Exploring the Effects of Learning Environment on Transfer, Student Perceptions, and Instructor Accommodations in an Undergraduate Course Sequence

References

• Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2014). Grade change: Tracking online education in the United States, 2013. Needham, MA: Online Learning Consortium.
   Google Scholar
• Arbaugh, J. B. (2002). Managing the online classroom: A study of technological and behavioral characteristics of web-based MBA courses. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 13, 203–223. doi:10.1016/S1047-8310(02)00049-4
   Google Scholar
• Arbaugh, J. B. (2004). Learning to learn online: A study of perceptual changes between multiple online course experiences. The Internet and Higher Education, 7, 169–182. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.06.001
   Google Scholar
• Arbaugh, J. B. (2014). System, scholar or students? Which most influences online MBA course effectiveness? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 30(4), 349–362. doi:10.1111/jcal.2014.30.issue-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arbaugh, J. B. (2018). One bridge, (at Least) two paths: Reflections on “Virtual classroom characteristics and student satisfaction in internet-based mba courses”. Journal of Management Education, 42(4), 533–556. doi:10.1177/1052562918770400
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arbaugh, J. B., & Benbunan-Finch, R. (2006). An investigation of epistemological and social dimensions of teaching in online learning environments. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 5(4), 435–447. doi:10.5465/amle.2006.23473204
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arbaugh, J. B., Dearmond, S., & Rau, B. L. (2013). New uses for existing tools? A call to study on-line management instruction and instructors. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 12(4), 635–655. doi:10.5465/amle.2011.0018a
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arbaugh, J. B., Godfrey, M. R., Johnson, M., Pollack, B., Niendorf, B., & Wresch, W. (2009). Research in online and blended learning in the business disciplines: Key findings and possible future directions. The Internet and Higher Education, 12, 71–87. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.06.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arbaugh, J. B., & Rau, B. L. (2007). A study of disciplinary, structural, and behavioral effects on course outcomes in online MBA courses. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 5(1), 65–95. doi:10.1111/dsji.2007.5.issue-1
   Google Scholar
• Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blume, B. D., Ford, J. K., Baldwin, T. T., & Huang, J. L. (2010). Transfer of training: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Management, 36(4), 1065–1105. doi:10.1177/0149206309352880
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bransford, J. D., & Schwartz, D. L. (1999). Chapter 3: Rethinking transfer: A simple proposal with multiple implications. Review of Research in Education, 24(1), 61–100.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cho, M. H., & Tobias, S. (2016). Should instructors require discussion in online courses? Effects of online discussion on community of inquiry, learner time, satisfaction, and achievement. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(2), 123–140. doi:10.19173/irrodl.v17i2.2342
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christensen, C. (2016). The innovative university. San Francisco, CA: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Clark, R. E., & Voogel, A. (1985). Transfer of training principles for instructional design. ECTJ, 33(2), 113–123.
   Google Scholar
• Colquitt, J. A., LePine, J. A., & Noe, R. A. (2000). Toward an integrative theory of training motivation: A meta-analytic path analysis of 20 years of research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(5), 678.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daymont, T., & Blau, G. (2008). Student performance in online and traditional sections of an undergraduate management course. Institute of Behavioral and Applied Management, 9(3), 275–294.
   Google Scholar
• Eom, S. B., Wen, H. J., & Ashill, N. (2006). The determinants of students’ perceived learning outcomes and satisfaction in university online education: An empirical investigation. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 4(2), 215–235. doi:10.1111/dsji.2006.4.issue-2
   Google Scholar
• Gagné, R. M., Wager, W. W., Golas, K., & Keller, J. M. (2005). Principles of instructional design (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.
   Google Scholar
• Gist, M. E., Stevens, C. K., & Bavetta, A. G. (1991). Effects of self-efficacy and post-training intervention on the acquisition and maintenance of complex interpersonal skills. Personnel Psychology, 44(4), 837–861. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb00701.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldstone, R. L., & Day, S. B. (2012). Introduction to “new conceptualizations of transfer of learning”. Educational Psychologist, 47(3), 149–152. doi:10.1080/00461520.2012.695710
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grossman, A. M., & Johnson, L. R. (2015). Faculty perceptions of online accounting coursework. American Journal of Business Education, 8(2), 95–106.
   Google Scholar
• Jaggars, S., & Xu, D. (2013). Predicting online student outcomes from a measure of course quality ( CCRC Working Paper No.57). New York, NY: Community College Research Center, Teachers College, Columbia University. Retrieved from https://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu/publications/predicting-online-student-outcomes-and-course-quality.html
   Google Scholar
• James, S., Swan, K., & Daston, C. (2016). Retention, progression and the taking of online courses. Online Learning, 20(2), 75–96.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jan, S. K. (2015). The relationships between academic self-efficacy, computer self-efficacy, prior experience, and satisfaction with online learning. American Journal of Distance Education, 29(1), 30–40. doi:10.1080/08923647.2015.994366
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirk, R. E. (2008). Statistics: An introduction (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.
   Google Scholar
• Kirkpatrick, D. L., & Kirkpatrick, J. D. (2006). Evaluating training programs: The four levels. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
   Google Scholar
• Kuo, Y. C., Walker, A. E., Belland, B. R., Schroder, K. E., & Kuo, Y. T. (2014). A case study of integrating interwise: Interaction, internet self-efficacy, and satisfaction in synchronous online learning environments. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(1), 161–181. doi:10.19173/irrodl.v15i1.1664
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuo, Y. C., Walker, A. E., Schroder, K. E., & Belland, B. R. (2014). Interaction, internet self-efficacy, and self-regulated learning as predictors of student satisfaction in online education courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 20, 35–50. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.10.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, X., Liu, S., Lee, S., & Magjuka, R. J. (2010). Cultural differences in online learning: International student perceptions. Educational Technology & Society, 13(3), 177–188.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morrison, G. R., Ross, S. M., Kemp, J. E., & Kalman, H. (2010). Designing effective instruction (6th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Mujtaba, B. G. (2007). Understanding the needs and wants of virtual students: Online MBA program at the H. Wayne Huizenga School of Business and Entrepreneurship of Nova Southeastern University. TechTrends, 51(6), 46–51. doi:10.1007/s11528-007-0094-9
   Google Scholar
• Nemanich, L., Banks, M., & Vera, D. (2009). Enhancing knowledge transfer in classroom versus online settings: The interplay among instructor, student, content, and context. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 7(1), 123–148. doi:10.1111/dsji.2009.7.issue-1
   Google Scholar
• Neuhauser, C. (2002). Learning style and effectiveness of online and face-to-face instruction. American Journal of Distance Education, 16(2), 99–113. doi:10.1207/S15389286AJDE1602_4
   Google Scholar
• Perkins, D. N., & Salomon, G. (2012). Knowledge to go: A motivational and dispositional view of transfer. Educational Psychologist, 47(3), 248–258. doi:10.1080/00461520.2012.693354
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phipps, R., & Merisotis, J. (1999). What’s the difference? A review of contemporary research on the effectiveness of distance learning in higher education. Washington, DC: The Institute for Higher Education Policy.
   Google Scholar
• Pugh, K. J., & Bergin, D. A. (2006). Motivational influences on transfer. Educational Psychologist, 41(3), 147–160. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4103_2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Redpath, L. (2012). Confronting the bias against on-line learning in management education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 11(1), 125–140. doi:10.5465/amle.2010.0044
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rydzewski, D. N., Eastman, J. K., & Bocchi, J. (2010). Important characteristics in an MBA program: The perceptions of online MBA students. American Journal of Business Education, 3(4), 33–41.
   Google Scholar
• Seaman, J. E., Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2018). Grade increase: Tracking distance education in the United States, 2018. Needham, MA: Online Learning Consortium.
   Google Scholar
• Shea, P., & Bidjerano, T. (2016). A national study of differences between online and classroom only Community College students in time to first associate degree attainment, transfer, and dropout. Online Learning, 20(3), 14–15. doi:10.24059/olj.v20i3.984
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shelley, D., Swartz, L., & Cole, M. (2008). Online vs. in-class teaching: Comparing and analyzing effectiveness. Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 1, Las Vegas, NV (pp. 724–731).
   Google Scholar
• Shen, D., Cho, M. H., Tsai, C. L., & Marra, R. (2013). Unpacking online learning experiences: Online learning self-efficacy and learning satisfaction. The Internet and Higher Education, 19, 10–17. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.04.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sunar, A. S., White, S., Abdullah, N. A., & Davis, H. C. (2017). How learners’ interactions sustain engagement: A MOOC case study. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 10(4), 475–487. doi:10.1109/TLT.2016.2633268
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tyler-Smith, K. (2006). Early attrition among first time eLearners: A review of factors that contribute to drop-out, withdrawal and non-completion rates of adult learners undertaking eLearning programmes. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 2(2), 73–85.
   Google Scholar
• Van Ness, B. F., Van Ness, R. A., & Adkins, R. L. (2000). Student performance in principles of finance: Differences between traditional and internet settings. Financial Practice and Education, 10, 160–166.
   Google Scholar
• Wegner, S. B., Holloway, K. C., & Garton, E. M. (1999). The effects of Internet-based instruction on student learning. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 3(2), 98–106.
   Google Scholar
• Wisneski, J. E., Ozogul, G., & Bichelmeyer, B. A. (2017). Investigating the impact of learning environments on undergraduate students’ academic performance in a prerequisite and post-requisite course sequence. The Internet and Higher Education, 32, 1–10. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2016.08.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wojciechowski, A., & Palmer, L. B. (2005). Individual student characteristics: Can any be predictors of success in online classes? Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 8(2), 1–20.
   Google Scholar
• Xu, D., & Jaggars, S. S. (2014). Performance gaps between online and face-to-face courses: Differences across types of students and academic subject areas. The Journal of Higher Education, 85(5), 633–659.
   Google Scholar