Search results

The purpose of this paper is to describe how researchers from four large Canadian distance education or dual mode institutions conducted a survey aiming to describe the use of and interest in social software and Web 2.0 applications by distance education students and to measure their interest in collaborating with peers.

In order to do this, an online questionnaire was distributed to students from four large Canadian distance education institutions. A systematic sampling procedure led to 3,462 completed questionnaires. The results show that students have diverse views and experiences, but they also show strong and significant age and gender differences in a variety of measures, as well as an important institution effect for interest in collaboration.

Males and younger students score higher on almost all indicators, including cooperative preferences. In this paper the authors review quantitative results from the survey from earlier work (Poellhuber et al.) and present an analysis of the qualitative data gathered from open‐ended questions in the survey. Answers to open‐ended questions regarding the expectation and interest in using social software in their courses, show that students have positive expectations about interactions and course quality, but also concerns about technical, time, and efficiency issues.

The probabilist sampling, as well as the high number of respondents, are forces. The limits of the research are linked to its survey methodology, possible self‐selection bias, history effect and social desirability effect.

The study opens avenues to those who consider the integration of social software or Web 2.0 tools in distance courses.

It also offers guidance to those who consider using social software for learning purposes in general.

While social media and social networking tools offer new educational affordances and avenues for students to interact, that may alleviate the drop‐out rate problem faced by distance education institutions. Little is known about distance students' expertise with social media or their interest in using them to learn individually or to collaborate with peers.

The covenant strength of flexible workspace (FW) providers as tenants is debatable. There is the argument that providers are risky mainly due to the very nature of their business which consists of volatile revenue streams obtained from subletting the space in membership format, paying little attention to covenants. On the other hand, there is also the argument that the presence of a provider can add vibrancy and diversity to a building whilst also offering an additional amenity to existing tenants through overflow space, making FW providers desirable. This paper aims to explore this ambiguity by comparing rents paid by FW providers and other tenants within the same building in London over the period 2011 to 2021.

Using a dataset of 1,042 leases in London over the period of 2011–2021 which was extracted from CoStar, the rent conditions of FW providers and their peers within the same building were analysed employing a hedonic pricing model.

The results of the analysis suggest that FW providers have a negative and statistically significant effect on the effective rent in comparison to other tenants within the same building over the analysed period.

This analysis has the potential to identify how FW providers are perceived in the market and offers both academics and practitioners valuable insights.

The relationship between landlords and FW providers as tenants does not have a major coverage in the literature.