System, scholar or students? Which most influences online MBA course effectiveness?

Journal of Computer Assisted Learning

Volumn 30, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 349-362

  Arbaugh, J B ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN OSHKOSH   (United States)

Author keywords

E learning; Internet and distance learning; Quantitative methodologies

Indexed keywords

EID: 84903819926     PISSN: 02664909     EISSN: 13652729     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/jcal.12048     Document Type: Article

References (86)

1. Alavi, M. (1994). Computer-mediated collaborative learning: An empirical evaluation. MIS Quarterly, 18, 159-174.
2. Alavi, M., Marakas, G. M., & Yoo, Y. (2002). A comparative study of distributed learning environments on learning outcomes. Information Systems Research, 13, 404-415.
3. Albert, L. J., & Johnson, C. S. (2011). Socioeconomic status and gender-based differences in students' perceptions of e-learning systems. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 9, 421-436.
4. Alexander, M. W., Perrault, H., Zhao, J. J., & Waldman, L. (2009). Comparing AACSB faculty and student online learning experiences: Changes between 2000 and 2006. Journal of Educators Online, 6(1), 1-20.
5. Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2011). Going the distance: Online education in the United States, 2011. Wellesley, MA: Babson Survey Research Group.
6. Alshare, K. A., Freeze, R. D., Lane, P. L., & Wen, H. J. (2011). The impacts of system and human factors on online learning systems use and learner satisfaction. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 9, 437-461.
7. Anderson, T. (2002). The hidden curriculum of distance education. Change, 33(6), 28-35.
8. Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing context. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2), 1-17. Retrieved December 10, 2004 from http://www.aln.org/publications/jaln/v5n2/v5n2_anderson.asp
9. Annand, D. (2011). Social presence within the community of inquiry framework. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(5), 40-56. Retrieved January 6, 2012, from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/924/1855
10. Arbaugh, J. B. (2000). Virtual classroom characteristics and student satisfaction with internet-based MBA courses. Journal of Management Education, 24, 32-54.
11. Arbaugh, J. B. (2002). Managing the on-line classroom: A study of technological and behavioral characteristics of web-based MBA courses. Journal of High Technology Management Research, 13, 203-223.
12. Arbaugh, J. B. (2005). Is there an optimal design for on-line MBA courses? Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4, 135-149.
13. Arbaugh, J. B. (2008). Does the community of inquiry framework predict outcomes in online MBA courses? International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 9, 1-21.
14. Arbaugh, J. B. (2010). Sage, guide, both, or even more? An examination of instructor activity in online MBA courses. Computers & Education, 55, 1234-1244.
15. Arbaugh, J. B. (2013). Does academic discipline moderate CoI-course outcomes relationships in online MBA courses? The Internet and Higher Education, 17, 16-28.
16. Arbaugh, J. B., Bangert, A., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2010). Subject matter effects and the community of inquiry (CoI) framework: An exploratory study. The Internet and Higher Education, 13, 37-44.
17. Arbaugh, J. B., & Benbunan-Fich, R. (2006). An investigation of epistemological and social dimensions of teaching in online learning environments. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 5, 435-447.
18. Arbaugh, J. B., & Benbunan-Fich, R. (2007). Examining the influence of participant interaction modes in web-based learning environments. Decision Support Systems, 43, 853-865.
19. Arbaugh, J. B., Desai, A. B., Rau, B. L., & Sridhar, B. S. (2010). A review of research on online and blended learning in the management discipline: 1994-2009. Organization Management Journal, 7(1), 39-55.
20. Arbaugh, J. B., & Duray, R. (2002). Technological and structural characteristics, student learning and satisfaction with web-based courses: An exploratory study of two MBA programs. Management Learning, 33, 231-247.
21. Arbaugh, J. B., Godfrey, M. R., Johnson, M., Leisen Pollack, B., Niendorf, B., & Wresch, W. (2009). Research in online and blended learning in the business disciplines: Key findings and possible future directions. The Internet and Higher Education, 12(2), 71-87.
22. Bailey, E. K., & Cotlar, M. (1994). Teaching via the internet. Communication Education, 43, 184-193.
23. Baugher, D., Varanelli, A., & Weisbord, E. (2003). Student hits in an internet-supported course: How can instructors use them and what do they mean? Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 1, 159-179.
24. Benbunan-Fich, R., & Hiltz, S. R. (2003). Mediators of the effectiveness of online courses. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 46(4), 298-312.
25. Brower, H. H. (2003). On emulating classroom discussion in a distance-delivered OBHR course: Creating an on-line community. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 2, 22-36.
26. Calk, R., Alt, K., Mills, S. K., & Oliver, R. (2007). The effective delivery of a streaming video course lecture. Accounting Education, 16(1), 81-93.
27. Connolly, M., Jones, C., & Jones, N. (2007). New approaches, new vision: Comparing teacher experiences in a brave new online world. Open Learning, 22(1), 43-56.
28. Coppola, N. W., Hiltz, S. R., & Rotter, N. G. (2002). Becoming a virtual professor: Pedagogical roles and asynchronous learning networks. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(4): 169-189.
29. Daspit, J., & D'Souza, D. E. (2012). Using the community of inquiry framework to introduce wiki environments in blended learning pedagogies: Evidence from a business capstone course. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 11, 666-683.
30. Davis, F. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13, 319-340.
31. Dineen, B. R. (2005). TeamXchange: A team project experience involving virtual teams and fluid team membership. Journal of Management Education, 29, 593-616.
32. Dobbins, M., Knill, C., & Votgle, E. M. (2011). An analytical framework for the cross-country comparison of higher education governance. Higher Education, 62, 665-683.
33. Dykman, C. A., & Davis, C. K. (2008). Online education forum Part three - A quality online educational experience. Journal of Information Systems Education, 19, 281-289.
34. Eom, S. B., Wen, H. J., & Ashill, N. (2006). The determinants of students' perceived learning outcomes and satisfaction in university online education: An empirical investigation. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 4, 215-235.
35. Friday, E., Friday-Stroud, S. S., Green, A. L., & Hill, A. Y. (2006). A multi-semester comparison of student performance between multiple traditional and online sections of two management courses. Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, 8(1), 66-81.
36. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2, 87-105.
37. Gibson, S. G., Harris, M. L., & Colaric, S. M. (2008). Technology acceptance in an academic context: Faculty acceptance of online education. Journal of Education for Business, 83, 355-359.
38. Giesbers, B., Rienties, B., Tempelaar, D. T., & Gijselaers, W. H. (2013). Investigating the relations between motivation, tool use, participation, and performance in an E-learning course using web-videoconferencing. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(1), 285-292.
39. Gratton-Lavoie, C., & Stanley, D. (2009). Teaching and learning of principles of microeconomics online: An empirical assessment. Journal of Economic Education, 40(2), 3-25.
40. Harris, A. L., & Rea, A. (2009). Web 2.0 and virtual world technologies: A growing impact in IS education. Journal of Information Systems Education, 20, 137-144.
41. Heckman, R., & Annabi, H. (2005). A content analytic comparison of learning processes in online and face-to-face case study discussions. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(2), article 7. Retrieved January 4, 2007, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol10/issue2/heckman.html
42. Henson, R. K., & Roberts, J. K. (2006). Use of exploratory factor analysis in published research: Common errors and some comment on improved practice. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(3), 393-416.
43. Hoover, J. D., Giambatista, R. C., Sorenson, R. L., & Bommer, W. H. (2010). Assessing the effectiveness of whole person learning pedagogy in skill acquisition. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 9, 192-204.
44. Hwang, A., & Arbaugh, J. B. (2009). Seeking feedback in blended learning: Competitive versus cooperative student attitudes and their links to learning outcome. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25, 280-293.
45. Hwang, A., & Francesco, A. M. (2010). The influence of individualism-collectivism and power distance on use of feedback channels and consequences for learning. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 9, 243-257.
46. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2009). An educational psychology success story: Social interdependence theory and cooperative learning. Educational Researcher, 38(5), 365-379.
47. Johnson, N., Oliff, P., & Williams, E. (2011). An update on state budget cuts. Washington, DC: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Retrieved January 3, 2012, from http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=1214
48. Johnson, R. D., Hornik, S., & Salas, E. (2008). An empirical examination of factors contributing to the creation of successful e-learning environments. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 66, 356-369.
49. 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, 1654-1664.
50. Ke, F. (2010). Examining online teaching, cognitive, and social presence for adult students. Computers & Education, 55, 808-820.
51. Kellogg, D. L., & Smith, M. A. (2009). Student-to-student interaction revisited: A case study of working adult business students in online courses. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 7, 433-456.
52. King, W. R., & He, J. (2006). A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model. Information & Management, 43, 740-755.
53. Kirschner, P. A., & van Merrienboer, J. J. G. (2013). Do learners really know best? Urban legends in education. Educational Psychologist, 48(3), 169-183.
54. Klein, H. J., Noe, R. A., & Wang, C. (2006). Motivation to learn and course outcomes: The impact of delivery mode, learning goal orientation, and perceived barriers and enablers. Personnel Psychology, 59, 665-702.
55. Landry, B. J. L., Griffeth, R., & Hartman, S. (2006). Measuring student perceptions of blackboard using the technology acceptance model. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 4, 87-99.
56. Lee, P. (2013). European higher education faces a widening budget gap between regions. Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved August 27, 2013, from http://chronicle.com/article/article-content/139907/
57. Leidner, D. E., & Jarvenpaa, S. L. (1995). The use of information technology to enhance management school education: A theoretical view. MIS Quarterly, 19, 265-291.
58. Liu, X., Bonk, C. J., Magjuka, R. J., Lee, S., & Su, B. (2005). Exploring four dimensions of online instructor roles: A program level case study. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 9(4), 29-48.
59. Liu, X., Magjuka, R. J., Bonk, C. J., & Lee, S. (2007). Does sense of community matter? An examination of participants' perceptions of building learning communities in online courses. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 8(1), 9-24.
60. Marks, R. B., Sibley, S., & Arbaugh, J. B. (2005). A structural equation model of predictors for effective online learning. Journal of Management Education, 29, 531-563.
61. Martins, L. L., & Kellermanns, F. W. (2004). A model of business school students' acceptance of a web-based course management system. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3, 7-26.
62. Mueller, R. O., & Hancock, G. Y. R. (2008). Best practices in structural equation modeling. In J. Osborne (Ed.), Best practices in quantitative methods (pp. 488-508). Los Angeles: Sage.
63. Nemanich, L., Banks, M., & Vera, D. (2009). Enhancing knowledge transfer in classroom versus online settings: The interplay among instructor, student, content, and context. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 7, 123-148.
64. Ng, C. S. L., Cheung, W. S., & Hew, K. F. (2012). Interaction in asynchronous discussion forums: Peer facilitation techniques. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28, 280-294.
65. Padilla-Melendez, A., Garrido-Moreno, A., & Del Aguila Obra, A. R. (2008). Factors affecting e-collaboration technology use among management students. Computers & Education, 51, 609-623.
66. Peltier, J. W., Drago, W., & Schibrowsky, J. A. (2003). Virtual communities and the assessment of online marketing education. Journal of Marketing Education, 25, 260-276.
67. Peltier, J. W., Schibrowsky, J. A., & Drago, W. (2007). The interdependence of the factors influencing the perceived quality of the online learning experience: A causal model. Journal of Marketing Education, 29, 140-153.
68. Rienties, B., Giesbers, B., Tempelaar, D. T., & Lygo-Baker, S. (2013). Redesigning teaching presence in order to enhance cognitive presence, a longitudinal analysis. In Z. Akyol & D. Garrison (Eds.), Educational communities of inquiry: Theoretical framework, research and practice (pp. 109-132). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
69. Rienties, B., Giesbers, B., Tempelaar, D. T., Lygo-Baker, S., Segers, M., & Gijselaers, W. H. (2012). The role of scaffolding and motivation in CSCL. Computers & Education, 59(3), 893-906.
70. Rienties, B., Kaper, W., Struyven, K., Tempelaar, D. T., Van Gastel, L., Vrancken, S., ... Virgailaite-Meckauskaite, E. (2012). A review of the role of Information Communication Technology and course design in transitional education practices. Interactive Learning Environments, 20(6), 563-581.
71. Rollag, K. (2010). Teaching business cases online through discussion boards: Strategies and best practices. Journal of Management Education, 34, 499-526.
72. Rovai, A. P. (2002). Development of an instrument to measure classroom community. The Internet and Higher Education, 5, 197-211.
73. Salmon, G. (2000). Computer-mediated conferencing for management learning at the Open University. Management Learning, 31, 491-502.
74. Sautter, P. (2007). Designing discussion activities to achieve desired learning outcomes: Choices using mode of delivery and structure. Journal of Marketing Education, 29(2), 122-131.
75. Schepers, J., & Wetzels, M. (2007). A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model: Investigating subjective norm and moderating effects. Information & Management, 44, 90-103.
76. Selim Ahmed, H. M. (2010). Hybrid e-learning acceptance model: Learner perceptions. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 8, 313-346.
77. 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, 543-553.
78. Shea, P., Hayes, S., & Vickers, J. (2010). Online instructional effort measured through the lens of teaching presence in the community of inquiry framework: A re-examination of method and approach. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 11(3), 127-153.
79. Sitzmann, T., Ely, K., Brown, K. G., & Bauer, K. N. (2010). Self-assessment of knowledge: A cognitive learning or affective measure? Academy of Management Learning & Education, 9, 169-191.
80. Smith, G. G., Heindel, A. J., & Torres-Ayala, A. T. (2008). E-learning commodity or community: Disciplinary differences between online courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 11, 152-159.
81. Stevens, J. P. (2009). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (5th ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
82. Vaughan, N., & Garrison, D. R. (2006). How blended learning can support a faculty development community of inquiry. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 10(4), 139-152.
83. Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008). Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences, 39, 273-315.
84. Wan, Z., Wang, Y., & Haggerty, N. (2008). Why people benefit from e-learning differently: The effects of psychological processes on e-learning outcomes. Information & Management, 45, 513-521.
85. Watson, R. T., Boudreau, M.-C., York, P. T., Greiner, M., & Wynn, D. E. (2008). Opening the classroom. Journal of Information Systems Education, 19, 75-85.
86. Yoo, Y., Kanawattanachai, P., & Citurs, A. (2002). Forging into the wired wilderness: A case study of a technology-mediated distributed discussion-based class. Journal of Management Education, 26, 139-163.