CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 76Online and Blended LearningEducational Innovations and TechnologyEducation during COVID-19 pandemic

Online Learning in a South African Higher Education Institution: Determining the Right Connections for the Student

Open access
Queiros, Dorothy Ruth, De Villiers, Mary Ruth·2016·The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning
DOI 10.19173/irrodl.v17i5.2552
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Online learning is a means of reaching marginalised and disadvantaged students within South Africa. Nevertheless, these students encounter obstacles in online learning. This research investigates South African students’ opinions regarding online learning, culminating in a model of important connections (facets that connect students to their learning and the institution). Most participants had no prior experience with online learning. Their perceptions and barriers to learning may apply to other developing countries as well. A cross-sequential research design was employed using a survey among 58 fourth-year students who were studying a traditional paper-based module via open distance learning. The findings indicated certain essential connections: first, a strong social presence (through timely feedback, interaction with facilitators, peer-to-peer contact, discussion forums, and collaborative activities); second, technological aspects (technology access, online learning self-efficacy, and computer self-efficacy); and third, tools (web sites, video clips). The study revealed low levels of computer/internet access at home, which is of concern in an ODL milieu heading online. Institutions moving to online learning in developing countries should pay close attention to their students’ situations and perceptions, and develop a path that would accommodate both the disadvantaged and techno-savvy students without compromising quality of education and learning. The article culminates in practical recommendations that encompass the main findings to help guide institutions in developing countries as they move towards online teaching and learning.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.19173/irrodl.v17i5.2552

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 36

  1. Bates, R., & Khasawneh, S. (2004). A path analytic study of the determinants of college students' motivation to use online teaching technologies. Academy of Human Resource Development International Conference (AHRD), 1075-1082. Retrieved from ERIC Reproduction Service (ED492503).
  2. Bharuthram, S., & Kies, C. (2012). Introducing e-learning in a South African higher education institution: Challenges arising from an intervention and possible responses. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(3), 410-420.
  3. Blackmom, S.J., & Major, C. (2012). Student experiences in online courses: A qualitative research synthesis. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 13(2), 77-85.
  4. Çakiroğlu, Ü. (2014). Evaluating students' perspectives about virtual classrooms with regard to seven principles of good practice. South African Journal of Education, 34(2), 1-19.
  5. Carlson, J., & Jesseman, D. (2011). Have we asked them yet? Graduate student preferences for web- enhanced learning. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 12(2), 125-134.
  6. Chang, S., & Tung, F. (2008). An empirical investigation of students' behavioural intentions to use the online learning course websites. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(1), 71-83.
  7. Cook, V. (2012). Learning everywhere, all the time. The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, Professional Development, Spring 2012.
  8. Fung, Y.Y.H. (2004). Collaborative online learning: Interaction patterns and limiting factors. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 19(2), 135-149.
  9. Geduld, B. (2013). Students' experiences of demands and challenges in open distance education: A South African case. Progressio, 35(2), 102-125.
  10. Geri, N. (2012). The resonance factor: Probing the impact of video on student retention in distance learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects, 8, 1-13.
  11. Glenn, J. M. (2000). Teaching the net generation. Business Education Forum, 54 (3):6-14.
  12. Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J. & Anderson, R.E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective (7 th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
  13. Hauser, R., Paul, R., & Bradley, J. (2012). Computer self-efficacy, anxiety, and learning in online versus face-to-face medium. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 11, 141-154.
  14. Ilgaz, H., & Gülbahar, Y. (2015). A snapshot of online learners: E-readiness, e-satisfaction and expectations. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(2), 171- 187.
  15. Leong, P. (2011). Role of social presence and cognitive absorption in online learning environments. Distance Education, 32(1), 5-28.
  16. Ljubojevic, M., Vaskovic, V., Stankovic, S., & Vaskovic, J. (2014). Using supplementary video in multimedia instruction as a teaching tool to increase efficiency of learning and quality of experience. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 15(3), 275- 291.
  17. Lund, C., & Volet, S. (1998). Barriers to studying online for the first time: Students' perceptions. Proceedings of Planning for Progress, Partnership and Profit, EdTech Conference, July 1998.
  18. Mayes, R., Luebeck, J., Ku, H., Akarasriworn, C., & Korkmaz, O. (2011). Themes and strategies for transformative online instruction: A review of literature and practice. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 12(3), 151-166.
  19. Mbati, L.A. (2012). Online learning for social constructivism: Creating a conducive environment. Progressio, 34(2), 99-119.
  20. McGinley, V., Osgood, J., & Kenney, J. (2012). Exploring graduate students' perceptual differences of face-to-face and online learning. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 13(3), 177-182.
  21. McKimm, J., Jollie, C., & Cantillon, P. (2003). Web-based learning. British Medical Journal, 326(7394), 870-873.
  22. McMahon, M., & Oliver, R. (2001). Promoting self-regulated learning in an online environment. Ed- Media 2001 World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications, 1299-1305. Charlottesville, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.
  23. Monk, D. (2001). Open/distance learning in the United Kingdom. Why do people do it here (and elsewhere)? Perspectives in Education, 19(3), 53-66.
  24. Mtebe, J.S. & Raisamo, R. (2014). Investigating perceived barriers to the use of open educational resources in higher education in Tanzania. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 15(2), 43-65.
  25. Muuro, M.E., Wagacha, W.P., Oboko, R., & Kihoro, J. (2014). Students' perceived challenges in an online collaborative learning environment: A case of higher learning institutions in Nairobi, Kenya. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 15(6), 132-161.
  26. Palloff, R.M., & Pratt, K. (2009). Assessing the online learner: Resources and strategies for faculty. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
  27. Phelan, L. (2012). Interrogating students' perceptions of their online learning experiences with Brookfield's critical incident questionnaire. Distance Education, 33(1), 31-44.
  28. Queiros, D.R., de Villiers, M.R., van Zyl, C., Conradie, N. & van Zyl, L. (2015). Rich environments for active Open Distance Learning: Looks good in theory but is it really what learners want? Progressio, 37(2):79-100.
  29. Samuels-Peretz, D. (2014). Ghosts, stars, and learning online: Analysis of interaction patterns in student online discussions. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 15(3), 50-71.
  30. Stacey, E. (1999). Collaborative learning in an online environment. International Journal of E-Learning and Distance Education, 14(2):14-33.
  31. Tait, A. (2003). Reflections on student support in open and distance learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 4(1), 1-10.
  32. Todhunter, B. (2013). LOL -limitations of online learning -are we selling the open and distance education message short? Distance Education, 34(2), 232-252.
  33. Tsai, C. (2012). The role of teacher's initiation in online pedagogy. Education + Training, 54(6), 456-471.
  34. Wang, C., Shannon, D.M., & Ross, M.E. (2013). Students' characteristics, self-regulated learning, technology self-efficacy, and course outcomes in online learning. Distance Education, 34(3), 302- 323.
  35. Zhang, J. & Walls, R. (2006). Instructor's self-perceived pedagogical principle implementation in the online environment. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 7(4), 413-426.
  36. Zhang, K., Peng, S., & Hung, J. (2009). Online collaborative learning in a project-based learning environment in Taiwan: A case study on undergraduate students' perspectives. Educational Media International, 46(20), 1-8.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Queiros, D. R., & De Villiers, M. R.
Affiliations
University of South Africa (ZA)
ORCID
Queiros, Dorothy Ruth
Venue
The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning
Publisher
Athabasca University Press
Published
2016-09-26
Volume
17
Issue
5
ISSN
1492-3831 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.19173/irrodl.v17i5.2552
OpenAlex
W2526032317
Cited by
76
References
2
Citations by year
2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
16.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Érudit (Université de Montréal) (submittedVersion)
  • Unisa Institutional Repository (University of South Africa) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Educational Innovations and Technology
  • Social Sciences › Education › Education during COVID-19 pandemic
Keywords
online learning, open and distance learning, student perceptions, barriers to online learning, social presence, self-efficacy, computer self-efficacy, access to technology, disadvantaged students, higher education, South Africa, developing countries

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review