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