support other faculty by the Program Director by
June 2018. The mentorship program will continue as an ongoing resource for the faculty.
Mandatory pre-class orientations for students will be developed for the purpose of
providing students with all the necessary information to understand their rights and
responsibilities as students, as well as build knowledge and skills on use of technology. The
current video presentation will be redesigned to include a step-by-step process on how to
navigate through the learning management systems, particularly in the use of technology to
upload assignments and other online tasks. The videos will be integrated in the LMS and will be
offered ongoing for all students. These training videos will include how students can develop the
skills of self-regulation, self-awareness, and self-empowerment. The new videos will be
developed by the technology expert with the guidance of the program director, and will be
implemented by June 2018.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 99
Engagement. Engagement is increased when faculty and students communicate more
effectively. To increase engagement, faculty will meet with their students by Blackboard or
Adobe Connect, for the purpose of real-time connectivity so faculty and students can create a
relationship that will foster continued engagement. Students desire an immediate
communication exchange with their faculty to obtain feedback on grades and assignments.
Faculty will arrange student appointments using Blackboard or Adobe Connect for the purpose
of providing real-time corrective feedback to their students. During these approximately 15-
minute pre-scheduled sessions, students will be engaged with their faculty to discuss the
rationale for the grade earned, and have an opportunity to ask questions or discuss improvement
plans for future work. This plan will be ongoing, with the initial implementation to be completed
by January 2018.
Currently, student support services fall under three different departments under the
institution. Students are asked to call multiple destinations to receive services. To avoid
confusion on who to call and where to call, the institution will place all coordination of student
support services activities of technology, academic support, and counseling into one umbrella
under the Department of Student Affairs. Additionally, the institution will hire a Lifeline
Liaison, who will coordinate all student activity necessary to retain the students. The Human
Resources Administrator will create the Lifeline Liaison job description. The Lifeline Liaison
will have an educational background in psychology, social work, or related field and a minimum
of three years of work experience working with college students. Candidates who are certified in
Substance Use Counseling and have three years of counseling and intervention experience will
also be considered.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 100
The Lifeline Liaison will serve as an intermediary so the students know they will have a
“lifeline” when they are frustrated or faced with challenges and need to talk with someone to
help them. The Lifeline Liaison will serve as the “connector” between the student and the
campus staff and faculty to support the student. This person will be a motivator, listener, a
compassionate communicator, and will continuously re-engage the student in the educational
system. To assist the students who do not know when they need support and do not feel
comfortable reaching out for help, the Lifeline Liaison will call his or her students weekly to get
a pulse of how they are doing. The Lifeline Liaison will have a checklist of action points that
need to be addressed with each student, based on his or her individual academic performance
and/or previous communications or previous questions or concerns addressed in prior
communications. The objective of the LL is to ensure students that a designated individual has
been assigned to them, to circumvent their possible decision to leave the program. Initially, one
Lifeline Liaison will be hired for every 50 students in the program. The recruitment and hiring
of the Lifeline Liaison will be completed by March 2018, and the position will be fully
implemented by June 2018. The ratio of students to Lifeline Liaisons will be increased to 75:1
by January 2019, when the Lifeline Liaisons are more familiar and efficient with their job duties.
Accountability. Accountability develops both competence and confidence and assists in
the development of independent judgment and creativity in people (Kouzes & Posner, 2012).
Faculty mentorship programs foster trust and cooperative commitment to the mentor and
participants. Faculty mentorships promote accountability for both the mentor and the mentee.
Faculty will engage in various activities designed to increase confidence and encourage self-
reflection. The activities will include small group and peer-to-peer sessions to discuss ideas that
can foster productive and meaningful discussions that encourage the development of critical
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 101
thinking skills. These discussions can be ongoing and will be transferable to the online class for
encouraging students to be critical thinkers. The accountability can then be practiced between
the faculty and the student in the online setting. The initial discussions will commence in March
2018 and continue as desired.
Student accountability is an integral part of online course work. Students will be
accountable for turning in assignments and participating in online discussion forums within the
deadlines established by faculty. Faculty will create extra credit in the form of Q&A or
participation in tutoring or other assignments as determined by faculty. When students make
themselves accountable for class instruction and submission of timely assignments that they will
receive additional credit points, which reinforces their accountability and their commitment for
being present and learning the material.
Mindset. When students can self-reflect, reach out for feedback, and participate in new
learning opportunities, they will develop a growth mindset. A growth mindset was defined by
Stanford psychologist Carol Dweck who stated when people believe they can make a difference
in their basic qualities to improve themselves, they are more likely to handle challenges better
and when they are faced with obstacles, they are more likely to persist than someone without a
growth mindset (Dweck, 2014). She writes in her book, “The passion for stretching yourself and
sticking to it even (or especially) when it’s not going well is the hallmark of the growth mindset.
This is the mindset that allows people to thrive during the most challenging times in their lives”
(p.7) This mindset would include the understanding of the students’ own efforts on what is
required to be an effective online student. Faculty need to promote a growth mindset culture, and
students need to believe they can achieve it.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 102
The institution must develop a growth mindset culture to help the students and even the
staff in exercises of self-reflection that reinforce the mindset. The psychology faculty will be
responsible for assisting in cultivating this culture and the concept and ideas surrounding growth
mindset will be expanded to all employees of the institution as a core value. Different activities
that promote a growth mindset will be incorporated in lesson plans, assignments, and even
examinations for students and in-service trainings for staff and faculty. Curriculum ideas include
introducing famous people who have a growth mindset and how they handled situations, movie
clips that promote a growth mindset, failures as learning opportunities, and journaling. The
program director will work closely with the psychology faculty to create and develop these
additional curricula undertakings, with an expected completion date of September 2018, and
ongoing.
Faculty will receive in-service training on growth mindset for their own personal and
professional benefit. The training will expand the faculty’s understanding and acceptance of a
growth mindset. It is expected that the fear or hesitation for use of technology will be overcome
with the learning about their own growth mindset as well as receiving the additional training on
technology, which will occur by September 2018. If the faculty embrace this training, they will
also be able to share what it means to have a growth mindset with their students.
Key Personnel Roles and Responsibilities
The roles of the key personnel responsible for the implementation of the solutions
outlined in this chapter are described below.
Online education director. The Online Education Director will oversee the entire
project, including the training, implementation, and evaluation of the plan. He will visit faculty,
hold monthly plan progress meetings, and submit budget needs for new hires, training resources,
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 103
and evaluation tools to the GVC Executive Committee for approval. The Online Education
Director’s role will include program management and finalization of all deliverables as outlined
in the project plan. The Online Education Director will work closely with the AEC program
director and technology specialist to ensure the timely completion of the overall implementation
plan.
AEC program director. The program director will serve a dual role. First, she will
hold the role of data collection manager and will be responsible for the development of the
student surveys discussed under solutions. She will conduct observations, and prepare reports
necessary regarding the project activities. The program director will prepare additional data
collection tools that may be needed for additional follow-up evaluations. The program director’s
additional role will be that of oversight of the training provided and observation conducted of
AEC faculty, as she is an integral part of the AEC program. She will oversee the creation and
development of training videos, online training modules, and in-service training. She will work
closely with her supervisor, the Online Education Director, to report the data collected. Reports
will be submitted to the Online Education Director to gauge project performance and progress.
Technology specialist. The technology specialist (TS) will provide technical support
and guidance for the faculty and students’ acquisition of knowledge, provide training, upload
training videos for students and faculty, and online course content. The TS will work closely
with the instructional design specialist (IDS) and will organize the technology training calendars
with the AEC program director. The TS will be available to troubleshoot for faculty trainings
and student mandatory pre-class orientations as needed.
Instructional design specialist. The IDS is a new position within the AEC program.
This position will be filled in June 2018. The projected responsibilities as it relates to the
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 104
project implementation will include course creation and development for the AEC program. The
IDS, under the monitoring and guidance of the Online Program Director, will work closely with
the TS to achieve the changes mandated under the implementation plan.
Lifeline liaison. The Lifeline Liaison (LL) is a new position within the AEC program.
This position will be filled in June 2018. The LL will report to the director of student affairs.
The LL will serve as an intermediary between the students and the institution, and therefore, the
LL will have the relationships and trust of the students. Their role in the implementation plan is
crucial. The responsibilities of the LL will ensure the students’ participation in the project plan.
The LL will work with the TS and IDS to create an enhanced online community within the
learning management system, which will include pre-class orientation content, video
introductions, welcome materials, and schedules.
Evaluation Plan
Evaluation provides an objective view of the progress that the organization has made to
improve performance and close the gap (Clark & Estes, 2008). Evaluation can assist the
institution to determine if the planned changes are working, or if the implementation plan
requires adjustment to achieve the intended objective of increasing the retention rate of the
online AEC program to 75%. This evaluation section will provide a description of how the
individual solutions as they are implemented will be evaluated. This section will explain the
evaluation pieces for each of the TEAM approaches: Training, Engagement, Accountability, and
Mindset, as they relate to Kirkpatrick’s training evaluation model.
Kirkpatrick’s training evaluation model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2007) consists of a
four-level training model that evaluates usefulness of training, by examining four different
levels: Reaction, learning, behavior and results. Reaction indicates how trainees measured their
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 105
learning experience and if there are topics that should be included in future training. The
learning level measures what is learned against the established training objectives. The behavior
level measures how trainees applied the learned skills, and lastly, results looks at the overall
outcomes from the training or learning experiences over a longer time frame. Outlined below is
the intervention proposal and how satisfaction would be assessed under Kirkpatrick’s four levels.
Reaction, Level 1, measures how the participants gauged the success of their training.
Under this level, faculty and students would indicate their satisfaction with the content of the
training and advise in the survey if they believed what they learned were appropriate and useful
to them. Learning, Level 2, indicates, through surveys and interviews, what students and faculty
have learned in their trainings and are able to apply the concepts in their work or school. For
faculty training in the use of technology, the peer-to-peer mentors and technology specialist will
assist in the reinforcement of the concepts through observation, practice, and corrective feedback
from faculty mentors using Team Viewer. For students, the technology experts will observe
students through Team Viewer or another program and provide feedback to the students as they
navigate through the LMS. Behavior, Level 3, will confirm that training has been effective by
observing faculty’s lesson plans and integration of content into the technology, and that these
lessons include concepts and ideas introduced in training and reinforced in faculty mentor
sessions and in-service follow-up trainings. Finally, Results, Level 4, will be completed
following a three-year period, which would show that the faculty and students have successfully
implemented the evaluation plan resulting in the increase, improvement, and/or achievement of
all aspects of the TEAM approach. The specific methods of evaluation are indicated below.

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 106
TEAM Approach in Evaluation
The TEAM approach, Technology, Engagement, Accountability and Mindset can be
interwoven into Kirkpatrick’s Training Evaluation model, specifically how the evaluation plan
would be coordinated and executed. The surveys, interviews, and observations will contain
questions or elements that would pertain to reaction, learning, behavior, and results,
Kirkpatrick’s four levels of evaluation.
Technology
The evaluation plan for the technology involves a mixed method that includes a survey,
distributed to all the students in the online AEC program as well as the faculty who are teaching
the AEC program online. A baseline survey will be given to students and faculty. The baseline
survey for the students will be conducted following their initial mandatory pre-orientation
training, which includes training in technology, rights and responsibilities of online students,
how to self-regulate and topics associated with online success. The survey will include questions
to determine if the students felt the training was engaging, useful and relevant to them. Students,
in the comments section, will be able to elaborate on any questions they may have relating to the
topics discussed.
Clark and Estes (2008) recommends both open and closed questions when surveying
participants at Level 1, to ascertain their reaction to the training. Three open questions and four
closed questions were developed that will be used for the purpose of evaluating the effectiveness
of the pre-class orientation for new students and will represent the first survey of new students.
Level 1 will indicate whether students believed the training was enjoyable and useful, and if they
are motivated to invest additional effort in their education. The survey will also serve as the
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 107
baseline for ensuring the students are engaged in order for them to persist to the next step. The
questions for the Level 1 survey can be found in the Appendices.
A similar survey will be given to the faculty, after their initial training in online
technology to assess their reaction to the training. This survey will also be conducted
anonymously to ensure confidentiality of the participation in the performance program. Because
the research data from the faculty indicated a lack of confidence in the use of technology,
questions pertaining to self-confidence and mental effort are helpful to identify their motivation
toward persistence of understanding the use of technology. A survey for faculty training that
will be used after the initial training in online technology is completed can be found under the
Appendices.
Learning. Learning, which is Kirkpatrick’s Level 2, focuses on the knowledge acquired
from the students and faculty participation in the training. Attitude, commitment and confidence
are also evaluated under this level (Kirkpatrick, 2006). The TS, under the guidance of the
program director, will conduct the training. The training will include practice exercises in
technology to build confidence and the proper attitude for learning, which will result in
commitment and positive results. An observation checklist can also be used to assess results.
The objective is to determine whether students and faculty have the knowledge, skills, attitudes,
confidence, and commitment to apply what they have learned in online technology.
Both open and closed questions will be asked in the faculty survey, that are directed to
traits of knowledge, skills, attitude, confidence, and commitment. Surveys results will be
calculated and if the results fall below expectations, the trainer will be informed of the results
and areas of deficiency so that trainer can concentration in those areas for future improvement.
Additionally, observations are an effective method of assessing learning. Observation checklists
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 108
will be used to gauge acquisition of knowledge. A survey that would be used to assess learning
for students can be found in the Appendices.
Behavior. Behavior, Level 3, of Kirkpatrick’s Level of Evaluations, reviews the degree
of learning that has occurred when faculty and students are back to the institution in their
respective roles. Specifically, according to Clark and Estes (2008), behavior looks at whether the
skills and knowledge that were acquired still in existence after leaving training and reporting to
work (or in the case of the students, to college). As indicated under Level 2, the students and
faculty will be aware of their training results from the observations, and additional training will
focus on the identified deficiencies. Behavior, Level 3, will also look at organizational systems
and processes and how they affect the faculty and staff’s behaviors. If there is insufficient
support to transfer skills learned into positive behaviors in the classroom, or if communication
about the expectations of the transfer of skills is unclear, the transfer will not occur (Clark &
Estes, 2008). Three open interview questions will be used to determine if faculty and students
are applying the newly learned knowledge and skills to their job or school. Additionally, an
observer questionnaire will be used to obtain the information through observation of the behavior
of those trained, utilizing the questions recommended by Clark and Estes (2008, p. 136).
Observations will take place within the technology, using Team Viewer for both students and
faculty. The questionnaire and observation questionnaire will be used quarterly and more often to
either improve or reinforce already acquired skills and knowledge. The questionnaire and
observer evaluation that will be used for both students and faculty are shown in Appendix B-3.
Results. Results, Level 4, measure whether training and reinforcement has resulted in the
achievement of performance goals. Students and faculty at this level should have a strong
familiarity with technology. Faculty should be able to fully integrate technology into the course
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 109
shell. Students should have the ability to complete all required coursework that is required in the
learning management system. If through surveys, interviews, classroom inspection, and class
observations, faculty can show proficiency in use of technology, this should result in the transfer
of those skills to their students. If students are still lacking in their knowledge and skill levels,
faculty may need additional training or the evaluation program needs to be reviewed for
necessary revisions so that the performance goals can be achieved.
Engagement
The evaluation plan is structured so that there will be an increase in engagement. By the
conclusion of the three-year implementation, students and faculty will be satisfied with the
quality of the communication exchange between them and within the institution. The evaluation
plan for engagement encompasses a mixed method approach that includes surveys, interviews,
and observations. The surveys will ask questions to ascertain whether students described their
training in engagement to be useful and pertinent to them. The training will be provided by
faculty who teach communication studies and is an expert in the field of engagement. His
presentation will be motivational and transformational, as the students will learn new ways to
express their feelings, desires, needs, as well as learn how to form a professional connective
bond with their faculty and other students. Level 1 will result in feedback from students on if
they enjoyed the training, are motivated to continue future trainings in engagement, and if they
desire to invest additional effort in engagement activities in the future. The questions for the
Level 1 survey are shown under Appendix B-4.
Learning. Focusing on the knowledge acquired from students and faculty participation
in training, follow-up activities, and observations, engagement activities under Level 2 focuses
on practice and observation to reinforce communication exchanges. Engagement training will
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 110
result in confidence building, positive attitude, and commitment to completion. To determine if
the implementation plan is effective, training activities requiring two-way communication
between faculty mentor and mentee is determined to be the most effective evaluation method.
Additionally, observation checklists will follow the activities. Faculty who teach
communications studies courses at the institution will provide the training to students and other
faculty, and will serve as faculty mentor for the engagement training and follow-up activities,
including observations and constructive feedback. The LL, who will join the institution in
March 2018, will also receive engagement training from the faculty mentor. This person, once
trained, will be able to provide support and reinforcement for continuing the active engagement
among employees and students. The observation checklist that will be used for the engagement
training program for faculty and students can be found under Appendix B-6.
Behavior. After training, faculty and students return to their respective roles and are
expected to take their knowledge and skills that they have acquired and apply them to their roles.
Often, the organizational structure and processes interfere with training and faculty and students
have difficulty implementing what they have learned. Engagement is impacted by organizational
culture, and when managers communicate the expectations clearly, there is a clear understanding
of expected behaviors. Behaviors resulting from training in engagement will be evaluated
through observations of faculty and interviews with students.
The knowledge and skills developed in engagement strategies require motivational
support and reinforcement by trainers. Faculty will have the additional support through
mentorship relationships, supervisors, and videos, or other technology to reinforce the
importance of immediate and consistent engagement. Students will have the additional support
from LL s, individuals who will be hired and trained by June 2018 for the purpose of
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 111
communicating the needs, concerns, and questions of the students. Appendix B-7 represents the
questions that will be asked of students who participate in the interview.
Results. This level is a measurement of whether training and reinforcement has resulted
in the achievement of performance goals in the area of engagement. Students and faculty at this
level should have effective communication and engagement. Faculty should be actively
involved with one-on-one sessions with students to review grades and provide feedback on
homework. Students should maximize their learning opportunities by participating in extra
credit, Q&A, and tutoring as needed. Students should be fully engaged with their LL as support
and reinforce the engagement strategies that students have learned to fully integrate them in their
everyday lives as students. Surveys, interviews, and online classroom audit will verify if faculty
are applying their knowledge and skills in engagement within the scope of their work.
Accountability
The evaluation plan for accountability involves increasing student commitment to their
coursework and to maintaining the communications and relationships, as they acknowledge their
confidence that contributes to accountability. Students lack accountability if they do not take an
active role in their education by asking for clarification on assignments, seeking support through
tutoring, and completing all required course work and testing on schedule.
Behavior. An aspect of evaluation plan of accountability is to increase the students’
ability to self-regulate. Self-regulation is a critical thinking skill, so when students internalize
their accountability they know that their knowledge and skills contribute to the commitment they
make to themselves to complete the work, have better communication with the faculty and peers,
while continuing to learn, maintaining their relationship with the LL. Self-regulation will be
evaluated through a survey where students rate their confidence level from 1-5 on a Likert Scale.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 112
Results. Under results, training of students in accountability will be evaluated in the
online classroom, through auditing students’ work, to determine if class assignments,
discussions, tests, and additional credit available (extra credit, Q&A, and tutoring) were
submitted timely and if the students were motivated to produce a high caliber of work, which
would be considered the achievement of the performance goals under accountability. Student
accountability can also be practiced with the faculty. A competency checklist can be created to
record achievement of skills and students are held accountable for maintaining their own
documentation of their work. These evaluation methods fall under Level 3 and Level 4 under
Kirkpatrick’s Evaluation Model.
Mindset
To develop a growth mindset, students must learn to be less defensive when mistakes are
identified when they receive feedback from faculty and understand that learning experiences will
help develop and grow their mindset. Self-examination and monitoring, open communication,
and belief that students can make their own internal changes will help develop their growth
mindset. Students need to learn to focus on their goals and the actions they can take to ensure
achieving them.
There are several effective actions that need to take place to help students develop the
growth mindset. First, students need to establish clear goals and stay the course until those goals
are achieved. GVC will develop, within the pre-class orientation, a course lecture and follow-up
activities on developing a growth mindset. Students will be introduced to concepts such as how
to study to gain understanding instead of study for memorization. Students will learn that
challenges are to be treated as opportunities for learning. Faculty in psychology will provide the
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 113
online lecture and support on the topic of growth mindset within the orientation. It will then be
integrated into the two required general education psychology course curricula.
Faculty will be trained on how to teach a growth mindset. LLs will be hired to help
students get the skills and seek out resources to help them achieve their goals and develop a
growth mindset, through commitment and persistence, not through avoidance of challenges. The
institution will develop a culture of a growth mindset environment.
Reaction. Although mindset is really a result, it is recommended that the prerequisite for
the students is to develop this questionnaire from a reaction standpoint to train the students for
the purpose of moving their mindset to develop self-efficacy. Training in this concept of mindset
was developed from the data and will be introduced as part of the evaluation plan.
Before training content in developing a mindset is presented, the program director will
distribute a confidential questionnaire that asks students to think about their beliefs in their own
abilities. Two open-ended questions requiring the students’ own beliefs about their own
intelligence and learning will encompass this questionnaire. After the questionnaire is
completed, students will then complete the same questionnaire after they have been exposed to
the concepts relating to growth mindset. The student will be able to identify if their perception
of a growth mindset has changed. Faculty will be given the same questionnaire that will ask
them about their beliefs about student intelligence and why they feel the way they do. Faculty
will also complete another questionnaire after they have been trained on growth mindset
concepts. Like the students, they will be able to determine if their belief about the growth
mindset has changed. The two questionnaires that will be used for students and faculty can be
found in Appendix B-8.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 114
Learning. This level of evaluation will indicate how much the faculty and students have
learned about the knowledge gap of mindset. For this level, the training will involve the learners
in exercises that will help them understand the procedural skills of mindset. For example,
student group activities on how to achieve the learning goals and ways in which to monitor them
will be a helpful group discussion and activity that promotes the elements discussed by
Kirkpatrick (2006), of skill, knowledge, attitude, and motivation. Practicing the exercises
together will help the students to remember what they learned but also transfer this knowledge
and skill to their individual learning environments. Faculty can participate in similar activities,
including the addition of communication activities that will assist them in how to provide student
guidance and support using growth mindset steps.
Behavior. Evaluation of student knowledge and skills in the area of growth mindset can
be performed by interviewing students and faculty by telephone to understand how the
application of knowledge and skills in the area of growth mindset helped students in school and
faculty in teaching their students. The interview questions below will be asked of students and
faculty, and their answers will be recorded, and will be given to the Online Program Director
who will be responsible for data collection. The interview questions for students and faculty
relating to Mindset training can be found in the Appendices.
Results. The expectation is that the students will learn how they can develop a growth
mindset that will help them focus on achievement of personal and academic goals. Faculty will
learn how to help students fulfill their potential while learning how to develop or improve their
own mindset. Students’ mindsets can be improved through appropriate praise, constructive
feedback, and less critical judgment. Faculty will have developed knowledge and skills on how
to help students improve their mindsets. Faculty and students will be able to show their
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 115
development of a growth mindset through the assessment, which will occur at the end of each 5-
week term. Increased skills and knowledge will be reflective of the students’ and faculty’s
attitude, commitment and motivation toward achievement of the growth mindset. For students,
the expectation will be evidence of an increase in the retention rate of students in the online AEC
program.
Limitations to the Study
The study was limited to one program, the associate’s degree AEC program at GVC.
Careful thought should be taken in generalizing the results of the study to all online programs.
The AEC program is specialized and the reasons students leave the AEC program may be unique
to this program and not be applicable to other programs. Also, students reported they left the
program for different reasons and may have emphasized a specific reason for leaving that was
external to them; however, the reason for leaving that they reported may have been a
contributing factor for their decision, but not the personal reason why they chose not to persist.
No other degree level was examined other than the associate’s degree program, which is
a limitation in the study. The specific program performance of the AEC program concentrated on
a gap analysis, because of the interest and desire to increase the retention rates of this program
for its online students. The study was limited to examining the online course of study because of
the lower retention rate compared with the AEC on-campus program. No other department,
program, or method of delivery was examined. The purpose was to improve the online AEC
program’s retention rate from 58% to 75%, and the determination of that goal achievement rate
is also considered a limitation of the study.

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 116
Future Research
More studies need to be conducted to replicate the current study for the purpose of
improving retention at institutions of the same size and same demographics as GVC.
Specifically, this study can be replicated for other online programs if there is a decrease in the
retention rate of those other program. Based on the results of the data, this study can be used as a
foundation for the other studies for other institutions that desire a qualitative examination of
reasons why students choose to leave an online program. It may be helpful in future studies to
include current students and graduates to determine their reasons for staying in the AEC
program, which may provide additional insight into how to bridge the performance gap.
Chapter Summary
The TEAM approach, Training, Engagement, Accountability and Mindset is an
integrated system for addressing how the evaluation plan would be coordinated and executed.
Training is an integral part of any institution’s viability and success. Faculty and students will
have expectation for learning technology, communication strategies, how to be successful in
their jobs and in school. The training includes skill development in self-awareness and self-
empowerment. Engagement plans include improving the communication exchange through
frequent and pre-scheduled sessions with faculty and the development of a new position called
LL for the purpose of providing students with one-on-one responsiveness. Accountability
addresses implementation strategies that will demonstrate to students how to accept
responsibility for their actions. The implementation plan includes training on how students can
become critical thinkers. In addition, Q&A sessions and one-on-one time with faculty to review
grades and ask questions will assist students in their critical thinking efforts. Finally, mindset,
which is a movement for academic and personal growth for each student and faculty, involves an
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 117
implementation plan that incorporates different activities incorporated into lesson plans and
assignments that will promote a growth mindset for students’ ability to succeed, an important
factor in student retention.
Reviewing the assumed causes that were validated and the solutions that were presented
in the previous section, as well as the implementation of those solutions, this improvement plan
that has addressed the gap represented as a TEAM approach shows a holistic system. This
system recognizes the integration of these assumed causes, solutions, and implementation,
whereby the entire organization, particularly the AEC program, will be involved in recognizing
that all these parts contribute to the student retention of this program. The TEAM approach
becomes a new mode of operation for the institution. The understanding of this approach is the
acknowledgment that everyone in the organization is an integral part of the success for the
student, but not forgetting that the student is in the center of achieving that success. The TEAM
approach may be considered a foundation for transforming other programs should a need arise.

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 118
References
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2011). Going the distance: Online education in the United States,
Babson Park, MA: The Babson Survey Research Group and Quahog Research Group.

Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2016). Online Report Card: Tracking Online Education in the United
States. Babson Survey Research Group.
Ali, R., & Leeds, E. (2009). The impact of face-to-face orientation on online retention: A pilot
study. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 12(4), pages.
Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C., & Norman, M. K. (2010). How
learning works: Seven research-based principles for smart teaching. John Wiley & Sons.
Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airasian, P., Cruikshank, K., Mayer, R., Pintrich, P., ... &
Wittrock, M. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of
Bloom’s taxonomy. New York. Longman Publishing. Artz, AF, & Armour-Thomas, E.
(1992). Development of a cognitive-metacognitive framework for protocol analysis of
mathematical problem solving in small groups. Cognition and Instruction, 9(2), 137-175.
Artino, A. R., & Stephens, J. M. (2009). Academic motivation and self-regulation: A
comparative analysis of undergraduate and graduate students learning online. The Internet
and Higher Education, 12(3), 146-151.
Azevedo, R. (2009). Theoretical, conceptual, methodological, and instructional issues in research
on metacognition and self-regulated learning: A discussion. Metacognition and
Learning, 4(1), 87-95.
Baath, J.A. (1981). On the nature of distance education. Distance Education, 2(2), 212-219.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 119
Bambara, C. S., Harbour, C. P., Davies, T. G., & Athey, S. (2009). Delicate Engagement The
Lived Experience of Community College Students Enrolled in High-Risk Online
Courses. Community College Review, 36(3), 219-238.
Bandura, A., & Wessels, S. (1994). Self-efficacy.
Barker, B., Frisbie, A., & Patrick K. (1989). Broadening the Definition of Distance Education in
Light of New Telecommunications Technologies. American Journal of Distance
Education, 3(1), 20-29.
Bawa, P. (2016). Retention in Online Courses: Exploring Issues and Solutions—A Literature
Review. Sage Open, 6(1), 2158244015621777.
Beaudoin, M. F. (2002). Learning or lurking?: Tracking the “invisible” online student. The
internet and higher education, 5(2), 147-155.
Beldarrain, Y. (2006). Distance education trends: Integrating new technologies to foster student
interaction and collaboration. Distance education, 27(2), 139-153.
Belfield, C. R., & Levin, H. M. (Eds.). (2007). The price we pay: Economic and social
consequences of inadequate education. Brookings Institution Press.
Betts, K. (2008). Online human touch (OHT) instruction and programming: A conceptual
framework to increase student engagement and retention in online education, Part
1. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 4(3), 399-418.
Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. Transaction Publishers.
Boettcher, J. V., & Conrad, R. M. (2016). The online teaching survival guide: Simple and
practical pedagogical tips. John Wiley & Sons.
Bogdan, R.C., & Biklen, S.K. (2007). Qualitative research for education. An introduction to
theories and methods. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 120
Bollinger, D.W., & Wasilik, O. (2009). Factors influencing faculty satisfaction with online
teaching and learning in higher education. Distance Education, 30(1), 103-116.
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2013). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership.
John Wiley & Sons.
Bonk, C. J., & Kim, K. J. (2006). The future of online teaching and learning in higher education:
The survey says. EDUCAUSE Quarterly Magazine, 29(4), 22-30.
Bonnel, W., & Boehm, H. (2011). Improving feedback to students online: Teaching tips from
experienced faculty. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 42(11), 503-509.
Breslow, L., Pritchard, D. E., DeBoer, J., Stump, G. S., Ho, A. D., & Seaton, D. T. (2013).
Studying learning in the worldwide classroom: Research into edX's first MOOC. Research
& Practice in Assessment, 8 (1), 13-25.
Carr, M. (2014). The Online University Classroom: One Perspective for Effective Student
Engagement and Teaching in an Online Environment. Journal of Effective Teaching, 14(1),
99-110.
Casey, D. M. (2008). The historical development of distance education through
technology. TechTrends, 52(2), 45.
Castillo, M. (2013). At issue: Online education and the new community college student. The
Community College Enterprise, 19(2), 35.
Cialdini, R. B. (1998). Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion Collins. Revised edition
(October 7, 2005).
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. IAP.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 121
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (1996). Cognitive task analysis for training. International Journal of
Educational Research, 25(5), 403-417.
Cohen, M. D., March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1972). A garbage can model of organizational
choice. Administrative science quarterly, 1-25.
Conrad, R. M., & Donaldson, J. A. (2011). Engaging the online learner: Activities and resources
for creative instruction (Vol. 31). John Wiley & Sons.
Conrad, R. M., & Donaldson, J. A. (2012). Continuing to engage the online learner: More
activities and resources for creative instruction (Vol. 35). John Wiley & Sons.
Curran, C. (1997). ODL and traditional universities: Dichotomy or convergence?. European
Journal of Education, 32(4), 335-346.
Darby, A., & Newman, G. (2014). Exploring faculty members' motivation and persistence in
academic service-learning pedagogy. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and
Engagement, 18(2), 91-119.
Day, J. C., & Newburger, E. C. (2002). The big payoff: Educational attainment and synthetic
estimates of work-life earnings. Special Studies. Current Population Reports.
Dawson, S. (2006). A study of the relationship between student communication interaction and
sense of community. The Internet and Higher Education, 9(3), 153-162.
Deci, E. L. & Ryan, R. (2013). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior.
New York, NY: Plenum Publishers.
Dembo, M. H., & Seli, H. (2008). Motivation and learning strategies for college success.
Routledge.
Denhardt, R. B., Denhardt, J. V., & Aristigueta, M. P. (2008). Managing human behavior in
public and nonprofit organizations. Sage Publications.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 122
Denler, H., Wolters, C., & Benzon, M. (2014). Social cognitive theory. Retrieved from.

Dixson, M. D. (2012). Creating effective student engagement in online courses: What do
students find engaging?. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 10(2), 1-
13.
Dresel, M., & Rindermann, H. (2011). Counseling university instructors based on student
evaluations of their teaching effectiveness: A multilevel test of its effectiveness under
consideration of bias and unfairness variables. Research in Higher Education, 52(7), 717-
737.
Dweck, C. (2014). Mindset, The New Psychology of Success.
Dynarski, M. (1994). Who defaults on student loans? findings from the national postsecondary
student aid study. Economics of education review,13(1), 55-68.
Fiorentine, R., Nakashima, J., & Anglin, M. D. (1999). Client engagement in drug
treatment. Journal of substance abuse treatment, 17(3), 199-206.
Eaton, J. S. (2012). An Overview of US Accreditation--Revised. Council for Higher Education
Accreditation.
Elmore, R. F., & Fuhrman, S. H. (2001). Holding schools accountable: Is it working?. Phi Delta
Kappan, 83(1), 67-72.
Ertmer, P. A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A., & York, C. S. (2006). Exemplary technology-using
teachers: Perceptions of factors influencing success. Journal of Computing in Teacher
Education, 23(2), 55-61.
Exter, M. E., Korkmaz, N., Harlin, N. M., & Bichelmeyer, B. A. (2009). Sense of community
within a fully online program. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 10(2), 177-
194.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 123
Fish, W.W., & Wickersham, L.E. (2009). Best practices for online instructors: Remindes.
Quarterly Review of Distance Education 10, no. 3 (2009): 279.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–
developmental inquiry. American psychologist, 34(10), 906.
Gambescia, S. F., & Paolucci, R. (2015). Are Advertisements for Online Degree Programs
Sending the Right Message to Prospective Students?.Journal of Health Administration
Education, 32(4), 605-612.
Gibson, S. G., Harris, M. L., & Colaric, S. M. (2008). Technology acceptance in an academic
context: Faculty acceptance of online education. Journal of Education for Business, 83(6),
355-359.
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist, 36(1),
45-56.
Grant, B. F. (1996). Prevalence and correlates of drug use and DSM-IV drug dependence in the
United States: results of the National Longitudinal Alcohol Epidemiologic Survey. Journal
of substance abuse, 8(2), 195-210.
Hagedorn, L. S. (2005). How to define retention. College student retention formula for student
success, 90-105.
Hancock, D. R. (1996). Enhancing faculty motivation to advise students: An application of
expectancy theory. NACADA journal, 16(2), 11-15.
Hannon, J. (2009). Breaking down online teaching: Innovation and resistance. Australasian
Journal of Educational Technology, 25(1).
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 124
Hart, C. (2012). Factors associated with student persistence in an online program of study: A
review of the literature. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 11(1), 19-42.
Harasim, L. (2000). Shift happens: Online education as a new paradigm in learning. The Internet
and higher education, 3(1), 41-61.
Hiebert & Lefevre, 1986
Helzer, J. E., & Pryzbeck, T. R. (1988). The co-occurrence of alcoholism with other psychiatric
disorders in the general population and its impact on treatment. Journal of studies on
alcohol, 49(3), 219-224.
Hiltz, S. R., Shea, P., & Kim, E. (2007). Using Focus Groups to Study ALN Faculty
Motivation. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 11(1), 107-124.
Holly, C., Legg, T. J., Mueller, D., & Adelman, D. S. (2008). Online teaching: Challenges for a
new faculty role. Journal of Professional Nursing, 24(4), 254-258.
Holmberg, B. (2005). Theory and practice of distance education. Routledge.
Hew, K. F., & Brush, T. (2007). Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: Current
knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Educational technology
research and development, 55(3), 223-252.
Inaba, D. S., Cohen, W. E., & Holstein, M. E. (2007). Uppers, downers, all arounders. Physical
and mental effects of psychoactive drugs. Oregon: CNS productions.
Johnson, J. L. (2003). Distance education: The complete guide to design, delivery, and
improvement. Teachers College Press.
Keengwe, J., & Kidd, T. T. (2010). Towards best practices in online learning and teaching in
higher education. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6(2), 533.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 125
Kember, D. (1995). Open learning courses for adults: A model of student progress. Educational
Technology.
Ko, S., & Rossen, S. (2017). Teaching online: A practical guide. Taylor & Francis.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2012). The Leadership Challenge: How to Make Extraordinary
Things Happen in Organizations Ed. 5. Jossey-Bass Incorporated.
Kuk, L (2012). The changing nature of student affairs. In A.Tull &L. Kuk (Eds.). New Realities
in the Management of Student Affairs (pp.3-12). Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.
LaBarbera, R. (2013). The Relationship Between Student’s Perceived Sense of Connectedness to
the Instructor and Satisfaction in Online Courses. Quarterly Review of Distance
Education, 14(4), 209.Lee, Y., & Choi, J. (2011). A review of online course dropout
research: Implications for practice and future research. Educational Technology Research
and Development, 59(5), 593-618.
Lee, Y., & Choi, J. (2011). A review of online course dropout research: Implications for practice
and future research. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59(5), 593-618.
Lehman, R. M., & Conceição, S. C. (2013). Motivating and retaining online students: Research-
based strategies that work. John Wiley & Sons.
Lencioni, P. (2006). The five dysfunctions of a team. John Wiley & Sons.
Li, C. S., & Irby, B. (2008). An overview of online education: Attractiveness, benefits,
challenges, concerns and recommendations. College Student Journal, 42(2), 449.
Liu, S., Gomez, J., Khan, B., & Yen, C. J. (2007). Toward a learner-oriented community college
online course dropout framework. International Journal on ELearning, 6(4), 519.
Keengwe, J., & Kidd, T. T. (2010). Towards best practices in online learning and teaching in
higher education. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6(2), 533.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 126
Kinney, J., & Leaton, G. (2009). Loosening the grip: A handbook of alcohol information. New
York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Kirkpatrick, D.L. (2006). Seven keys to unlock the four levels of evaluation. Performance
Improvement, (45(7), 5-8.
Kirkpatrick, D.L., & Kirkpatrick, J.D. (2007). Implementing the four levels. San Francisco, CA.
Berret-Koehler Publishers, Inc.
Kirst, W. & M. Stevens, (Eds.). (2015). Remaking college: The changing ecology of higher
education. Stanford University Press.
Lloyd, S. A., Byrne, M. M., & McCoy, T. S. (2012). Faculty-perceived barriers of online
education. Journal of online learning and teaching, 8(1), 1.
Lynch, R., & Dembo, M. (2004). The relationship between self-regulation and online learning in
a blended learning context. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed
Learning, 5(2).
Maguire, L. L. (2005). Literature review–faculty participation in online distance education:
Barriers and motivators. Online journal of distance learning administration, 8(1), 1-16.
Mangum, W. M., Baugher, D., Winch, J. K., & Varanelli, A. (2005). Longitudinal study of
student dropout from a business school. Journal of Education for Business, 80(4), 218-
221.
Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2016). Designing qualitative research (6
th
Edition) Sage
publications.
Martin, E. J., Tobin, T. J., & Sugai, G. M. (2003). Current information on dropout prevention:
Ideas from practitioners and the literature. Preventing School Failure: Alternative
Education for Children and Youth, 47(1), 10-17.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 127
Martinez, M. (2003). High attrition rates in e-learning: Challenges, predictors, and solutions. The
E-Learning Developers’ Journal, 14(1), 1-9.
Matthews, D. (1999). The origins of distance education and its use in the United States. T.H.E.
Journal, (27)2, 54-59.
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Boston, MA: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation: Revised and
expanded from qualitative research and case study applications in education. San
Franscisco: Jossey-Bass.
Miller, G. (1989) Distance education in the United States: collaboration and
diversity, Open Learning, 4, pp. 23-27
Miller, W. R. (1992). The effectiveness of treatment for substance abuse: Reasons for
optimism. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 9(2), 93-102.
Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (2012). Distance education: A systems view of online learning.
Cengage Learning.
Muilenburg, L. Y., & Berge, Z. L. (2005). Student barriers to online learning: A factor analytic
study. Distance education, 26(1), 29-48.
Mulqueen, W. E. (2001). Technology in the classroom: Lessons learned through professional
development. Education, 122(2), 248-257.
Murdock, J., Williams, A., Becker, K., Bruce, M. A., & Young, S. (2012). Online versus on-
campus: A comparison study of counseling skills courses. The Journal of Human Resource
and Adult Learning, 8(1), 105.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 128
Nash, R. D. (2005). Course completion rates among distance learners: Identifying possible
methods to improve retention. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 8(4),
pages.
Nkonge, B., & Gueldenzoph, L. E. (2006). Best practices in online education: Implications for
policy and practice. Business Education Digest, (15).
O’Neill, D. K., & Sai, T. H. (2014). Why not? Examining college students’ reasons for avoiding
an online course. Higher Education, 68(1), 1-14.
Oomen-Early, J., & Murphy, L. (2009). Self-actualization and e-learning: A qualitative
investigation of university faculty’s perceived barriers to effective online
instruction. International Journal on E-Learning, 8(2), 223-240.
Orr, R., Williams, M. R., & Pennington, K. (2009). Institutional efforts to support faculty in
online teaching. Innovative Higher Education, 34(4), 257-268.
Packham, G., Jones, P., Miller, C., & Thomas, B. (2004). E-learning and retention: Key factors
influencing student withdrawal. Education+ Training, 46(6/7), 335-342.
Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2003). The virtual student: A profile and guide to working with online
learners. John Wiley & Sons.
Pappano, L. (2012). The Year of the MOOC. The New York Times, 2(12), 2012.

Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative interviewing. Qualitative research and evaluation methods, 3,
344-347.
Patton, M.Q. (2005). Qualitative research. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Park, J. H., & Choi, H. J. (2009). Factors Influencing Adult Learners' Decision to Drop Out or
Persist in Online Learning. Educational Technology & Society,12(4), 207-217.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 129
Paul, J. A., & Cochran, J. D. (2013). Key interactions for online programs between faculty,
students, technologies, and educational institutions: A holistic framework. Quarterly
Review of Distance Education, 14(1), 49.
Pierrakeas, C., Xeno, M., Panagiotakopoulos, C., & Vergidis, D. (2004). A comparative study of
dropout rates and causes for two different distance education courses. The International
Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 5(2), pages.
Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components
of classroom academic performance. Journal of educational psychology, 82(1), 33.
Poellhuber, B., Chomienne, M., & Karsenti, T. (2008). The effect of peer collaboration and
collaborative learning on self-efficacy and persistence in a learner-paced continuous intake
model. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education, 22(3), 41-62.
Portman, D. N. (1978).The universities and the public: A history of higher adult education in the
United States. Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall.
Richards, L., & Morse, J. M. (2012). Readme first for a user's guide to qualitative methods.
Sage.
Rockwell, S. K., Schauer, J., Fritz, S., & Marx, D. B. (1999). Incentives and obstacles
influencing higher education faculty and administrators to teach via distance. Faculty
Publications: Agricultural Leadership, Education & Communication Department, 53.
Rodwell, J., & Fairbairn, L. (2008). Dangerous liaisons? Defining the faculty liaison librarian
service model, its effectiveness and sustainability. Library management, 29(1/2), 116-124.
Rosch, D. M. (2014). Predicting student leadership in agricultural professional preparation
organizations. NACTA Journal, 58(1), 7-10.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 130
Rovai, A. P. (2004). A constructivist approach to online college learning. The internet and
higher Education, 7(2), 79-90.
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 Dimensions of Improving Student Performance: Finding the Right
Solutions to the Right Problems. Teachers College Press. 1234 Amsterdam Avenue, New
York, NY 10027.
Sadera, W.A., Robertson, J., Song, L., & Mindon, M.N. (2009). The role of community in
online learning success. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 5(2), 277.
Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership (Vol. 2). John Wiley & Sons.
Scott, S., & Palincsar, A. (2013). Sociocultural theory. Education. com.

Shay, M., & Rees, J. (2004). Understanding why students select online courses and criteria they
use in making that selection. INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY, 23.
Shea, P., Li, C. S., & Pickett, A. (2006). A study of teaching presence and student sense of
learning community in fully online and web-enhanced college courses. The Internet and
Higher Education, 9(3), 175-190.
Shea, P., Li, C.S., Swan, K., & Pickett, A. (2005). Developing learning community in online
asynchronous college courses: The role of teaching presence. Journal of Asynchronous
Learning Networks, 9(4), 59-82.
Song, L., Singleton, E. S., Hill, J. R., & Koh, M. H. (2004). Improving online learning: Student
perceptions of useful and challenging characteristics. The internet and higher
education, 7(1), 59-70.
Stevens, M., & Kirst, M. W. (Eds.). (2015). Remaking college: The changing ecology of higher
education. Stanford University Press.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 131
Swan, K. (2001). Virtual interaction: Design factors affecting student satisfaction and perceived
learning in asynchronous online courses. Distance education, 22(2), 306-331.
Swan, K. (2002). Building learning communities in online courses: The importance of
interaction. Education, Communication & Information, 2(1), 23-49.
Tierney, W. G., Corwin, Z. B., & Colyar, J. E. (2005). Preparing for college: Nine elements of
effective outreach. SUNY Press.
Tinto, V. (2012). Completing college: Rethinking institutional action. University of Chicago
Press.
Tinto, V. (1987). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition.
University of Chicago Press, 5801 S. Ellis Avenue, Chicago, IL 60637.
Tomei, L. A. (2006). The impact of online teaching on faculty load: Computing the ideal class
size for online courses. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14(3), 531.
Tyack, D. B., & Cuban, L. (1995). Tinkering toward utopia. Harvard University Press.

Van Eerde, W., & Thierry, H. (1996). Vroom's expectancy models and work-related criteria: A
meta-analysis. Journal of applied psychology, 81(5), 575.
Vroom V.C. (1964). Work and motivation, New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons.
Watkins, B. L., & Wright, S. J. (1991). The foundations of American distance education: A
century of collegiate correspondence study. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company.
Whittaker, R. (2007). Teaching online in the Bronx: Local distance education. ON the
horizon, 15(3), 145-156.
Wheelan, C. J. (2011). Introduction to public policy. WW Norton & Company.
Willging, P. A., & Johnson, S. D. (2009). Factors that influence students' decision to dropout of
online courses. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 13(3), 115-127.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 132
Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy–value theory of achievement
motivation. Contemporary educational psychology, 25(1), 68-81.
Wladis, C., Conway, K. M., & Hachey, A. C. (2015). The Online STEM Classroom—Who
Succeeds? An Exploration of the Impact of Ethnicity, Gender, and Non-traditional
Student Characteristics in the Community College Context. Community College Review,
0091552115571729.
Wojciechowski, A., & Palmer, L. B. (2005). Individual student characteristics: Can any be
predictors of success in online classes? Online journal of distance learning
administration, 8(2).
Young, S., & Bruce, M. A. (2011). Classroom community and student engagement in online
courses. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 7(2), 219.
Young, S., & Duncan, H. E. (2014). Online and face-to-face teaching: How do student ratings
differ?. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 10(1), 70.
Yukselturk, E., & Inan, F. A. (2006). Examining the factors affecting student dropout in an
online certificate program. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 7(3).

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 133
Appendix A
Expanded Solutions for Assumed Knowledge, Motivation and Organization Causes
Knowledge Gaps Proposed Solutions
The faculty are not familiar with the terminology
associated with technology options that is used in
the learning management system. (factual)
Solution 1: Provide training to faculty on the key terms
used in the learning management system as it relates to
technology.
The faculty do not know appropriate advanced
technology to use in their classrooms that will
assist them in creating a more interactive learning
environment for the students. (factual)
Solution 2: Provide faculty training on the available online
technology resources.
Solution 3: Update the faculty guide specifics on use of
online technology
Solution 4: Establish a Growth Mindset for learning of new
terminology to be used within the online community, to
become part of the learning environment for the students,
through training and reinforcement.
The faculty lack conceptual knowledge on how to
identify students who are considered to be at risk
or have online apprehension. (conceptual)
Solution 5: Faculty to learn the concepts relating to
categories of at-risk students.
Solution 6: Provide faculty training on various ways to
assist at-risk students.

New faculty do not know how to fully integrate
advanced technology into their classrooms for the
purpose of creating a more interactive learning
environment for the students. (procedural)
Solution 7: Provide orientation to newly hired faculty on
how to incorporate the additional technology into their
classrooms, including orientation on how to establish a
growth mindset of learning technology.
Solution 8: Provide ongoing in-service training and
mentorship on technology integration to course shell.
Students who are new to the online delivery format
often do not know how to use technology,
including how to upload assignments and integrate
technology in their course work.
Students do not know how to seek help, including
knowing when the help is needed and where to go
for assistance when falling behind in coursework
or when facing barriers
Solution 9: Provide a mandatory pre-class orientation for
all new students on how to use technology, how to navigate
through the online learning management system.
Students do not know how to assess their own
readiness and skill level for online learning
Solution 10: Students will learn how to assess their own
readiness and skill level for online learning, and will also
learn how to self-reflect by writing a self-reflection
assignments, including consistent journaling.

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 134
Motivational Gaps Proposed Solutions
Faculty and students lack effective communication
methods and engagement, causing frustration.
Online faculty do not want to put in the mental effort
to participate in all of the in-service trainings and
other training opportunities available to them to
integrate additional technology skills and effective
teaching methods online.
Solution 11: Enhance consistency of collaborate
communication through connectivity.
Solution 12: Faculty to create short-term achievable goals
and institution provides training and constructive feedback,
and increase confidence through praise.
Solution 13: Students to receive extra credit for their
participation in Q&A, and other activities.
Solution 14: Faculty to provide one-on-one feedback on
all graded assignments.
Students lack focus when they are faced with
academic and non-academic challenges.
Some faculty who were transferred from on-ground
assignments lack confidence in their abilities (self-
efficacy).
Solution 15: Assign a Lifeline Liaison to students to
improve engagement and provide additional extensive
student support.
Solution 16: Provide opportunities for faculty to self-
reflect in the form of small group activities and peer-to-
peer sessions.

Organizational Gap Proposed Solutions
Online faculty do not consistently participate in
various professional development and in-service
opportunities due to their varied geographical
locations.

Solution 17: Provide training via webcast, Adobe
Connect, or Blackboard or video recording at their
convenience.
Solution 18: Faculty to mentor other faculty to provide
additional guidance and support.

Students lack support and reinforcement services
required to assist them in specific online tasks.

Solution 19: Restructure existing services so that services
are provided more effectively and efficiently.
Solution 20: Provide training for individuals that will hold
positions of “lifeline liaisons”.
The faculty lack the time necessary to create and
revise course materials and documents for online
AEC courses.

Solution 21: Hire instructional design support team for the
AEC program.
Solution 22: Provide faculty training on course
development and implementation.
Solution 23: Update faculty guide on course development
and implementation.

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 135
Solutions for Knowledge Gaps
The solutions presented in this appendix are based on areas of research utilizing the framework
from Anderson and Krathwohl (2001), often referred to as the taxonomy of cognition. This
framework defines the different levels and types of knowledge: factual, procedural, conceptual
and metacognitive.
Factual Knowledge Gaps and Solutions
The factual knowledge gap shown by the faculty were as follows:
1. The faculty are not familiar with the terminology associated with technology options that
is used in the learning management system.
2. The faculty do not know appropriate advanced technology to use in their classrooms that
will assist them in creating a more interactive learning environment for the students.
Factual knowledge represents the basic points that faculty must be familiar with so they
can use this information to assist in difficult problems they face in their positions. Factual
knowledge includes information such as definitions and knowledge concerning various details
(Anderson & Krothwohl, 2011). In order to effectively address the factual knowledge gaps,
faculty will need specific knowledge of the terminology used in the learning management
system. They will also need to which of the available technology to choose from for their online
classrooms. Although the faculty have a training manual for the LMS, they lack sufficient
knowledge of the most appropriate technology to use. Job aids are used that provides self-guided
information that faculty can rely upon to perform their job. In order to acquire a higher level of
knowledge, such as the ease and effectiveness of use of one technology over another, training is
the recommended solution (Clark & Estes, 2008). The factual knowledge gaps that were
validated, and their recommended solutions are shown in Table 5.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 136

Solution 1: Provide training to faculty on the key terms used in the learning
management system as it relates to technology options. The recommended solution is to
provide training on the available online resources for technology use in the learning management
system. The trainers should observe and provide corrective feedback when faculty are practicing
the key terms (Clark & Estes, 2008). Training, along with the job aids, will assist the faculty in
mastering the knowledge. Training can be provided as a webinar, video presentation, or live,
depending on the preference of the trainer and the participants.
Solution 2: Provide training on the available online technology resources. Faculty
will receive training to provide support and assistance in addressing the various design
challenges. Faculty will learn the terms associated with content design, including the functions
of the various features of Blackboard and Adobe Connect, the basic understanding of what an
online community entails, and some common terms and uses for digital media. The training will
introduce the faculty to best practices used in other educational institutions. This training can be
provided live, webinar, and video presentation, depending on the availability and preference of
the faculty the trainers.
Solution 3: Update the faculty guide specifics on use of online technology. The
faculty will receive an updated training guide that will include a list of the different technologies
that can assist them in course development and which technology works best, depending on the
circumstances. The updated guide will provide examples for teaching and learning technology,
Blackboard site menu, digital media options for classroom use, and tips for using technology for
putting together projects or discussions. A list of resources that are available online will also be
included.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 137
Solution 4: Establish a growth mindset for learning technology. Changing mind-sets
can be difficult (Bolman & Deal, 2013). The achievement of a growth mindset can be a powerful
tool to change one’s outlook in life. A growth mindset is the belief that abilities can be
developed, thereby increasing skills, knowledge and overall accomplishments (Dweck, 2016). A
growth mindset can occur specifically toward technology when the faculty’s online apprehension
has been minimized to the extend that faculty can effectively use the terminology and transfer
their knowledge to the students. Faculty and students will be trained on the terminology used
when developing a growth mindset will teach students and faculty the power of mindset.
Conceptual Knowledge Gap and Solutions
One conceptual knowledge gap was validated:
1. Faculty lack the conceptual knowledge of how to identify students who are considered to be
at risk, including those with online apprehension.
Conceptual knowledge is believed to be learning that is more logical, reflective and
thoughtful. Conceptual knowledge explains why something happens in the way in which it
occurs (Hiebert & Lefevre, 1986). In order to close the knowledge gap of how to identify
students who are considered to be at risk, the faculty will need to understand what students
constitute at risk designation. The conceptual knowledge gap that were validated, and the
recommended solutions are shown in Table 6 below.
Solution 5: Faculty need to learn to identify student characteristics by their
interaction with others, their answers, and what they say that represents their commitment
to their education. Faculty will gain conceptual knowledge of what it means for a student to be
considered at risk and which students fall in that at risk category. There are a variety of ways to
gather this information, including the creation of a simple questionnaire for each student, asking
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 138
students how they manage their online assignments, and what they are concerned about
regarding their weekly requirement, as well as learn about the students’ apprehension for online
education. This information will guide the faculty in better communication with students, give
the faculty more direction in helping the students, and minimize frustrations from the students.
Solution 6: Provide faculty training on various ways to assist at-risk
students. Faculty can provide support and academic assistance to students who are considered
to be at risk. This training will include examining the traditional characteristics of the at-risk
population and specifically those characteristics of the AEC students. In addition to the normal
characteristics, some students who receive low marks on attendance and grades and show signs
of online apprehension will need to be categorized as at risk, and a plan for support will be
developed. The indication of online apprehension can be revealed in the student questionnaire.
Specific education or coursework in these subject matters will also provide the faculty with the
conceptual knowledge to identify and assist the students.
Procedural Knowledge Gaps and Solutions
Three procedural knowledge gaps was validated, pertaining to the faculty and students’
knowledge of integration of technology, and the other procedural gap addressed students’ self-
help seeking knowledge and ability:
1. Faculty do not know how to integrate technology into their online classrooms.
2. Students who are new to the online delivery format often do not know how to use
technology.
3. Students do not know how to assess their own readiness and skill level for online
learning.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 139
4. Students do not know how to seek help, including knowing when the help is needed and
where to go for assistance when falling behind in their coursework or when facing
barriers.
The faculty need to know how to use the technology, and know which technology is the
most appropriate one to use based on a given set of learning objectives. The faculty need to
know how to use each of the available technology as an integrated tool in order to create a more
interactive learning environment for the students. Additionally, faculty need to know how to
enhance their use of technology in order to teach effectively online. In order to be able to
incorporate lecture material with multimedia, the faculty will need to learn the “how to”
knowledge and skills, as well as practice and constant feedback from trainer or supervisor in
order to assist in reaching the goal of adding the technology (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Students also need to know how to use technology in order to be successful in the online
learning environment. The skills sets required include how to upload assignments, submit work,
access course materials, know how to participate in threaded discussions, and complete
assignments using technology such as video and voice thread, to name a few. Students may be
savvy with social media and basic computer skills in word processing or spreadsheets; however,
the knowledge required differs. Training, practice, and receiving feedback from faculty will
provide the training and reinforcement needed for the students. Strengthening technology skills
for both the faculty and the students is mutually beneficial and will improve student learning.
The solution for this knowledge gap is shown in Table 7.
Solution 7: Provide orientation to newly hired faculty on how to incorporate
additional technology into their online classrooms. When there are procedural knowledge
deficiencies in technology, this usually indicates the need for training, supervised practice,
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 140
observation, feedback, and independent practice (Clark & Estes, 2008). The solution proposed
will incorporate training in a variety of topics into an orientation program to include best
practices for interactive teaching methods and strategies. Additionally, faculty will learn how to
write course content and facilitate online course interaction. Faculty new to online will be
required to participate in this training program before teaching an online class. Experienced
faculty will be asked to demonstrate their procedural knowledge in technology use. Based on
their level of procedural knowledge, a customized orientation will be provided to experienced
and trained faculty. The training program will contain training topics that are presented in the
same order as they would be performing the tasks on the job, because if they are presented in a
disorganized fashion, the knowledge will be learned in a disorganized fashion, thereby reducing
the amount of knowledge that will be retained (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Solution 8: Provide ongoing in-service training and coaching on technology
integration. Technology changes occur frequently, creating ongoing procedural knowledge
deficiencies. When technology changes, there will be a need for redesign work, and thus the need
for additional training. In-service training will need to be introduced, revisiting “how to”
knowledge and skills. Faculty will need training, practice, and feedback. After faculty receives
the training, the next step will include peer-to-peer coaching from a GVC experienced
faculty. The purpose of coaching is to help guide the faculty through the process of technology
integration so that they will learn how to perform the task independently. Ongoing coaching will
be available to faculty on an as-needed basis. The coaching can be informal, a call or email to
the coach for clarification or guidance, or more formal, additional one-on-one coaching sessions
to support the achievement of the technology project. The program director should be trained so
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 141
that she can provide guidance, feedback and praise for the work completed by the faculty. All
training and coaching will support a growth mindset.
Solution 9: Provide a mandatory pre-class orientation for all new
students. Successful online institutions provide student orientations to students in order to
resolve potential problems students face in technology, communication, and navigation through
the learning management system (Ko & Rossen, 2017). The GVC orientation currently provides
the student with a video lesson on how to use the online technology that is used in the program.
Students who have experience taking online courses believe they do not need the training and
often do not participate. Students do not know how to seek help, including knowing where to go
for assistance when falling behind in their coursework or when facing struggles. The solution
will include the creation and development of a detailed orientation video, mandatory for all
students to view, that provides lessons in how to use the learning management system, how they
will use the portal to turn in assignments, and how to communicate with faculty and other
students. Students will also learn how to communicate with student support staff for services
and, through this orientation and other training opportunities, students will develop their own
growth mindset for learning.
Solution 10: Students will learn how to assess their own readiness and skill level for
online learning, and will also learn how to self-reflect by writing a self-reflection
assignments, including consistent journaling. . Students need to involve themselves in many
processes to monitor and control their own learning (Pintrich, 2000). Ambrose, et al (2010)
described the “Cycle of Self-Directed Learning” as “Assess, Evaluate, Plan, Monitor, and
Reflect” (p. 193). The students’ understanding of their own beliefs about whether they are quick
or slow learners and if they consider themselves intelligent learners impacts this processes.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 142
Students often believe they are ready for online classes; however, they do not know how to
assess their readiness and ability.
An orientation video will be developed that will train students on how they can self-
assess their readiness for online learning. The student will receive examples of how to read
assignments carefully so they know what needs to be completed in order to correctly finish the
assignment, prepare for examinations, and the importance of reviewing feedback from faculty
before redoing or completing an additional assignment. Students need to be familiar with what
their own strengths and weaknesses are in order to accurately determine the time it will take to
complete assignments and how to plan the most effective method to complete the assignments,
given the students’ strengths and weaknesses.
The video will include how students can learn to manage their time through development
of daily schedules and the identification of priorities. Students will learn what is required of an
online student in terms of workload and time commitments and students, as well as how to
monitor their own performance by maintaining a timeline of work required from the beginning of
a term until the end. Throughout this orientation video, students will be introduced to idea of
reflection to help them identify their own ability and needs for success in the online learning
environment. Students will learn how to journal, and will have added self-reflection exercises in
their professional development curriculum. Students who develop a personal insight with a sense
of understanding of responsibilities can achieve self-regulation.

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 143
Solutions for Motivation Causes
Motivation Gap
Three motivational gaps were identified:
1. Faculty and students lack effective communication methods and engagement, causing
frustration.
2. Students lack focus when they are faced with academic and non-academic challenges.
3. Some faculty who were transferred from on-ground assignments lack confidence in their
abilities (self-efficacy).
Motivation can be improved when people are engaged in decisions relating to their work.
Clark and Estes (2008) suggests involving people with things of personal interest, maintaining a
positive mood, and sharing in trust and equity to solve motivational problems. Students and
faculty desire their communication to be active, engaging and immediate. They also desire
positive communication with trust and fairness, and they want to have school-related discussions
that are of interest to them. The data indicated that faculty and students experience feelings of
frustration due to communication delays, limitations or unclear communication. Students prefer
to communicate with their faculty by text messaging or through social media. Faculty have the
responsibility to document all communication exchange within the learning management system
so that those records are available for review by other departments within the institution, and for
audit purposes.
Additionally, students lose focus when they are faced with academic and non-academic
challenges. The data has identified how focus is interrupted because of factors related to
frustration with technology. If the students are faced with outside challenges not related to their
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 144
educational obligation, they may concentrate on solving those problems losing motivation for
continuing their AEC program. Table 8 represents the motivational gaps and proposed solutions.
Solution 11: Enhance consistency of collaborate communication through
connectivity of students and faculty. In order to increase engagement and online community,
additional means of communication between students and faculty will need to be developed in
order to maximize opportunity. Promoting and increasing student engagement and online
community support will not only improve retention, but also will validate the school experience
for the students. Boettcher and Conrad (2010) stated teaching and learning is not only about
improving the students’ knowledge base, but also it is about developing relationships.
Engagement requires effective communication.
The method of this engagement is initially what is at issue. Students prefer text
messaging and faculty generally prefer email communication. If this means of communication is
utilized through the LMS, students can send a text that can be converted to email and the faculty
can email back a message that converts to a text message. Audio communication is effective in
personalizing a message to the student, and is immediate. Additionally, the faculty can adopt
real-time Q&A within the LMS so that students can ask questions and get immediate feedback.
Faculty can also increase their use of Adobe Connect to increase the face-to-face time with
students. The institution should seek the recommendation of both the faculty, students and other
staff within the institution to determine other viable means of communications that are deemed
effective and compliant.
Solution 12: Faculty to be assigned short-term achievable goals, provide training
and constructive feedback, and increase confidence through praise. According to Clark and
Estes (2008), if people believe they have the skills needed to succeed, it positively impacts their
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 145
dedication to the job at hand and the degree of mental effort they will put in their work. If the
faculty expect that they will do well with a task, they will work harder and will show more
interest and perform better (Pintrich, 2003). Satisfaction of people and the effectiveness of the
organization relies on good interpersonal relationships (Bolman & Deal, 2013). In order to
incentivize faculty to participate in training opportunities, these opportunities, if personalized,
will gain greater participation. Faculty will be more attentive and interested in smaller group
sessions where they will be given personalized attention. Trainers can increase faculty
confidence through praise, recognition and sharing both the participation and the performance
with their supervisor. Additionally, training sessions through webinar, video, or teleconference
may increase participation and motivation if available in these formats as an option to faculty.
In terms of engagement training, the proposed solution is focused on faculty training on
various methods of communication that may prove to be effective with all students, utilizing the
various communication preferences discussed in Solution 1. Training on communication
integration is an integral part of building confidence in the online teaching environment, as
faculty desire a direct and real-time connection. Training will include the development of some
short-term achievable goals including clearly defined objectives and activities. Trainers will
provide feedback using encouragement as a motivator, as a positive environment for faculty will
help to build confidence. The integration of communication and training will result in resolution
of problems stemming from students’ frustrations of navigating through the online format, and
increase the self-efficacy of the on-ground faculty who are new to online teaching.
Solution 13: Students to receive extra credit for their participation in Academic
Engagement Activities. People are willing to work hard to achieve their goals if they receive a
benefit or incentive. Students will be motivated to participate as long as the goal is achievable
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 146
(Clark & Estes, 2008). Based on the work of Deci and Ryan (2014) on intrinsic and extrinsic
motivation, their research reinforces the need for both types of motivation. Since individuals
have different emotional triggers, therefore, the rationale for Solution 3, giving students extra
credit for their participation, may be a strong motivation for them as an extrinsic reinforcement,
while helping other students with the development of a Q & A session, for example, becomes an
intrinsic motivation for others. Although Deci and Ryan favor intrinsic motivation, the reality of
needing extrinsic motivation such as the extra credit described as a solution is conceivable.
Faculty can create many engagement opportunities that will allow students to have real-time
support such as tutoring, online Q&A session, and face-to-face online time during office
hours. Students can receive incentive such as extra credit for their participation in Q&A or other
live sessions. This type of engagement validates the learning experience for the students.
Solution 14: Faculty to provide one-on-one feedback on all graded
assignments. Providing student feedback lets students know if they are on the correct track and
gives then direction toward next steps (Ko & Rossen, 2017). In order to improve interpersonal
communications while sharing feedback with students on their academic performance, faculty
can return graded work to the student in individual sessions through Adobe Connect or
Blackboard, where students can receive corrective feedback by faculty. These individual
meetings will assist to minimize the feelings of isolation and disconnectedness, and will foster
trust and relationship development, which is important for both students and faculty.
Faculty can also provide group feedback and allow students to give comments to one
another on their assignments and work, prior to the grading by faculty. According to Bonnell and
Boehm (2011), an effective way of providing group feedback is to take all faculty notes on the
papers and summarize those comments to give students an indication of how well they
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 147
performed in comparison to other students on the same assignment. Students can be given
additional learning opportunities in the feedback exercises through student inquiries about how
to take the learning concepts to the next steps. Through this type of discussion, student self-
reflection is enhanced through reinforcement of concepts learned.
Solution 15: Assign a Lifeline Liaison to each student to improve student
engagement and provide student support. Student liaisons can be an integral part of
improving communication, providing academic services and support to students, and assisting
students when they become discouraged due to academic and non-academic issues. Students can
become discouraged when they cannot upload a document or follow the simple technology
directions or need other academic support such as tutoring or guidance on assignments. Students
may have different learning styles that create problems in learning online. Students faced with
such challenges can become disengaged, and, without guidance, the challenges and lack of
institutional response can result in decreased motivation for completing the course requirements.
If the students are faced with outside challenges not related to their educational obligation, they
change their focus to those problems losing motivation for continuing their AEC program.
The recommended solution is to provide all students with an LL whose responsibility is
to communicate directly with the student, as needed, during a predetermined time period for the
purpose of discussing any challenges the students may be facing, and to provide academic
support including tutoring. The LL will be the main point of contact for the student and will
provide the consistency of collaborative communication through connectivity between the
student and the institution, including its faculty. The student liaison should have an educational
background in social work, psychology, or related field. The ideal candidate would be a
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 148
graduate of the online AEC program. This individual must be a motivator and compassionate
communicator.
There are other models for student mentors, liaisons, or student concierge that provide
student support for communication outside of the classroom, such as that of Walden University
and National University (Mossavar-Rahmani & Larson-Daugherty, 2007). The GVC model
proposes a LL that serves as the student’s main point of contact for any questions, concerns, or
needs that may or may not be academically related. The LL will support the student in
discussions with others at the institution until the students’ questions, concerns, or needs are fully
resolved. A LL will be hired for every 50 students in the program.
Solution 16: Faculty to self-reflect in the form of small group activities and peer-to-
peer sessions for the purpose of building confidence teaching online. The data indicated
faculty feel confident in their ability to teach online, particularly those faculty who previously
taught on-campus. Faculty who believe they will do well will try harder and push through and
will perform better, the definition of self-efficacy (Pintrich, 2003). The process of self-reflection
includes looking at one’s experience, what was learned, and how one would take into
consideration the experiences of the past that were positive and repeat them, and the negative
ones reflect on what can be done to improve.
Self-reflection can be done in a group setting. Faculty can participate in reflection
exercises that include the following: Sharing best practices in online communication and
learning with other faculty, Coaching or mentoring by another faculty to assist in reflection, and
journaling. Various group and individual activities will be organized to promote reflection so
faculty can learn from experiences and improve performance by reflecting on their work. Self-
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 149
reflection increases confidence and the belief that a goal can be achieved (self-efficacy). It also
creates a stronger culture of professional learning.
Solutions for Organization Causes
All organizations have their own culture. According to Clark and Estes (2008), “culture
describes the core values, goals, beliefs, emotions, and processes learned as people develop over
time” (p. 108). The organization must have effective processes in order for there to be efficiency
(Clark & Estes, 2008). There are organizational causes that were validated relating to
curriculum, technology, staffing, and training (including mentoring and in-service programs).
There were three organizational gaps related to training and staffing.
1. The faculty lack the time necessary to create and revise course materials and documents
for online students.
2. Faculty do not consistently participate in all professional development opportunities.
3. Students lack effective support and reinforcement services required to assist students in
specific online tasks.
The validated organizational gaps are outlined in Table 9.
Solution 17: Provide training via webcast, Adobe Connect, or Blackboard or video
recording. According to Ko and Rossen (2017), faculty who are not based on campus often
have fewer resources. Although there are continuous and comprehensive in-service training and
professional development opportunities available at the institution, training gap for online faculty
was identified, which was the lack of consistency in participation in professional development
opportunities. The deficiency is primarily due to the geographical barriers for the
faculty. Online faculty live in various geographical locations, some of which are nearly 3000
miles away from the main institution site. In order to increase participation in the in-service and
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 150
professional development trainings, the trainings will be video recorded and available through
the learning management system so the faculty can view the recordings at their convenience and
as often as they need to reinforce their own learning. For sessions that require real-time
participation, training can be provided through Adobe Connect or Blackboard.
Solution 18: Faculty to mentor other faculty to provide additional guidance and
support. Mentors provide role modeling to others (Clark & Estes, 2008). Faculty mentors are
effective in providing support to reinforce key concepts of the training and to answer follow-up
questions from the training or additional inquiries concerning content, technology, and best
practices for teaching online. Mentors are normally selected for their talent and interpersonal
skills. They are effective support to faculty especially after training so that the faculty can
receive observation and corrective feedback informally from a peer. Faculty are at liberty to feel
comfortable asking their peer questions that they might be embarrassing or intimidating to ask
the administration or the formal trainer.
Solution 19: Restructure existing services so that services are provided more
effectively and efficiently. According to Clark and Estes (2008), an organizational structure
must match the goals of the organization. As the goals change, the structure must be
accommodated to parallel that change. At GVC, student support services are provided by three
different individual departments. These services are not coordinated for the benefit of the
students. The organization can be restructured so that its staff and faculty can have a better flow
of the academic program, the relationship of student flow through classes and an evaluation
product. The organization’s flow must also include any culminating activities involving faculty
and staff participation in graduation as well as administrative and stakeholders’ oversight of the
entire process.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 151
Solution 20: Provide training for individuals that will hold positions of “lifeline
liaisons”. An LL will assist students with both academic and non-academic services so that the
students have a point of contact to problem solve and ease frustration. The establishment of a LL
is a new concept, identified from the data. The literature is limited, referencing the term of
liaison in library sciences (Rodwell & Fairbairn, 2008). There is no reference to Liaisons or LL
s as a role of support to students. Therefore, this term, used in this context, adds to the body of
knowledge and fills a gap in the literature.
Lifeline liaisons are directly related to the issue of student needs so that the retention is
improved at the retention level of at least 75%. The LL s should receive training in how students
can utilize support from one another in order to resolve difficult challenges. LL s will learn how
to engage in proactive decision-making for the benefit of students enrolled in the AEC program.
Training will also include crisis intervention, specifically how to identify and overcome
obstacles students face. LLs can provide support to students who have left the program and
desire reentry, assisting them in reengaging in the educational system.
Solution 21: Hire instructional design support team for the AEC program. Design
styles and other factors affect the perceived learning of students (Swan, 2001). In order to
provide the necessary support to the AEC program and its faculty, and to achieve high
satisfaction from online students, the institution will need to hire an IDS specific to the AEC
program. This individual will work with the program director and technology specialist to
create, revise, and update content and incorporate the technology into the course shell for online
courses. This individual will be hired by June 2018, and trained by September 2018. The
current IDS on contract will train the AEC program IDS. Any support or guidance that is needed
specific to the technology used by GVC will be provided by the technology specialist (TS).
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 152
Solution 22: Provide faculty training on course development and implementation.
Once the IDS is hired, this individual will work closely with the Program Director and TS to
create, within the course shell, the course outline, materials, syllabus, media, and put it all
together, appropriately designed for easy understanding and access by students. Curricula must
include ample opportunities for interaction to keep students engaged and support learning (Swan,
2002).
Solution 23: Update faculty guide on course development and implementation. The
institution’s faculty guide does not contain any specific information on how to create and
develop new courses online and how to implement and evaluate them. A revised guide will need
to be developed to provide guidance on everything from planning to teaching the courses within
the AEC program. The guide should include pedagogical design issues and facilitating
interaction within the online format.

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 153
Appendix B
Summary Of Assumed Causes For Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization Gaps by Source

INTERVIEWS, DOCUMENT ANALYSIS, AND PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE

Sources Knowledge Causes Motivation Causes Organization Causes
Interviews
Document
Analysis
Personal
Knowledge

Knowledge/Factual:
The faculty were not
familiar with the
terminology associated
with technology options
that is used in the
learning management
system.

Knowledge/Conceptual:
Faculty lacked the
conceptual knowledge of
how to identify students
who are considered to be
at risk, include those
relating to online
apprehension.

Motivation/Intrinsic
Value: Students lack
focus when they are
faced with academic
and non-academic
challenges.

Motivation /
Self-Efficacy: Some
faculty who were
transferred from on-
ground assignments
lack confidence in
their abilities (self-
efficacy).

Organization/Resources:
The faculty lack the time
necessary to create and
revise course materials
and documents for online
students

Organization/Resources:
Students lack coordinated
support and reinforcement
services required to assist
them in specific online
tasks.

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 154
Appendix C
Summary of Assumed Causes for Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization Gaps by Source

LEARNING THEORIES

Knowledge Causes Motivation Causes Motivation Causes Organization Causes
Knowledge
Procedural: Faculty
do not know how to
integrate technology
into their online
classrooms for the
purpose of creating a
more interactive
learning
environment for the
students.

Knowledge
Procedural:
Students do not
know how to assess
their own readiness
and skill level for
online learning.

Knowledge
Metacognitive:
Faculty have not
established goals for
themselves to raise
the retention rate in
the classes they
teach.

Motivation/Mental
Effort/ Social
Exchange Theory:
Faculty and students
lack effective
communication
methods and
engagement, causing
frustration.

Motivation/Mental
Effort: Online
faculty do not want to
put in the mental
effort to participate in
all of the in-service
trainings and other
training opportunities
available to them to
integrate additional
technology skills and
effective teaching
methods online.

Extrinsic
Motivation: Students
will leave school if
there is an external
motivation factor that
is perceived to
control the situation
or environment (Deci
& Ryan, 2014).

Motivation/Mental
Effort: Faculty did
not consistently use
the available
resources in their
classrooms.

Active Choice:
Faculty did not see
the value in using
technology to
enhance learning in
the classroom and
assist students in
staying in school.

Active Choice:
Faculty did not
believe that their
efforts would help
students remain in
school.

Expectancy Value:
Students do not
believe they can be
successful online.

Task Value: Faculty
do not place a high
value on teaching
online due to their
beliefs that online
students are not as
committed as those
who attend on
campus.
Organization/Goal
Setting: The
institution has not
given the faculty
clear goals on
achieving a higher
retention rate.

Training/Profession
al Development:
Faculty have
insufficient In-
Service and
professional
development in the
subject of student
retention.

Training/Profession
al Development:
Faculty have
insufficient In-
Service and
professional
development in
course design and
technology
integration

Resources/Persisten
ce: There are
insufficient after
hours support to
assist online students
with technical
support.
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 155
Appendix D
Summary of Assumed Causes for Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization Gaps by Source
LITERATURE REVIEW
Knowledge Causes Motivation Causes Organization Causes

Literature
Review
Knowledge/Factual: The
faculty did not know
advanced technology to
use in their classrooms
that would assist them in
creating a more interactive
learning environment for
the students.

Knowledge/ Procedural:
Students do not know how
to seek help, when the
help is needed, and where
to go for assistance when
falling behind in their
coursework or when
facing barriers.
Knowledge/
Procedural
Students who are new to
the online delivery format
often do not know how to
use technology, including
how to upload
assignments and other
tasks required of them.

Communication:
Faculty do not see the
connection between
immediate feedback to
students and student
remaining in school
(Bonnel&Boehm,
2011).

Faculty do not see the
relationship between
using the best available
technology tools and
online students
persisting (Bonnel and
Boehm, 2011).

Communication:
Students did not feel
connected with the
institution or other
students and decided to
leave the program
(Willging & Johnson,
2007).

Persistence: Students
have many goals that
may distract them from
staying on task with
online classes
(Muilenber & Berge,
2005).

Some online students
lacked self-regulated
learning (Artino &
Stephens, 2009)

Organization/System
: Online faculty do
not always build
groups and assign
group activities in the
LMS, leading to
feelings of frustration
and isolation (Bonnel
and Boehm, 2011).

Training: There is
insufficient follow-up
in training that is
given to faculty (Clark
& Estes, 2008)

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 156
Appendix E
Student Survey, Pre-Class Orientation Training (Level 1)
Survey of Students Who Participated in Mandatory Pre-Class Orientation, Level 1
Questions One through Four: Please circle the
number that best describes your reaction.
Far Below Average – 1
Below Average – 2
Average – 3
Above Average – 4
Far Above Average – 5
1. I enjoyed the program. 1 2 3 4 5
2. I will be able to use what I gained to
practice in my online classes
1 2 3 4 5
3. I am confident that what I learned I will be
able to use in my classroom.
1 2 3 4 5
4. I value the goals of this orientation.

1 2 3 4 5
Please answer the following three questions as
truthfully as you can.
Please place your comments below:
What did you like most about the orientation? Please comment:
What did you dislike about the orientation? Please comment:

What would you change about the orientation
and how would you change it to make it more
effective for you?

Please comment:

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 157
Appendix F
Faculty Survey, Online Technology Training (Level 1)
Questions One through Four: Please circle the
number that best describes your reaction.
Far Below Average – 1
Below Average – 2
Average – 3
Above Average – 4
Far Above Average – 5

1. I enjoyed the training.
1 2 3 4 5

2. I will be able to use what I gained in my
online classes

1 2 3 4 5

3. I am confident that what I learned I will be
able to use for my students in my classroom.

1 2 3 4 5

4. I value the goals of this training.

1 2 3 4 5
Please answer the following three questions as
truthfully as you can.
Please place your comments below:

What did you like most about the technology
training?

Please comment:

What did you dislike about the training?

Please comment:

What would you change about the training and
how would you change it to make it more
effective for you?

Please comment:

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 158
Appendix G
Student Survey, Online Technology Training (Level 2)
Questions One through Four: Please circle the
number that best describes your reaction.
Far Below Average – 1
Below Average – 2
Average – 3
Above Average – 4
Far Above Average – 5

1. I believe technology is important in order
to be successful my online classes. (attitude)

1 2 3 4 5

2. I believe I can apply the new skills I have
acquired in technology. (confidence)

1 2 3 4 5

3. I intend to utilize what I have learned in my
online classes (commitment)

1 2 3 4 5

4. I value the goals of technology training.

1 2 3 4 5
Please answer the following three questions as
truthfully as you can.
Please place your comments below:

How do you intend to apply the learned
technology skills in your online classes?

Please comment:

What are some of the strategies you intend to
employ in your online classes you take?

Please comment:

What would you change about the technology
training and how would you change it to make
it more effective for you?

Please comment:

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 159
Appendix H
Faculty Survey, Online Technology Training (Level 2)
Questions One through Four: Please circle the
number that best describes your reaction.
Far Below Average – 1
Below Average – 2
Average – 3
Above Average – 4
Far Above Average – 5

1. I believe technology is important for my
online work. (attitude)

1 2 3 4 5

2. I believe I can apply the new skills I have
acquired in technology. (confidence)

1 2 3 4 5

3. I intend to utilize what I have learned in my
classroom. (commitment)

1 2 3 4 5

4. I value the goals of this training.

1 2 3 4 5
Please answer the following three questions as
truthfully as you can.
Please place your comments below:

How do you intend to apply the learned
technology skills in your work?

Please comment:

What are some of the strategies you intend to
employ in your next online class?
Please comment:

What would you change about the training and
how would you change it to make it more
effective for you?

Please comment:

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 160
Appendix I
Interview Questions for Students and Faculty Technology, Level 3
Interview Questions for Students and Faculty (Level 3)
1. How did the application of the knowledge and skills you learned in technology training
show you how to solve a problem or accomplish a task?
2. Are you now doing anything different in your classes as a result of attending the
technology training? If yes, please describe. If no, please indicate why not.
3. What would you add or change in the training, and why?

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 161
Appendix J
Faculty Survey on Engagement Training, Level 3
Questions One through Four: Please circle the
number that best describes your reaction.
Far Below Average – 1
Below Average – 2
Average – 3
Above Average – 4
Far Above Average – 5

1. I enjoyed the training.
1 2 3 4 5

2. I will be able to use what I gained in my
communication exchange with my students.

1 2 3 4 5

3. I am confident that what I learned that I will be
able to use in my online classroom.

1 2 3 4 5

4. I value the goals of this training.

1 2 3 4 5
Please answer the following three questions as
truthfully as you can.
Please place your comments below:

What did you like most about the engagement
training?

Please comment:

What did you dislike about the training?

Please comment:

What would you change about the training and how
would you change it to make it more effective for
you?

Please comment:

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 162
Appendix K
Student Survey on Engagement Training, Level 3
Questions One through Four: Please circle
the number that best describes your
reaction.
Far Below Average – 1
Below Average – 2
Average – 3
Above Average – 4
Far Above Average – 5
1. I enjoyed the training. 1 2 3 4 5

2. I will be able to use what I gained in
future communication exchanges with
faculty, staff at the institution, and other
students.

1 2 3 4 5

3. I am confident that what I learned about
engagement that I will be able to use in my
online courses.

1 2 3 4 5

4. I value the goals of this training.

1 2 3 4 5
Please answer the following three questions
as truthfully as you can.
Please place your comments below:

What did you like most about the
engagement training?

Please comment:

What did you dislike about the training?

Please comment:

What would you change about the training
and how would you change it to make it
more effective for you?

Please comment:

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 163
Appendix L
Faculty Engagement Training Observation Checklist Level 2
Skill Level Response

1. Describe the engagement type that occurred during this observation.

TYPE:
2. Was the engagement with the student personalized?

YES / NO

3. Did the student receive responses to questions he or she had during
the engagement?

YES / NO
4. Did the student receive constructive feedback?

YES / NO
5. Was the student referred to others in the institution if he or she had
questions that could not be answered by the participant?

YES / NO
What would you change about the training and how would you change it
to make it more effective for you?

COMMENTS:

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 164
Appendix M
Engagement Interview Questions for Students Level 3
Engagement Interview Questions for Students (Level 3)
1. How did training change your behavior to become more effective in engagement strategies
with faculty or staff?

2. Are you now doing anything different in your classes as a result of your new
communication knowledge and skills? If yes, please describe. If no, please indicate why not.

3. Describe how you have been able to address challenges through increased engagement.

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 165
Appendix N
Student and Faculty Interview Questions On Growth Mindset Level 1

Interview Questions for students on Growth Mindset
Interview Questions for Students (Level 1)
(To be used pre-training and after the introduction of concepts of growth mindset)
1. What is your belief about your own intelligence and learning?

2. What is the origin of your belief?

Interview Questions for Faculty on Growth Mindset
Interview Questions for Faculty (Level 1)
(To be used pre-training and after the introduction of concepts of growth mindset)
1. What is your belief about student intelligence and learning?

2. What is the origin of your belief?

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 166
Appendix O
Student Interview Questions on Growth Mindset Level 3

Interview Questions for Students on Mindset.
Interview Questions for Students on Mindset (Level 3)
1. How has training changed your behavior to help you to become more effective in school?

2. What do you do now when you are faced with challenges or setbacks in your plan for
achievement of graduation?

3. Are you now doing anything different in your life as a result of your understanding or
transformation of your mindset? If yes, please describe. If no, please indicate why not.

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 167
Appendix P
Faculty Interview Questions on Growth Mindset Level 3
Interview Questions for Faculty on Mindset.
Interview Questions for Faculty on Mindset (Level 3)
1. How has training changed your behavior to help you to become more effective as an
instructor?

2. What actions do you take now when you are faced with students’ challenges or setbacks,
such as non-participation or late assignments?

3. Are you now doing anything different in your life as a result of your understanding or
transformation of your mindset? If yes, please describe. If no, please indicate why not.

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 168
Appendix Q
Validated Knowledge Causes, Solutions, and Implementation Plan
Category Validated Cause Solution Implementation
Knowledge
(Factual)
The faculty are not familiar with
the terminology associated with
technology options that is used in
the learning management system.
Solution 1: Provide training to faculty
on the key terms used in the learning
management system as it relates to
availability of Technology.
Training on key terms to be completed by
technology expert by March 2018.
Knowledge
(Factual)
The faculty do not know
advanced technology to use in
their classrooms that will assist
them in creating a more
interactive learning environment
for the students.
Solution 2: Provide faculty training on
the available online technology
resources.
Solution 3: Update the faculty guide on
terms and use of online technology
Solution 4: Establish a growth mindset
for learning technology.
Training on available technology resources
will be completed by technology expert by
March 2018.

Faculty Guide specific on the use of online
technology will be completed by Program
Director with support of Technology
expert, by June 2018.
Knowledge
(Conceptual)
Faculty lack the conceptual
knowledge of how to identify
students who are considered to be
at risk, include those relating to
online apprehension.
Solution 5: Faculty to learn about what
the characteristics of at-risk students at
GVC.

Solution 6: Provide faculty training
various ways to assist at-risk students.
Expert in the field to work hand-in-hand
with the Program Director to create the
questionnaire and to train the faculty on
how that questionnaire is to be used. Same
expert to work with the Program Director to
develop a training program on how to
identify at-risk students and action to be
taken once they have been identified.
Knowledge
Procedural
Faculty do not know how to
integrate technology into their
online classrooms for the purpose
of creating a more interactive
learning environment for the
students.
Solution 7: Provide orientation to
newly hired faculty on how to
incorporate the additional technology
into their classrooms, including
orientation on how to establish a growth
mindset.
Solution 8: Provide ongoing in-service
training and mentorship on technology
integration and establishment growth
mindset.
Instructional Design Specialist (IDS) to be
hired to assist in integrating technology and
course content by June 2018.
Technology expert to assist the Program
Director and newly hired Instructional
Designer Specialist (IDS) in the creation of
a training orientation given to new hires,
that will provide training on how to
incorporate technology into the classrooms.
Training will also include how to establish
a GMT. Training will be ongoing, with
initial training on integration to be
completed by September 2018.
Faculty mentors will be identified from the
pool of current faculty by March 2018.
Mentors will be trained on how to mentor
other faculty by the Program Director by
June 2018.
In-Service training on technology will be
ongoing, with initial training completed by
September 2018.
Knowledge
Procedural
Students who are new to the
online delivery format often do
not know how to use technology,
including how to upload
assignments and other tasks
required of them.
Solution 9: Provide a mandatory pre-
class orientation for all new students on
how to use technology and how to
navigate through the online learning
management system.
Mandatory pre-class orientations will be
redesigned to include a step-by-step process
on how to navigate through technology, and
how to develop a growth mindset . The
videos will be developed by the technology
expert and will be implemented by June
2018, and will be offered ongoing for all
new students.
Knowledge
Procedural
Students do not know how to
assess their own readiness and
skill level for online learning.
(Under metacognitive in Ch4)
Solution 10: Students will learn how to
assess their own readiness and skill
level for online learning, and will also
learn how to self-reflect by writing a
self-reflection assignments, including
consistent journaling.
Students will be given a readiness survey
that extends beyond computer
specifications. The survey will evaluate the
students’ understanding of what is required
as an online student, and determine the
students’ availability of time and skill-level
for online learning. The survey will be
developed as a collaborative effort with PD,
TS, and Student Affairs Staff, by March
2018.

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 169
Appendix R
Validated Motivational Causes, Solutions, and Implementation Plan
Motivation
(Social
Exchange
Theory)
Faculty and students lack
effective communication
methods and engagement,
causing frustration.

Solution 11: Enhance consistency of
collaborate communication through
connectivity of students and faculty.
Solution 12: Faculty to create short-term
achievable goals and institution provides
training and constructive feedback, and
increase confidence through praise.
Solution 13: Students to receive extra
credit for their participation in Q&A,
tutoring, or other academic activities.
Solution 14: Faculty to provide one-on-
one feedback on all graded assignments.
Faculty will receive training by an outside party
who specializes in online communications (both
verbal and written) who will provide ideas on
how to foster discussions both in and out of the
LMS and establish ways to encourage frequent
response and critical thinking. The initial
training will be completed by March 2018.

Faculty will develop short-term
communications goals and will work with peer
mentors to reinforce learning, to be ongoing,
with the initial training completed by June
2018.

Faculty will arrange appointments with each
student for a 15 minute increment for the
purpose of providing corrective feedback to the
students. This plan is ongoing, with the initial
implementation to be completed by January
2018.
Motivation
(Intrinsic
Value)
Students lack focus when
they are faced with
academic and non-
academic challenges.

Solution 15: Assign a Lifeline Liaison to
each student to improve student
engagement and provide additional
student support.

The Lifeline Liaison job description will be
developed by the HR Administrator, by January
2018.

Lifeline Liaisons will be hired by March 2018.
One LL for every 50 students initially; The ratio
will increase to 75:1 by January 2019 when
they are more familiar and efficient in their job
duties.

Training for new Liaisons will take place by
June 2018.

Liaisons will initially be monitored by the
Online Director of Education and Program
Director until September 2018, when Liaisons
will work independently in providing student
support services.
Motivation
(Self-Efficacy)
Some faculty who were
transferred from on-ground
assignments to not believe
they have the ability to
teach online.
Solution 16: Provide opportunities for
faculty to self-reflect through
participation in small group activities and
peer-to-peer sessions.
Faculty mentors will be identified from the pool
of current faculty by March 2018. Mentors will
be trained on how to mentor other faculty by
the Program Director by June 2018.

Faculty mentorship activities to increase
confidence will include self-reflection in small
group or peer-to-peer sessions by September
2018.

Training on available technology resources will
be completed by technology expert by March
2018, and in-service on same will be ongoing.

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 170
Appendix S
Validated Organizational Causes, Solutions, and Implementation Plan
Organization
(Training)
Faculty do not
consistently participate in
all professional
development
opportunities.
Solution 17: Provide training via
webcast, Adobe Connect, or
Blackboard or video recording
available to view for faculty at their
convenience.
Solution 18: Faculty to mentor other
faculty to provide additional guidance
and support.
Create and design videos for the faculty in the
AEC Program who are unable to attend in person.
These training vides will be developed in
collaboration by IDS, PD, and select faculty by
March 2019, and will be updated on an ongoing
basis.

Faculty mentorship activities and peer-to-peer
sessions to provide ongoing guidance and support
to faculty, to be completed by September 2018.
This will be ongoing.

Organization
(Resources)
Students lack coordinated
support and reinforcement
services required to assist
them in specific online
tasks.

Solution 19: Restructure existing
services so that services are provided
more effectively and efficiently to
students.
Solution 20: Recruit, select, hire and
train Lifeline Liaison Positions for
student support.
Restructure organization to place all student
support services from three departments to services
under one umbrella by January 2018.

The Lifeline Liaison job description will be
developed by the HR Administrator, by January
2018.

Lifeline Liaisons will be hired by March 2018.
One LL for every 50 students initially; The ratio
will increase to 75:1 by January 2019 when they
are more familiar and efficient in their job duties.

Training for new Liaisons will take place by June
2018.

Liaisons will initially be monitored by the Online
Director of Education and Program Director until
September 2018, when Liaisons will work
independently in providing student support
services.

Organization
(Resources)
The faculty lack the time
necessary to create and
revise course materials
and documents for online
students.
Solution 21: Hire instructional design
support team for the AEC program.
Solution 22: Provide faculty training
on course development and
implementation.
Solution 23: Update faculty guide on
course development and
implementation.
Instructional Design Specialist (IDS) to be hired,
by June 2018. The IDS will work AEC Program
Director Program and select faculty, to integrate
course materials into the LMS that were developed
by faculty and PD.
IDS to update faculty guide, with the assistance of
the PD by December 2018.

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 171
Appendix T
Organizational Chart Depicting Newly Created Positions

EXHIBIT T: ORGANIZATIONAL CHART
DEPICTING NEWLY CREATED POSITIONS
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 172
Appendix U
Non-Instructional Strategies to Support Online Students to Persist
Strategy Implementation

Send welcome email to new students.
Email is to be sent within 72 hours of
student’s enrollment.

Director of Admissions, Director of Career Services,
and Instructor would send three different
personalized emails to students, welcoming the
student to the institution and explaining their roles
within the institution will support for the student.

Email from Student Affairs
72 hours after student’s enrollment

Send link to participate in orientation, and provide
direct contact information in case student is having
difficulty with technology or accessing/completing
orientation. Post updated orientation video to the
LMS for students to view.

LMS posting from Technology
Specialist
(One week before classes commence)

Post to LMS contact information for TS, including
phone number and email. Post an updated
troubleshooting post for student to follow in case
they are having difficulty.

Email from Program Director,
(with cc to Instructor and LL)
One week before classes commence.

Reminder to student that mandatory pre-class
orientation requires completion. Offer support;
explain one-on-one time that will be scheduled to
review grades. Explain opportunities for extra
credit, Q&A, and tutoring. Provide contact for
Lifeline Liaison (LL), and “cc” LL on email. Share
information about instructor’s background and
experience and tutoring schedule.

Call and email from Lifeline Liaison
(upon receiving PD’s email

LL to reach out to the student by email then
telephone. Provide contact information by email,
then call student to schedule a weekly time to meet
and discuss progress, support and other needs.

LMS posting from online director of
education

Introduction, how the modules are formatted,
process to select future classes, and posting about
graduation requirements and ceremony.

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 173

Student Affairs communication about
orientation
Congratulations email for students who have
completed orientation; Follow-up with students by
email and telephone who have not completed
orientation and offer one-on-one support; Notify LL
of orientation status.

Faculty assignment - Gather
information/break the ice
Obtain information on first assignment from student
that promotes sharing, including information about
student, hobbies, goals, motivation toward the
program. Include a request for contact information,
including employer information, and best times to
reach out. Assignment to include threaded
discussion other students to build community.

LL Weekly Calls Commence in First
Week of Classes
LL calls during pre-determined time to determine
how the student is progressing and offer support.
Discuss availability of services in the first week.
Post all notes to the SMS so others can assist,
eliminating confidential discussions.

Director of Career Services
First month in Program, and every five
weeks thereafter until graduation, then
weekly calls with graduates who need
career preparation assistance.
DCS to send placement questionnaire that will
provide information on student’s specific career
goals, including type of treatment center for
internship and employment; obtain resume. Send
internship policies and certification/portfolio
documents required. Call with students every five
weeks. Students who are entering internship will
need information on graduation.
Conference Call Opportunities with
Employers
(Every five weeks)
Students invited to dial in to talk with employers in
the field about current events, legislative updates,
internship and employment opportunities.

Writing Workshops
(Every five weeks)
Students who need additional writing support or
those enrolled in English 101 or English 102 can
participate in the monthly writing workshops in
addition to tutoring sessions. Students can learn
writing tips, grammar support, and assistance with
assignments.

Certification Preparation Workshops
(Monthly)
AEC students and graduates can participate in the
preparation for the IC&RC examination. Assistance
with the portfolio review and application submission
is provided

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 174
Appendix V
Data Collection Process

University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
3470 Trousdale Parkway
Los Angeles, CA 90089

Dear Former Student/Dear Current Online Faculty Member:

Re: Request for Your Participation in a Research Interview

You are invited to participate in a research study conducted by Geeta Bidasha Brown under the
supervision of Professor Dr. Mark Robison at the University of Southern California because you
are a former student or online faculty member with knowledge of why students who attended the
online Associates Degree Program in Addiction Education Counseling Program (AEC) but did
not complete their studies.

Research Title: Retention Rate of Online Students in the Associates Degree Program in
Addiction Education Counseling: A Gap Analysis

This research study will include only people who voluntarily choose to take part. This document
explains information about this study. You should ask questions about anything that is unclear.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this study is to examine the reasons underlying why college students enrolled in
the Addiction Education Counseling Program at InterCoast College (ICC) chose to leave their
online program. The participants will be interviewed to determine what inhibited them to
complete their programs and to provide an opportunity to recommend ways to positively impact
the students’ ability to complete their education.

PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
If you volunteer to be involved in this study, you will be asked to participate in an interview
about your experiences as a student or faculty member at ICC. The interview will be conducted
in a private office at the branch campus site in West Covina, CA. The ICC President is the
researcher for the study and will conduct the study. The interview will be guided by a series of
questions that will assist the researcher in determining why students decided not to complete
their studies at ICC, including the discussion of some barriers that may have contributed to the
students’ decision to leave school. The interview is expected to last no longer than 60 minutes.

Participants will be asked to participate in one additional session, namely a focus group
activity. The focus group will consist of others who will, along with you, share their experiences
with other study participants present. The purpose of the focus group is to allow participants to
get together and offer additional information pertaining to why students leave school. The
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 175
student focus group will consist of 7 students that were purposely selected like you. The faculty
focus group will also consist of 7 faculty purposely selected. The focus group will clarify
answers to some previous questions, thereby providing more in depth data on the reasons choose
not to complete at ICC. This focus group is expected to last 45 to 60 minutes. You are not
required to participate. Your relationship with the institution will not be affected whether you
participate or not in this study.

COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
There is no financial compensation for your participation.

CONFIDENTIALITY
There will be no identifiable information obtained in connection with this study. Your name,
address or other identifiable information will not be collected or used in any way.

The results of this research may be made public, shared with participating sites and quoted in
professional journals and meetings, but results from this study will only be reported as a group
and no individual respondents can be identified nor will any identifiable information will be
included. The members of the research team and the University of Southern California’s Human
Subjects Protection Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP reviews and monitors
research studies to protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.

INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
GEETA BIDASHA BROWN Geetaangelabrown1@gmail.com, (818) 402-5207
Doctoral Candidate - Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
9846 White Oak Avenue, Suite 100
Northridge, CA 91325

DR. MARK ROBISON mrobison@usc.edu, (213) 821-5607
Professor of Education- Doctoral Committee Chair
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
3470 Trousdale Parkway
Los Angeles, CA 90089

IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have questions, concerns, or complaints about your rights as a research participant or the
research in general and are unable to contact the research team, or if you want to talk to someone
independent of the research team, please contact the University Park Institutional Review Board
(UPIRB), 3720 South Flower Street #301, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0702, (213) 821-5272 or
upirb@usc.edu. Your call is confidential

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 176
Appendix W
Data Collection Instrument
STUDENT – SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEW PROTOCOL

1. What brought you to the field of AEC? (M)
2. How long were you in school before leaving?
3. Did you take any classes in the AEC Program on campus?
4. Explain the factors that resulted in your leaving the program (M)
5. What do you think you could have done to help you stay on track to complete the
program? Please give some examples. (M)
6. What personal barriers, if any, that prevented you from completing? (M)
7. Describe how you knew you were at risk for leaving the program. (M)
8. Describe what services would have been helpful to you so that you would have stayed
in school. (O)
9. What would you like to see in the way of collaboration among faculty, administration
and students that would have help students complete? (K/M/O)
10. Describe any difficulties you had using the online technology. (K/M/O)
11. What additional services can the institution provide in the future to better meet the
students’ needs and assist with completion? (O)
12. Are there any recommendations you would make for future students? Please
elaborate. Why would you make these recommendations? (O)
13. Is there anything else you would like to add?

RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 177
Appendix X
Data Collection Instrument
FACULTY – SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEW PROTOCOL

1. Did you teach the AEC Program on campus? If so, when and how long?
2. What do you think are the reasons students leave the online AEC Program?
3. What do you believe are some of the barriers that prevented the students from completing
the program? (K/M/O)
4. What do you believe students could have done to keep themselves on track for
graduation? (M)
5. Describe if and how you know a student is at risk for leaving the program. (K/M/O).
6. What do you think that you could have done to help the students could stay in school?
(K/M/O)
7. What would you like to see in the way of collaboration among administration, faculty,
staff, students and other stakeholders that will help students complete? (O)
8. Describe the type of activities/time do you do that relate to student engagement? (M/O)
9. Describe difficulties, if any, that students have with technology. (K/M/O)
10. What would you recommend to improve the online technology that would prevent
students from dropping? (K/M/O)
11. Describe what would be helpful to you in support or resources now that you have
transitioned to online teaching. (K/M/O)
12. Do the faculty have a strong understanding of how to add technology such as media, and
course content to the LMS? Describe. (K)
RETENTION RATE OF ONLINE STUDENTS 178
13. What type of technological support or additional technology do you believe faculty need
to assist the students to stay in school? (K/O)
14. What type of in-service trainings would you like to see added so that you are receiving
what you need and participation is increased? (K/O)
15. What do you see as the signs that indicate students are no longer engaged in your
classroom? (K/M)
16. How do faculty address students who are showing signs that they are disengaged and may
be leaving the program? (M)
17. If you would wave a magic wand and change anything about your online experience,
what changes would you recommend that would be help future students to graduate? Why do
you make these recommendations?
18. Is there anything else you would like to add?

Abstract (if available)

Abstract Using the gap analysis framework by Clark and Estes (2008), this qualitative study examined the knowledge, motivation, and organization causes that contributed to the low retention rate of the 18-month associate’s degree program in addiction education counseling at Green Valley College (pseudonym). Green Valley College’s associate’s degree program is offered both online and at a campus setting. The two programs are identical in length and content, and both prepare students for CCAAP certification

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Coaching to increase retention in online degree completion programs

PDF

Minority Reserve Officer Training Corps officer candidate recruitment and retention: a gap analysis

PDF

Building national capacity in student affairs at a local university in Qatar: A gap analysis

PDF

Creating a comprehensive professional development program for MBA students: a needs analysis

PDF

Online student attrition in blended learning programs

PDF

Increasing the number of petroleum engineering students in the United Arab Emirates: an improvement model

PDF

Improving educational attainment at a bridge program in Saudi Arabia: a gap analysis

PDF

Attracting and retaining talent: improving the impact of workplace mentorship

PDF

Creating "excellent" learning experiences: a gap analysis of a university extension program

PDF

Increasing institutional retention: a gap analysis

PDF

Student engagement in online education: an evaluation study

PDF

Serving those who have served: the role of university career services in student veteran degree completion

PDF

Improved student success at California State University, Dominguez Hills: a promising practice study

PDF

An evaluation study of the training, orientation, and implementation of a community college new student counseling intervention program: a gap analysis

PDF

Teacher retention in an urban, predominately Black school district: an improvement study in the Deep South

PDF

A gap analysis on improving teacher retention in kindergarten: a case of a private kindergarten in Hong Kong

PDF

Evaluation of the career development counseling in public high school in Qatar

PDF

The role of divisional principals in teacher retention in East African international schools

PDF

Understanding student persistence in massive open online courses (MOOCs): an evaluation study

PDF

Preparing students for the 21st century labor market through liberal arts education at a Chinese joint venture university

Asset Metadata

Creator Bidasha Brown, Geeta Angela (author)

Core Title Retention rate of online students in the associate's degree program in addiction education counseling: a gap analysis

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Global Executive

Publication Date 08/01/2017

Defense Date 08/01/2017

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag accountability,addiction education,attrition rate,college attrition rate,college retention rate,Distance education,engagement,mindset,OAI-PMH Harvest,online,online associate's degree program attrition,online associate's degree program completion rate,retention rate,TEAM approach,Technology

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Robison, Mark (committee chair), Krop, Cathy (committee member), Tambascia, Tracy (committee member)

Creator Email bidasha@usc.edu,geetaangelabrown1@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-420798

Unique identifier UC11263778

Identifier etd-BidashaBro-5668.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-420798 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-BidashaBro-5668.pdf

Dmrecord 420798

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Bidasha Brown, Geeta Angela

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA