You are here

Home » Content

The examination of factors affecting e-learning effectiveness

Journal Name:

  • International Journal of Innovation and Applied Studies

Publication Year:

  • 2013

Key Words:

Author Name
Abstract (2. Language): 
Technology information has increased dramatically in the last years and has contributed to the growth in technology delivered instruction as an important learning and education method. In this perspective, many academic researches considered the importance of e-learning effectiveness. Although the existing models of e-learning effectiveness has improved our understanding of how online training can support and enhance learning, most of published models do not take into account the importance of the relationship between social presence and interaction. Thus, this study develops preceding investigation by extending a model of elearning effectiveness which adds social presence to other studied variables including computer self efficacy, perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, interaction between trainer and trainees, and e-learning effectiveness. Moreover, the model includes the possible relationships between independent factors. In this case, the present research seek to identify the influence of computer self efficacy, ease of use, perceived usefulness, interaction, and social presence on e- learning effectiveness. Furthermore, this study considers the possible influences between individual characteristics, perceptual characteristics and environmental characteristics. Using data from 410 employees, the conceptual model was validated through a Tunisian context. Results indicate the importance of interaction, perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and social presence on e-learning achievement. Elearning achievement, in turn, influences e-learning transfer.
Bookmark/Search this post with
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-examination-factors-affecting-e-learning-effectiveness.pdf
  • 4
423-435
  • English

REFERENCES

References: 

[1] Allen, I. E. and Seaman, J., Staying the Course: Online Education in the United States, Needham MA: Sloan Consortium.
In Wikipedia the free encyclopedia, 2008.
[2] Aragon, S. R., “Creating social presence in online environments”. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education,
Vol.100, pp. 57-68, 2003.
[3] Ayadi, F. and Kammoun, F.F, “Determinants of the use of e-learning by students”, Paper presented at 14 Th Annual
Conference of AIM, Marrakech, Maroc, 2009.
[4] Bandura, A. and Wood. R, “Social cognitive Theory of organizational management’, Academy of Management Review,
Vol. 14 n°. 3, pp. 361 -384, 1989.
[5] Baird, D.E. and Fisher, M, “Neomillennial user experience design strategies: Utilizing social networking media to
support “always on” learning styles”, Journal of Educational Technology Systems, Vol. 34, pp. 5-32, 2005.
[6] Compeau, D. and Higgins. C.A, “Application of social cognitive theory to training for computer skills”, Information
systems Research, Vol. 6, n°. 2, pp. 118- 143, 1995a.
[7] Compeau, D. and Higgins. C. A, “Computer self- efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test”, MIS Quarterly,
Vol. 19, n°. 2, pp. 189- 211, 1995b.
[8] Colquitt, J. A. and Lepine, J A, “Toward an Integrative theory of training motivation: A Meta – analytic path analysis of
20 years of research,” Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 85, n°. 5, pp. 678- 707, 2000.
[9] Chiu, M. Hsu. M. Sun S. Liu. C., Sun. P, “Usability, quality, value and e-learning continuance decisions”, Computers and
Education, Vol. 45, pp. 399-416, 2005.
[10] Chau, H. W. and Wang. T. B, “The influence of learning style and training method on self – efficacy and learning
performance in WWW homepage design training”, International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 20, pp. 455-
472, 2000.
[11] Daft, R. L. and Lengel, R. H, “Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design”,
Management Science, Vol. 32. n°, 2, pp. 554–571, 1986.
[12] Davis, F. D, “Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology”, MIS
Quarterly, pp. 319- 340, 1989.
[13] Davis, F. D., Bagozzi. R. P. and Warshau. P. R, “User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two
theoretical models”, Management Science, Vol. 35, n°.8, pp. 982-1003, 1989.
The examination of factors affecting e-learning effectiveness
ISSN : 2028-9324 Vol. 2 No. 4, Apr. 2013 432
[14] Davis, F, “User acceptance of information technology: system characteristics, user perceptions and behavioral
impacts”, Inter. J. Man-Machine Studies, Vol. 38, pp. 475-487, 1993.
[15] Degagne, J C. and Walters. K, “Online teaching experience: a qualitative metasynthesis (QMS)”, Journal of Online
Learning and Teaching, Vol. 5, n°. 4, pp. 577- 589, 2009.
[16] Garrison, D.R., Anderson, T. and Archer, W, “Critical thinking and computer conferencing: A model and tool to assess
cognitive presence”, American Journal of Distance Education, Vol. 15, pp. 7-23, 2001.
[17] Gist, M. E., Stevens, C. K. and Bavetta, A. G, “Effects of self-efficacy and post-training intervention on the acquisition
and maintenance of complex interpersonal skills”, Personnel psychology, Vol. 44, n°. 4, pp. 837-861, 1991.
[18] Guffey, M. E. Business Communication: Process & Product. Mason, OH: South-western, Cengage Learning, 2008.
[19] Imamoglu, Z. S, “An Empirical Analysis Concerning the User Acceptance of E-learning”, Journal of American Academy
of Business Cambrige, Vol. 11, n°. 1, pp. 132- 137, 2007.
[20] Huang, W. H. D, “A case study of wikis’ effects on online transactional interactions”, Journal of online Learning and
Teaching, Vol. 6, n°. 1, pp. 1 – 14, 2010.
[21] Hermandez, B., Jimenez, J. and Martin, M.J, “The impact of self efficacy, ease of use and usefulness on e-purchasing:
an analysis of experienced e-shoppers”, Interacting with computers, Vol. 21, pp. 146 – 156, 2009.
[22] Holton, E. F .III, “The flawed four-level evaluation model,” Human Resource Development Quarterly, Vol. 7, n°. 1, pp. 5-
21, 1996.
[23] Holton, E .F. III. Bates, R. A. and Ruena, W. E. A, “Development of a generalized learning transfer system inventory,”
Human Resource Development Quarterly, Vol. 11, n°.4, pp. 333- 360, 2000.
[24] Hillman, D.C., Willis, D.J. and Gunawardena, C.N, “Learner interface interaction in distance education: an extension of
contemporary models and strategies for practitioners”, The American Journal of Distance Education, Vol. 8, pp. 30–42,
1994.
[25] Jöreskog, K., “Statistical analysis of sets of congeneric tests”, Psychometrika, Vol. 36, pp.109–133, 1971.
[26] Kraiger, K., Ford, J. K. and Salas, E, “Application of cognitive, skill- based, and affective theories of learning outcomes
to new methods of training evaluation,” Journal of applied psychology, Vol. 78, n°.2, pp. 311- 328, 1993.
[27] Kirkpatrick, D, “Great Ideas Revised,” Training& development, Vol. 169, pp. 55- 59, 1996.
[28] Lear, J. L., Ansorge, CH. and Steckelberg, A, “Interactivity Community process model for online education
environment”, Journal of online learning and teaching, Vol. 6, n°. 1, pp. 71- 77, 2010.
[29] Latham, G.P, “Human Resources Training and Development”, Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 39, pp. 545 -582,
[30] L1e9i9d8n.e r, D. E. and Jarvenpaa, S. L, “The use of information technology to enhance management school education: a
theoretical view”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 19, n°. 3, pp. 265 – 291, 1995.
[31] Lim, H., Lee, S. G. and Nam, K, “Validating E-learning factors affecting training effectiveness”, International Journal of
Information Management, Vol. 27, pp. 22-35, 2007.
[32] Nehari, M. and Bender, H, “Meaningfulness of a learning experience: a measure for educational outcomes in higher
education”, Higher Education, Vol. 7, n°. 1, pp. 1- 11, 1978.
[33] Ngai, E.W.T., Poon, J.K.L. and Chan, Y.H.C, “Empirical examination of adoption of WebCT using TAM”, Computers and
Education, Vol. 48, pp. 250- 267, 2007.
[34] Marakas, G. M., Yi Mun. and Johnson, R, “The Multilevel and Multifaceted Character of Computer Self efficacy:
Toward Clarification of the Construct and an Integrative Framework for Research”, Information Systems Research, Vol.
9, n°. 2, pp. 126- 163, 1998.
[35] Moore, M. G, “Three types of interaction”, The American Journal of Distance Education, Vol. 3, pp. 1–6, 1989.
[36] Roussel, P., Durieu, F., Campoy, E. and El Akremi, A, “Méthodes d’équations structurelles: recherché et applications
en gestion”, Paris, Economica, 257p, 2002.
[37] Sambrook, S, “E-learning in small organisations”, Education and Training, Vol. 45, n° 8/9, pp. 506 – 516, 2003.
[38] Saadé, R. and Bahli, B, “The impact of cognitive absorption on perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use in on –
line learning: an extension of the technology acceptance model”, Information and management, Vol. 42, pp. 317-327,
2005.
[39] Short, J.A., Williams, E. and Christie, B, The social psychology of telecommunications. New York: John Wiley & Sons,
1976.
[40] Johnson, R.D., Hornik. S. and Salas, E, “An empirical examination of factors contributing to the creation of successful
e-learning environments”, International Journal of Human Computer Studies, Vol. 66, pp. 356 – 369, 2008.
[41] Piccoli, G., Ahmad, R. and Ives, B, “Web- based virtual learning environments: a research framework and a
preliminary assessment of effectiveness in basic IT skills training”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 25, n°. 4, pp. 401- 426, 2001.
[42] Tahir, M. N, “E-learning in Public organisations”, Public Personnel Management, Vol. 33, n°. 1, pp. 79-88, 2004.
Rabeb Mbarek and Dr. Ferid Zaddem
ISSN : 2028-9324 Vol. 2 No. 4, Apr. 2013 433
[43] Tannenbaum, S. I., Mathieu, J. E., Salas, E. and Cannon – Bowers, J. A, “Meeting trainees’ expectations: the influence
of training fulfilment on the development of commitment, self – efficacy, and Motivation”, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 76, n°. 6, pp. 759 – 769, 1991.
[44] Tastle, W.J., White. B.A. and Shackleton, P, “E-learning in Higher Education: The Challenge, Effort, and Return on
Investment”, International Journal on E-learning, Vol. 4, n°. 2, pp. 241-251, 2005.
[45] Te’eni, D, “A cognitive-affective model of organizational communication for designing IT”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 25, n°.
2, pp. 251-312, 2001.
[46] Tu, C. H. and McIsaac, M. S, “The relationship of social presence and interaction in online classes”, The American
Journal of Distance Education, Vol. 16, n°.3,pp. 131-150, 2002.
[47] Tung, F. W. and Deng, F. T. “Designing social presence in e-learning environments: Testing the effect of interactivity
on children”, Interactive Learning Environments, Vol. 14, n°.3, pp. 251-264, 2006.
[48] Wen Cheng, K, “A Research Study on Students’ Level of Acceptance in Applying E-learning for Business Courses: A
Case Study on a Technical College in Taiwan”, Journal of American Academy of Business Cambridge, Vol. 8, n°. 2, pp.
265- 270, 2006.
[49] Wu, J.W., Chen, Y.C. and Lin, L.M, “Empirical evaluation of the revised end user computing acceptance model”,
Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 23, n°. 1, pp. 162–174, 2007.
[50] Yi, M. Y. and Davis, F. D, “Developing and Validating an Observational Learning Model of Computer Software Training
and Skill Acquisition”, Information Systems Research, Vol.14, n°. 2, pp. 146 – 169, 2003.
[51] Zhang, D., Zhou, L, “Enhancing E-learning with Interactive Multimedia”, Information Resources Management Journal,
Vol. 16, n°.4, pp. 1- 14, 2003.
[52] Zhang, D., Zhou, L., Briggs, R. O. and Nunamaker, J. F, “Instructional video in e-learning: Assessing the impact of
interactive video on learning effectiveness”, Information and Management, Vol. 43, pp. 15- 27, 2006.
[53] Alliger G. M, Tannenbaum. S. I, Bennett. W, Traver. H A meta-analysis of the relations among training criteria.
Personnel psychology 1997; 50 (2): 341- 358.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com