Key factors of effecting blended learning satisfaction: A study on Peking University students

Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

Volumn 6248 LNCS, Issue , 2010, Pages 282-295

  Zhao, Guodong ^a   Yuan, Shuai ^a  

^a PEKING UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

Blended hybrid learning; Peking University; Student satisfaction

Indexed keywords

ANALYTICAL MODEL; BLENDED LEARNING; BLENDED/HYBRID LEARNING; KEY FACTORS; LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS; PEKING UNIVERSITY; PERCEIVED EASE OF USE; PERCEIVED USEFULNESS; STUDENT SATISFACTION; STUDENT'S SATISFACTION; SYSTEM CHARACTERISTICS;

E-LEARNING; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; STUDENTS; TEACHING;

LEARNING SYSTEMS;

EID: 82755176693     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-14657-2_26     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (31)

1. Graham, C.R.: Blended learning systems: definition, current trends, and future directions. In: Bonk, C.J., Graham, C.R. (eds.) Handbook of Blended Learning:Global Perspectives, Local Designs, pp. 3-21. Pfeiffer Publishing, San Francisco (2006)
2. Young, J.R.: 'Hybrid' teaching seeks to end the divide between traditional and online instruction. Chron. High. Educ. A-33 (March 22, 2002)
3. Trends in e-learning, http://www.learningcircuits.org/2002/nov2002/finn. htm
4. Zastrocky, M., Harris, M., Lowendahi, J.-M.: E-learning for Higher Education: Are We Reaching Maturity. Industry Research. ID Number: G 00156361 (2008)
5. Browne, T., Hewitt, R., Jenkins, M., Walker, R.: 2008 survey of technology enhanced learning for higher education in UK. Universities and colleges Information systems Association (2008)
6. Li, H.: ICT Use in South Korea Higher Education. XinHua Review in Higher Education Edition, the 19th Journal (April 2009)
7. Bashar, M.I., Khan, H.: E-Learning in Singapore: A Brief Assessment. U21Global Working Paper, No. 003 (2007)
8. Zhao, G.: Comparative Research on ICT Use in Education. JianSu Education Publishing Company, Nanjing (2008)
9. Prensky, M.: Digital natives, digital immigrants. Part 2. Do they really think differently. On Horizon 9(6), 1-6 (2001)
10. Educating the Net Generation, http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ pub7101.pdf
11. Alavi, M., Dufner, D.: Technology-mediated collaborative learning: a research perspective. In: Hiltz, S.R., Goldman, R. (eds.) Learning Together Online: Research on Asynchronous Learning Networks, pp. 191-213. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah (2005)
12. Garrison, D.R., Kanuta, H.: Blended learning: uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. Internet Higher Educ. 7(2), 95-105 (2004)
13. Graham, C.R., Robison, R.: Realizing the transformational potential of blended learning: comparing cases of transforming blends and enhancing blends in higher education. In: Picciano, A.G., Dziuban, C.D. (eds.) Blended Learning: Research Perspectives, pp. 83-110. Sloan Consortium, Needham (2007)
14. Dziuban, C.D., Hartman, J., Moskal, P.D.: Blended learning. EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Res. Bull. 2004(7), 1-12 (2004)
15. Utts, J., Sommer, B., Acredolo, M.W., Maher, M.W., Matthews, H.R.: A study comparing traditional and hybrid internet-based instruction in introductory statistics classes. J. Stat. Educ. 11(3), 171-173 (2003)
16. Graff, M.: Individual differences in sense of classroom community in a blended learning environment. J. Educ. Media. 28(2-3), 203-210 (2003)
17. Rovai, A.P., Jordan, H.M.: Blended learning and sense of community: a comparative analysis with traditional and fully online graduate courses. Int. Rev. Res. Open Dist. Learn. 5(2), 13 (2004)
18. Vignare, K.: Longitudinal success measures of online learning students at the Rochester Institute of Technology. In: Bourne, J., Moore, J.C. (eds.) Elements of Quality Online Education: Practice and Direction, vol. 4, pp. 261-278. Sloan Consortium, Needham (2006)
19. DeLone, W.H., McLean, E.R.: The DeLone and McLean Model of Information Systems Success: A ten-Year Update. Journal of Management Information Systems 19(4), 9-30 (2003)
20. Knowles, M.S.: The modern practice of adult education: Andragogy versus earning and the learning organization: Examining the connection between the individual and the learning environment. Human Resource Development Quarterly 9(4), 365-375 (1970)
21. Long, H.B.: Contradictory expectations? Achievement and satisfaction in adult learning. Journal of Continuing Higher Education 33(3), 10-12 (1989)
22. Arbaugh, J.B., Duray, R.: Technological and Structural Characteristics, Student Learning and Satisfaction with Web-based Courses An Exploratory Study of Two On-line MBA Programs. Management Learning 33(3), 331-347 (2002)
23. Webster, J., Hackley, P.: Teaching effectiveness in technology-mediated distance learning. Academy of Management Journal, 40(6) (1997)
24. Quantitative research methods in educational planning, http://www.sacmeq.org
25. Park, S.Y.: An Analysis of the Technology Acceptance Model in Understanding University Students Behavioral Intention to Use e-Learning. Educational Technology & Society 12(3), 150-162 (2009)
26. Quantitative Data Analysis, http://www.gao.gov/special.pubs/pe10111.pdf
27. Davis, F.D.: Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly 13(3), 319-340 (1989)
28. Karahanna, E., Straub, D.W., Chervany, N.L.: Information Technology Adopting Across Time: A Cross-Sectional Comparison of Pre-Adoption and Post-Adoption Beliefs. MIS Quarterly 23(2), 183-213 (1999)
29. Jiajing, L.: A Study of Key Influential Factors on Satisfaction of E-Learning. National Kaohsiung Normal University/Graduate Institute of Information & Computer Education/Master's thesis (2003)
30. Smith, P.L., Dillon, C.L.: Comparing distance learning and classroom learning: Conceptual considerations. The American Journal of Distance Education 13(2), 6-23 (1999)
31. Guidelines on information literacy for lifelong learning, http://archive.ifla.org/VII/s42/pub/IL-Guidelines2006.pdf