Neag School of Education

Task Value, Self-Efficacy, and Experience: Predicting Military Students’ Attitudes Toward Self-Paced, Online Learning

Anthony R. Artino, Jr.

Program in Cognition and InstructionDepartment of Educational Psychology

2

Overview

• Background

• Research Questions

• Methods

• Results

• Discussion

• Limitations & Future Directions

3

BackgroundInterest in Self-Regulated Learning

• Interest in academic self-regulation has grown

• How do students become masters of their own learning processes?

• Self-regulated learners efficiently control their own learning experiences by…

– Establishing a productive work environment and using resources effectively

– Organizing and rehearsing information to be learned

– Holding positive beliefs about their capabilities, the value of learning, and the factors that influence learning (Schunk & Zimmerman, 1998)

4

BackgroundGrowth of Online Learning

• Online education has emerged as a viable alternative to traditional classroom instruction (Moore, 2003; Tallent-Runnels et al., 2006)

• Survey of 1000 U.S. colleges and universities:

– 63% of schools offering undergraduate face-to-face courses also offer undergraduate courses online (Sloan Consortium, 2005)

• Department of Defense committed to transforming majority of face-to-face training to online learning (United States General Accounting Office, 2003)

5

BackgroundA Learner-Centered Focus

• A shift from an instructor-centered to a learner-centered focus

• Without an ever-present instructor, students do not received as much guidance/structure

• Students must take greater responsibility for the management/control of their own learning

6

BackgroundLinking Self-Regulation and Online Learning

• Ultimately, online students may need…

– well-developed self-regulated learning skills to guide their cognition and behavior in these highly independent environments (Bandura, 1997; Schunk & Zimmerman, 1998)

7

BackgroundSocial Cognitive Self-Regulation

Person

Environment Behavior

EnvironmentalSelf-Regulation

BehavioralSelf-Regulation

Covert Self-Regulation

(Adapted from Bandura, 1997)

8

BackgroundImportant Personal Variables

• Prior research in traditional classrooms, and limited research with online learning, has revealed the importance of…

– Task Value

– Self-Efficacy

– Prior Experience

• Positively related to students use of SRL strategies, academic achievement, satisfaction, and choice behaviors

9

Purpose of the Study

• To determine if the linkages between task value, self-efficacy, prior experience, and adaptive learning outcomes extend to military students learning in the context of self-paced, online training

10

Research Questions

RQ1: How do task value, self-efficacy, and prior experience with online learning relate to students’ overall satisfaction, perceived learning, and intentions to enroll in future online courses?

RQ2: Are there significant differences in the predictor and outcome variables when comparing students reporting on required courses versus students reporting on courses they chose to complete?

11

Methods

• Convenience sample of military personnel (n = 204) from the Naval Operational Medicine Institute

• Completed an online survey regarding…

– “the most effective self-paced, online course they had completed within the last two years”

• Participants indicated if the course was one they chose to take or were required to complete

12

MethodsSurvey Components

Section 1

– 25 items; Likert-type response scale

• 1-completely disagree to 7-completely agree

– Principle axis factor analysis with oblique rotation (Oblimin; delta = 0)

• 3 interpretable factors accounting for 61.6% of the total variance in items

Task Value (14 items; α = .95)

– I liked the subject matter of this course.

– I will be able to use what I learned in this course in my job.

Self-Efficacy for Learning with Self-Paced, Online Training (7 items; α = .89)

– I can perform well in a self-paced, online course.

– I am confident I can learn without the presence of an instructor to assist me.

Satisfaction (4 items; α = .91)

– Overall, I was satisfied with my online learning experience.

– This online course met my needs as a learner.

13

MethodsSurvey Components

Section 2

– Background and demographics items

– Three individual items used as variables

Experience

– In your estimation, how experienced are you with self-paced, online learning?

– 1-extremely inexperienced to 7-extremely experienced

Perceived Learning

– In your estimation, how well did you learn the material presented in this course?

– 1-not well at all to 7-extremely well

Choice

– What is the likelihood that you will enroll in another self-paced, online Navy course if you are not required to do so?

– 1-definitely will not enroll to 7-definitely will enroll

14

ResultsParticipant Characteristics

Gender:

53 women (26%)

150 men (74%)

Age:

Mean Age: 39.0 years

SD: 9.3 years

Range: 22-69

Educational Experience:

High School/GED (n = 21, 10%)

Some College(n = 51, 25%)

2-Year College(n = 24, 12%)

4-Year College (B.S./B.A.)(n = 25, 12%)

Master’s Degree(n = 48, 24%)

Doctoral Degree(n = 15, 7%)

Professional Degree (M.D./J.D.)(n = 16, 8%)

15

ResultsRQ1: Pearson Correlations

Variable M SD α 1 2 3 4 5 6

1. Task Value 4.47 1.16 .95 .36** .17* .73** .58** .50**

2. Self-Efficacy 5.36 1.07 .89 .43** .58** .57** .41**

3. Experience 5.19 1.37 .91 .20** .36** .46**

4. Satisfaction 4.56 1.42 - .70** .59**

5. Perceived Learning 4.53 1.45 - .54**

6. Choice (Intentions to Enroll) 4.32 1.88 -

Means, Standard Deviations, Cronbach’s Alphas, and Pearson Correlations Between the Measured Variables.

Note. N = 204. *p < .05. **p < .01.

16

ResultsRQ1: Multiple Linear Regressions

Variable

Satisfaction Perceived LearningChoice

(Intentions to Enroll)

B SE B β B SE B β B SE B β

Task Value .73 .06 .60** .54 .07 .43** .64 .10 .40**

Self-Efficacy .52 .07 .39** .49 .08 .36** .22 .11 .12

Experience -.07 .05 -.07 .13 .06 .12* .46 .08 .33**

Model Summary R2 = .65, p < .001 R2 = .50, p < .001 R2 = .40, p < .001

Note. N = 204. *p < .05. **p < .001.

Summary of Multiple Linear Regression Analyses Predicting Satisfaction, Perceived Learning, and Intentions to Enroll in Future Online Courses

Multivariate Regression (Stevens, 2002):

Wilks’ Λ = .25, F = 40.47, p < .001

17

ResultsRQ2: Group Comparisons

Variable

Elective Course(n = 35)

Required Course(n = 166)

M SD M SD t df Cohen’s d

Task Value 5.21 .86 4.32 1.14 4.29*** 62.38 .81

Self-Efficacy 5.56 1.03 5.34 1.06 1.15 50.64 -

Experience 5.49 1.25 5.14 1.39 1.35 53.30 -

Satisfaction 5.24 1.38 4.43 1.38 3.16** 49.36 .59

Perceived Learning

5.00 1.39 4.44 1.45 2.01* 48.89 .39

Choice 5.66 1.45 4.05 1.85 4.83*** 59.91 .90

Results of t-Tests Comparing Students Reporting on an Elective and Students Reporting on a Required Course

Note. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

1-Way MANOVA; Wilks’ Λ = .86, F(6, 191) = 5.15, p < .001

18

DiscussionGeneral Findings

• Findings generally support prior research that students’ motivational beliefs and prior experience are related to positive academic outcomes

• Results provide some evidence that these relationships extend to self-paced, online learning in the context of military training

19

DiscussionTask Value

• Task value was a significant positive predictor of satisfaction, perceived learning, and choice behaviors

• Findings are consistent with prior research

– Task value → cognitive engagement and academic performance (Pintrich & De Groot, 1990)

– Task value → overall satisfaction (Lee, 2002)

Educational Implications

• Instructional elements designed to enhance value may improve overall satisfaction, learning, and choice behaviors

20

DiscussionSelf-Efficacy

• Self-efficacy was a significant positive predictor of satisfaction and perceived learning, but not choice

• Findings are consistent with prior research

– Online education; self-efficacy → satisfaction and academic achievement (Lynch, 2002; Wang & Newlin, 2002)

– Value beliefs tend to be better predictors of choice behaviors than expectancy beliefs (Eccles & Wigfield, 1995)

Educational Implications

• Instructional elements designed to enhance efficacy may improve students’ overall satisfaction and learning

21

DiscussionGroup Differences

• Participants reporting on a course they chose to take conveyed significantly more positive attitudes than those reporting on required courses

• Findings consistent with motivation literature (Dai & Sternberg, 2004; Pintrich & Schunk, 2002)

Educational Implications

• Organizational leaders may want to provide personnel with opportunities to exercise choice and control over their online learning activities

22

Limitations & Future Directions

Limitations– Data are correlational; cannot make causal conclusions– Some participants reporting on recent courses, some distant

courses– Use of self-reports only

• Social desirability bias• Mono-method bias; method itself may influence results• Perceived learning variable is particularly problematic

Future Directions– Use more direct measures of student performance

(i.e., course grades)– Control for prior knowledge when studying interest/value

(Tobias, 1994)– Assess whether online interventions designed to enhance task

value and self-efficacy also improve academic performance

23

The End

Questions?

Paper can be downloaded at

http://www.tne.uconn.edu/presentations.htm