Abstract:

Open and Distance Learning (ODL) provided flexible, inclusive learning opportunities but challenges hinder learner satisfaction and retention. BUCODeL framework should help with motivation, accessibility, and intervention. This study appraises the framework's effectiveness using a mixed-methods approach, combining quantitative survey data and qualitative feedback from 82 learners. 49% of learners in the finding express satisfaction with the support system, 30% remain neutral, and dissatisfaction is higher among older learners (40+) and male respondents. The frequency of interaction with support services is a factor, highlighting the critical role of regular engagement in reducing transactional distance and fostering a sense of community. Female learners reported higher satisfaction levels, suggesting existing services align more closely with their needs compared to male learners, who require tailored interventions. The research draws on the Transactional Distance Theory and the Community of Inquiry Framework. Enhanced communication channels, proactive engagement, and personalized support are identified as strategies to reduce psychological distance and foster social presence. The findings suggest that targeted interventions, such as improved technical and emotional support for older learners and tailored communication for male learners, are essential to address demographic-specific challenges. My recommendation is personalized feedback, peer mentoring programs, and increased outreach to promote regular engagement based on the gaps that remain in addressing the diverse needs of learners. Future research should explore longitudinal impacts of these interventions and refine support mechanisms to ensure sustained learner success. This study contributes to the theoretical understanding of ODL and provides practical insights for enhancing learner support frameworks.

References:

[1]. Akindele, A. T., Akande, N. O., Fajobi M. O., Olagoke H. B., Ajagbe O. A., and Badmus T. A., 2021. Assessing Learners’ Perceptions and Experiences in Distance Education — A Case Study of LAUTECH Open and Distance Learning Centre (LODLC). International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 11(10), pp. 479-485.

[2]. Chakuchichi, D., 2011. Student retention as a function of the quality of learner support in open and distance learning: Students’ perceptions at the Zimbabwe Open University. Zimbabwe International Journal of Open & Distance Learning, 1(1).

[3]. Dubey, P., & Sahu, K. K., 2021. Students' perceived benefits, adoption intention, and satisfaction to technology-enhanced learning: Examining the relationships. Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching and Learning, 14(3), 310-328.

[4]. Garg, M., 2018. Student satisfaction as determinant of academic success of distance learners: A study across distance learning courses. The Online Journal of Distance Education and e-Learning, 6(3), 30-43.

[5]. Goh, C., Leong, C., Kasmin, K., Hii, P., & Tan, O., 2017. Measuring teachers and learners' learning outcomes and satisfaction in e-learning. Journal of E-Learning and Knowledge Society, 13, 117-128.

[6]. Imed B., 2023 Distance Learning: The Ultimate Guide to Online Learning in 2023 https://research.com/education/distance-learning-the-ultimate-guide-to-online-learning

[7]. Kurucay, M., & Inan, F., 2017. Examining the effects of learner-learner interactions on satisfaction and learning in an online undergraduate course. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 115, 20-37.

[8]. Lemoine, P. A., Garretson, C. J., Waller, R. E., Mense, E. G., & Richardson, M. D., 2021. Online Learning for the Adult Learners Using Andragogy. Ensuring Adult and Non-Traditional Learners’ Success with Technology,

[9]. Lumadi, R. I., 2021. Enhancing student development through support services in an open distance learning institution: A case study in South Africa. Higher Education, 35(1). https://hdl.handle.net/10520/ejc-high-v35-n1-a9

[10]. Luo, N., Zhang, M., & Qi, D., 2017. Effects of different interactions on students' sense of community in e-learning environment. Computers and Education, 115, 153-160.

[11]. Nyathi, M., & Sibanda, E., 2023. E-learning: Substitutability of learner–learner, and learner–facilitator interactions to enhance learner satisfaction in higher education. Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning, 16(2), 210-225. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIT-04-2022-0018

[12]. Patphol, M., Saengloetuthai, J., & Intalapaporn, C., 2021. Learning Management Model to Promote Growth Mindset of Student Teachers. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 9, 396-408. https://doi.org/10.4236/jss.2021.95021

[13]. Quadir, B., Yang, J., & Chen, N., 2022. The effects of interaction types on learning outcomes in a blog-based interactive learning environment. Interactive Learning Environments, 30(2), 293-306.

[14]. Radebe, T., Tebeta, R., & Maladzhi, R. W., 2023. The impact of technology adoption in teaching and learning within ODeL. Education and Information Technologies.

[15]. Sarah Antwi, 2020 Analysis of Enrollment, Retention, Completion and Attrition Rates of Regular and Distance Learning Students in The Masters Education Programmes at Knust, Doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.12220.46720.

[16]. SOTUNSA, M. E., 2024. Quality Delivery in ODeL: Research, Perception, and Prospects. Keynote Paper Delivered at the Obafemi Awolowo University Centre for Distance Learning (OAUCDL) Open and Distance Learning Summit, May 30, 2024. https://codel.babcock.edu.ng/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/

[17]. Tawfik, A., Giabbanelli, P., Hogan, M., Msilu, F., Gill, A., & York, C., 2018. Effects of success v failure cases on learner-learner interaction. Computers and Education, 118, 120-132.

[18]. Tinto, V., 2016. Analysis of Tinto’s student integration theory in first-year undergraduate computing students of a UK higher education institution. International Journal of Comparative Education and Development, 19(2/3), 97-121. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCED-10-2016-0019

[19]. Xavier, M., & Meneses, J., 2020. Dropout in Online Higher Education: A scoping review from 2014 to 2018. Barcelona: eLearn Center, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya. https://doi.org/10.7238/uoc.dropout.factors.2020