Assessment of Variables Responsible for Distance Learning Students' Dropout from University of Maiduguri, Borno State, Nigeria
Keywords:
Students' Opinion, Factors, Dropout, Distance Learning ProgrammeAbstract
This study soughts students' opinion on factors responsible for students' dropout from distance learning programme University of Maiduguri, Borno State. The study had set three research objectives to determine students' factors, course contents factors and staff/students relationship factors The target population for the study included all the 15,217 CDL students during 2019/2020 academic session. Krejcie and Morgan method was used to select a total of 550 CDL students, Factors Responsible for Students Dropout Questionnaire developed and validated by the researchers was used in this study, with reliability index of 0.64. The data collected were analyzed using percentages. Findings on course content factors revealed that poor delivery on learning management system LMS as revealed, tutors unable to organize chat, teaching online, unable to attend to students' questions, these will lead to student's dropout from the programme in CDL, course content factors; the management failure to activate students' passwords to join LMS in time also lead to students' dropout from the programme. Study also revealed that students' dropout from the programme due to poor staff/students relationship factors, It is recommended that CDL management should understand and implement the policy guiding CDL programme. One of the policy of the programme is there is no repeat in CDL programme.
Résumé
Cette étude utilise l'opinion des étudiants sur les facteurs qui contribuent à l'abandon de leurs études. Elle a trois objectifs de recherche en vue de déterminer les facteurs tels que ceux qui sont liés aux étudiants eux-mêmes, aux contenus des cours et à la relation entre étudiants et enseignants. La population visée par cette étude comprend tous les étudiants de l'année académique 2019/2020 au nombre de 15.217. La méthode de Krejcie et Morgan a été adoptée pour sélectionner un nombre de 550 étudiants. Un questionnaire sur les facteurs qui poussent les étudiants à abandonner les études a été développé et validé par les chercheurs a été utilisé pour cette enquête avec un index de fiabilité de 0.64. Les données recueillies ont été analysées par pourcentage. Les résultats sur les facteurs de contenus des cours révèlent une mauvaise gestion de système d'apprentissage (Learning Management System, LMS), les enseignants sont incapables de dispenser les cours en ligne et ne peuvent pas répondre aux questions des étudiants, tout cela conduit à l'abandon des programmes des FOAD par les étudiants. Le contenu des cours, l'incapacité des administrateurs à activer à temps les mots de passe des étudiants pour qu'ils rejoignent les activités sur la plateforme, ont aussi pour conséquence l'abandon scolaire. L'étude a aussi révélé que les étudiants abandonnent les programmes à cause de facteurs liés à la mauvaise qualité des relations entre les étudiants et les enseignants. Il est conseillé aux gérants de centres de FOAD de comprendre et de mettre en œuvre la politique qui régit les programmes des centres de FOAD. L'une des règles des centres de FOAD est qu'il n'y a pas de reprise de cours.
References
Ary, D., Jacob, L. C. & Razaviah, A. (1979). Introduction to research in education. Sydney: Holt Rinehart Winston.
Bertrand, J. R. & Amunsen L. (1989). Relation between high school average grade and academic achievement. College and University, 30, 166-181.
Brown, M., Hughes, H., Keppell, M. Hard, N. & Smith, L. (2015).
Stories from students in their first semester of distance learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(4). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v16i4.1647
Budiman, R. (2015a). Distance language learning: Students'views of challenges and solutions. International Journal on New Trends in Education, 6(3), 137-147.
Budiman, R. (2015b). A longitudinal study of student achievement and dropout in a distance learning English writing course.
Unpublished Master Dissertation University of Dundee.
Bean, J. P. & Metzner, B. S. (1985). A conceptual model of nontraditional undergraduate students attrition. Review of Educational Research, 55(4), 485-540.
Cambruzzi, W. L., Rigo, S. J. & Barbosa, J. L. (2015). Dropout prediction and reduction in dis tance education courses with the learning analytics multiracial Approach. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36 (2), 237-253.
Doherty, W. (2006). An analysis of multiple factors affecting retention in web- based community college courses. Internet and Higher Education, 9 (4): 245-255. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ihe duc.2006.08.004
Hagel, P., & Shaw, R. N. (2006). Students' perceptions of study modes. Distance education, 27(3), 283-302.
Jun, J. (2005). Understanding dropout of adult learners in e-learning. (Doctoral dissertation, Univarsity of Georgia, 2005). Unpublished Ph.D Dissertation
Kerlinger, F. W. & Lee, B. H. (2000). Foundation of behavioural r esearch (4th Edition) Philadelphia. Harcourt College Publishers.
Krejcie, R. & Morgan, D. W. (2006). Determining sample size for Research Activities: Educational and Psychological Measurement. Obtained from http//www.fns.usda.govaccess on 13/05/202.
Li. Y., Niu, J. & Ding, X. (2012). A follow-up study of the dropouts from the English program of open and distance learning (part 2), Open Education Research, 18 (6), 80-86.
Maor, D. (2003). The teacher's role in developing interaction and reflection in an online learning community. Computer Mediated Communication, 40 (1/2), 127-137.
Meister, J. (2002). Pillars of e-learning success. New York: Corporate University Xchange.
Musingafi, M. C., Mapuranga, B., Chiwanza, K. & Zebron, S. (2015). Challenges for open and distance learning (ODL) students: Experiences from students of the Zimbabwe open University. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(18), 59-66.
Pike, G. R. & Saupe, J. L. (2002). Does high school matter? An analysis of three methods of predicting first-year grades. Research in Higher Education, 43(2), 187-207.
Rashid, M. M., Jahan, M., Islam, M. A. & Ratna, M. M. (2015). Student enrollment and dropout: An evaluation study of diploma in computer science and application programme at Bangladesh Open University. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(4), 18-32. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v16i4.2157
Rovai, A. P. (2003). In search of higher persistence rates in distance education online programme”, Internet and Higher Education, 6 (1), 1-16.
Rowntree, D. (1995). Teaching and learning online: a correspondence education for the 21st century?”, British Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 205-215.
Roblyer, M. D., Davis, L. & Mills, S. C. (2008). Toward practical procedures for predicting and promoting success in virtual school students. The American Journal of Distance Education, 22(2): 90-109. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08923640802039040
Shin, N. & Kim, J. (1999). An exploration of learner progress and drop-out in Korea National Open University. Distance Education, 20(1), 81–95.
Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
UNESCO (2002). Open and distance learning: Trends, Policy and Strategy considerations, Symposium in France
Willging, P. A. & Johnson, S. D. (2004). Factors that influence students' decision to dropout of online courses. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Network, 8(4), 105-118.
Yang, D., Sinha, T., Adamson, D., & Rosé, C. P. (2013, December). Turn on, tune in, drop out: Anticipating student dropouts in massive open online courses. In Proceedings of the 2013 NIPS Data-driven education workshop (Vol. 11, p. 14).
Zielinski, D. (2000). Can you keep learners online? Training, 37(3), 64-71.
Zhang, M. & Luo, F. (2006). Factor analysis and proposal for counter measures of dropouts from modern distance education. Distance Education in China, 11: 39-44.
