THE COLLEGE PATH: a VIRTUAL TOUR a Project Presented to The

THE COLLEGE PATH: A VIRTUAL TOUR

A Project

Presented to the

Faculty of

California State Polytechnic University, Pomona

In Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirements for the Degree

Master of Arts

Education

Tracy A. Mendolia-Moore

2018

SIGNATURE PAGE

PROJECT: THE COLLEGE PATH: A VIRTUAL TOUR

AUTHOR: Tracy A. Mendolia-Moore

DATE SUBMITTED: Fall 2018

Department of Education

Shahnaz Lotfipour, Ph.D. Project Committee Chair Professor of Education

Richard A. Feldman, M.A.Ed. Multimedia Developer California State Polytechnic University, Pomona

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would first like to sincerely thank my thesis advisor, Dr. Shahnaz Lotfipour, of the College of Education and Integrative Studies at California State Polytechnic

University, Pomona. Dr. Lotfipour cares deeply for all her students in the Educational

Multimedia Program, and it is shown in her dedication to each and every one of us. One example of Dr. Lotfipour’s commitment to her students is displayed in her prompt reply to questions; it was not uncommon to receive an email response within an hour, even during the late evenings, on the weekends, or during holiday breaks. Dr. Lotfipour is always available to her students, and I am thankful to have had her support and encouragement through this process. I am eternally grateful to Dr. Lotfipour for creating and implementing such a forward-thinking graduate program which has not only harnessed my technical and design knowhow, but has also inspired me to push the boundaries of my skills. The Educational Multimedia program has opened my eyes to the future of learning and has laid a successful foundation for my new career as an

Instructional Designer.

I will forever be thankful to my former supervisor, Dr. Deborah Brandon. In many ways I have seen Deborah as an unofficial mentor, and a strong female leader who has positively influenced my career path and success. I feel fortunate to have worked closely with Deborah, and to have had her as an influencer in my life during a time when

I needed it most. It was Deborah that opened my eyes to the career opportunities within higher education by inviting me to be part of her team; it was Deborah who saw my potential and gave me the opportunity to do more in my career; it was Deborah who advised me on the curriculum of the Educational Multimedia program and suggested I iii

apply; it was Deborah who asked me to think outside-the-box when trying to accommodate the unmet demand for campus tours, which ultimately became my thesis project; and it was Deborah who encouraged me to continue my career growth within instructional design. God brings people into our lives for a reason, and my life would not be what it is today without Deborah’s guidance and inspiration.

I would also like to thank Richard Feldman who helped me with additional guidance and suggestions in the development of the campus tour app. I am thankful for

Richard’s support and the hours he spent reading this long thesis paper, as well as reviewing my tour app and listening to the lengthy audio content to help me fine-tune the user experience.

Additional thanks go out to my former student tour guides who acted as my subject matter experts throughout this process. Thank you for your insight and firsthand student knowledge, as well as your contagious energy and love for both Cal Poly Pomona and the Campus Tour Program. I will miss you all the most!

A special thank you to those students and colleagues who helped to test the app:

Alberto Nunez, Linda Mondaca, Christian Manoukian, Megan Smith, Matt Martino,

Maritza Trujillo, Jose Jimenez and Xiomara Melendez.

While there are so many people to thank, the individuals for whom I owe my deepest gratitude are my family. It’s been a long haul and this accomplishment would not be possible without your endless support. I feel so lucky to have such an amazing family to call my own.

Ron Ysselstein has been my support over the last few years. Ron’s patience and support are limitless. He has stayed up late with me while I worked on homework and iv

research, he’s spent his evenings and weekends at campus testing out tour ideas and new pathways, and he was very instrumental to the audio recording within the tour app. I am truly thankful for Ron’s knowledge as an audio engineer, as his expertise was invaluable to the level of professionalism portrayed within the final audio recordings. It has been a long grad program, but I am truly thankful to have had Ron along for the journey.

To my mom and dad, I am eternally grateful. The last few years have been rough, and my parents have been my rock. They have supported me when I needed them most and have even supported me when I didn’t know how much I needed it. Being a single- mother has been bearable due to the love and support provided by my mom and dad. My parents saved me and my children from near-homelessness, stood by my side through the rollercoaster of divorce, helped me get back on my feet as a single-mother, wiped my tears and calmed my sorrows. As this grad program comes to an end, I look back at my parents and see the pride in their eyes, for they believed in me even when I did not believe in myself. This accomplishment would not be possible without the love, support and influence of my mom and dad.

Lastly, my children. Emily and Ethan have been, and always will be, my motivation. Our little family of three has been handed down some sour lemons, but over the years we have learned to turn those sour lemons into the sweetest lemonade. I am a stronger person because of my children’s influence, and I will never give up because those two little people depend on me. This thesis, this graduate degree is devoted to my children.

Emily and Ethan, you are my everything. I pray that one day you will know that mommy worked her tail off to achieve all her successes, and that all of mommy’s hard- v

work was done for you! I pray that my achievements inspire you to do more and be more in your own lives. May you never give up when faced with adversity, and instead see adversity as a challenge to conquer. Life is hard, and nothing gets handed to you. When you become adults, I pray that you will slay life and all of life’s challenges to become the amazing people I know you are inside. As I reflect on the past few years, the late nights and missed baseball games or missed volleyball games are nearly over. Yes, there have been some sacrifices, but those sacrifices have made us stronger and will provide us with a better future and a better life. Emily and Ethan, thank you for being by my side and supporting me through this process. Thank you for your patience and understanding, and your wonderful hugs when I needed them most. I love you more than the moon and the stars, and all the galaxies combined. Thank you for being my inspiration.

ABSTRACT

College campus tours are one of the best recruiting tools for prospective students.

As competition between universities target the best and brightest, universities are developing innovative campus tours to lure in the best students. In a poll conducted by the Art & Science Group, LLC, a higher education consulting firm, of the 500 students surveyed 94% visited a college campus and 65% indicated that their campus visit had influenced their application decision (Hesel, 2004).

Prospective students are amongst a generation that grew up with the internet, so a mobile tour app appeals to their media sensibilities by meeting them where they are at, which is on their mobile devices (McArthur, 2016). According to a 2015 national survey conducted by Harris Poll and assembled for the learning company, Pearson, 85% of college students own a smartphone. James Roberts’ research discovered that college students spend 8-10 hours per day on their cellphones (cited in Goodrich, 2014). A mobile campus tour has the ability to reach students when standard campus tours are not readily available, such as on a weekend or on holidays (McArthur, 2016).

The purpose of this project was to create an interactive, tablet-based digital tour of four-year university located in Southern California to aid in meeting the unfulfilled demand for campus tours by visiting prospective students.

This project was designed based on the ADDIE model, which stands for Analysis,

vii

The project developed was a self-guided virtual tour mobile application of a four- year university located in Southern California. The tour route was designed to engage prospective students while teaching them about college life, academics and community opportunities at a four-year university located in Southern California. Tour audio enhanced the overall experience by providing relative story content. Supplemental student success videos were added as a personal testimonial. With the supplemental augmented reality feature, layered content was displayed on the screen to further expand the available learning content.

Over 150 individuals were contacted via email and invited to participate in the application testing. Ultimately twenty individuals downloaded the app and completed the survey. Participants had the opportunity to review the tour application onsite at the university, or remotely at an offsite location. Upon the completion of the tour, participants were asked measurable questions that consisted mainly of yes-and-no questions, as well as agree-or-disagree statements on a five-point Likert scale. Questions were based on the measurable outcomes of Level 1: Reaction of the Kirkpatrick model.

The feedback gathered from the data analysis was favorable in all areas questioned. Ninety percent of the participants strongly agreed that the digital tour app was a valuable educational tool. Sixty-five percent of the participants felt that the most beneficial component of a digital tour was that it allowed additional flexibility for groups to tour the campus, and 20% stated that it met the student’s technology needs. In addition, 75% of the participants would recommend the use of the digital tour app as an alternative activity to other teachers and chaperones. Within the open-ended questions

viii

participants provided enhancement ideas and areas of improvement that were beneficial to the designer.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SIGNATURE PAGE ...... ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... iii

ABSTRACT ...... vii

LIST OF FIGURES ...... xii

LIST OF TABLES ...... xiv

CHAPTER ONE ...... 1

INTRODUCTION ...... 1

Background of the Problem ...... 1

Statement of the Problem ...... 4

Purpose of the Project ...... 4

Assumptions ...... 6

Limitations ...... 6

Definition of Terms...... 7

CHAPTER TWO ...... 10

LITERATURE REVIEW ...... 10

College Tours - Where Are We Now ...... 10

Role of Emerging Technologies in College Tours ...... 13

Higher Education Marketing Trends ...... 16 x

Intended Users of Digital Tour App ...... 17

Summary ...... 20

CHAPTER THREE ...... 22

METHODOLOGY ...... 22

Content Development ...... 22

Program Development ...... 30

Field Testing Procedure ...... 34

CHAPTER FOUR ...... 39

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 39

Summary ...... 39

Conclusions ...... 41

Recommendations ...... 51

REFERENCES ...... 54

Appendix A: Institutional Review Board Approval ...... 61

Appendix B: Invitation Email ...... 63

Appendix C: Invitation Email Reminder ...... 65

Appendix D: Study Questionnaire ...... 67

Appendix E ...... 69

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Percentage of group tour attendance per student...... 19

Figure 2: Percentage of visitors who did not get accommodated...... 23

Figure 3: Audio Tour Home Screen...... 28

Figure 4: App Menu Screen ...... 28

Figure 5: Campus Dining Screen ...... 29

Figure 6: Embedded webpage linked to the Admissions website...... 29

Figure 7: Student Stories Content via YouTube...... 29

Figure 8: Post-Tour Survey Review Screen...... 29

Figure 9: Mobile Screen for Tour Stop 14...... 31

Figure 10: Mobile Screen for Tour Stop 17...... 31

Figure 11: Augmented Reality Tour Stop Trigger Logo...... 32

Figure 12: Augmented Reality Trigger Image Map...... 32

Figure 13: AR Tour Webpage...... 33

Figure 14: Participants who have previously taken a campus tour...... 42

Figure 15: Participants who have done a self-guided tour...... 43

Figure 16: Participants who have had trouble getting a tour reservation...... 43

Figure 17: Physical location while viewing the app...... 44

Figure 18: Benefits of a digital campus tour...... 45

Figure 19: Ease of app user interface...... 46

Figure 20: Ease of tour path...... 46

xii

Figure 21: App multimedia features worked as expected...... 47

Figure 22: Value ranking of the digital tour app...... 48

Figure 23: Rank of the enhanced experience of a digital tour...... 49

Figure 24: Participant recommendations of the app to educational colleagues...... 50

xiii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: App Technical difficulties ...... 50

Table 2: Additional comments and suggestions ...... 51

xiv

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

College campus tours are one of the best recruiting tools for prospective students.

According to Richard A. Hesel of the Art & Science Group, LLC, “…the campus visit is the single most influential source of information for students…” (Hesel, 2004). In addition to the standard walking tour, many universities are going out of their way to create unique experiences for prospective students by thinking outside-the-box when it comes to the campus tour. Universities must be aware that in order to stay competitive within the evolving landscape they need to embrace technology by embracing virtual reality and augmented reality (Mandelbaum, 2015).

Background of the Problem

School fieldtrips are often the first, and sometimes the only, opportunity a prospective student may have to visit a college campus. Research conducted at

College campus tours are one of the best recruiting tools for prospective students.

As competition between universities target the best and brightest, universities are developing innovative campus tours to lure in the best students. Qualitative research conducted at Midwestern State University confirmed that the greatest impact in the decision-making process of a prospective college student is a campus visit (Brown,

2010). 1

In a poll conducted by the Art & Science Group, LLC, a higher education consulting firm, of the 500 students surveyed 94% visited a college campus and 65% indicated that their campus visit had influenced their application decision (cited in Hesel,

2004). The 2010 study conducted by Jill Kruger Brown of the University of Nebraska-

Lincoln found that if a student participated in a college tour, they were nearly two-times more likely to attend the university than those who did not attend a college tour. The study suggests that additional effort must be placed on the campus tour experience, as the campus visit has the greatest impact of the prospective student’s ultimate decision to enroll (Brown, 2010).

In addition to the standard walking tour, many universities are going out of their way to create unique experiences for prospective students by thinking outside-the-box when it comes to the campus tour. With students applying to more colleges than ever before, the campus visit experience is extremely influential, and universities must find increased ways to stand out amongst the crowd (Hoover, 2010; Soodik, 2017).

Successful tours go beyond buildings and grounds, and capture the college community within the overall atmosphere (McCrea, 2011).

Described as the third key of better recruiting, Alicia Brazington (2012) suggests that universities must provide an unforgettable campus tour. Cora Bennett, the Director of Orientation Programs at University of Oregon reports that approximately 65% of admitted prospective students who attended an on-campus tour paid their confirmation deposit after the tour concluded (cited in Powell, 2018). When prospective students select the university of choice, there are selecting much more than the academics of the

institution. They are selecting the environment, student involvement, the friendliness, the campus fit (Okerson, 2016).

Bob Rafferty, former Director of New Media at Wittenberg University in Ohio shared: “Admissions offices need to be focused on experience-based media. Creating memorable experiences for campus visitors is of the utmost importance" (cited in

Brazington, 2012, p. 3). Exciting and personalized campus visits are not the only trend in campus touring, and many universities are utilizing technology to produce virtual reality and augmented reality tours. Universities must be aware that in order to stay competitive within the evolving landscape they need to embrace technology by embracing virtual reality and augmented reality (Mandelbaum, 2015).

In January of 2016, University of Oregon launched a virtual tour application utilizing a third-party software called Guidebook. Guidebook provides designers with a customizable easy-to-use interface. Leveraging a GPS-enabled audio tour, the application utilizes geolocation to help visitors navigate a college campus. University of

Oregon reported over 800 mobile app downloads within four months of the digital campus tour launch (Ebert, 2016).

Prospective students are amongst a generation that grew up with the internet and a mobile tour app appeals to their media sensibilities by meeting them where they are at, which is on their mobile devices (McArthur, 2016). According to a 2015 national survey conducted by Harris Poll and assembled for the learning company, Pearson, 85% of college students own a smartphone. A mobile campus tour has the ability to reach students when standard campus tours are not readily available, such as on a weekend or on holidays (McArthur, 2016). 3

Statement of the Problem

College campus tours are one of the best recruiting tools for prospective students.

As competition between universities target the best and brightest, universities are developing innovative campus tours to lure in the best students. In a poll conducted by the Art & Science Group, LLC, a higher education consulting firm, of the 500 students surveyed, 94% visited a college campus, and 65% indicated that their campus visit had influenced their application decision (cited in Hesel, 2004).

Prospective students are amongst a generation that grew up with the internet and a mobile tour app appeals to their media sensibilities by meeting them where they are at, which is on their mobile devices (McArthur, 2016). According to a 2015 national survey conducted by Harris Poll and assembled for the learning company, Pearson, 85% of college students own a smartphone. James Roberts’ research discovered that college students spend 8-10 hours per day on their cellphones (cited in Goodrich, 2014). A mobile campus tour has the ability to reach students when standard campus tours are not readily available, such as on a weekend or on holidays (McArthur, 2016).

Purpose of the Project

The purpose of this project was to create an interactive multimedia, tablet-based digital tour to aid in meeting the unfulfilled demand of prospective students requesting a campus tour of a four-year university located in Southern California.

According to Richard A. Hesel of the Art & Science Group, LLC, “…the campus visit is the single most influential source of information for students…” (Hesel, 2004).

With tens-of-thousands of prospective students touring college campuses each year, 4

understanding the importance of the campus tour within the recruitment cycle is necessary. Hesel’s research goes on to explain that 65% of students polled indicated the campus tour was most influential with their college enrollment decision choice (Hesel,

2004).

An early adaptation of utilizing technology as a campus tour tool was the original idea of Tim Desch, the Undergraduate Dean at Arizona State University. In 2004 he explained the benefits of leveraging technology as a means of touring the campus. "We give student-guided tours to hundreds of visitors every week. Now, with this innovative use of GPS technology, we're giving visitors another choice. The tour is a great student- recruiting tool. It's convenient and flexible and allows students and their families to spend as much time as they want at campus locations that most interest them" (“ASU

Campus Tour Goes High Tech,” 2004).

Technology has come a long way since the early adaptors, with colleges and universities beginning to introduce new forms of technology such as augmented reality.

Augmented reality refers to technologies that layer digital images or information onto real world objects (Cuendet, 2013). Colleges and universities often use augmented reality to assist in marketing to students or to enhance educational experiences

(Mandelbaum, 2015). Employing an augmented reality tablet-based tour of a four-year university located in Southern California will ignite the university’s outreach efforts, launching a new form of recruitment technology.

Description of Project

The mobile application is a self-guided tour of a four-year university located in

Southern California. The tour route is designed to engage prospective students while 5

teaching them about college life, academics and community opportunities at a four-year university located in Southern California. The application employs geolocation designed to provide the user with information relative to their physical location, where ever they may be along the tour route. Tour audio enhances the overall experience by providing relative story content. Supplemental student success videos are added as a personal testimonial. With the supplemental augmented reality feature, layered content is displayed on the screen to further expand the available learning content. This interactive mobile tour application will help increase the number of prospective students touring the campus by meeting the unfulfilled demand without increasing staff overhead.

Assumptions

The following assumptions were made in the creation of this project:

 Users have access to a touch-screen mobile device with audio capabilities and

Wi-Fi accessibility.

 Users possess basic technology skills needed to navigate a mobile device touch

screen.

 Users possess the necessary English language skills to understand the information

presented.

Limitations

This project was subject to the following limitations:

 Processing speed, available data storage, and battery power of the user’s mobile

device can potentially affect the overall quality of the experience. 6

 Low or limited bandwidth experienced throughout the campus can interrupt the

fluidity of the tour experience.

 Older phones and/or older mobile operating systems can affect access and

functionality of the mobile application.

Definition of Terms

App

“The term “app” is an abbreviation of “application” meaning a self-contained

program or type of software that has a particular purpose” (Hanson, 2016, p. 31).

Augmented Reality

“Augmented reality refers to technologies that layer digital images or information

onto real world objects” (Cuendet, Bonnard, Do-Lenh, & Dillenbourg, 2013, p.

557).

Geolocation

“Typically, geolocation apps do two things: They report your location to other

users, and they associate real-world locations (such as restaurants and events) to

your location…Smartphones today have a GPS chip inside, and the chip uses

satellite data to calculate your exact position (usually when you're outside and the

sky is clear), which services such as Google Maps can then map. When a GPS

signal is unavailable, geolocation apps can use information from cell towers to

triangulate your approximate position, a method that isn't as accurate as GPS but

is has greatly improved in recent years” (Ionescu, 2010, p. 1).

Mobile Phone 7

“Mobile phones are wireless devices that transmit and receive messages through

radio signals that reach antennas that send signals to base stations that connect to

other phones, or to other base stations” (Hanson, 2016, p. 249).

Smartphone

“There is no specific technical definition of what makes a mobile phone a

smartphone, but perhaps the defining feature of a smartphone is its ability to

connect to the Internet and web” (Hanson, 2016, p. 312).

Viewbook

“Ultimately the viewbook functions as a form of bricolage, where the edited

version of the colleges’ offerings is presented to appeal to as many students as

possible. Through this, the viewbooks from different institutions appear very

similar, and the institutions promote features that are common among the majority

of higher education institutions such as study abroad, internship opportunities, and

academic programs. In the role as readers of viewbooks, students act as

consumers who weigh the offerings and presentation of the colleges to decide

whether to consider a particular college further with additional research or a

campus visit” (Kamauf, 2018).

Virtual Reality

“Virtual reality is an immersive experience, meaning that technologies simulate

real life through artificial means” (Hanson, 2016, p. 362).

Wi-Fi

“Wi-Fi is a term promulgated by the Wi-Fi Alliance, and is short for Wireless

Fidelity. It refers to any type of network which conforms to a standard known as 8

802.11. Wi-Fi is all about the connection of devices, such as computers to networks, without the use of copper or optical fiber cables” (What is Wi-Fi?,

2004, p. 48).

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

College campus tours are one of the best recruiting tools for prospective students.

This literature review examines the current trends of college tours from basic to innovative, while exploring technology advancements and marketing within the higher education visitor segment.

College Tours - Where Are We Now

According to California State Polytechnic University of Pomona’s website, the campus tours are housed within the Department of Outreach, Recruitment and

Educational Partnerships. The department offers two types of tours: a tour for perspective students and a tour for large groups or fieldtrips. The campus tours webpage boasts that over 20,000 visitors attend a school group tour of the campus each year, and an additional 12,000 visitors attend the prospective student tour of the California State

Polytechnic University, Pomona campus (“Cal Poly Pomona Official…,” 2018).

Qualitative research conducted at Midwestern State University confirmed that the greatest impact in the decision-making process of a prospective college student is a 10

campus visit (Brown, 2010). The 2010 study conducted by Jill Kruger Brown of the

University of Nebraska-Lincoln found that if a student participated in a college tour, they were nearly two-times more likely to attend the university than those who did not attend a college tour. The study suggests that additional effort must be placed on the campus tour experience, as the campus visit has the greatest impact of the prospective student’s ultimate decision to enroll (Brown, 2010).

Timothy C. Johnston studied the influencers relative to the prospective student’s college decision choice. Prospective students, comprised of 457 respondents, were asked to rank their sources of influence from 1-6, with 1 having the most influence and 6 having the least influence. Additionally, a second study was conducted of 190 university employees who were asked to predict the outcome of the student responses of the first study. To no surprise, the top sources of influence were members of the student’s primary reference group which included: coaches, teachers, counselors, parents, family members and friends. A surprise discovery of the study was that the third-highest rated form of influence by the student was the campus visit, and this was the only non-personal influence within the top ratings. The students rated the campus visit experience with a mean of 3, whereas the survey respondents of the university employee group listed the campus visit influence with a mean of 10. The significant difference in ranking may indicate that university employees undervalue the impact that the campus visit has on a prospective student (Johnston, 2010).

Universities are encouraged to create an experience or lasting memory for the visitors. The emotional marketing technique is designed to build a bond with the consumer, in this case the prospective student, that will distinguish the university 11

amongst the competitors (Hoover, 2010). Since 2013, more than 80% of prospective first-time freshmen students applied to three or more universities (Clinedinst &

Koranteng, 2017). More specifically, during the Fall of 2013 36% of first-time freshmen students applied to seven or more universities (Clinedinst & Koranteng, 2017). With students applying to more colleges than ever before, the campus visit experience is extremely influential and universities must find increased ways to stand out amongst the crowd (Hoover, 2010; Soodik, 2017).

In addition to the standard walking tour, many universities are going out of their way to create unique experiences for prospective students by thinking outside-the-box when it comes to the campus tour. In St. Petersburg, Florida Eckerd College provides campus tours by boat, whereas Alfred University in New York leads group tours via a seven-person conference bike steered by the tour guide (Opidee, 2015). According to the

University of Oregon’s website, the Admissions Office offers running tours where prospective students can join a campus tour guide for a comfortably-paced 3.7 mile run through the surrounding trails (“Running Tour,” 2018).

The University of Michigan offers Segway tours to their campus visitors stating that: “Being open to creative campus tour approaches helps make visits memorable to prospective students and families” (Opidee, 2015, p. 1). Prospective students of West

Virginia University can take a three-hour bus ride and walking tour of the university’s three campuses (Kern, 2010). Additionally, many universities like University of

California, Los Angeles offer a self-guided printable brochure tour which can be printed directly from the university website (Explore UCLA, n.d.).

At the University of Louisville in Kentucky prospective students and their families are encouraged to bring their cameras along on the tour in hopes of capturing an image of a rare white squirrel which can sometimes be spotted on campus. If the visitor can get an image of the squirrel they are rewarded with a free t-shirt that reads “I spotted the white squirrel” (Hoover, 2010, p. 6). Yet another example of how universities have gone out of their way to create a memorable experience for their visitors.

When prospective students select the university of choice, there are selecting much more than the academics of the institution. They are selecting the environment, student involvement, the friendliness, the campus fit. Which basically means the ideals of the campus to see if those ideals line up with the ideals for the prospective student

(Okerson, 2016).

Role of Emerging Technologies in College Tours

Described as the third key of better recruiting, Alicia Brazington suggests that universities must provide an unforgettable campus tour. Bob Rafferty, former Director of

New Media at Wittenberg University in Ohio shared: “Admissions offices need to be focused on experience-based media. Creating memorable experiences for campus visitors is of the utmost importance" (Brazington, 2012, p. 3). Successful tours go beyond buildings and grounds, and capture college community within the overall atmosphere (McCrea, 2011).

Tours at California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo allow prospective students the option to download a virtual tour app to their mobile device.

California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo being the first to create a GPS 13

tour device called the GPS Ranger. The GPS Ranger allows prospective students and their families to tour the campus utilizing geolocation in which the mobile app displays short videos and narration on the user’s device while the user walks along the campus.

As the mobile user approaches a building the software provides information about the current location (Kern, 2010).

In 2011 California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo expanded on their digital tour technology and incorporated their digital tour into the university’s customer retention management (CRM) database. Before a prospective student can download the tour application they are prompted to answer a few questions which captures their contact information and areas of interest. James Maraviglia, Associate

Provost for Marketing and Enrollment Development, shared that because the digital tie to the CRM system California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo often knows more about the virtual prospective students than is known of the on-site visitors. This knowledge allows the university to gather better data as the prospective students go through the pipeline of recruitment, to application, to yield, to matriculation (McCrea,

2011).

Oregon reported over 800 mobile app downloads within four months of the digital campus tour launch (Ebert, 2016).

According to independent research, nearly 75% of the 451 students polled explored their first-choice school on their own and without a guided tour (Hesel, 2004).

Prospective students are amongst a generation that grew up with the internet and a mobile tour app appeals to their media sensibilities by meeting them where they are at, which is on their mobile devices (McArthur, 2016). According to a 2015 national survey conducted by Harris Poll and assembled for the learning company, Pearson, 85% of college students own a smartphone. James Roberts’ research discovered that college students spend 8-10 hours per day on their cellphones (cited in Goodrich, 2014). A mobile campus tour has the ability to reach students when standard campus tours are not readily available, such as on a weekend or on holidays (McArthur, 2016).

The number one trend in 2017 was that virtual reality was here to stay and the year was set to be the year that society embraced virtual reality and begin to be considered a staple in our day-to-day lives (Redfern, 2017). Virtual Reality (VR) and

Augmented Reality (AR) vary, as VR fully immerses the user in a three-dimensional world. AR changes the way people see their environment by adding computer-generated elements to the real-world. Augmented reality is often referred to as “mixed reality”

(Gronstedt, 2016).

Exciting and personalized campus visits are not the only trend in campus touring, but many universities are utilizing technology to produce virtual reality and augmented reality tours. YouVisit is a leader in virtual reality tours within the education marketplace and boasts the development of over a thousand virtual reality tours within over five-hundred partner schools. Universities must be aware that in order to stay

competitive within the evolving landscape they need to embrace technology by embracing virtual reality and augmented reality (Mandelbaum, 2015).

Tufts University in Boston, Massachusetts developed an app in which tour goers can point their mobile devices at a university landmark, and utilizing the augmented reality features within the app, informative assets will appear. Users can view more information or graphics, watch a video, or listen to audio related to the landmark directly in front of them. Users can also save important information regarding the school visit to be referenced at a later time, preventing the schools from blurring together after multiple site visits (Brazington, 2012).

Higher Education Marketing Trends

The higher education sector is no different than any other corporation. Thousands of customers make an important choice as to where they want to invest their thousands of dollars at the selected college. As a result, universities need to act like corporations and their marketing efforts need to follow suit. At California State Polytechnic University,

Pomona, the importance of a prospective student’s choice can represent tens-of- thousands of dollars’ worth of an investment over the course of their college career

(“Tuition and Fees,” n.d.).

The students are making an investment in their education, but also the reputation of the college or institution where they choose to get their education, as this will follow their lifetime career and goals and often will be the most memorable and defining years in a person’s life. College recruitment encompasses a variety of verticals, including:

traditional marketing, social media marketing, college fairs, events and programs, college tours (Okerson, 2016).

To nurture yield, prospective college students are inundated with information from admissions and recruitment offices. In the mail students receive college viewbooks, emails, letters, postcards, packets, and while online students subscribe to multiple universities’ social media feeds (Okerson, 2016).

Cora Bennett, the Director of Orientation Programs at University of Oregon reports that approximately 65% of admitted prospective students who attended an on- campus tour paid their confirmation deposit after the tour concluded. Yield is the percentage of admitted students who enroll at the university. Schools want their yield rates as high as possible, because it reflects popularity and allows institutions to shape their incoming class (cited in Powell, 2018).

School fieldtrips are often the first, and sometimes the only, opportunity a prospective student may have to visit a college campus. Research conducted at

Appalachian State University in North Carolina discovered that students who participate in college visits, such as campus tours, are 1 ½ times more likely to attend college than those who did not participate in a campus visit. These findings provide stakeholders with validation that college visits are worth the time and resources it takes to organize (Tillery,

2013).

Intended Users of Digital Tour App

How young is too young for students to begin exploring and attending college campus tours? The Senior Associate Dean of Admissions, Jennifer Scott, at the College 17

of William and Mary notes that any serious college touring prior to a student’s sophomore year in high school is too soon (cited in Howard, 2011). The College

Foundation of North Carolina suggests that it is never too early for students to be taken on a college tour and students should start to visualize their future (“Seven Ways to Get

Your Kids Excited About College,” 2016).

In an article written for the New York Times, Laura Pappano credits President

Obama and a competitive culture for promoting college and career readiness in young students (Pappano, 2015). Rice University led 91 elementary and middle school tours in

2014. The University of Maryland led 8,000 young students on tour in 2012-13, and the program became so popular that it was not sustainable (cited in Pappano, 2015).

Quantitative data that was gathered for the 2016-2017 year-end attendance reports by the Office of Outreach, Recruitment and Educational Partnerships at California State

Polytechnic University, Pomona found that 20,998 students and chaperones visited the campus and participated in a college campus tour (Office of Outreach, Recruitment and

Educational Partnerships [OREP], 2017). Of the 20,998 individuals who attended a tour:

42% were high school groups, 36% were middle school groups, 6% were community college students, 9% were elementary students, and the remaining 7% consisted of internal faculty/staff requests not considered to be prospective students (see Figure 1).

Group Tour Attendance

7% 9%

36%

42%

Elementary School Middel School High School Community College Other

Figure 1: Percentage of group tour attendance per student.

Young students are not taking college field trips alone. The Albuquerque Public

School system in Albuquerque, New Mexico requires a student to chaperone ratio for fieldtrips of: 1:7 for elementary school students, 1:10 for middle school students, and

1:15 for high school students (Field Trips, 2014). The Everette Area Local School

District in Everette, Pennsylvania requires a student to chaperone ratio of: 1:15 for elementary, middle and high school students (Everette Area School District 121-AR-0.

Field Trips, 2016). The San Diego Unified School District requires that the student to

chaperone ratio be 1:10 for fieldtrips (San Diego Unified School District Administrative

Procedure, 2012).

California State Polytechnic University, Pomona requires a minimum chaperone to student ratio of 25:1 (Group Tours, 2018). Based on the above quantitative data

(OREP, 2017) and the chaperone to student requirement of a minimum of 1 chaperone for every 25 students, over 800 chaperones would have toured the California State

Polytechnic University, Pomona campus during the 2016-2017 academic year, thus identifying the target audience for the digital campus tour.

Summary

Since 2013, more than 80% of prospective first-time freshmen students applied to three or more universities (Clinedinst & Koranteng, 2017). With students applying to more colleges than ever before, the campus visit experience is extremely influential and universities must find increased ways to stand out amongst the crowd (Hoover, 2010;

Soodik, 2017). College campus tours are one of the best recruiting tools for prospective students and 65% of students indicated that their campus visit had influenced their application decision (Hesel, 2004).

Wittenberg University in Ohio shared: “Admissions offices need to be focused on experience-based media. Creating memorable experiences for campus visitors is of the utmost importance" (Brazington, 2012, p. 3). Exciting and personalized campus visits are 20

not the only trend in campus touring, but many universities are utilizing technology to produce virtual reality and augmented reality tours.

According to independent research, nearly 75% of students explored their first- choice school on their own and without a guided tour (Hesel, 2004). Prospective students are amongst a generation that grew up with the internet and a mobile tour app appeals to their media sensibilities by meeting them where they are at, which is on their mobile devices (McArthur, 2016). Universities must be aware that in order to stay competitive within the evolving landscape they need to embrace technology by embracing virtual reality and augmented reality (Mandelbaum, 2015).

CHAPTER THREE

METHODOLOGY

The purpose of this project was to create an interactive, tablet-based digital tour of a four-year university located in Southern California to aid in meeting the unfulfilled demand for campus tours by visiting prospective students.

This project was designed based on the ADDIE model, which stands for Analysis,

Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation (Legault, 2015). The ADDIE model is an acronym referring to the major processes within the overall generic instructional design process (Ozdilek & Robeck, 2009). Although the ADDIE model is not attributed to one single author, sources of the ADDIE model stem back to the 1970’s at Florida State University while that institution was working with a branch of the U.S.

Army to eventually develop Interservice Procedures for Instructional Systems

Development (IPISD). IPISD has since evolved into what now is considered to be the

ADDIE model (Molenda, 2015).

Content Development

The project was designed based on the ADDIE model with the primary component of the ADDIE model identified as the Analysis Phase. Included in the

Analysis Phase of the ADDIE model is the needs assessment, the identification of the learner characteristics, the learning objectives, and the technology accesses needed by the learners, review of the extant-data analysis (Ozdilek & Robeck, 2009).

The analysis for the needs assessment began with quantitative data that was gathered for the 2016-2017 year-end attendance reports by the Office of Outreach, 22

Recruitment and Educational Partnerships (Office of Outreach, Recruitment and

Educational Partnerships [OREP], 2017). Upon evaluating the data, at the end of the year there were 120 tour requests remaining on a stand-by list and were not accommodated.

These 120 requests represented approximately 6,000 individuals, consisting of potential students and chaperones. Of the 6,000 individuals unaccommodated: 50% were high school groups, 19% were middle school groups, 9% were community college students,

6% were elementary students, and the remaining 16% consisted of internal faculty/staff requests not considered to be prospective students (see Figure 2).

Visitor Count of Unfulfilled Requests

6% 16%

19%

50%

Elementary School Middel School High School Community College Other

Figure 2: Percentage of visitors who did not get accommodated.

Extant data available to visitors and currently identified through the Analysis

Phase of the ADDIE model include: the official printed university map that includes a written self-guided tour option as printed by the Parking and Transportation Services

Office of a university located in Southern California, as well as a website virtual tour that includes over 80 panorama pictures as developed by the Facilities Department of that same university. Although the Office of Outreach, Recruitment and Educational

Partnerships oversees the official campus tour program for the university, there are no existing published tour guidebook, maps or images available to the public as a potential self-guided tour.

After conducting scholarly research and informally discussing the shortfall of available tour with school chaperones and teachers, it was determined that visiting school groups led by a chaperone, teacher, or school counselor would likely benefit from a digital mobile tour app. Additional research conducted by the Office or Outreach,

Recruitment and Educational Partnerships found that the school group chaperones will often lead a tour of the university campus themselves if an official reservation is not available. The overall research points out to the target audience, which is identified as part of the Analysis Phase of the ADDIE model. The target audience is identified as teachers, chaperones, and adults who work with college-bound students who may have been unable to secure a reservation for an official student-led campus tour.

The learning objectives identified within the Analysis Phase with the ADDIE model include:

 Learners will recall basic history of the university.

 Learners will describe what it means to be a polytechnic school and provide

examples of how courses or club organizations help to support the polytechnic

learning philosophy.

 Learners will be able to identify campus buildings.

As identified within the ADDIE model in the Analysis Phase, the technology needs identified include: mobile device access with audio capabilities, Wi-Fi accessibility, and access to the Apple App Store or the Google Play Store. Users must possess basic technology skills needed to navigate a mobile device touch screen.

Minimum operating system requirements include iOS 9 operating system or later for an

Apple device, or Android devices must run version 4.4 or later, with access to Google

Play. Users must possess the necessary English language skills to understand the information presented.

Continuing with the ADDIE module, the Design Phase includes subitems such as: content information, the interface design of the course, and the interactions developed within the project (Ozdilek & Robeck, 2009).

As part of the Design Phase within the ADDIE module, content information was gathered to review major topics and design the content overview. The project overview outlined was a self-guided tour mobile application of a four-year university located in

Southern California. The tour route was designed to engage prospective students while teaching them about college life, academics and community opportunities at a four-year university located in Southern California. Tour audio enhances the overall experience by providing relative story content. Supplemental student success videos were added as a 25

personal testimonial. With the supplemental augmented reality feature, layered content is

displayed on the screen to further expand the available learning content.

Major topics outlined within the app include:

 University and Project Overview

 Campus Audio Tour

 Augmented Reality Tour

 Student Stories

 Admissions Information

 Campus Dining

 College Prep topics

For the interface and design of the application, as outlined within the Design

Phase of the ADDIE module, a third-party platform was utilized to develop the digital

tour. Guidebook, the platform utilized, is a simple application with a user-friendly design

interface allowing the designer ease and flexibility in creating the final product. This

specific platform targets university campus tours, allowing the designer to develop GPS

point-to-point directions of the tour route (see Figure 3). Designers can customize the

audio content, visible text and images for each of the tour stops along the route. The

color pallet for the app theme and design followed the university’s graphic standards

(Colors, n.d.).

Images and text were then added to the software. Descriptive text supports each

tour stop along the route and explains in detail the location at which the user is standing.

Tour content was gathered from the current tour guide guidebook (Outreach, Recruitment

and Educational Partnerships [OREP], 2017). Official images were gathered from the university’s website (Zasadzinski, 2018).

Images, text and audio were used to support the learning content at each of the tour stops. Video was used within the student stories tab, utilizing YouTube technology to relay student testimonials of their college experience at the university (Cansino, 2017).

Images and text were used to list the available food locations on campus. Social media was integrated into the application allowing visitors to post their photos to Twitter or

Facebook directly from the digital tour application. The photo album feature permits visitors to share their tour images with the Office of Outreach, Recruitment &

Educational Partnerships. An optional banner advertisement feature is available and advertisements are displayed every 10 seconds at the bottom of the screen to promote on- campus locations or important campus events (see Figures 4-8).

Initial beta testing was conducted after the tour route was designed within the app.

The tour path for the digital tour app follows a new route, not currently being utilized by the university. The route was intentionally designed not to mimic a current tour route in an effort that control the visiting crowds so that the digital tour app participants do not encroach upon the pathways of the tours led by the standard student-led campus tours.

The app was tested on the campus and the path was examined for any obstacles.

Eventually audio was added to the app. The tour content was narrated, recorded and edited in ProTools audio editing software. After the audio files were tested and uploaded to the application server, and downloaded to a mobile device, the digital tour

was tested again. It was in this test that it was discovered that more photos at each location needed to be added to support the audio content.

Figure 3: Audio Tour Home Screen Figure 4: App Menu Screen

Figure 5: Campus Dining Screen Figure 7: Student Stories Content via YouTube.

Figure 6: Embedded webpage linked to the Figure 8: Post-Tour Survey Review Screen.

Admissions website. 29

Program Development

Program Development covers the Development Phase of ADDIE and related to the development of instructional design techniques, such as: technology, procedures, and tools (Ozdilek & Robeck, 2009). The technology utilized to develop the completed product includes: Adobe Photoshop CS6, Adobe Dreamweaver, FileZilla, Guidebook software, HP Reveal software, ProTools audio software, mobile device camera, internet browsers, SurveyMonkey, YouTube, Facebook and Twitter.

Campus staff and faculty were consulted regarding the outlined path and content.

The subject matter experts, the official campus tour guides, were asked to review the app’s tour path and provided content. The subject matter experts provided insight to additional content that should be discussed within the app and informed the researcher of potential challenges regarding content and tour path.

The Director of the Office of Outreach, Recruitment and Educational

Partnerships, the Office that oversees the tour guide program, was consulted on the content as part of the Implementation Phase. At the suggestion of the Director, a menu topic was added that links potential students using the app to the Admissions Office webpage where the student can learn more about how to apply to the university. Touring students utilizing the digital tour app can now get information about the application process without ever leaving the user interface of the digital tour app.

Adobe Photoshop CS6 was used to format the size of the images within the audio tour component, adjusting the images to an ideal size of 750 pixels wide by 750 pixels tall (see Figures 9-10). Adobe Photoshop CS6 was also used to adjust the banner advertisement images to an ideal size of 600 pixels wide by 110 pixels tall. Within the 30

AR component in HP Reveal, Adobe Photoshop CS6 was used to design the tour stop trigger logos found along the tour route, as well as the AR Map (see Figures 11-12).

Figure 9: Mobile Screen for Tour Stop 14. Figure 10: Mobile Screen for Tour Stop 17.

Figure 11: Augmented Reality Tour Stop Trigger Logo.

Figure 12: Augmented Reality Trigger Image Map.

Adobe Dreamweaver was used to create a basic responsive webpage with inline

CSS. The webpage developed is embedded as a tab within the Guidebook application 32

and posted within the webpage are links to the Apple Store or Google Play Store so that the user can download the HP Reveal app and therefore participate in the augmented reality component (see Figure 13). Filezilla was used to seamlessly upload the AR webpage to the hosting server.

Figure 13: AR Tour Webpage.

HP Reveal was used to develop the augmented reality component of the tour. HP

Reveal, formally Aurasma, is a downloadable application software for Android or iOS mobile devices that displays multimedia layers overtop a trigger image displaying an augmented reality video, image or animation (Blevins, 2018). To expand the digital tour capabilities, the HP Reveal interface was added as a link within the digital tour app.

Visitors can use the HP Reveal component to learn more about specific academic polytechnic learning experiences throughout campus.

ProTools was used to enhance and clean the audio files for the audio tour component of the project. The sibilance was cut from the narration for a cleaner sound, and a chime was added to the end of each audio file. In total, 27 audio files were produced and edited for this project.

The mobile device camera was used to take pictures of the campus buildings and grounds. SurveyMonkey software is used for the various surveys within the application.

YouTube is utilized within the app to share student stories. Facebook and Twitter social media platforms are integrated within the app for users to post updates and share their mobile campus visit.

Field Testing Procedure

The Implementation Phase of the ADDIE module includes implementation and field testing of the project (Ozdilek & Robeck, 2009).

As part of the Implementation Phase, the planned tour route was fine-tuned. The tour route was designed to be a walking tour of the university campus, featuring assets of all eight academic colleges, as well as important student centers. Once the tour route was identified in the Development Phase, the researcher walked the route on campus identifying relevance of the location to the information outlined in the tour route, as well as notating any potential hindrances or tripping hazards. Additional consideration was given to the current university-sponsored guided tours to ensure that the digital tour did not conflict paths with the ongoing university-sponsored tours.

Campus staff and faculty were consulted regarding the outlined path and content.

The subject matter experts, the official campus tour guides, were asked to internally test

the application and the content. The subject matter experts provided insight to additional content that should be discussed within the app and informed the researcher of potential challenges regarding content and tour path. The app was adjusted based on the feedback

provided by the subject matter experts, as well as the university staff and faculty.

Upon testing the live application both an iOS device and a device operating the

Android operating system were used. The primary device used to test the app was an

iPhone 7 with an updated iOS operating system, as well as a Kindle Fire tablet with an

updated Android operating system. Other devices that sampled the app included a

Galaxy Note 7 mobile phone, an iPhone X mobile phone, and an iPad Air. The

researcher worked with the Guidebook developer to communicate inconsistencies

between the varied devices as they were discovered. The developer triaged the

inconsistencies experienced when using an iOS system verses an Android operating

system.

The augmented reality component of the application was implemented separately

to the Guidebook app. The technology landscape, regarding augmented reality, changed

over the course of the Implementation Phase. The researcher initially sought out the

integration of augmented reality utilizing the Aurasma app. At the time of the initial

research, it was discovered that the Aurasma technology was acquired by Hewlett

Packard. Hewlett Packard was working on the rebranding and relaunch of the Aurasma

technology as their own self-branded HP Reveal. At the time of the initial integration,

the new HP Reveal was unavailable and therefore the researcher sought other developers

to integrate the augmented reality component.

Upon extensive review, the researcher chose to utilize the Blippar app with which

to integrate the augmented reality tour component. Blippar is an industry leader in

augmented reality with an easy-to-use user development interface. Yet, the primary

downfall of Blippar is that trigger images would only be posted for the maximum of one

month, and then be deleted. Blippar offered a paid plan that allowed for a longer lasting

image hosting period, however upon inquiry the researcher discovered that the paid plans

were upwards of $10,000 annually.

Approximately six months after the initial review of the augmented reality apps

had past, and during that time Hewlett Packard released their rebranded version of the

original Aurasma app, HP Reveal. It was at this time that the researcher reviewed the

new HP Reveal technology and concluded that the best technology for the project is HP

Reveal. Thus, the project was reconfigured utilizing the HP Reveal app. When the

augmented reality component design was complete the researcher walked the campus to

verify and confirm that the trigger images initiated as envisioned.

The researcher gathered contact information for chaperones, teachers, and

counselors from schools that requested a tour of the campus but for a variety of reasons,

could not schedule a tour. These individuals are the main point of contact for the

approximate 120 unmet group tour requests from the 2016/2017 academic year (OREP,

2017).

The final phase of the ADDIE model is the Evaluation phase (Ozdilek & Robeck,

2009). For evaluating this project, Level 1: Reaction of the Kirkpatrick Model, was applied. Level 1 of the Kirkpatrick Model measures the participant’s satisfaction and is

important for two reasons: to let participants know that their opinion is valid, as well as obtain suggestions for further improvements (Kirkpatrick, 1979).

For field testing of the app, the following steps were taken:

 Receiving approval from Institutional Review Board (IRB).

 Once IRB consent was received, the invitation email would be sent to the

target audience, inviting them to participate in the study voluntarily with

the link and clear instructions on how to download the app.

 Trigger image notifications would be placed on campus in the areas that

correlate with the tour stops.

 Target audience would be contacted via email notifying the group of

participation compensation.

 Anticipated participation time was expected to be approximately 30-120

minutes, and users would have two weeks upon which to field-test the

application.

 Upon field-test conclusion the users could complete the anonymous

survey online.

 The data from the survey was evaluated and written in Chapter Four of

this study.

Field-testing surveys were conducted online via a link within the menu of the

digital tour app. Upon the participation completion of the tour, participants were asked

measurable questions consisted mainly of yes-and-no questions, as well as agree-or-

disagree statements on a five-point Likert scale. Questions were based on the measurable

outcomes of Level 1 of the Kirkpatrick model, as identified in Appendix D. Two open- 37

ended written response questions were also included within the survey for additional commentary.

In compliance with the Institutional Review Board (IRB) protocols, the researcher created an implied consent form which explained the purpose of the project and the value of field-testing. The consent letter clearly stated that participation was voluntary and there were no penalties if the recipient chose not to participate (See Appendix A).

Individuals were contacted via email and invited to participate in the tour application field test process (See Appendix B). A reminder invitation email was sent to the group on the date the survey was to be closed (See Appendix C). Contacted individuals had the opportunity to review the tour application onsite at the university, or remotely at an offsite location.

CHAPTER FOUR

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS

Summary

College campus tours are one of the best recruiting tools for prospective students.

2010). In a poll conducted by the Art & Science Group, LLC, a higher education consulting firm, of the 500 students surveyed 94% visited a college campus and 65% indicated that their campus visit had influenced their application decision (cited in Hesel,

2004).

According to independent research, nearly 75% of the 451 students polled explored their first-choice school on their own and without a guided tour (Hesel, 2004).

Prospective students are amongst a generation that grew up with the internet and a mobile tour app appeals to their media sensibilities by meeting them where they are at, which is on their mobile devices (McArthur, 2016). In January of 2016, University of Oregon launched a virtual tour application utilizing a third-party software called Guidebook.

University of Oregon reported over 800 mobile app downloads within four months of the digital campus tour launch (Ebert, 2016).

According to a 2015 national survey conducted by Harris Poll and assembled for the learning company, Pearson, 85% of college students own a smartphone. James

Roberts’ research discovered that college students spend 8-10 hours per day on their 39

cellphones (cited in Goodrich, 2014). A mobile campus tour has the ability to reach students when standard campus tours are not readily available, such as on a weekend or on holidays (McArthur, 2016).

Brazington, 2012, p. 3). Exciting and personalized campus visits are not the only trend in campus touring, and many universities are utilizing technology to produce virtual reality and augmented reality tours. Universities must be aware that to stay competitive within the evolving landscape they need to embrace technology by embracing virtual reality and augmented reality (Mandelbaum, 2015).

Once consent was received from the Institutional Review Board (IRB), the invitation email was sent to the target audience inviting them to participate in the study.

The email content included the app link and passphrase, clear instructions on how to download the app, and detailed information regarding participation compensation.

Trigger image notifications were placed on campus in the areas that correlate with the augmented reality tour stops. Upon conclusion the participants were asked to complete an online survey.

The initial invitation email to the target audience did not garner a response and therefore the researcher resubmitted a revised proposal to the IRB with a request to 40

include a participation incentive. The review deadline was extended, and participants were offered the opportunity to be entered in a random drawing to win one of three potential gift cards. The following gift card incentives were available: one (1) $25.00

Amazon gift card, one (1) $10.00 Target gift card , and one (1) $5.00 Starbucks gift card.

At the end of the review survey questionnaire participants had the option to be entered into the drawing by submitting their email address into the questionnaire field provided.

Participation in the drawing was optional, and the app survey could be submitted without entering into the drawing. The revised incentive was key to gaining participation in this study.

The researcher gathered the results from the survey two weeks after the initial invitation was sent to the target audience, and a total of 20 individuals participated.

Conclusions

Question #1: Have you previously taken a student-led tour of the Cal Poly Pomona campus?

Fifteen individuals (75%) out of the twenty responded stated that they have previously taken a student-led tour of the Cal Poly Pomona campus. Five individuals

(25%) out of the twenty responded stated that they have not previously taken a student- led tour of the Cal Poly Pomona campus (See Figure 14).

Have you previously taken a student-led tour of the Cal Poly Pomona campus? 80% 75%

60%

40% 25% 20%

Yes No

Figure 14: Participants who have previously taken a campus tour.

Question #2: Have you conducted a self-guided tour of the Cal Poly Pomona campus?

Ten individuals (50%) of the twenty responded stating that they have conducted a self-guided tour of the Cal Poly Pomona campus, and ten individuals (50%) stated that they have not conducted a self-guided tour of the Cal Poly Pomona campus (See Figure

15).

Have you conducted a self-guided tour of the Cal Poly Pomona campus? 60% 50% 50% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

Yes No

Figure 15: Participants who have done a self-guided tour.

Question #3: Have you previously had trouble getting a reservation for a Cal Poly

Pomona campus tour?

Sixteen individuals (80%) stated that they have not had trouble reserving a tour of the Cal Poly Pomona campus, where as four individuals (20%) stated that they have had

trouble getting a campus tour reservation of the university (See Figure 16).

Have you previously had trouble getting a reservation for a Cal Poly Pomona campus tour? 100% 80% 80%

60%

40% 20% 20%

Yes No

Figure 16: Participants who have had trouble getting a tour reservation.

Question #4: How did you view the digital tour?

Eighteen individuals (90%) of the twenty respondents stated that they viewed the

digital tour app off-campus from their home, office or classroom. Two individuals (20%)

stated that they viewed the digital tour while on-campus at Cal Poly Pomona (See Figure

17).

How did you view the digital tour?

100% 90%

80%

60%

40%

20% 10%

Off-campus from home, office or classroom On-campus while at Cal Poly Pomona

Figure 17: Physical location while viewing the app.

Question #5: In your opinion, what is the most beneficial if implementing a digital campus tour?

Thirteen individuals of the twenty respondents (65%) stated that allowed flexibility for groups to tour the campus is most beneficial if implementing a digital campus tour. Four individuals (20%) stated that the most beneficial components of a digital campus tour is that it meets the students’ technology needs. Two individuals of the twenty respondents (10%) stated that independence is the most beneficial components of a digital campus tour. One individual (5%) of the twenty respondents stated that a

benefit of a digital campus tour is that it has better tour content. None of the respondents

(0%) selected that a digital tour would be beneficial due to lack of interest in the student- guide perspective (See Figure 18).

In your opinion, what is the most beneficial if implementing a digital campus tour? 70% 65% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 20% 10% 10% 5% 0% 0%

Allowed flexibility for groups to tour the campus Meets students technology needs Better tour content Independence Lack of interest in student-guide prospective

Figure 18: Benefits of a digital campus tour.

Question #6: Was the app’s user interface easy to navigate?

Twelve individuals (60%) of the twenty respondents selected that they strongly agreed that the app’s user interface was easy to navigate. Seven individuals (35%) of the respondents agreed that the app’s user interface was easy to navigate, and one individual

(5%) chose to neither agree nor disagree that the app’s user interface was easy to navigate

(See Figure 19).

Was the app's user interface easy to navigate? 70% 60% 60% 50% 40% 35% 30% 20% 10% 5% 0% 0% 0%

Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree

Figure 19: Ease of app user interface.

Question #7: The tour path was easy to follow?

Eleven individuals (55%) of the twenty respondents strongly agreed that the tour path was easy to follow. Eight individuals (40%) agreed that the tour path was easy to follow. One individual (5%) of the twenty respondents selected to neither agree nor disagree that the tour path was easy to follow (See Figure 20).

The tour path was easy to follow? 60% 55%

50% 40% 40%

30%

20%

10% 5% 0% 0% 0%

Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree

Figure 20: Ease of tour path.

Question #8: The interactive multimedia features (photographs, video, audio) worked as expected?

Eleven individuals (55%) of the twenty respondents strongly agreed and eight individuals (40%) agreed that the interactive multimedia features worked as expected.

One individual (5%) of the twenty respondents selected to neither agree nor disagree that the interactive multimedia features worked as expected (See Figure 21).

The interactive multimedia features worked as expected? 60% 55% 50% 40% 40% 30% 20% 10% 5% 0% 0% 0%

Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree

Figure 21: App multimedia features worked as expected.

Question #9: The digital tour of Cal Poly Pomona is a valuable educational tool?

Of the twenty respondents eighteen individuals (90%) strongly agreed and two individuals (10%) agreed that the digital tour of Cal Poly Pomona is a valuable educational tool. None (0%) of the respondents selected to disagree that the digital tour would be a valuable educational tool (See Figure 22).

The digital tour of Cal Poly Pomona is a valuable educational tool? 100% 90%

80%

60%

40%

20% 10% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree

Figure 22: Value ranking of the digital tour app.

Question #10: Use of the digital tour would enhance the Cal Poly Pomona tour experience for my students?

Of the twenty individuals surveyed one individual chose to skip this question.

Fourteen (73.68%) of the nineteen remaining respondents stated that they strongly

agreed, and four (21.05%) agreed that the use of the digital tour would enhance the Cal

Poly Pomona tour experience for their students. One individual (5.26%) of the nineteen

remaining respondents selected to neither agree nor disagree that the interactive

multimedia features worked as expected (See Figure 23).

Use of the digital tour would enhance the Cal Poly Pomona tour experience for my students? 80% 74%

60%

40% 21% 20% 5% 0% 0% 0%

Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree

Figure 23: Rank of the enhanced experience of a digital tour.

Question #11: I would recommend the use of the CPP digital tour app as an alternative activity to other teachers and chaperones?

Of the twenty respondents, 100% agreed or strongly agreed that they would recommend the use of the CPP digital tour all as an alternative activity to other teachers and chaperones. Fifteen respondents (75%) strongly agreed and five (25%) agreed with this statement (See Figure 24).

I would recommend the use of the CPP digital tour app as an alternative activity to other teachers or chaperones? 80% 75% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 25% 20%

10% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree

Figure 24: Participant recommendations of the app to educational colleagues.

Question #12: Please describe any difficulties you may have experience while navigating the CPP digital tour app.

The question resulted in twelve out of twenty responses. A sampling of those comments follows (See Table 1). A complete list of responses may be found in

Appendix E.

Table 1

App Technical difficulties. Number of Percentage of Comments Responses Responses

Participants shared confusion regarding the main app interface. 1 8.3%

Participants were confused by the download process and/or experienced 3 25% longer than desired download speed.

Participants expressed frustrations surrounding audio delivery method. 3 25%

Participants noted that some images did not accurately represent the 1 8.3% correct location.

Participants shared difficulties surrounding the audio tour interface. 3 25%

Participants experienced no difficulties. 1 8.3%

Question #13: Please provide any additional comment or suggestions for improving the CPP digital tour app.

The second open-ended question resulted in twelve responses out of twenty. A sampling of those comments can be found below and the complete list may be found in

Appendix E.

Table 2

Additional comments and suggestions. Number of Percentage of Comments Responses Responses

Participants suggested more pictures. 3 25%

Participants requested additional university weblinks to be added. 1 8.3%

Participants requested additional functionalities within the app’s user 1 8.3% interface. Participants had no improvement suggestions, and instead shared their 7 58.3% admiration for the overall app project.

Recommendations

The feedback gathered from the data analysis was favorable in all areas questioned. Ninety percent of the participants strongly agreed that the digital tour app is a valuable educational tool. Sixty-five percent of the participants felt that the most beneficial component of a digital tour is that it allows flexibility for groups to tour the campus, and 20% stated that it meets the student’s technology needs. In addition, 75% of 51

the participants would recommend the use of the digital tour app as an alternative activity to other teachers and chaperones. Within the open-ended questions participants provided enhancement ideas and areas of improvement that were beneficial to the designer.

According to the comments and responses from the open-ended questions, the participants' feedback was beneficial for the researcher to improve areas of the application. For example, the designer should have included more pictures at the tour stops, with the first picture being a picture of the actual tour location so that the participant would know that they were in the correct location. Multiple requests were made for additional pictures; however, the addition of more pictures could significantly decrease the app's download speed. Some participants identified that the download time was already longer than desired and therefore a balance of images should be identified to maximize the experience without inconveniencing the participant.

Another recommendation would be to consider developing the app outside of the

Guidebook interface. While Guidebook offers flexibility to the designer and the user, some of the links within the mobile app can be difficult to navigate. Participants identified that they would have liked easier interface functionalities such as: rewind or fast-forward, going to a specific or previous location, and use of the mobile device speakerphone.

Overall, the digital tour app allows for schedule flexibility, increased content, and meets the students’ technology needs. Considering that 75% of students polled explored their first-choice school on their own and without a guided tour (Hesel, 2004), and that the campus visit has the greatest impact in the decision-making process of a prospective college student (Brown, 2010), universities are in need of a digital tour app to help meet 52

the demand of campus visitors by providing an informative and flexible alternative to the standard student-led tour.

REFERENCES

ASU Campus Tour Goes High Tech. (2004). Wireless News, 1.

Bangalore Nagaraja, K., & Eckenberg, C. (2015). Android Augmented Reality

Application: SDSU University Campus Guide, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.

Blevins, B. (2018). Teaching Digital Literacy Composing Concepts: Focusing on the

Layers of Augmented Reality in an Era of Changing Technology. Computers and

Composition, Computers and Composition.

Brazington, A. (2012, October). 3 Keys to Better Recruiting. Campus Technology, 26-28.

Brown, J. K. (2010). An examination of undergraduate student recruitment procedures

and activities at a Midwestern state university. Enrollment Management Journal,

4(3), 89-116.

Burdett, K., Greisen, J. V., Hoover, R., Royer, J., & Uerling, D. (2013). How Students

Choose a College: Understanding the Role of Internet Based Resources in the

College Choice Process, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.

Cal Poly Pomona Official Prospective Student Tours. (2018, March 29). Retrieved from

http://www.cpp.edu/~outreach/tours/prospectivestudenttours.shtml

Cal Poly – San Luis Obispo, University Tour. (2017, September 01). Retrieved

from http://www.zcivic.com

Campus Names. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.calstate.edu/brand/styleguide/campus-

names.shtml

Cansino, D. (2017, December 19). Cal Poly Pomona Bronco Stories: Ashley, Animal

Science Major [Video File]. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/Kf45aHRLb-Y

Clinedinst, M., & Koranteng, A. (2017). 2017 State of College Admission (Rep.).

Retrieved from https://www.nacacnet.org/globalassets/documents/publications/

research/soca17final.pdf

Colors. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.cpp.edu/~graphicstandards/typefaces-

colors/colors.shtml

Craig, A. B. (2013). Understanding augmented reality: Concepts and applications.

Amsterdam: Elsevier Morgan Kaufmann.

Cuendet, S., Bonnard, Q., Do-Lenh, S., & Dillenbourg, P. (2013). Designing augmented

reality for the classroom. Computers & Education, 68, 557-569.

Ebert, A. (2016, April 26). University of Oregon looks to creatively meet rising

admissions goals as resources decrease. Retrieved from

https://guidebook.com/mobile-guides/university-of-oregon-tours-app/

Education — YouVisit. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.youvisit.com/education/

Everette Area School District 121-AR-0. Field Trips. (2016, September 15). Retrieved

from http://www.everettasd.org/docs/district/field trip packet2017.pdf?id=4053

Explore UCLA; Self-Guided Walking Tour of Campus. (n.d.). Retrieved from

https://www.admission.ucla.edu/Tours/Self-Guided Tour.pdf

Facts & Figures. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.cpp.edu/~aboutcpp/calpolypomona-

overview/facts-and-figures.shtml

Field Trips. (2014, August 13). Retrieved from http://www.aps.edu/about-us/policies-

and-procedural-directives/procedural-directives/j.-students/field-activity-trips

Goodrich, T. (2014, August 27). Cellphone Addiction Is 'an Increasingly Realistic

Possibility,' Baylor Study of College Students Reveals. Retrieved from

https://www.baylor.edu/mediacommunications/news.php?action=story&story=14

5864

Gronstedt, A. (2016). From immersion to PRESENCE. Talent Development, 70(6), 54-

59.

Group Tours. (2018, March 6). Retrieved from http://www.cpp.edu/~outreach/tours/

grouptours.shtml

Hanson, J. (2016). The social media revolution: An economic encyclopedia of friending,

following, texting, and connecting. Santa Barbara, CA: Greenwood, an imprint of

ABC-CLIO, LLC.

Hesel, R. A. (2004). Campus Visit Drives College Choice. Student Poll, 5(5), 1-8.

Retrieved from https://www.artsci.com/

Hoover, E. (2010b). Campus Tours Go Disney. The Chronicle of Higher Education,

Retrieved from http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/college_guide/feature/

campus_tours_go_disney.php?page=all

Howard, C. (2011, August 10). The College Tour: How Soon Is Too Soon? Retrieved

from https://www.forbes.com/sites/carolinehoward/2010/08/12/the-college-tour-

how-soon-is-too-soon/#3728acfb2b24

Ionescu, D. (2010, March 29). Geolocation 101: How It Works, the Apps, and Your

Privacy. Retrieved from https://www.pcworld.com/article/192803/geolo.html

Johnston, T. C. (2010). Who And What Influences Choice Of University? Student And

University Perceptions. American Journal of Business Education (AJBE), 3(10).

doi:10.19030/ajbe.v3i10.484

Kamauf, R., Klasik, D., Ali, A., & Whitaker, R. (2018). Viewbook Marketing of Women's

Colleges [Abstract], ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.

Kern, R. (2010, April 8). Colleges Attract Students with Unique Campus Tours ...

Retrieved from https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/right-

school/tours/articles/2010/04/08/colleges-attract-students-with-unique-campus-

tours

Kirkpatrick, D. (1979). Techniques for Evaluating Training Programs. Training and

Development Journal, 33(6), 78.

Kirkpatrick, D. (1996). Revisiting Kirkpatrick's four-level model. Training &

Development, 50(1), 54-57.

Kirkpatrick, D., & Kirkpatrick, James D. (2005). Transferring learning to behavior:

Using the four levels to improve performance (1st ed.). San Francisco, CA:

Berrett-Koehler.

Larson, C., Okrusch, C., Gibson, R., & Hawthorne, N. (2014). Developing a Multimodal

Virtual Tour App for Butte, Montana, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.

Legault, N. (2015, July 2). An Introduction to the ADDIE Model for Instructional

Designers. Retrieved from https://community.articulate.com/articles/an-

introduction-to-the-addie-model-for-instructional-designers

Levine, F., Mayer, R., Murphy, K., Newcombe, N., Worrell, F., & Lawless, K. (2016). 57

Educational Technology. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences,

3(2), 169-176.

Mandelbaum, A. (2015, July 10). Virtual tools give student recruiters an edge. University

World News. Retrieved from http://www.universityworldnews.com/article.php?

story=20150707130247274

McArthur, J. (2016, June 23). Will a virtual campus tour work? Within the right context.

Retrieved from https://guidebook.com/mobile-guides/virtual-campus-tour/

McCrea, B. (2011, October 1). Virtual Tour de Force. Retrieved from

https://campustechnology.com/articles/2011/10/01/virtual-tour-de-force.aspx

Molenda, M. (2015). In Search of the Elusive ADDIE Model. Performance Improvement,

54(2), 40-42.

Office of Outreach, Recruitment and Educational Partnerships. (2017). Cal Poly Pomona

Campus Tours Annual Report for the 2016/2017 Academic Year (pp. 1-17, Rep.).

Office of Outreach, Recruitment and Educational Partnerships. (2017). Tour Guide

Guidebook (pp. 1-67).

Okerson, J. (2016). Beyond the Campus Tour: College Choice and the Campus Visit,

ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.

Opidee, I. (2015, October 1). Tours That Turn Heads: One Dozen Ideas and Trends for

Making Your Campus Tour Stand Out. University Business.

Ozdilek, Z., & Robeck, E. (2009). Operational priorities of instructional designers

analyzed within the steps of the Addie instructional design model. Procedia –

Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1(1), 2046-2050.

Pappano, L. (2015, February 04). Is Your First Grader College Ready? Retrieved from 58

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/08/education/edlife/is-your-first-grader-

college-ready.html

Pearson Student Mobile Device Survey 2015 (Rep.). (2015, June). Retrieved from

https://www.pearsoned.com/wp-content/uploads/2015-Pearson-Student-Mobile-

Device-Survey-College.pdf

Powell, F. (2018, January 23). Universities, Colleges Where Students Are Eager to

Enroll. Retrieved from https://www.usnews.com/education/best-

colleges/articles/2018-01-23/universities-colleges-where-students-are-eager-to-

enroll

Redfern, P. (2017, January 19). Four Trends to Look Out For in 2017 | Inside Higher Ed.

Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com

Running Tour. (2018, March 31). Retrieved from

https://admissions.uoregon.edu/visit/running-tour

San Diego Unified School District Administrative Procedure. (2012, May 12). Retrieved

from https://www.sandiegounified.org/sites/default/files_link/district/files/

procedures/pp4587.pdf

Seven Ways to Get Your Kids Excited About College During Their Early Years. (2016,

September 28). Retrieved from http://nc529.org/seven-ways-to-get-your-kids-

excited-about-college-during-their-early-years/

Smith, S., & Johnstone, B. (2006). An Exploration of Perceived Usefulness of Admissions

Advisors, Guidance Counselors, Family, Friends, Websites, Campus Tours, and

Print Publications during the Search and Choice Phases of the College Selection

Process, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. 59

Soodik, N. (2017, December 4). Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from

https://www.insidehighered.com/admissions/views/2017/12/04/

high-school-students-are-applying-too-many-colleges-essay

Tillery, C. Y. (2013). The summative impact of college access interventions: A program

evaluation of GEAR UP North Carolina: A dissertation (Doctoral dissertation,

Appalachian State University

Tuition and Fees. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.cpp.edu/~student-accounting/tuition-

fees/

Visit In Person. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://visit.asu.edu/

What is Wi-Fi? (2004). Printing World, 48.

Zasadzinski, T. (2018, April 12). Author Archives: Tom Zasadzinski. Retrieved from

http://polycentric.cpp.edu/author/tzasadzinski

APPENDIX A

INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL

Memorandum California State Polytechnic University, Pomona Institutional Review Board -- Office of Research Compliance Federalwide Assurance 00001759 -- IRB principles: respect for persons, beneficence, and justice

Date: October 30, 2018 PI Name: Tracy Moore; Department/College: Educational Multimedia Co-PI(s): Shahnaz Lotfipour IRB Protocol Number: IRB-18-112 Protocol Title: Cal Poly Pomona Digital Campus Tour Protocol Submission Type: Initial; Review Board Type: by CPP IRB members Review Type: Expedited Decision: Approved

Dear Investigator(s),

The protocol as described above has been reviewed by the Cal Poly Pomona Institutional Review Board (IRB) by the expedited review method. It was found to be in compliance with applicable federal and state regulations and Cal Poly Pomona policies regarding the protection of human subjects used in research. Thus, the Cal Poly Pomona IRB grants you approval to conduct the research. On its behalf, I thank you for your adherence to established policies meant to ensure the safety and privacy of your study participants. You may wish to keep a copy of this memo with you while conducting your research project.

You may initiate the project as of October 30, 2018, and it must be completed by October 30, 2019. Federal regulations limit the IRB approval of studies for up to one year. If you find the need to renew your protocol, please remember to submit a request to the IRB at least six (6) weeks before this end date to ensure continuous human subjects’ protection and IRB approval. The Cayuse system will remind you, however the responsibility lies with the study investigators. 61

It would be appreciated that you advise the IRB upon the completion of your project involving the interaction with human subjects. Please use the "Closure or termination of the protocol" form in the Cayuse system.

Approval is conditional upon your willingness to carry out your responsibilities as the principal investigator under University policy. Your research project must be conducted according to the methods described in the final approved protocol. Should there be any changes to your research plan as described, please advise the IRB, because you may be required to submit an amendment (with re-certification). Additionally, should you as the investigator or any of your subjects experience any “problems which involve an undescribed element of risk” (adverse events in regulatory terms), please immediately inform the IRB of the circumstances. There are forms for both in the Cayuse system.

These are additional notes, if any, from the Board: The committee wishes you success in your future research endeavors. If you need further assistance, you are encouraged to contact the IRB.

Sincerely,

Heather Taylor Wizikowski, Ph.D. Chair, Institutional Review Board Assistant Professor, Education College of Education and Integrative Studies

This message has been automatically generated by the Cayuse system installed at Cal Poly Pomona. Please contact the IRB office ([email protected] or 909.869.4215 or .3713) if you have questions or you believe you have received this message in error. Thanks for your compliance with the regulations while conducting human subjects research. [2/13]

APPENDIX B

INVITATION EMAIL

Greetings!

My name is Tracy Moore, and I am a graduate student within the Education Multimedia Program at Cal Poly Pomona and I have developed a NEW Cal Poly Pomona tour app! I am contacting you because you have reached out, or have brought your students, to take a campus tour of the Cal Poly Pomona campus.

My campus tour app has taken me over a year to develop and I am in need of chaperones, teachers and adults who work with adolescents to test this app that I have worked so hard to produce. I am reaching out to you to ask for your help by testing my digital tour app. I promise it won’t take too much of your time, and you will learn so much about Cal Poly Pomona!

As an incentive for your participation, upon completion of the app review survey, you have a chance to be entered into a random drawing to win one of three possible e-gift cards!

The following gift cards are available: one (1) $25.00 Amazon gift card, one (1) $10.00 Target gift card , and one (1) $5.00 Starbucks gift card. At the end of the review survey questionnaire participants will have the option to be entered into the drawing by submitting their email address into the questionnaire field provided. Participation in the drawing is optional, and the app survey can be submitted without entering into the drawing. All entries into the drawing must be received by 11:59 p.m. on November 16, 2018. Winners will be notified no later than 11:59 p.m. on November 30, 2018.

Please test the app and help me, a future educator, get one step closer to my Master of Arts in Education degree.

To participate, download the app via the following link and enter the passcode noted below.

Link: https://guidebook.com/g/cpptour Passphrase: cpptour18

Most importantly, please be sure to answer the brief survey about the tour app:

Survey Link: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/Y6K69ZH

If you have any questions or need any assistance please contact me day or night on my cell phone at 909-802-4530 or via email at [email protected]

The Cal Poly Pomona Institutional Review Board (IRB) has approved this research under protocol number IRB-18-112; please visit the following link for participation, liability, and contact information: http://bit.ly/IRB112

Thanks for your help and participation. Have a great day!

Warm Regards,

Tracy Moore

Tracy A. Moore Graduate Student, Educational Multimedia College of Education and Integrative Studies California State Polytechnic University, Pomona

APPENDIX C

INVITATION EMAIL REMINDER

Happy Friday!

Thank you to all of you who have helped test my campus tour app of Cal Poly Pomona. I have received some great feedback, and I thank you for taking the time to review my tour app and help me get one-step closer to graduation. Thank you!

For those of you who have not yet reviewed the app, today is the LAST DAY to be entered to into the random participation drawing for your chance to win a gift card to either Amazon, Target or Starbucks.* Participation is free! Don’t miss this opportunity to, not only be entered, but to also help a grad student complete her degree!!

If you’ve already reviewed the app and are having trouble finding the “Tour Survey,” here is a direct link to that survey: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/Y6K69ZH Please note that this survey is the MOST IMPORTANT part of the research, and thus your opinion is very valuable. (Hint: this is also where you enter to be in the drawing.)

To download the Campus Tour App visit the following link and enter the passcode noted below:

Link: https://guidebook.com/g/cpptour Passphrase: cpptour18

If you have any questions or need any assistance, please contact me day or night on my cell phone at 909-802-4530 or via email at [email protected]. The drawing will close tonight, November 16, 2018 at 11:59 PM, so don't delay!

Thank you again and have a wonderful Thanksgiving break!

Warm Regards,

Tracy Moore

Tracy A. Moore Graduate Student, Educational Multimedia College of Education and Integrative Studies California State Polytechnic University, Pomona ______

*The following are giftcards are available: one (1) $25.00 Amazon e-giftcard, one (1) $10.00 Target e-giftcard , and one (1) $5.00 Starbucks e-giftcard. At the end of the review survey questionnaire participants will have the option to be entered into the drawing by submitting their email address into the questionnaire field provided. Participation in the drawing is optional, and the app survey can be submitted without entering into the drawing. All entries into the drawing must be received by 11:59 p.m. on November 16, 2018. Winners will be notified no later than 11:59 p.m. on November 30, 2018.

APPENDIX D

STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE

Post-Survey Feedback

1. Have you previously taken a student-led tour of the Cal Poly Pomona campus?

◯ Yes ◯ No

2. Have you conducted a self-guided tour of the Cal Poly Pomona campus?

◯ Yes ◯ No

3. Have you previously had trouble getting a reservation for a Cal Poly Pomona campus tour?

◯ Yes ◯ No

4. How did you view the digital tour?

◯ Off-campus from home, office or classroom ◯ On-campus while at Cal Poly Pomona

5. In your opinion, what is most beneficial when implementing a digital campus tour?

◯ Allowed ◯ Better tour ◯ Lack of flexibility for ◯ Meets students ◯ Independence content interest in student- groups to tour the technology needs guide prospective campus

6. Was the app's user interface easy to navigate?

◯ Strongly ◯ Neither agree ◯ Strongly ◯ Agree ◯ Disagree Agree or disagree Disagree

7. The tour path was easy to follow?

◯ Strongly ◯ Neither agree ◯ Strongly ◯ Agree ◯ Disagree Agree or disagree Disagree

8. The interactive multimedia features (photographs, video, audio) worked as expected?

◯ Strongly ◯ Neither agree ◯ Strongly ◯ Agree ◯ Disagree Agree or disagree Disagree

9. The digital tour of Cal Poly Pomona is a valuable educational tool?

◯ Strongly ◯ Neither agree ◯ Strongly ◯ Agree ◯ Disagree Agree or disagree Disagree

10. Use of the digital tour would enhance the Cal Poly Pomona tour experience for my students?

◯ Strongly ◯ Neither agree ◯ Strongly ◯ Agree ◯ Disagree Agree or disagree Disagree

11. I would recommend the use of the CPP digital tour app as an alternative activity to other teachers or chaperones? ◯ Strongly ◯ Neither agree ◯ Strongly ◯ Agree ◯ Disagree Agree or disagree Disagree 12. Please describe any difficulties you may have experience while navigating the CPP digital tour app.

13. Please provide any additional comment or suggestions for improving the CPP digital tour app.

APPENDIX E

STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS

I would Have you Use of the recommend In your The Have you previously digital tour the use of Have you opinion, interactive The digital previously had trouble Was would the CPP conducted a what is the multimedia tour of Cal taken a getting a How did the app's The tour enhance the digital tour self-guided most features Poly student-led reservation you view user path was Cal Poly app as as tour of the beneficial if (photograp Pomona is tour of the for a Cal the digital interface easy to Pomona alternative Cal Poly implementi hs, video, a valuable Cal Poly Poly tour? easy to follow? tour activity to Pomona ng a digital audio) educational Pomona Pomona navigate? experience other campus? campus worked as tool? campus? campus for my teachers or tour? expected? tour? students? chaperones ? Allowed Off-campus flexibility from home, Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly No No No for groups Agree office or agree agree agree agree agree to tour the classroom campus Off-campus from home, Independen Strongly Strongly Strongly Yes Yes No Agree Agree Agree office or ce agree agree agree classroom Allowed flexibility Strongly Strongly Yes Yes No On-campus for groups Agree Agree Agree Agree agree agree to tour the campus Allowed Off-campus flexibility from home, Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly No Yes No for groups office or agree agree agree agree agree agree to tour the classroom campus

Allowed Off-campus flexibility from home, Strongly Strongly Strongly Yes Yes No for groups Agree Agree Agree office or agree agree agree to tour the classroom campus Allowed Off-campus flexibility from home, Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Yes No No for groups Agree Agree office or agree agree agree agree to tour the classroom campus Off-campus Neither Neither from home, Independen Strongly Yes No Yes Agree agree nor Agree Agree agree nor office or ce agree disagree disagree classroom Allowed Off-campus flexibility from home, Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Yes Yes No for groups office or agree agree agree agree agree agree to tour the classroom campus On-campus Meets Neither while at students Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Yes Yes No agree nor Cal Poly technology agree agree agree agree agree disagree Pomona needs Off-campus Meets from home, students Yes No No Agree Agree Agree Agree Agree Agree office or technology classroom needs Allowed Off-campus flexibility from home, Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Yes No Yes for groups office or agree agree agree agree agree agree to tour the classroom campus Allowed Off-campus flexibility from home, Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Yes No Yes for groups office or agree agree agree agree agree agree to tour the classroom campus Off-campus from home, Better tour Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly No No No office or content agree agree agree agree agree agree classroom

Allowed Off-campus flexibility from home, Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Yes No No for groups office or agree agree agree agree agree agree to tour the classroom campus Allowed Off-campus flexibility from home, Strongly Strongly Strongly Yes No No for groups Agree Agree Agree office or agree agree agree to tour the classroom campus Allowed Off-campus flexibility from home, Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly No Yes No for groups office or agree agree agree agree agree agree to tour the classroom campus Off-campus Meets from home, students Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Yes Yes No Agree Agree office or technology agree agree agree agree classroom needs Allowed Off-campus flexibility from home, Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Yes Yes No for groups Agree office or agree agree agree agree agree to tour the classroom campus Off-campus Meets Neither from home, students Strongly Yes No Yes agree nor Agree Agree Agree Agree office or technology agree disagree classroom needs Allowed Off-campus flexibility Neither from home, Strongly Strongly Strongly No Yes No for groups Agree Agree agree nor office or agree agree agree to tour the disagree classroom campus

Open-Ended Questions

Please describe any difficulties you may have experience while navigating the CPP Please provide any additional comment or suggestions for improving the CPP digital digital tour app. tour app. I had a hard time trying to go back to the previous stop once I went to the next. I would provide a link to the online bookstore so I can get some swag!!! I would recommend incorporating more pictures of projects for different majors. Certain pictures didn't line up with some areas (e.g., manor house, quad). I would Overall, great app and easy to navigate! This is a good tool for those who are not able recommend putting pictures of the actual place for the first picture instead of only to visit the campus or for prospective student who visited and want a refresher on how putting President Soraya Coley as the first picture for the manor house. the campus looks/is. The app was great, and is a great tool that can help people who may not be able to make it to the campus Downloading the audio files was a slow process for me. I think that warning the chaperones to download the audio files ahead of time before arriving on campus The app worked well and was very informative, I can't think of anything that could would be an important step. Other than that, I had no problems with the app or the improve it. tour. I think not having a speakerphone option was limiting. I do understand how that may be problematic for those around a student using speakerphone. But the app was good other than that. Shorting and integrating a fast forward option to the app would allow me to pay Skipping around from one stop to another was not a smooth process. attention and highlight specific important options of the tour. Amazing app. Will drastically improve the Cpp tour experience for all parties N/A involved. none Well done! It was a fantastic app. My only suggestion would be to provide as many pictures as possible for each area. It was fun to see places we wouldn’t otherwise see, even This app was very user friendly and had the perfect amount of background during a guided tour. For example, my students have never seen the swimming pools. information . Also, it would be wonderful to insert a few student interviews so we can hear about their personal experience at Cal Poly. Perhaps even a new section of “Best tips for first year students”. The Guidebook was a little weird to use, I am not used to it. But, moving from one section to another was not bad.

The application took a bit to download, but after a few tries I was able to download. The application is a great addition to a live campus tour. None! This is a great tool that allows everyone to view and learn about Cal Poly N/A...great tool Pomona It was easy to find the survey once on the main page but downloading the tour page This is awesome and would be helpful to anyone who is doing a self guided tour too! was a slightly confusing step. There were some minor audio problems I experienced. The audio jumped during the Old Stables and BSC sections (both toward the end of each segment). I also A few more pictures would help with the overall experience. Some stops only had experienced a noticeable delay in the play of audio when starting the Old one. Administration session. Without earbuds, the phone had to be against ear. None. 70