A review of research regarding acceptance of online degrees by employers returns contradictory results. The current research focused on human resources recruiters’ perceptions and biases toward traditional versus online education. Human capital theory, signaling theory, and stakeholder theory formed the conceptual support for understanding the potential impact of bias toward online education. The researcher used semi-structured phone interviews with 18 recruiters as the data collection method. A purposive sample ensured that the participants were selected appropriately. Interviews were transcribed, coded, and manually analyzed for themes related to the acceptance of online education. Eighty-three percent of respondents believed online and traditional educations are equal among accredited institutions. This finding marks a change from previous studies that have found mixed attitudes among employers about online education. The perceived lack of social interaction inherent in online education and reputation of specific institutions were concerns. The results suggest that attitudes toward online education are changing to a more favorable view. The majority (83%) of participants indicated online education was equal to traditional education when reviewing resumes. The researcher recommends that online students participate in outside the classroom social activities to compensate for perceived lack of social interaction. Institutions offering online programs should obtain or maintain accreditation and strengthen their reputation for their graduates to be acceptable to business recruiters.
|Commitee:||Dereshiwsky, Mary, Stahley, James|
|School:||Baker College (Michigan)|
|Department:||Center for Graduate Studies|
|School Location:||United States -- Michigan|
|Source:||DAI-A 78/06(E), Dissertation Abstracts International|
|Subjects:||Education, Adult education, Higher education|
|Keywords:||Acceptance, Education, Human resource, Online, Recruiters, Resume|
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