Search results

The purpose of this paper is to know the personalized online student support system provided by e-learning centers, to find out academic advice as Student Support Services provided by institution running e-learning programs; to find out career counseling as Student Support Services provided by institution running e-learning programs; to find out technical support as Student Support Services provided by institution running e-learning programs; to find out registration assistance as Student Support Services provided by institution running e-learning programs; to find out methods used for paying fee for e-learning programs for LIS education; and to find out financial aid available for students for e-learning programs in LIS education.

The present study is exploratory in nature. In the study, the attempt was made to explore the Student Support Services provided by e-learning institution. It focuses on the various online Student Support Services. Data collection was made through following methods: through Web pages of related departments; by contacting the departments and by sending questionnaires.

Student Support Services provided by institutions – academic advice: it was observed from Table I that the data were significant (p < 0.05) and that high percentage (60.9 per cent) of universities/institutes provide support systems like academic advice to the students opting LIS courses through e-programs; career counseling: it was observed from Table II that the data were significant (p < 0.05) and that high percentage (60.9 per cent) of universities/institutes provide support systems like career counseling to the students opting LIS courses through e-programs; technical support: it was observed from Table III that 100 per cent universities/institutes provide technical support to the students opting LIS courses through e-programs; and registration assistance: it was observed from Table IV that 100 per cent universities/institutes provide registration assistance support to the students opting LIS courses through e-programs. *Mode of payment of fees for e-learning programs for LIS education: it was apparent from the information (Table V) that mode of payment of fees such as credit card, check and purchase order or money order is available for majority of e-learning courses. *Financial aid available for students for e-learning programs in LIS education: it may be concluded on the basis of the study results (Table VI) that for significantly (p < 0.05) high percentage of LIS courses, the financial aid is not available.

The research work, especially Student Support Services, was limited to only 23 institutions which are running courses in LIS education by e-learning technology.

The present study shows that there is a need to strengthen more Student Support Services. The successful implementation of such a system would need efforts by the concerned management of the institutions and substantial support from the apex statutory organizations. The stakeholders have strongly reinforced the necessity of support strategies which need to start from the time the student enrolls to completion of course. Feedback from students, teachers and researchers should be taken for improving the services. It is useful for those who are running e-learning courses.

Students who are taken and studying online courses would be aware of Student Support Services.

This research work is valuable and original, and no prior research has been identified for Student Support Services for e-learning programs in LIS.

This paper aims to help higher education institutions (HEIs) develop a better understanding of student support and services needs, thereby enabling them to allocate limited resources for initiatives that effectively improve student experience.

An assessment framework following the Kano analysis is developed to categorize student service features based on customer satisfaction and need fulfillment. The framework is used at a local university, using 23 service features listed as minimum requirements by the national regulatory body for education. Analysis of the satisfaction survey results and prioritization are based on quality indices derived from a factor of importance and the satisfaction gap. A survey was conducted for two academic years to generate a comparison of results.

Of the list mandated as minimum requirements for HEIs, the study revealed that no features were regarded as “must-be,” eight as performing, 14 as attractive and one as indifferent by the students. As these results were disaggregated per year level, the natural decay of delight as in the Kano theory was exhibited as there were less attractive features for students who have been in the university longest. After a full-year academic cycle, results compared to the baseline figures seemed to reveal of impact of the achievement of performance targets by the units rendering specific activities on client satisfaction.

Further rounds of the study are needed to build up more data sets on the relationship between objective performance and satisfaction level for performing features, mindful that this categorization is also bound to change along the way.

As HEIs in the Philippines journey towards the establishment of their own respective internal quality assurance systems, this study provides a practical approach for institutions to transform a mere list of student services for compliance into a strategic tool to enhance the student experience.

In the context of continuous quality improvement, the study presents how the qualitative Kano model, along with simple quantitative tools in the methodology, can be utilized not only in the planning stage of service design but also in closing the planning, doing, checking and acting (PDCA) cycle and opening the quality improvement spiral.

Higher education, and in particular libraries, have changed significantly over the last decade due to the adoption of technological advancements such as the Internet and the World Wide Web. The multitude of ways patrons can interact with librarians and library resources has been only the latest step in a very long process which started with traditional snail mail and the phone. As educators, librarians have always been interested in using new tools to improve services. These services are increasingly being made available to patrons who do not physically enter a library building. This paper looks at what library services are currently being offered to students at a distance in order to better plan for the future.

The purpose of this paper is to develop a prioritisation framework that can guide the provision and management of on-campus student housing facility (SHF) services of southern Ghana Universities.

The paper adopted a phenomenological research strategy. Data was collected by means of focus group discussions (FGDs); a total of ten FGDs were conducted. Observations were also done during the site visit to augment the FGDs. The data were analysed thematically.

The study found that some services are perceived as “extremely important” and “basic” while others are seen as “unimportant” and “indifferent”. Services including; electricity, water, security, internet, cleaning service, maintenance service, generator, ventilation (fan), health service, library service, electric socket, study furniture, refuse collection, pest control and fire extinguisher were perceived by students as “extremely important”. However, not all of these services were perceived as “basic” requirements.

The framework can be used as a guide by facility and hostel managers to effectively prioritise and manage the services required in a university SHF. Moreover, when designing, constructing and adapting student housing facilities, the framework can be used as a guide to ensure that all critical services are provided in the student housing facilities.

Although several studies have been conducted on student housing, studies that specifically focuses on the services required in a SHF and the prioritisation of such services is lacking. This study combines students’ requirements, importance levels of requirements, and classification of requirements to develop a prioritisation system for student housing services.

The purpose of this paper is to assess student perceptions of their engagement in tangible and intangible higher education services using the College Student Experiences Questionnaire (CSEQ).

The research draws on a random sample of students without disabilities and all students with disabilities in a public university in Qatar. Group comparison analysis is conducted to find differences between the two groups by adapting the CSEQ to assess student perceptions of engagement with the services.

The findings showed that students with disabilities were less satisfied with intangible services in learning systems. Students with and without disabilities felt that the campus facilities were below average; students with disabilities rated university services lower than students without. All students felt that the learning systems were above average, with higher ratings among students without disability.

Considerable work needs to be done in capacity and professional development with faculty to deal with learning and teaching methods with students with disabilities.

In general, this study compares students with disabilities with non-disabilities. Both groups confront barriers to access learning and to the assessment of their learning. They both were satisfied with services but with higher perceptions of engagement among those with non-disabilities. Higher education institutions must consider those services in unison to both groups treating both equally, recognizing that a discourse of differences may pit one group over another in infrastructure and the institutional services provided.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the prospects and benefits of collaborating with student services organizations in order to integrate information literacy and instruction services into pre‐existing academic programs and services.

The paper begins with a literature review of recent library collaborations with student services areas such as international student centers, study abroad, multicultural student services, career services and writing centers, and then outlines a general rubric employed at the University of Illinois used to develop, implement and assess library partnerships with these student services units.

A current literature review reveals a new and often overlooked information literacy niche that exists within the student services realm. These collaborations are generally welcomed by the partners, heighten students' access to information, and incorporate information literacy objectives into students' lives beyond the classroom.

This paper highlights an often overlooked area in student services units for collaboration on information literacy programming and the number of positive associated outcomes.

This paper describes a new and unique approach to connecting students with the library's services beyond the traditional faculty‐based approach.

This paper aims to provide details of a collaborative campus effort that created a Media Commons at an undergraduate library at a major research university to provide students and faculty opportunities to experiment with emerging technologies, with expanded opportunities to learn of best practices in educational technology.

This is a case study that used a web survey, focus groups, usage statistics, and interviews to determine the needs and best practices for creating and maintaining the Media Commons.

Preliminary results indicate that this program provides value to students and faculty seeking to learn about and use multimedia for coursework and projects. It confirms the gap on campus for places students can go for loanable technology and consultation services in the production and editing of multimedia.

Because the Media Commons just launched there has not had a programmatic evaluation yet to assess the impact of this program. However, based on initial feedback, suggestions for improvements in the program are included.

The rationale, process and efforts described in this paper can be replicated by other institutions that are interested in creating a Media Commons.

Although there are many articles written about Learning Commons and Information Commons, there is not much available that documents the efforts of creating a Media Commons at a library and the rationale for centralizing and freely making available campus multimedia expertise and equipment.

The purpose of this paper is to use theoretical and field evidence to discuss what the value-attributes for academic-administrative services as perceived by students in higher education institutions (HEIs) and how such organizations deliver them. An emerging framework relating value-attributes for HEIs’ administrative and academic services is presented from the perspective of students.

Focus group analysis with Brazilian HEI’s students supported this study. Extensive theoretical references from lean services and services theory contribute to building an emerging framework that extends the background on the subject.

The following framework of eight value-attributes for administrative services in HEIs were studied: reliability, empathy, access, responsiveness, self-service technology convenience, communication, personalization and imperceptibility. The value-attributes may receive different degrees of prioritization and improvement effort according to the type of service and strategic positioning of the organization.

Field evidence is limited by the extent of students and organizations accessed. Implications include directing future research to produce a quantitatively validated model and as an emerging framework, to support decision-planning in the context of HEIs.

The study extends the literature relating the connection between lean services, services theory and higher education services. No similar study has been found in Brazilian HEIs.

Undergraduate information commons have become pervasive in the academic library landscape. In recent years, librarians and administrators have come to identify the need for comparable commons’ spaces and services for graduate students. This chapter serves as a review of recently developed models of graduate commons—in this discussion referred to as Scholars’ Commons—as defined by an integration of physical learning spaces, personnel, and a dynamic availability of research support services that support assist graduate students throughout their academic life cycle. These provisions serve as the foundation for the development of enhanced library-supported graduate student success.

Still a rare commodity, existing models from selected institutional web sites were examined using a framework for analysis consisting of several criteria: new use of space; segmented services; partnerships; and new organizational structures. Through a synthesis of the commonalities prevalent in these systems, this chapter aims to provide recommendations for prospective Scholars’ Commons models and proposals for their development. Library organizations contemplating the development of a Scholars’ Commons need to consider the needs of their target population, potential new or reallocated spaces, feasibility of providing support and research technologies, and possible staffing models. As well, the authors consider the importance of library-based graduate student support that bolsters cross-divisional collaborative partnerships across the academy.