[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.2010.07.005]Search 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/BF03033415]Search 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).10.1080/02601370903471270]Search in Google Scholar
[6. Bonk, C.J. (2009). The world is open: How web technology is revolutionizing education. Jossey-Bass]Search 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/s10734-011-9424-0]Search 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.x]Search 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.2010.14]Search 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.x]Search 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/134]Search 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.2010.03.002]Search 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).10.1037/0022-3514.42.3.566]Search 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).10.1080/87567559909595802]Search 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=187]Search 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/s11412-007-9009-1]Search 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=257]Search 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.2009.11.006]Search 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).10.1348/000709906X160778]Search 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.413]Search 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).10.2307/3090266]Search 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.pdf]Search 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.x]Search 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).10.2307/249596]Search 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.2004.04.001]Search 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).10.1177/016235320602900302]Search 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.0000012343.96370.39]Search 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).10.28945/1128]Search 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.2011.04.010]Search 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.2010.09.004]Search 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=554]Search 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).10.1080/713696667]Search 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.v2i2.55]Search 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.v16i1.42]Search 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.0000026609.94841.2f]Search 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).10.1080/106689201753235930]Search 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-PPNE]Search 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.x]Search 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.2010.12.004]Search 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-x]Search 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).10.1080/03075070802211810]Search 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).10.1108/09513540010344731]Search 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/S0104-11692007000300007]Search 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.2006.12.009]Search 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.2006.03.001]Search 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-2014-0008]Search 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-X]Search 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)10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1271]Search 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). 10.28945/1427]Search in Google Scholar
