You are here:

Persistence at e-Learning in a China Corporate Training Context
PROCEEDINGS

, University of Texas (Student), United States ; , Hong Kong University, Hong Kong ; , University of Texas, Austin, United States

E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, in Orlando, Florida, USA ISBN 978-1-880094-83-9 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), San Diego, CA

Full Text

Abstract

Corporations are finding e-learning as a valuable delivery method for training as it allows employees to take courses at a time that fits their schedules, and the courseware is scalable. This paper is a study of various functional levels of e-learning training delivered by an international food and beverage company operating at various locations in Mainland China. Though much of their training is delivered in face-to-face classrooms, a growing number of courses are posted in the company’s learning management system and delivered through e-learning. Some locations have a higher success rate in terms of numbers and percentages of completed courses. The completion rate among individual users follows a similar trail. Common factors for persistence at e-learning such as work environment and favorite courses, became evident.

Citation

Orr, G., Shirra, S.M. & Keng, L. (2010). Persistence at e-Learning in a China Corporate Training Context. In J. Sanchez & K. Zhang (Eds.), Proceedings of E-Learn 2010--World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 742-751). Orlando, Florida, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 5, 2024 from .

© 2010 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Boekaerts, M., Pintrich, P.R., & Zeidner, M. (2005). Handbook of Self-Regulation (1st ed.). Academic Press.
  2. Bradburn, E.M. (2002). Short-Term Enrollment in Postsecondary Education: Student Background and Institutional Differences in Reasons for Early Departure, 1996-98. Postsecondary Education Descriptive Analysis Reports. ED Pubs, P.O. Box 1398, Jessup, MD 20794-1398. Tel: 877-433-7827 (Toll Free); Fax: 301-4701244; e-mail: edpubs@inet.ed.gov.
  3. Carter, C.S., Braver, T.S., Barch, D.M., Botvinick, M.M., Noll, D., & Cohen, J.D. (1998). Anterior cingulate cortex, error detection, and the online monitoring of performance. Science, 280(5364), 747.
  4. Crisp, G., & Nora, A. (2010). Hispanic Student Success: Factors Influencing the Persistence and Transfer Decisions of Latino Community College Students Enrolled in Developmental Education. Research in Higher Education, 51(2), 175-194.
  5. Fozdar, B.I., & Kumar, L.S. (2007). Mobile Learning and Student Retention. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 8(2), 1-18.
  6. Frankola, K. (2001). Why Online Learners DropOut. Workforce. Retrieved from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FXS/is_10_80/ai_79352432/
  7. Hayek, J., & Kuh, G. (2004). Principles for Assessing Student Engagement in the First Year of College. Assessment Update, 16(2), 11-13.
  8. Nash, R. (2005). Course Completion Rates among Distance Learners: Identifying Possible Methods to Improve Retention. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 8(4). Retrieved from http://distance.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/winter84/nash84.htm
  9. Pascarella, E.T., & Terenzini, P.T. (1991). How College Affects Students: Findings and Insights from Twenty Years of Research. Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers, P.O. Box 44305, San Francisco, CA 94144-4305 (ISBN-155542-304-3--$75.00, hardcover).
  10. Upcraft, M.L., Gardner, J.N., & Barefoot, B.O. (2004). Challenging and Supporting the First-Year Student: A Handbook for Improving the First Year of College. Jossey-Bass.
  11. Wang, G.G., Foucar-Szocki, D., & Griffin, O. (2006). HRD learning participation: an empirical study of e-learning completion. In Academy of Human Resource Development International Conference (AHRD), Columbus, OH, February (pp. 22–26).
  12. Williams, P.E., & Hellman, C.M. (2004). Differences in Self-Regulation for Online Learning Between First-and Second-Generation College Students. Research in Higher Education, 45(1), 71-82.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References