Achieving Effective Learning Effects in the Blended Course:A Combined Approach of Online Self-Regulated

Learning and Collaborative Learning with Initiation

Chia-Wen Tsai, Ph.D.

Abstract

In many countries, undergraduates are required to take at least one introductory computer course to enhancetheir computer literacy and computing skills. However, the application software education in Taiwan can hardlybe deemed as effective in developing students’ practical computing skills. The author applied online self-regulated learning (SRL) and collaborative learning (CL) with initiation in a blended computing course andexamined the effects of different combinations on enhancing students’ computing skills. Four classes, comprising221 students, participated in this study. The online SRL and CL with initiation (G1, n¼ 53), online CL withinitiation (G2, n¼ 68), and online CL without initiation (G3, n¼ 68) were experimental groups, and the last class,receiving traditional lecture (G4, n¼ 32), was the control group. The results of this study show that students whoreceived the intervention of online SRL and CL with initiation attained significantly best grades for practicalcomputing skills, whereas those that received the traditional lectures had statistically poorest grades among thefour classes. The implications for schools and educators who plan to provide online or blended learning for theirstudents, particularly in computing courses, are also provided in this study.

Introduction

As the skills of using application software to solveproblems and complete work are general requirements

in the workplace, application software education is empha-sized for students in academic universities and vocationalschools in Taiwan.1 However, the teaching in computingcourses tends to adopt traditional lecturing pedagogy. Inaddition, many inappropriate and lack-of-context examplesare used in teaching of different sections.2 In this learningcontext, it is difficult to develop students’ practical computingskills. Thus, the author turns to an approach that can helpstudents develop practical computing skills and further con-tribute to their competence.

Collaborative learning (CL), which assists teaching a spe-cific educational objective through a coordinated and sharedactivity by means of social interactions among the groupmembers,3,4 is considered as an effective approach. The mostcritical characteristic of CL is the active role of the learners,5

which implies that participants learn from peers by actively co-constructing knowledge.6,7 Nevertheless, many students inTaiwan have got used to a ‘‘spoon-feeding’’ teaching methodand generally lack the ability to seek essential information andlearn independently.1,8 Students may face difficulties and have

to climb a stiff learning curve in the initial stage of the problem-solving learning context.9 Therefore, the author integrated CLwith teacher’s initiation to build up students’ basic knowledgein the initial stage of a blended course.

When virtual learning environments are discussed, thefocus falls on the technology as a tool for active learningmodalities (e.g., learning via self-driven).10 King et al. con-clude that self-regulation of learning is more important in thedistance education context than in the traditional context.11

Learning strategies that prepare students for the rigors oflearning at a distance and increase the probability of retentionand success must be put into practice.12 Therefore, self-regulated learning (SRL) was applied in this study to helpstudents develop regular learning habits and improve theirlearning.

Recently, a growing number of universities have employedlearning management system and educational technologies tosupport their courses.13 However, few researchers have ex-perimentally investigated the factors that facilitate e-learningand its effects.14 In this regard, the author conducted an ex-periment in a computing course and applied online SRL andCL with initiation to enhance students’ computing skillsand empirically examined their effects. In this article, theauthor first describes the background and insufficiencies of the

Department of Information Management, Ming Chuan University, Taipei, Taiwan.

CYBERPSYCHOLOGY, BEHAVIOR, AND SOCIAL NETWORKING

Volume 14, Number 9, 2011ª Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.DOI: 10.1089/cyber.2010.0388

505

computing courses in Taiwan and the specific need for SRLand CL with initiation in the Introduction section. Literaturerelated to online SRL and CL with initiation is separatelyportrayed in the Literature Review section. Subsequently, TheEmpirical Study section illustrates the experimental design, thecourse and participants involved, and the intervention con-cerning online SRL, CL, and initiation, along with how stu-dents’ computing skills were evaluated. The analysis ofstudents’ computing skills is presented in the Results section.Finally, the main findings in this empirical study and impli-cations for educators and schools are addressed in the Dis-cussion and Implications and Conclusion sections.

Literature Review

Collaborative learning

CL refers to methodologies and environments in whichstudents engage in a common and authentic task whereineach peer depends on and is accountable to one another.15 CLcontributes to deeper level learning, shared understanding,critical thinking, and long-term retention of the learned ma-terial.16–18 It has been revealed that learners in collaborativeteams achieve higher levels of performance and retain infor-mation longer than learners who work individually.19,20

Online courses integrated with online CL represent a newand greatly valued opportunity, not only in terms of access tofellow students but also in the chance to work together.21 CLmakes online learning as effective or even more effective thanthat in the traditional face-to-face class.22,23 In this regard, theresearchers in this study applied online CL to enhance stu-dents’ computing skills.

Initiation

Initiation is regarded as teacher’s help and effort to es-tablish learners’ essential knowledge and develop basicskills in the initial stage of a course.24 In Tsai’s25 study, ithas been reported that students who received the inter-vention of Web-enhanced CL with initiation had signifi-cantly higher involvement (4.7582) than those withoutinitiation (4.3400). Moreover, it has been reported thatteachers should provide the essential skills and knowledgefor students in the initial stage to help them climb thelearning curve and achieve the effectiveness of onlineproblem-solving.9 Hence, the author integrated initiationinto the implementation of online CL.

Self-regulated learning

SRL is defined in terms of self-generated thoughts, feelings,and actions, which are systematically oriented toward at-tainment of students’ own goals.26 SRL develops students’ability to control and influence their learning processes pos-itively.27 In a blended learning environment that integratedself-regulation, it has been reported that verbal ability andself-efficacy relate significantly to performance, together ex-plaining 12 percent of the variance in course grades.28 Aze-vedo et al. also indicate that the related theories of SRL inmedia-mediated learning supply researchers with perspec-tives helpful in understanding the processes and outcomes ofmedia-mediated learning.29–32 Therefore, SRL was applied inthis research to develop students’ regular learning habits andenhance their computing skills.

The Empirical Study

Participants

The participants in this study were 221 undergraduatesfrom four class sections taking a compulsory course titled‘‘Applied Information Technology: Networking’’ in Taiwan.Students in the first two classes, who came from the depart-ment of security management (G1, n¼ 53; G2, n¼ 68), andthose in the third, who were from the department of coun-seling and industrial-organizational psychology at an aca-demic university (G3, n¼ 68), were experimental groups,whereas those in the fourth class, who came from the de-partment of business administration at a university of scienceand technology (G4, n¼ 32), served as the control group. Themean age of students was around 20 years. All students inthis study used the same course Web site interface; however,they received different teaching methods with or withoutteacher’s initiation.

Course setting

The course involved was a semester-long, 2 credit-hourcourse targeting second-year university students. This coursefocused on the development of students’ knowledge and skillsfor using networking technologies and software to search forinformation through Internet, receive and send e-mail, transferfiles, and, most importantly, build up business-quality Websites. Students were divided into teams for cooperation tocomplete the teacher’s requirements and assignments.

Experimental design and procedure

There were four blended classes included in this study. Theclasses of online SRL and CL with initiation (G1), online CLwith initiation (G2), and online CL without initiation (G3)were the experimental groups, whereas the last class receiv-ing traditional lecture (G4) was the control group. Students inthis study were divided into teams, each consisting of six toseven members for discussion and collaboration, each re-quired to build up a business-quality Web site that met theguidelines in the literature and textbook. The interventionsfor the four classes are as described below:

Intervention concerning CL (for G1, G2, and G3). Theauthor in this study designed a simulation context in whichstudents in G1, G2, and G3 could interact, collaborate withpeers, and learn through problem-solving processes. Thefunctions of interactivity have critical implications for learn-ing.33 It is indicated that learners’ interactions support jointproblem solving, coordination, and social learning, which areessential for complex collaboration.34 Thus, the teacher in-volved students in a simulation of planning to establish avirtual company collaboratively. They had to discuss aboutcategories of products to sell through the Internet and plantheir business Web site in the third week of the semester.Then, students were asked to build a prototype of the Website by the sixth week.

Each team in the three classes was assigned a chapter orsection of the textbook and had to present the functions andprocesses of installing and using modules to complete abusiness-quality Web site. When a team finished their pre-sentation, the visual aids would be uploaded to the courseWeb site for other classmates to download and as reference.

506 TSAI

Intervention concerning initiation (for G1 and G2). In theteaching for G1 and G2 students, the teacher first establishedstudents’ basic skills and guided them to develop essentialknowledge in the initial stage of the course. The teacher il-lustrated the processes of server installation and how to buildup the prototype of a Web site, so that these students had theoverall concepts of Web site architecture building. In addi-tion, before students’ presentations, the teacher also illus-trated the goal and basic functions of each module.

Intervention concerning SRL (for G1 only). SRL strate-gies are the processes that students use to manage their ownlearning.35 The SRL strategies of reviewing notes and keepingrecords were adopted in the implementation of SRL in thisstudy, as they are the two most often mentioned learningstrategies.36,37 G1 students had to take notes in class and re-view the notes and visual aids after school. Moreover, theteacher assigned schoolwork to students in Assignments andExercises section of the course Web site every week. Thesestudents were also required to complete and upload the as-signments by the deadline. Students could not submit as-signments after the deadlines set by the teacher.

Measurement

To prevent the potential threat from students’ initial dif-ferences that might cause bias of measurement, the re-searchers first checked students’ skills and experience of webpage programming and Web site building. None of themreported having had related experience or having used thattype of software. Thus, it is believed that students in the fourgroups appeared to have similar levels of computing skills ofweb page programming at the beginning of the experiment.In addition, it is observed that many students in Taiwan areInternet-addicted to online games, shopping Web sites, andsocial networking Web sites.24 It is also noted that whilestudents may be motivated to persist in playing online gamesto level up, are adept at scanning scores of web pages toextract information needed for their reports, and are savvy insurfing the Internet, one cannot necessarily assume that theseactivities promote students to become more technologicallyliterate in broader or deeper ways,38 such as in the actualconstruction of Web pages or skills for building Web sites. Asno student had related experience or had used the softwarefor Web site building, the researchers could thus rule outinitial differences as alternative explanations for the differ-ences of outcomes detected.39

In this research, students began to present with their Websites in the 14th week of the semester. The teacher mainlygraded according to Website Evaluation Criteria40 and WebUsability.41 All students in the same team received the samegrade for the Web site design; however, students’ individualgrades varied based on their presentation quality and re-sponse to the teacher’s challenge or questions.

Results

The effects of online SRLin the implementation of CL with initiation

The independent samples t test was used to compare stu-dents’ computing skills between G1 (online SRL and collab-oration with initiation) and G2 (online collaboration with

initiation). Based on the data shown in Table 1, G1 students’computing skills (90.8491) were significantly higher than thatin G2 (86.1824). It was found that the effects of online SRLwere positive, and higher than that without, in the im-plementation of CL.

The effects of teacher’s initiationin the implementation of online CL

As the data show in Table 2, the results indicate that G2students’ computing skills (86.1824) were on average higherthan that (82.8382) for G3 (online collaboration). That is, it isbelieved that teacher’s initiation could help students learn, andcontribute to the development of students’ computing skills.

The effects of online CL

Finally, a one-way analysis of variance was used to com-pare students’ computing skills among the four classes. Asthe data show in Table 3, students who learned in the CLcontext (G1, mean¼ 90.8491; G2, mean¼ 86.1824; G3,mean¼ 82.8382) had significantly higher grades than thosewho received traditional lecture (G4, mean¼ 69.5625).Moreover, students who received traditional lecture hadstatistically poorest grades among the four classes (last threerows of negative numbers in Table 3). Therefore, it could beconcluded that online CL had positive effects on developingstudents’ computing skills.

Discussion and Implications

With the development of educational technologies,e-learning provides flexibility and potential for applying in-novative teaching and learning strategies.42 However, muchdebate has surfaced in the learning and education communitywith regard to the attributes and effectiveness of varioustechnologies toward learning.43 The author in this studyadopted two innovative instructional designs, SRL and CLwith initiation, to help students develop practical computingskills in a blended course.

According to the positive results of online SRL and CL withinitiation, it is believed that this study contributed to online orblended learning in three different ways. First, this studyprovided the intervention of SRL to help students developregular habits and enhance their learning in the blendedlearning environment. Second, the researchers designed a

Table 1. Comparison of Grades: G1 and G2

Class n Mean SD F t value df p value

G1 53 90.8491 5.99486 0.480 3.443 119 0.001*G2 68 86.1824 8.32323

*p< 0.01.

Table 2. Comparison of Grades: G2 and G3

Class n Mean SD F t value df p value

G2 68 86.1824 8.32323 10.921 2.900 134 0.004*G3 68 82.8382 4.59919

*p< 0.01.

ONLINE SRL AND CL WITH INITIATION 507

scenario and simulated a learning context in which studentsinteracted and collaborated to solve problems. Finally, thisstudy emphasized the importance of teacher’s initiation andspecified how teachers could initiate students’ learning andhelp them climb the learning curve.

The effects of online SRL in the implementation of CL

The positive effects of online SRL were found in enhanc-ing students’ computing skills in the implementation of CLin this study. Based on the analysis of the empirical data inTable 1, it is found that there was a significant differencebetween G1 and G2 on students’ computing skills( p¼ 0.001). The results of the present study are similar tothose that appeared in previous studies, which indicatedthat SRL students significantly outperformed the non-SRLstudents in e-learning environments,44 and the effect of SRLon students’ success was statistically significant in an onlinecourse.45

Understanding of students and their contexts is the key todesign effective learning methods and to promote the incor-poration of new learning into practice.46 Teaching online orblended courses challenges teachers to help students regu-larly learn in an environment that is full of online games,shopping Web sites, and social networking Web sites (e.g.,Facebook). Many students in Taiwan are Internet-addicted tothese online entertainments. In this regard, learning within ahypermedia or online environment requires a student toregulate her/his learning.47 Based on the effects of SRL foundin this study, it is suggested in this study that teachers couldadopt SRL to regulate students’ learning habits and furthercontribute to learning effectiveness.

The effects of teacher’s initiationin the implementation of online CL

Based on the data shown in Table 2, there was a statisticallysignificant difference between G2 and G3 ( p¼ 0.004). Tea-cher’s initiation was found to have positive effects on en-hancing students’ practical computing skills. Thus, it isbelieved that teacher’s initiation could first develop students’essential skills, by laying the groundwork when they are ledinto a new professional field. The findings of the present

study are similar to Shen’s9 and Tsai and Shen’s24 studies thatdemonstrated the effects of teacher’s initiation in onlineproblem-solving environments.

In online collaborative courses, learning should involveinteraction with other people or environments, which fosterspotential development through instructors’ guidance or incollaboration with more capable peers.19 However, studentsmay suffer from ineffective discussion and interaction if theydo not have the basic knowledge and skills. Thus, it issuggested that teachers should first develop students’ basicskills and essential knowledge, before beginning students’collaboration in the online or blended learning environ-ments.

The effects of online CL

The data shown in Table 3 indicates the statistically sig-nificant differences among the four classes involved in thisstudy. The first three classes, which received online CL, hadsignificantly better learning effects than that which receivedtraditional lecture (G4). Even the class that received online CLwithout initiation or SRL (G3, mean¼ 82.8382) significantlyoutperformed the control group (G4, mean¼ 69.5625). Thus,the positive role of online CL in improving students’ learningis shown. The theoretical and empirical studies in the field ofCL indicate convincing evidence to ground CL in a largevariety of instructional settings.48 In this regard, teacherscould adopt CL to develop students’ professional, collabo-rative, and practical knowledge and skills, particularly for thecomputing courses.

Limitations of this study

As the experimental groups (G1, G2, and G3) significantlyoutperformed the control group (G4), the positive effects ofonline SRL and CL with initiation were found in this study.However, potential threats to the validity may result fromstudents in the comparison group having more enthusiasticteaching, being more involved and motivated than studentsin the control group, etc.39 Teachers and researchers who mayapply online SRL and CL in their courses should be aware ofthese contextual factors that may threaten the performance ofclaims made by this study.

Table 3. One-Way Analysis of Variance: Students’ Computing Skills

95% Confidence interval

(I) Groups Mean ( J) Groups Mean difference (I – J) Standard error Sig. Lower bound Upper bound

G1 90.8491 G2 4.66670* 1.49942 0.023 0.4420 8.8914G3 8.01082* 1.49942 0.000 3.7861 12.2355G4 21.28656* 1.83198 0.000 16.1249 26.4483

G2 86.1824 G1 �4.66670* 1.49942 0.023 �8.8914 �0.4420G3 3.34412 1.40341 0.132 �0.6101 7.2983G4 16.61985* 1.75426 0.000 11.6771 21.5626

G3 82.8382 G1 �8.01082* 1.49942 0.000 �12.2355 �3.7861G2 �3.34412 1.40341 0.132 �7.2983 0.6101G4 13.27574* 1.75426 0.000 8.3330 18.2185

G4 69.5625 G1 �21.28656* 1.83198 0.000 �26.4483 �16.1249G2 �16.61985* 1.75426 0.000 �21.5626 �11.6771G3 �13.27574* 1.75426 0.000 �18.2185 �8.3330

*The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.

508 TSAI

Conclusion

Industry managers seek graduates with higher-level skillsin information system and programming.49 However, thesoftware training courses and programs in Taiwan can hardlybe deemed as effective.2 Moreover, many undergraduates areused to receive teachers’ arrangements and are not willing totake responsibility for their learning. To achieve effectivelearning in a blended course, teachers should reconsider theirstudents’ specific needs and provide an exquisite course de-sign with appropriate teaching methods. This study rede-signed a blended course and adopted innovative teachingmethods to help students develop practical computing skills.The positive effects of online SRL and CL with initiation werefound to enhance students’ computing skills in this study.

Although governments around the world have been keento promote the use of Information and CommunicationTechnology (ICT) to enhance students’ learning,50 neverthe-less, teachers face more difficulties in ascertaining how stu-dents learn in an online or blended course, compared withface-to-face education.51 Based on the positive effects of on-line SRL and CL with initiation, it is suggested that teacherscould adopt appropriate teaching methods in their online orblended course to help their students achieve better learningeffects in online learning environments.

Disclosure Statement

No competing financial interests exist.

References

1. Tsai CW. Do students need teacher’s initiation in onlinecollaborative learning? Computers and Education 2010; 54:1137–1144.

2. Lee TH, Shen PD, Tsai CW. Enhancing computing skills oflow-achieving students via e-learning: A design experimentof web-based, problem-based learning and self-regulatedlearning. Cyberpsychology and Behavior 2008; 11:431–436.

3. Dillenbourg P. (1999) Collaborative learning: Cognitive andcomputational approaches. London: Pergamon.

4. Zurita G, Nussbaum M. Computer supported collaborativelearning using wirelessly interconnected handheld comput-ers. Computers and Education 2004; 42:289–314.

5. Koschmann T. (1996) CSCL: Theory and practice of an emergingparadigm. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

6. Kienle A, Ritterskamp C. Facilitating asynchronous discussionsin learning communities: The impact of moderation strategies.Behaviour and Information Technology 2007; 26:73–80.

7. Stahl G. (2002) Contributions to a theoretical framework onCSCL. In Stahl G. eds. Proceedings of CSCL 2002. pp. 62–71.

8. Tsai CW. The effects of feedback in the implementation ofweb-mediated self-regulated learning. Cyberpsychology,Behavior and Social Networking 2010; 13:153–158.

9. Shen PD. The effects of web-enabled self-regulated learningand problem-based learning with initiation on students’computing skills. International Journal of Information andCommunication Technology Education 2009; 5:1–13.

10. Persky S, Kaphingst KA, McCall C, et al. Presence relates todistinct outcomes in two virtual environments employingdifferent learning modalities. Cyberpsychology and Beha-vior 2009; 12:263–268.

11. King FB, Harner M, Brown SW. Self-regulatory behaviorinfluences in distance learning. International Journal of In-structional Media 2000; 27:147–156.

12. Chang MM. Applying self-regulated learning strategies in aweb-based instruction: An investigation of motivation per-ception. Computer Assisted Language Learning 2005;18:217–230.

13. Yueh HP, Hsu S. Designing a learning management systemto support instruction. Communication of the ACM 2008;51:75–79.

14. Boatright-Horowitz SL, Langley M, Gunnip M. Depth-of-processing effects as college students use academic advisingweb sites. Cyberpsychology and Behavior 2009; 12:331–335.

15. Rahman H. Collaborative learning: An effective tool to em-power communities. International Journal of InformationCommunication Technologies and Human Development2009; 1:1–27.

16. Garrison DR, Anderson T, Archer W. Critical thinking andcomputer conferencing: A model and tool to access cognitivepresence. American Journal of Distance Education 2001;15:7–23.

17. Johnson DW, Johnson RT. (1999) Learning together and alone:Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning. Boston:Allyn & Bacon.

18. Kreijns K, Kirschner PA, Jochems W. Identifying the pitfallsfor social interaction in computer-supported collaborativelearning environments: A review of the research. Computersin Human Behavior 2003; 19:335–353.

19. Li Y, Dong M, Huang R. Toward a semantic forum for activecollaborative learning. Educational Technology and Society2009; 12:71–86.

20. Webb NM. Constructive activity and learning in collabora-tive small groups. Journal of Educational Psychology 1995;87:406–423.

21. Macdonald J. Assessing online collaborative learning: Processand product. Computers and Education 2003; 40:377–391.

22. Hiltz SR, Turoff M. What makes learning networks effec-tive? Communications of the ACM 2002; 45:56–59.

23. Turoff M, Hiltz SR, Li Z, et al. Online collaborative learningenhancement through the Delphi method. Turkish OnlineJournal of Distance Education 2004; 7:66–79.

24. Tsai CW, Shen PD. Applying web-enabled self-regulatedlearning and problem-based learning with initiation to in-volve low-achieving students in learning. Computers inHuman Behavior 2009; 25:1189–1194.

25. Tsai CW. Involving students in a blended course via teach-er’s initiation in web-enhanced collaborative learning. Cy-berPsychology, Behavior and Social Networking 2010; 13:577–580.

26. Zimmerman BJ, Schunk DH. (1989) Self-regulated learning andacademic achievement: Theory, research, and practice. New York:Springer-Veriag.

27. Nuckles M, Hubner S, Renkl A. Enhancing self-regulatedlearning by writing learning protocols. Learning and In-struction 2009; 19:259–271.

28. Lynch R, Dembo M. The relationship between self-regulationand online learning in a blended learning context. Interna-tional Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning5. www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/189/799(accessed Sep. 25, 2010).

29. Azevedo R, Guthrie JT, Seibert D. The role of self-regulatedlearning in fostering students’ conceptual understanding ofcomplex systems with hypermedia. Journal of EducationalComputing Research 2004; 30:87–111.

30. Dresel M, Huagwitz M. A computer-based approach tofostering motivation and self-regulated learning. The Journalof Experimental Education 2008; 77:3–18.

ONLINE SRL AND CL WITH INITIATION 509

31. Hadwin AF, Winne PH, Nesbit JC. Roles for software tech-nologies in advancing research and theory in educationalpsychology. British Journal of Educational Psychology 2005;75:1–24.

32. Winne PH. How software technologies can improve re-search on learning and bolster school reform. EducationalPsychologist 2006; 41:5–17.

33. Ritterfeld U, Shen C, Wang H, et al. Multimodality and in-teractivity: Connecting properties of serious games witheducational outcomes. Cyberpsychology and Behavior 2009;12:691–697.

34. Gu JC, Fan L, Suh YH, et al. Comparing utilitarian and he-donic usefulness to user intention in multipurpose infor-mation systems. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and SocialNetworking 2010; 13:287–297.

35. Gravill J, Compeau D. Self-regulated learning strategies andsoftware training. Information and Management 2008;45:288–296.

36. Zimmerman BJ, Martinez-Pons M. Development of a struc-tured interview for assessing student use of self-regulatedlearning strategies. American Educational Research Journal1986; 23:614–628.

37. Ross JD. (1999) Regulating hypermedia: Self-regulation learningstrategies in a hypermedia environment. Ph.D. Dissertation,Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.

38. Judson E. Improving technology literacy: Does it open doorsto traditional content. Educational Technology Research andDevelopment 2010; 58:271–284.

39. Gribbons B, Herman J. (1997) True and quasi-experimentaldesigns. Practical Assessment. Research & Evaluation 5.http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v¼ 5&n¼ 14 (accessed Sep.23, 2010).

40. Tan FB, Tung LL. (2003) Exploring website evaluation cri-teria using the repertory grid technique: A web designers’perspective. Proceedings of the Second Annual Workshop onHCI Research in MIS 65-69. http://sigs.aisnet.org/SIGHCI/Research/ICIS2003/HCI03_10.pdf (accessed Sep. 23, 2010).

41. Schaffer E, Sorflaten J. Web usability illustrated: Breathingeasier with your usable e-commerce site. The Journal ofEconomic Commerce 1999; 11:158–166.

42. Chen NS, Wei CW, Wu KT, et al. Effects of high levelprompts and peer assessment on online learners’ reflectionlevels. Computers and Education 2009; 52:283–291.

43. Luthans F, Avey JB, Patera JL. Experimental analysis of aweb-based training intervention to develop positive psy-chological capital. Academy of Management Learning andEducation 2008; 7:209–221.

44. Kramarski B, Gutman M. How can self-regulated learningbe supported in mathematical E-learning environments?Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 2006; 22:24–33.

45. Yukselturk E, Bulut S. Predictors for student success in anonline course. Educational Technology and Society 2007;10:71–83.

46. Libin A, Lauderdale M, Millo Y, et al. Role-playing simulationas an educational tool for health care personnel: Developingan embedded assessment framework. Cyberpsychology, Be-havior and Social Networking 2010; 13:217–224.

47. Azevedo R, Moos DC, Greene JA, et al. Why is externally-regulated learning more effective than self-regulated learn-ing with hypermedia? Educational Technology Researchand Development 2008; 56:45–72.

48. Schellens T, Van Keer H, Valcke M, et al. Learning inasynchronous discussion groups: A multilevel approach tostudy the influence of student, group and task characteris-tics. Behaviour and Information Technology 2007; 26:55–71.

49. Benamati JH, Ozdemir ZD, Smith HJ. Aligning undergrad-uate is curricula with industry needs. Communication of theACM 2010; 53:152–156.

50. Sorensen P, Twidle J, Childs A, et al. The use of the Internetin science teaching: A longitudinal study of developments inuse by student-teachers in England. International Journal ofScience Education 2007; 29:1605–1627.

51. Graf S, Kinshuk, Liu TC. Supporting teachers in identifyingstudents’ learning styles in learning management systems:An automatic student modelling approach. EducationalTechnology and Society 2009; 12:3–14.

Address correspondence to:Chia-Wen Tsai, Ph.D.

Department of Information ManagementMing Chuan University

Taipei 111Taiwan

E-mail: jawen12b@gmail.com

510 TSAI