Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The internet has become the chosen medium for professional learning. Completing professional learning can improve work performance; however, many individuals who begin online courses do not complete them. It is not well understood which influences keep individuals engaged in online professional learning. We address these issues with a systematic review. Our review of 51 studies and 9,583 participants includes a narrative synthesis and a meta-analysis that examined influences on user engagement in online professional learning. We found that course design and employers’ provision of time to complete learning are key for engaging learners. Other important influences were learners’ reasons for learning (e.g., intrinsic value and perceived usefulness), access to learning support, and opportunities for interaction during the learning experience.

Keywords

meta-analysis narrative synthesis engagement professional learning online learning

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abdul Jabbar

A. I.

Felicia

. (2015). Gameplay engagement and learning in game-based learning: A systematic review. Review of Educational Research, 85(4),740–779. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315577210

Alexander

P. A.

(2020). Methodological guidance paper: The art and science of quality systematic reviews. Review of Educational Research, 90(1), 6–23. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654319854352

Althauser

(2015). Job-embedded professional development: its impact on teacher self-efficacy and student performance. Teacher Development, 19(2), 210–225. https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530.2015.1011346

*Andreu

Jáuregui

(2005). Key factors of e-learning: A case study at a Spanish bank. Journal of Information Technology Education, 4, 1–31. https://doi.org/10.28945/262

*Annansingh

Bright

(2010). Exploring barriers to effective e-learning: Case study of DNPA. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 7(1), 55–65.https://doi.org/10.1108/17415651011031653

APA Publications and Communications Board Working Group on Journal Article Reporting Standards. (2008). Reporting standards for research in psychology: Why do we need them? What might they be? The American Psychologist, 63(9), 839–851. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.63.9.839

Appleton

J. J.

Christenson

S. L.

Furlong

M. J.

(2008). Student engagement with school: Critical conceptual and methodological issues of the construct. Psychology in the Schools, 45(5), 369–386. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20303

*Atack

(2003). Becoming a web-based learner: Registered nurses’ experiences. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 44(3), 289–297. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.2003.02804.x

Attfield

Kazai

Lalmas

Piwowarski

(2011, June 9–12). Towards a science of user engagement (Position paper). WSDM Workshop on User Modelling for Web Applications, Hong Kong, China. https://www.academia.edu/1036712/Towards_a_science_of_user_engagement_Position_Paper_

10.

*Baia

Strang

A. F.

(2016). Pharmacy educator motives to pursue pedagogical knowledge. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 80(8), 132. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe808132

11.

Bakia

(2010). Internet-based education. In Peterson

Baker

McGaw

(Eds.), International encyclopedia of education (pp. 102–108). https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-08-044894-7.00755-7

12.

*Balasubramanian

Badrinath

Vijayabanu

Vijayanand

(2014). E-learning drivers: An empirical study with special reference to Indian IT organizations. International Journal of Applied Engineering Research, 9(19),5653–5662.

13.

Bartleby. (2018). More staff training is vital: Companies must overcome skill shortages. The Economist. https://www.economist.com/business/2018/08/09/more-staff-training-is-vital

14.

*Becker

Newton

Sawang

(2013). A learner perspective on barriers to e-learning. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 53(2), 211–233.

15.

*Bern

Schulmann

Bastiaens

(2017). WBT and learning motivation in health and nursing education. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 26(4), 309–323.

16.

*Blackmore

Tantam

van Deurzen

(2008). Evaluation of e-learning outcomes: Experience from an online psychotherapy education programme. Open Learning, 23(3), 185–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680510802420027

17.

*Bonafini

F. C.

(2017). The effects of participants’ engagement with videos and forums in a MOOC for teachers’ professional development. Open Praxis, 9(4), 433–447. https://doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.9.4.637

18.

Brekelmans

G. F.

Poell

van Wijk

. (2013). Factors influencing continuing professional development: A Delphi study among nursing experts. European Journal of Training and Development, 37(3), 313–325. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090591311312769

19.

*Brown

K. G.

(2005). A field study of employee e-learning activity and outcomes. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 16(4), 465–480. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.1151

20.

*Burns

(2013). Staying or leaving? Designing for persistence in an online educator training programme in Indonesia. Open Learning, 28(2), 141–152. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2013.851023

21.

Campbell

(2016). Talking point: Flexible targeted online staff development that works. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 2016(1), 3. https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.395

22.

CASP. (2014). CASP Checklist: Cohort study. CASP Checklist: Making sense of evidence. https://casp-uk.net/

23.

CASP. (2018). CASP Checklist: Qualitative study. CASP Checklist: 10 questions to help you make sense of a qualitative research. https://casp-uk.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/CASP-Qualitative-Checklist-2018_fillable_form.pdf

24.

*Chang

C. C.

Liang

Shu

K. M.

Chiu

Y. C.

(2015). Alteration of influencing factors of continued intentions to use e-learning for different degrees of adult online participation. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 16(4), 33–61.

25.

*Cheng

Y.-M.

(2013). Exploring the roles of interaction and flow in explaining nurses’ e-learning acceptance. Nurse Education Today, 33(1), 73–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2012.02.005

26.

Chesney

Marcangelo

(2010). “There was a lot of learning going on”: Using a digital medium to support learning in a professional course for new HE lecturers. Computers & Education, 54(3), 701–708. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.027

27.

Chtena

(2015). Massive open online courses: The MOOC revolution edited by Paul Kim [Book review]. InterActions: UCLA Journal of Education and Information Studies, 11(2).

28.

Clark

R. C.

Mayer

R. E.

(2008). E-learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning (2nd ed., Vol. 2). Pfeiffer.

29.

*Conte

(2012). First-time-users’ impressions of continuing education using the internet. Quality Assurance in Education, 20(4), 372–386. https://doi.org/10.1108/09684881211264000

30.

Cruess

S. R.

Johnston

Cruess

R. L.

(2004). “Profession”: A working definition for medical educators. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 16(1), 74–76.https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328015tlm1601_15

31.

Deci

E. L.

Ryan

R. M.

(2002). Reflections and future directions. In Deci

E. L.

Ryan

R. M.

(Eds.), The handbook of self-determination research (pp. 431–441). University of Rochester Press.

32.

Desimone

L. M.

(2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181–199. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X08331140

33.

Diep

N. A.

Cocquyt

Zhu

Vanwing

(2016). Predicting adult learners’ online participation: Effects of altruism, performance expectancy, and social capital. Computers & Education, 101, 84–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.06.002

34.

Eccles

J. S.

(2016). Engagement: Where to next? Learning and Instruction, 43, 71–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.02.003

35.

Eccles

J. S.

Roeser

R. W.

(2009). Schools, academic motivation, and stage-environment fit. In Lerner

R. M.

(Ed.), Handbook of adolescent psychology: Individual bases of adolescent development, (Vol. 1, pp. 404–434). John Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470479193.adlpsy001013

36.

Elliott

J. C.

(2017). The evolution from traditional to online professional development: A review. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 33(3), 114–125.https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2017.1305304

37.

Filipe

H. P.

Golnik

K. C.

Mack

H. G.

(2018). CPD? What happened to CME? CME and beyond. Medical Teacher, 40(9), 914–916. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159x.2018.1471200

38.

Fredricks

J. A.

Blumenfeld

P. C.

Paris

A. H.

(2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059

39.

*Gagnon

M.-P.

Légaré

Labrecque

Frémont

Cauchon

Desmartis

(2007). Perceived barriers to completing an e-learning program on evidence-based medicine. Informatics in Primary Care, 15(2), 83–91. https://doi.org/10.14236/jhi.v15i2.646

40.

*Garavan

T. N.

Carbery

O’Malley

O’Donnell

(2010). Understanding participation in e-learning in organizations: A large- scale empirical study of employees. International Journal of Training and Development, 14(3), 155–168.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2419.2010.00349.x

41.

Gaytan

(2013). Factors affecting student retention in online courses: Overcoming this critical problem. Career and Technical Education Research, 38(2), 145–155. https://doi.org/10.5328/cter38.2.147

42.

Green

Cifuentes

(2011). The effects of follow-up and peer interaction on quality of performance and completion of online professional development. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 22(1), 85–109.

43.

Greene

J. A.

Lobczowski

N. G.

Freed

Cartiff

B. M.

Demetriou

Panter

A. T.

(2020). Effects of a science of learning course on college students’ learning with a computer. American Educational Research Journal, 57(3), 947–978.https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831219865221

44.

Hedges

L. V.

Pigott

T. D.

(2004). The power of statistical tests for moderators in meta-analysis. Psychological Methods, 9(4), 426–445. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.9.4.426

45.

Higgins

J. P. T.

Altman

D. G.

Gøtzsche

P. C.

Jüni

Moher

Oxman

A. D.

Savovic

Schulz

K. F.

Weeks

Sterne

J. A. C.

, & Cochrane Bias Methods Group, Cochrane Statistical Methods Group. (2011). The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ, 343, d5928. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d5928

46.

Higgins

J. P. T.

Thompson

S. G.

Deeks

J. J.

Altman

D. G.

(2003). Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ, 327(7414), 557–560. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557

47.

*Hong

J. C.

Tai

K. H.

Hwang

M. Y.

Kuo

Y. C.

Chen

J. S.

(2017). Internet cognitive failure relevant to users’ satisfaction with content and interface design to reflect continuance intention to use a government e-learning system. Computers in Human Behavior, 66, 353–362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.08.044

48.

Joksimović

Poquet

Kovanović

Dowell

Mills

Gašević

Dawson

Graesser

A. C.

Brooks

(2018). How do we model learning at scale? A systematic review of research on MOOCs. Review of Educational Research, 88(1), 43–86. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654317740335

49.

*Joo

B. K.

Lim

(2009). The effects of organizational learning culture, perceived job complexity, and proactive personality on organizational commitment and intrinsic motivation. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 16(1), 48–60. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051809334195

50.

*Joo

Y. J.

Joung

Kim

E. K.

(2013). Structural relationships among e-learners’ sense of presence, usage, flow, satisfaction, and persistence. Educational Technology & Society, 16(2), 310–324.

51.

*Joo

Y. J.

Lim

K. Y.

Kim

S. M.

(2012). A model for predicting learning flow and achievement in corporate e-learning. Educational Technology & Society, 15(1), 313–325.

52.

Kennedy

M. M.

(2016). How does professional development improve teaching? Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 945–980. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315626800

53.

Khodakarami

Dirani

(2020). Drivers of employee engagement: differences by work area and gender. Industrial and Commercial Training, 52(1), 81–91.https://doi.org/10.1108/ICT-06-2019-0060

54.

Kim

M.-S.

Koo

D.-W.

(2017). Linking LMX, engagement, innovative behavior, and job performance in hotel employees. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 29(12), 3044–3062. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-06-2016-0319

55.

King

R. B.

(2015). Sense of relatedness boosts engagement, achievement, and well-being: A latent growth model study. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 42, 26–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2015.04.002

56.

Kizilcec

R. F.

Pérez-Sanagustín

Maldonado

J. J.

(2017). Self-regulated learning strategies predict learner behavior and goal attainment in Massive Open Online Courses. Computers & Education, 104, 18–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.10.001

57.

Knapp

Hartung

(2003). Improved tests for a random effects meta-regression with a single covariate. Statistics in Medicine, 22(17), 2693–2710. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.1482

58.

Kumar

P. P.

Kumar

P. K. P.

Gulla

(2011). Corporate e-learning: Possibilities, promises, and realities. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology, 31(3), 179–188. https://doi.org/10.14429/djlit.31.3.987

59.

Landis

J. R.

Koch

G. G.

(1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310

60.

Lawson

M. A.

Lawson

H. A.

(2013). New conceptual frameworks for student engagement research, policy, and practice. Review of Educational Research, 83(3), 432–479. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654313480891

61.

*Lee

M. C.

(2010). Explaining and predicting users’ continuance intention toward e-learning: An extension of the expectation–confirmation model. Computers & Education, 54(2), 506–516. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.002

62.

Liera

(2020). Moving beyond a culture of niceness in faculty hiring to advance racial equity. American Educational Research Journal, 57(5), 1954–1994.https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831219888624

63.

Littlejohn

Margaryan

(2014). Technology-enhanced professional learning: Processes, practices, and tools. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203745052

64.

*LoCasale-Crouch

Hamre

Roberts

Neesen

(2016). If you build it, will they come? Predictors of teachers’ participation in and satisfaction with the effective classroom interactions online courses. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(1), 100–122. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v17i1.2182

65.

Lonsdale

Lester

Owen

K. B.

White

R. L.

Peralta

Kirwan

Diallo

T. M. O.

Maeder

A. J.

Bennie

MacMillan

Kolt

G. S.

Ntoumanis

Gore

J. M.

Cerin

Cliff

D. P.

Lubans

D. R.

(2019). An internet-supported school physical activity intervention in low socioeconomic status communities: Results from the Activity and Motivation in Physical Education (AMPED) cluster randomised controlled trial. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 53(6), 341–347. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2017-097904

66.

Lowenthal

P. R.

Wilson

Parrish

(2009). Context matters: A description and typology of the online learning landscape. In Simonson

(Ed.), 32nd Annual proceedings: Selected research and development papers presented at the annual convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology. Association for Educational Communications and Technology. http://patricklowenthal.com/pubs/AECT2009TypologyOnlineLearning.pdf

67.

*Maor

Volet

(2007). Engagement in professional online learning: A situative analysis of media professionals who did not make it. International Journal on ELearning, 6(1), 95–117.

68.

Marks

H. M.

(2000). Student engagement in instructional activity: Patterns in the elementary, middle, and high school years. American Educational Research Journal, 37(1), 153–184. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312037001153

69.

Marriss

(2011). Academic staff development. In McIntosh

Gidman

Mason-Whitehead

(Eds.), Key concepts in healthcare education (pp. 1–5). Sage.

70.

McGowan

B. S.

(2015). The rise and stall of eLearning: Best practices for technology-supported education. Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 46(7), 292–294. https://doi.org/10.3928/00220124-20150619-11

71.

Meyer

J. P.

Gagné

(2008). Employee engagement from a self-determination theory perspective. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1, 60–62. https://doi.org/10.1002/aehe.20018

72.

Meyer

K. A.

(2014). An analysis of the cost and cost-effectiveness of faculty development for online teaching. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v18i1.389

73.

Moher

Liberati

Tetzlaff

Altman

D. G.

, & PRISMA Group. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097

74.

*Montgomerie

Edwards

Thorn

(2016). Factors influencing online learning in an organisational context. International Journal of Management & Enterprise Development. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-05-2016-0067

75.

Murphy

P. K.

Knight

S. L.

Dowd

A. C.

(2017). Familiar paths and new directions: Inaugural call for manuscripts. Review of Educational Research, 87(1), 3–6.https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654317691764

76.

Nakagawa

Santos

E. S. A.

(2012). Methodological issues and advances in biological meta-analysis. Evolutionary Ecology, 26(5), 1253–1274. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10682-012-9555-5

77.

Nipper

N. G.

van Wingerden

Poell

(2018). The motivational potential of human resource development: Relationships between perceived opportunities for professional development, job crafting and work engagement. International Journal of Learning and Development, 8(2), 27–41. https://doi.org/10.5296/ijld.v8i2.13197

78.

Nortvig

A.-M.

Petersen

A. K.

Balle

S. H.

(2018). A literature review of the factors influencing e-learning and blended learning in relation to learning outcome, student satisfaction and engagement. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 16(1), 46–55.

79.

Odden

Archibald

Fermanich

Gallagher

H. A.

(2002). A cost framework for professional development. Journal of Education Finance, 28(1), 51–74.

80.

Owsinski

(2015, April 13). Linkedin’s purchase of Lynda.com is the best money it’ll ever spend. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/bobbyowsinski/2015/04/13/why-linkedins-purchase-of-lynda-com-is-the-best-money-it-will-ever-spend/#1367839a2b00

81.

Parks

A. N.

(2020). Centering children in mathematics education classroom research. American Educational Research Journal, 57(4), 1443–1484. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831219873853

82.

*Patterson

Resko

(2015). Predictors of attrition for a sexual assault forensic examiner (SAFE) blended learning training program. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 35(2), 99–108. https://doi.org/10.1002/chp.21277

83.

Pellas

(2014). The influence of computer self-efficacy, metacognitive self-regulation and self-esteem on student engagement in online learning programs: Evidence from the virtual world of Second Life. Computers in Human Behavior, 35(1),157–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.02.048

84.

Peterson

R. A.

Brown

S. P.

(2005). On the use of beta coefficients in meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(1), 175–181. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.1.175

85.

Pigott

T. D.

Polanin

J. R.

(2020). Methodological guidance paper: high-quality meta-analysis in a systematic review. Review of Educational Research, 90(1),24–46. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654319877153

86.

Reeve

Cheon

S. H.

Jang

H.-R.

(2019). A teacher-focused intervention to enhance students’ classroom engagement. In Fredricks

Christenson

Reschly

A. L.

(Eds.), Handbook of student engagement interventions (pp. 87–102). Elsevier.

87.

Reeve

Lee

(2014). Students’ classroom engagement produces longitudinal changes in classroom motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(2),527–540. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034934

88.

Reschly

A. L.

Christenson

S. L.

(2012). Jingle, jangle, and conceptual haziness: Evolution and future directions of the engagement construct. In Christenson

S. L.

Reschly

A. L.

Wylie

(Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 3–19). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_1

89.

*Roca

J. C.

Gagné

(2008). Understanding e-learning continuance intention in the workplace: A self-determination theory perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(4), 1585–1604. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2007.06.001

90.

*Rodriguez

B. C. P.

Armellini

(2015). Expanding the interaction equivalency theorem. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(3). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v16i3.2085

91.

The Role of Employers: Cognition Switch. (2017, January 14). The Economist. https://www.economist.com/special-report/2017/01/12/what-employers-can-do-to-encourage-their-workers-to-retrain

92.

Rose

R. C.

Kumar

Pak

O. G.

(2009). The effect of organizational learning on organizational commitment, job satisfaction and work performance. Journal of Applied Business Research, 25(6). https://doi.org/10.19030/jabr.v25i6.995

93.

Rosenthal

(1994). Parametric measures of effect size. In Cooper

(Ed.), The handbook of research synthesis (Vol. 573, pp. 231–244). Russell Sage Foundation.

94.

R Programmer Core Team. (2018). R: A language and environment for statistical computing [Computer software] (Version 3.4.3). https://www.R-project.org

95.

Ryan

(2010). A history of the Internet and the digital future (1st ed.). Reaktion Books.

96.

Saldaña

(2012). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage.

97.

Shaha

S. H.

Ellsworth

(2013). Predictors of success for professional development: Linking student achievement to school and educator successes through on-demand, online professional learning. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 40(1), 19–25.

98.

*Shurville

Fernstrom

Henderson

(2007). Sustaining online teacher professional development through community design. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 24(3), 162–173. https://doi.org/10.1108/10650740710762202

99.

*Smith

J. A.

Sivo

S. A.

(2012). Predicting continued use of online teacher professional development and the influence of social presence and sociability. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(6), 871–882. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01223.x

100.

Srivastava

Hopwood

(2009). A practical iterative framework for qualitative data analysis. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 8(1), 76–84. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690900800107

101.

*Sweeney

N. M.

Saarmann

Flagg

Seidman

(2008). The keys to successful online continuing education programs for nurses. Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 39(1), 34–41. https://doi.org/10.3928/00220124-20080101-09

102.

*Swierczek

F. W.

Bechter

Chankiew

(2012). Learner cultures and corporate cultural differences in e-learning behaviors in the IT business. International Journal on E-Learning, 11(3), 317–337.

103.

*Te Pas

Meinema

J. G.

Visser

M. R. M.

van Dijk

. (2016). Blended learning in CME: The perception of GP trainers. Education for Primary Care, 27(3), 217–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/14739879.2016.1163025

104.

Tepe

(2015, April 17). The next experiment in education. TIME. https://time.com/3818184/the-next-experiment-in-education/

105.

Thomas

Harden

(2008). Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 8, 45. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-8-45

106.

TIME Staff. (2020, June 18). TIME and Columbia Business School partner to launch a series of business classes for professional development during uncertain economic times. TIME. https://time.com/5855616/time-columbia-business-school-classes-professional-development-uncertain-economic-times/

107.

Van den Noortgate

López-López

J. A.

Marín-Martínez

Sánchez-Meca

. (2015). Meta-analysis of multiple outcomes: A multilevel approach. Behavior Research Methods, 47(4), 1274–1294. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-014-0527-2

108.

Viechtbauer

(2010). Conducting meta-analyses in R with the Metafor package. Journal of Statistical Software, 36(3), 1–47. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v036.i03

109.

Visscher-Voerman

Gustafson

K. L.

(2004). Paradigms in the theory and practice of education and training design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(2), 69–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504840

110.

Wang

Kang

(2006). Cybergogy for engaged learning: A framework for creating learner engagement through information and communication technology. In Hung

Khine

M. S.

(Eds.), Engaged learning with emerging technologies (pp. 225–254). Springer.

111.

*Weng

Tsai

C.-C.

Weng

(2015). Social support as a neglected e-learning motivator affecting trainee’s decisions of continuous intentions of usage. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 31(2), 177–192. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.1311

112.

Whitehurst

K. E.

Carraway

Riddick

Basnight

L. L.

Garrison

H. G.

(2019). Making the learning continuum a reality: The critical role of a graduate medical education-continuing medical education partnership. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions. https://doi.org/10.1097/CEH.0000000000000271

113.

Wilson

M. S.

(2001). Cultural considerations in online instruction and learning. Distance Education, 22(1), 52–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/0158791010220104

114.

Yang

S. C.

Liu

S. F.

(2004). Case study of online workshop for the professional development of teachers. Computers in Human Behavior, 20(6), 733–761. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2004.02.005

115.

Yasuzato

Katagiri

(2019). Factors promoting continued lifelong learning: Focus on the person-environment fit in Japan. Innovation in Aging, 3(Suppl. 1), S661–S662. https://doi.org/10.1093/geroni/igz038.2450

116.

*Yoo

S. J.

Han

S.-H.

Huang

(2012). The roles of intrinsic motivators and extrinsic motivators in promoting e-learning in the workplace: A case from South Korea. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(3), 942–950. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.12.015

117.

Chen

I. J.

Yang

K. F.

Wang

T. F.

Yen

L. L.

(2007). A feasibility study on the adoption of e-learning for public health nurse continuing education in Taiwan. Nurse Education Today, 27(7), 755–761. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2006.10.016

118.

*Zha

Adams

A. H.

Calcagno-Roach

J. M.

Stringham

D. A.

(2017). An examination of the effect of prior knowledge, personal goals, and incentive in an online employee training program. New Horizons in Adult Education & Human Resource Development, 29(4), 35–46. https://doi.org/10.1002/nha3.20198

119.

*Zhang

Lin

Zhan

Ren

(2016). The impact of teaching presence on online engagement behaviors. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 54(7), 887–900. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633116648171

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.13 MB

Influences on User Engagement in Online Professional Learning: A Narrative Synthesis and Meta-Analysis

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material