Many studies have been conducted to verify the effect of learner characteristics and motivation in traditional classroom, but very few are found in online learning research. This study sought to identify what learner characteristics and motivation types affected a group of undergraduate students' learning and application of learning for a course conducted online. Utilizing quantitative and qualitative analyses, the study found that gender and employment status affected online learners' learning and learning application. Several motivation variables were also found to significantly influence online learners' learning application. Discussions of instructional strategies to promote learner motivation and satisfaction in online learning environment were included.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
VafaS., Web-based Instruction and Motivation: Some Useful Guidelines for Educators, Proceedings of the 1999 Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education, San Antonio, Texas, pp. 1900–1904, 1999.
KnowlesM., The Adult Learner: A Neglected Species, Gulf Publishing Company, Houston, 1990.
4.
RobbM. M., Exploring Individual Characteristics Associated with Learning to Use Computers in Preservice Teacher Preparation, Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 31:4, pp. 402–425, 1999.
5.
OryJ. C.BullockC.BurnaskaK., Gender Similarity in the Use of and Attitudes about ALN in a University Setting, Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 1:1, pp. 1–17, 1997.
6.
DolenceM. G., Transforming Higher Education: A Vision for Learning in the 21st Century, Society for Colleges and Universities, New York, 1995.
7.
LaurillardD., Rethinking University Teaching: A Framework for the Effective Use of Educational Technology, Routledge, London and New York, 1993.
8.
RotterJ., Internal versus External Control of Reinforcement: A Case History of a Variable, American Psychologist, 45, pp. 489–493, 1990.
9.
LepperM. R.MaloneT., Intrinsic Motivation and Instructional Effectiveness in Computer-Based Education, in Aptitude, Learning and Instruction: Cognitive and Effective Process Analysis, SnowR.FarsM. (eds.), Erlbaum, Hillsdale, New Jersey, 1987.
10.
VroomV. H., Work and Motivation, Wiley, New York, 1964.
11.
PajaresF.MillerM. D., Role of Self-Efficacy and Self-Concept Beliefs in Mathematical Problem Solving: A Path Analysis, Journal of Education Psychology, 86, pp. 193–203, 1994.
12.
AtkinsonJ., An Introduction to Motivation, Van Nostrand, Princeton, New Jersey, 1964.
13.
WeinerB., Integrating Social and Personal Theories of Achievement Striving, Review of Educational Research, 64, pp. 557–573, 1994.
14.
DeciE. L., Intrinsic Motivation, Extrinsic Reinforcement and Inequality, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77:22, pp. 3–120, 1977.
15.
HerzbergF.MausnerB.SnydermanB., The Motivation to Work, John Wiley, New York, 1959.
16.
MaloneT., Towards a Theory of Intrinsically Motivating Instruction, Cognitive Science, 4, pp. 333–369, 1981.
17.
KellerJ. M., The Systematic Process of Motivational Design, Performance & Instruction, 26:9–10, pp. 1–8. 1987.
18.
GrahamS., Classroom Motivation from an Attrition Perspective, in Motivational: Theory and Research, DrillingsM. (ed.), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey, 1994.
19.
FosterJ. J., Why Technology is Being Integrated into the Classroom at Such a Slow Rate: A Discussion of Self-Efficacy, Motivation, and Utility, Proceedings of the 2001 Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education, Orlando, pp. 2178–2179, 2001.
20.
DweekC. S., The Development of Early Self-Conceptions: Their Relevance for Motivational Processes, in Motivation and Self-Regulation across the Life Span, HeckhausenJ.DweckC. S. (eds.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1998.
21.
WlodkowskiR. J., Enhancing Adult Motivation to Learn (2nd Edition), Jossey-Bass Inc., San Francisco, 1999.
22.
BaudD.KeoghR.WalkerD., Promoting Reflection in Learning: A Model, in Reflection: Turning Experience into Learning, BoudD.KeoghR.WalkerY. D. (eds.), Kogan Page, London, 1985.
SfardA., On Two Metaphors for Learning and the Dangers of Choosing Just One, Educational Research, 27:2, pp. 4–12, 1998.
25.
CrookC., Computers and the Collaborative Experience of Learning, Routledge, London, 1994.
26.
BlackJ. B.McClintockR. O., An Interpretation Construction Approach to Constructivist Design, in Constructivist Learning Environments: Case Studies in Instructional Design, WilsonB. G.PerkinsD. N. (eds.), Educational Technology Publications, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, pp. 25–32, 1996.
27.
HonebeinP. C., Seven Goals for the Design of Constructivist Learning Environments, in Constructivist Learning Environments: Case Studies in Instructional Design, WilsonB. G.PerkinsD. N. (eds.), Educational Technology Publications, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, pp. 11–24, 1996.
