James R. Lindner

Differences in Competencies between Doctoral Students On-Campus and at a Distance

Abstract This article describes differences between on‐campus and distance learners by knowledge, skills, and abilities. On‐campus doctoral students at Texas A&M University were compared with doctoral students enrolled in a distance education program offered jointly with Texas Tech University. Student perceptions of their competency levels were gathered using a mixed mailed/Internet questionnaire. On‐campus and distance education students had different levels of competence. Competency models can serve faculty and administrators as an assessment tool for strategic decision making and development of courses and curricula. This study provides a model for benchmarking competencies and provides baseline data for making such changes.

Behaviorally anchored competencies: evaluation tool for training via distance

The purpose of the study was to evaluate and measure perceived learning in a training program delivered via distance education. The program was entitled: Course Design for the Digital Age: Instructional Design and Materials Conversion. The study documents the growth in distance education core competencies of professionals in Costa Rica using a competency-based behaviorally anchored instrument. The study uses both qualitative and quantitative methods of data collection and analysis. The resulting scores provide outcome assessment measures useful for researchers and practitioners for documenting the results of self-assessment and comparing observable behaviors of competence.

Faculty adoption behaviour about web-based distance education: a case study from China Agricultural University

The purpose of this study was to determine China Agricultural University’s (CAU’s) faculty adoption behaviour about web-based distance education (WBDE). Rogers’ (2003) model of five stages in the innovation–decision process was adopted and modified as the theoretical base for the study. Quantitative research was employed and the research design for the study was descriptive in nature. The results of data analysis found that about 70% of participating CAU faculty (N= 273) stayed in early stages in the innovation–decision process related to WBDE (no knowledge, knowledge, or persuasion) and about 30% were in later stages (decision, implementation and confirmation). Faculty members’ stage in the innovation–decision process differed significantly by their professional area, level of education, teaching experience and distance education experience. Gender, age and academic rank had no significant influence on faculty members’ stage in the process.