Results

This chapter presents the seven research questions, followed by the findings which answer each question. The chapter concludes with a summary of significant findings.

1) To what extent do U.S. college and university journalism/ mass communication programs utilize publicized academic program Web sites?

Of the 193 randomly-selected journalism/ mass communication programs, 172 (89 %) had a specific academic WWW site for journalism/ mass communication. The remaining 21 (10%) had no such site specifically delineated. Instead, these programs disseminated information about their journalism/ mass communication offerings through the host institution site. Table I profiles the institutions and programs which make up the qualified population for study. Table II profiles programs by academic subject area description.

By Carnegie Classification, Program Organizational Structure, & Graduate Offerings

Carnegie Classific.	N	Pub.	Priv.	College	School	Dept.	Division	Program	Graduate Degree(s) Offered
Research I	32	28	4	4	11	17			29
Research II	16	11	5		8	8			13
Doctoral I	13	11	2	1	1	9	1	1	11
Doctoral II	18	12	6		6	11	1		11
Masters I	86	57	29	1	12	68	3	2	36
Masters II	10	2	8			7	1	2	1
Baccal. I	3		3		1	2
Baccal. II	15	5	10		2	9	1	3	2
	193	126	67	6	41	131	7	8	103

2) What types of visual, operational, and informational enhancements are in evidence on journalism/ mass communication program Web sites?

Each of the 15 types of visual enhancements, 18 types of operational enhancements, and 24 types of informational enhancements was observed on at least one qualifying Web site. The most common visual enhancement was use of varying fonts (191 sites, or 99 %). The most common operational enhancement was that of links to institutional sites (167 sites, or 87 %). The most common informational enhancement was display of program news (153 sites, or 79 %).

Combined visual, operational, and informational enhancement scores for subject sites ranged from a low of 0 to a high of 38. The group mean was 19.26. The standard deviation was 8.29.

3) What quantitative differences are observed among enhancements displayed by journalism/ mass communication program Web sites, and how do these enhancements work together to establish "user friendliness" of sites?

Web sites were electronically accessed and scored individually. Presence of absence of visual, operational, and informational enhancements was recorded by category and collectively. Date and time of site access was noted. Qualitative observations were made, and written comments recorded, in regard to apparent veracity and consistency of observed enhancements.

Individual site visual enhancement scores ranged from a low of 0 to a high of 13. The group mean was 6.24. The standard deviation was 2.14.

The most technologically simple visual enhancements were most commonly observed among Web sites. The more elaborate enhancements were far less common. Frequently-observed enhancements included one or more occurrence of varying fonts (191 sites, or 99 %); lines and borders (180 sites, or 93 %); user-assist graphics (159 sites, or 82 %); institutional logo (148 sites, or 77 %); illustrations (147 sites, or 76 %); background color other than white (137 sites, or 71 %); or photos (125 sites, or 65 %).

Visual enhancements which are more technically sophisticated were used by a much smaller proportion of sites. These enhancements included one or more use of text frames (48 sites, or 25 %); animated graphics (21 sites, or 11 %); "construction" identifiers (18 sites, or 9 %); "new" identifiers (12 sites, or 6 %); audio clips (9 sites, or 5 %); video clips (5 sites, or 3 %); enlargeable photos (4 sites, or 2 %); or "live" camera images (2 sites, or 1 %). Table III shows the different visual enhancements which were observed during content analysis, and the frequency with which those enhancements were displayed within the population of sites analyzed.

Individual site operational enhancement scores ranged from a low of 0 to a higher of 12. The group mean was 4.99. The standard deviation was 2.81.

Operational enhancements commonly observed among Web sites included one or more links to institutional Web sites (167 sites, or 87 %); links to related sites within the journalism/ mass communication program (143 sites, or 74 %); or e-mail links (141 sites, or 73 %). While the display of at least one e-mail link was fairly common among Web sites, it should be noted that some site links were to an unnamed "Webmaster" and not to any journalism/ mass communication faculty, professional, staff member, or student.

Other operational enhancements included one or more links to professional organizations (90 sites, or 47 %); links to faculty Web sites (86 sites, or 45 %); links to student sites (80 sites, or 41 %); or date of last revision (78 sites, or 40 %).

Among dates of last revision, the most current revision was reported as two days previous to the site analysis. The most dated revision was reported as 44 months earlier. The average mean time since last reported revision was 9.04 months. The standard deviation was 8.76 months.

Less commonly-observed operational enhancements included one or more links to job search information (65 sites, or 34 %); links to program advertisers or sponsors (30 sites, or 16 %); links to student media (24 sites, or 12 %); user 'Guest Book' (21 sites, or 11 %); access counter (12 sites, or 6 %); internal search engine (10 sites, or 5 %); "Best with. . ." software notice (9 sites, or 5 %); server information (2 sites, or 1 %); multi-lingual text (2 sites, or 1 %); downloadable files (2 sites, or 1 %); or load time warning (2 sites, or 1 %). Table IV shows the different operational enhancements which were observed during content analysis, and the frequency with which those enhancements were displayed within the population of sites analyzed.

Operational enhancements	Number of sites displaying (N=193)	Frequency of use among population
Link to institutional sites	167	87%
Link to other program sites	143	74
E-mail link	141	73
Link to professional organization(s)	90	47
Link to faculty sites	86	45
Link to student media	80	41
Date of last revision	78	40
Link to job search help	65	34
Link to program advertiser or sponsor	30	16
Link to student sites	24	12
'Guest book'/ comment box	21	11
Access counter	12	6
Internal search engine	10	5
"Best with" software	9	5
Load time warning	2	1
Server information	2	1
Multi-lingual text	2	1
Downloadable files	2	1

Written comments relating to site operational enhancements were made during the site analyses. It was noted that 31 sites (or 16 %) contained at least one invalid link-a hypertext link to subordinate pages, other sites, or e-mail boxes-which was not operational. Several sites contained more than five invalid links. Occasionally, an invalid link was immediately observable-an access effort would result in an immediate "file not found" message. In most cases, however, the invalid nature was not obvious. Therefore, it is possible that the actual number of invalid links on program sites is larger than shown here.

Individual site informational enhancement scores ranged from a low of 0 to a high of 18. The group mean was 8.02. The standard deviation was 4.35.

Informational enhancements commonly observed among Web sites included the explicit display of program news (153 sites, or 79 %); degree requirements (146 sites, or 76 %); or degree offerings (136 sites, or 70 %). It should be noted that not all programs displayed information about all degree offerings. Nine program Web sites (or, 5 %) displayed information about Bachelor's degree offerings but displayed no information about available graduate degrees.

Other informational enhancements observed among sites included the explicit display of facilities information (122 sites, or 63 %); faculty/ staff biographies or vitae (119 sites, or 62 %); student social information (118 sites, or 61 %); program goal statement (118 sites, or 61 %); program mailing address or phone number (115 sites, or 60 %); student organization information (113 sites, or 59 %); student media information (102 sites, or 53 %); or enrollment information (88 sites, or 46 %).

Less commonly-observed informational enhancements included explicit display of internship information (65 sites, or 34 %); scholarship information (49 sites, or 25 %); course syllabi (20 sites, or 10 %); student or graduate resumes (14 sites, or 7 %); student profiles (13 sites, or 7 %); community directory information (12 sites, or 6 %); program rankings (11 sites, or 6 %); "frequently asked questions" (9 sites, or 5 %); student directory information (9 sites, or 5 %); social or academic calendar (7 sites, or 4 %); program organizational chart (5 sites, or 3 %); program assessment information (3 sites, or 2 %); or course lectures/ notes (1 site, or 1 %). Table V shows the different informational enhancements which were observed during content analysis, and the frequency with which those enhancements were displayed within the population of sites analyzed.

Informational enhancement type	Number of sites displaying (N=193)	Frequency of use among population
Program news	153	79%
Degree requirements	146	76
Degree(s) offered by program	136	70
Program facilities info.	122	63
Faculty/ staff bios, vitae	119	62
Student social info.	118	61
Statement of program goals	118	61
Mailing address/ phone	115	60
Student organization info.	113	59
Student media information	102	53
Enrollment help	88	46
Internships information	65	34
Scholarship information	49	25
Course syllabi	20	10
Recent graduate resumes	14	7
Student profiles or quotes	13	7
Community directory	12	6
Program rankings/ info.	11	6
Student directory	9	5
Frequently asked questions	9	5
Academic calendar	7	4
Program organizational chart	5	3
Academic assessment info	3	2
Course lectures/ notes	1	1

Most of the literature which addresses whether World Wide Web sites are found to be "user friendly" equates the term with organization of visual enhancements according to a structure (Hagerty, 1994), or theme (Corry, Frick, & Hansen, 1997), or in accordance with the visual processing of information of users (Marks & Dulaney, 1998). The issue of "user friendliness" has also been equated with content readability (Geske, 1997; Griffin, Pettersson, Semali, & Takakuwa, 1994) and the extent to which content is consistent with user likes and dislikes (Fucella,& Pizzolato, 1998). Clearly, "user friendliness" is a subjective, user-centered concept. It is difficult to make objective generalizations about the issue based on site content. However, the analysis of Web sites for this research did attempt to make a subjective identification of elements in each of the three enhancement categories which appeared to be blatant examples of "not user friendly" site content.

Visual elements which contributed to the finding included one or more of the following: Inconsistent design; incomplete visual elements; inappropriate use of color; graphic elements missing, of poor quality, or inappropriate; or, complicated frame displays. Operational elements which contributed to this finding included one or more of the following: Lengthy loading time; operational elements difficult to use; directory indistinguishable or absent; "dead" or confusing hyperlinks; and, indication of last content revision missing or dated. Informational elements which contributed to this finding included one or more of the following: Excessive or insufficient amount of program information; program information perceived as outdated, irrelevant, or trivial; and, program information inaccurate-factually, grammatically, or stylistically.

Using this guideline, the reviewer determined a total of 55 sites (or, 28% of the total) to be "not user friendly" due to problems in any one or all three of the enhancement categories: Thirty of the sites (or, 28% of the total) were"not user friendly" based on visual enhancement elements. Fifty-five sites (or, 28% of the total) were "not user friendly" based on operational enhancement elements. Fifty-four sites (or, 28% of the total) were "not user friendly" based on informational enhancement elements.

4) Are relationships indicated among particular institutional, academic program, or subject area characteristics and quantitative differences observed among journalism/ mass communication program Web sites?

A t test was used to compare the mean Web site enhancement scores of sites hosted by 126 journalism/ mass communication programs housed within public institutions with the mean Web site enhancement scores of sites hosted by 67 journalism/ mass communication programs housed within private institutions. The mean scores of public institution program Web sites were found to be significantly different from the mean scores of private institution program Web sites, reflecting greater levels of enhancement among Web sites within programs in private institutions.

The mean visual enhancement score among public institution sites was 6.55. The standard deviation was 1.85. The mean visual enhancement score among private institution sites was 5.67. The standard deviation was 2.51. The means were significantly different (t test of equal variances, t = 2.77, df = 191, <.01).

The mean operational enhancement score among public institution sites was 5.66. The standard deviation was 2.61. The mean operational enhancement score among private institution sites was 3.73. The standard deviation was 2.75. The means were significantly different (t test of equal variances, t = 4.80, df = 191, <.01), reflecting greater levels of enhancement among public institution Web sites.

The mean informational enhancement score among public institution sites was 9.00. The standard deviation was 3.96. The mean informational enhancement score among private institution sites was 6.16. The standard deviation was 4.47. The means were significantly different (t test of equal variances, t = 4.53, df = 191, <.01), reflecting greater levels of enhancement among public institution Web sites.

An additional t test was used to compare the total site enhancement mean scores-the scores which reflect the use of all visual, operational, and informational enhancements on Web sites. Mean scores of Web sites hosted by programs within public institutions were compared with mean scores of Web sites hosted by programs within private institutions. The mean scores for Web sites hosted by programs within public institutions were found to be significantly different from those of Web sites hosted by programs within private institutions.

The mean summed site enhancement score among public institution sites was 21.23. The standard deviation was 7.30. The mean summed site enhancement score among private institution sites was 15.56. The standard deviation was 8.81. The means were significantly different (t test of equal variances, t = 4.76, df = 191, <.01), reflecting greater levels of enhancement among public institution Web sites.

The t tests affirm that Web sites hosted by journalism/ mass communication programs housed within public colleges and universities have significantly higher levels of enhancement than sites hosted by journalism/ mass communication programs housed within private colleges and universities. The higher levels of enhancement are evidenced in total, and among all three enhancement categories, as shown in Table VI.

	N	Visual Enhancement	Operational Enhancement	Informational Enhancement	Total Site Enhancement
Public	126	M = 6.55 s = 1.85	M = 5.66 s = 2.61	M = 9.00 s = 3.96	M = 21.23 s = 7.30
Private	67	M = 5.67 s = 2.51	M = 3.73 s = 2.75	M = 6.16 s = 4.47	M = 15.56 s = 8.81
	193	M = 6.11 s = 2.18	M = 4.70 s = 2.68	M = 7.58 s = 4.22	M = 18.40 s = 8.06

A one-way analysis of variance was performed to compare the total Web site enhancement mean scores among journalism/ mass communication programs within each of the eight Carnegie Foundation classifications of higher education institutions (Carnegie Foundation Classifications. . ., 1994). ANOVA was used because the data involved were non-proportional mean scores; each Carnegie classification category and responses obtained within it were independent of all other classifications and responses. A separate ANOVA was calculated for each category.

Total site enhancement mean scores for institutions in the Carnegie Baccalaureate II category were found to be significantly different from total site enhancement mean scores for institutions in the Research I, Research II, and Master's I categories (ANOVA, F = 5.55, df = 192, <.01).

Total site enhancement mean scores for institutions in the Carnegie Baccalaureate II category were found to be significantly different from total site enhancement mean scores for institutions in the Doctoral I category (ANOVA, F = 5.55, df = 192, <.05). These findings are shown in Table VII.

A similar finding was obtained for visual, operational, and informational enhancement mean scores. Visual enhancement mean scores for Baccalaureate II institutions were significantly different from visual enhancement mean scores for Research I and Research II institutions (ANOVA, F = 3.13, df = 192, <.05).

Operational enhancement mean scores for Baccalaureate II institutions were significantly different from operational enhancement mean scores for Research I, Research II, Doctoral I, and Master's I institutions (ANOVA, F = 5.19, df = 192, <.01) and were significantly different from Doctoral II institutions (ANOVA, F = 3.13, df = 192, <.05).

Informational enhancement mean scores for Baccalaureate II institutions were significantly different from informational enhancement mean scores for Research I, Research II, and Master's I institutions (ANOVA, F = 3.13, df = 192, <.01).

These differences are reflected in Table VIII. The table shows the significant differences of Web site enhancement scores among categorical means.

Carnegie Classification	Visual Enhancement	Operational Enhancement	Informational Enhancement
Research I	+2.23 (.646)	+4.42 (.820)	+6.47 (1.27)
Research II	+2.32 (.742)	+4.70 (.942)	+5.94 (1.46)
Doctoral I		+3.71 (.993)
Doctoral II		+2.77 (.916)
Master's I		+3.40 (.734)	+4.06 (1.14)
Master's II
Baccalaureate I
Baccalaureate II	4.73 (.581)	1.66 (.504)	3.86 (.716)

The one-way analysis of variance tests affirm that Web sites hosted by journalism/ mass communication programs within colleges and universities ranked by the Carnegie Foundation as Baccalaureate II institutions have overall lower levels of enhancement than sites hosted by journalism/ mass communication programs within colleges and universities ranked by the Carnegie Foundation as Research I, Research II, Doctoral I, Doctoral II, and Master's I institutions.

Using t tests, an examination was made of the mean site enhancement scores of Web sites hosted by journalism/ mass communication programs which offered graduate degrees, and the mean scores of Web sites hosted by undergraduate journalism/ mass communication programs. The t tests were used to determine whether site mean scores were normally distributed around a given mean.

The first t tests compared visual, operational, and informational site enhancement scores. The mean scores of graduate degree-offering programs were found to be significantly different from the mean scores of programs not offering graduate degrees.

The mean visual enhancement score among graduate degree-offering programs was 6.83. The standard deviation was 1.77. The mean visual enhancement score among programs not offering graduate degrees was 5.57. The standard deviation was 2.33. The means were significantly different (t test of equal variances, t = 4.24, df = 191, <.01).

The mean operational enhancement score among graduate degree-offering programs was 5.87. The standard deviation was 2.38. The mean operational enhancement score among programs not offering graduate degrees was 3.98. The standard deviation was 2.94. The means were significantly different (t test of equal variances, t = 4.91, df = 191, <.01).

The mean informational enhancement score among graduate degree-offering programs was 9.73. The standard deviation was 3.80. The mean informational enhancement score among programs not offering graduate degrees was 6.05. The standard deviation was 4.12. The means were significantly different (t test of equal variances, t = 6.45, df = 191, <.01).

A t test was used to compare the total site enhancement mean scores of Web sites hosted by programs which offered graduate degrees and the total site enhancement mean scores of Web sites hosted by programs which did not offer graduate degrees. The total site enhancement mean score among graduate degree-offering programs was 22.44. The standard deviation was 6.70. The total site enhancement mean score among programs which did not offer graduate degrees was 15.62. The standard deviation was 8.47. The mean scores were significantly different (t test of equal variances, t = 6.24, df = 191, <.01). The t tests affirm that Web sites hosted by journalism/ mass communication programs which offer graduate degrees had significantly higher levels of enhancement than sites hosted by journalism/ mass communication programs which did not offer graduate degrees. The higher levels of enhancement are evidenced in total, and among all three enhancement categories, as shown in Table IX.

	N	Visual Enhancement	Operational Enhancement	Informational Enhancement	Total Site Enhancement
Undergrad only	90	M = 5.57 s = 2.33	M = 3.98 s = 2.94	M = 6.05 s = 4.12	M = 15.62 s = 8.47
Grad. degree(s)	103	M = 6.83 s = 1.77	M = 5.87 s = 2.38	M = 9.73 s = 3.80	M = 22.44 s = 6.70
	193

A preliminary review of subject institutions and data revealed no objective means of quantifying the relationship between journalism/ mass communication academic program structure and Web site enhancements. Similarly, no means was found of quantifying the relationships between journalism/ mass communication subject area description and Web site enhancements. These areas of investigation were dropped from the study.

5) How do faculty members qualify four key areas of social order (delegation of labor, establishment of trust, regulation of resources, and support for academic processes) as those relationships affect journalism/ mass communication program Web site creation and maintenance?

A total of 750 faculty members were contacted for survey. Responses were obtained from 20 percent of these faculty members. Those responding self-identified as academic program chairs (33, or 36% of 92 surveyed), Web site administrators (35, or 46% of 76 surveyed), and 'other' faculty (59, or 10% of 582 surveyed).

Survey responses indicated that respondents perceived, at best, only moderate levels of social order within their programs, as social order affects the creation and maintenance of their program Web site. The mean response to all social order statements was 3.19, indicating "unsure or don't know" on the part of the respondent. The standard deviation was 0.67.

Faculty gave their highest categorical rankings to the establishment of trust in the academic unit. The mean ranking in this category was 3.59. The standard deviation was 0.40. Among the four statements in the 'trust' category, respondents gave highest ranking of agreement to the statement: "The people managing our academic Web site can be trusted to do professional work." The mean response to this statement was 4.10. The standard deviation was .99.

Respondents gave their lowest ranking of agreement to the statement: "Technical elements of our Web site always work the way they're supposed to." The mean response to this statement was 3.16. The standard deviation was 1.26.

The mean ranking of the regulation of resources component was 3.24. The standard deviation was 0.39. Among the four statements in the 'resources' category, respondents gave highest ranking of agreement to the statement: "Faculty members have a say in the Web site development process." The mean response to this statement was 3.55. The standard deviation was 1.10. Respondents gave their lowest ranking of agreement to the statement: "Development of the Web site is coordinated with a program strategic plan." The mean response to this statement was 2.73. The standard deviation was 1.21.

The mean ranking of the support for academic processes component was 3.08. The standard deviation was 0.49. Among the four statements in the 'process' category, respondents gave highest ranking of agreement to: "Faculty are encouraged to make suggestions or help with the Web site." The mean response to this statement was 3.69. The standard deviation was 1.04. Respondents gave their lowest ranking of agreement to the statement: "Our academic program experiences no difficulty in keeping the Web site technically advanced." The mean response to this statement was 2.60. The standard deviation was 1.14.

Faculty gave their lowest categorical rankings to delegation of labor within the academic unit. The mean score in this category was 2.83. The standard deviation was 0.85. Among the four statements in the 'labor' category, respondents gave highest ranking of agreement to: "The technical people working on our Web site know what to do, to keep the site working." The mean response to this statement was 3.91. The standard deviation was 1.08. Respondents gave their lowest ranking of agreement to the statement "Faculty work is coordinated; everyone helps in some way with the Web site." The mean response to this statement was 1.85, reflecting "strongly disagree." This was the lowest ranking given to any of the 16 statements. The standard deviation was .95-also, the lowest of any of the statements.

Table X shows the 16 social order statements contained on the questionnaire. It also shows respondents' mean rankings for each category and for each individual statement.

A one-way analysis of variance was performed to compare mean scores of faculty respondents within job responsibility classifications. No statistical significance was found (ANOVA, F = 2.35, df = 2, <.05).

Faculty summed mean responses to the group of 16 social order statements varied slightly when broken down by faculty members' institutional affiliations. Faculty members working in journalism/ mass communication programs housed within private institutions gave higher mean rankings to each of the four categories of social order statements as compared to responses of faculty members working in journalism/ mass communication programs housed within public institutions. The data are shown in Table XI.

	N	Labor	Trust	Resources	Process	Sum
Public	98	M = 11.04 s = 3.20	M = 14.13 s = 3.29	M = 12.67 s = 3.60	M = 12.19 s = 3.05	M = 50.04 s = 10.82
Private	29	M = 12.24 s = 3.61	M = 15.13 s = 2.91	M = 13.96 s = 2.86	M = 12.72 s = 2.46	M = 53.00 s = 9.62
	127	M = 11.64 s = .85	M = 14.63 s = .71	M = 13.32 s = .91	M = 12.46 s = .37	M = 51.52 s = 2.09

One-way analysis of variance tests were performed to compare mean scores of faculty respondents to the four categories of social order statements within institutional affiliation classification-public and private. A separate ANOVA was calculated for each social order response category and for the sum of all response means. Tests showed no significant difference between means in the categories of labor (ANOVA, F = 2.96, df = 1, <.05), trust (ANOVA, F = 2.19, df = 1, <.05), resources (ANOVA, F = 3.14, df = 1, <.05), academic process (ANOVA, F = 0.73, df = 1, <.05), and sum (ANOVA, F = 3.25, df = 1, <.05).

Faculty mean responses to the group of 16 social order statements also varied slightly when broken down by Carnegie classification of each respondent's host institution. Mean scores in the categories of 'trust' and 'resources' tended to be higher individually and collectively than mean scores in the other two categories. The data are shown in Table XII.

	N	Labor	Trust	Resources	Process
Research I	28	M = 10.89 s = 2.99	M = 15.25 s = 2.92	M = 12.21 s = 3.44	M = 12.23 s = 2.76
Research II	12	M = 11.66 s = 3.14	M = 14.08 s = 4.03	M = 14.16 s = 3.35	M = 13.25 s = 3.60
Doctoral I	10	M = 11.80 s = 2.57	M = 15.20 s = 1.47	M = 13.30 s = 2.26	M = 12.50 s = 1.71
Doctoral II	10	M = 12.50 s = 1.90	M = 14.10 s = 1.37	M = 13.80 s = 3.08	M = 11.20 s = 2.53
Masters I	55	M = 10.98 s = 3.60	M = 13.70 s = 3.67	M = 12.41 s = 3.81	M = 12.03 s = 3.22
Masters II	4	M = 13.25 s = 6.75	M = 17.00 s = 2.58	M = 14.75 s = 2.06	M = 14.00 s = 2.31
Baccal. I	3	M = 11.67 s = 5.69	M = 13.00 s =3.61	M = 15.66 s = 0.57	M = 12.67 s = 2.89
Baccal. II	5	M = 11.40 s = 0.89	M = 14.80 s = 0.83	M =15.00 s = 3.0	M = 13.40 s = 1.34
	127	M = 11.77 s = 0.78	M = 14.64 s = 1.22	M = 13.91 s = 1.23	M = 12.66 s = 0.88

A one-way analysis of variance test was performed to compare respondents within the eight Carnegie classifications of institutions according to respondents' mean scores for the four categories of social order statements. The ANOVA showed no significant differences between means (ANOVA, F = 0.77, df = 126, <.05).

Faculty mean responses to the group of 16 social order statements varied when broken down by presence or absence of graduate degree offerings within faculty members' host academic program. Faculty members working in journalism/ mass communication programs which offered graduate degrees gave lower mean rankings to each of the four categories of social order statements than faculty members working in journalism/ mass communication programs which were exclusively undergraduate. The lower mean scores were observed in the four individual social order categories as well as in sum. The data are shown in Table XIII.

A t test was used to compare mean scores of faculty respondents within public and private institutions-as separate groups-with the four categories of social order statements. The t test showed a significant difference between means. The responses given by faculty members working in journalism/ mass communication programs which offered graduate degrees were significantly lower than responses given by faculty members working within undergraduate programs (t test of equal variances, t = 3.06, df = 125, > .01).

6) How do faculty members rank their own academic program Web sites in regard to visual, operational, and informational enhancements; concept; site maintenance; purpose; and faculty involvement?

Survey responses indicate faculty members gave, at best, only moderate rankings of agreement to the statements addressing their own program Web sites. Faculty members' mean ranking of the seven statements was 3.24, indicating "unsure or don't know" responses. The standard deviation among all statements was 1.07.

Among the seven statements, respondents gave highest ranking of agreement to: "The operational components of our site are complete, professional, and attractive." The mean response to this statement was 3.76. The standard deviation was .90.

Respondents gave their lowest ranking of agreement to the statement "I am pleased with the level of involvement of faculty, staff, and students in regard to Web site planning, development, and use." The mean ranking of this statement was 2.54, indicating "disagree" responses. The standard deviation was 1.09.

Table XIV shows the seven statements. Response means and standard deviations are shown for each.

7) Are relationships indicated between particular institutional, academic program, or subject area characteristics and faculty rankings of journalism/ mass communication program Web sites?

The responses of faculty members to the survey statements were summed and grouped, so that a comparison could be made between faculty within different job responsibility groups. When compared by groups, the response means were fairly consistent regardless of the self-declared job responsibilities of respondents, or the Carnegie Classification of their host institution. Related data are shown in Table XV.

A one-way analysis of variance test was performed to compare the ranking by faculty members of program Web sites, by the three different categories of job responsibilities across Carnegie classifications of institutions. The ANOVA showed no significant difference between means (ANOVA, F = 2.34, df = 127, <.05).

An preliminary review of subject institutions and obtained data revealed that no relationships were likely to be identified between journalism/ mass communication academic program structure and Web site enhancements. Similarly, no relationships were likely to be identified between journalism/ mass communication subject area description and Web site enhancements. These areas for examination were dropped from the study.

A t test was used to compare the rankings of program Web sites by faculty, to see if the summed mean scores of faculty teaching in programs offering graduate degrees were different from those teaching in undergraduate programs. The mean score among faculty in programs offering graduate degrees was 22.14. The standard deviation was 5.19. The mean score among faculty in undergraduate programs was 24.37. The standard deviation was 5.68. The mean scores were significantly different-showing faculty in undergraduate programs give higher rankings to their program Web sites (t test of equal variances, t = 2.10, df = 125, > .05).

A large quantity of data was obtained through the analysis of journalism/ mass communication program Web sites and the survey responses of faculty members. Though not complete in all areas, the evidence allows for a more comprehensive portrait of the content, functionality, and value of journalism/ mass communication Web sites. The information also enables some generalizations to be made about how journalism/ mass communication faculty members rank the social order components which contribute to Web site creation and maintenance, and how faculty rate the appropriateness of their own program Web sites and associated processes.

This research found that most U.S. journalism/ mass communication programs maintain academic Web sites. However, large numbers of Web sites contain qualitative visual, operational, or informational components which inhibit content, functionality, and value. Among the most common are "dead" hyperlinks and obviously outdated, erroneous, or incorrect information.

Statistically-significant differences were found between the levels of Web site visual, operational, and informational enhancements. Web sites maintained by programs housed within public institutions were significantly more enhanced than sites maintained by programs within private institutions. The statistical significance of greater enhancement was seen at all levels of analysis-visual, operational, informational, and in sum.

Significant differences were found in the levels of Web site enhancement among different institutional classifications. Journalism/ mass communication programs within institutions ranked by the Carnegie Foundation as Baccalaureate II were found to have Web sites which were lower in total site enhancement than Web sites of programs housed within Research I, Research II, Doctoral I, and Master's I schools.

Journalism/ mass communication programs within institutions ranked by the Carnegie Foundation as Baccalaureate II were found to have Web sites which were lower in site visual enhancement than Web sites of programs housed within Research I and Research II schools. Journalism/ mass communication programs within institutions ranked by the Carnegie Foundation as Baccalaureate II were found to have Web sites which were lower in site operational enhancement than Web sites of programs housed within Research I, Research II, Doctoral I, Doctoral II, and Master's I schools. Journalism/ mass communication programs within institutions ranked by the Carnegie Foundation as Baccalaureate II were found to have Web sites which were lower in site informational enhancement than Web sites of programs housed within Research I, Research II, and Master's I schools.

Journalism/ mass communication programs which offered graduate degrees were found to have Web sites which were higher in enhancement than the Web sites of undergraduate programs. The statistical significance of greater enhancement was seen at all levels of analysis-visual, operational, informational, and in sum.

Despite this fact, the analysis of survey data revealed the site rankings offered by faculty members in programs which offered graduate degrees were lower than the rankings offered by faculty in undergraduate programs. The difference was statistically significant. Faculty respondents in graduate degree-offering programs also offered lower rankings of social order components than did faculty within undergraduate institutions, although the difference in this area was not statistically significant.

Carnegie Classification	N	Visual Enhancement	Operational Enhancement	Informational Enhancement	Total Site Enhancement
Research I	32	M = 6.96 s = 1.69	M = 6.09 s = 2.05	M = 10.34 s =3.64	M = 23.40 s = 6.41
Research II	16	M = 7.06 s = 1.12	M = 6.37 s =2.80	M = 9.81 s = 2.99	M = 23.25 s = 5.31
Doctoral I	13	M = 5.92 s = 2.72	M = 5.38 s =2.66	M = 8.53 s =3.86	M = 19.84 s = 8.20
Doctoral II	18	M = 5.55 s = 2.33	M = 4.44 s =3.14	M = 6.72 s = 5.07	M = 16.72 s = 9.92
Masters I	86	M = 6.46 s = 2.01	M = 5.06 s = 2.66	M = 7.93 s = 4.37	M = 19.46 s = 7.85
Masters II	10	M = 5.10 s = 2.72	M = 4.40 s = 2.75	M = 7.40 s = 4.11	M = 16.90 s = 8.62
Baccal. I	3	M = 5.00 s = 3.00	M = 4.00 s = 4.58	M = 4.66 s = 4.16	M = 13.66 s = 11.50
Baccal. II	15	M = 4.73 s = 2.25	M = 1.66 s = 1.95	M = 3.86 s = 2.77	M = 10.26 s = 8.29
	193	M = 6.24 s = 2.14	M = 4.99 s = 2.81	M = 8.02 s = 4.35	M = 19.82 s = 8.29

Social Order Component	Statement	Mean Ranking (Std. Deviation)
Trust M = 3.59 s = .40	The people managing our academic Web site can be trusted to do professional work. (#5)	4.10 (.99)
	Our program has trustworthy technological systems and support for the Web site. (#6)	3.66 (1.14)
	The Web site always offers an accurate presentation of our program. (#8)	3.44 (1.14)
	Technical elements of our Web site always work the way they're supposed to. (#7)	3.16 (1.26)
Resources M = 3.24 s = .39	Faculty members have a say in the Web site development process. (#11)	3.55 (1.10)
	Our academic World Wide Web site benefits everyone in the program. (#9)	3.54 (1.08)
	There's effective leadership in our program for future Web site development. (#12)	3.15 (1.26)
	Development of the Web site is coordinated with a program strategic plan. (#10)	2.73 (1.21)
Process M = 3.08 s = .49	Faculty are encouraged to make suggestions or help with Web site technical work. (#15)	3.69 (1.04)
	Our program's Web site supports academic and scholarly activity. (#13)	3.24 (1.21)
	The faculty's best expectations for our program Web site have been met or exceeded. (#14)	2.78 (1.08)
	Our academic program experiences no difficulty in keeping the Web site technically advanced. (#16)	2.60 (1.14)
Labor M = 2.83 s = .85	The technical people working on our Web site know what to do, to keep site working. (#4)	3.91 (1.08)
	We have enough technical help to professionally maintain the program's Web site. (#3)	2.87 (1.45)
	Our program faculty and staff always know about changes to the Web site. (#1)	2.69 (1.16)
	Faculty work is coordinated; everyone helps in some way with the Web site. (#2)	1.85 (.95)

	N	Labor	Trust	Resources	Process	Sum
Undergrad. only	35	M = 12.40 s = 3.72	M = 15.31 s = 3.01	M = 14.42 s = 2.66	M = 13.37 s = 2.28	M = 55.51 s = 9.27
Graduate program	92	M = 10.90 s = 3.08	M = 14.00 s = 3.24	M = 12.41 s = 3.60	M = 11.91 s = 3.05	M = 49.23 s = 10.69
	127	M = 11.65 s = 1.06	M = 14.66 s = 0.93	M = 13.42 s = 1.42	M = 12.64 s = 1.03	M = 52.37 s = 4.44

Statement	Mean Ranking	Standard Deviation
The operational components of our site are complete, professional, and attractive. (#18)	3.76	.90
The visual components of our site are complete, professional, and attractive. (#17)	3.73	.90
The information offered by our site is thorough, accurate, and relevant. (#19)	3.43	1.12
Our unit's academic Web site is professionally maintained. (#21)	3.26	1.18
Our unit's academic Web site was developed in accordance with a clearly defined concept. (#20)	3.06	1.12
Our academic unit has a clearly-defined purpose for Web site; the site fulfills that purpose. (#22)	2.91	1.18
I am pleased with the level of involvement of faculty, staff, and students in regard to Web site planning, development, and use. (#23)	2.54	1.09

Carnegie Classification	N	Journalism	Mass Comm.	Comm.	(Combination)
Research I	32	13	2	9	8
Research II	16	4	2	6	4
Doctoral I	13	5	1	6	1
Doctoral II	18	6		9	3
Masters I	86	10	14	25	37
Masters II	10	1	1	5	3
Baccal. I	3	1		1	1
Baccal. II	15	1	3	6	5
	193	41	23	67	62

Visual enhancement type	Number of sites displaying (N=193)	Frequency of use among population
Varying fonts	191	99%
Lines and borders	180	93
Graphics (pointers, etc.)	159	82
Institutional logo	148	77
Illustrations	147	76
Background color not white	137	71
Photos	125	65
Frames	48	25
Animated graphics/ Java script	21	11
"Construction" noted	18	9
"New" noted	12	6
Audio clips	9	5
Video clips	5	3
Photos enlargeable	4	2
"Live" camera	2	1

WORLD WIDE WEB SITES AND SOCIAL ORDER WITHIN HIGHER EDUCATION JOURNALISM AND MASS COMMUNICATION PROGRAMS