Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.15207/JKCS.2021.12.7.133

A study on the effect of non-face-to-face online education according to the type of learner motivation  

Chin, HongKun (Department of Media & Communication, Kookmin University)
Kim, MinJung (Division of Media & Advertising, Dongeui University)
Publication Information
Journal of the Korea Convergence Society / v.12, no.7, 2021 , pp. 133-142 More about this Journal
Abstract
This study aims to expand the effect of online education into the aspect of active exploration and sharing of class-related issues by learners. Based on theoretical discussions, Two types of motivation (personal and social) to explore issues, engagement, attitude toward issue content, and eWOM model were verified. As a result of the study, it was found that the impact of personal and social motivations that online education has on engagement on specific issues, and the positive(+) influence on attitudes toward issue content and word of mouth intentions on SNS, considering engagement as a parameter. In this study, the role of engagement in inducing the next learning by oneself was confirmed, and it can be seen that social and personal motives for issues and class content should be utilized to increase engagement.
Keywords
On-line Education; Personal Motivation; Social Motivation; Engagement; Attitude toward issue content; eWOM;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 R. J. Marzano. (2001). A new era of school reform going where the research takes us. Aurora : Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning.
2 D. H. Lim, M. L. Morris & W. Yoon. (2006). Instructional and learner factors influencing learning outcomes with online learning environment. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED492786.pdf.
3 M. Mehmetogh. (2012). Personality effects on experimental consumption. Personality and Individual Differences. 52, 94-99.   DOI
4 D. Jonassen, M. Davison, M. Collins, J. Campbell & B. B. Haab. (1995). Constructivism and computer-mediated communication in distance education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 9(2), 7-25.   DOI
5 K. C. Nam, H. C. LIM, & K. J. Hwang. (2002). A study of On-line on training effectiveness. Journal of the Korean Operation Research and Management Science Society, 27(1), 75-94. http://www.dbpia.co.kr/journal/articleDetail?nodeId=NODE00310503
6 S. P. Tao. (2013). Personality, Motivation, and Behavioral intentions in the experiential consumption of artworks. Social behavior and Personality, 41(9), 1533-1546. http://dx.doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2013.41.9.1533   DOI
7 D. Rossin, Y. K. Ro, B. D. Klein & Y. M. Guo. (2009). The effects of flow on learning outcomes in an online information management course, Journal of Information Systems Education, 20(1), 87-98.
8 X. Liu, C. J. Bonk, S. McIntyre & R. Magjuka. (2008). An investigation of the relationship between flow in computer-mediated interaction and virtual learning team effectiveness. In E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), 1(1), 2919-2928.
9 M. D. Dixon. (2010). Creating effective student engagement in online courses: What do students find engaging?. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 10(2), 1-13.
10 A. Wang. (2006). Advertising Engagement: A driver of message involvement on message effects. Journal of Advertising Research, 46(4), 355-368. https://doi.org/10.2501/S0021849906060429   DOI
11 M. Browne & R. Cudeck. (1993). Testing structural equation models, 136-162, Newbury Park. CA : Sage.
12 P. R. Pintrich & E. V. DeGroot. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Education Psychology, 82(1), 33-40.   DOI
13 P. D. Chen, R. Gonyea & G. Kuh. (2008). Learning at a distance : Engaged or Not?. Innovate, 4-3, 1-7.
14 D. Constant, L. Sproull & S. Kiesler. (1997). The kindness of strangers: On the usefulness of electronic weak ties for technical advice. In S. Kiesler (Ed.), Culture of the Internet (pp. 303-322). Mahweh : Lawrence Erlbaum.
15 D. R. Garrison & T. Anderson. (2003). E-learning in the 21th century: A framework for research and practice. London.: RoutledgeFalmer.
16 H. K. Chin, M. Oh & T. J. Lee. (2014). Determinants of electronic Word-of-Mouth (eWOM) and purchase intention in digital signage advertising (DSA). International Journal of Applied Engineering Research, 9(21), 9149-9156.
17 R. M. Carini, G. D. Kuh & S. P. Klein. (2006). Student engagement and student learning: Testing the linkage. Research in Higher Education, 47(1), 1-32.   DOI
18 J. Webster & P. Hackley. (1997). Teaching effectiveness in technology-mediated distance learning. Academy of Management Journal, 40(6), 1282-1309.   DOI
19 B. J. Calder, E. C. Malthouse & U. Schaedel. (2009). An experimental study of the relationship between online engagement and advertising effectiveness. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 23, 321-331.   DOI
20 M. P. Gardner. (1985). Mood sates and consumer behavior: A critical review. Journal of Consumer Research, 12, 281-300.   DOI
21 A. Friedlein. (2006). Web 2.0-what are the metrics for successful 'engagement'?. http://www.econsultancy.com
22 R. M. Sorrentino & E. T. E. Higgins. (1986). Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations of social behavior. New York : Guilford Press.
23 M. Csikszentmihalyi. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York : Harper & Row.
24 E. T. Higgins. (2006). Value from hedonic experience and engagement. Psychological review, 113(3), 439.   DOI
25 J. Pearce. (2005). Engaging the learner: how can the flow experience support e-learning?. In E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), 2288-2295.