Thông tin tài liệu
MOTIVATIONS AND BARRIERS OF
VIETNAMESE STUDENTS TOWARDS
DISTANCE EDUCATION
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of the Degree of
MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
In International Business
By
Mr. Tran Vu
ID: MBA03043
International University – Vietnam National University HCMC
March 2013
MOTIVATIONS AND BARRIERS OF
VIETNAMESE STUDENTS TOWARDS
DISTANCE EDUCATION
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of the Degree of
MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
In International Business
By
Mr. Tran Vu
ID: MBA03043
International University – Vietnam National University HCMC
March 2013
Under the guidance and approval of the committee, and approved by all its members, this thesis
has been accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree.
Approved:
---------------------------------------------Chairperson
--------------------------------------------Adviser – Dr. Nguyen Quynh Mai
---------------------------------------------Committee member
--------------------------------------------Committee member
---------------------------------------------Committee member
--------------------------------------------Committee member
Acknowledgement
First of all, I’d like to express my great appreciation to my adviser – Dr. Nguyen Quynh
Mai. It’s my honor to work with her through this research. She had provided me countless
support including guidelines doing the research, insights about the topic, data collection,
recommendation and feedback in order to finish the thesis.
I am also grateful to the administrative staffs of the universities and my friends who
supported and helped me in collecting data, provided the insight about this topic. Their help and
inputs were very valuable to me.
Finally, it’s my biggest thanks to my parents who gave me love, strength and great
support in time and finance. They are one of the greatest motivations for me to finish the MBA
program.
2012 – MBA Thesis – Tran Vu – International University
Plagiarism Statements
I would like to declare that, apart from the acknowledged references, this thesis either
does not use language, ideas, or other original material from anyone; or has not been previously
submitted to any other educational and research programs or institutions. I fully understand that
any writings in this thesis contradicted to the above statement will automatically lead to the
rejection from the MBA program at the International University – Vietnam National University
Ho Chi Minh City.
2012 – MBA Thesis – Tran Vu – International University
Copyright Statement
This copy of the thesis has been supplied on condition that anyone who consults it is
understood to recognize that its copyright rests with its author and that no quotation from the
thesis and no information derived from it may be published without the author’s prior consent.
© Tran Vu / MBA03043 / 2013
2012 – MBA Thesis – Tran Vu – International University
Table of Content
TABLE OF CONTENT ................................................................................................. I
LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................... III
LIST OF TABLES ...................................................................................................... IV
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................ VI
CHAPTER ONE – INTRODUCTION .........................................................................1
1.
RESEARCH BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................. 1
1.1.
Distance education around The World................................................................................ 1
1.2.
Distance education in Vietnam: .......................................................................................... 3
2.
RATIONALE OF THE STUDY ........................................................................................................... 5
3.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND OBJECTIVES ....................................................................................... 6
4.
RESEARCH SCOPE AND LIMITATION............................................................................................... 7
5.
IMPLICATION OF THE STUDY ......................................................................................................... 7
6.
RESEARCH STRUCTURE ................................................................................................................ 8
6.1.
Introduction:...................................................................................................................... 8
6.2.
Literature review................................................................................................................ 8
6.3.
Research methodology ....................................................................................................... 8
6.4.
Findings and Discussion .................................................................................................... 8
6.5.
Conclusion......................................................................................................................... 9
CHAPTER TWO - LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................... 10
1.
DISTANCE EDUCATION ............................................................................................................... 10
2.
ADULT LEARNERS ...................................................................................................................... 12
3.
MOTIVATION ............................................................................................................................. 13
4.
BARRIERS .................................................................................................................................. 17
5.
BEHAVIORAL INTENTION ........................................................................................................... 19
6.
INFLUENCE OF DEMOGRAPHIC FACTORS TO MOTIVATIONS AND BARRIERS: ................................... 20
CHAPTER THREE – RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ........................................... 22
1.
RESEARCH PROCESS ................................................................................................................... 22
2.
RESEARCH MODEL ..................................................................................................................... 24
3.
HYPOTHESIS .............................................................................................................................. 26
4.
QUALITATIVE METHOD .............................................................................................................. 26
5.
QUANTITATIVE METHOD ............................................................................................................ 27
5.1.
Measurement ................................................................................................................... 27
5.2.
Questionnaire design ....................................................................................................... 30
5.3.
Data collection method .................................................................................................... 30
2012 – MBA Thesis – Tran Vu – International University
i
6.
DATA ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................................ 30
CHAPTER FOUR – FINDINGS & DISCUSSION .................................................... 32
1.
SAMPLE DEMOGRAPHIC .............................................................................................................. 32
1.1.
Motivation ....................................................................................................................... 34
1.2.
Barriers ........................................................................................................................... 34
2.
RELIABILITY ANALYSIS .............................................................................................................. 35
3.
FACTOR ANALYSIS ..................................................................................................................... 37
3.1.
Motivations ...................................................................................................................... 37
3.2.
Barriers ........................................................................................................................... 41
3.3.
Behavioral intention......................................................................................................... 44
4.
CORRELATION BETWEEN BEHAVIORAL INTENTION AND MOTIVATIONS, BARRIERS ....................... 44
5.
DIFFERENCE AMONG SUBGROUPS ............................................................................................... 50
5.1.
Motivation ....................................................................................................................... 50
5.2.
Barriers ........................................................................................................................... 52
CHAPTER FIVE – CONCLUSION ........................................................................... 56
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................ 58
APPENDIX .................................................................................................................. 63
2012 – MBA Thesis – Tran Vu – International University
ii
List of Figures
Figure 1 - Percentage of undergraduates enrolled in a distance education course/degree
program in U.S. ...........................................................................................................................2
Figure 2 - Number of students attending online program at HCMUS ...............................4
Figure 3 - Elements of the Self-determination theory ..................................................... 16
Figure 4 - Research process ........................................................................................... 23
Figure 5 - Research model ............................................................................................. 24
Figure 6 - Percentage of Students' Experience in Distance Education ............................. 33
Figure 7 - Motivation levels over Age ............................................................................ 51
Figure 8 - Motivation level over Gender ........................................................................ 51
Figure 9 - Motivation levels over Experience in Distance education .............................. 52
Figure 10 - Barrier level over Gender ............................................................................ 53
Figure 11 - Barrier level over Age ................................................................................. 54
Figure 12 - Barrier level over Experience in Distance Education.................................... 55
2012 – MBA Thesis – Tran Vu – International University
iii
List of Tables
Table 1 - Top 5 University/College in U.S. of online learner enrollment (Aug, 2009) ......3
Table 2 - Motivational factors of Grabowski & Curtis (1991) and Keller (1991) ............ 14
Table 3 - Measurement of Motivations and Barriers ....................................................... 28
Table 4 - Details of age and gender of respondents ........................................................ 32
Table 5 - Frequency of major fields ............................................................................... 33
Table 6 - Top ten highest motivations ............................................................................ 34
Table 7 - Top ten highest barriers .................................................................................. 35
Table 8- Reliability analysis result ................................................................................. 36
Table 9 - Rotated Factor Matrix of component Motivation ............................................. 38
Table 10 - Motivations of Vietnamese students towards Distance Education .................. 40
Table 11 - Rotated Factor Matrix of component Barrier ................................................. 41
Table 12 - Barriers of Vietnamese students towards Distance education ........................ 43
Table 13 - Factor Matrix of Behavioral Intention ........................................................... 44
Table 14 - Behavioral intention of learners towards Distance education ......................... 44
Table 15 - Correlations between Barriers and Motivations ............................................. 47
Table 16 - Relationship between Behavioral Intention and Motivation/Barrier ............... 49
Table 17 - Total variance explained of Motivations ....................................................... 63
Table 18 - Total variance explained of Barriers .............................................................. 64
Table 19 – Motivation significance by Age .................................................................... 65
Table 20 – Motivation significance by Gender ............................................................... 66
Table 21 – Motivation significance by Experience in Distance education....................... 67
Table 22 - Tukey test of Motivation among Experience in Distance Education .............. 68
2012 – MBA Thesis – Tran Vu – International University
iv
Table 23 - Barriers significance by Experience in Distance Education ........................... 69
Table 24 - Tukey test of Barriers significance by Experience in Distance Education ...... 72
Table 25 - Barriers significance by Gender .................................................................... 73
Table 26 - Barriers significance by Age ......................................................................... 74
Table 27 - Tukey test of Barriers significance by Age .................................................... 77
2012 – MBA Thesis – Tran Vu – International University
v
Abstract
Distance education has a long history in over the World. Thank to the modern
technology, especially the Internet, there are many great and useful applications for it. Distance
education is also provided by few universities in Ho Chi Minh City although there are a lot of
difficulties and challenges while implementing the program. Distance education, with many
advantages, begins to be a good channel for everyone to follow. In order to have a high quality
distance education program in Vietnam, there are a lot of concerns. One of the concerns is about
the learners. Therefore, this research is going find out the motivations and barriers of Vietnamese
students towards the distance education. Base on the result of this research, distance education
designers, instructors, and even students will have their own points of view of the current
motivation and barriers of Vietnamese students, then they could have appropriate modifications
in order to make distance education program better.
Quantitative and qualitative method was used to do this research. While the qualitative
method was used to explore the potential motivational and barriers factors, the quantitative
method used the survey method to collect mass information. A survey instrument was distributed
to 250 students who were following the distance education program in Ho Chi Minh City.
There were six motivation factors and six barrier factors found. The correlation between
motivation factors and barrier factors was also found although some was not strong. Moreover,
research also found that motivations and barriers also had the significant influence to the
behavioral intention of the learners.
Keywords: distance education, online learning, Vietnamese students, motivation, barrier,
behavioral intention.
2012 – MBA Thesis – Tran Vu – International University
vi
This page is intentionally left blank.
Chapter One – Introduction
1. Research background
1.1. Distance education around The World
Information technology, computers, Internet and its applications have changed the World
recently. There are a lot of areas that apply that modern technology effectively from military,
Government to hospital, business companies, and even retail stores. That includes the education field.
One of the most important applications is the online education.
Online education is an innovation in learning. It has a lot of advantages such as:
Pay less in tuition fee and books.
Flexible class schedule.
Save money and time on commuting to the campus.
Able to learn anywhere, any time.
The United State of America, with its powerful and latest technology, is one of the leading
countries in provide online learning program. It also invests a lot of money into this area. In 2009, the
U.S. President Barack Obama pledged $500 million in federal funds for the creation of new online
course and material. The online education in U.S. has a long history. It’s already started in the mid1970s. At that time, the software developers created some programs that allowed students to access to
the course information or material via the network easily. However, due to the limitation of the
technology at that time, the course was not fully online yet. It only had some simple functions such as:
material delivery via local network, local email and some other simple administrative actions. Later
then, in the 1980s, the online collaborative learning using computer conference started to emerge.
Using computer conferencing systems, students were able to interact synchronously and faculty began
1
to adopt group learning activities (Harasim, 2000). The invention of Internet and WWW in 1990s made
the revolution in many areas, including education. It increases the flexibility of material delivery
method, higher interactivity between learners and instructors, easier to access to online resources, etc.
In the United States, less than 10 states had online education programs in 1992. By 2004, all 50
states had some form of online learning programs available at the college level (Lynch, 2004).
According to Radford (2011), during the 2002 – 2003 school years, 36% of public school districts
enrolled a total of more than 328,000 students in technology-based distance education courses. Most
reviews of education trends show a dramatic increase in both the capacity and use of technology in our
schools. In fact, at least 22 states had established “virtual” schools by the 2004 – 2005 school-years.
The below figure shows the change of percentage of undergraduates enrolled in a distance education
course/degree program by years.
25
20
15
Enrolled in a distance education
course
Enrolled in a distance education
degree program
10
5
0
1999-2000
2003-2004
2007-2008
Figure 1 - Percentage of undergraduates enrolled in a distance education course/degree program in U.S.
2
In 1989, the University of Phoenix became the first institution to fully launch an online program
to offer both Bachelor’s and Master’s degree. It’s one of the reasons that University of Phoenix is the
university has the largest number of online learners. The success of University of Phoenix could also be
seen through the money that they used for the marketing of online education. In 2009, it’s $130 million.
No.
University/College
Number of online enrollment
1
University of Phoenix
443,000
2
Miami Dade College Florida
54,094
3
Ohio State University, Main campus
52,568
4
Arizona State University, the Tempe Campus
51,481
5
University of Minnesota, Twin Cities
50,883
Table 1 - Top 5 University/College in U.S. of online learner enrollment (Aug, 2009)
Recently, Harvard University and Massachusetts Institute of Technology has found a $60million non-profit enterprise named edX (www.edx.org) that features learning designed specifically for
interactive study via the web. Based on a long history of collaboration and their shared educational
missions, the founders are creating a new online-learning experience with online courses that reflect
their disciplinary breadth.
1.2. Distance education in Vietnam:
Although online learning has appeared in Vietnam for a long time in the form of English
training via website, it has not had much developed recently. In Ho Chi Minh City, there are only few
universities have the distance education in their programs. Even some top universities do not provide
the distance education such as University of Technology, University of Economics, etc.
3
Open University (OU) or University of Science (HCMUS) is one of the universities that provide
distance education program for the Bachelor Degree. While HCMUS only provides the bachelor degree
for Information Technology, OU provides a more diversified program including Information
Technology, Business Administration, Finance – Banking, Accounting, Economics Law, English, etc.
OU is the first university in Vietnam has the distance education program since 1993. Up to now, OU
has more than 3.000 students graduated and more than 18.000 students attending the distance education
programs (Trung Tâm Đào Tạo Từ Xa - Đại Học Mở TP.HCM, 2012).
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Figure 2 - Number of students attending online program at HCMUS
Although HCMUS launched the distance education program later than OU, the number of
students increase gradually, especially in 2011. There are nearly 700 students, nearly triple times the
previous year (Office of Academic Affairs, HCMUS). That is the signal that distance education is
getting known by Vietnamese learners. It’s one of the right and appropriate channel for them to obtain
the knowledge beside the traditional education.
4
2. Rationale of the study
There are a lot of difficulties in delivering a good quality distance education program in
Vietnam. It’s not only the infrastructure, but also the quality control. There are a lot of top famous
universities in Vietnam not provide distance education. It, however, is clear to see that more
universities are considering offering that program to learners recently. It does not only increase the
opportunity to learners, especially for ones who are not able to follow the traditional program, but also
increases the competitive advantages of the universities. It is able to attract more adult learners who
want to seek for a higher degree but they do not have enough time to commute to the campus, or they
may not live near the campus.
On the other hand, there are also evidences that Vietnamese are getting familiar with the
distance education. They may find the advantages of online learning towards the traditional educations
such as:
Flexibility in class schedule. It’s very helpful for people who are full-time workers or
have odd job shifts.
Saving time to commute to the campus. This also helps to save the money on gasoline.
Saving money on books, accessories, etc.
Sharpening the learners’ soft-skills since they are on their own in organizing study.
Having classmate that are from various geographic locations, allows for an exciting
exchange of social and culture information and expands the network.
In general, distance education in Vietnam is still in the very beginning phase comparing to other
countries’’. In order to have a high quality distance education in Vietnam, the issues are not only
coming from the universities, but also from the learners. Therefore, it becomes the motivation to do this
5
research in order to let the universities have more insight about the learners and meet the learners’
demand of distance education. The universities may refer to the result from this research to have some
changes in the strategy and operations in order to launch a high quality online program and increase its
reputation.
3. Research questions and objectives
Although there have been a lot of researches for the distance education on over the World, there
are not many papers or researches in Vietnam, especially related to learners. Therefore, the main
objective of this paper is to take the first step to investigate the barriers and motivations of Vietnamese
learners towards the distance education. There are two main concerns of this research: the motivations
and the barriers of Vietnamese learners. Therefore, this paper is going to answer the question: What are
the barriers and motivations of Vietnamese online learners? They are, in specific:
To define the motivations’ and barriers’ components of Vietnamese students towards the
distance education program.
To assess motivations and barriers of Vietnamese students towards the distance
education.
To evaluate the influence of motivations, barriers of Vietnamese students towards
distance education to Behavioral intentions.
To define the influence of demographic factors to motivations and barriers of
Vietnamese students.
To give suggestions to program designers to improve the quality of distance education
program, or lecturers to modify teaching method that could fit to the expectations of
students.
6
4. Research scope and limitation
Due to the time constraint and limited resources, this research will only focus on the learners’
point of view in order to investigate their perceptions and expectations to the online learning program.
It’s the background to define the motivation and barriers of Vietnamese learners. This paper will not
discuss about the program designer or the instructor’s point of view. Therefore, it cannot define all
kinds of motivation and barriers of Vietnamese learners.
Although there are a lot of distance education programs or online courses in Vietnam, the target
objects of this research are limited to:
1. Distance education program (Master and Bachelor’s degree), not a single online course.
It’s provided by Vietnamese University, both local and international programs.
2. Geography: Ho Chi Minh City.
5. Implication of the study
From that result, it could give the suggestions for
Distance education program designer: to have some appropriate modifications to the
current program or to launch a program that fits Vietnamese online learners’
characteristic and meet their expectations.
Instructor: to have an appropriate teaching methodology that could transfer the
knowledge to the learners in the most effective way and give the best result.
Learner: to have a new point of view towards online learning and consider if distance
education is an effective educational channel in Vietnam.
7
6. Research structure
6.1. Introduction:
The part will be about the introduction of online learning around the World and in Vietnam.
From the current facts of online learning in Vietnam, it will state the current issues that motivate the
author to do this research. The research objectives will also be defined clearly in this part, together with
the research scope and limitation.
6.2. Literature review
This part will give the definitions and discussions about four terms: “Distance education”,
“Adult learners”, “Motivation” and “Barrier”. The agreement or argument of many authors will be also
discussed here. Moreover, it also reviews the influence of demographic factors to Motivations and
Barriers.
6.3. Research methodology
Research process and research model will be in this part. It’s about the steps in conducting and
doing this research such as how a questionnaire is formed, what the data collection method is, etc.
Moreover, it also states how the data will be analyzed in order to have the findings for this research.
6.4. Findings and Discussion
This part will contain the findings of the research based on the analyzed data. It is a
straightforward commentary exactly of what is found. Interpreting the findings and discussion will also
be put here. This part will be going to answer the research questions that were raised in the first part.
8
6.5. Conclusion
Base of the results and discussion, some recommendations or suggestion for relevance will be
given. Moreover, it will contain the further research or directions for further investigations to fill in
gaps of this research.
9
Chapter Two - Literature Review
1. Distance Education
Currently, there are there main terms that are used interchangeably: distance education (or
distance learning), e-learning and online learning (or online learning). There are so many definitions for
them. The differences are coming from the way of learning, material delivery, technology and even
personal perception (Moore, Dickson-Deane, & Gaylen, 2011). However, in this research, I just focus
to the original definitions.
Distance education is the oldest terms. It’s referred to the education that is provided through the
distant geographic. It’s applied for people who live in the remote area such as mountain or countryside.
It’s very hard to go to a “physical” school. As computers became involved in the delivery of education,
a proposed definition identified the delivery of instructional materials, using both print and electronic
media (Moore M. , 1990). Thanks to the modern technology, current distance education does not only
refer to different geographic, but also in time. In general, distance education is an education form that
occurs between two parties (learners and instructors); it’s held at different times and/or places, uses
varying forms of instructional materials (Moore, Dickson-Deane, & Gaylen, 2011).
There are a lot of argument and conflicts in defining term e-learning. It may originate during the
1980’s, within the similar time frame of another delivery mode – online education. Nichols (2003)
defined e-learning as strictly being accessible using technological tools such as web-based, webdistributed or web-capable. With this definition, e-learning would not exist if Internet technology was
not invented. Therefore, Ellis (2004) disagreed with Nichols to give another definition. Ellis said that elearning did not only covers content and instructional methods delivered via CD-ROM, Internet or
Intranet (Benson, A.; Elliot, D.; Grant, M.; Holschuh, D.; Kim, B.; Kim, H., 2002) but also includes
10
audio, video tape, satellite broadcast and interactive TV (Clark, 2002). Triacca, Bolchini, Botturi, &
Inversini (2004) made it more complicated by adding that e-learning was a type of online education.
On the other hand, online learning is described by most authors as access to learning experience
via the use of some technology (Benson, 2002; Carliner, 2004; Conrad, 2002). It’s the more recent
version of distance education which improves access to educational opportunities for learners described
as both non-traditional and disenfranchised (Benson, 2002; Conrad, 2002). Moreover, it’s not only the
accessibility to the education through the Internet, but also its convenient features such as flexibility
and ability to promote varied interactions (Ally, 2004; Hitltz & Turoff, 2005; Oblinger & Oblinger,
2005). Online learning could be either fully online program or hybrid program based on a mix of online
and face-to-face strategy (Kumarawadu, 2009). Moreover, an online learning program must have at
least 80% of content that is delivered through the Internet (Allen & Seaman, 2011).
Although there are a lot of similarities and differences of those three terms, there is only one
purpose among them. That is providing the education to people who cannot go to a “physical” school.
It gives the learning opportunity for individuals. Thanks to the improvement of technology and the
appearance of Internet, there have been a lot of advantages compare to the traditional education. In
general, before the age of Internet, distance education used to be the form that leaners and instructors
sat at different places and communicated through radio system. Then with the involvement of modern
technology, instructional material is not only delivered via printed version but also by electrical
versions such as CD-ROM, video and audio tape, etc. That’s e-learning which stands for electrical
learning. It also includes computers and the network (Internet and Intranet). Then it became the age of
online learning which takes big advantages of the Internet and the high technology.
Therefore, in order to avoid arguments, this research will use the most general term “distance
education”. Most Vietnamese Universities may use the term “distance learning” or “distance
11
education”. They have some common points such as: instructional materials are delivered via either
printed or electrical version; it’s flexible in time and places; mixture of offline (traditional) and online
learning, etc. There is one only exceptional case of HCMUS; they provide the distance education via
Internet fully.
2. Adult learners
Since the main research object is the learners who take part in the distance education program,
it’s important to know the definition of adult learners. Although there are several definitions of adult
learners, most of them have the same baseline at the outset to establish research parameters. They are
age and experience (Kimmel & McNeese, 2006).
An adult is a fully grown person who is legally responsible for their actions, so the age of an
adult depends on their own countries. It could be older than either 16 or 18. In Vietnam, it is 18-yearold. On the other hand, the National Center for Education Statistics of the U.S. Department of
Education (NCES) defined adult learners as “adults age 16 or older and not enrolled in the 12 th grade or
below” (NCES, 2005). Another definition of adult learner is “age 25 or older with multiple
commitments, experience that contributes to their learning and goals based on well-defined needs”
(Osgood-Treston, 2001). He also subdivided adult learners into two groups (1) “those who participate
in organized learning activities (enrichment and community education)” and (2) “those who engage in
learning for academic credit”.
In general, although there are few cases that learners are younger than 18 but they already
attended the college, this research will focus on the one who is (1) 18 and older, (2) have college degree
or higher.
12
3. Motivation
The term motivation is a familiar one. The Oxford Advance Learner's Dictionary defines
“motivate somebody” is “to be the reason why somebody does something or behaves in a particular
way”. Hence, in this research, motivations mean the reasons for somebody to take part in distance
education program.
There are two important concepts related to motivation. They are intrinsic motivation and
extrinsic motivation. There have been more than 800 publications have explored the intrinsic and
extrinsic motivation dichotomy for more than two decades (Vallerand, 1997). Intrinsic motivation
refers to performing an activity for itself, in order to experience pleasure and satisfaction inherent in the
activity, while extrinsic motivation pertains to a wide variety of behaviors where the goals of action
extend beyond those inherent in the activity itself (Deci, E. L.; Ryan, R. M., 1985). An intrinsic
motivator is the source of motivation that originates inside the individual as a response to the job itself
and the circumstances surrounding its execution (Martin, 2005). On the other hand, an extrinsic
motivator is one that originates outside the individuals and which influence their behavior (Martin,
2005).
The motivations for seeking education could be one factor of the extrinsic motivators. In the
research of Kimmel & McNeese (2006), the author found several motivators based on online learners in
Canada and U.S. such as:
A desire for personal accomplishment.
A desire to be a role model for my children.
A desire to finish a degree that I began, but did not complete earlier.
A desire for knowledge/skills in this degree field.
13
Encouragement from my children.
The intrinsic motivators are more complex and affect much to the online learners during the
program. If the online learners demotivated, they may not overcome numerous barriers. This could be
seen through the attrition rate of the program. There are several researches about the intrinsic
motivational factors of online learners. They could share some point of views such as Grabowski &
Curtis (1991) and (Keller, 1999). While Grabowski & Curtis focused on the influence of information
and technology to learners, Keller defined what encourages learner’s active involvement in learning.
The ACRS model of Keller (1991) stands for (A) attention, (R) relevance, (C) confidence and (S)
satisfaction. The summary of both models could be found in the following table:
Keller (1991) – ACRS model
Grabowski & Curtis (1991)
1. Usefulness of the information.
1. (A)
Engaging
and
maintaining
learner interests.
2. Perceived
relevance
of
the 2. (R) Relating course content to
students’ interest.
information.
3. Self-confidence in the ability to 3. (C) Enhancing student’s confidence
access and use the information.
4. Resulting
satisfaction
successful access to.
in understanding course content
from 4. (S)
Satisfying
students’
inquisitiveness related to information
Table 2 - Motivational factors of Grabowski & Curtis (1991) and Keller (1991)
Although the motivational factors are described in the different words, most authors agreed that
in order to motivate learners, there should be (1) a closed relationship between the program and
14
learners’ self-interest (value of the program); (2) recognition of the usefulness of the program to their
life; (3) confidence in using and applying the modern technology to the learning.
To motivate online learners, it’s not only the responsibility of their own learners, but also the
program designers’ and even lecturers’. Therefore, it’s also important to analyze the learners’
expectations to motivate them. In order to explore the insight of learners’ motivations and expectations,
Kumarawadu suggested the following questions:
1. What are the characteristics of the ideal online learners?
2. What is the value of the online learning program to the learners?
3. What do the learners hope to achieve from the program?
4. How much interaction exists in an online learning program compared to a tradition
program (face-to-face)?
5. What are the most effective ways to design instruction for online environment?
6. How does online learning program motivate learners who are not as self-directed or
independent?
7. How can designers create collaborative online learning environments?
8. How does the online learning program operate?
Another important theory about motivation is Self-determination theory (SDT) (Deci, E. L.;
Ryan, R. M., 1985). In this theory, different types of motivation underlie human behavior. The
motivation was categorized and listed from high to low levels of self-determination. They are intrinsic
motivation, extrinsic motivation and amotivation. The elements of the SDT are illustrated in the
following figure.
15
Amotivation
Extrinsic Motivation
External
Regulation
Quality
of
Behavior
Introjected
Regulation
Identified
Regulation
Intrinsic Motivation
Integrated
Regulation
Non-self determined
Self-determined
Figure 3 - Elements of the Self-determination theory
The Intrinsic motivation had been pointed out previously. In addition to previous definition,
extrinsic motivation pertains to a wide variety of behaviors where goals of action extend beyond those
inherent in the activity itself (Frédéric Guay, Robert J. Vallerand, and Céline Blanchard, 2000). It had
been divided into another four sub groups that ordered from lower to higher levels of selfdetermination. They are:
1. External regulation: this is the type of extrinsic motivation that is the most contrast to
intrinsic motivation. Individuals are responsive to threats of punishment/offers/rewards
and tend to be compliant as a result (Maggie Hartnett, Alison George, John Dron, 2011).
This behavior is regulated by rewards or in order to avoid negative consequences.
2. Introjected regulation: this refers to individuals who engage in a task because they feel
they should due to the expectations of others (Maggie Hartnett, Alison George, John
Dron, 2011).
3. Identified regulation: this occurs when a behavior is valued and perceived as being
chosen by oneself. Although it seems to be the same as intrinsic motivation, it’s still
categorized as extrinsic motivation. The reason is that it is the utility value (a means to
an end), personal importance, and/or relevance of the task rather than interest and
enjoyment in the task itself that determines the behavior (Brophy, 2008).
16
4. Integrated regulation: this is the most autonomous type of extrinsic motivation, where
learners engage in the activity because of its significance to their sense of self (Maggie
Hartnett, Alison George, John Dron, 2011).
Besides intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, the last element in the SDT is amotivation. This was
a new concept that proposed by Deci and Ryan (1985) in order to fully understand human behaviors.
When amotivated, individuals experience a lack of contingency between their behaviors and outcomes.
It’s neither intrinsically nor extrinsically motivated. Amotivation is the least self-determined because
there is no sense of purpose and no expectations of reward or possibility of changing the course of
events (Frédéric Guay, Robert J. Vallerand, and Céline Blanchard, 2000).
In the SDT model, the placement of intrinsic motivation is on the far right while amotivation is
on the far left and extrinsic motivation is in the middle. It does not mean that amotivation or extrinsic
motivation could be shifted to intrinsic motivation. Those three motivations should be independent. The
placement just intends to highlight that it is the best example of human autonomy (Deci, E. L.; Ryan, R.
M., 1985). Moreover, according to SDT, those types of motivation are differently related o various
types of outcomes. For example, one would expect intrinsic motivation to be mostly associated with
positive outcomes followed by identified regulation. In contrast, the most negative outcomes will stem
from amotivation followed to external regulation (Deci, E. L.; Ryan, R. M., 1985 & Vallerand, 1997).
4. Barriers
The Oxford Advance Learner's Dictionary (2012) defines “barrier” as “a problem, rule or
situation that prevents somebody from doing something, or that makes something impossible”. In the
scope of this research, barriers mean something that prevents somebody to start distance education
program and/or to finish the program.
17
Many authors agreed that adult learners face numerous of challenges and difficulties when they
are back to school. Moreover, Mbilinyi (2006) stated that adults returning to school face – and in many
case, overcome – obstacles different from those facing younger students. In fact, almost adult learners
who are seeking for the online learning are working, self-financed or married. They study online to take
the advantages of flexibility of place and time. Therefore, adults worry most about juggling school with
their family and work responsibility (Mbilinyi, 2006). Some examples barriers that are found out by
Mbilinyi (2006) and Kimmel & McNeese (2006):
The role as primary caregiver in a family.
Lack of childcare for the minor child/children.
Lack of funds for childcare for the minor child/children.
Lack of personal funds to pay for the colleges.
Concern about paying back student loans.
Finding the time for school amidst work, family and other commitment.
In another study, Lin Y. Muilenburg & Zane L. Berge (2005) had found eight groups of barriers
of students towards online learning. They are:
1. Administrative/instructor issues: barriers which are controlled by administrative staffs or
instructors. They could be the problems with delivery material on time, lack of online
assistance or lack of timely feedback from the instructors.
2. Social interaction: this is caused by lack of interaction with peers or the instructors, such
as lack of collaboration between students or feeling of isolated while studying online.
3. Academic skills: this is caused by student’s perceive due their lacking of academic skills
in order to follow the study, such as writing, reading or communication.
18
4. Technical skills: this factor concerns respondents’ perceived barriers to online learning
due to their lack of technical skills such as unfamiliar with delivery system or fear of
new tools/software for online learning.
5. Learner motivation: respondent answered whether they had certain characteristic that
would affect their motivation in online learning course.
6. Time and support for studies: this barriers concern about the respondents’ lacking of
time and support from employer, family and friends.
7. Cost and access to the Internet: this factor concerns whether the respondents find access
to the Internet too expensive, fear the loss of privacy, confidence or property rights.
8. Technical problem: this factor concerns such things as a lack of consistent platforms,
browsers and software or the lack of technical assistance that causes obstacles to online
learning.
5. Behavioral Intention
Behavioral intention of distance education or online learning learners had been investigated in
some study with different models. There was a study about the investigation of students’ behavioral
intention to use the online learning course websites which used the three-tier Technology Use Model
(Liaw, 2008). It integrates multidisciplinary perspective that included motivation, social cognitive
theory (SCT), theory of planned behavior (TBP), and technology acceptance model (TAM).
Another study combined TAM model and innovation diffusion theory (IDT) (Su-Chao Chang &
Feng-Cheng Tung, 2008) to investigate the behavioral intention of online learners. Although different
model was used, some similarities to motivations and barriers were found. Su-Chao Chang & FengCheng Tung found the factors that affected behavioral intention of online learners as following:
19
Compatibility: is the degree to which the innovation is perceived to be consistent with
the potential users’ existing value, previous experiences and needs. It has great positive
and direct effect on perceived usefulness and the behavioral intention.
Perceived usefulness: is the degree to which a person believes that using a particular
system will enhance his or her job performance. It has great positive and direct effect on
the behavioral intention.
Perceived ease of use: is the degree to which a person believes that using a particular
system will be free of effort. It has great positive and direct effect on the behavioral
intention.
Perceived system quality: system quality is concern with whether or not
there are bugs
in the system, the consistency of the user interface, ease of use, response rate in
interactive system, quality documentation, and sometimes, quality and maintainability of
the program code (Seddon, 1997). It has positive direct effect on the behavioral
intention.
Computer self-efficacy: it’s defined as an individual’s perceptions of his or her ability to
use computers in the accomplishment of a task rather than reflecting simple component
skills’. It has positive effect on the behavioral intention.
6. Influence of demographic factors to motivations and barriers:
The influence of demographic factors to motivations/barriers was mentioned in several
researches. It’s done by using ANOVAs in order to determine whether particular subgroups of
respondents viewed motivations or barriers differently. In the research of barriers which was done by
(Lin Y. Muilenburg & Zane L. Berge, 2005), ten of the eleven independent variables tested affected
20
students rating of barriers to online learning significantly: gender, age, ethnicity, type of learning
institution, self-rating of online learning skills, effectiveness of learning online, online learning
enjoyment, the number of online courses completed, the likelihood of taking a future online course and
persons who reported experiencing prejudicial treatment.
In contrast to that research, no motivation s or barriers of significance by gender were noted
(Kimmel & McNeese, 2006). However, in this study, one motivator and four barriers were shown to be
significant, supported the hypothesis adult students will differ significantly by race/ethnicity in their
motivations for seeking education and adult students will differ significantly by race/ethnicity in their
barriers to higher education.
21
Chapter Three – Research Methodology
The mixed methods will be used to do this research: quantitative and qualitative methods. While
the qualitative method is used to explore the potential motivational and barriers factors, the quantitative
method uses the survey method to collect mass information.
1. Research process
This research paper will follow the process that is presented in the below figure. The research
started with the objectives as described in the previous part. Based on the objectives, literature review
will be done in order to define the key terms and identify past studies/researches that supports for this
topic. In the next step, research model and hypothesis will be formed.
Qualitative and quantitative methods will be used to do this research. The details steps will be
discussed in the next parts.
In the analysis stage, several techniques will be used to analyze the data that had been collected
in the previous step. Then, all findings, discussion, recommendation and conclusion will be done at the
last stage.
22
Objectives
Literature Review
Research Model &
Hypothesis
Qualitative method
Measurement &
Questionnaire design
Quantitative method
In-depth interview
Questionnaire
Data Analysis
Pilot survey to test the
questionnaire
Discussions and
Recommendations
Final questionnaire
Data collection
Figure 4 - Research process
23
2. Research model
The model of this research is presented in the following figure:
Interest/Enjoyment
Perceived Competency
Effort/Importance
Pressure/Tension
Autonomous Regulation
Perceived Choice
Controlled Regulation
Value/Usefulness
Extrinsic
motivation
Intrinsic
motivation
Amotivation
Motivation
Behavioral
Intention
Barrier
Administrative/
Instructor issue
Social
interations
Academic skills
Technology
issues
Technical skills
Figure 5 - Research model
24
Time/Support
for studies
Financial issues
The research model had three main parts.
1. Motivation and its components.
2. Barriers and its components.
3. Relationship between motivations, barriers and behavioral intention.
In the part Motivation, three main types of motivation including extrinsic motivation, intrinsic
motivation and amotivation were evaluated. The measurement of motivation was basically based on the
situational motivation scale (Frédéric Guay, Robert J. Vallerand, and Céline Blanchard, 2000).
However, the author thought that the intrinsic motivation’s scale was not enough while the extrinsic
motivation’s scale was focused to Identified regulation and External regulation only. Therefore, the
author was seeking for another scale for the motivation, only amotivation’s scale was kept. Self
regulation questionnaire was applied to measure extrinsic motivation with two main subscales:
autonomous regulation and controlled regulation. It asked three questions about why people engaged in
learning related-behaviors. Thus, the responses that were provided were either autonomous regulation
(identified regulation and intrinsic motivation) or controlled regulation (external regulation or
introjected regulation). On the other hand, intrinsic motivation inventory was applied to measure
intrinsic motivation. Its components were contributed by many authors. Those six components of
intrinsic motivation were picked since the author thought it’s applicable to the target objects of this
research.
Secondly, the seven components of barriers were formed by combining two research of (Lin Y.
Muilenburg & Zane L. Berge, 2005) and (Kimmel & McNeese, 2006).
Lastly, the third part of the model was the relationship between motivations, barriers and
behavioral intention. It showed how motivations and barriers affected to the behavioral intention of the
learners.
25
3. Hypothesis
The hypotheses will be used to test the existence of differences by demographic factors in
motivations and barriers of adult learners. They are:
H1: Adult learners will differ significantly by gender in their motivations towards
distance education.
H2: Adult learners will differ significantly by age in their motivations towards distance
education.
H3: Adult learners will differ significantly by experience in learning in their motivations
towards distance education.
H4: Adult learners will differ significantly by gender in their barriers towards distance
education.
H5: Adult learners will differ significantly by age in their barriers towards distance
education.
H6: Adult learners will differ significantly by experience in learning in their barriers
towards distance education.
H7: There is a relationship between behavioral intention and motivations, barriers.
4. Qualitative method
The method used in-depth, unstructured interview and literature review in order to explore the
potential factors of motivation and barriers of distance education in Vietnam.
For the in-depth interview, the target objects were the ones who have experience in the distance
education environment. They were Vietnamese students, program designers and instructors. Each of
them will give different points of view about the motivations and barriers. The type of interview is
unstructured. The interview will be conducted once it’s (nearly) saturated.
26
Literature review is used to get the motivational and barrier factors in other countries. That
result was investigated if it’s still applicable in Vietnam.
5. Quantitative method
5.1. Measurement
Measurement was based on literature review and the previous researches. The following table
will illustrate the summary of researches and scales that are used in this paper.
Factor.
Extrinsic
Research/Scale
Self-regulation questionnaire
motivations
Intrinsic
Author
(Williams, G. C. & Deci, E. L.,
1996)
Intrinsic Motivation Inventory
motivations
(Deci, E. L., Eghrari, H., Patrick,
B. C., Leone, D., 1994)
(McAuley, E., Duncan, T., &
Tammen, V.V., 1987)
(Plan, R. W., & Ryan, R. M.,
1985)
(Ryan, 1982)
(Ryan, R. M., Connel, J. P., &
Plant, R. W., 1990)
(Ryan, R. M., Koestner, R. &
Deci, E. L., 1991)
(Ryan, R. M. Mims, V., &
Koestner, R., 1983)
27
Amotivation
On the assessment of Situational (Frédéric
Guay,
Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation: Vallerand,
The Situational Motivation Scale
Barriers
Students
barriers
to
and
Robert
J.
Céline
Blanchard, 2000)
Online (Lin Y. Muilenburg & Zane L.
Learning: a factor analytic study
Berge, 2005)
Barriers to Business Education: (Kimmel & McNeese, 2006)
Motivating Adult Learners
Table 3 - Measurement of Motivations and Barriers
Although there is a scale for both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in the research of (Frédéric
Guay, Robert J. Vallerand, and Céline Blanchard, 2000), the author thought it may not be enough,
especially for intrinsic motivation. The author in that research only developed scale for intrinsic
motivation, identified regulation, external regulation and amotivation. Therefore, the only
amotivation’s scale was kept; another scale for intrinsic and extrinsic motivation will be applied.
The scale that was applied for extrinsic motivation was Self-regulation questionnaire. It’s
developed for use in a study conducted in a medical school (Williams, G. C. & Deci, E. L., 1996).
There questionnaire concerned the reasons why people learn in particular settings such as college or
medical school. It had 14-question about why people engage in learning-related behaviors. The
questionnaire was formed with just two subscales: Controlled regulation (external or introjected) and
autonomous regulation (identified or intrinsic). The questionnaire was adapted as needed to refer to the
distance education in Vietnam.
Intrinsic motivation was measured by Intrinsic Motivation Inventory (IMI). This is a
multidimensional measurement device intend to assess participants’ subjective experience related to a
target activity in laboratory experiments. This inventory has been contributed by many authors. There
are totally seven subscales in this inventory:
28
1. Interest/Enjoyment.
2. Perceived Competence.
3. Effort/Importance.
4. Pressure/Tension.
5. Perceived Choice.
6. Value/Usefulness.
7. Relatedness.
The IMI items have often been modified slightly to fit specific activities. It does not need to
include all seven subscales in the research, just only the needed items. However, the author may think
all seven items are related and appropriated to assess intrinsic motivation of Vietnamese students, all
are chosen. Moreover, redundancy may be the issue of this measurement. Item within the subscales
overlap considerably, but this can be solved at the data analysis stage.
The measurement of Barriers was based on two researches (Lin Y. Muilenburg & Zane L.
Berge, 2005) and (Kimmel & McNeese, 2006). The items are:
1. Administrative/Instructor issues.
2. Social interactions.
3. Academic skills.
4. Technology issues.
5. Technical skills.
6. Time/support for study.
7. Financial issues.
29
5.2. Questionnaire design
Questionnaire design was based on the measurement that’s already discussed in the previous
part. Since most of the factors were based on the foreign researches, the original questionnaire was
written in English. Then it’s translated into Vietnamese by the author with the support of a foreign and
Vietnamese English teachers. When it’s translated, the author try to keep the original meaning while
making it understandable as much as possible to Vietnamese students. After translation, the Vietnamese
questionnaire was given to five respondents for testing to avoid any wording issues. Then, it’s finalized
to be the official one.
The questionnaire had two parts: (1) demographic factors (Age, Gender, and Experience in
distance education) and (2) measurement of Motivations and Barriers. The second part required the
respondents to answer a series of questions by choosing a 7-point Likert scale for each question. The
scale was range from totally disagree (1 point) to totally agree (7 points).
The questionnaire, both Vietnamese and English version, can be found in the Appendix.
5.3. Data collection method
There are two phase in the data collection method. The first one is the pilot survey phase. In this
phase, ten random respondents were chosen to do the survey. After this, there were some adjustments
of the wordings in the questionnaire for the appropriateness of the survey.
In the main phase, direct distribution of survey will be applied in order to have the highest
response rate. It was distributed at the school when students were gathered in the orientation day.
6. Data analysis
The data from the questionnaire was input and analyzed by using SPSS. Then, the following
analysis methods will be applied:
Descriptive statistic: provide the summary of those factors in measurement.
30
Reliability test: use the Cronchbach’s alpha as the measurement for reliability test in
order to determine the consistency of all scales.
Factor analysis (EFA): it will be used in order to reduce the number of variable and
detect the structure in the relationship between variables.
Correlation between Motivations and Barriers: used to determine if these two variables
are linearly related to each other.
Data analysis of Variance: determine if there is any statistical significant difference in
Motivations and Barriers by demographic factors.
31
Chapter Four – Findings & Discussion
1. Sample demographic
There were 250 surveys distributed to distance education students of one university in Ho Chi
Minh City. The response rate was 74.4% with 186 surveys. However, there were only 116 (46.4%)
valid surveys. Invalid surveys such as incomplete, random chosen, etc. were eliminated.
Female respondents (52.6%) a little bit outnumbered males (47.4%). Most of respondents in the
distance education program between the ages of 25-29 (29.3%) and over 35 (27.6%). The details of age
and gender of respondents are shown in the following table:
25
20
15
Male
Female
10
5
0
18 - 24
25 - 29
30 - 35
Over 35
Table 4 - Details of age and gender of respondents
The majority (56.9%) of survey respondents were in the degree program which is related to
Business. It’s included Business Administration (22.4%), Economic – Laws (17.2%), Accounting
(10.3%) and Finance – Banking (6.9%). The other major fields (43.1%) were Sociology, Social
Activities, Civil Engineering and English. It’s shown in the following table:
32
Major field
Frequency
Percent
Business Administration
26
22.4%
Economic – Law
20
17.2%
Civil Engineering
19
16.4%
Sociology
14
12.1%
Accounting
12
10.3%
Social Activities
11
9.5%
Finance – Banking
8
6.9%
English
6
5.2%
116
100%
Total
Table 5 - Frequency of major fields
The experience of respondents is distributed nearly evenly. The number of first-year students is
a bit higher than others, 40 students, which account for 34.5%. Second-year, third-year and fourth-year
students account for 25%, 22.4% and 18.1% respectively.
18.1%
34.5%
Under 1 year
1 - 2 years
2 - 3 years
22.4%
Over 3 years
25.0%
Figure 6 - Percentage of Students' Experience in Distance Education
33
1.1. Motivation
According to literature review, motivations are divided into 3 sub-groups: (1) extrinsic
motivations, (2) intrinsic motivation and (3) Amotivation. The following table illustrated top ten
highest motivations as determined by aggregate mean score. All of them are extrinsic motivations and
intrinsic motivations. No Amotivation is found here. Actually, amotivation was found among five
lowest mean values. It showed that many respondents had no amotivation.
Rank
ID
Motivation
Mean
Standard
Deviation
1
EM6
2
think instructors’ suggestion is good
6.00
1.377
PCH3 my own choice
5.99
1.161
3
VU1
beneficial
5.90
1.083
4
VU4
useful to improve knowledge
5.85
1.105
5
EM14 excite to apply new knowledge to daily work
5.85
1.320
6
EI3
important to finish this well
5.78
1.156
7
VU2
has some value to me
5.75
1.208
8
EM1
improve knowledge and skill
5.72
1.399
9
EM12 proud about myself if join
5.68
1.405
10
EM3
5.58
1.539
a part of promotion plan
Table 6 - Top ten highest motivations
1.2. Barriers
Top ten highest motivations are illustrated in the following table, as determined by aggregate
mean score.
34
Rank
ID
Barrier
Mean
Standard
Deviation
1
SI1
lacking of communication
4.20
1.979
2
AI4
difficulty in contacting administrative staff
4.11
1.896
3
FI1
primary career for elder
4.05
2.089
4
SI2
distance education seems personal
3.87
1.904
5
AI5
difficulty in contacting academic staff
3.75
1.915
6
AI7
low quality/insufficient material
3.62
1.859
7
SI4
lacking of collaboration
3.56
1.957
8
TI4
lack of technical assistance
3.50
1.976
9
AS4
lack of communication skill
3.49
1.881
10
AI8
is not trained to use delivery system
3.47
1.815
Table 7 - Top ten highest barriers
In contrast to Motivations, the top ten highest barriers had the mean value from 3.47 to 4.20.
That’s the middle value of 7-ponint Likert scale. Standard deviations of these barriers are also higher
than those motivations. That indicates that respondents’ point of view about barriers is spread out over
the 7-point scale.
2. Reliability analysis
The following table shows the result of reliability analysis for all of the scales:
35
Cronbach’s alpha
Cronbach’s alpha
Scale
if item deleted
Autonomous regulation
0.720
Controlled regulation
0.726
Interest/Enjoyment
0.512
Perceived Competence
0.637
Intrinsic
Effort/Importance
0.304
motivations
Pressure/Tension
0.605
Perceived Choice
0.358
0.651
Value/Usefulness
0.589
0.767
Extrinsic
motivations
Amotivation
Barriers
0.797
Academic Issues
0.832
Social Interaction
0.719
Academic Skills
0.898
Technical Skills
0.826
Time/Support for Study
0.862
Technology Issues
0.796
Financial Issues
0.767
Behavioral
0.663
intention
Table 8- Reliability analysis result
According to the above result, we can see that extrinsic motivations, Amotivation and Barriers
scale had high Cronbach’s alpha (all above 0.7). On the other hand, intrinsic motivations and
36
Behavioral intention scales were below 0.7. The threshold for Cronbach’s alpha, however, for this
analysis would be set to 0.5 since this is the first time it’s running in Vietnam, this should be an
acceptable value. . In the further analysis of reliability, the Value/Usefulness scale, if the item feel
distant to distance education was removed, the Cronbach’s alpha increased to 0.767. Similarly, if the
item have another choice in scale Perceived Choice was deleted, the Cronbach’s alpha increased to
0.651. Therefore, those two item were removed. Moreover, there was one scale (Effort/Importance)
below 0.5. However, it should be kept for further analysis since the author thought the scale was
important or its items may belong to other scale.
3. Factor analysis
A principal axis factor analysis (PAFA) with Varimax rotation and Kaiser Normalization was
used to determine the underlying structure of the data. A cutoff for statistical significance of the factor
loading of 0.5 was used. Each item loaded distinctively on one factor. The highest factor loading was
separated from its next nearest loading by at least 0.25. After running PAFA, the new factors’ variables
were computed by the mean of all variables in that factor.
3.1. Motivations
The PAFA of the 39 motivations listed in the survey resulted in 6 factors that accounted for
57.255% of the overall variance. 21 of the 39 motivation items were deleted because of their factor
loadings were below the 0.5 cut-off or they did not have significant different from theirs next nearest
loadings.
37
Factor
1
2
3
4
5
Beneficial
.755
.281
has some value to me
.703
.283
follow since I wanted to
.651
my own choice
.556
not sure it's good to pursue
.798
not sure if it's worth to follow
.766
don't know what distance education could bring to me
.693
not feel good if not follow instructors' suggestion
.744
want instructor think I am a good student
.685
important to follow instructors' suggestion
.684
easier to do than self-thinking
.551
interesting and want to know more about it
6
.724
excite to apply new knowledge to daily work
.270
.694
feel pretty competent after following for a while
.256
.648
pay much attention
-.323
not boring
.816
.710
very relaxed
.888
not feel nervous
.511
Extraction Method: Principal Axis Factoring.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
a. Rotation converged in 6 iterations.
Table 9 - Rotated Factor Matrix of component Motivation
The 18-motivation items left were grouped into 6 subgroups. They were:
1. Self-perceive of the value.
beneficial
has some value to me
follow since I wanted to
my own choice
2. Lack of orientation.
not sure it's good to pursue
38
not sure if it's worth to follow
don't know what distance education could bring to me
3. Effect of instructors to students.
not feel good if not follow instructors' suggestion
want instructor think I am a good student
important to follow instructors' suggestion
want instructor think I am a good student
4. Self-interest.
interesting and want to know more about it
excite to apply new knowledge to daily work
feel pretty competent after following for a while
5. Enjoyment.
pay much attention
not boring
6. Pressure.
very relaxed
not feel nervous
In general, the result was supported the literature review.
More than half of the extrinsic motivation items were removed. There was only one group left
for this scale. It’s about the effect of instructors to the students.
There was only one item removed from the Amotivation scale and it’s renamed into Lack of
orientation. The six-intrinsic-motivation groups from the beginning were gathered into four groups
after doing factor analysis. There is one interesting note here that the Interest/Enjoyment group was
39
divided into two subgroups: Enjoyment and Self-interest. It’s on the different between the literature
review about intrinsic motivation in IMI and the result. The other two subgroups were Self-perceive of
the value and Pressure.
Besides, there was one item that had high mean value but removed after running PFAF. That’s a
part of promotion plan. The reason may come from the current context of Vietnam. Although it’s
supported by many respondents but it was not strong enough to contribute into the literature.
N
Mean
Std. Deviation
Self-perceive of the value
116
5.79
.955
Self-interest
116
5.41
1.088
Pressure
116
5.07
1.404
Enjoyment
116
4.00
.620
Effect of instructors to students
116
3.96
1.384
Lack of orientation
116
2.62
1.301
Valid N (listwise)
116
Table 10 - Motivations of Vietnamese students towards Distance Education
The above table illustrated the motivations of Vietnamese students towards Distance Education
in the descending mean order. According to this result, Vietnamese students, in general, had high
perceive on the value of the distance education (M = 5.79). It’s logical that they also had high selfinterest (M = 5.41) and pressure (M = 5.07). There is a note about pressure that the question design for
this component was very relaxed and not feels pressure when joining the distance education. Other
groups had positive meaning to theirs group name except Pressure. Therefore, higher mean of Pressure
meant they had less pressure while learning. On the other hand, respondents rated the Effect of
instructors to students and Lack of orientation as low obstacles to distance education (M = 3.96 and
2.62).
40
3.2. Barriers
The same method of analyzing Motivation was used to analyze Barriers. The PAFA of the 36
barriers’ item listed in the survey resulted in 6 factors that accounted for 62.943% of the overall
variance. 18 of the 36 barriers items were deleted because of their factor loadings were below the 0.5
cut-off or they did not have significant different from theirs next nearest loadings. Here is the result
after running factor analysis.
In general, the result supported the literature review since it gave the same factors.
Factor
1
2
lack of writing skill
.859
lack of reading skill
.824
lack of communication skill
.794
lack of confidence
.765
lack of language skill
.690
lack of typing skill
.595
3
not allocate any funds for suddenly events
.886
lack of fund for college
.821
lack of fund for childcare
.750
4
distance education seems personal
.716
lacking of collaboration
.630
lacking of communication
.573
family life is disrupted
5
6
.254
.797
lack of support from family/employer
.329
.716
difficulty in contacting administrative staff
.810
difficulty in contacting academic staff
.297
lack of technical assistance
.663
.865
incompatibility system
.294
Extraction Method: Principal Axis Factoring.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
a. Rotation converged in 5 iterations.
Table 11 - Rotated Factor Matrix of component Barrier
The 18-item left were categorized into six components as follow.
41
.544
1. Lack of academic skills.
Lack of writing skill.
Lack of reading skill.
Lack of communication skill.
Lack of language skill.
Lack of typing skill.
Lack of confidence.
2. Financial issues.
not allocate any funds for suddenly events.
lack of fund for college.
lack of fund for childcare.
3. Lack of social interactions.
distance education seems personal.
lacking of collaboration.
lacking of communication.
4. Support from family/employer.
family life is disrupted.
lack of support from family/employer.
5. Difficulty in contacting staffs.
difficulty in contacting administrative staff
difficulty in contacting academic staff.
6. Technical issues.
lack of technical assistance.
42
incompatibility system.
N
Mean
Std. Deviation
Difficulty in contacting staffs
116
3.93
1.691
Lack of social interaction
116
3.88
1.519
Technical issues
116
3.30
1.736
Financial issues
116
3.28
1.720
Lack of academic skills
116
3.17
1.498
Support from family/employer
116
2.91
1.569
Valid N (listwise)
116
Table 12 - Barriers of Vietnamese students towards Distance education
There were several components of Barriers removed from the original survey. All the
Technology issues items were removed since it may not be applicable to Vietnamese students. The
distance education program is designed as a hybrid program. It’s the combination of offline and online
learning. Offline learning is organized as the usual traditional class, with lecturers and students meeting
in an auditorium. Online learning is self-organized learning in which students needs to learn by
themselves via books, electronic devices (such as CD-ROM, eBooks, etc.) and the Internet. Therefore,
Technology issues may not have significant influence in this situation.
All groups had positive meaning to theirs group name except Support from family/employer.
Therefore, although the lowest mean of barriers was Support from family/employer, it had positive
meaning. Low value meant the respondents had support from family or employer in order to follow the
distance education program.
All barriers in Academic issues were also removed except the difficulty in contacting school’s
staffs, including both academic staffs and administrative staffs. There may be no barrier with the
material and teaching methodology.
There is no factors in Barriers have the mean value above the average value 4. The highest
mean value is M = 3.93 (Difficulty in contacting academic staffs). However, standard deviations of
43
Barriers were also high (around 1.6); it indicated that the respondents’ point of view about the Barriers
was spread out the scale from “totally not agree” to “totally agree”.
3.3. Behavioral intention
There was one factor was extracted in the Behavioral intention scale. Only one item with low
loading was removed.
Factor
1
fulfill my promotion application
.663
intend to recommend to others
.642
intend to use as autonomous study tool
.576
Table 13 - Factor Matrix of Behavioral Intention
The descriptive statistic of behavioral intention was illustrated in the below table. All of the
mean values were high (M > 5.5). It showed that respondents may have positive behavior to the
distance education program.
N
intend to use as
autonomous study tool
intend to recommend to
others
fulfill my promotion
application
Mean
Std. Deviation
116
5.63
1.361
116
5.71
1.237
116
5.76
1.283
Valid N (listwise)
116
Table 14 - Behavioral intention of learners towards Distance education
4. Correlation between Behavioral Intention and Motivations, Barriers
Bivariate correlation will be used to determine if any variables of Barriers and Motivations are
linearly related to each other. The correlation between variables were illustrated in the below table. In
the study of Lin Y. Muilenburg & Zane L. Berge (2005), it considered Learner motivation as a
44
component of Barriers. It indicated that there was a relationship between those two components
although it’s not a deeply investigation of motivation.
Although this result could not determine whether one variable was cause and other was effect, it
could show us some potential relationship among those variables. Some relationships were logical and
interesting. Self-interest, Lack of orientation and Self-perceived of the value had the most correlations
with other variables.
Lack of orientation had the most correlations with other variables, up to seven. An individual
with high lack of orientation could also have high lack of academic skills (Pearson correlation P =
0.561), high lack of support from family/employer (P = 0.417). Other correlations were not so high. If
leaners perceived that they are lacking of academic skills or lack of support from family/employer in
order to follow the education, they themselves may know that they were incompetent. There, however,
were some reasons for them to be there to study, but the choice may not be made by themselves and
they may not know what distance program could bring to them. Then, it will lead to the high pressure
while learning (P = -0.188).
Self-perceived of the value had significant correlations at 0.01 level (2-tailed) with four
variables. While it had positive correlation with self-interest (P = 0.369), pressure (P = 0.253) and
behavioral intention (P = 0.520), lack of orientation had negative correlation with it (P= -0.277). When
individual recognized the value of the distance education program could bring to them, that individual
would also have high self-interest, less pressure in the study and positive behavior to the program. This
is quite important since it’s very hard to force a person to study, especially when they have to learn by
themselves in the distance education program. Therefore, once the learners must recognize the value of
the program could bring to them, then they would have positive self-motivated and less lack of
orientation.
45
Another factor that had significant correlation at the 0.01 level (2-tailed) with other variables
was Support from family/employer. An individual with high lacking of support form family/employer
would also have high lack of academic skills or financial issues. Due to the special characteristics of
distance education, they had to learn by themselves. They were on their own but they were also lacking
of support from the family or employer, then they were so isolated. Therefore, they may face a lot of
difficulties in learning and in finance. An interesting correlation here was that although they may lack
of support from family/employer but they may have self-interest in the distance education program.
Similar to factor support from family/employer, technical issues had many correlations with
lack of orientation (P = 0.290), self-interest (P = -0.1914), lack of academic skills (P = 0.305), support
from family/employer (P = 0.360) and difficulty in contacting school staffs (P = 0.219). It was easy to
see that if one person was lacking of academic skills, he may also face to technical issues while joining
distance education program. It could lead to be less interested in the program.
46
Correlations
Selfperceive of
the value
Self-perceive
of the value
Lack of
orientation
Effect of
instructors to
students
Self-interest
Enjoyment
Pressure
Lack of
orientation
Effect of
instructors
to
students
Selfinterest
Enjoyment
Pressure
Lack of
academic
skills
Financial
issues
Lack of
social
interaction
Support
from
family
employer
Difficulty
in
contacting
school
staffs
Technical
issues
Behavioral
intention
1
-.277**
.117
.369**
-.121
.253**
-.103
1
.237*
-.137
-.136
-.188*
1
.222*
.007
.077
Lack of
.561**
.340**
academic
skills
Financial
.003
.058
.254**
issues
Lack of
-.135
-.052
.218*
social
interaction
Support from
-.129
.052
.471**
family
employer
Difficulty in
-.109
.150
-.085
contacting
school staffs
Technical
-.053
-.004
.290**
issues
Behavioral
-.094
.120
.520**
intention
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
1
-.058
1
.134
1
.054
-.034
-.027
-.031
.129
-.088
.145
.144
-.058
-.004
.007
.089
-.007
-.101
.231*
-.023
-.271**
.053
-.194*
.333**
-.026
.198*
1
.189*
.223*
.390**
.180
.305**
-.158
1
.094
.399**
.111
.206*
.282**
.374**
.196*
.081
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Table 15 - Correlations between Barriers and Motivations
47
1
.011
1
.160
.360**
-.049
1
.219*
-.062
1
-.101
1
Besides the correlation between Motivation and Barrier, another test was made in order to find
if behavioral intention had the linear regression to Motivation and Barrier. Although the linear
regression did not give result as exactly as Structural Equation Modeling (SEM), it somehow gave a
prediction and a way to do a further research. The result of running linear regression that dependent
variable was behavioral intention and independent variables were six motivation factors and six barrier
factors.
a
ANOVA
Model
1
Sum of Squares
df
Mean Square
F
Regression
41.162
12
3.430
Residual
73.277
103
.711
114.440
115
Total
4.822
Sig.
.000b
a. Dependent Variable: behavioral intention
b. Predictors: (Constant), Technical issues, Effect of instructors to students, Enjoyment, Selfperceive of the value, Difficulty in contacting school staffs, Pressure, Lack of social interaction,
Support from family/employer, Financial issues, Self-interest, Lack of academic skills, Lack of
orientation
Model Summary
Model
1
R
R Square
a
.600
.360
Adjusted R
Std. Error of the
Square
Estimate
.285
.843
a. Predictors: (Constant), Technical issues, Effect of instructors to
students, Enjoyment, Self-perceive of the value, Difficulty in contacting
school staffs, Pressure, Lack of social interaction, Support from
family/employer, Financial issues, Self-interest, Lack of academic
skills, Lack of orientation
48
Coefficientsa
Model
Unstandardized Coefficients
Standardized
t
Sig.
Coefficients
B
(Constant)
1.133
.929
Self-perceive of the value
.505
.096
Lack of orientation
.109
Beta
1.219
.225
.484
5.254
.000
.086
.142
1.277
.205
.050
.065
.070
.778
.438
Self-interest
.161
.086
.176
1.886
.062
Enjoyment
.104
.135
.064
.769
.443
Pressure
.004
.063
.006
.064
.949
-.169
.070
-.254
-2.424
.017
Financial issues
.052
.053
.089
.965
.337
Lack of social interaction
.079
.058
.120
1.357
.178
.050
.064
.079
.782
.436
-.022
.051
-.037
-.423
.673
-.046
.054
-.081
-.865
.389
Effect of instructors to
students
1
Std. Error
Lack of academic skills
Support from
family/employer
Difficulty in contacting
school staffs
Technical issues
a. Dependent Variable: behavioral intention
Table 16 - Relationship between Behavioral Intention and Motivation/Barrier
According to that result, ANOVA test gave the strong significance (p-value was equal to zero).
It confirmed that there is a relationship between Behavioral Intention and Motivation and Barrier.
Hence, the hypothesis H7 was rejected. Since R-square (0.360) or adjusted R-square (0.285) was
small, it indicated that the data was not linear. However, the author thought it requires further study on
this (maybe larger sample size could solve this problem).
From the coefficients table, there were two variables that had significant influence to Behavioral
Intention. One variable belonged to Motivation and the other belonged to Barrier. They were selfperceived of the value ( = 0.505, p-value = 0) and Lack of academic skills ( = -0.169, p-value =
49
0.017). This result confirmed the importance of the variable self-perceived of the value again. Selfperceive of value had the highest mean value of the motivation. In the previous part, this variable was
already discussed about its own importance and influence to other variable. In this part, it showed the
positive relationship with Behavioral intention with high significance. Once an individual selfperceived the value of the distance education program, he will obviously behaved positively such as
recommend to others or try harder to study.
On the other side, Lack of academic skills showed the negative relationship with Behavioral
intention. Once an individual was lack of academic skill, he may feel that he was not competent and not
good in field. It could lead to negative behavior such as drop the program.
5. Difference among subgroups
In order to determine if there is any difference in motivation among subgroups of demographic
factors (age, gender and experience of studying), a series of ANOVA test was conducted using factor
scores of the Motivation and Barrier as dependent variables.
5.1. Motivation
The result showed that there is no statistical significant difference in motivations by Age and
Gender. In the below figure about the motivations level over age, the line were almost homogeneous.
50
Pressure
Self-perceive of the
valueness
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Lack of orientation
18 - 24
25 - 29
30 - 35
Over 35
Effect of instructors
to students
Enjoyment
Self-interest
Figure 7 - Motivation levels over Age
Similarly to Age, there is no statistical significant difference in motivation by Gender, between
Male and Female.
Self-perceive of the
valueness
6
5
4
Pressure
Lack of orientation
3
2
1
Male
0
Female
Effect of instructors
to students
Enjoyment
Self-interest
Figure 8 - Motivation level over Gender
51
With Experience in learning, two significant differences in motivation among groups were
recorded. They were Self-perceived of the value and Effect of instructors to students. With Selfperceived of the value, the junior students had less mean value to the others. They may have not
perceived the value of the distance education as much as the senior students. The result also showed
that the students in the second year were affected by instructors’ suggestions more than others.
Pressure
Self-perceive of
the valueness
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Lack of orientation
Under 1 year
1 - 2 years
2 - 3 years
Effect of
instructors to
students
Enjoyment
Over 3 years
Self-interest
Figure 9 - Motivation levels over Experience in Distance education
5.2. Barriers
The result showed that there is no statistical significant different mean of Barriers among
Gender. It was supported by Kimmel & McNeese (2006) although Lin Y. Muilenburg & Zane L. Berge
(2005) found there was a difference here. In general, the finding fail to support H4: Adult learners will
differ significantly by gender in their barriers towards distance education.
52
Self-perceive of the
valueness
6
5
4
Pressure
Lack of orientation
3
2
1
Male
0
Female
Effect of instructors
to students
Enjoyment
Self-interest
Figure 10 - Barrier level over Gender
Difference in mean of Barriers by Age and Experience was found. Both Kimmel & McNeese
(2006) and Lin Y. Muilenburg & Zane L. Berge (2005) also found this in their research.
With Age, the difference was found with the group of age 18 – 24 in Financial issues. Since it’s
the youngest group, the respondents may not find difficulties for the college fund. They may not have a
job yet but they could get the sponsor for the college fee from the family. In contrast to this group, the
group of age 25 – 29 may find financial issues here. This age was old enough to not have sponsor from
the family. Although they were young and may have a job, it may be not a stable and well-paid job.
They also may have their own family and must take care of it by themselves.
53
Lack of academic
skills
5
4
Technical issues
3
Financial issues
2
18 - 24
1
25 - 29
0
30 - 35
Over 35
Difficulty in
contacting staffs
Lack of social
interaction
Support from
family/employer
Figure 11 - Barrier level over Age
There was only one statistical significant difference in Barrier means among Experience in
Distance education. It’s Lack of social interaction. The junior students (under 1-year experience in
distance education) may find difficulty in interact with other people. It’s somehow true since it’s the
first year they joined the distance education program, everything was new and the network had not
formed yet. Therefore, this is the group that had the highest mean value of Lack of social interaction.
54
Lack of academic
skills
5
4
Technical issues
3
Financial issues
2
Under 1 year
1
1 - 2 years
0
2 - 3 years
Difficulty in
contacting staffs
Lack of social
interaction
Support from
family/employer
Figure 12 - Barrier level over Experience in Distance Education
55
Over 3 years
Chapter Five – Conclusion
In general, the research’s findings support the findings of Frédéric Guay, Robert J. Vallerand,
and Céline Blanchard (2000), Intrinsic Motivation Inventory in motivations and Kimmel & McNeese
(2006), Lin Y. Muilenburg & Zane L. Berge (2005) in Barriers. Since all of universities in this research
have not provided distance education via Internet fully (there is a fact that very few Vietnamese
universities provide that), there were some adjustments to the original literature. There were some
differences between Vietnam and foreign distance education (mostly online learning) over the World.
There were six motivation factors were found. They are: self-perceived of the value, self-interest,
enjoyment, pressure, effect of instructors and lack of orientation. There were also six barrier factors
were found including: difficulty in contacting staffs, lack of academic skills, lack of social interaction,
financial issues, technical issues and support from family/employer. Among those factor, self-perceived
of the value seemed to be most important factor and influenced other factors most.
The research also found that there were not many statistical significant difference in Motivation
and Barrier by demographic factors (age, gender and experience in distance education). Moreover, a
relationship between Barriers and Motivations was also found, althuogh it was not strong enough. This
research also found that Motivation and Barrier had the influence to the Behavioral Intention of the
learners. They were, in specify, self-perceived of the value and lack of academic skills.
However, this research had some limitations that required further study. First of all, the sample
size was not large enough. It needs to increase the number of students and universities involvinng in the
research. Second, other advanced techiniques also need applying in analyzing the data in order to have
better and more reliable results.
Finally, in the scope of this research, there are some suggestions that are made:
56
For the distance education designer: the learners found it’s difficult to contact school’s
staff, including both administrative and academic staffs. The school need have another
effective way to communicate to students, so they can help students as soon as possible
once they have any issues, including technical issues. Technical issues was considered
as one of the students’ barriers. It’s not all students who are competent enough to solve
the technical issues by themselves. Therefore, the school needs to take care of their
system frequently in order to reduce the errors and issues for students while using it.
Finally, there was an evidence that students also declared they are lacking of academic
skills or the prerequisite skills to follow distance education program. The distance
education program designer may make more time to supplement those skills for students
before they join the main program.
For the instructors: although distance education requires student to study by themselves
most of the time, the effect of instructors was an important factor as traditional study
style. Base on the result, the instructor was one of the motivators of students. Hence,
instructors were still an important part of students’ study period. However, students may
also found it difficulty in contacting to instructors. Therefore, instructors may need to
support students effectively by creating more contact channels such phone, email,
forum, video call, etc. in order to help students solve their issues on time.
For the students: distance education gives prominence to self-study. Therefore, students
need to find the interest, enjoyment in the program and its value by themselves. Once
they perceived the value of the program and had high self-interest in the program, their
motivation will be high enough in order to follow and finish the program well.
57
References
Trung Tâm Đào Tạo Từ Xa - Đại Học Mở TP.HCM. (2012). Retrieved 9 1, 2012, from Open
University: http://dttx.ou.edu.vn/showdata.php?act=st&f=intro
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2011). Going the Distance: Online Education in the United States. Bason
Survey Research Group.
Ally, M. (2004). Foundations of educational theory for online learning. The theory and practice of
online learning, 3-31.
Benson, A. (2002). Using online learning to meet workforce demand: A case study of stakeholder
influence. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 443-452.
Benson, A.; Elliot, D.; Grant, M.; Holschuh, D.; Kim, B.; Kim, H.;. (2002). Usability and instructional
design heuristics for e-Learning evaluation. World Conference on Educational Multimedia,
Hypermedia and Telecommunications (EDMEDIA), (pp. 1615-1621). Chesapeake, VA: ACCE.
Brophy, J. (2008). Developing students' appreciation for what is taught in school. Educational
Psychologist, 132-141.
Carliner, S. (2004). An overview of online learning (2nd. ed.). Armherst, MA: Human Resource
Development Press.
Clark, R. (2002). Six principles of effective e-Learning: What works and why. The e-learning
developer's Journal, 1-10.
Conrad, D. (2002). Deep in the hearts of learners: Insights into the nature of online community. Journal
of Distance Education, 1-19.
Deci, E. L., Eghrari, H., Patrick, B. C., Leone, D. (1994). Facilitating internalization: The selfdetermination theory perspective. Journal of Personality, 62, 119-142.
58
Deci, E. L.; Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior.
Dictionary, T. O. (2012). Retrieved 8 15, 2012, from the Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary:
http://oald8.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/dictionary/barrier
Ellis, R. (2004). Down with boring e-learning! (M. W. Allen, Interviewer)
Frédéric Guay, Robert J. Vallerand, and Céline Blanchard. (2000). On the Assessement of Situational
Instrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation: The Situational Motivation Scale (SIMS). Motivation and
Emotion, 24(3), 175-213.
Grabowski, B. L., & Curtis, R. (1991). Information, instruction and learning: A Hypermedia
perspective. performance Improvement Quarterly, 2-12.
Harasim, L. (2000). Shift happens: Online education as a new paradigm in learning. Internet and
Higher Education, 3, 41-61.
Hitltz, S. R., & Turoff, M. (2005). Education goes digital: The evolution of online learning and the
revolution in higher education. Communications of the ACM, 59-64.
Keller, J. M. (1999). Using the ARCS motivational process in computer-based instruction and distance
education. New Directions for teching and learning, 78.
Kimmel, S. B., & McNeese, M. n. (2006). Barriers to Business Education: Motivating Adult Learners.
Institute of Behavioral and Applied Management.
Kumarawadu, P. (2009). Motivation of online learners: Review of practices and emerging trends. Sri
Lanka Institute of Information Technology.
Liaw, S.-S. (2008). Investigating students' perceived satisfaction, bahavioral intention and effectiveness
of e-learning: A case study of the Blackboard system. Computers & Education, 51, 864 - 873.
Lin Y. Muilenburg & Zane L. Berge. (2005, May). Student Barriers to Online Learning: A factor
analytic study. Distance Education, 26(1), 29-48.
59
Lynch, M. M. (2004). Learning online: A guide to success in the virtual classroom. New York, NY:
Routledge.
Maggie Hartnett, Alison George, John Dron. (2011). Examining Motivation in Online Distance
Learning Environments: Complex, Multifaceted and Situation-Dependent. The International
Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12.
Martin, J. (2005). Organizational Behaviour and Management (Third ed.). Thompson Learning.
Mbilinyi, L. (2006). Adults' view on the value and feasibility of returning to school. Capella University.
Degrees of Oppurtunity.
McAuley, E., Duncan, T., & Tammen, V.V. (1987). Psychometric properties of the Intrinsic Motivation
Inventory in a competitive sport setting: A confirmatory factor analysis. Research Quarterly for
Exercise and Sport, 60, 48-58.
Moore, J. L., Dickson-Deane, C., & Gaylen, K. (2011). e-Learning, online learning and distance
learning environments: Are they the same? Internet and Higher Education 14, 129-135.
Moore, M. (1990). Background and overview of contemporary American distance education.
Contemporary issues in American distance education, xii-xxvi.
NCES, N. C. (2005). Ressons for Adults' Participation in Work-related Courses, 2002-2003. U.S.
Department of Education Institute of Education Sciences.
Nichols, M. (2003). A theory of eLearning. Educational Technology & Society, 1-10.
Oblinger, D. G., & Oblinger, J. L. (2005). Educating the net generation. EDUCAUSE.
Osgood-Treston, B. (2001). Program Completion Barriers Faced by Adult Learners in Higher
Education. Academic Exchange Quarterly.
60
Plan, R. W., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and the effects of self-consciousness, selfawareness and ego-involvement: An investigation of internally-controlling styles. Journal of
Personality, 53, 435-449.
Radford, A. W. (2011). Learning at a Distance: Undergraduate Enrollment in Distance Education
Courses and Degree Programs. Statistics in Brief.
Ryan, R. M. (1982). Control and information in the intrapersonal sphere: An extension of cognitive
evaluation theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 450-461.
Ryan, R. M. Mims, V., & Koestner, R. (1983). Relation of reward contingency and interpersonal
context to instrinsic motivation: A review and test using cognitive evaluation theory. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 736-750.
Ryan, R. M., Connel, J. P., & Plant, R. W. (1990). Emotions in non-directed text learning. Learning
and Individual Differences, 2, 1-17.
Ryan, R. M., Koestner, R. & Deci, E. L. (1991). Varied forms of persistence: When free-choice
behavior is not intrinsically motivated. Motivation and Emotion, 15, 185-205.
Seddon, P. B. (1997). A respecificatoin and extension of the DeLone and McLean model of IS success.
Information Systems Research, 8(3), 240-253.
Su-Chao Chang & Feng-Cheng Tung. (2008). An emperical investigation of students' behavioural
intentions to use the online learning websites. British Journal of Education Technology, 39(1),
71-83.
The Oxford Advance Learner's Dictionary. (2012). Retrieved 8 15, 2012, from Oxford Advanced
Learner's Dictionary: http://oald8.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/dictionary/motivate
Triacca, L., Bolchini, D., Botturi, L., & Inversini, A. (2004). Mile: Systematic usability evaluation for
e-Learning web applications. ACCE Journal.
61
Vallerand, R. J. (1997). Toward a hierachical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Advances in
experimental social psychology, 271-360.
Williams, G. C. & Deci, E. L. (1996). Internalization of biopsychosocial values by medical students: A
test of self-dermination theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 767-779.
62
Appendix
Total Variance Explained
Factor
Initial Eigenvalues
Total
% of Variance
Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings
Cumulative %
Total
% of Variance
Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings
Cumulative %
Total
% of Variance
Cumulative %
1
4.121
22.894
22.894
3.728
20.712
20.712
2.099
11.661
11.661
2
3.081
17.118
40.012
2.653
14.737
35.449
1.986
11.032
22.693
3
1.596
8.865
48.877
1.188
6.603
42.051
1.936
10.757
33.450
4
1.456
8.086
56.963
1.072
5.957
48.009
1.702
9.458
42.908
5
1.348
7.487
64.451
.918
5.099
53.108
1.350
7.502
50.410
6
1.128
6.264
70.715
.747
4.147
57.255
1.232
6.845
57.255
7
.766
4.257
74.972
8
.748
4.157
79.129
9
.582
3.234
82.363
10
.514
2.856
85.219
11
.487
2.705
87.924
12
.418
2.322
90.246
13
.416
2.313
92.559
14
.369
2.050
94.608
15
.305
1.696
96.305
16
.265
1.471
97.775
17
.206
1.144
98.919
18
.195
1.081
100.000
Extraction Method: Principal Axis Factoring.
Table 17 - Total variance explained of Motivations
63
Total Variance Explained
Factor
Initial Eigenvalues
Total
% of Variance
Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings
Cumulative %
Total
% of Variance
Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings
Cumulative %
Total
% of Variance
Cumulative %
1
5.437
30.204
30.204
5.090
28.276
28.276
3.753
20.851
20.851
2
2.548
14.156
44.360
2.241
12.452
40.728
2.300
12.776
33.627
3
1.982
11.013
55.372
1.537
8.537
49.266
1.454
8.076
41.703
4
1.268
7.047
62.419
.863
4.792
54.058
1.366
7.590
49.293
5
1.126
6.255
68.674
.833
4.629
58.687
1.268
7.045
56.338
6
1.054
5.857
74.531
.766
4.256
62.943
1.189
6.605
62.943
7
.797
4.426
78.957
8
.689
3.825
82.782
9
.512
2.842
85.624
10
.418
2.320
87.944
11
.385
2.138
90.083
12
.355
1.972
92.055
13
.307
1.705
93.760
14
.285
1.582
95.343
15
.254
1.413
96.755
16
.237
1.316
98.071
17
.195
1.086
99.157
18
.152
.843
100.000
Extraction Method: Principal Axis Factoring.
Table 18 - Total variance explained of Barriers
64
ANOVA
Sum of Squares
Between Groups
Self-perceive of the value
3
1.810
99.522
112
.889
104.950
115
5.389
3
1.796
Within Groups
189.173
112
1.689
Total
194.562
115
8.556
3
2.852
Within Groups
211.729
112
1.890
Total
220.284
115
4.751
3
1.584
Within Groups
131.328
112
1.173
Total
136.080
115
2.754
3
.918
Within Groups
41.494
112
.370
Total
44.248
115
Between Groups
11.464
3
3.821
Within Groups
215.164
112
1.921
Total
226.627
115
Table 19 – Motivation significance by Age
Within Groups
Between Groups
Effect of instructors to
students
Between Groups
Between Groups
Self-interest
Between Groups
Enjoyment
Pressure
Mean Square
5.429
Total
Lack of orientation
df
65
F
Sig.
2.036
.113
1.064
.368
1.509
.216
1.351
.262
2.478
.065
1.989
.120
ANOVA
Sum of Squares
Between Groups
Self-perceive of the value
Effect of instructors to
students
1
.092
Within Groups
104.858
114
.920
Total
104.950
115
.032
1
.032
Within Groups
194.530
114
1.706
Total
194.562
115
.907
1
.907
Within Groups
219.378
114
1.924
Total
220.284
115
4.493
1
4.493
Within Groups
131.587
114
1.154
Total
136.080
115
.259
1
.259
Within Groups
43.989
114
.386
Total
44.248
115
4.161
1
4.161
222.466
114
1.951
Between Groups
Between Groups
Self-interest
Between Groups
Enjoyment
Between Groups
Pressure
Mean Square
.092
Between Groups
Lack of orientation
df
Within Groups
Total
226.627
115
Table 20 – Motivation significance by Gender
66
F
Sig.
.100
.752
.019
.891
.471
.494
3.892
.051
.671
.414
2.132
.147
ANOVA
Sum of Squares
Between Groups
Self-perceive of the value
3
3.060
95.772
112
.855
104.950
115
7.256
3
2.419
Within Groups
187.306
112
1.672
Total
194.562
115
14.965
3
4.988
Within Groups
205.320
112
1.833
Total
220.284
115
5.133
3
1.711
Within Groups
130.946
112
1.169
Total
136.080
115
.359
3
.120
Within Groups
43.889
112
.392
Total
44.248
115
Between Groups
12.496
3
4.165
214.131
112
1.912
Within Groups
Between Groups
Effect of instructors to
students
Between Groups
Between Groups
Self-interest
Between Groups
Enjoyment
Pressure
Mean Square
9.179
Total
Lack of orientation
df
Within Groups
Total
F
Sig.
3.578
.016
1.446
.233
2.721
.048
1.464
.228
.305
.822
2.179
.095
226.627
115
Table 21 – Motivation significance by Experience in Distance education
67
Multiple Comparisons
Tukey HSD
Dependent Variable
(I) Experience
(J) Experience
Mean Difference
Std. Error
Sig.
(I-J)
95% Confidenc
Lower Bound
1 - 2 years
*
-.637
.226
.028
-1.23
2 - 3 years
-.507
.233
.136
-1.11
Over 3 years
-.606
.249
.077
-1.26
Under 1 year
*
.637
.226
.028
.05
2 - 3 years
.130
.250
.954
-.52
Over 3 years
.031
.265
.999
-.66
Under 1 year
.507
.233
.136
-.10
1 - 2 years
-.130
.250
.954
-.78
Over 3 years
-.098
.271
.984
-.81
Under 1 year
.606
.249
.077
-.04
1 - 2 years
-.031
.265
.999
-.72
2 - 3 years
.098
.271
.984
-.61
1 - 2 years
-.479
.330
.470
-1.34
2 - 3 years
.515
.341
.434
-.37
Over 3 years
-.290
.365
.856
-1.24
Under 1 year
.479
.330
.470
-.38
2 - 3 years
*
.995
.366
.037
.04
Effect of instructors to
Over 3 years
.189
.388
.962
-.82
students
Under 1 year
-.515
.341
.434
-1.40
1 - 2 years
*
-.995
.366
.037
-1.95
Over 3 years
-.806
.397
.184
-1.84
Under 1 year
.290
.365
.856
-.66
1 - 2 years
-.189
.388
.962
-1.20
2 - 3 years
.806
.397
.184
-.23
Under 1 year
1 - 2 years
Self-perceive of the value
2 - 3 years
Over 3 years
Under 1 year
1 - 2 years
2 - 3 years
Over 3 years
*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.
Table 22 - Tukey test of Motivation among Experience in Distance Education
ANOVA
Sum of Squares
Between Groups
Lack of academic skills
df
Mean Square
7.598
3
2.533
Within Groups
250.510
112
2.237
Total
258.107
115
68
F
1.132
Sig.
.339
Between Groups
Financial issues
6.681
3
2.227
Within Groups
333.675
112
2.979
Total
340.356
115
24.016
3
8.005
Within Groups
241.213
112
2.154
Total
265.229
115
1.388
3
.463
281.569
112
2.514
282.957
115
20.772
3
6.924
Within Groups
308.176
112
2.752
Total
328.948
115
10.605
3
3.535
335.835
112
2.999
Between Groups
Lack of social interaction
Between Groups
Support from family/employer Within Groups
Total
Between Groups
Difficulty in contacting staffs
Between Groups
Technical issues
Within Groups
Total
346.440
115
Table 23 - Barriers significance by Experience in Distance Education
69
.748
.526
3.717
.014
.184
.907
2.516
.062
1.179
.321
Multiple Comparisons
Tukey HSD
Dependent Variable
(I) Experience
(J) Experience
Mean Difference
Std. Error
Sig.
(I-J)
Under 1 year
1 - 2 years
95% Confidenc
Lower Bound
1 - 2 years
.498
.365
.524
-.45
2 - 3 years
.622
.377
.354
-.36
Over 3 years
.213
.403
.952
-.84
Under 1 year
-.498
.365
.524
-1.45
.124
.404
.990
-.93
Over 3 years
-.285
.429
.910
-1.40
Under 1 year
-.622
.377
.354
-1.61
1 - 2 years
-.124
.404
.990
-1.18
Over 3 years
-.409
.439
.787
-1.55
Under 1 year
-.213
.403
.952
-1.26
1 - 2 years
.285
.429
.910
-.83
2 - 3 years
.409
.439
.787
-.74
1 - 2 years
-.614
.421
.465
-1.71
2 - 3 years
-.324
.435
.878
-1.46
Over 3 years
-.398
.465
.828
-1.61
Under 1 year
.614
.421
.465
-.48
2 - 3 years
.290
.466
.925
-.93
Over 3 years
.217
.495
.972
-1.07
Under 1 year
.324
.435
.878
-.81
1 - 2 years
-.290
.466
.925
-1.51
Over 3 years
-.073
.506
.999
-1.39
Under 1 year
.398
.465
.828
-.82
1 - 2 years
-.217
.495
.972
-1.51
2 - 3 years
.073
.506
.999
-1.25
1 - 2 years
*
1.067
.358
.018
.13
2 - 3 years
.374
.370
.742
-.59
Over 3 years
.956
.395
.080
-.08
Under 1 year
*
-1.067
.358
.018
-2.00
2 - 3 years
-.692
.396
.305
-1.73
Over 3 years
-.111
.421
.994
-1.21
Under 1 year
-.374
.370
.742
-1.34
.692
.396
.305
-.34
2 - 3 years
Lack of academic skills
2 - 3 years
Over 3 years
Under 1 year
1 - 2 years
Financial issues
2 - 3 years
Over 3 years
Under 1 year
Lack of social interaction
1 - 2 years
2 - 3 years
1 - 2 years
70
Over 3 years
Under 1 year
1 - 2 years
Support from family/employer
2 - 3 years
Over 3 years
Under 1 year
1 - 2 years
Difficulty in contacting staffs
2 - 3 years
Over 3 years
Under 1 year
Technical issues
1 - 2 years
2 - 3 years
Over 3 years
.581
.431
.533
-.54
Under 1 year
-.956
.395
.080
-1.99
1 - 2 years
.111
.421
.994
-.99
2 - 3 years
-.581
.431
.533
-1.70
1 - 2 years
-.014
.387
1.000
-1.02
2 - 3 years
.150
.399
.982
-.89
Over 3 years
-.195
.427
.968
-1.31
Under 1 year
.014
.387
1.000
-.99
2 - 3 years
.164
.428
.981
-.95
Over 3 years
-.181
.454
.978
-1.37
Under 1 year
-.150
.399
.982
-1.19
1 - 2 years
-.164
.428
.981
-1.28
Over 3 years
-.345
.465
.880
-1.56
Under 1 year
.195
.427
.968
-.92
1 - 2 years
.181
.454
.978
-1.00
2 - 3 years
.345
.465
.880
-.87
1 - 2 years
.137
.405
.987
-.92
2 - 3 years
-.937
.418
.119
-2.03
Over 3 years
.108
.447
.995
-1.06
Under 1 year
-.137
.405
.987
-1.19
-1.074
.448
.084
-2.24
Over 3 years
-.029
.475
1.000
-1.27
Under 1 year
.937
.418
.119
-.15
1 - 2 years
1.074
.448
.084
-.09
Over 3 years
1.045
.487
.145
-.22
Under 1 year
-.108
.447
.995
-1.27
1 - 2 years
.029
.475
1.000
-1.21
2 - 3 years
-1.045
.487
.145
-2.31
1 - 2 years
.472
.422
.679
-.63
2 - 3 years
-.315
.436
.888
-1.45
Over 3 years
-.271
.467
.937
-1.49
Under 1 year
-.472
.422
.679
-1.57
2 - 3 years
-.788
.468
.337
-2.01
Over 3 years
-.744
.496
.441
-2.04
Under 1 year
.315
.436
.888
-.82
1 - 2 years
.788
.468
.337
-.43
Over 3 years
.044
.508
1.000
-1.28
2 - 3 years
71
Over 3 years
Under 1 year
.271
.467
.937
-.95
1 - 2 years
.744
.496
.441
-.55
2 - 3 years
-.044
.508
1.000
-1.37
*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.
Table 24 - Tukey test of Barriers significance by Experience in Distance Education
72
ANOVA
Sum of Squares
Between Groups
Lack of academic skills
1
.060
Within Groups
258.047
114
2.264
Total
258.107
115
.048
1
.048
Within Groups
340.308
114
2.985
Total
340.356
115
2.285
1
2.285
Within Groups
262.944
114
2.307
Total
265.229
115
.477
1
.477
282.480
114
2.478
282.957
115
8.086
1
8.086
Within Groups
320.862
114
2.815
Total
328.948
115
1.504
1
1.504
344.936
114
3.026
Between Groups
Lack of social interaction
Between Groups
Support from family/employer Within Groups
Total
Between Groups
Difficulty in contacting staffs
Between Groups
Technical issues
Mean Square
.060
Between Groups
Financial issues
df
Within Groups
Total
346.440
115
Table 25 - Barriers significance by Gender
73
F
Sig.
.026
.871
.016
.899
.991
.322
.193
.662
2.873
.093
.497
.482
ANOVA
Sum of Squares
Between Groups
Lack of academic skills
3
2.569
Within Groups
250.400
112
2.236
Total
258.107
115
22.968
3
7.656
Within Groups
317.388
112
2.834
Total
340.356
115
15.347
3
5.116
Within Groups
249.882
112
2.231
Total
265.229
115
6.401
3
2.134
276.555
112
2.469
282.957
115
5.640
3
1.880
Within Groups
323.309
112
2.887
Total
328.948
115
13.705
3
4.568
332.735
112
2.971
Between Groups
Lack of social interaction
Between Groups
Support from family/employer Within Groups
Total
Between Groups
Difficulty in contacting staffs
Between Groups
Technical issues
Mean Square
7.708
Between Groups
Financial issues
df
Within Groups
Total
346.440
115
Table 26 - Barriers significance by Age
74
F
Sig.
1.149
.333
2.702
.049
2.293
.082
.864
.462
.651
.584
1.538
.209
Multiple Comparisons
Tukey HSD
Dependent Variable
(I) Age
(J) Age
Mean Difference
Std. Error
Sig.
(I-J)
18 - 24
25 - 29
95% Confidence Interval
Lower Bound
Upper Bound
25 - 29
.288
.382
.875
-.71
1.28
30 - 35
.563
.426
.552
-.55
1.67
Over 35
.667
.387
.316
-.34
1.68
18 - 24
-.288
.382
.875
-1.28
.71
30 - 35
.275
.409
.907
-.79
1.34
Over 35
.380
.368
.732
-.58
1.34
18 - 24
-.563
.426
.552
-1.67
.55
25 - 29
-.275
.409
.907
-1.34
.79
Over 35
.105
.414
.994
-.98
1.18
18 - 24
-.667
.387
.316
-1.68
.34
25 - 29
-.380
.368
.732
-1.34
.58
30 - 35
-.105
.414
.994
-1.18
.98
25 - 29
*
-1.198
.430
.031
-2.32
-.08
30 - 35
-.739
.480
.417
-1.99
.51
Over 35
-.491
.436
.674
-1.63
.65
18 - 24
*
1.198
.430
.031
.08
2.32
30 - 35
.459
.461
.752
-.74
1.66
Over 35
.707
.415
.326
-.37
1.79
18 - 24
.739
.480
.417
-.51
1.99
25 - 29
-.459
.461
.752
-1.66
.74
Over 35
.248
.466
.951
-.97
1.46
18 - 24
.491
.436
.674
-.65
1.63
25 - 29
-.707
.415
.326
-1.79
.37
30 - 35
-.248
.466
.951
-1.46
.97
25 - 29
-.023
.381
1.000
-1.02
.97
30 - 35
.672
.426
.395
-.44
1.78
Over 35
.744
.387
.224
-.26
1.75
18 - 24
.023
.381
1.000
-.97
1.02
30 - 35
.695
.409
.328
-.37
1.76
Over 35
.767
.368
.164
-.19
1.73
18 - 24
-.672
.426
.395
-1.78
.44
25 - 29
-.695
.409
.328
-1.76
.37
Lack of academic skills
30 - 35
Over 35
18 - 24
25 - 29
Financial issues
30 - 35
Over 35
18 - 24
Lack of social interaction
25 - 29
30 - 35
75
Over 35
18 - 24
25 - 29
Support from family/employer
30 - 35
Over 35
18 - 24
25 - 29
Difficulty in contacting staffs
30 - 35
Over 35
18 - 24
Technical issues
25 - 29
30 - 35
Over 35
.072
.414
.998
-1.01
1.15
18 - 24
-.744
.387
.224
-1.75
.26
25 - 29
-.767
.368
.164
-1.73
.19
30 - 35
-.072
.414
.998
-1.15
1.01
25 - 29
-.488
.401
.617
-1.53
.56
30 - 35
-.268
.448
.932
-1.44
.90
Over 35
.076
.407
.998
-.98
1.14
18 - 24
.488
.401
.617
-.56
1.53
30 - 35
.221
.430
.956
-.90
1.34
Over 35
.564
.387
.466
-.45
1.57
18 - 24
.268
.448
.932
-.90
1.44
25 - 29
-.221
.430
.956
-1.34
.90
Over 35
.344
.435
.859
-.79
1.48
18 - 24
-.076
.407
.998
-1.14
.98
25 - 29
-.564
.387
.466
-1.57
.45
30 - 35
-.344
.435
.859
-1.48
.79
25 - 29
-.417
.434
.771
-1.55
.71
30 - 35
-.219
.484
.969
-1.48
1.04
Over 35
.132
.440
.991
-1.01
1.28
18 - 24
.417
.434
.771
-.71
1.55
30 - 35
.198
.465
.974
-1.01
1.41
Over 35
.549
.418
.558
-.54
1.64
18 - 24
.219
.484
.969
-1.04
1.48
25 - 29
-.198
.465
.974
-1.41
1.01
Over 35
.351
.471
.878
-.88
1.58
18 - 24
-.132
.440
.991
-1.28
1.01
25 - 29
-.549
.418
.558
-1.64
.54
30 - 35
-.351
.471
.878
-1.58
.88
25 - 29
-.526
.440
.630
-1.67
.62
30 - 35
-.619
.491
.591
-1.90
.66
Over 35
-.951
.446
.149
-2.11
.21
18 - 24
.526
.440
.630
-.62
1.67
30 - 35
-.092
.472
.997
-1.32
1.14
Over 35
-.425
.425
.750
-1.53
.68
18 - 24
.619
.491
.591
-.66
1.90
25 - 29
.092
.472
.997
-1.14
1.32
Over 35
-.332
.477
.898
-1.58
.91
76
Over 35
18 - 24
.951
.446
.149
-.21
2.11
25 - 29
.425
.425
.750
-.68
1.53
30 - 35
.332
.477
.898
-.91
1.58
*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.
Table 27 - Tukey test of Barriers significance by Age
77
QUESTIONNAIRE
I am doing a research on the motivations and barriers of Vietnamese students towards distance
education. I hope that you could spend a little of your valuable time on answering the following
questionnaire based on your own experience and knowledge. All the information will be only used for
the research purpose and be analyzed by descriptive statistic.
Age
18 – 24
25 – 30
Gender
Male
Female
31 – 35
Over 35
Major field: ............................................................................................................
Experience in distance education
Under 1 year
1 – 2 years
2 – 3 years
Over 3 years
Please answer the following questions by checking the appropriate cell. The rate is ranged from
1 (totally disagree) to 7 (totally agree).
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Hoàn toàn
không đồng ý
Không đồng
ý
Hơi không
đồng ý
Không ý kiến
Hơi đồng ý
Đồng ý
Hoàn toàn
đồng ý
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
1. I will participate actively in the distance education program…
1.1.
Because I feel like it's a good way to improve my
skills/knowledge
1.2.
Because others would think badly of me if I didn't.
1.3.
Because it's an important part of my promotion.
1.4.
Because I would feel good about myself if I did it.
2. In the distance education program, I would follow my instructor's suggestions…
78
2.1.
Because I would get a good grade if I do what
he/she suggests.
Because I believe my instructor's suggestions are
very helpful to me.
Because I want my instructor think that I am a
good student.
Because it's easier to do what I am told than to
think about it.
2.5.
Because it's important to me to do well at this.
2.6.
Because I would probably feel guilty if I didn't
comply with my instructor's suggestions.
2.2.
2.3.
2.4.
3. The reason that I will continue the distance education program to study…
3.1.
Because it's exciting to try new ways improve my
productivity.
Because I would feel proud if I did continued to
improve myself.
3.3.
Because it's a challenge to obtain new knowledge.
3.4.
Because it's interesting to apply the
knowledge to the daily work and life.
new
4.1.
I think that distance education is so fun (I could
start learning in the near future).
4.2.
I think that distance education is so boring.
4.3.
I do not pay much attention to distance education.
4.4.
I think that distance education is so interesting (I’d
like to know more about that).
3.2.
4. Interest/Enjoyment
5. Perceived Competence
5.1.
5.2.
5.3.
I think I am good at distance education, compare to
other students.
I am satisfied with my distance education
performance.
After joining distance education program for a
while, I feel pretty competent.
6. Effort/Importance
6.1.
I put a lot of effort into distance education activity.
79
6.2.
6.3.
I do not try very hard to do well in distance
education.
It's important to me to finish distance education
well.
7. Pressure/Tension
7.1.
7.2.
7.3.
7.4.
I do not feel nervous at all while I am following
distance education.
I am very relaxed in while I am following distance
education.
I am anxious while I am following distance
education.
I do not feel pressured while I am following
distance education.
8. Perceived choice
8.1.
I choose distance education since I had no other
choice.
8.2.
I did distance education since I wanted to.
8.3.
Distance education is my own choice.
I believe that distance education could be
beneficial to me.
I am willing to attend distance education because it
has some value to me.
Distance education helps me to continue the study
since it can reduce the difficulties in distance.
Distance education is so useful for improving my
knowledge/skills/etc.
9.5.
I feel really distant to distance education.
9.6.
What I achieved from distance education has
closed relationship to my work.
9. Value/Usefulness/Relatedness
9.1.
9.2.
9.3.
9.4.
10. Amotivation
10.1. There may be good reasons to follow distance
education, but personally I don't see any.
10.2. I do distance education but I am not sure if it is
worth it.
10.3. I don't know or I don't see what distance education
could bring to me.
80
10.4. I follow distance education but I am not sure it is a
good thing to pursue it.
11.1. Course materials not always delivered on time.
11.2. Instructors do not know how to teach online.
11.3. Instructors provide insufficient or unclear the
courses’ expectations/instructions.
11.4. I find difficulty in contacting academic staffs.
11.5. I find difficulty in contacting administrative staffs.
11.6. Instructors/Tutors do not usually feedback to my
academic issues.
11.7. I think that the quality of materials/instruction is so
low and insufficient.
11.8. I am not trained well to use the distance education
system.
12.1. I think that distance education environment is
lacking of interactions/communication among
students.
12.2. I think that distance education seems personal.
12.3. I am afraid of feeling isolated while attending
distance education.
12.4. I think that distance education environment is
lacking of student collaboration.
12.5. I prefer to learn in person.
11. Administrator/Instructor issues
12. Social interactions
13. Academic skills
13.1. I think I am lacking of language skills for distance
education.
13.2. I think I am lacking of writing skills for distance
education.
13.3. I think I am lacking of reading skills for distance
education.
13.4. I think I am lacking of communication skills for
distance education.
81
13.5. I think I am lacking of typing skills for distance
education.
13.6. I think I am lacking of confidence for distance
education.
14.1. I think I am fear of computer and technology.
14.2. I think I am lacking of skills for using the distance
education system.
14.3. I think I am unfamiliar with distance education
technical tools.
14.4. I thing I am unfamiliar of different learning
methods that are used for distance education.
15.1. I am afraid that my family life will be disrupted.
15.2. I am afraid that distance education cuts into my
personal time.
15.3. I think I am lacking of support from my family,
friends or employer.
15.4. I am afraid of having significant interruptions
during study at home/work.
15.5. I think that I don’t have sufficient time for the
distance education.
16.1. My living area is lacking of adequate Internet
access.
16.2. I think that the needed technology for distance
education is not available at my side.
16.3. I am afraid that there will be inconsistent or
incompatibility platforms, browsers, software, etc.
at my side.
16.4. I am afraid of lacking technical assistance.
17.1. My role as primary caregiver for an elder.
17.2. I am afraid of lack of funds for childcare for my
minor child/children.
14. Technical skills
15. Time and support for studies
16. Technology issues
17. Financial issues
82
17.3. I haven’t allocated any funds for significant
sudden events.
17.4. I am afraid of lacking of personal funds to pay for
college.
18. Behavioral intention of learning online in the future
18.1. I intend to use distance education as my
autonomous study tool.
18.2. I’d like to continue or follow the distance
education program to obtain a degree to fulfill my
promotion application.
18.3. I’d like to recommend the distance education
program to others because of its usefulness or
advantages.
18.4. I’d like to drop or not join the distance education
program.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH!!!
83
PHIẾU KHẢO SÁT
Tôi đang làm nghiên cứu về các động lực và cản trở của học viên Việt Nam đối với chương
trình đào tạo từ xa. Tôi hy vọng bạn có thể dành chút thời gian để trả lời bảng câu hỏi sau, dựa trên
kinh nghiệm và kiến thức của bạn. Tất cả những thông tin bên dưới chỉ được sử dụng vào mục đích
nghiên cứu và được phân tích bằng thống kê mô tả.
Tuổi: 18 – 24 tuổi
25 – 29 tuổi
30 – 35 tuổi
Giới tính:
Nam
Nữ
Trên 35 tuổi
Ngành học: ............................................................................................................
Bạn đã theo học chương trình đào tạo từ xa trong bao lâu:
Dưới 1 năm
1 – 2 năm
2 – 3 năm Trên 3 năm
Xin bạn vui lòng trả lời các câu hỏi sau đây bằng cách đánh dấu () vào ô thích hợp. Mỗi câu
hỏi được đánh giá từ 1 (hoàn toàn KHÔNG đồng ý) cho đến 7 (hoàn toàn đồng ý), theo cấp độ ý
tăng dần.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Hoàn toàn
không đồng ý
Không đồng
ý
Hơi không
đồng ý
Không ý kiến
Hơi đồng ý
Đồng ý
Hoàn toàn
đồng ý
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
1. Tôi sẽ tích cực tham gia vào chương trình đào tạo từ xa…
1.1.
1.2.
1.3.
1.4.
Bởi vì tôi cảm thấy đó là cách tốt để nâng cao các
kỹ năng cũng như kiến thức của bản thân.
Bởi vì có những người sẽ nghĩ tôi không tốt nếu tôi
không tham gia vào chương trình đào tạo từ xa.
Bởi vì đó là một phần nằm trong kế hoạch thăng
tiến nghề nghiệp của tôi.
Bởi vì tôi cảm thấy sẽ tốt hơn nếu tôi tham gia vào
chương trình đào tạo từ xa.
84
2. Khi tham gia chương trình đào tạo từ xa, tôi sẽ nghe theo những lời gợi ý/đề nghị của
giảng viên…
2.1. Bởi vì tôi nghĩ sẽ được điểm tốt nếu làm theo
những gì giảng viên gợi ý.
2.2. Bởi vì tôi tin rằng những gợi ý của giảng viên rất
hữu ích đối với tôi.
2.3. Bởi vì tôi muốn giảng viên nghĩ rằng tôi là một
sinh viên tốt.
2.4. Bởi vì việc làm theo những gì giảng viên gợi ý dễ
hơn việc tự suy nghĩ để làm.
2.5. Bởi vì làm tốt theo lời gợi ý của giảng viên thì quan
trọng đối với tôi.
2.6. Bởi vì tôi chắn chắn sẽ cảm thấy cắn rứt nếu không
tuân thủ theo những gợi ý của giảng viên.
3. Nguyên nhân để tôi theo học chương trình đào tạo từ xa là…
3.1.
3.2.
3.3.
3.4.
Bởi vì tôi rất hứng thú với việc áp dụng những
phương pháp mới học để tăng năng suất làm việc.
Bởi vì tôi cảm thấy rất tự hào nếu tôi tiếp tục nâng
cao năng lực bản thân của mình.
Bởi vì việc tiếp nhận những kiến thức mới là một
thử thách.
Bởi vì tôi cảm thấy thích thú khi áp dụng những
kiến thức mới học vào cuộc sống và công việc hàng
ngày.
4. Sự thích thú
4.1.
4.2.
4.3.
4.4.
Tôi nghĩ rằng việc theo học chương trình đào tạo từ
xa khá vui và có thể bắt đầu chương trình này trong
một tương lai không xa.
Tôi nghĩ rằng việc tham gia chương trình đào tạo từ
xa khá nhàm chán.
Tôi không quá chú tâm tới chương trình đào tạo từ
xa.
Tôi nghĩ việc tham gia chương trình đào tạo từ xa
khá thú vị và tôi muốn biết nhiều thông tin hơn về
nó.
5. Nhận thức về khả năng
5.1.
5.2.
Tôi nghĩ tôi học chương trình đào tạo từ xa khá giỏi
nếu so với những sinh viên khác.
Tôi khá hài lòng với kết quả học tập trong chương
trình đào tạo từ xa của tôi.
85
5.3.
Sau một thời gian tham gia chương trình đào tạo từ
xa, tôi cảm thấy mình rất có khả năng ở lĩnh vực
này.
6. Công sức bỏ ra/Tầm quan trọng
6.1.
6.2.
6.3.
Tôi bỏ khá nhiều công sức cho chương trình đào tạo
từ xa.
Tôi thường không cố hết sức để học tốt chương
trình đào tạo từ xa.
Việc hoàn thành tốt chương trình đào tạo từ xa rất
quan trọng với tôi.
7. Áp lực/Sự căng thẳng
7.1.
7.2.
7.3.
7.4.
Tôi không cảm thấy lo lắng khi tham gia chương
trình đào tạo từ xa.
Tôi cảm thấy thoải mái với việc tham gia chương
trình đào tạo từ xa.
Tôi cảm thấy hồi hộp khi tham gia chương trình đào
tạo từ xa.
Việc tham gia chương trình đào tạo từ xa không
khiến tôi cảm thấy bị áp lực.
8. Nhận thức về sự lựa chọn/quyết định
8.1.
8.2.
8.3.
Tôi chọn tham gia chương trình đào tạo từ xa vì tôi
không còn sự lựa chọn nào khác.
Tôi chọn tham gia chương trình đào tạo từ xa vì đó
là điều tôi muốn.
Việc tham gia chương trình đào tạo từ xa là quyết
định của chính tôi.
9. Giá trị, tính hữu ích của việc tham gia chương trình đào tạo từ xa
9.1.
9.2.
Tôi tin rằng việc tham gia chương trình đào tạo từ
xa rất có ích lợi đối với tôi.
Tôi rất sẵn lòng tham gia chương trình đào tạo từ xa
vì nó rất có giá trị đối với tôi.
9.3.
Tôi có thể theo đuổi việc học tập nhờ chương trình đào
tạo từ xa giúp tôi giảm các khó khăn về khoảng cách địa
lý.
9.4.
Việc tham gia chương trình đào tạo từ xa rất có ích
lợi trong việc nâng cao kĩ năng, kiến thức của tôi.
Những gì tôi học từ chương trình đào tạo từ xa
không liên quan nhiều tới cuộc sống/công việc của
tôi.
9.5.
86
9.6.
Những gì tôi học được từ chương trình đào tạo từ
xa rất gần gũi với công việc của tôi.
10. Thiếu động lực
10.1. Có thể có nhiều lý do tốt để theo học chương trình
đào tạo từ xa nhưng bản thân tôi không thấy được
những điều đó.
10.2. Tôi theo học chương trình đào tạo từ xa nhưng tôi
không chắc nó có đáng để theo học hay không.
10.3. Tôi không thấy được những gì chương trình đào tạo
từ xa có thể mang lại cho tôi.
10.4. Tôi theo học chương trình đào tạo từ xa nhưng tôi
không chắc đó là một điều tốt để tôi theo đuổi nó.
11. Những vấn đề liên quan đến nhân viên hành chính/giảng viên
11.1. Tài liệu thường không được phát đúng lúc.
11.2. Giảng viên không có phương pháp giảng dạy phù
hợp với chương trình đào tạo từ xa.
11.3. Giảng viên không cung cấp đủ các hướng dẫn hoặc
các hướng dẫn thiếu rõ ràng.
11.4. Tôi gặp khó khăn trong việc liên lạc với giảng
viên/trợ giảng.
11.5. Tôi gặp khó khăn trong việc liên lạc với các nhân
viên hành chính.
11.6. Giảng viên/trợ giảng thường không phản hồi các
thắc mắc về bài học với tôi.
11.7. Tôi nghĩ chất lượng của tài liệu trong khóa học thấp
và không đầy đủ.
11.8. Tôi không được hướng dẫn sử dụng hệ thống công
cụ dùng trong chương trình đào tạo từ xa.
12. Sự giao tiếp
12.1. Tôi nghĩ rằng việc học qua mạng thiếu tính tương
tác, giao tiếp giữa các sinh viên với nhau.
12.2. Tôi nghĩ việc học qua chương trình đào tạo từ xa
dường như chỉ mang tính cá nhân.
12.3. Tôi lo sợ về cảm giác một mình khi tham gia vào
chương trình đào tạo từ xa.
12.4. Tôi nghĩ môi trường chương trình đào tạo từ xa
thiếu tính liên kết, hợp tác giữa các sinh viên với
nhau.
12.5. Tôi thích được học một mình hơn.
87
13. Kĩ năng học
13.1. Tôi nghĩ tôi thiếu kĩ năng về ngôn ngữ cho việc học
trong chương trình đào tạo từ xa.
13.2. Tôi nghĩ tôi thiếu kĩ năng viết cho việc học trong
chương trình đào tạo từ xa.
13.3. Tôi nghĩ tôi thiếu kĩ năng đọc cho việc học trong
chương trình đào tạo từ xa.
13.4. Tôi nghĩ tôi thiếu kĩ năng giao tiếp cho việc học
trong chương trình đào tạo từ xa.
13.5. Tôi nghĩ tôi thiếu kĩ năng đánh máy cho việc học
trong chương trình đào tạo từ xa.
13.6. Tôi nghĩ tôi thiếu tự tin cho việc học trong chương
trình đào tạo từ xa.
14. Kĩ năng về kĩ thuật
14.1. Tôi nghĩ mình có cảm giác sợ máy tính và công
nghệ.
14.2. Tôi nghĩ mình thiếu kĩ năng sử dụng hệ thống công
cụ dùng trong chương trình đào tạo từ xa.
14.3. Tôi nghĩ tôi không quen sử dụng các công cụ kĩ
thuật để phục vụ cho chương trình đào tạo từ xa.
14.4. Tôi nghĩ tôi không quen với các phương pháp học
và giảng dạy của chương trình đào tạo từ xa.
15. Thời gian và sự hỗ trợ cho việc học
15.1. Tôi lo ngại rằng cuộc sống gia đình tôi sẽ bị gián
đoạn.
15.2. Tôi lo ngại rằng việc tham gia chương trình đào tạo
từ xa chiếm quá nhiều thời gian cá nhân của tôi.
15.3. Tôi nghĩ tôi thiếu sự hỗ trợ từ gia đình, bạn bè hoặc
sếp của tôi.
15.4. Tôi lo ngại có những sự gián đoạn quan trọng trong
việc học của tôi từ phía gia đình hoặc công việc.
15.5. Tôi nghĩ tôi không có đủ thời gian cho chương trình
đào tạo từ xa.
16. Những vấn đề liên quan đến công nghệ
16.1. Nơi tôi sống không có đường truyền internet đủ tốt
cho chương trình đào tạo từ xa.
16.2. Tôi nghĩ tôi không có đủ những công nghệ cần thiết
để phục vụ việc học trong chương trình đào tạo từ
xa.
88
16.3. Tôi lo ngại rằng có những sự không tương thích về
phần mềm, trình duyệt web,… giữa tôi và hệ thống
chính của chương trình đào tạo từ xa.
16.4. Tôi lo ngại về việc thiếu sự hỗ trợ kĩ thuật.
17. Những vấn đề liên quan đến tài chính
17.1. Tôi có vai trò chăm lo cho người lớn tuổi trong gia
đình.
17.2. Tôi lo ngại rằng tôi sẽ thiếu tiền để lo cho các con
nhỏ của tôi trong suốt quá trình học.
17.3. Tôi không có phân bổ nguồn tiền nào cho những
việc quan trọng xảy ra bất ngờ.
17.4. Tôi lo ngại rằng tôi sẽ không có đủ tiền để trả tiền
học phí.
18. Ý định về việc học đào tạo từ xa trong tương lai
18.1. Tôi dự định tham giao vào chương trình đào tạo từ
xa để tiếp tục sự nghiệp học hành.
18.2. Tôi sẽ tiếp tục hoặc theo học chương trình đào tạo
từ xa để có được bằng cấp và được thăng tiến trong
công việc.
18.3. Tôi sẽ giới thiệu chương trình đào tạo từ xa cho
người khác.
18.4. Tôi sẽ thôi học hoặc không có ý định theo học
chương trình đào tạo từ xa.
XIN CHÂN THÀNH CÁM ƠN!!!
89
[...]... the motivations and barriers components of Vietnamese students towards the distance education program To assess motivations and barriers of Vietnamese students towards the distance education To evaluate the influence of motivations, barriers of Vietnamese students towards distance education to Behavioral intentions To define the influence of demographic factors to motivations and barriers of Vietnamese. .. quality distance education program in Vietnam, there are a lot of concerns One of the concerns is about the learners Therefore, this research is going find out the motivations and barriers of Vietnamese students towards the distance education Base on the result of this research, distance education designers, instructors, and even students will have their own points of view of the current motivation and barriers. .. learners Therefore, the main objective of this paper is to take the first step to investigate the barriers and motivations of Vietnamese learners towards the distance education There are two main concerns of this research: the motivations and the barriers of Vietnamese learners Therefore, this paper is going to answer the question: What are the barriers and motivations of Vietnamese online learners? They... motivation and barriers of Vietnamese learners This paper will not discuss about the program designer or the instructor’s point of view Therefore, it cannot define all kinds of motivation and barriers of Vietnamese learners Although there are a lot of distance education programs or online courses in Vietnam, the target objects of this research are limited to: 1 Distance education program (Master and Bachelor’s... are nearly 700 students, nearly triple times the previous year (Office of Academic Affairs, HCMUS) That is the signal that distance education is getting known by Vietnamese learners It’s one of the right and appropriate channel for them to obtain the knowledge beside the traditional education 4 2 Rationale of the study There are a lot of difficulties in delivering a good quality distance education program... term distance education Most Vietnamese Universities may use the term distance learning” or distance 11 education They have some common points such as: instructional materials are delivered via either printed or electrical version; it’s flexible in time and places; mixture of offline (traditional) and online learning, etc There is one only exceptional case of HCMUS; they provide the distance education. .. particular subgroups of respondents viewed motivations or barriers differently In the research of barriers which was done by (Lin Y Muilenburg & Zane L Berge, 2005), ten of the eleven independent variables tested affected 20 students rating of barriers to online learning significantly: gender, age, ethnicity, type of learning institution, self-rating of online learning skills, effectiveness of learning online,... OU has more than 3.000 students graduated and more than 18.000 students attending the distance education programs (Trung Tâm Đào Tạo Từ Xa - Đại Học Mở TP.HCM, 2012) 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Figure 2 - Number of students attending online program at HCMUS Although HCMUS launched the distance education program later than OU, the number of students increase gradually,... years, 36% of public school districts enrolled a total of more than 328,000 students in technology-based distance education courses Most reviews of education trends show a dramatic increase in both the capacity and use of technology in our schools In fact, at least 22 states had established “virtual” schools by the 2004 – 2005 school-years The below figure shows the change of percentage of undergraduates... research scope and limitation 6.2 Literature review This part will give the definitions and discussions about four terms: Distance education , “Adult learners”, “Motivation” and “Barrier” The agreement or argument of many authors will be also discussed here Moreover, it also reviews the influence of demographic factors to Motivations and Barriers 6.3 Research methodology Research process and research ... define the motivations and barriers components of Vietnamese students towards the distance education program To assess motivations and barriers of Vietnamese students towards the distance education. .. influence of motivations, barriers of Vietnamese students towards distance education to Behavioral intentions To define the influence of demographic factors to motivations and barriers of Vietnamese. . .MOTIVATIONS AND BARRIERS OF VIETNAMESE STUDENTS TOWARDS DISTANCE EDUCATION In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of the Degree of MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
Ngày đăng: 23/10/2015, 15:38
Xem thêm: Motivations and barriers of vietnamese students towards distance education, Motivations and barriers of vietnamese students towards distance education
