IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/jfr/ijhe11/v8y2019i4p72.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Examination of Differences between the Mean Indicator Ratings by Different Stakeholders in Distance Education Programme

Author

Listed:
  • Ernest Adu-Gyamfi
  • Paul Kwadwo Addo
  • Charles Asamoah-Boateng

Abstract

The continued rapid growth of distance education programmes in higher education has brought concerns regarding how stakeholers perceive quality in distance education. The study examined the differences between the mean indicator ratings by different stakeholders in a distance learning programme. The study adopted a case study research design to collect data from 320 students, 56 facilitators and 24 administrative staff selected randomly from the Institute of Distance Learning, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology in Ghana. The data collected through questionnaires were analysed using the statistical package for the social sciences (SPSS) software, version 20. Mean indicator rating analysis revealed that students’ highest perception of quality was on support services and the lowest was academic integrity and institutional prestige. Whilst both facilitators and administrators rated support services as the highest, infrastructure scored the lowest. The results of the study therefore, revealed common benchmarks and quality indicator (support services) that all parties deem important in designing, implementing, and evaluating distance education programmes. Respondents noted the lack of appropriate tools and media; unavailability of reliable technology and technological plan; ineffective communication and co-ordination; and, time constraints as some of the quality challenges for distance education at the Institute. The study recommends monitoring and evaluation of service delivery for distance learning programmes to ensure fitness for purpose, value for money and customer satisfaction.

Suggested Citation

  • Ernest Adu-Gyamfi & Paul Kwadwo Addo & Charles Asamoah-Boateng, 2019. "An Examination of Differences between the Mean Indicator Ratings by Different Stakeholders in Distance Education Programme," International Journal of Higher Education, Sciedu Press, vol. 8(4), pages 1-72, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:jfr:ijhe11:v:8:y:2019:i:4:p:72
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.sciedupress.com/journal/index.php/ijhe/article/download/15800/9841
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.sciedupress.com/journal/index.php/ijhe/article/view/15800
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joyce Kanini Mbwesa, 2014. "Students¡¯ Perceived Quality of Distance Education Courses as a Correlate of Learner Satisfaction: A Case Study of the Bachelor of Education Arts Program, University of Nairobi, Kenya," International Journal of Social Science Studies, Redfame publishing, vol. 2(2), pages 86-99, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Santiago Batista-Toledo & Diana Gavilan, 2023. "Student Experience, Satisfaction and Commitment in Blended Learning: A Structural Equation Modelling Approach," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-15, February.
    2. M. J. Perera & Gapar Johar & Ali Kathibi & Halinah Atan & Nalin Abeysekera & Isuri Dharmaratne, 2017. "PLS-SEM Based Analysis of Service Quality and Satisfaction in Open Distance Learning in Sri Lanka," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(11), pages 194-194, October.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:jfr:ijhe11:v:8:y:2019:i:4:p:72. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sciedu Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.