Course sampling marketing strategy
This may be the initial step in marketing strategy for GSC online course offerings.
Focus: Getting GSC’s name associated with online course offerings.
Audience: Primarily the current GSC student population.
Strategy: Any courses offered online can be an IFDOC, e-Pack, or Web-enhanced.
Delivery: A write-up in GSC’s newspaper, The Phoenix, course schedule, course catalogue, messages on hold, main voice mail greeting, GSC’s main Web page, blogs, radio spots, and ads in local papers.
Transfer marketing strategy
This may be the second-step marketing strategy for online course offerings at GSC. It is suggested that GSC may market itself as a less-expensive, yet fully accredited alternative to higher priced educational institutions.
Focus: The online course credits earned at GSC are fully transferable to other in-state institutions. Naturally once a student is enrolled, the object will be to keep the newly enrolled student from transferring to another institution.
Audience: The non-traditional student and the lowincome student.
Strategy: Courses which are fully transferable, or for which GSC has matriculation agreements to other institutions, should be developed for online delivery. Courses offered online can be an IFDOC or e-Pack.
Delivery: A write up in GSC’s newspaper, The Phoenix, a department placing an ad touting its online course offering (may be paid for by the course fee generation), course schedule, course catalogue, messages on hold, main voice mail greeting, GSC’s main Web page, blogs, radio spots, and ads in local papers.
Degree marketing strategy
This may be the third-step marketing strategy for online course offering at GSC, which will ultimately lead a student to attain a two- or four-year degree.
Focus: The attainment of a degree through online course credits.
Audience: The non-traditional student.
Strategy: Courses which lead to attaining fully accredited degree(s). Courses offered online can be an IFDOC or e-Pack. Courses offered will also enable a traditional student to attain a degree.
Delivery: A write up in GSC’s newspaper, The Phoenix, a department placing an ad touting its online course degree offering (may be paid for by the course fee generation), course schedule, course catalogue, messages on hold, main voice mail greeting, GSC’s main Web page, Internet search engine, blogs, radio spots, and ads in local papers.
Third party pay marketing strategy
It was suggested that GSC previously had
relationships with the State of
Focus: To enhance and bring forward GSC as an attractive option for
education or re-education of
Audience: The non-traditional student.
Strategy: Courses which lead to attaining certifications or progress toward a degree; courses and certifications offered online can be an instructor fully developed online course, e-Pack, or Web-enhanced.
Delivery: Items suggested previously, but also include sending notifications directly to Workman’s Compensation Education/Re-education and State Employment/Unemployment contacts.
Certification program marketing strategy
Glenville State College has developed some certification programs that are currently being utilized at the Federal Penitentiary. These certification programs may be useful to the general population to enhance or update skills and education.
Focus: To enhance and bring forward GSC as an attractive option for
skills and education enhancement for
Audience: The non-traditional student.
Strategy: Courses which lead to attaining certifications or progress toward a degree; courses and certifications offered online can be an instructor fully developed online course, e-Pack, or Web-enhanced.
Delivery: The items suggested previously, but also include sending notifications directly to employers as professional development certification program(s) that they cannot provide themselves.
Comments from faculty
Table 1 lists all comments solicited from faculty regarding online course creation. The Categories of Feedback column indicates the types of concerns expressed by Faculty. The Number column only indicates the number of times different faculty indicated a given category. The Responses column indicates which section addressed the concern.
| Categories of feedback |
# |
Responses |
| OLC replace TDC |
1 |
See Rationale section of the Web-based Course Incentive Proposal. |
| OLC compete TDC |
1 |
See Rationale and Discussion sections of the Web-based Course Incentive Proposal. |
| How will OLC be marketed |
1 |
See Marketing Recommendation document. |
| OLC Marketing Uniqueness |
2 |
See Marketing Recommendation document. |
| OLC replicate TDC interaction |
4 |
While nothing can replace recurring face-to-face interaction, the OLC Committee did make recommendations to become part of a group that will purchase software (Wimba, Centra, WebEx, etc.) that will allow synchro-nous student-student and student-instructor interaction — Also see Additional recommendations document. |
| OLC Peer-review |
2 |
Please see Process section, item 4 in the Web-based Course incentive proposal document. |
| OLC content delivery |
2 |
Content development is at the discretion of the instructor during Online Course development. |
| Includes Face-to-Face for class |
1 |
Please see Guidelines for Online Course Development document. |
| Concern for available resources, training, help |
5 |
Please see the Additional Recommendations document, item 2. |
| Teach but not Design |
2 |
This is not recommended — Please see Additional Recommendations document, item 6. |
| Templates for development |
2 |
Please see Guidelines for Online Course Development document. |
| For student body only or for anyone — prohibit on-campus student from taking |
2 |
Any person can sign up for OLC classes. See Rationale and Discussion sections of the Web-based Course Incentive Proposal. |
| Enrollment limitation |
2 |
Minimum enrollment was established. Additionally please see Additional Recommendations document. |
| Screening or testing of student gauges ability to adapt |
6 |
Recently published data suggest that early use of the tracking capabilities of a Learning Management System, like WebCT, is an early predictor of student\'s success in an OLC. Other predictive data is not yet available. Please see the Additional Recommendations document. |
| Use e-Reserves instead of OLC |
1 |
Use of this delivery is a great reservoir for file distribution and should not be overlooked, and helps define a class as Web-enhanced. |
| Inadequate monetary compensation |
1 |
After reviewing compensation and additional course fees, it was deemed that additional compensation was cost-prohibitive to GSC and its student body. |
| Develop minimum monetary compensation |
1 |
After reviewing compensation and additional course fees, it was deemed that additional compensation was cost-prohibitive to GSC and its student body. |
| No time, energy, or motivation |
1 |
Sorry, can\'t address this. |
| Assessment authentication (security) |
4 |
Training in WebCT Assessments may help alleviate some of the concerns here. Also see Additional recom-mendations document, item 2. |
| Chat room value is questioned |
1 |
See Guidelines for Online Course Development. |
| Must all faculty develop OLC? |
2 |
Currently, this is optional. Also see Additional Recommendations, item 3. |
| Class ownership — 1st right of refusal — admin distribution |
2 |
Please see Web-based Course Incentive Proposal, Process section, item 2.h. |
| Record lectures to post |
2 |
Please see Additional Recommendations document, item 1. |
| Adjunct class development |
2 |
Please see Web-based Course Incentive Proposal, Process section, item 2.a. |
| OLC for lower or upper division classes |
1 |
Any person can sign up for OLC classes. See Rationale and Discussion sections of the Web-based Course Incentive Proposal. |
| Contact hour justification |
2 |
Same as before — contact also included with chats, discussions, etc. |
| Limitation on number of hours taken online |
1 |
No one suggests that this should be limited. |
| Limitation on number of hours taught per person per semester |
1 |
No one suggests that this should be limited. |
| Populate names into OLC |
1 |
To be determined by the Office Of Technology. Also see Additional Recommendations, item 7. |
| Departmental chair buy-in |
1 |
Thought to be encouraged by Web-based Course Incentive Proposal. See Proposal section, items 3.a.i., 4.a, and 5.b. and also see Guidelines for Online Course Development (see meeting and components requirements) |
| Develop online degree |
1 |
See Web-based Incentive Proposal, Proposal section, item 1. |
| Online labs are not acceptable |
1 |
Please see Guidelines for Online Course Development (meetings). |
| Time drain for both faculty and student |
1 |
This was not seen as an issue. |
| Computer concerns — student skills |
1 |
See Additional Recommendations document, Student section, item 1. |
| Reason for push — what\'s the rush? |
1 |
Please see the Discussion section of the Web-based Incentive Proposal. |
| Some class content not appropriate for online delivery |
1 |
This is determined by the Instructor and Chair. Also see Additional Recommendations document, item 5. |
| Modified online approach |
1 |
Please see Web-enhanced Course section of the Guidelines for Online Course Development |
