Date of Award
2001
Document Type
Dissertation
Degree Name
Doctor of Education
Department
Programs for Higher Education
Advisor
Stan Hannah
Committee Member
Richard E. Hoehlein
Committee Member
Richard Cardinali
Abstract
The Army Logistics Management College (ALMC) has the mission to provide quality training, products, and services in acquisition, logistics, resource management, decision science, management science, environmental management, and related subjects to the United States Army, Department of Defense, and to other eligible organizations. The ALMC opened in 1954 at Ft. Lee, Virginia. The college is a traditional Army school with courses that range from three days to over six months for military, civilian, and international students of all ranks.
Since its inception, ALMC has grown to use eight modes of instruction to deliver its courses. Those modes of instruction include resident courses, onsite courses, accredited off-campus instruction, satellite education, correspondence courses, contractor-delivered courses, CD-ROM courses, and World Wide Web courses. One such course is the Associate Logistics Executive Development Course (ALEDC) , which was delivered in two modes: resident and correspondence.
The purpose of this study was to determine if the Associate Logistics Executive Development Correspondence Course was effective in meeting its training goals and objectives. Once the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of the course was determined, the ALMC could better decide whether to continue or discontinue the ALEDC or how to improve current ALEDC training.
There were three research questions for this project. One, "Is correspondence an effective way to teach?" Two, "What were the criteria that were to be used to evaluate the ALEDC?" Three, "Based on selected criteria, was the Associate Logistics Executive Development Course effectively achieving its goals and objectives?"
Six procedures were used to answer the research questions. First, a review of the literature was conducted. Second, a formative committee was established. This committee assisted with the development of the criteria used to evaluate the ALEDC. Third, a summative committee was established. The criteria and evaluation instrument were provided to the summative committee for their review and approval. Fourth, during the fall of 2000, 324 ALEDC enrollees were administered the evaluation instrument approved by the summative committee. Fifth, completed and returned questionnaires were collected and analyzed with the findings shared with the formative committee. A comparison o f the original criteria with the survey results obtained from the survey concluded that the initial criteria identified by the ALEDC were applicable to the course. Sixth, a draft of the findings was presented to the summative committee for validation against the previously established study criteria to determine that all the study criteria were met.