Self-regulation has gained much prominence due to its necessity and significance in eLearning environment. The nature of eLearning mandates higher self-regulation to attain efficacy. In this article, we study the Online Self-regulated Learning Quotient (OSLQ) scale as it is a pioneering scale that has been verified for studying self-regulation in eLearning environment. The literature delineates the need to empirically examine the reliability and validity of the OSLQ in various contexts. This study was conducted in two phases on business school students from tier one management institutes in India. In phase 1, we performed qualitative analysis through focus group discussions on a sample of 24 respondents to check the content validity of the scale. In phase 2, we performed quantitative analysis on a sample of 528 respondents. Exploratory factor analysis in phase 2 of the study confirmed six factors. Confirmatory factor analysis in phase 2 of the study confirmed scale validity. Based on the findings, we conclude that OSLQ is a valid and reliable scale to assess self-regulation among Indian students in eLearning context. These findings have added to the theoretical legitimacy of the scale. In terms of practical implication, our findings suggest that OSLQ may be employed in an Indian context. This has significant implications for future research in self-regulation studies in India, especially in the context of eLearning.
Al-FraihatD., JoyM., & SinclairJ. (2020). Evaluating E-learning systems success: An empirical study. Computers in Human Behavior, 102, 67–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.08.004
2.
All India Council for Technical Education AICTE (2017). Retrieved fromhttps://www.aicte-india.org/education/distance-education
3.
BanduraA. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
4.
BanduraA. (2005). The evolution of social cognitive theory. In SmithK. G., & HittM. A. (Eds.), Great minds in management (pp. 9–35). Oxford University Press.
5.
BarnardL., PatonV., & LanW. (2008). Online self-regulatory learning behaviors as a mediator in the relationship between online course perceptions with achievement. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 9(2), 1–11.
BoatengG. O., NeilandsT. B., FrongilloE. A., Melgar-QuiñonezH. R., & YoungS. L. (2018). Best practices for developing and validating scales for health, social, and behavioral research: A primer. Frontiers in Public Health, 6,149. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2018.00149
8.
BroadbentJ., PanaderoE., LodgeJ. M., & Fuller-TyszkiewiczM. (2023). The self-regulation for learning online (SRL-O) quotient. Metacognition Learning, 18, 135–163. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-022-09319-6
9.
BuschleC., ReiterH., & BethmannA. (2020). Introducing the Qualitative Pertest Interview (QPI) for quotient development.
10.
ByrneB. M. (2016). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Routledge.
11.
ChatteinierN. (2016). Self-regulated learning and success in an online developmental math community college course(Doctoral Dissertation). Northcentral University. https://www.proquest.com/openview/7a52f4b70918152dd72eaf6a23c18e8b/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750
12.
ChawlaD., & SondhiN. (2011). Research methodology: Concepts and cases. Vikas Publishing House.
13.
CreswellJ. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed method approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
14.
DarI. A., & MishraM. (2021). Human capital and SMEs internationalization: Development and validation of a measurement scale. Global Business Review, 22(3), 718–734. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972150918817390
15.
DhawanS. (2020). Online learning: A panacea in the time of COVID-19 crisis. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 49(1), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239520934018
16.
DhouchakP., & KumarN. (2022). A proposed model for evaluating quality of technology enabled learning in management education programmes. Global Business Review, 1(37). https://doi.org/10.1177/09721509221107965
17.
DixitS. K., & SinhaJ. (2023). Adaptation and validation of the gratitude quotient (GQ-6) for the Indian context. Current Psychology, 42(11), 8722–8732. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-02143-2
18.
FilzmoserP. (2004). A multivariate outlier detection method (pp. 18–22).
19.
FornellC., & LarckerD. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.
20.
FungJ. J., YuenM., & YuenA. H. (2018). Validity evidence for a Chinese version of the online self-regulated learning quotient with average students and mathematically talented students. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 51(2), 111–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/07481756.2017.1358056
21.
GrimmP. (2010). Social desirability bias. In ShethJ., & MalhotraN. (Eds.), Wiley international encyclopedia of marketing.
22.
Hair JrJ. F., BlackW. C., BabinB. J., AndersonR. E., & TathamR. L. (2010). SEM: An introduction. In HairJ. F. (Ed.), Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective (pp. 629–686). Pearson Education.
23.
HairJ. F. (2009). Multivariate data analysis. Prentice Hall.
24.
HofstedeG. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1), 2307–0919. http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/orpc/vol2/iss1/8
25.
JansenR. S., Van LeeuwenA., JanssenJ., KesterL., & KalzM. (2017). Validation of the self-regulated online learning quotient. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 29(1), 6–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-016-9125-x
26.
JavidanM., & DastmalchianA. (2009). Managerial implications of the GLOBE project: A study of 62 societies. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 47(1), 41–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/1038411108099289
27.
JohriR., MisraR. K., & BhattacharjeeS. (2016). Work passion: Construction of reliable and valid measurement scale in the Indian context. Global Business Review, 17 (Suppl. 3), 147S–158S. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972150916631206
28.
KilisS., & YildirimZ. (2018). Online self-regulation quotient: Validity and reliability study of Turkish translation. Cukurova University Faculty of Education Journal, 47(1), 233–245. https://doi.org/10.14812/cuefd.298791
29.
KorstjensI., & MoserA. (2018). Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 4: Trustworthiness and publishing. European Journal of General Practice, 24(1), 120–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/13814788.2017.1375092
30.
KuoY. C., WalkerA. E., SchroderK. E., & BellandB. R. (2014). Interaction, Internet self-efficacy, and self-regulated learning as predictors of student satisfaction in online education courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 20, 35–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.10.001
31.
LimC., Ab JalilH., Ma’rofA., &SaadW. (2020). Peer learning, self-regulated learning and academic achievement in blended learning courses: A structural equation modeling approach. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (IJET), 15(3), 110–125. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/217022/
32.
MohajanH. K. (2018). Qualitative research methodology in social sciences and related subjects. Journal of Economic Development, Environment and People, 7(1), 23–48. link.gale.com/apps/doc/A541328342/AONE?u=anon~5337f49&sid=googleScholar&xid=e5694bee
33.
MorenoV., CavazotteF., & AlvesI. E. S. (2014). Explaining students’ effective use of e-learning platforms. InAcademy of management proceedings (Vol. 2014, No. 1, p. 16513). Academy of Management. https://doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.2014.16513
34.
PanaderoE., & TapiaJ. A. (2014). How do students self-regulate? Review of Zimmerman’s cyclical model of self-regulated learning. Anales de Psicología, 30(2), 450–462. http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/analesps.30.2.167221
35.
PanaderoE., FraileJ., & PardoR. (2017). Co-creating rubrics: The effects on self-regulated learning, self-efficacy and performance of establishing assessment criteria with students. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 53, 69–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2017.03.003
36.
PanaderoE., KlugJ., & JärveläS. (2016). Third wave of measurement in the self-regulated learning field: When measurement and intervention come hand in hand. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 60(6), 723–735. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2015.1066436
37.
PhelpsA., & VlachopoulosD. (2020). Successful transition to synchronous learning environments in distance education: A research on entry-level synchronous facilitator competencies. Education and Information Technologies, 25(3), 1511–1527. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09989-x
38.
PhutelaN., & DwivediS. (2020). A qualitative study of students’ perspective on e-learning adoption in India. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 12(4), 545–559. https://www.emerald.com/insight/2050-7003.htm
39.
PintrichP. R., WoltersC. A., & BaxterG. P. (2000). 2. Assessing metacognition and self-regulated learning.
40.
PintrichP. R. (2005). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In. Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 451–502). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50043-3
41.
RousseeuwP. J., &Van ZomerenB. C. (1990). Unmasking multivariate outliers and leverage points. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 85(411), 633–639. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459
42.
RoweJ. A. (2019). Synchronous and asynchronous learning: How online supplemental instruction influences academic performance and predicts persistence(Doctoral Dissertation). Capella University. https://www.proquest.com/openview/6afd91273cc1e2167553eb2e023ceb06/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y
43.
SchunkD. H. (2005). Self-regulated learning: The educational legacy of Paul R. Pintrich. Educational Psychologist, 40(2), 85–94. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4002_3
44.
SchunkD. H., & ZimmermanB. J. (2013). Self-regulation and learning. In ReynoldsW. M., MillerG. E., & WeinerI. B. (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Educational psychology (2nd ed., pp. 45–68). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
45.
SessaV. I., & LondonM. (2015). Continuous learning in organizations: Individual, group, and organizational perspectives. Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315820941
46.
SinghP. K., & RaoM. K. (2017). HR practices, learning culture and human capital: A study on Indian business and professional service sector. Global Business Review, 18(3), 678–690. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972150917692178
47.
SuperJ., KellerR. H., BettsT. K., &Roach HumphreysJ. (2019, July). Simulation games: Learning goal orientations and norms for knowledge sharing. InAcademy of management proceedings (Vol. 2019, No. 1, p. 15436). Academy of Management. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2019.15436
48.
TaghizadeA., AzimiE., & MirzaeeR. (2020). Validity evidence for a Persian version of the online self-regulated learning quotient. Interdisciplinary Journal of Virtual Learning in Medical Sciences, 11(1), 13–24. https://doi.org/10.30476/ijvlms.2020.84802.1017
49.
TohW., & KirschnerD. (2020). Self-directed learning in video games, affordances and pedagogical implications for teaching and learning. Computers & Education, 154, 103912. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103912
50.
UsherE. L., & SchunkD. H. (2017). Social cognitive theoretical perspective of self-regulation. In Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 19–35). Routledge.
51.
Valverde-BerrocosoJ., Garrido-ArroyoM. D. C., Burgos-VidelaC., & Morales-CevallosM. B. (2020). Trends in educational research about e-learning: A systematic literature review (2009–2018). Sustainability, 12(12), 5153. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12125153
52.
WinlowH., SimmD., MarvellA., & SchaafR. (2013). Using focus group research to support teaching and learning. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 37(2), 292–303. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2012.696595
53.
YenC. J., TuC. H., Sujo-MontesL., & SealanderK. (2016). A predictor for PLE management: Impacts of self-regulated online learning on student’s learning skills. Journal of Educational Technology Development & Exchange, 9(1), 29–48. https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/efl_fac_pubs/8
54.
YinR. K. (2015). Qualitative research from start to finish. Guilford Publications.
55.
ZhengB., WardA., & StanulisR. (2020). Self-regulated learning in a competency-based and flipped learning environment: Learning strategies across achievement levels and years. Medical Education Online, 25(1), 1686949. https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2019.1686949
56.
ZhaoL., & YeC. (2020). Time and performance in online learning: Applying the theoretical perspective of metacognition. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 18(3), 435–455. https://doi.org/10.1111/dsji.12216
57.
ZimmermanB. J. (2008). Investigating self-regulation and motivation: Historical background, methodological developments, and future prospects. American Educational Research Journal, 45(1), 166–183. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831207312909
58.
ZimmermanB. J., & MoylanA. R. (2009). Self-regulation: Where metacognition and motivation intersect. In Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 311–328). Routledge.
59.
ZimmermanB. J., BanduraA., & Martinez-PonsM. (1992). Self-motivation for academic attainment: The role of self-efficacy beliefs and personal goal setting. American Educational Research Journal, 29(3), 663–676. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312029003663
