1. bookVolume 17 (2014): Issue 1 (July 2014)
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
eISSN
1027-5207
First Published
11 Dec 2014
Publication timeframe
2 times per year
Languages
English
access type Open Access

The Temporal Perspective in Higher Education Learners: Comparisons between Online and Onsite Learning

Published Online: 11 Dec 2014
Volume & Issue: Volume 17 (2014) - Issue 1 (July 2014)
Page range: 190 - 209
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
eISSN
1027-5207
First Published
11 Dec 2014
Publication timeframe
2 times per year
Languages
English
Abstract

Higher Education increases flexibility with online learning solutions. Nevertheless, dropout rates in online university are large. Among the reasons, one aspect deserving further study is students’ Time Perspective (TP), which has been studied in onsite HE. It is necessary to know the TP profile of the growing population of online students, and consider its relation with students’ preference and convenience factors for choosing online or onsite contexts. In this study, learners’ TP in an online and an onsite Catalan HE institutions are compared. Results show that HE students present a high future orientation in general, while online students showed a higher orientation to past negativism. Basic guides are given to help institutions and students in the choice of the better suited learning context according to their TP.

Keywords

1. Altbach, P.; Reisberg, L. and Rumbley, L. (2009). Trends in global higher education: Tracking an academic revolution. Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College Center for International Higher Education.Search in Google Scholar

2. Artino, A.R. (2010). Internet and Higher Education Online or face-to-face learning? Exploring the personal factors that predict students’ choice of instructional format. In The Internet and Higher Education, 13(4), (pp. 272-276).10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.07.005Search in Google Scholar

3. Bates, A.T. (2004). Technology, e-learning and distance education. Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

4. Bishop, M.J.; Hyclak, T. and Yerk-Zwicki, S. (2007). The clipper project: Lessons learned teaching an online economics course. In Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 18(2), (pp. 99-120).10.1007/BF03033415Search in Google Scholar

5. Boeren, E.; Nicaise, I.; Baert, H. (2010). Theoretical models of participation in adult education: The need for an integrated model. In International journal of lifelong education, 29(1), (pp. 45-61).10.1080/02601370903471270Search in Google Scholar

6. Bonk, C.J. (2009). The world is open: How web technology is revolutionizing education. Jossey-BassSearch in Google Scholar

7. Bosato, G. (2001). Time perspective, academic motivation, and procrastination. Master’s thesis. San Jose State University.Search in Google Scholar

8. Carnoy, M.; Jarillo B.; Castano-Munoz, J.; Duart, J.M.; Sancho-Vinuesa, T. (2012). Who attends and completes virtual universities: the case of the open University of Catalonia (UOC). In Higher Education, 63, (pp. 53-82).10.1007/s10734-011-9424-0Search in Google Scholar

9. Clay, M.; Rowland, S. and Packard, A. (2009). Improving undergraduate online retention through gated advisement and redundant communication. In Journal of college student retention, 10(1), (pp. 93-102).Search in Google Scholar

10. Clayton, K.; Blumberg, F. and Auld, D.P. (2010). The relationship between motivation, learning strategies and choice of environment whether traditional or including an online component. In British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(3), (pp. 349-364).10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00993.xSearch in Google Scholar

11. Cocea, M. and Weibelzahl, S. (2011). Disengagement Detection in Online Learning: Validation Studies and Perspectives. In IEEE transactions on learning technologies, 4(2), (pp. 114-124).10.1109/TLT.2010.14Search in Google Scholar

12. Collier, C. and Morse, F.K. (2002). Requiring independent learners to collaborate: Redesign of an online course. In Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 1(1), (pp. 1-9).Search in Google Scholar

13. Concannon, F.; Flynn, A. and Campbell, M.(2005). What campus-based students think about the quality and benefits of e-learning. In British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(3), (pp. 501-512).10.1111/j.1467-8535.2005.00482.xSearch in Google Scholar

14. Costa, P. and McCrae, R. (1992). NEO personality inventory-revised (NEO PI-R). Odessa, FA: Psychological Assessment Resources.Search in Google Scholar

15. Cuthrell, K. and Lyon, A. (2007). Instructional strategies: What do online students prefer? In MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 4, (pp. 357-362).Search in Google Scholar

16. Dabbagh, N. (2005). Pedagogical models for E-Learning: A theory-based design framework.In International Journal of Technology in Teaching and Learning, 1(1), (pp. 25-44).Search in Google Scholar

17. Daugherty, M. and Funke, B.L. (2007). University faculty and student perceptions of webbased instruction. In The Journal of Distance Education, 13(1), (pp. 21-39). Retrieved from http://www.jofde.ca/index.php/jde/article/viewArticle/134Search in Google Scholar

18. de Bilde, J.; Vansteenkiste, M. and Lens, W. (2011). Understanding the association between future time perspective and self-regulated learning through the lens of self-determination theory. In Learning and Instruction, 21(3), (pp. 332-344).10.1016/j.learninstruc.2010.03.002Search in Google Scholar

19. de Volder, M.L. and Lens, W. (1982). Academic Achievement and Future Time Perspective as a Cognitive-Motivational Concept. In Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42(3), (pp. 566-571).10.1037/0022-3514.42.3.566Search in Google Scholar

20. Deal III, W. (2002). Distance Learning: Teaching technology online. In The Technology Teacher, 61, (pp. 21-26).Search in Google Scholar

21. Delfino, M.; Manca, S.; Persico, D.; Sarti, L. (2004). Online Learning: Attitudes, Expectations and Prejudices of Adult Novices. In Proceedings of the IASTED Web Based Education Conference, Innsbruck, Austria, (pp. 31-36).Search in Google Scholar

22. Diaz, D. (2002). As distance education comes of age, the challenge is keeping the students. In Chronicle of Higher Education, (p. A39).Search in Google Scholar

23. Diaz, D.P. and Cartnal, R.B. (1999). Students’ Learning Styles in Two Classes and Equivalent On-Campus. In College teaching, 47(4), (pp. 130-135).10.1080/87567559909595802Search in Google Scholar

24. Díaz-Morales, J. F. (2006). Estructura factorial y fiabilidad del Inventario de Perspectiva Temporal de Zimbardo. In Psicothema, 18(3), (pp. 565-571).Search in Google Scholar

25. Eren, A. (2009). Exploring the effects of changes in future time perspective and perceived instrumentality on graded performance. In Electronic Journal of Educational Research, 19(7), (pp. 1217-1248).Search in Google Scholar

26. Evans, T.N. (2009). An investigative study of factors that influence the retention rates in online programs at selected state, state-affiliated, and private universities. PhD Dissertation. UMI Number: 3388741.ProQuest.Search in Google Scholar

27. Favretto, G.; Caramia, G. and Guardini, M. (2005). E-learning measurement of the learning differences between traditional lessons and online lessons. In European Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 8(2). Available online at: http://www.eurodl.org/index.php?p=archives&year=2005&halfyear=2&article=187Search in Google Scholar

28. Fillion, G.; Limayem, M.; Laferrière, T. and Robert, M. (2007). Integrating ICT into higher education: a study of onsite vs. online students. In Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 11(2).Search in Google Scholar

29. Fischer, G.; Rohde, M. and Wulf, W. (2007). Community-based learning: The core competency of residential, research-based universities. In Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2, (pp. 9-40).10.1007/s11412-007-9009-1Search in Google Scholar

30. Fourez, M. (2009). Impoverished students’ perspectives of time. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.Search in Google Scholar

31. Gallagher, J.G. (2007). Online Learning: Strategy or Sophistry? In European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 10(1). Available online at: http://www.eurodl.org/index.php?p=archives&year=2007&halfyear=1&article=257Search in Google Scholar

32. Gibbs, G. (2003). The future of student retention in open and distance learning. In The future of open and distance learning, (pp. 37-48). Search in Google Scholar

33. Gilbert, N. (2001). Researching Social Life. SAGE.Search in Google Scholar

34. Glenn, M. and D’Agostino, D. (2008). The Future of Higher Education: How Technology Will Shape Learning. New Media Consortium, 2008, October 1. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED505103. Retrieved February 19, 2014, from ERIC database.Search in Google Scholar

35. Glover, L. and Lewis, V. (2012). Student preference online versus traditional courses. In The Global eLearning Journal, 1(3), (pp. 1-28).Search in Google Scholar

36. Green, K.C. (1996). The coming ubiquity of information technology. In Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 28(2), (pp. 24-28).Search in Google Scholar

37. Halsne, A.M. and Gatta, L.A. (2002). Online versus Traditionally-Delivered Instruction: A Descriptive Study of Learner Characteristics in a Community College Setting. In Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 5(1), (p. 1).Search in Google Scholar

38. Harrington, R. and Loffredo, D.A. (2010). MBTI personality type and other factors that relate to preference for online versus face-to-face instruction. In The Internet and Higher Education, 13, (pp. 89-95).10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.11.006Search in Google Scholar

39. Hiltz, S.R.; Coppola, N.; Rotter, N.; Toroff, M.; Benbunan-Fich, R. (2000). Measuring the Importance of Collaborative Learning for the Effectiveness of ALN: A Multi-Measure. In J.Bourne (ed.), Online Education: Learning effectiveness and faculty satisfaction: Volume 1. (p. 101-119).Needham, MA.: Sloan-C.Search in Google Scholar

40. Horstmanshof, L. and Zimitat, C. (2007). Future time orientation predicts academic engagement among first-year university students. In British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(3), (pp. 703-718).10.1348/000709906X160778Search in Google Scholar

41. Hu, S.; Katherine, L. and Kuh, G.D. (2011). Student typologies in higher education. In New Directions for Institutional Research, (pp. 5-15)10.1002/ir.413Search in Google Scholar

42. Jacobs, J. and King, R.B. (2002). Age and college completion: A life-history analysis of women aged 15-44. In Sociology of Education, 75, (pp. 211-230).10.2307/3090266Search in Google Scholar

43. Karber, D. (2003). Comparisons and contrasts in traditional versus online teaching in management. In Higher Education in Europe, 26, (pp. 533-536).Search in Google Scholar

44. Kell, C. (2006). Undergraduates’ learning profile development: what is happening to the men? In Medical Teacher, 28(1), (pp. 16-24).Search in Google Scholar

45. Kim, T.; Welch, S.M.; Nam, S. (2012). Examining Graduate Students’ Perceptions of and Preferences for Online Courses. In proceedings of Academic and Business Research Institute, International Conference - Las Vegas 2012, October 4 - 6, 2012. Available online at: http://www.aabri.com/LV2012Manuscripts/LV12065.pdfSearch in Google Scholar

46. Koons, K. (2012). New study - students prefer online college classes to traditional classes.Search in Google Scholar

47. Lee, Y.; Choi, J. and Kim, T. (2012). Discriminating factors between completers of and dropouts from online learning courses. In British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(2), (pp. 328-337). doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01306.x10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01306.xSearch in Google Scholar

48. Leidner, D.E. and Jarvenpaa, S.L. (1995). The use of information technology to enhance management school education: a theoretical view. In MIS Quarterly, 19(3), (pp. 265-91).10.2307/249596Search in Google Scholar

49. Lens, W.; Simons, J. and Dewitte, S. (2001). Student motivation and self-regulation as a function of future time perspective and perceived instrumentality Motivation in learning contexts: Theoretical advances and methodological implications, (pp. 233-248), Pergamon: New York.Search in Google Scholar

50. MacGregor, C.J. (2000). Does personality matter? A comparison of student experiences in traditional and online classrooms. In Dissertation Abstracts International, 61, 1696A. Search in Google Scholar

51. Malka, A. and Covington, M. V. (2005). Perceiving school performance as instrumental to future attainment: effects on graded performance. In Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30(1), (pp. 60-80).10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.04.001Search in Google Scholar

52. Mello, Z.R. and Worrell, F.C. (2006). The Relationship of Time Perspective to Age, Gender, and Academic Achievement among Academically Talented Adolescents. In Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 29(3), (pp. 271-289).10.1177/016235320602900302Search in Google Scholar

53. Miller, R.B. and Brickman, S.J. (2004). A model of future-oriented motivation and selfregulation: effects of time perspective on student motivation. In Educational Psychology Review, 16(1), (pp. 9-33).10.1023/B:EDPR.0000012343.96370.39Search in Google Scholar

54. Mortagy, Y. and Boghikian-Whitby, S. (2010). A longitudinal comparative study of student perceptions in online education. In Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects, 6(1), (pp. 23-44).10.28945/1128Search in Google Scholar

55. Northrup, P. (2002). Online learners’ preferences for interaction. In The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 3(2), (pp. 219-226).Search in Google Scholar

56. Oppedisano, V. (2011). The (adverse) effects of expanding higher education: Evidence from Italy. In Economics of Education Review, 30(12).10.1016/j.econedurev.2011.04.010Search in Google Scholar

57. Paechter, M. and Maier, B. (2010). Online or face-to-face? Students’ experiences and preferences in e-learning. In The Internet and Higher Education, 13(4), (pp. 292-297).10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.09.004Search in Google Scholar

58. Palloff, R.M. and Pratt, K. (2003). The virtual student: A profile and guide to working with online learners. Jossey-Bass.Search in Google Scholar

59. Paunescu, M. (2013). Students’ Attitudes towards Technology-Enabled Learning: A Change in Learning Patterns? The Case of a Master’s Course in Political Science. In European Journal of Open and Distance e-Learning, 16(1). Available online at: http://www.eurodl.org/index.php?p=archives&year=2013&halfyear=1&article=554Search in Google Scholar

60. Peetsma, T.T.D. (2000). Future time perspective as a predictor of school investment. In Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 44(2), (pp. 177-192).10.1080/713696667Search in Google Scholar

61. Pérez-Cereijo, M.V. (2006). Attitude as Predictor of Success in Online Training. In International Journal on E-Learning, 5(4), (pp. 623-639).Search in Google Scholar

62. Robai, A.P. and Jordan, H.M. (2004). Blended Learning and Sense of Community: A Comparative Analysis with Traditional and Fully Online Graduate Courses. In International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 5(2).Search in Google Scholar

63. Romero, M. and Usart, M. (2012). Game Based Learning Time-on-Task and Learning Performance According to the Students’ Temporal Perspective. In Proceedings of the 6th European Conference on Games Based Learning, (pp. 4-5).Search in Google Scholar

64. Romero, M. and Barberà, E. (2013). Identificación de las dificultades de regulación del tiempo de los estudiantes universitarios en formación a distancia. RED. In Revista de Educación a Distancia, 38.Search in Google Scholar

65. Sangrà, A. (2001). La calidad en las experiencias virtuales de educación superior, Actas de la conferencia internacional sobre educación, formación y nuevas tecnologías, (pp. 614-625).Search in Google Scholar

66. Sangrà, A. (2002). A New Learning Model for the Information and Knowledge Society: The case of the Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (UOC). In The international review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 2(2), (pp. 1-8). 10.19173/irrodl.v2i2.55Search in Google Scholar

67. Schmidt J.T. and Werner C.H. (2007). Designing Online Instruction for Success: Future Oriented Motivation and Self-Regulation. In The Electronic Journal of e-learning, 5(1), (pp. 69 -78).Search in Google Scholar

68. Siemens, G. and Matheos, K. (2012). Systemic changes in higher education. In Education, 16(1).10.37119/ojs2010.v16i1.42Search in Google Scholar

69. Simons, J.; Vansteenkiste, M.; Lens, W. and Lacante, M. (2004). Placing motivation and future time perspective theory in a temporal perspective. In Educational Psychology Review, 16(2), (pp. 121-139).10.1023/B:EDPR.0000026609.94841.2fSearch in Google Scholar

70. Sullivan, P. (2001). Gender differences and the online classroom: Male and female college students evaluate their experiences. In Community College Journal of Research &Practice, 25(10), (pp. 805-818).10.1080/106689201753235930Search in Google Scholar

71. Sursock, A. and Smidtt, H. (2010). Trends 2010: A decade of change in European Higher Education.European University Association. ISBN: 9789078997177.Search in Google Scholar

72. Swan, K.; Shea, P.; Fredericksen, E.; Pickett, A.; Pelz, W.; Maher, G. et al. (2000). Building knowledge building communities: Consistency, contact and communication in the virtual classroom. In Journal of Educational Computing Research, 23(4), (pp. 359-383).10.2190/W4G6-HY52-57P1-PPNESearch in Google Scholar

73. Taniguchi, H. and Kaufman, G. (2005). Degree completion among nontraditional college students. In Social Science Quarterly, 86(4), (pp. 912-927).10.1111/j.0038-4941.2005.00363.xSearch in Google Scholar

74. Thomas, E. and Quinn, J. (2007). First generation entry into higher education. McGraw-Hill International.Search in Google Scholar

75. Van der Veen, I. and Peetsma, T. (2011). Motivated for leisure in the future: A personcentred longitudinal study in the lowest level of secondary education. In Learning and Individual Differences, 21(2), (pp. 233-238).10.1016/j.lindif.2010.12.004Search in Google Scholar

76. Varela, O.E.; Cater, J.J. and Michel, N. (2012). Online learning in management education: an empirical study of the role of personality traits. In Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 24(3), (pp. 209-225).10.1007/s12528-012-9059-xSearch in Google Scholar

77. Vermeulen, L. and Schmidt, H.G. (2008). Learning environments, learning process, academic outcomes and career success of university graduates. In Studies in Higher Education, 33(4), (pp. 431-451).10.1080/03075070802211810Search in Google Scholar

78. Volery, T. and Lord, D. (2000). Critical success factors in online education. In International Journal of Educational Management, 14(5), (pp. 216 - 223).10.1108/09513540010344731Search in Google Scholar

79. Wetterich, N.C. and Melo, M.R. (2007). Sociodemographic profile of undergraduate nursing students. In Rev Latino-am Enfermagem, 15(3), (pp. 404-410).10.1590/S0104-11692007000300007Search in Google Scholar

80. Yang, F.Y. and Tsai, C.C. (2008). Investigating university student preferences and beliefs about learning in the Web-based context. In Computers & Education, 50(4), (pp. 1284-1303).10.1016/j.compedu.2006.12.009Search in Google Scholar

81. Young, A. and Norgard, C. (2006). Assessing the quality of online courses from the students’ perspective. In The Internet and Higher Education, 9(2), (pp. 107-115). doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2006.03.00110.1016/j.iheduc.2006.03.001Search in Google Scholar

82. Yukselturk, E.; Ozekes, S. and Türel, Y.K. (2014).Predicting Dropout Student: An Application of Data Mining Methods in an Online Education Program. In European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 17(1). Available online at: http://www.eurodl.org/index.php?p=current&article=616 10.2478/eurodl-2014-0008Search in Google Scholar

83. Zabel, A. (1995). Correspondence course completion rates. PhD dissertation. Retrieved from https://repositories.tdl.org/ttu-ir/bitstream/handle/2346/16268/31295009342592.pdf [01/06/2014]Search in Google Scholar

84. Zimbardo, P.G.; Keough, K.A. and Boyd, J.N. (1997). Present time perspective as a predictor of risky driving. In Personality and Individual Differences, 23, (pp. 1007-1023).10.1016/S0191-8869(97)00113-XSearch in Google Scholar

85. Zimbardo, P.G. and Boyd, J.N. (1999). Putting time into perspective: A valid, reliable individual differences metric. In Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, (pp. 1271-1288)10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1271Search in Google Scholar

86. Žuvic-Butorac, M.; Roncevic, N.; Nemcanin, D. and Nebic, Z. (2011). Blended E-Learning in Higher Education: Research on Students’ Perspective. In Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 8, (pp. 409-429). 10.28945/1427Search in Google Scholar

Recommended articles from Trend MD

Plan your remote conference with Sciendo