Abstracts
Abstract
This study examines how technological and relational factors independently and interactively predict the perceived learning success of doctoral students enrolled in online-based leadership programs offered in the United States. The 73-item Online Learning Success Scale (OLSS) was constructed, based on existing instruments, and administered online to collect self-reported data on three primary variables: student learning success (SLS), relational factors (RF), and technological factors (TF). The SLS variable focuses on the gain of knowledge and skills, persistence, and self-efficacy; the RF on the student-student relationship, the student-faculty relationship, and the student-non-teaching staff relationship; and the TF on the ease of use, flexibility, and usefulness. In total, 210 student responses from 26 online-based leadership doctoral programs in the United States were used in the final analysis. The results demonstrate that RF and TF separately and together predict SLS. A multiple regression analysis indicates that, while all dimensions of TF and RF are significant predictors of SLS, the strongest predictor of SLS is the student-faculty relationship. This study suggests that building relationships with faculty and peers is critical to leadership doctoral students’ learning success, even in online-based programs that offer effective technological support.
Keywords:
- online education,
- online learning success,
- leadership doctoral program,
- technological factors,
- relational factors
Download the article in PDF to read it.
Download
Appendices
Bibliography
- Akyol, Z., & Garrison, D. R. (2011). Understanding cognitive presence in an online and blended community of inquiry: Assessing outcomes and processes for deep approaches to learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(2), 233-250. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.01029.x
- Alammary, A., Sheard, J., & Carbone, A. (2014). Blended learning in higher education: Three different design approaches. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 30(4), 440-454. doi: 10.14742/ajet.693
- Alavi, M. (1994). Computer-mediated collaborative learning: An empirical evaluation. MIS Quarterly, 18, 159-174.
- Allen, I. E., Seaman, J., Poulin, R., & Straut, T. T. (2016). Online report card: Tracking online education in the United States. Newburyport, MA: Online Learning Consortium. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED572777.pdf
- Ampaw, F. D., & Jaeger, A. J. (2012). Completing the three stages of doctoral education: An event history analysis. Research in Higher Education, 53(6), 640-660. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/23257602
- Anohina, A. (2005). Analysis of the terminology used in the field of virtual learning. Educational Technology & Society, 8(3), 91-102. Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/74943/
- Arbaugh, J. B. (2000). Virtual classroom characteristics and student satisfaction with internet-based MBA courses. Journal of Management Education, 24(1), 32-54. doi: 10.1177/105256290002400104
- Arbaugh, J. B., Cleveland-Innes, M., Diaz, S. R., Garrison, D. R., Ice, P., Richardson, J. C., & Swan, K. P. (2008). Developing a community of inquiry instrument: Testing a measure of the community of inquiry framework using a multi-institutional sample. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(3-4), 133-136. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2008.06.003
- Augustsson, G., & Jaldemark, J. (2013). Online supervision: A theory of supervisors’ strategic communicative influence on student dissertations. Higher Education, 67(1), 19-33. doi: 10.1007/s10734-013-9638-4
- Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: Freeman and Company.
- Bayne, S., Gallagher, M. S., & Lamb, J. (2014). Being “at” university: The social topologies of distance students. Higher Education, 67(5), 567-583. Retrieved from http://sianbayne.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Being-at-University-draft.pdf
- Bolliger, D. U., & Halupa, C. (2012). Student perceptions of satisfaction and anxiety in an online doctoral program. Distance Education, 33(1), 81-98. Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/111288/
- Bures, E. M., Abrami, P. C., & Amundsen, C. (2000). Student motivation to learn via computer conferencing. Research in Higher Education, 41(5), 593-621. doi: 10.1023/A:1007071415363
- Celik, V., & Yesilyurt, E. (2013). Attitudes to technology, perceived computer self-efficacy and computer anxiety as predictors of computer supported education. Computers & Education, 60(1), 148-158. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2012.06.008
- Cheung, R., & Vogel, D. (2013). Predicting user acceptance of collaborative technologies: An extension of the technology acceptance model for e-learning. Computers & Education, 63, 160-175. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.003
- Cho, M., & Auger, G. A. (2013). Exploring determinants of relationship quality between students and their academic department perceived relationship investment, student empowerment, and student–faculty interaction. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 68(3), 255-268. doi: 10.1177/1077695813495048
- Cho, M. H., & Kim, B. J. (2013). Students’ self-regulation for interaction with others in online learning environments. The Internet and Higher Education, 17, 69-75. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.11.001
- Davidson, W. B., Beck, H. P., & Milligan, M. (2009). The college persistence questionnaire: Development and validation of an instrument that predicts student attrition. Journal of College Student Development, 50(4), 373-390. doi: 10.1353/csd.0.0079
- Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340. doi: 10.2307/249008
- Edmunds, R., Thorpe, M., & Conole, G. (2012). Student attitudes towards and use of ICT in course study, work and social activity: A technology acceptance model approach. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(1), 71-84. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01142.x
- Erichsen, E. A., Bolliger, D. U., & Halupa, C. (2014). Student satisfaction with graduate supervision in doctoral programs primarily delivered in distance education settings. Studies in Higher Education, 39(2), 321-338. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2012.709496
- Fuller, J. S., Risner, M. E., Lowder, L., Hart, M., & Bachenheimer, B. (2014). Graduates’ reflections on an online doctorate in educational technology. TechTrends, 58(4), 73-80. doi: 10.1007/s11528-014-0771-4
- Gardner, S. K. (2009). Conceptualizing success in doctoral education: Perspectives of faculty in seven disciplines. The Review of Higher Education, 32(3), 383-406. doi: 10.1353/rhe.0.0075
- Garrison, D. R. (2007). Online community of inquiry review: Social, cognitive, and teaching presence issues. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 11(1), 61-72. doi: 10.1.1.904.2942
- Hart, C. (2012). Factors associated with student persistence in an online program of study: A review of the literature. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 11(1), 19-42. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ842688.pdf
- Hill, P. (2012). Online educational delivery models: A descriptive view. Educause Review, 47(6), 85-97. Retrieved from https://er.educause.edu/articles/2012/11/online-educational-delivery-models--a-descriptive-view
- Holden, G., Anastas, J., & Meenaghan, T. (2003). Determining attainment of the EPAS foundation program objectives: Evidence for the use of self-efficacy as an outcome. Journal of Social Work Education, 39(3), 425-440. doi: 10.1080/10437797.2003.10779147
- Hung, M. L., Chou, C., Chen, C. H., & Own, Z. Y. (2010). Learner readiness for online learning: Scale development and student perceptions. Computers & Education, 55(3), 1080-1090. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.05.004
- Im, T., & Kang, M. (2019). Structural relationships of factors which impact on learner achievement in online learning environment. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 20(1), 111-124. doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v20i1.4012
- Ivankova, N. V., & Stick, S. L. (2007). Students’ persistence in a distributed doctoral program in educational leadership in higher education: A mixed methods study. Research in Higher Education, 48(1), 93-135. doi: 10.1007/s11162-006-9025-4
- Joo, Y. J., Lim, K. Y., & Kim, E. K. (2011). Online university students’ satisfaction and persistence: Examining perceived level of presence, usefulness and ease of use as predictors in a structural model. Computers & Education, 57(2), 1654-1664. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.02.008
- Kennedy, D. H., Terrell, S. R., & Lohle, M. (2015). A grounded theory of persistence in a limited-residency doctoral program. The Qualitative Report, 20(3), 215-230. Retrieved from https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol20/iss3/5
- Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Schuh, J. H., & Whitt, E. J. (2010). Student success in college: Creating conditions that matter. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
- Kumar, S. (2014). Signature pedagogy, implementation and evaluation of an online program that impacts educational practice. The Internet and Higher Education, 21, 60-67. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.11.001
- Kutner, M. H., Nachtsheim, C. J., & Neter, J. (2004). Applied linear regression models (4th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
- Lai, K. W. (2015). Knowledge construction in online learning communities: A case study of a doctoral course. Studies in Higher Education, 40(4), 561-579. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2013.831402
- Lambie, G. W., Hayes, B. G., Griffith, C., Limberg, D., & Mullen, P. R. (2014). An exploratory investigation of the research self-efficacy, interest in research, and research knowledge of Ph.D. in education students. Innovative Higher Education, 39(2), 139-153. doi: 10.1007/s10755-013-9264-1
- Lee, P. C., & Mao, Z. (2016). The relation among self-efficacy, learning approaches, and academic performance: An exploratory study. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 16(3), 178-194. doi: 10.1080/15313220.2015.1136581
- Lee, S. M. (2014). The relationships between higher order thinking skills, cognitive density, and social presence in online learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 21, 41-52. doi: 10.28945/3418
- Liu, J., Rau, P. L. P., & Schulz, B. (2014). Culture and student-faculty communication in higher education: Implications for the design of educational communication tools. In P. L. P. Rau (Ed.), Cross-cultural design (pp. 563-573). New York, NY: Springer International Publishing.
- Martin, K. (2005). Self-efficacy as an evaluation measure for programs in support of online learning literacies for undergraduates. The Internet and Higher Education, 8(4), 307-322. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2005.09.004
- Martínez-Argüelles, M. J., & Batalla-Busquets, J. M. (2016). Perceived service quality and student loyalty in an online university. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(4), 264-279. Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/2518/3788
- National Center for Education Statistics. (2018 ). Integrated postsecondary education data system (IPEDS): Table 311.15 [Data file]. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d17/tables/dt17_311.15.asp
- Ravindran, S. D., & Kalpana, M. (2012). Student’s expectation, perception and satisfaction towards the management educational institutions. Procedia Economics and Finance, 2, 401-410. doi: 10.1016/S2212-5671(12)00102-5
- Roach, V., & Lemasters, L. (2006). Satisfaction with online learning: A comparative descriptive study. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 5(3), 317-332. Retrieved from http://www.ncolr.org/jiol/issues/pdf/5.3.7.pdf
- Rockinson-Szapkiw, A. J., Wendt, J., Whighting, M., & Nisbet, D. (2016). The predictive relationship among the community of inquiry framework, perceived learning and online, and graduate students’ course grades in online synchronous and asynchronous courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(3), 18-35. doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v17i3.2203
- Rovai, A. P. (2002). Development of an instrument to measure classroom community. The Internet and Higher Education, 5(3), 197-211. doi: 10.1016/S1096-7516(02)00102-1
- Rovai, A. P., & Baker, J. D. (2005). Gender differences in online learning: Sense of community, perceived learning, and interpersonal interactions. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 6(1), 31-44. Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/106724/
- Sampson, P. M., Leonard, J., Ballenger, J. W., & Coleman, J. C. (2010). Student satisfaction of online courses for educational leadership. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 13(3). Retrieved from https://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/Fall133/sampson_ballenger133.html
- Shea, P., & Bidjerano, T. (2009). Community of inquiry as a theoretical framework to foster “epistemic engagement” and “cognitive presence” in online education. Computers & Education, 52(3), 543-553. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2008.10.007
- Sitzmann, T., & Yeo, G. (2013). A meta-analytic investigation of the within-person self-efficacy domain: Is self-efficacy a product of past performance or a driver of future performance? Personnel Psychology, 66(3), 531-568. doi: 10.1111/peps.12035
- Sohail, M. S., & Shaikh, N. M. (2004). Quest for excellence in business education: A study of student impressions of service quality. International Journal of Educational Management, 18(1), 58-65. doi: 10.1108/09513540410512163
- Sowell, R., Zhang, T., Redd, K., & King, M. (2008). Ph.D. completion and attrition: Analysis of baseline program data from the Ph.D. Completion Project. Washington, DC: Council of Graduate Schools. Retrieved from https://cgsnet.org/phd-completion-and-attrition-analysis-baseline-program-data-phd-completion-project
- Tinto, V. (1999). Taking retention seriously: Rethinking the first year of college. NACADA Journal, 19(2), 5-9. doi: 10.12930/0271-9517-19.2.5
- Williams, E. A., Duray, R., & Reddy, V. (2006). Teamwork orientation, group cohesiveness, and student learning: A study of the use of teams in online distance education. Journal of Management Education, 30(4), 592-616. doi: 10.1177/1052562905276740
- Williams, P. E., Wall, N., & Fish, W. (2019). Mid-career adult learners in an online doctoral program and the drivers of their academic self-regulation: The importance of social support and parent education level. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 20(1), 63-78. doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v20i1.3789
- York, T., Gibson, C., & Rankin, S. (2015). Defining and measuring academic success. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 20(5), 1-20. Retrieved from https://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=20&n=5