Despite the rapid growth of online learning and student enrollment at for-profit colleges, previous research has found that employers are wary of job applicants with credentials earned from these sources. This study compared the attitudes of health care recruiters toward four different RN-to-BSN degree options based on the method of instruction (classroom, online) and the type of college (traditional, for-profit). A sample of 116 health care recruiters from across the United States completed an online survey. The study revealed that there were significant differences in the perceived advantage in the hiring process, credibility, concerns about credentials and likelihood to recommend hiring. Applicants with RN-to-BSN degrees from traditional colleges and via classroom instruction were clearly most favored and those with degrees earned through online instruction at for-profit colleges were perceived the least favorably. An online degree from a traditional college was determined to be more acceptable than an online degree from a for-profit college but still less acceptable than a degree earned through classroom instruction at a traditional college. The implication of these findings is that the return on education for students earning college degrees online or from for-profit colleges may be inhibited by employer perceptions regarding the quality of credentials earned in these environments.
|Commitee:||Calderone, Theresa, Leidman, Mary Beth|
|School:||Indiana University of Pennsylvania|
|School Location:||United States -- Pennsylvania|
|Source:||DAI-A 75/03(E), Dissertation Abstracts International|
|Subjects:||Nursing, Educational technology, Higher education|
|Keywords:||For-profit colleges, Health care recruiters, Instructional delivery, Online degrees, Online learning|
Copyright in each Dissertation and Thesis is retained by the author. All Rights Reserved
The supplemental file or files you are about to download were provided to ProQuest by the author as part of a
dissertation or thesis. The supplemental files are provided "AS IS" without warranty. ProQuest is not responsible for the
content, format or impact on the supplemental file(s) on our system. in some cases, the file type may be unknown or
may be a .exe file. We recommend caution as you open such files.
Copyright of the original materials contained in the supplemental file is retained by the author and your access to the
supplemental files is subject to the ProQuest Terms and Conditions of use.
Depending on the size of the file(s) you are downloading, the system may take some time to download them. Please be