Holly McCracken
University of Illinois at Springfield, Springfield, IL, USA

Abstract

"Outreach Beyond the Virtual Campus: Promoting Engagement and Retention Through Integrated Support Systems" focuses upon the need to move beyond the provision of skeletal student support services (in a higher education setting) to revisioning a campus' virtual environment as inclusive, accessible, informative, and responsive to changing learner needs. Using the University of Illinois at Springfield's experience of online program expansion in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, this paper will examine student support and outreach as important natural progressions of early online program development.

Specifically, this presentation will explore:

• Methods for expanding a physical campus environment to a full service virtual presence.
• Specific approaches that facilitate virtual support and outreach.
• Benefits of and barriers to supporting extended programming.
• Strategies to promote continuous student support for distant students.

  "Information technology can be the excuse and the means to move closer to educational goals that we have been unable to achieve for decades - and to some new ones. With enough commitment of resources, thoughtful effort, patience, and luck, technology will help more than it hurts." TLT Group, 2002

  Excerpt from "A New Vision Worth Working Toward: Connected Education & Collaborative Change," February 2002.

Introduction

I'm joining you from the University of Illinois at Springfield (UIS) in Springfield, Illinois, to discuss a significant gap in web-based higher education, institutions' limited abilities to provide time and location-independent integrated access to an array of instructional and student support services that promote successful articulation, persistence, and degree completion processes. The term "outreach" typically describes an approach to supporting the recruitment and retention of non-traditional students to an educational institution; UIS’ academic outreach activities had historically been limited to small student cohorts studying at two to three physical off-campus sites. Media-based programming had been limited to several telecourses or interactive video courses, roughly averaging less than 100 students a semester; subsequently, support programs and services had been developed for the majority of students whose shared demographic was the academic discipline they had chosen to study. Because opportunities for outreach programming were so limited, there had never been a reason to develop systems to support a significant media-based student population.

However, this changed in 1999 when the UIS College of Liberal Arts and Sciences offered its first online bachelors degree completion program, Liberal Studies Online. Now in its fourth year of operation, the Liberal Studies Online Program has admitted over 400 students, 70 to 75 percent of whom study completely at a distance, never coming to the physical campus. A grant from the Alfred P. Sloan foundation, funded in the summer of 2002, enabled UIS to expand its web-based undergraduate degree completion programs in a range of liberal arts and sciences disciplines, expanding the existing online curriculum by immediately developing the English major and minor, and Philosophy minor, with several additional majors and minors planned for online migration over the next three academic years. It was projected that these additional programs would translate to a growth in online enrollments from an average of 10 percent to 30 percent of the overall institutional enrollment in a given semester, a substantial increase to the University’s media-based student population.

Our experiences in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences Online indicated that the support needs of students studying exclusively in a virtual environment were sufficiently unique to demand a redefinition of outreach that emphasized institutional systems integration, the ultimate goal of which was student retention through program completion. In order to extend systems and policies that reinforced persistence and completion for virtual students, it became insufficient to simply adapt policies and programs initially created for its traditional students; the shared demographic of a developing virtual student population, the media-based delivery method, directed a process of revisioning academic and support systems to promote congruent and consistent access to a range of infrastructures in order to ensure academic quality across instructional delivery systems. The technological infrastructure had been in place for four years; online classes were developed, and instructors trained, but was the university, in fact, equipped for significant growth of a virtual population?

As we’d learned from our collective experiences supporting students in the Liberal Studies Online program, sustaining virtual academic programs demanded the same types of strategic planning and resources be allocated to developing and maintaining web-based support systems that were required by their campus-based counterparts. While network and online course management systems had been centralized across the University, individual academic and student support functions continued to be coordinated in isolation; this resulted in inconsistent access to an already fragmented service continuum available to virtual students. As instructional programming expanded to accommodate rising enrollments, it became increasingly critical to integrate support systems necessary to transition the University from one that simply offered online courses to one that extended virtual access to programs and services representative of the larger, physical campus. For purposes of this paper, the following figure represents those components necessary for the provision of integrated virtual systems.

Figure 1. Supporting Access Through Seamless Systems Integration: System Components

The Case for Integrated Support

The University continues to realize, as has higher education in general, a growing demand for online courses by not only location-restricted, non-traditional students, but also increasing numbers of technologically literate, younger students. To illustrate this trend, a recent article in the New York Times by John Schwartz (September 16, 2002) discussed the dramatic rise in Internet use among college students and the results of a report recently produced by the Pew Internet and American Life Project, titled The Internet Goes to College: How Students Are Living in the Future With Today's Technology. Schwartz noted that report results, based on survey responses from 2,054 students at 27 schools throughout the U.S., included the following revealing statistics about the prominence of computer and Internet use in the lives of college students:

• One fifth of today's college students began using computers from the ages of five to eight.
• 86 percent of them had gone online compared with 59 percent of the general population.
• 72 percent checked e-mail messages at least once a day.
• They were roughly twice as likely to have downloaded music as the general population, 60 percent versus 28 percent.
• Instant messages, used daily by 12 percent of the general population, were used by 26 percent of college students.
• Nearly 75 percent of college students said they used the Internet more than they used the library to look for information; just nine percent said they used the library more.

(New York Times, September 16, 2002)

Virtual students were redefining themselves as the new tradition; as Internet use rapidly increased by students and faculty alike, a web-based learning environment limited solely to the provision of online courseware became insufficient to meet a growing demand for integrated networked business, academic, instructional, and student support services. Although early program planners concluded that distant students would not prioritize nor require the same types of activities and services as those studying on a traditional residential campus might, practitioners have since determined that this, in fact, was inaccurate. While distant students did not require existing services, they did need comparable, re-conceptualized programs constructed to support the medium by which they studied; retention through program completion increased as equal access to integrated services such as writing/math tutoring, computer skills training, career development and placement, grievance and mediation processes, or co-curricular activities and programs were visible, accessible, and responsive.

In order to extend systems and policies that reinforce persistence and program completion for virtual students, the University was challenged to ensure that they were offered comparable opportunities for learning, development and affiliation that were as substantial, meaningful, and relevant as their on campus counterparts. In its "Guiding Principles for Distance Education," the American Distance Education Consortium (2003) emphasized that in addition to designing effective web-based learning experiences, critical institutional components for sustaining virtual learning environments include:

Support[ing] the needs of learners. Principle: Distance learning opportunities are effectively and flexibly supported, including:

• initial disclosure of information on the learning opportunities
• orientation to the process of learning at a distance, including use of technologies for learning
• site and tutorial support
• student advising and counseling
• provision of technical support and library and information services
• problem-solving assistance

Develop[ing] and maintain[ing] the technological and human infrastructure. Principle: The provider of distance learning opportunities has both a technology plan and a human infrastructure to ensure that

• appropriate technical requirements are established
• compatibility needs are met
• technology at origination and receive sties are maintained to ensure technical quality
• learners and learning facilitators are supported in their use of these technologies
• partnering and collaboration are explored as appropriate

Sustain[ing] administrative and organizational commitment. Principle: Distance education initiatives are sustained by an administrative commitment to quality distance education, as indicated by

• integration of distance education into the mission of the organization
• financial commitment to accommodate diverse distance learning needs
• faculty development and reward structures
• training to support learners, site facilitators, and technicians
• marketing and management structures to promote and sustain distance education
• cost-effectiveness reflected through best use of fiscal, technical, and human resources
• ongoing evaluation and research

(American Distance Education Consortium, 2003)

The critical role such components play in facilitating learning achievement in a virtual environment has been well documented; both research and anecdotal information indicated that the following five general categories promoted retention for distant student populations in a web-based environment. (Boettcher, 1999; Palloff & Pratt, 1999 & 2001; Fredericksen, Pickett, Shea, Pelz, & Swan, 2001; Western Cooperative for Educational Telecommunications, 2001):

• reliable, stable technology and related support and training (combined technology and instructional support functions).
• available, accessible and visible instructional, business, and student support systems, programs, and services (combined academic, business/administrative, and student support functions).
• ongoing responsiveness from and communication/interaction with support staff and faculty members (combined academic and student support functions).
• available career readiness and transition information (student support functions).
• the creation of strong, congruent and interactive learning opportunities (combined academic and student support functions).

The Role of Student Support in Engaging & Retaining Distance Students

The importance of providing opportunities for communication, participation, and interaction has been well demonstrated as it relates to the cognitive development possible in web-based classrooms. As an example, Fredericksen, Pelz, Pickett, Shea, and Swan (2001) surveyed 1,406 online students about their experiences in, satisfaction with, and perceptions of virtual courses. The largest study completed to date, it substantiated the correlation between, and importance of student-to-student and instructor-to-student interaction to perceived learning effectiveness in virtual environments. However, it is widely accepted that learning, and subsequently students’ development, is not limited to a cognitive experience; to extend opportunities for growth beyond students’ intellectual needs, necessitates a coordinated approach to facilitating and supporting learning opportunities that engage the "complete student," regardless of the medium in which s/he studies. In Principles of Good Practice in Student Affairs (1997), author Paul Olierio, et al., noted, "Focusing on learning rather than instruction [requires] a fundamental shift in perspective." In a web-based learning environment, facilitating such a shift requires instructional and support functions to be seamlessly and consistently linked. Olierio, et al., continued by explaining the importance of this context to providing opportunities for engagement that enhance intellectual development.

Our beliefs about higher education serve as the foundation for our commitment to the development of "the whole person"; our collective professional values are derived from that commitment. Values evident across the history of student affairs work include:

• an acceptance and appreciation of individual differences;
• lifelong learning;
• education for effective citizenship;
• student responsibility;
• ongoing assessment of learning and performance (students' and our own);
• pluralism and multiculturalism;
• ethical and reflective student affairs practice;
• supporting and meeting the needs of students as individuals and in groups; and,
• freedom of expression with civility.

(American College Personnel Association, 1997)

Within the framework of Olierio’s comments, it can be concluded that just as activities that promote communication, participation, and interaction are important to one's cognitive maturity, so are they essential for associated aspects of development such as affective and social growth; this is true, regardless of the medium by which students learn. Specific examples of such experiences noted as contributing to the combined personal, academic, and social development are frequently unavailable to distant students, for instance:

• participation in internships and graduate assistantships.
• attendance at convocations, graduation ceremonies, and other academic rituals.
• membership in clubs and other activities in academic majors (e.g., History Club, Verbal Arts Festivals, etc.).
• participation in "in house" opportunities for research and publication.
• participation in service learning and volunteer opportunities.
• access to grievance, ombuds, and other appeal systems and processes.
• access to career development and transition information specific to professional focus and geographic region.
• use of the entire range of services and resources of the library, bookstore and physical campus.
• attendance at cultural, social, and athletic events.
• participation in co-curricular activities, such as arts festivals, debate team, or campus choir.

These opportunities are not unavailable because technology can't support them, but rather because institutions don’t prioritize these types of experiences as valuable to the overall learning and academic development of students studying from a distance.

Although imperative that virtual and campus-based students have access to university programs and services, it is shortsighted to believe that identical programs should be developed to accommodate students in two such distinct learning environments. Particularly in the past five years, institutions have sought to strengthen such aspects of support provision to distant students; there are multiple exemplary models for single-focused program development. While these types of programs provide very effective solutions for specific support needs of distant students, there appear to be very few institutions that integrate these systems into a single approach promoting persistence, achievement, and degree completion. The continued absence of both integrated, web-based systems offering comparable access and consistent and reliable avenues for engagement, indicate that these aspects of virtual learning environments are only beginning to be understood as relevant to the quality of educational experiences provided to distant students.

Examples of Exemplary Single-Focus Support Programs for Distant Students

• Washington State University and San Diego State University provide comprehensive resources about career and academic planning via the Internet, making them widely accessible to all non-residential students.
• At Weber State University and Capella University students can communicate with academic advisors via synchronous web-based conferencing mechanisms.
• Distant students at the University of California, Riverside, and Colorado State University participate in online networking sessions and career development workshops.
• The University of Oregon and the University of Indiana, Purdue, have developed extensive virtual writing labs.
• Regents College's Electronic Peer Network enables students to interact and communicate virtually both academically and socially.
• Washington State University and Dakota State University have constructed interactive online learning communities in order to promote an increased sense of affiliation among remote learners.
  (Western Cooperative for Educational Telecommunications, 2001)

Toward A Student Centered Delivery System: A Model for Systems Integration to Support Web-Based Instruction

Fragmented support, regardless of the environment in which it is delivered, is evidenced by a lack of a cohesive and consistent response to students' needs; these common cultural and infrastructure issues combine to frustrate all members of a university community; however, virtual students quickly become isolated when they receive inconsistent information and conflicting policies as a result of inadequate and inaccessible programs, services, and technical support. Particularly in institutions in which the majority of the student population is comprised of traditional campus-based students, those labeled "distant" are intrinsically vulnerable to institutional barriers that separate them from academic programs and the larger university. Moreover, as growing numbers of students gain experience using the Internet and rising numbers of instructors integrate this medium into their on ground and blended platform courses, it becomes increasingly time-consuming, costly, and inefficient to maintain separate support systems, the primary differentiation of which is dictated by instructional delivery medium. Beyond institutional waste, the ultimate impact of fragmented systems can be measured in student attrition rates; distant students are aware of the competitive e-learning market, pursuing admission to those institutions that can most efficiently, cost-effectively, comprehensibly, and responsively meet their learning goals.

Broad-based systems integration is difficult to achieve, particularly in institutional environments that are under-funded, lack strategic planning, or resist a collaborative approach to support and instructional coordination. A core barrier to systems integration relates specifically to a continuum of unmet needs, conceptualized very differently by various constituencies, based on role, responsibility, focus, and relationship to the organization. For example, while students note the importance of mediated business and student systems (e.g., admissions, registration, account access, etc.), they may be unaware of the need for a stable course management system and faculty training to support their actual access to online courses. As a second example, technology specialists may be keenly aware of the need for a stable and reliable technological infrastructure but be unfamiliar with student needs for academic or enrollment management support components. When institutions are not able to fund and coordinate parallel systems development, someone’s needs remain unmet; this effect is extremely isolating for distant students.

Promoting Integrated Systems

Environments that promote integrated systems demonstrate responsiveness through:

• maintaining a student-centered focus in implementation of all current & developing technology-based systems.
• incorporating core institutional commitments/values in technology-based activities and programs that support the development of a range of learning opportunities.
• realistically determining institutional enrollment goals, ensuring that recruitment, retention, and other support activities support these goals.
• identifying and confronting cultural, political, and operational barriers to integrative process and decision-making.
• developing new, technology-based systems that interact with standing institutional systems to fill service gaps, and migrating obsolete systems so that they optimally function
• collecting reliable data, and, therefore, allowing data, such as broad based needs assessment processes, to direct integrated enrollment management activities (such as admissions, registration, financial aid, etc.).
• promoting cross function training and project management for associated personnel.
• fostering increased coordination, communication and interaction between support and instructional personnel (for example, making co-curricular activities, such as an art gallery or music festival accessible to distant students).
• identifying project opportunities for collaboration between support units. Increasing collaborative experiences promotes consistent information and communication, as well as shared responsibilities that encourage problem solving.
• promoting opportunities for shared governance and decision-making to virtual students and personnel. Encouraging inclusive participation enables participants to feel visible, and empowered. • • • • • •
• prioritizing resource allocation through ongoing strategic planning for support departments at comparable levels with web-based instructional programming.
• cultivating both internal and external partnerships involving a range of stakeholders (students, staff, faculty, administrators) on which to continuously develop delivery infrastructure.
• delivering learning experiences based on coordinated service, support, and academic goals, providing support integration in ways that further articulation, learning achievement, and program completion.
• ensuring continuous access to the curriculum, academic advising resources, and academic support services (e.g., assessment, tutoring, study skills, test proctoring, etc.)
• promoting cost-effectiveness through resource consolidation and program centralization.
• continuously evaluating systems effectiveness, assessing unmet needs & return on investment.

There are inherent challenges to establishing integrated support systems:

• A virtual infrastructure that limits learning experiences to the instruction possible through technology-based course management systems cannot adequately provide distant students comparable learning opportunities as those accessed by their on ground peers.

• Support units develop and reach capacity at different rates, based on resource distribution, institutional priorities, and unique program needs.

• Web-based learning environments have unique and specific support requirements, and these often are incompatible with larger university systems. Web-based support functions, frequently develop "around" standing systems; these are often incongruent with standing institutional systems, requiring both the development of new as well as the migration of obsolete systems.

• Cultural beliefs, competing political interests, and administrative hierarchies limit opportunities for collaborative planning, governance, management, and outreach. Resources are disproportionately allocated to support direct instruction at the cost of maintaining widely accessible support services.

• A lack of resources, expertise, and support for broad-based systems integration stifles the required collaboration between academic faculty and support personnel.

Given the overall resource expenditure to prioritize systems integration, institutions invariably consider support structure migration extravagant and irrelevant. However, as noted by TLT Group President Steven Gilbert (October 4, 2001), the rationale for such integration is obvious: "Because more people will be able to learn and teach better." Providing continuous, comprehensive access to a web-based campus is an ambitious undertaking; however, it is one that is critical if an institution is to responsibly provide online programming. Delivery, accessibility, connectivity, and affiliation not only promote virtual student retention; in combination they effectively enable academic achievement. An institution’s commitment to ensuring ongoing persistence and degree completion for its virtual students is only as strong as the programs and services which support a comprehensive approach to personal, academic, and social development, a cornerstone of undergraduate liberal education.

Methods That Facilitate Support Integration

When determining the allocation of resources to virtual capacity building, certainly establishing a reliable infrastructure for hardware and software use and developing web-based courseware are initial priorities. However, those institutions realizing increasing and consistent enrollment gains understand that not even one online course can be offered in the absence of a continuum of critical support services and programs. Because the immediate development and integration of such systems are costly, requiring their implementation over a period of time, there are methods that temporarily can be utilized while the institution integrates its support infrastructure and further develops capacity.

• Create a 24 x 7 technical support system, library services, and skeletal web-based student services (e.g., web-based admission, registration, financial aid access) and academic programs (writing support, computer skills training) as first priorities. Migration of these systems to an online platform allows distant students to access essential academic supports, enabling a strong foundation for continued coursework.
• Ensure that technical support includes a coordinated "first response system" providing information about accessing virtual technical, instructional, and advising systems, and that this support is available on a continuous and well-published basis. As an example, Indiana State University provides a telephone/e-mail based response system staffed by trained advisors according to a published schedule. This system is provided to all non-residential students regardless of the medium by which they learn as an extension of the University's campus-based system. (Barrett, 5/11/01)
• Implement a team academic advising approach that allows a coordinated response to instructional, academic, technical, business, and student support systems. Capella University, a private for-profit virtual university, implements two approaches to front line support that focuses on academic advising. A "two minute advisor" system provides advising personnel who respond to student inquiries and questions within a two minute timeframe during specified times of operations. Additionally, Capella provides immediate telephone response via a 12-hour, seven-day per week screening and referral system, also staffed by trained student advisors. (Keith & Maday, 1/11/01)
• Develop a university-wide electronic portfolio system to document and support integrated academic, professional, and social development. Stanford University has implemented electronic portfolio systems to provide an integrated approach promoting continuous engagement, reflection, research, and problem solving; such an approach offers exclusively distant students an additional means to integrate academics and affiliation.
• Participate in local, statewide, or regional consortia, task forces, and work groups to build capacity by sharing licensing agreements, hardware, and training resources between institutions. Growing numbers of institutions have implemented partnerships that facilitate the development of consortia; these, in turn have enabled shared resources and expertise. For example, the Illinois Prairie Internet Consortium developed a course sharing system that enabled eight distinct community colleges districts to share instructional resources.
• Use the resources of the state’s virtual campus to augment campus resources. The Illinois Virtual Campus provides a range of resources in a virtual "Student Support Center;" while these services do not replace the need for university specific virtual services, they do augment specific UIS systems, and they include web-based tutoring, self-assessment, career development and orientation information programs.

UIS’ Online Technology Integration Subcommittee

UIS’ Online Technology Integration Subcommittee grew from the University Senate's Academic Technology Committee. The mission of this subcommittee is to bring together key campus partners in delivering web-based instruction, including academic, student, business, and technology support campus leaders. It has been instrumental in promoting campus-wide collaboration in support of web-based instructional delivery.

The result of this collaboration has included increased access to coordinated systems for all members of the campus community.

Sample projects completed by the Subcommittee include:

1. coordinating an annual campus-based "Technology Day," during which the University community has access to a wide range of technologically based demonstrations and applications
2. conducting a faculty satisfaction survey related to technology support for instructional development and delivery
3. promoting an online evaluation pilot for faculty members.
4. facilitating in-service training events for faculty and staff participating in online program delivery.

Promoting Integrated Support Systems For Virtual Students

• Develop a plan for support integration that parallels the organization's larger strategic vision for virtual programming within the context of enrollment planning and management. Particularly in programs requiring quick start-up, such as grant-funded programs, there exists a tendency for implementation to proceed without requisite strategic planning at the delivery level. This results in fragmented systems that provide inconsistent response to students and other stakeholders. Even under circumstances in which program planning is completely disconnected from development and delivery functions, it is possible to develop localized action plans that include short- and long-term goals, identify strategies for goal achievement, and integrate evaluation activities.
• If it's already broken, technology won't fix it. An integrated response requires that the role and functionality of support systems be critically examined for relevance, functionality, and responsiveness within the context of new technologies. Fragmented systems will not be assisted by technological applications, and in fact, such applications can only serve to exacerbate long-standing problems.
• Focus support on inclusive student learning across domains to facilitate learning achievement, as opposed to a sole focus on the instructional medium. Technology is an instructional tool, not a replacement for learning communities, experiences and opportunities. Develop support systems that facilitate communication, participation, interaction, affiliation, and visibility for distant students.
• Use technology as a tool to revision antiquated support systems. New applications, increasingly accessible and affordable, are available to solve old problems.
• Use a virtual platform to reinforce affiliation with the campus for all students, not limited to distant and other non-residential student populations. Regardless of the medium in which they study, students’ comprehensive growth and development depends on the access, support, and responsiveness of the institution to their cognitive, social, and affective needs.
• Ensure that decision-making processes regarding delivery technology engage all stakeholders, e.g., student support personnel, systems users, and related practitioners. Involving a range of stakeholders in needs assessments, evaluation efforts, and training activities enables continuous and consistent capacity building.
• Strategically budget for systems integration to accompany the utilization of technology. Incorporate a systemic approach to technological capacity building in all planning and development activities.
• Develop an approach to support provision that enables inclusive virtual access for all students, regardless of the ways the institution labels or categorizes them. For support systems to be genuinely accessible, they must appear seamless to the user.
• Make the institution's virtual presence visible, accessible, and reliable. Users, regardless of the ways they are defined administratively, must feel that a virtual campus presence is a priority for the institution.
• Consciously seek opportunities for integration through outreach to internal and external partners, involving stakeholders at all levels of program delivery.
• Identify "best practices," drawing from the experiences of peer institutions. Become aware of initiatives developing locally and regionally, participate in consortia agreements, and investigate opportunities to share resources.
• Continuously assess unmet needs, and evaluate and modify systems based on assessment/evaluation data, changing student demographics, new delivery technologies, etc.

The UIS CLAS Online Experience

Recognizing that support was critical to online student retention & program stability, the UIS College of Liberal Arts & Sciences Online (CLAS Online) developed such mechanisms concurrently with technology systems. These mechanisms were developed to compensate for the absence of campus-wide supports to offer individualized response and advising, important not only to individual students, but also to referring community college counselors, parents, and others affiliated with the University. In the absence of integrated virtual university systems, the College developed an internal capacity for support.

Program Support Infrastructure:

• A staff including a full-time Director & Director of Online Student Services, a part-time Program Coordinator, and two part-time Program Secretaries maintain regular contact with all inquiring, new and continuing students.
• All inquiries/requests for information are responded to within 24 hours via telephone or e-mail.
• The programs established a communication plan for ongoing contact and support for all online majors. It includes provisions for specific interventions with "at risk" students (i.e., those students at risk for dropping/ stopping out of the program).
• In an effort to assist students to feel a part of the programs’ community, a range of print and web-based materials is distributed to students upon admission to the program.
• A student orientation module was developed to help students become familiar with UIS and online learning.
• A newsletter provides communication to students and other interested parties on an ongoing basis.
• A conferencing mechanism is established at the program’s website to promote ongoing interaction & communication among continuing students.

Furthering Institutional Integration:

• Information regarding changing requirements, new courses & programs is distributed to a network of community college advisers.
• Partnership agreements are pursued with transferring institutions in order to promote seamless articulation and transfer.
• Program personnel collaborate with student life, instructional and technical support, and business and enrollment management personnel via broad-based committees to further awareness of unmet needs and promote support integration
• Program personnel provide outreach to statewide community colleges, furthering customized program development.

Conclusion

Web-based instructional programs continue to develop rapidly, sometimes so much so that systems and policies critical to virtual student persistence often compete with an institution's priority of providing a technical infrastructure and online courseware. As rapidly increasing numbers of students access a wide range of non-traditional academic options to facilitate ongoing education and credentialing, institutions remain challenged to provide support in ways that will ensure a successful outcome. Regardless of the scope and nature, an integrated approach to conceptualizing, developing, and implementing necessary support systems and personnel enables learning achievement among students, stability and retention in programs, and strategically planned growth for an institution. This approach to educational programming suggests that technology is only one aspect of an instructional process, and it cannot and should not be conceptualized independently of other key functions and initiatives identified for inclusion in the system.

An Important Resource

The Western Interstate Commission on Higher Education (WICHE) Guide to Developing Online Student Services is an important resource to aid in the development of effective online approaches to delivering student support services. It provides:

• Ideas for designing effective online student services
• Narrative presentations about a range of student support services for online and distant students
• "Best practice" guidelines for delivering these services via the Internet Examples of institutions that use the Internet to offer a variety of services and programs
  (Western Cooperative for Educational Telecommunications, 2001)

References

Al-Ashkar, Karen. (October 22, 2002). Support in a distance education environment. Retrieved October 22, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://elearnmag.org/subpage/sub_page.cfm?section=3&list_item=9&page=1

American College Personnel Association. (1997). The student learning imperative: Implications for student affairs. Retrieved October 1, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://www.acpa.nche.edu/sli/sli.htm

American Distance Education Consortium. (2003). ADEC guiding principles for distance education. Retrieved February 15, 2003, from the World Wide Web: http://www.adec.edu/admin/papers/distance-learning_principles.html

Barratt, Will. (May 11, 2001). Managing information technology in student affairs: A report on policies, practices, staffing and technology. Retrieved October 2, 2002, from the World Wide Web: www.studentaffairs.com/ejournal/Spring_2001/will2.html

Fredericksen, E., Pelz, W., Pickett, A., Shea, P., & Swan, K. (2001). Student satisfaction and perceived learning with on-line courses: Principles and examples from the SUNY Learning Network. Retrieved May 12, 2001, from the World Wide Web: http://www.aln.org

Gilbert, Stephen. (October 4, 2001). Why bother? Retrieved October 1, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://www.tltgroup.org/gilbert/WhyBother.htm

Keith, Christine, and Maday, Ted. (November 6, 2001). Team advising plan. Retrieved October 1, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://www.studentaffairs.com/ejournal/Fall_2001/maday.html

Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (1999). Building learning communities in cyberspace: Effective strategies for the online classroom. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Pfeiffer.

Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2001). Lessons from the virtual classroom. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Pfeiffer.

Schwartz, John. (September, 16, 2002). Student skill is expected to bolster technology. Retrieved September 16, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/16/technology/16NET.html

TLT Group. (February, 2000). A new vision worth working toward: Connected education & collaborative change," February 2000. Retrieved October 24, 2002, from the World Wide Web:: http://www.tltgroup.org/default.htm

Bibliography

Al-Ashkar, Karen. (October 22, 2002). Support in a distance education environment. Retrieved October 22, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://elearnmag.org/subpage/sub_page.cfm?section=3&list_item=9&page=1

American College Personnel Association. (1997). The student learning imperative: Implications for student affairs. Retrieved October 1, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://www.acpa.nche.edu/sli/sli.htm

American Council on Education. (1937). The student personnel point of view: A report of a conference on the philosophy and development of student personnel work in colleges and universities (American Council on Education Study, Series 1, Vol. 1, No. 3). Washington, DC: American Council on Education.

American Distance Education Consortium. (2003). ADEC guiding principles for distance education. Retrieved February 15, 2003, from the World Wide Web: http://www.adec.edu/admin/papers/distance-learning_principles.html

Barratt, Will. (May 11, 2001). Managing information technology in student affairs: A report on policies, practices, staffing and technology. Retrieved October 2, 2002, from the World Wide Web: www.studentaffairs.com/ejournal/Spring_2001/will2.html

Blimling G. & Whitt, E. (1999). Good Practice in student affairs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Boettcher, Judith. (1999). Faculty guide to moving teaching and learning to the web. League for Innovation in the Community College: Archipelago Publications.

Chickering, A.W., & Gamson, Z.F. (June, 1987). Principles for good practice in undergraduate education [Special insert to The Wingspread Journal, June 1987]. Racine, WI: Johnson Foundation.

Flagler, Cheryl. (October 2, 2002). Online exclusive: How to improve learning outcomes. Retrieved October 2, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://www.elearningmag.com/elearning/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=31567

Fredericksen, E., Pelz, W., Pickett, A., Shea, P., & Swan, K. (2001). Student satisfaction and perceived learning with on-line courses: Principles and examples from the SUNY Learning Network. Retrieved May 12, 2001, from the World Wide Web: http://www.aln.org

Gilbert, Stephen. (October 4, 2001). Why bother? Retrieved October 1, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://www.tltgroup.org/gilbert/WhyBother.htm

Harris, M. B., & Brooks, L. J. (1998, Summer). Challenges for older students in higher education. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 31(4), 226-235.

Keith, Christine, and Maday, Ted. (November 6, 2001). Team advising plan. Retrieved October 1, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://www.studentaffairs.com/ejournal/Fall_2001/maday.html

Kramer, Gary L. and McCauley (1995) "High Tech and High Touch: Integrating Information Technology in the Advising Process," Academic Advising as a Comprehensive Campus Process, NACADA Monograph Number 2. NACADA.

Masie, Elliot. (July 30, 2002). Is online learning really student friendly? Retrieved July 30, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://www.train-net.co.uk/magazine/full_columnist.cfm?ID=3623

NACADA Statement of Core Values of Academic Advising, NACADA Journal, 15, 1, 5-7. NACADA.

NACADA Task Force on Distance Education. (1999). NACADA standards for advising distance learners. Retrieved October 1, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http:// www.nacada.ksu.edu/Profres/distance.htm

Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (1999). Building learning communities in cyberspace: Effective strategies for the online classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Pfeiffer.

Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2001). Lessons from the virtual classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Pfeiffer.

Pascarella, E. T. & Terenzini, P. T. (1991). How college affects students. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Pew Internet & American Life Project. (2002). The Internet goes to college: How students are living in the future with today's technology. Pew Foundation.

Railsback, G., & Colby, A. (1988). Improving academic advising in the community college. Los Angeles: ERIC Clearinghouse for Junior Colleges. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 320647).

Schwartz, John. (September, 16, 2002). Student skill is expected to bolster technology, in the New York Times. Retrieved September 16, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/16/technology/16NET.html

Smith, Susan. (May 11, 2001). Beyond face-to-face: One institution's journey to develop online student services and ways to get started. Retrieved October 1, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://www.studentaffairs.com/ejournal/Spring_2001/services.html

Steele, George, Leonard, Michael J., Haberle, Charles J. &, Lipschultz, Wesley. (January 1, 2000). Technology in academic advising. Retrieved October 1, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://www.psu.edu/dus/ncta/techartc.htm

Teitelbaum, H. (1994). Changing the campus environment. NACADA Journal, 14(1), 32-37. NACADA.

TLT Group. (February, 2000). A new vision worth working toward: Connected education & collaborative change," February 2000. Retrieved October 24, 2002, from the World Wide Web:: http://www.tltgroup.org/default.htm

Upcraft, M.L., Terenzini, Patrick T., & Kruger, Kevin. (1997). Looking beyond the horizon: Trends shaping student affairs. Retrieved October 1, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http:// www.studentaffairs.com/ejournal/Fall_2000/art4.html

Van Dusen, Gerald C. (1997). The virtual campus: Technology and reform in higher education, ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, Volume 25, Number 5. Washington, DC: The George Washington University.

Wiernicki, Kristl, & Miller, Martyne J. (February 3, 2001). From here to technology: Practical tips for student affairs professionals. Retrieved October 1, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://www.studentaffairs.com/ejournal/Winter_2001/tips.html

TCC 2003 Online Conference
Copyright © 2003 Kapi'olani Community College,
University of Hawaii, All rights reserved.