While institutions of higher education are enthusiastically embracing technology-mediated learning (TML), little research has been conducted to identify factors that influence student use of TML tools or determine whether use of them increases student learning. This study of business communication students at two universities found that (1) students tend to be sensing, visual, active, and sequential learners; (2) perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use of TML tools are positively associated with perceived learning success; (3) learning styles do influence the students' usage behavior of certain TML tools; and (4) students' sensing/intuitive learning style is related to their perceived learning success.
Alavi, M., & Gallupe, B. (2000). The transformation of business education. In G. DeSanctis & G. Dickson (Eds.). Creating value networks: Managing IT in the 21st century (pp. 261-281). New York: Prentice Hall.
2.
Allen, I.E., Seaman, J., & Garrett, R. (2007). Blending in: The extent and promise of blended education in the United States. Needham, MA: Sloan-C.
3.
Arbaugh, J.B. (2000). Virtual classroom characteristics and student satisfaction with Internet-based MBA courses. Journal of Management Education, 2, 32-54.
4.
Barnett, T., Kellermanns, F.W., Pearson, A., & Pearson, R. (2006-2007). Measuring system usage: Replication and extensions. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 47(2), 76-85.
5.
Baron, R.M., & Kenny, D.A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
6.
Bigelow, J.D. (1999). The Web as an organizational behavior learning medium. Journal of Management Education, 23, 635-650.
7.
Bilimoria, D. (1997). Management educators: In danger of becoming pedestrians on the information superhighway. Journal of Management Education , 21, 232-243.
8.
Campbell, D.T., & Stanley, J.C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand McNally .
9.
Carter, E.W. (2002). Doing the best you can with what you have: Lessons learned from outcomes assessment. Journal of Academic Librarianship , 28, 36-41.
10.
Chen, C.C., Chen, Y.R., & Xin, K. (2004). Guanxi practices and trust in management: A procedural justice perspective. Organization Science, 15, 200-209.
11.
Concannon, F., Flynn, A., & Campbell, M. (2005). What campus-based students think about the quality and benefits of e-learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36, 501-512.
12.
Cook, D.A., & Smith, A.J. (2006). Validity of Index of Learning Styles scores: Multitrait-multimethod comparison with three cognitive/learning style instruments. Medical Education, 40, 900-907.
13.
Cook, T.D., & Campbell, D.T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Chicago : Rand McNally.
14.
Curry, L. (1990). Learning styles in secondary schools: A review of instruments and implications for their use. Madison : National Center on Effective Secondary Schools, University of Wisconsin-Madison. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 317 283)
15.
Davis, F. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13, 319-340.
16.
Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P., & Warshaw, P.R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35, 982-1003.
17.
Dillon, A. (2000). Designing a better learning environment with the Web: Problems and prospects. CyberPsychology & Behavior , 3, 97-101.
18.
Dos Santos, B.L., & Wright, A.L. (2001). Internet-supported management education. Information Services & Use, 21, 53-64.
19.
Felder, R.M., & Silverman, L.K. (1988). Learning and teaching styles in engineering education. Engineering Education, 78, 674-681.
20.
Felder, R.M., & Soloman, B.A. (1991). Index of Learning Styles. Retrieved July 28, 2007, from http://www.4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/ILSpage.html
21.
Felder, R.M., & Spurlin, J. (2005). Applications, reliability, and validity of the Index of Learning Styles. International Journal of Engineering Education, 21, 103-112.
22.
Gemeinhardt, G. (2002). Best practices in technology-mediated learning in American business education. Educational Technology & Society, 5(2), 39-46.
23.
Genovese, J.E.C. (2004). The Index of Learning Styles: An investigation of its reliability and concurrent validity with the Preference Test. Individual Differences Research, 2, 169-174.
24.
Houghton, W. (2004). Learning styles. In Engineering Subject Centre guide: Learning and teaching theory for engineering academics . Loughborough, Leicestershire, UK: HEA Engineering Subject Centre. Retrieved January 26, 2008 , from http://www.engsc.ac.uk/er/theory/learningstyles.asp
25.
Hsiao, R., Kuo, F., & Chu, T. (2006). The more we study, the less we learn: A primer on the analysis of TML effectiveness. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 16, 149-176.
26.
Karahanna, E., & Straub, D.W. (1999). The psychological origins of perceived usefulness and ease-of-use. Information & Management, 35, 237-250.
27.
Ke, H., Kwakkelaarb, R., Taic, Y., & Chenc, L. (2002). Exploring behavior of e-journal users in science and technology: Transaction log analysis of Elsevier`s ScienceDirect OnSite in Taiwan. Library & Information Science Research, 24, 265-291.
Lederer, A.L., Maupin, D.J., Sena, M.P., & Zhuang, Y. (2000). The technology acceptance model and the World Wide Web. Decision Support Systems, 29, 269-282.
30.
Lehman, C.M., & DuFrene, D.D. (2005). Business communication (14th ed.). Mason, OH: South-Western /Thomson Learning.
31.
Loo, R. (2004). Kolb's learning styles and learning preferences: Is there a linkage? Educational Psychology, 24, 99-108.
32.
Martins, L., & Kellermanns, F.W. (2004). Student acceptance of a Web-based course management system. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 3, 7-26.
33.
Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1976). On qualitative differences in learning: I. Outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 4-11.
34.
Miesing, P. (1998). B-Schools on the I-Way: Avoiding potholes, dead-ends, and crashes. Journal of Management Education, 22, 753-770.
35.
Milliot, J. (2004, March 1). Mixed year at Thomson, Reed. Publishers Weekly. Retrieved February 16, 2008, from http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA386924.html
36.
Mitchell, R.K., Morse, E.A., & Sharma, P. (2003). The transacting cognitions of nonfamily employees in the family business setting. Journal of Business Venturing , 18, 533-551.
37.
Moon, J.W., & Kim, Y.G. (2001). Extending the TAM for a World-Wide-Web context . Information and Management, 38, 217-230.
38.
Muis, K.R., Winne, P.H., & Jamieson-Noel, D. (2007). Using a multitrait-multimethod analysis to examine conceptual similarities of three self-regulated learning inventories. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 177-195.
39.
Ng, W., & Gunstone, R. (2002). Students' perceptions of the effectiveness of the World Wide Web as a research and teaching tool in science learning. Research in Science Education, 32, 489-510.
40.
Owens, L., & Barnes, J. (1992). Learning preference scales: Handbook and test master set. Melbourne: Australian Council for Education Research.
41.
Parikh, M., & Verma, S. (2002). Utilizing Internet technologies to support learning: An empirical analysis. International Journal of Information Management, 22, 27-46.
42.
Pintrich, P.R., Smith, D.A.F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W.J. (1993). A manual for the use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.
43.
Quible, Z. (2006). Analysis of motivational orientation of and learning strategies used by students in a written business communication course. The Delta Pi Epsilon Journal, 48, 168-190.
44.
Salmon, G. (2000). Computer mediated conferencing for management learning at the Open University. Management Learning, 31, 491-502.
45.
Scifres, E.L., Behara, R.S., & Gundersen, D.E. (1998). An empirical investigation of electronic groups in the classroom. Journal of Education for Business, 73, 247-250.
46.
Smith, R.M. (1982). Learning how to learn. Chicago : Follett.
47.
Van Zwanenberg, N., Wilkinson, L.J., & Anderson, A. (2000). Felder and Silverman's Index of Learning Styles and Honey and Mumford's Learning Styles Questionnaire: How do they compare and do they predict academic performance? Educational Psychology , 20, 365-380.
48.
Venkatesh, V. (2000). Determinants of perceived ease of use: Integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion into the technology acceptance model. Information Systems Research, 11, 342-365.
49.
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F.D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology adoption model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science , 46, 186-204.
50.
Weinstein, C.E. (1987). LASSI user's manual. Clearwater, FL: H & H Publishing.
