TECHNOLOGY-BASED TRAINING: Toward a Learner-Centric Research Agenda

Human-Computer Interaction and Management Information Systems: Applications

Volumn , Issue , 2014, Pages 247-257

  Sasidharan, Sharath ^a   Santhanam, Radhika ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY   (United States)

^b NONE

Author keywords

E Learning; Technology Based Training; Training Effectiveness

Indexed keywords

EID: 85139708490     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9781315703626-21     Document Type: Chapter

References (58)

1. Agarwal, R., and Prasad, J. Are individual differences germane to the acceptance of new information technologies? Decision Sciences, 30, 2 (1999), 361-391.
2. Agarwal, R., and Karahanna, E. Time flies when you are having fun: cognitive absorption and beliefs about information technology usage. MIS Quarterly, 24, 4 (2000), 665-694.
3. Alavi, M., Yoo, Y., and Vogel, D.R. Using information technology to add value to management education. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 6 (1997), 1310-1333.
4. Alavi, M., and Leidner, D.E. Research commentary: technology-mediated learning-a call for greater depth and breadth of research. Information Systems Research, 12, 1 (2001), 1-10.
5. Allen, I.E., and Seaman, J. Sizing the opportunity: the quality and extent of online education in the United States, 2002 and 2003. The Sloan Consortium, Needham, MA, 2003 (available at www.sloan-c.org/resources/sizing_opportunity.pdf, accessed on April 26, 2004).
6. Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, D.R., and Archer, W. Assessing teacher presence in a computer conferencing context. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5, 2 (2001), 1-17 (available at www.sloanc.org/publications/jaln/index.asp, accessed on August 5, 2004).
7. Barron, T. E-learning weathers a bear market. American Society for Training and Development, Alexandria, VA, 2001 (available at www.learningcircuits.org/2001/mar2001/barron.html, accessed on April 28, 2004).
8. Bostrom, R.P., Olfman, L., and Sein, M.K. The importance of learning style in end-user training. MIS Quarterly, 14, 1 (1990), 101-119.
9. Brennan, M. U.S. corporate and government eLearning forecast, 2002-2007. International Data Corporation, Framingham, MA, 2003 (available at www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId_fr2003_10_09_163314, accessed on April 18, 2004).
10. Carr, S. As distance education comes of age, the challenge is keeping the students. Chronicle of Higher Education, 46, 23 (2000), 39-41.
11. Chau, P.Y.K. Influence of computer attitude and self-efficacy on IT usage behavior. Journal of End User Computing, 13, 1 (2001), 26-33.
12. Felder, R. Reaching the second tier: learning and teaching styles in college science education. Journal of College Science Teaching, 22, 5 (1993), 286-290.
13. Harris, P. E-learning: a consolidation update. Training and Development, 56, 4 (2002), 27-33.
14. Heijden, H.v.d. Factors influencing the usage of websites: the case of a generic portal in the Netherlands. Information and Management, 40, 6 (2003), 541-549.
15. Hislop, G. Working professionals as part-time on-line learners. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 4, 2 (2000), 73-89 (available at www.sloan-c.org/publications/jaln/index.asp, accessed on August 5, 2004).
16. Hu, P.J.H., Clark, T.H.K., and Ma, W. Examining technology acceptance by school teachers: a longitudinal study. Information and Management, 41, 2 (2003), 227-241.
17. Igbaria, M. User acceptance of microcomputer technology: an empirical test. Omega, 21, 1 (1993), 73-90.
18. Igbaria, M., and Iivari, J. The effects of self-efficacy on computer usage. Omega, 23, 6 (1995), 587-605.
19. Kaplan-Leiserson, E. (ed.) Learning circuits glossary. American Society for Training and Development, Alexandria, VA (available at http://www.learningcircuits.org/glossary.htm, accessed on April 28, 2004).
20. Karahanna, E., and Limayem, M. E-mail and v-mail usage: generalizing across technologies. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 10, 1 (2000), 49-66.
21. Kirkpatrick, D.L. Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publications, 1998.
22. Leidner, D.E., and Jarvenpaa, S.L. The use of information technology to enhance management school education: a theoretical view. MIS Quarterly, 19, 3 (1995), 265-291.
23. Loomis, K.D. Learning styles and asynchronous learning: comparing the LASSI model to class performance. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 4, 1 (2000), 23-32 (available at www.sloan-c.org/publications/jaln/index.asp, accessed on August 5, 2004).
24. Marcolin, B.L., Compeau, D.R., Munro, M.C., and Huff, S.L. Assessing user competence: conceptualization and measurement. Information Systems Research, 11, 1 (2000), 37-60.
25. Mayer, R.E., Heiser, J., and Lonn, S. Cognitive constraints on multimedia learning: when presenting more material results in less understanding. Journal of Educational Technology, 93, 1 (2001), 187-198.
26. Moon, J.W., and Kim, Y.G. Extending the TAM for a world-wide-web context. Information and Management, 38, 4 (2001), 217-230.
27. Moore, G.A. Crossing the chasm: Marketing and Selling High-Tech Goods to Mainstream Customers. New York: HarperBusiness, 1991.
28. Norman, D.A. The Invisible Computer: Why Good Products Can Fail, the Personal Computer Is So Complex, and Information Appliances Are the Solution. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1998.
29. Papa, F., Perugini, M., and Spedaletti, S. Psychological factors in virtual classroom situations: a pilot study for a model of learning through technological devices. Behavior and Information Technology, 17, 4 (1998), 187-194.
30. Phipps, R., and Merisotis, J. What’s the difference? A review of contemporary research on the effectiveness of distance learning in higher education. The Institute for Higher Education Policy, Washington, DC, 1999 (available at www.ihep.com/Pubs/PDF/Difference.pdf, accessed on April 20, 2004).
31. Piccoli, G., Ahmad, R., and Ives, B. Web-based virtual learning environments: a research framework and a preliminary assessment of effectiveness in basic IT skills training. MIS Quarterly, 25, 4 (2001), 401-426.
32. Pintrich, P.R., and DeGroot, E.V. Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 1 (1990), 33-40.
33. Richardson, J.C., and Swan, K. Examining social presence in online courses in relation to students’ perceived learning and satisfaction. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7, 1 (2003), 68-88 (available at www.sloan-c.org/publications/jaln/index.asp, accessed on August 5, 2004).
34. Rogers, E.M. Diffusion of Innovations. New York: The Free Press, 1995.
35. Rossett, A., and Schafer, L. What can we do about e-dropouts? Training and Development, 57, 6 (2003), 40-46.
36. Rossman, M.H. Successful online teaching using an asynchronous learner discussion forum. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 3, 2 (1999), 91-97 (available at www.sloan-c.org/publications/jaln/index.asp, accessed on August 5, 2004).
37. Santhanam, R., and Sein, M.K. Improving end user proficiency: effects of conceptual training and nature of interaction. Information Systems Research, 5, 4 (1994), 378-399.
38. Schank, R.C. Revolutionizing the traditional classroom course. Communications of the ACM, 44, 12 (2001), 21-24.
39. Schrum, L., and Hong, S. Dimensions and strategies for online success: voices from experienced educators. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 6, 1 (2002), 57-67 (available at www.sloan-c.org/publications/jaln/index.asp, accessed on August 5, 2004).
40. Shea, P., Pickett, A., and Pelz, W. Follow-up investigation of teaching presence in the SUNY learning network. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7, 2 (2003), 61-80 (available at www.sloan-c.org/publications/jaln/index.asp, accessed on August 5, 2004).
41. Shneiderman, B., Alavi, M., Norman, K., and Borkowski, E.Y. Windows of opportunity in electronic classrooms. Communications of the ACM, 38, 11 (1995), 19-24.
42. Shneiderman, B. Relate-create-donate: a teaching/learning philosophy for the cyber-generation. Computers and Education, 31, 1 (1998), 25-39.
43. Stacey, P. E-Learning: The second wave. T-Net British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, 2001 (available at www.bctechnology.com/statics/pstacey-feb0201.html, accessed on May 5, 2004).
44. Sugrue, B. ASTD 2003 State of the Industry Report. Alexandria, VA: American Society for Training and Development, 2003.
45. Thong, J.Y.L., Hong, W.H., and Tam, K. R. Understanding user acceptance of digital libraries: what are the roles of interface characteristics, organizational context, and individual differences? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 57, 3 (2002), 215-242.
46. University of Wisconsin-Madison. Designing distance learning courses. (available at www.soemadison.wisc.edu/outreach/deweb/index.html, accessed on April 26, 2004).
47. Valenta, A., Therriault, D., Dieter, M., and Mrtek, R. Identifying student attitudes and learning styles in distance education. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5, 2 (2001), 111-127 (available at www.sloan-c.org/publications/jaln/index.asp, accessed on August 5, 2004).
48. Venkatesh, V. Creation of favorable user perceptions: exploring the role of intrinsic motivation. MIS Quarterly, 23, 2 (1999), 239-260.
49. Venkatesh, V. Determinants of perceived ease of use: integrating perceived behavioral control, computer anxiety and enjoyment into the technology acceptance model. Information Systems Research, 11, 4 (2000), 342-365.
50. Venkatesh, V., and Davis, F.D. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46, 2 (2000), 186-204.
51. Venkatesh, V., and Morris, M.G. Why don’t men ever stop to ask for directions? Gender, social influence, and their role in technology acceptance and usage behavior. MIS Quarterly, 24, 1 (2000), 115-139.
52. Vockell, E. Educational psychology: a practical approach. (available at http://education.calumet.purdue.edu/vockell/EdPsyBook, accessed on April 5, 2004).
53. Wang, A.Y., and Newlin, M.H. Predictors of web-student performance: the role of self-efficacy and reasons for taking an on-line class. Computers in Human Behavior, 18, 2 (2002), 151-163.
54. Webster, J., and Hackley, P. Teaching effectiveness in technology-mediated distance learning. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 6 (1997), 1271-1281.
55. Wiley, D.A. Connecting learning objects to instructional design theory: a definition, a metaphor, and a taxonomy. In D.A. Wiley (ed.), The Instructional Use of Learning Objects. Bloomington, IN: Agency for Instructional Technology and Association for Educational Communications Technology, 2001, pp. 2-35 (available at http://reusability.org/read/chapters/wiley.doc, accessed on August 5, 2004).
56. Zimmerman, B.J., and Martinez-Pons, M. Development of a structured interview for assessing student use of self-regulated learning strategies. American Educational Research Journal, 23, 4 (1986), 614-628.
57. Zimmerman, B.J. Models of self-regulated learning and academic achievement. In B.J. Zimmerman and D.H. Schunk (eds.), Self-Regulated Learning And Academic Achievement: Theory, Research, and Practice. New York: Springer, 1989, pp. 1-25.
58. Zimmerman, B.J. Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: an overview. Educational Psychologist, 25, 1 (1990), 3-17.