Research-Based Best Practices for Online Programs: A Dual Administrative- and Instruction-Based Model

Introduction

The literature is replete with research on guidelines for distance education and identified best practices (see e.g., Orellana, Hudgins, & Simonson, 2009; Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2008). There are also entire journals dedicated to theory, research, and best practices in distance education such as the AECT’s Quarterly Review of Distance Education. Thus it might seem somewhat redundant to delineate yet another set of best practices. The following document however, differs in that it outlines a dual set of best practices developed to encompass both the administrative and the instructional perspectives in one manuscript. While many of the best practices documents focus on the instructional side almost exclusively, both aspects must be considered in parallel for a systematic understanding of the topic. Consequently, there is, in this researcher’s opinion, a need for a dual model of best practices based in research and the current literature.

These proposed guidelines have a three-fold purpose: 1) to recommend a research-based minimum standard or level of quality control for current and future online courses; 2) to provide standards which will insure a quality distance learning experience for students seeking online courses and degrees; and 3) to assist any institution in need of a published best practices policy document in preparation for a focus visit by a regional or national accrediting body aimed at receiving approval for new electronically offered courses, degrees and certificate programs.

While the vast majority of the published best practices allude to the need for administrative support (see e.g., Abel, 2005a; Simonson, et al., 2009) it is this researcher’s belief that administrative support is in reality one of two concurrent sets of best practices required for a successful online program. Thus, there are first, those best practices associated with overall administrative practices, and second, those associated with actual instructional practices.

Without major administrative/institutional support, online courses or degree programs could exist, but will be less successful, and likely would remain mired in mediocrity. Abel (2005b) states, “. . . the involvement of key leaders in prioritizing where to focus online learning development activities was critical and highly correlated with perceived success in these institutions” (p. 76).

A major study (Abel, 2005a) was conducted by the Alliance for Higher Education Competitiveness (A-HEC) after which a summary of the study was published in the Educause Quarterly (Abel, 2005b). This study canvassed 21 institutions of all Carnegie classifications to identify those practices most likely to lead to successful online programs. Ranked most important among the “Ingredients for Success” was “executive leadership and support” (Abel, 2005b, p. 75). Therefore this document delineates two distinct but necessarily overlapping sets of best practices, which this author believes in tandem, will result in a quality online program that neither set could fully accomplish separately.

Further, this author strongly concurs with the A-HEC study which found that a programmatic approach is far superior to an individual course approach. Abel (2005b) says,

What follows is a list of the ten major institutional support structures applicable to any size institution and believed to be essential to ensure a robust and sustainable online program capable of delivering high quality online courses leading to online degrees.