Article review

ARTICLE REVIEW

Unpacking online learning experiences: online learning

self-efficacy and learning satisfaction

Nodirahon Rajabaliyeva

R1810D6529572

Induction module UU-Msc-IND100-ZM

Lyda Eleftheriou

05.05.2019

Demei Shen, Moon-Heum Cho, Chia- Lin Tsai, Rose Marra

Unpacking online learning experiences: online learning self-efficacy and learning satisfaction

Internet and Higher Education

Accepted 8 April 2013

Available online 15 April 2013

According to Bandura (1988), self-efficacy beliefs control the measurement of effort and reflect the amount of time and time that takes to survive under difficult circumstances. Decisions that people make by themselves on their abilities effort to achieve a certain success (Bandura, 1986, p.391). The less student shows self-efficacy in a course, the less he/she gets success. On the other hand, it is easier to predict academic success in online learning compared to knowledge and emotional processes (Schunk, 1991).

It is very necessary in student self- efficacy to exchange their knowledge with each other, so that virtual learning has less chances to communicate and it separates them from each other (Cho and Jonassen, 2009; Cho, Shen, and Laffey, 2010). Researches give the information that the percentage of students who enrolled internet has higher point to leave their study before finishing than that of traditional students (Ali and Leeds, 2009). Studies have had argument that self- efficacy is a way of getting success in online learning environment, or in order to develop online education we have to understand what self-efficacy is (Hodges, 2008).

Although there are many hypotheses, researchers have to test at least following three aspects such as technology, learning, and social interaction in self- efficacy. Firstly, many researches show the most important aspect is technology compared to others, so that they are seldom observed. Therefore, the majority of the research is focused on the importance of technological advancement in students’ success. McGhee’s (2010) observed 45 community college students and explored exact, hopeful correlation between virtual learning technology and the academic success. Contrastingly, detected self- efficacy can predict exactly student’s knowledge and success (Ergul, 2004). According to Cho and Jonassen (2009), they paid special attention to the contribution of the subject to the interaction with online instructor and to the social network. Adding that, those who made a great deal of instructor feedback were also the most active in social networking. Whereas, in my point of view, self- efficacy is not connected with three above- mentioned aspects firmly. To show self- efficacy, students need to have knowledge, experience, ethic habits to communicate also.

Secondly, self- efficacy is shown differently in prior online learning experience, gender and academic status. According to researcher’s findings (Cho and Kim, 2013) self- efficacy has not any relationship with prior online learning experience. Furthermore, online education skill can work to fill the tasks or any communication with others. Although Cho and Kim’s ideas do not relate to online self- efficacy, it shows prior online education skills are not able to show self- efficacy. On the other hand, self- efficacy has significant difference in gender. As an example, Wesley and his colleagues made experiment on 400 community college students and did not find any exact difference between genders, however 25 years old and older students gave higher point of self- efficacy than Youngers. Likely, Hung, Chou, Chen and Own (2010) did not find any significant varieties in genders. Nevertheless, Fletcher showed that prior online skill is higher point of self- efficacy among female students rather than males. Generally, self- efficacy is different in gender. Because males have more independent, freer time, more freedom than females, so that they have more trouble, lack of time, attention.

On the other hand, some researchers such as Billings, Skiba, and Connars (2005) made exploration on undergraduate and graduate students. As a result, undergraduate students gave greater point of faculty-students interactions rather than graduate ones. Even they have higher point to communicate with other students and instructor. According to Artino and Stephen’s (2009) samples, undergraduate students have more interests to study online education and to continue their study in the future or to have great responsibility to do task. However, graduate students are different from them with critical thoughts. In order to show self- efficacy, students should be satisfied with online learning experience. Therefore, Womble and some other researchers made inquiries on student’s satisfaction and explored clear relation between them.

In conclusion, the above- mentioned factors and research are scientifically considered in demonstrating human self- efficacy. Even if I look at myself, it may be different from those of the same sexes, not just the opposite exes, but because of their different interests. Initiative, regardless of the number of different values, requires the student to perform the task, to be in touch with instructor, to participate actively in the task, and always be satisfied with their work and then they can show higher self- efficacy not only in virtual learning environment but also in traditional education.

References

Ali, R., & Leeds, E. (2009). The impact of face-to-face orientation on online student retention:

A pilot study. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 12(4) (Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/winter124/ali124.html)

Artino, A. R. (2008).Motivational beliefs and perceptions of instructional quality: Predicting satisfaction with online training. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24, 260–270.

Artino, A. R., & Stephens, J. M. (2009). Academic motivation and self-regulation: A comparative analysis of undergraduate and graduate students learning online. Internet and Higher Education, 12(3–4), 146–151.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:

Prentice-Hall.

Bandura, A. (1988). Self-regulation of motivation and action through goal systems. In

V. Hamilton, G. H. Bower, & N. H. Frijda (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on emotion and motivation (pp. 37–61). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.

Billings, D. M., Skiba, J., & Connors, H. R. (2005). Best practices in web-based courses: Generational differences across undergraduate and graduate nursing students. Journal of Professional Nursing, 21(2), 126–133.

Cho, M. -H. (2012). Online student orientation in higher education: A developmental study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60, 1051–1069.

Cho, M. -H., & Jonassen, D. (2009). Development of the human interaction dimension of the Self-Regulated Learning Questionnaire in asynchronous online learning environments. Educational Psychology, 29, 117–138.

Cho, M. -H., & Kim, B. J. (2013). Students' self-regulation for interaction with others in online learning environments. Internet and Higher Education, 17, 69–75.

Cho, M. -H., Shen, D., & Laffey, J. (2010). The role of metacognitive self-regulation (MSR) on social presence and sense of community in online learning environments. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 21(3), 297–316.

Ergul, H. (2004). Relationship between student characteristics and academic achievement in distance education and application on students of Anadolu University. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education-TOJDE, 5(2) (Retrieved from,

http:// tojde.anadolu.edu.tr/tojde14/articles/ergul.htm)

Fletcher, K.M. (2005). Self-efficacy as an evaluation measure for programs in support of online learning literacies for undergraduates. Internet and Higher Education, 8, 307–322.

Gebara, N. L. (2010). General self-efficacy and course satisfaction in online learning: A correlational study. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Columbia, MO: University of Missouri.

Hodges, C. B. (2008). Self-efficacy in the context of online learning environments: A review of the literature and directions for research. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 20(3–4), 7–25.

Hung, M., Chou, C., Chen, C., & Own, Z. -Y. (2010). Learner readiness for online learning: Scale development and student perceptions. Computers in Education, 55(3), 1080–1090.

Lee, Y., & Choi, J. (2011). A review of online course dropout research: Implications for practice and future research. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59, 593–618.

Li, H. (2007). Efficacy, computer self-efficacy, and satisfaction with e-learning courses. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Vermillion, SD: University of South Dakota.

Lim, C. K. (2001). Computer self-efficacy, academic self-concept, and other predictors of satisfaction and future participation of adult distance learners. The American Journal of Distance Education, 15(2), 41–50.

Lin, Y. (2005). Understanding students' technology appropriation and learning perceptions in online learning environments. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Columbia, MO: University of Missouri.

Lin, Y. M., Lin, G., & Laffey, J. (2008). Building a social and motivational framework for understanding satisfaction in online learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 38(1), 1–27.

McGhee, R. M. H. (2010). Asynchronous interaction, online technologies self-efficacy and self-regulated learning as predictors of academic achievement in an online class. (Doctoral dissertation). Baton Rouge, LA: Southern University and Agricultural and Mechanical College.

Pett,M. A., Lackey, N. R., & Sullivan, J. J. (2003).Making sense of factor analysis: The use of factor analysis for instrument development in health care research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Schunk, D. H. (1991). Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26, 207–231.

Shea, P., Li, C. S., & Pickett, A. (2006). A study of teaching presence and student sense of learning community in fully online and web-enhanced college courses. Internet and Higher Education, 9, 175–190.

Thompson, L. F., & Lynch, B. L. (2003). Web-based instruction: Who is inclined to resist it and why? Journal of Educational Computing Research, 29, 375–385.

Wesley, J. W. (2002). A study of academic achievement, attitude, motivation, general self-efficacy, and selected demographic characteristics of community college students. (Doctoral dissertation). Starkville, MS: Mississippi State University.

Womble, J. (2008). E-learning: The relationship among learner satisfaction, self-efficacy, and usefulness. The Business Review, 10(1), 182–188.

Yang, C. -C., Tsai, I. -C., Kim, B., Cho, M. -H., & Laffey, J. M. (2006). Exploring the relationships between students' academic motivation and social ability in online learning environments. The Internet and Higher Education, 9, 277–286.