1 liý. 2I t=..? 1! L'S11: ii 12: ! ":! lilii:!? : : 6: 1t(? CIiUh
V y"h:, a':
P. KHIDMAT MAKLUMAT AKADEMIK UNIMAS
iiuumimuuuNiimn 1000165979
READINESS FOR SELF-DIRECTED LEARNING AMONG DISTANCE
LEARNERS IN KUCHING
BIBIANA LIM CHIU YIONG
A thesis submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the
Degree of Master of Science
Faculty of Cognitive Sciences and Human Development
UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SARAWAK
2007
KESEDIAAN UNTUK PEMBELAJARAN KENDIRI DI KALANGAN
PELAJAR PENDIDIKAN JARAK JAUH DI KUCHING
BIBIANA LIM CHIU YIONG
Tesis yang dikemukakan
Untuk memenuhi keperluan bagi Ijazah Sarjana Sains
Fakulti Sains Kognitif and Pembangunan Manusia
UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SARAWAK
2007
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I have indeed learned a lot of things from this post-graduate master program
and I would not have been able to complete this study all by my own. Therefore,
I would like to thank the people who have helped me through the completion of
my master study and research dissertation.
First of all, I am very grateful to my supervisor, Dr. Hong Kian Sam, for his
patience, comments, suggestions and advice concerning my research and
dissertation. His critical thinking and analytical skills have helped me to
develop my research and writing skills.
I am also grateful to Dr. Frank Kiong, Director of the Regional Learning Centre
for Open University Malaysia (OUM), Sarawak and Puan Dayang Sofia Abang
Haji Bohan, Chief Operation Officer of Universiti Tun Abdul Razak (UNITAR)
Sarawak campus, for giving me the consent to conduct the study at their
universities. I am also thankful for the Student Council of UNITAR for helping
me to coordinate the administration of the questionnaires among their students. To the staff and students of OUM and UNITAR, I express my sincere
appreciation for their assistance and voluntary participation in this study.
I am deeply grateful to Dr. Bryan Lim Choon Yang, my uncle, who believed in
me and taught me in many ways to be a good researcher; Dr. Nagarajah Lee, for
his help in using the SPSS and suggestions in statistical analysis and my
beloved husband, Joseph for his help in data entry.
Many thanks are due to my family members for their support and prayers. To
those who have helped me directly and indirectly in this study, my sincere
appreciation and thanks. Most importantly, I thank God for his mercy and
blessings throughout my entire life.
I
ABSTRACT
This study aimed to investigate distance learners' acceptance of e-learning and
readiness for self-directed learning in two major Malaysian distance learning
higher education institutions. This cross-sectional survey research used a
questionnaire to obtain the research data. The questionnaire used to measure
distance learners' acceptance of e-learning and readiness for self-directed
learning was adapted from the research instruments used by Poon, Low and
Yong (2004) and Guglielmino (1977). A total of 229 students from the Open
University of Malaysia and the Universiti Tun Abdul Razak campuses in
Kuching responded to the questionnaires, representing a return rate of 82.417c.
The majority of the students reported a moderate level of acceptance of e-
learning and perceived themselves to be at the moderate level of self-directed
learning readiness. Acceptance of e-learning and readiness for self-directed
learning was found to have a moderate but significant positive relationship.
Students with higher readiness of self-directed learning were found to accept e-
learning more readily. Generally, the students experienced moderate
satisfaction with their e-learning studies and also had moderate achievement in
their e-learning course. However, students' satisfactions with e-learning and
achievements in their e-learning course were not significantly related to AEL
and readiness for SDL. Single and younger students were found to have lower
levels of both acceptance of e-learning and self-directed learning readiness.
Students with more working experiences and with only Form 5 or Form 6
education background tended to have higher level of acceptance of e-learning.
However, computer use experience and gender did not have significant influence
1I
on the levels of acceptance of e-learning and readiness for self-directed learning.
The findings of this study indicated that institutions offering e-learning should
provide some non-credit courses to improve students' acceptance of e-learning
and their readiness for self-directed learning. These courses should also be
targeted at certain types of students such as those that are single and younger
in ages. Further research could be carried out to extend the findings of this
study to include more e-learners in Malaysia, investigating rural and urban
students, issues of digital divide and including the use of more qualitative data
to further illuminate understanding on self-directed learning readiness for e-
learning.
111
ABSTRAK
Matlamat kajian ini adalah untuk menyelidiki tahap penerimaan e-
pembelajaran dan kesediaan untuk pembelajaran kendiri di kalangan pelajar
pendidikan jarak jauh di dua buah institusi pengajian tinggi berasaskan
pendidikan jarak jauh di Malaysia. Kajian ini berbentuk kajian survei keratan
rentas yang menggunakan soul selidik untuk mendapat data kajian. Soul selidik
digunakan untuk mengukur penerimaan e-pembelajaran dan kesediaan untuk
pembelajaran kendiri di kalangan pelajar jarak jauh, diubahsuai daripada
instrumen kajian yang telah digunakan oleh Poon, Low dan Yong (2004) dan
Guglielmino (1977). Seramai 229 pelajar jarak jauh dari Universiti Terbuka
Malaysia dan Universiti Tun Abdul Razak, Kampus Kuching, telah memberikan
respons kepada soal selidik dengan kadar respons 82.4%. Majoriti pelajar
melaporkan penerimaan e-pembelajaran dan kesediaan untuk pembelajaran
kendiri pada tahap sederhana. Wujud perhubungan yang sederhana positif dan
signifikan di antara penerimaan e-pembelajaran dan kesediaan untuk
pembelajaran kendiri. Pelajar yang menpunyai kesediaan yang lebih tinggi
untuk pembelajaran kendiri didapati lebih sanggup menerima kaedah e-
pembelajaran. Pada amnya, pelajar melaporkan kepuasan yang sederhana
terhadap e-pembelajaran dan juga mempunyai kadar pencapaian pembelajaran
yang sederhana. Walau bagaimanapun, kepuasan dengan pengaji. an dan
pencapaian pembelajaran didapati tiada hubungan dengan e-pembelajaran dan
kesediaan untuk pembelajaran kendiri. Pelajar yang lebih muda and masih
bujang didapati menunjukkan tahap penerimaan e-pembelajaran dan kesediaan
mengikuti pembelajaran kendiri yang lebih rendah. Pelajar yang berpendidikan
iX
sekolah menengah (Tingkatan 5 dan Tingkatan 6) dan berpengalaman bekerja
menpunyai tahap penerimaan e-pembelajaran yang lebih tinggi. Walau
bagaimanapun, pengalaman menggunakan komputer dan jantina tidak
menpengaruhi tahap penerimaan e-pembelajaran dan kesediaan mengikuti
pembelajaran kendiri. Dapatan kajian juga menunjukkan institusi yang
menawarkan e-pembelajaran perlu menyediakan kursus tanpa kredit untuk
mempertingkatkan tahap penerimaan e-pembelajaran dan kesediaan untuk
pembelajaran kendiri di kalangan pelajar mereka. Kursus perlu disasarkan
kepada pelajar tertentu seperti mereka yang masih bujang dan berusia lebih
muda. Kajian lanjut diperlukan untuk memperluaskan dapatan kajian ini
dengan melibatkan lebih pelajar e-pembelajaran di Malaysia, melibatkan
pelajar dari bandar dan luar bandar, serta mendapatkan data kualitatif untuk
memberikan gambaran dan pemahaman yang lebih mendalam tentang kedua-
dua proses yang dikaji.
X'
I'; 'I ý`l1i. SÜ: (1; 11 , \K21(l(; ITUn. !, v! \t: ttSlll N9AlAYSIA SAKAWA-9
Q1. (Nl KoIa S(im: irah; in
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .....................................................................
i
ABSTRACT .......................................................................................
ii
ABSTRAK ......................................................................................... iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS ...................................................................... vi
LIST OF TABLES .............................................................................. x
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................. xiii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................. xiv
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ............................................................ 1 1.0 Overview ................................................................................. 1 1.1 Self-directed distance learning ...................................................... 3
1.1.1 Definition of Self-Directed Learning (SDL) ..........................
4 1.1.2 The importance of SDL to distance learning
........................ 4 1.2 Distance learning in Malaysia
..................................................... 5 1.2.1 Background of Open University Malaysia (OUM) .................
6 1.2.2 Background of Universiti Tun Abdul Razak (UNITAR)......... 7
1.3 Problem statement ....................................................................... 8 1.4 Research questions .................................................................... 10 1.5 Research framework
................................................................... 10 1.6 Significance of the study .............................................................
13 1.7 Limitations of the study .............................................................. 13 1.8 Assumptions of the study ............................................................ 15 1.9 Definitions of important terms ..................................................... 15 1.10 Summary
................................................................................. 17
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................... 19
2.0 Background .............................................................................. 19 2.1 Overview of e-learning .................................................................
19 2.2 E-learning in Malaysia
............................................................... 20 2.2.1 E-learning among institutions of higher learning in
Malaysia ........................................................................
21 2.2.2 Open University Malaysia (OUM)
...................................... 23
2.2.3 UNITAR ........................................................................
25 2.3 Studies on e-learning in Malaysia
.................................................. 27
2.4 Studies on the level of acceptance of e-learning in Malaysia (AEL).... 29 2.5 Factors influencing the level of acceptance of e-learning (AEL)......... 31
2.5.1 Students' behaviour ......................................................... 32
vi
2.5.2 Technology support and system ........................................ 32 2.5.3 Institutional support .......................................................
33 2.5.4 Course content and knowledge management .......................
33 2.5.5 Online tasks or discussion groups ........................................
34 2.5.6 Instructors and peers interaction
.......................................... 35
2.5.7 Motivational factors ...........................................................
35 2.6 Measuring acceptance of e-learning (AEL)
..................................... 36
2.7 Self-Directed Learning (SDL) ......................................................
39 2.7.1 History of SDL
............................................................... 39
2.7.2 Definitions and development of SDL ..................................
40 2.7.3 Studies on the level of SDL
............................................... 45 2.7.4 Factors affecting SDL
....................................................... 47 2.7.5 SDL Instruments
............................................................. 49
2.7.6 Benefits of SDL ............................................................... 54
2.8 Relationship between AEL and readiness for SDL ..........................
55 2.9 AEL and distance learning students' demographics
........................ 57
2.9.1 Age, gender, marital status and ethnicity ........................... 57
2.9.2 Work experience, computer use experience and educational background
.................................................................... 58 2.10 SDL and distance learning students' demographics
........................ 60
2.10.1 Age, gender, marital status and ethnicity .......................... 60
2.10.2 Work experience, computer use experience and educational background
.................................................................... 62 2.11 Studies on students' satisfactions and achievements ......................
63 2.11.1 Studies on readiness for AEL with students' satisfactions
and achievements ........................................................... 63 2.11.2 Studies on readiness for SDL with students' satisfactions
and achievements in e-learning ............................................ 65 2.12 Distance learning students' demographics and students'
satisfactions and achievements with their e-learning course............ 66 2.13 Summary
................................................................................. 66
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY ..................... 70 3.0 Introduction .............................................................................. 70 3.1 Research design ......................................................................... 70 3.2 Research instruments
................................................................... 70
3.2.1 Section 1 of questionnaire: Demographics ...........................
71 3.2.2 Section 2 of questionnaire: Acceptance of e-learning (AEL)..... 71 3.2.3 Section 3 of questionnaire: SDLRS
.................................... 73
3.2.4 Section 4 of questionnaire: Students' satisfactions and achievements ................................................................. 77
3.3 Samples ...................................................................................
77 3.4 Data collection procedures ...............................................................
78 3.5 Data analysis .............................................................................. 80 3.6 Summary
................................................................................. 82
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND FINDINGS ............................................... 83
4.0 Introduction ............................................................................. 83
vii
4.1 Description of the sample .............................................................. 83
4.1.1 Age ............................................................................... 85 4.1.2 Gender
.......................................................................... 85
4.1.3 Marital status ................................................................. 86
4.1.4 Computer use experience ................................................. 86
4.1.5 Work experience ............................................................. 87
4.1.6 Educational background .................................................. 87 4.2 Reliability of the questionnaires ..................................................
88 4.2.1 Reliability of the AEL factors
............................................. 88 4.2.2 Reliability of the SDLRS factors
........................................ 89
4.3 Research Question 1: To what extent was e-learning accepted by distance learners
......................................................................... 90
4.3.1 Factor 1: Students' behaviour and attitude ............................ 92
4.3.2 Factor 2: Technology and system ....................................... 93
4.3.3 Factor 3: Interactive applications ....................................... 95
4.3.4 Factor 4: Institutional factors ..............................................
97 4.3.5 Factor 5: Instructors' characteristics ...................................
99 4.4 Research Question 2: What was the level of readiness for self-
directed learning among distance learners? ..........................................
101 4.5 Research Question 3: Was there a relationship between the level of
AEL and the level of readiness for SDL? ...............................................
103 4.6 Research Question 4: To what extent did the level of AEL and the
level of readiness for SDL influenced students' satisfactions with e- learning and achievements in their e-learning course? ........................
104 4.7 Research Question 5: What were the effects of demographic
characteristics on students' AEL, SDL, satisfactions with e-learning and achievements in their e-learning course? .......................................
106 4.7.1 Age
.............................................................................. 106 4.7.2 Gender
.......................................................................... 109 4.7.3 Marital status .................................................................. 112 4.7.4 Computer use experience .................................................
114 4.7.5 Work experience ............................................................. 117 4.7.6 Educational background
.................................................. 119
4.8 Summary .................................................................................
124
CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION ...................................... 126
5.0 Summary ................................................................................. 126 5.1 Summary of the study ................................................................ 126 5.2 Reliability and applicability of research instruments
...................... 127
5.3 Discussions of findings ...............................................................
128 5.3.1 Students' acceptance of e-learning .....................................
128 5.3.2 Readiness for self-directed learning
................................... 134
5.3.3 Relationship between the acceptance of e-learning and readiness for self-directed learning ....................................... 136
5.3.4 Relationship between acceptance of e-learning and readiness for self-directed learning, students' satisfactions with e-learning and achievements in their e-learning course ........................................................................... 136
5.3.5 Effects of students' demographics on students' AEL, SDL,
vlll
satisfactions with e-learning and achievements in their e- learning course ...............................................................
137 5.4 Implications
............................................................................. 142
5.4.1 Recommendations for future research ............................... 143
5.5 Conclusion ................................................................................ 144
REFERENCES ..................................................................................
145
APPENDICES APPENDIX A APPENDIX B APPENDIX C APPENDIX D APPENDIX E APPENDIX F
LIST OF SDLRS FACTORS .......................................... 172 QUESTIONNAIRE ..................................................... 179 OUM LETTER OF APPROVAL ..................................... 187 UNITAR LETTER OF APPROVAL ................................ 188 COVER LETTER ........................................................ 189 REMINDER LETTER ................................................. 190
ix
Table 2.1:
Table 3.1:
Table 3.2:
Table 3.3:
Table 3.4:
Table 4.1:
Table 4.2:
Table 4.3:
Table 4.4:
Table 4.5:
Table 4.6:
Table 4.7:
Table 4.8:
Table 4.9:
Table 4.10:
Table 4.11:
Table 4.12:
Table 4.13:
Table 4.14:
Table 4.15:
Table 4.16:
Table 4.17:
LIST OF TABLES
Components of SDL as defined in the literature (LeJeune,
2001) ............................................................................. 50
Sample of AEL statements in the questionnaires ................. 72
Sample of SDLRS statements in the questionnaires ............. 75
Readiness for self-directed learning based on SDLRS............ 76
Research questions and data analysis ................................. 81
Frequency and percentage of OUM and UNITAR students.... 84
Reliability of the AEL factors ..............................................
89
Cronbach Alpha coefficient of the SDLRS factors ...................
90
Means and standard deviations for the AEL factors .............. 91
Responses to Factor 1: Students' behaviour and attitude....... 93
Responses to Factor 2: Technology and system ..................... 94
Responses to Factor 3: Interactive applications .................... 96
Responses to Factor 4: Institutional factors .........................
98
Responses to Factor 5: Instructors' characteristics ................. 100
Mean and standard deviation of SDLRS among students....... 101
Classification of SDLRS among the students .......................... 102
Independent t-test results for SDLRS for OUM and
UNITAR .........................................................................
102
Frequency of students' satisfactions with their e-learning
course ............................................................................ 104
Frequency of students' achievements in their e-learning
course ........................................................................... 105
Results of Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient
analysis on the levels of AEL, SDL, students' satisfactions
with e-learning and achievements in their e-learning
course ............................................................................ 106
Results of Kruskal-Wallis test for AEL, SDL, students'
satisfactions with e-learning and achievements in their e-
learning course based on age ............................................. 108
Results of Mann-Whitney U test for AEL and SDL based on
age ............................................................................... 108
x
Table 4.18: Results of Spearman rank correlation coefficient analysis for
AEL, SDL, students' satisfactions with e-learning and
achievements in their e-learning course based on age............ 109
Table 4.19: Results of Independent t-test for AEL, SDL, students'
satisfactions with e-learning and achievements in their e-
learning course based on gender ........................................ 111
Table 4.20: Results of Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient
analysis based on gender .................................................. 111
Table 4.21: Results of Mann-Whitney U test for AEL, SDL, students'
satisfactions with e-learning and achievements in their e-
learning course based on marital status .............................. 113
Table 4.22: Results of Spearman rank correlation coefficient analysis for
AEL, SDL, students' satisfactions with e-learning and
achievements in their e-learning course based on marital
status ............................................................................. 114
Table 4.23: Results of Independent t-test for AEL, SDL, students'
satisfactions with e-learning and achievements in their e-
learning course based on computer use experience ................ 116
Table 4.24: Results of Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient
analysis based on computer use experience .......................... 116
Table 4.25: Results of Kruskal-Wallis test for AEL, SDL, students'
satisfactions with e-learning and achievements in their e-
learning course based on working experience ....................... 119
Table 4.26: Results of Mann-Whitney U test for AEL and SDL based on
working experience .......................................................... 120
Table 4.27: Results of Spearman rank correlation coefficient analysis for
AEL, SDL, students' satisfactions with e-learning and
achievements in their e-learning course based on working
experience ....................................................................... 121
Table 4.28: Results of Kruskal-Wallis test for AEL, SDL, students'
satisfactions with e-learning and achievements in their e-
learning course based on educational background .................
123
xi
Table 4.18: Results of Spearman rank correlation coefficient analysis for
AEL, SDL, students' satisfactions with e-learning and
achievements in their e-learning course based on age............ 109
Table 4.19: Results of Independent t-test for AEL, SDL, students'
satisfactions with e-learning and achievements in their e-
learning course based on gender ........................................ 111
Table 4.20: Results of Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient
analysis based on gender .................................................. 111
Table 4.21: Results of Mann-Whitney U test for AEL, SDL, students'
satisfactions with e-learning and achievements in their e-
learning course based on marital status .............................. 113
Table 4.22: Results of Spearman rank correlation coefficient analysis for
AEL, SDL, students' satisfactions with e-learning and
achievements in their e-learning course based on marital
status ............................................................................. 114
Table 4.23: Results of Independent t-test for AEL, SDL, students'
satisfactions with e-learning and achievements in their e- learning course based on computer use experience ................
116
Table 4.24: Results of Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient
analysis based on computer use experience .......................... 116
Table 4.25: Results of Kruskal-Wallis test for AEL, SDL, students'
satisfactions with e-learning and achievements in their e-
learning course based on working experience ....................... 119
Table 4.26: Results of Mann-Whitney U test for AEL and SDL based on
working experience .......................................................... 120
Table 4.27: Results of Spearman rank correlation coefficient analysis for
AEL, SDL, students' satisfactions with e-learning and
achievements in their e-learning course based on working
experience ....................................................................... 121
Table 4.28: Results of Kruskal-Wallis test for AEL, SDL, students'
satisfactions with e-learning and achievements in their e-
learning course based on educational background .................
123
xi
Table 4.29: Results of Mann-Whitney U test for AEL and SDL based on
educational background .................................................... 123
Table 4.30: Results of Spearman rank correlation coefficient analysis for
AEL, SDL, students' satisfactions with e-learning and
achievements in their e-learning course based on educational
background .................................................................. 124
x11
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1: A snapshot of myLMS (OUM) homepage ..............................
6
Figure 1.2: A snapshot of myLMS online discussion webpage ................. 7
Figure 1.3: A snapshot of VOISS webpage content ................................ 8
Figure 1.4: Conceptual framework of the study .................................... 12
Figure 4.1: Scatter plot of the level AEL versus the level of readiness for
SDL ..................................................................................
103
111
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AEL Acceptance of E-Learning
LMS Learning Management System (Open University Malaysia)
ODCLI Oddi Continuing Learning Inventory
OUM Open University Malaysia
SDL Self-Directed Learning
SDLPS Self-Directed Learning Perception Scale
SDLRS Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scales
UNIMAS Universiti Malaysia Sarawak
UNITAR Universiti Tunku Abdul Razak
VIOSS Virtual Online Instructional Support System (Universiti Tunku Abdul Razak)
xiv
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.0 Overview
Distance learning is fast becoming an important educational medium in
Malaysia and e-learning is one of the most important modes of learning for
distance learning (Jefferies & Hussain, 1998).
Distance learning first started in the 1980s with the two-way interactive video-
conferencing as the initial interaction methods. It had since evolved from
satellite-based video-conferencing in the 1980s to ISDN (Integrated Services
Digital Network, compressed video) in the 1990s and to Internet Protocol (IP)
based video-conferencing in the current decade (Tiedemann, 2002).
The appearance of the Internet in the 1980s did not lead to the development of
Internet-based learning right away (DeLacey & Leonard, 2002). However, by the
1990s, in tandem with the rapidly expanded use of the Internet, there was an
increase in the use of the Internet-based online learning to support distance
learning (Jefferies & Hussain, 1998). The Internet is dramatically affecting the
way people teach and learn (DeLacey & Leonard, 2002).
Distance-learning programmes were not popular until the 1990s, when an
increasing number of established universities began embracing distance
learning because of its benefits, especially of borderless, anytime and anywhere
I
learning using e-learning (DeLacey & Leonard, 2002). Since then, electronic
learning (e-learning) as a form of distance learning has become an increasingly
important medium of instruction (Jefferies & Hussain, 1998; Poon, Low, &
Yong, 2004; Volery & Lord, 2000). Nowadays, most institutions of higher
learning offer campus-based learning with some components of e-learning to
supplement face-to-face interaction.
E-learning includes web-based courses and multimedia enhanced delivery
medium and it has the potential to make the learning process an active one. E-
learning also consists of online and knowledge management (Rosenberg, 2001).
E-learning as a form of distance learning is being promoted as the educational
medium of the future (O'Malley, 1999). However, technology itself does not
improve learning (Alexander & McKenzie, 1998) but its use makes possible some
kinds of activity and limits others (Stephenson, 2001). The new learning
environments should reflect the change in the culture of education from teacher-
centred to learner-centred (O'Malley, 1999).
It is also important for distance learning students to be ready for this technology
in learning as past experience had shown that new technologies, do not
necessarily lead to major improvement in education (Stephenson, 2001).
1.1 Self-directed distance learning
In the 1980s, many researchers described distance learning as a learning
environment with a physical separation of instructors and students during
delivery of education (Holmberg, 1980). Hence, this kind of learning
environment required the students' learning to be independent and self-directed
as the students had to learn with minimal interaction with their instructors.
As technology improved, distance learning began to move away from merely
paying attention to technology and emphasizing the needs for the learners' self-
determination, self-direction and self-control in the learning process (Peters,
1983). Nowadays, it is generally accepted that students enrolled in distance
learning programmes using the e-learning mode should, in the first phase,
already have a certain level of self-motivation and possess a certain degree of
self-directed learning readiness (Jain & Lee, 2003).
Thus, distance learning students using e-learning as a mode of distance learning
should possess certain attributes such as self-independence, self-motivation and
seriousness about learning and achieving higher education. However, theses
attributes may differ among individuals depending on their different
characteristics and e-learning background (Jain & Lee, 2003).
Distance learning students are usually mature students with prior working
experiences. These characteristics meant that distance learning students
usually have confidence and additional skills to work independently based on
their work experiences (Gunasekaran, McNeil, & Shaul, 2002). Thus, an
important aspect to look at among distance learning student characteristics is
"self-directed learning".
1.1.1 Definition of Self-Directed Learning (SDL)
There are many definitions of self-directed learning (SDL). In this study, SDL
was defined as a blend of the learners' capabilities, learner's motivation and
learner's satisfactions with their own learning goals and the availability of
resources (LeJeune, 2001). LeJeune (2001) viewed SDL as the process in which
learners take control of their own learning, in particular regarding the decision
on the learning approaches based on their capabilities, locating appropriate
resources, setting learning goals, and evaluating progress based on their
performance.
1.1.2 The importance of SDL to distance learning
SDL is valuable to students because this learning approach enhances creativity,
prevents blind acceptance of existing knowledge, encourages the use of
brainstorming to determine what is personally important and consistent with
personal values, and helps students to adapt to rapidly changing social and
physical environments (Ramsey & Couch, 1994).
From the e-learning point of view, SDL approaches provide students with
flexibility in acquiring knowledge but its effectiveness however may depend on
4
certain students' demographics. For example, most students enrolled in distance
learning programmes receive their previous education in conventional or
traditional institutions where teachers play the lead role in the teaching-
learning process (Jain & Lee, 2003). Therefore, although it is generally assumed
that distance learning students can fall back on their work experiences, it does
not necessarily mean that they can foster SDL for e-learning given their prior
educational experiences which are teacher-centred.
Hence, it is important to conduct research on e-learning looking into SDL to
examine the distance learning students' ability to learn analytically within this
learning environment (Gan, 1998; Jain & Lee, 2003; Ndubisi, 2004).
1.2 Distance learning in Malaysia
The Malaysian higher education system traditionally involved tertiary students
taught didactically in a lecture mode (Alhabshi & Hakim, 2003). This education
system put emphasis on rote learning, examinations and rigid curriculum.
However, Malaysia has embarked on e-learning as part of a series of measures
to achieve the applications of Multimedia Super Corridor (Ahmad Sarji Abdul
Hamid (1993), Ministry of Education (1997), and Corridor of Power (1997) cited
by Hong & Koh, 2002). In line with Malaysia's mission of providing excellence in
education, there are approximately 14 private colleges or universities in
Malaysia providing distance learning to their students (Alhabshi & Hakim,
2003). Two well established distance learning universities in Malaysia are the
Open University Malaysia (OUM) and Universiti Tun Abdul Razak (UNITAR).
5
1.2.1 Background of Open University Malaysia (OUM)
OUM was established on August 10, 2000 as the seventh private university in
Malaysia with more than 24,000 students enrolled in e-learning programmes
(Open University Malaysia, 2005) at the year 2004. The OUM e-learning system
is called the Learning Management System (LMS). It is user-friendly, with a
pleasant interface and is integrated with a single-login procedure. The LMS
serves as the contact between the university and the students (Latifah & Ramli,
2003). At OUM, students are expected and required to become self-directed
learners as they only meet and interact with their assigned tutors five times in a
semester. Therefore, OUM's students have to rely on self-instructional materials
such as printed modules, digital libraries and online discussion as the main
sources of learning (Latifah & Ramli, 2003). Figure 1.1 and Figure 1.2 are
snapshots of myLMS from OUM.
°ýý t; caad 4ontinq evYsan<5
Olhti4 Le. +, ýýý= coý, ý., ý;: o. ý,
,: =_1
1-1.1 ýý 4-11-
. -.. e.; /+ddn; >o .
,.;, m
H... ýuva! Sý. +sn fýýýVt lö ý
+ývC<ýwr>r i. M!
a
Figure 1.1: A snapshot of myLMS (OUM) homepage
6
1.2.2 Background of Universiti Tun Abdul Razak (UNITAR)
UNITAR first established its operation in 1998, with an initial batch of 162
students (Alhabshi & Hakim, 2003). By the year 2003, UNITAR had more than
8,000 students in several campuses all around Malaysia.
ortim: SME-TUTOR
ý F inad UýmMý ý
CnLne 0 ä uw[n k onrtorm *., A nnouncýwwnt f)-pit2l Ikop Fins
Oplu Gio. p
- ic1 ý-
. = i r.; ý.. ý. ýf , _. .., .
i' . . r
. ý]" i 'r ]t; ý. ri 1r''", ýý. - . . ý
ý.
: r ý ý i-1
lopi(. ) tit't'. J(lCltý l. n( 4(t1. i1( Postcd
i. . . , ý, lire
q harvncef hairA, 'M t a'a11 SnCh
tec (in 1 Na n5
ý"r
t. ý v : : ay . OUL 1;. 13.2a FM
I 1 +.:lý. f I+
Figure 1.2: A snapshot of myLMS online discussion webpage
UNITAR developed VOISS (Virtual Online Instructional Support System) as its
learning management system to provide a supportive e-learning environment
for its students. VOISS includes online discussion, online tutorials and lectures,
electronic bulletin-boards and other online material (Alhabshi & Hakim, 2003;
Jain & Lee, 2003). UNITAR students were exposed to the use of computer and
the Internet for their studies in all their courses. UNITAR uses a combination of
7