You are here:

Interaction and Learning Outcomes in Online Learning Environments
PROCEEDINGS

, Jackson State University, United States ; , National Chiao Tung University, Taiwan

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in New Orleans, Louisiana, United States ISBN 978-1-939797-02-5 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

The paper intended to investigate students’ perceptions of interaction, satisfaction, and performance in online learning environments with the use of Blackboard. The interactions included learner-learner interaction, learner-instructor interaction, and learner-content interaction. The participants were African-American students from a university in the southerneast US. Regression and ANOVA analyses were performed to examine the contribution of predictor variables to student satisfaction and how student satisfaction was related to student performance. In addition, Internet self-efficacy and its impact on interaction was investigated. The results showed that learner-content interaction was the significant predictor of student satisfaction while interactions among students or with the instructor did not play an important role in student satisfaction. Internet self-efficacy was positively associated with three types of interaction. Student satisfaction was related to student performance.

Citation

Kuo, Y.C. & Kuo, Y.T. (2013). Interaction and Learning Outcomes in Online Learning Environments. In R. McBride & M. Searson (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2013--Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 662-670). New Orleans, Louisiana, United States: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved May 23, 2022 from .

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Allen, M., Bourhis, J., Burrell, N., & Mabry, E. (2002). Comparing student satisfaction with distance education to traditional classrooms in higher education: A metaanalysis. The American Journal of Distance Education, 16(2), 83-97.
  2. Allen, I.E., & Seaman, J. (2008). Staying the course: Online education in the United States, 2008. Retrieved April 24, 2009 from http://www.sloan-C.org/publications/survey/pdf/staying_the_course.pdf
  3. Anderson, T. (2003). Modes of interaction in distance education: Recent developments and research questions. In M.G. Moore& W.G. Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of distance education (pp. 129-144). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  4. Artino, A.R. (2007). Online Military training: Using a social cognitive view of motivation and self-regulation to understand students' satisfaction, perceived learning, and choice. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 8(3), p191-202.
  5. Bolliger, D.U., & Martindale, T. (2004). Key factors for determining student satisfaction in online courses. International Journal on E-Learning, 3(1), 61-67.
  6. Bray, E., Aoki, K., & Dlugosh, L. (2008). Predictors of learning satisfaction in Japanese online distance learners. International Review of Research in Open& Distance Learning, 9(3), 1-24.
  7. Brown, B.W., & Liedholm, C.E. (2002). Can web Courses replace the classroom in principles of microeconomics? American Economics Review, 92(2), 444-448.
  8. Chejlyk, S. (2006). The effects of online course format and three components of student perceived interactions on overall course satisfaction. Dissertation Abstracts International, 67(04). (UMI No. 3213421).
  9. Eastin, M.S., & LaRose, R. (2000). Internet self-efficacy and the psychology of the digital divide. Retrieved January 14, 2009 from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol6/issue1/eastin.html
  10. Garrison, D.R., & Shale, D. (1990). A new framework and perspective. In D.R. Garrison& D. Shale (Eds.), Education at a distance: From issues to practice (pp. 123-133). Malabar, FL: Kreiger.
  11. Graham, R., & Smith, D.T. (2012). An empirical examination of technology use and Internet activity among African-Americans. Information, Communication& Society, 13(6), 892-908.
  12. Johnson, S.D., Aragon, S.R., Shaik, N., & Palma-Rivas, N. (2000). Comparative analysis of learner satisfaction and learning outomes in online and face-toface learning environments. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 11(1), 29-49.
  13. Keeler, L.C. (2006). Student satisfaction and types of interaction in distance education courses. Dissertation Abstracts International, 67(09). (UMI No. 3233345).
  14. Keller, J.M. (1983). Motivational design of instruction. In C. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: An overview of their current status (pp. 386-434). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  15. Kuo, Y.C. (2010). Interaction, Internet self-efficacy, and self-regulated learning as predictors of student satisfaction in distance education courses. Available from ProWuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3419203)
  16. Moore, M.G. (1989). Three types of interactions. The American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1-6.
  17. Moore, M.G., & Kearsley, G. (1996). Distance education: A systems view. New York, NY: Wadsworth.
  18. Parsad, B., & Lewis, L. (2008). Distance education at degree-granting postsecondary institutions: 2006-07.
  19. Reinhart, J., & Schneider, P. (2001). Student satisfaction, self-efficacy, and the perception of the two-way audio/video distance learning environment: A preliminary examination. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 2(4), 357-365.
  20. Sahin, I. (2007). Predicting student satisfaction in distance education and learning environments. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED496541).
  21. Stevens, J.P. (2002). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

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

Suggest Corrections to References

Also Read

Related Collections