Identification of the Structural Relationship between Goal Orientation, Teaching Presence, Approaches to Learning, Satisfaction and Academic Achievement of Online Continuing Education Learners

Title & Authors
Identification of the Structural Relationship between Goal Orientation, Teaching Presence, Approaches to Learning, Satisfaction and Academic Achievement of Online Continuing Education Learners
Joo, YoungJu; Chung, Aekyung; Choi, Miran;

Abstract
The purpose of this study is to investigate the structural relationships among goal orientation, teaching presence, approaches to leaning, satisfaction and academic achievement. For this study, the web survey was administered to 235 learners who participated in distance lifelong education centers of A, B, and C university in South Korea. Structural equation modeling (SEM) analysis was conducted in order to examine the causal relationships among the variables. The results indicated that first, mastery-approach goal and teaching presence had positive effects on deep approach. Second, mastery-approach goal showed negative effects on surface approach, while teaching presence did not. Third, deep approach had positive effects on satisfaction, Fourth, surface approach had negative effects on satisfaction. Fifth, deep approach showed positive effects. Last, surface approach showed negative effects on academic achievement. Based on the result of the research, the study propose the constructive foundation for providing strategies raising the satisfaction and academic achievement in distance life-long education.
Keywords
Goal Orientation;Teaching Presence;Approaches to Learning;Satisfaction;Academic Achievement;
Language
Korean
Cited by
References
1.
National Institute for Lifelong Education, Lifelong Education White Paper, 2013.

2.
J. Biggs, "From theory to practice: A cognitive systems approach. Higher Education Research and Development", vol.12, no.1, pp. 73-85. 1993.

3.
J. Biggs, "Teaching for quality learning at university(2nd ed.)". Berkshire. UK: Open University Press, 2003.

4.
Ames, C. "Classrooms: Goals, structure, and student motivation", Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, pp. 261-271, 1992.

5.
Ames, C and Archer, J, "Achievement goals in the classroom: Students' learning strategies and motivation processes", Journal of educational psychology, vol. 80, no. 3, p. 260, 1988.

6.
Witkow, M. R and Fuligni, A. J, "Achievement goals and daily school experiences among adolescents with Asian, Latino, and European American backgrounds", Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 99, no.3, p. 584. 2007.

7.
Meece, J. L. and Holt, K, "A pattern analysis of students' achievement goals", Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, pp. 582-590, 1993.

8.
Garrison, D. R and Cleveland-Innes, M, "Facilitating cognitive presence in online learning: Interaction is not enough. The American Journal of Distance Education", vol.19, no.3, pp. 133-148. 2005.

9.
Corbetta, M and Shulman, G. L. "Control of goal-directed and stimulus-driven attention in the brain", Nature reviews neuroscience, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 201-215. 2002.

10.
Marton, F and Saljo, R. "On Qualitative Differences in Learning: I-Outcome and process", British Journal of Edycational Psychology, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 4-11. 1976.

11.
Baeten, M., Kyndt, E., Struyven, K and Dochy, F. "Using student-centred learning environments to stimulate deep approaches to learning: Factors encouraging or discouraging their effectiveness". Educational Research Review, vol 5, no. 3, pp. 243-260, 2010.

12.
Biggs, J. B, "Student Approaches to Learning and Studying. Research Monograph", Australian Council for Educational Research Ltd., Radford House, Frederick St., Hawthorn 3122, Australia. 1987.

13.
Diseth, A and Kobbeltvedt, T, "A mediation analysis of achievement motives, goals, learning strategies, and academic achievement", British Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 80, no.4, 671-687, 2010.

14.
Picciano, A. G, "Beyond student perceptions: Issues of interaction, presence, and performance in an online course", Journal of Asynchronous learning networks, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 21-40, 2002.

15.
Shea, P. J and Pickett, A. M and Pelz, W. E, "A follow-up investigation of 'teaching presence' in the SUNY Learning Network", Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, vol. 2, pp. 61-80. 2003.

16.
Richardson, J. C and Newby, T, "The role of students' cognitive engagement in online learning", The American Journal of Distance Education, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 23-37, 2006.

17.
Entwistle, N and Hanley, M. and Hounsell, D, "Identifying distinctive approaches to studying". Higher education, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 365-380, 1979.

18.
Lawless, C. J and Richardson, J. T, "Approaches to studying and perceptions of academic quality in distance education", Higher Education, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 257-282, 2002.

19.
Yang, Y. F and Tsai, C. C, "Conceptions of and approaches to learning through online peer assessment", Learning and Instruction, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 72-83, 2010.

20.
Elliot, A. J and McGregor, H. A, "A $2{\times}2$ achievement goal framework", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 80, no. 3, pp. 501-519, 2001.

21.
Garrison, D. R., Cleveland-Innes, M and Fung, T, "Student Role Adjustment in Online Communities of Inquiry: Model and Instrument Validation", Journal of Asynchronous Learning Netwoeks, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 61-74, 2004.

22.
Biggs, J. B., Kember, D., and Leung, D. Y, "The revised two factor study process questionnaire: R.SPQ.2F", British Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 71, no. 1, pp. 133-149, 2001.

23.
R. Kline, Principles and practice of structual equation modeling, New York: The Guilford Press, 2010.

24.
S. Moon, Understanding and application of structural equation modelling, Hakjisa, 2009.