The ‘woeful’ state of administrative support for online programmes: A critical discourse analysis

IF 2.8 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Mary Ann Bodine Al-Sharif, Yvonne Earnshaw, Stephanie Corcoran
{"title":"The ‘woeful’ state of administrative support for online programmes: A critical discourse analysis","authors":"Mary Ann Bodine Al-Sharif,&nbsp;Yvonne Earnshaw,&nbsp;Stephanie Corcoran","doi":"10.1111/hequ.12497","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This study used critical discourse analysis to explore how higher education administrators in the United States talk about how they assess and support online programmes. Specifically, we hoped to analyse administrators' perceptions of their responsibilities over online programmes, faculty and students, to attain where they may need more training. Therefore, we explored the perspectives of 11 administrators at both the mid-level administrative and campus senior administrative levels who oversee online programmes in U.S. higher education. Our findings suggest that mid-level administrators hold pivotal roles in communicating needs, administrators are not viewing their online faculty holistically, current online programmes assessment is insufficient and concern for student engagement is often neglected. Implications for research and practice include additional investigation of the online faculty experience and the development of administrative training specifically focused on the needs of online programming and online faculty support.</p>","PeriodicalId":51607,"journal":{"name":"HIGHER EDUCATION QUARTERLY","volume":"78 3","pages":"918-933"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/hequ.12497","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HIGHER EDUCATION QUARTERLY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hequ.12497","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study used critical discourse analysis to explore how higher education administrators in the United States talk about how they assess and support online programmes. Specifically, we hoped to analyse administrators' perceptions of their responsibilities over online programmes, faculty and students, to attain where they may need more training. Therefore, we explored the perspectives of 11 administrators at both the mid-level administrative and campus senior administrative levels who oversee online programmes in U.S. higher education. Our findings suggest that mid-level administrators hold pivotal roles in communicating needs, administrators are not viewing their online faculty holistically, current online programmes assessment is insufficient and concern for student engagement is often neglected. Implications for research and practice include additional investigation of the online faculty experience and the development of administrative training specifically focused on the needs of online programming and online faculty support.

Abstract Image

在线课程行政支持的 "糟糕 "状况:批判性话语分析
本研究使用批判性话语分析来探讨美国高等教育管理者如何谈论他们如何评估和支持在线课程。具体来说,我们希望分析管理人员对他们在在线课程、教师和学生方面的责任的认识,以了解他们在哪些方面可能需要更多培训。因此,我们对美国高等教育中负责管理在线项目的 11 位中层行政管理人员和校园高级行政管理人员进行了调查。我们的研究结果表明,中层管理人员在沟通需求方面起着关键作用,管理人员没有全面地看待他们的在线教师,目前的在线项目评估不够充分,对学生参与的关注往往被忽视。对研究和实践的启示包括:对在线教师的经验进行更多的调查,开发专门针对在线课程和在线教师支持需求的行政培训。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
HIGHER EDUCATION QUARTERLY
HIGHER EDUCATION QUARTERLY EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
9.10%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: Higher Education Quarterly publishes articles concerned with policy, strategic management and ideas in higher education. A substantial part of its contents is concerned with reporting research findings in ways that bring out their relevance to senior managers and policy makers at institutional and national levels, and to academics who are not necessarily specialists in the academic study of higher education. Higher Education Quarterly also publishes papers that are not based on empirical research but give thoughtful academic analyses of significant policy, management or academic issues.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信