This study explores the intrinsic and extrinsic features of Moodle learning managements system and how these features motivate students to use an e-learning portal, which subsequently influences their perceived learning effectiveness and academic performance. Theoretical underpinning of motivation theory, self-determination theory (SDT), and cognitive evaluation theory (CET) is used to design the framework. The quantitative empirical research to test the hypothesized relationships was conducted on 276 online students in Pakistan who use Moodle for online learning. By analysing the responses using AMOS, the findings reveal that both the intrinsic motivators (communication module features, course content module features and course delivery module features) and extrinsic motivator (assignment module feature) significantly influence the students’ perceived learning effectiveness, which results in improve academic performance.
Ai-Lim LeeEWongKWFungCC (2010) How does desktop virtual reality enhance learning outcomes? A structural equation modelling approach. Computers & Education55: 1424–1442.
2.
Al-AjlanAZedanH. (2008) Why Moodle. In: 12th IEEE International Workshop on Future Trends of Distributed Computing Systems FTDCS’08, 21-23 October 2008. Kunming: IEEE, 58–64.
3.
Al MusawiAAsanAAbdelraheemA. (2012) A Case of web-based inquiry learning model using learning objects. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology11: 1–9.
4.
AlaviMLeidnerDE (2001) Research commentary: Technology-mediated learning – A call for greater depth and breadth of research. Information Systems Research12: 1–10.
5.
AlexanderSGoljaT (2007) Using students’ experiences to derive quality in an e-Learning system: An institution’s perspective. Educational Technology & Society10: 17–33.
6.
AlparslanCCagiltayNEÖzenM. (2008) Teaching usage of equipments in a remote laboratory. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology7: 38–45.
7.
AmabileTMHillKGHennesseyBA. (1994) The work preference inventory: Assessing intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations. Personality and Social Psychology66: 950–967.
8.
ArbaughJBBenbunan-FichR (2007) The importance of participant interaction in online environments. Decision Support Systems43: 853–865.
9.
AybayIDağOO. (2003) A Learning Management System Developed at the Eastern Mediterranean University. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology2: 15–19.
10.
Benbunan-FichRHiltzSR (2003) Mediators of the effectiveness of online courses. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication46: 298–312.
11.
BerryM (2006) An investigation of the effectiveness of virtual learning environment implementation in primary education Leicester, UK: University of Leicester.
12.
BrandlK (2005) Are you ready to “Moodle”?Language Learning &Technology9: 16–23.
13.
BrophyJ (1999) Teaching. In: WalbergHJ (ed) Teaching educational practices series - 1. Switzerland: International Academy of Education & International Bureau of Education, 8–9.
14.
ByrneBM (2013) Structural Equation Modeling With AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming, New York: Routledge.
15.
ChangSCTungFC (2008) An empirical investigation of students’ behavioural intentions to use the online learning course websites. British Journal of Educational Technology39: 71–83.
16.
ChangVFisherD (2001) The validation and application of a new learning environment instrument for online learning in higher education. In: PLJeffery (ed) Australian Association for Research in Education Conference, May 2 2001. Fremantle, WA: Australian Association for Research in Education, 1–16.
17.
ChanLinLJ (2009) Applying motivational analysis in a Web-based course. Innovations in Education and Teaching International46: 91–103.
18.
Chin-RoemerRDeCreaseBGomezR (2011) Exploring e-learning development: Studies of ICT access and educational usage in Latin America. Information Development27: 280–289.
19.
ChurchillGAJr (1979) A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing Research16: 64–73.
20.
ColeJFosterH. (2007) Using Moodle: Teaching with the Popular Open Source Course Management System, California, USA: O’Reilly.
21.
ConcannonFFlynnACampbellM (2005) What campus-based students think about the quality and benefits of e-learning. British Journal of Educational Technology36: 501–512.
22.
CronbachLJ (1970) Essentials of Psychological Testing. New York: Harper & Row.
23.
De VicenteAPainH. (2002) Informing the detection of the students’ motivational state: an empirical study. Intelligent tutoring systems. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer, 933–943.
24.
DeciEL (1980) The Psychology of Self-Determination, Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
25.
DeciELRyanRM (1985) Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior. New York: Plenum Press.
26.
DougiamasM (2004) Moodle: Virtual learning environment for the rest of us. TESL-EJ8: 1–8.
27.
FalkRFMillerNB (1992) A Primer for Soft Modeling, Akron, Ohio: University of Akron Press.
28.
FornellCLarckerDF (1981) Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research18: 382–388.
29.
GefenDStraubDWBoudreauM-C. (2000) Structural equation modeling and regression: Guidelines for research practice. Communications of the association for information systems4: 2–20.
30.
HartnettMGeorgeASDronJ (2011) Examining motivation in online distance learning environments: Complex, multifaceted and situation-dependent. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning12: 20–38.
31.
HassandraMGoudasMChroniS (2003) Examining factors associated with intrinsic motivation in physical education: A qualitative approach. Psychology of Sport and Exercise4: 211–223.
32.
HullCL (1943) Principles of Behavior: An introduction to behavior theory, Oxford, England: Appleton-Century.
33.
IshtaiwaFF (2011) Faculty attitudes and use of Moodle course management system as a supplement to face-to-face Instruction: A Jordanian Case Study. Journal of Educational & Psychological Sciences12: 12–44.
34.
JenkinsT (2001) The motivation of students of programming. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin33: 53–56.
35.
JohnsG (1996) Organizational Behavior: Understanding and managing life at work, New York, US: HarperCollins College Publishers.
36.
JohnsonRDHornikSSalasE (2008) An empirical examination of factors contributing to the creation of successful e-learning environments. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies66: 356–369.
37.
JonesAIssroffK (2005) Learning technologies: Affective and social issues in computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers & Education44: 395–408.
38.
JucksRPaechterMRTatarDG (2003) Learning and collaboration in online discourses. International Journal of Educational Policy Research and Practice4: 117–146.
39.
KellerJM (2008) First principles of motivation to learn and e3 learning. Distance Education29: 175–185.
40.
KocabasI (2009) The effects of sources of motivation on teachers’ motivation levels. Education129: 724–733.
LeeJ-KLeeW-K (2008) The relationship of e-learner’s self-regulatory efficacy and perception of e-learning environmental quality. Computers in Human Behavior24: 32–47.
Munoz-OrganeroMMunoz-MerinoPJKloosCD (2010) Student behavior and interaction patterns with an LMS as motivation predictors in e-learning settings. IEEE Transactions on Education53: 463–470.
Novo-CortiIVarela-CandamioLRamil-DíazM (2013) E-learning and face to face mixed methodology: Evaluating effectiveness of e-learning and perceived satisfaction for a microeconomic course using the Moodle platform. Computers in Human Behavior29: 410–415.
51.
NunnallyJC (1978) Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
52.
NyagowaHOOchollaDNMutulaSM (2013) The influence of infrastructure, training, content and communication on the success of NEPAD’S pilot e-Schools in Kenya. Information Development30: 235–246.
PaechterMMaierBMacherD (2010) Students’ expectations of, and experiences in e-learning: Their relation to learning achievements and course satisfaction. Computers & Education54: 222–229.
55.
PaechterMSchweizerK (2006) Learning and motivation with virtual tutors. Does it matter if the tutor is visible on the net? In: MPivec (ed.) Affective and Emotional Aspects of Human–Computer-Interaction: Game-based and innovative learning approaches. Netherlands, Amsterdam: IOS Press, 155–164.
56.
PflichterF (2006) Weiterentwicklung im Blended Learning-Bereich aus Sicht des bm: bwk. Usability im e-learning & e-learning Strategien: 112–115.
57.
RichardsonJCSwanK (2003) Examining social presence in online courses in relation to students’ perceived learning and satisfaction. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks7: 68–88.
58.
RovaiAPontonMWightingM. (2007) A comparative analysis of student motivation in traditional classroom and e-learning courses. International Journal on E-learning6: 413–432.
59.
RyanRM (1982) Control and information in the intrapersonal sphere: An extension of cognitive evaluation theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology43: 450–461.
60.
RyanRMDeciEL (2000a) Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology25: 54–67.
61.
RyanRMDeciEL (2000b) Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist55: 68–78.
62.
SheeDYWangY-S (2008) Multi-criteria evaluation of the web-based e-learning system: A methodology based on learner satisfaction and its applications. Computers & Education50: 894–905.
63.
ShroffRHVogelDR (2009) Assessing the factors deemed to support individual student intrinsic motivation in technology supported online and face-to-face discussions. Journal of Information Technology Education8: 59–85.
64.
SinghNM. (2010) Moodle and it’s Features. Department of Electronics and communication engineering. Bachelor Thesis, Rourkela, India: National Institute of Technology.
65.
SkeltonD (2009) Blended Learning Environments: Students report their preferences. In: SMannMVerhaart (eds) 22nd Annual Conference of the National Advisory Committee on Computing Qualifications, July 10-13 2001. Napier, New Zealand, 105–114.
66.
StathacopoulouRSamarakouMGrigoriadouM. (2004) A neuro-fuzzy approach to detect student’s motivation. In: IEEE International Conference on advanced learning technologies, 30 Aug - 1 Sept. Joensuu, Finland: IEEE, 71–75.
67.
SusluS (2006) Motivation of ESL teachers. The Internet TESL Journal12: 1–8.
VallerandRJPelletierLGBlaisMR. (1992) The academic motivation scale: A measure of intrinsic, extrinsic, and amotivation in education. Educational and Psychological Measurement52: 1003–1017.
70.
WaheedMJamAF (2010) Teachers’ intention to accept online education: Extended TAM model. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research In Business2: 330–344.
71.
WaheedMKaurK. (2014) Knowledge quality: A review and a revised conceptual model. Information Development. Epub ahead of print 23 June 2014. DOI: 10.1177/0266666914539694.
72.
WanZWangYHaggertyN (2008) Why people benefit from e-learning differently: The effects of psychological processes on e-learning outcomes. Information & Management45: 513–521.
Wharekura-TiniHAotearoaK (2004) Technical Evaluation of Selected Learning Management Systems. New Zealand: Catalyst IT Limited.
75.
WightingMJLiuJRovaiAP (2008) Distinguishing sense of community and motivation characteristics between online and traditional college students. Quarterly Review of Distance Education9: 285–295.
76.
YooSJHanS-hHuangW (2012) The roles of intrinsic motivators and extrinsic motivators in promoting e-learning in the workplace: A case from South Korea. Computers in Human Behavior28: 942–950.
77.
YukselturkEBulutS (2007) Predictors for student success in an online course. Educational Technology & Society10: 71–83.
78.
Zenha-RelaMCarvalhoR. (2006) Work in progress: Self evaluation through monitored peer review using the moodle platform. In: 36th Annual conference on frontiers in education, 27-31 October 2006. San Diego, CA: IEEE, 26–27.
