Examining factors influencing e-learning engagement among university students during covid-19 pandemic: a mediating role of “learning persistence”

References

• Abdullah, M. N. L. Y., & Primus, D. (2021). The impact of institutional support and student engagement on educational outcomes of orang asli students at public universities. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 41(1), 182–197. doi:10.1080/02188791.2020.1773393
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abubakar, A. M., & Adeshola, I. (2019). Digital exam and assessments: A riposte to industry 4.0. In A. Elçi, L. L. Beith, & A. Elçi (Eds.), Handbook of research on faculty development for digital teaching and learning (pp. 245–263). IGI Global.
   Google Scholar
• Adeshola, I., & Abubakar, A. M. (2020). Assessment of higher order thinking skills: Digital assessment techniques. In E. A. Railean (Ed.), Assessment, testing, and measurement strategies in Global higher education (pp. 153–168). IGI Global.
   Google Scholar
• Ajayi, L. (2009). An exploration of pre-service teachers’ perceptions of learning to teach while using asynchronous discussion board. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 12(2), 86–100.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alamri, M. M., Almaiah, M. A., & Al-Rahmi, W. M. (2020). Social media applications affecting students’ academic performance: A model developed for sustainability in higher education. Sustainability, 12(16), 6471–6485. doi:10.3390/su12166471
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Al-Fraihat, D., Joy, M., & Sinclair, J. (2020). Evaluating E-learning systems success: An empirical study. Computers in Human Behavior, 102, 67–86. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2019.08.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alghamdi, A., Karpinski, A. C., Lepp, A., & Barkley, J. (2020). Online and face-to-face classroom multitasking and academic performance: Moderated mediation with self-efficacy for self-regulated learning and gender. Computers in Human Behavior, 102, 214–222. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2019.08.018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ali, G. E., & Magalhaes, R. (2008). Barriers to implementing e-learning: A Kuwaiti case study. International Journal of Training and Development, 12(1), 36–53. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2419.2007.00294.x
   Google Scholar
• Ali, S., Uppal, M. A., & Gulliver, S. R. (2018). A conceptual framework highlighting e-learning implementation barriers. Information Technology & People, 31(1), 156–180. doi:10.1108/ITP-10-2016-0246
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2013). Changing course: Ten years of tracking online education in the United States. Babson Survey Research Group.
   Google Scholar
• Alsalhi, N. R., Eltahir, M. E., & Al-Qatawneh, S. S. (2019). The effect of blended learning on the achievement of ninth grade students in science and their attitudes towards its use. Heliyon, 5(9), e02424. doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e02424
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alsowat, H. (2016). An EFL flipped classroom teaching model: Effects on English language higher-order thinking skills, student engagement and satisfaction. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(9), 108–121.
   Google Scholar
• Aparicio, M., Bacao, F., & Oliveira, T. (2017). Grit in the path to e-learning success. Computers in Human Behavior, 66, 388–399. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.10.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Atmojo, A. E. P., & Nugroho, A. (2020). EFL classes must go online! teaching activities and challenges during COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia. Register Journal, 13(1), 49–76. doi:10.18326/rgt.v13i1.49-76
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A Social Cognitive theory. Printice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Bandura, A., Freeman, W. H., & Lightsey, R. (1999). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy, 13(2), 158–166. doi:10.1891/0889-8391.13.2.158
   Google Scholar
• Baruah, T. D. (2011). Improving student retention through technology in India. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 9(2), 15–25.
   Google Scholar
• Bebell, D., & Kay, R. (2010). One to one computing: A summary of the quantitative results from the berkshire wireless learning initiative. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 9(2). https://ejournals.bc.edu/index.php/jtla/article/view/1607
   Google Scholar
• Becker, J. M., Klein, K., & Wetzels, M. (2012). Hierarchical latent variable models in PLS-SEM: Guidelines for using reflective-formative type models. Long Range Planning, 45(5-6), 359–394. doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2012.10.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bedggood, R. E., & Donovan, J. D. (2012). University performance evaluations: What are we really measuring? Studies in Higher Education, 37(7), 825–842. doi:10.1080/03075079.2010.549221
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergdahl, N., Knutsson, O., & Fors, U. (2018). Designing for engagement in TEL–A teacher-researcher collaboration. Designs for Learning, 10(1), 100–111. doi:10.16993/dfl.113
   Google Scholar
• Bergdahl, N., Nouri, J., Fors, U., & Knutsson, O. (2020). Engagement, disengagement and performance when learning with technologies in upper secondary school. Computers & Education, 149, 103783. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103783
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boekaerts, M. (2016). Engagement as an inherent aspect of the learning process. Learning and Instruction, 43, 76–83. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.02.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bower, M., Dalgarno, B., Kennedy, G. E., Lee, M. J., & Kenney, J. (2015). Design and implementation factors in blended synchronous learning environments: Outcomes from a cross-case analysis. Computers & Education, 86, 1–17. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2015.03.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowman, J. M., & Filar, D. C. (2017). Masculinity and student success in higher education. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Bowman-Perrott, L., Davis, H., Vannest, K., Williams, L., Greenwood, C., & Parker, R. (2013). Academic benefits of peer tutoring: A meta-analytic review of single-case research. School Psychology Review, 42(1), 39–55. doi:10.1080/02796015.2013.12087490
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burke, A. S., & Fedorek, B. (2017). Does “flipping” promote engagement?: A comparison of a traditional, online, and flipped class. Active Learning in Higher Education, 18(1), 11–24. doi:10.1177/1469787417693487
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Busebaia, T. J. A., & John, B. (2020). Can flipped classroom enhance class engagement and academic performance among undergraduate pediatric nursing students? A mixed-methods study. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 15(1), 1–16. doi:10.1186/s41039-019-0121-4
   Google Scholar
• Carter, A. G., Creedy, D. K., & Sidebotham, M. (2016). Efficacy of teaching methods used to develop critical thinking in nursing and midwifery undergraduate students: A systematic review of the literature. Nurse Education Today, 40, 209–218. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2016.03.010
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, I. S. (2017). Computer self-efficacy, learning performance, and the mediating role of learning engagement. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 362–370. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.059
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chicca, J., & Shellenbarger, T. (2018). Connecting with generation Z: Approaches in nursing education. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 13(3), 180–184. doi:10.1016/j.teln.2018.03.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. Modern Methods for Business Research, 295(2), 295–336.
   Google Scholar
• Chin, W. W. (2010). How to write up and report PLS analyses. In V. Esposito Vinzi, W. Chin, J. Henseler, & H. Wang (Eds.), Handbook of partial least squares (Springer handbooks of computational statistics, pp. 655–690). Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-32827-8_29
   Google Scholar
• Cho, M. H., & Cho, Y. (2014). Instructor scaffolding for interaction and students’ academic engagement in online learning: Mediating role of perceived online class goal structures. The Internet and Higher Education, 21, 25–30. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.10.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choudhury, S., & Pattnaik, S. (2020). Emerging themes in e-learning: A review from the stakeholders’ perspective. Computers & Education, 144, 103657. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103657
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cidral, W. A., Oliveira, T., Di Felice, M., & Aparicio, M. (2018). E-learning success determinants: Brazilian empirical study. Computers & Education, 122, 273–290. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2017.12.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Costagliola, G., De Lucia, A., Ferrucci, F., Gravino, C., & Scanniello, G. (2008). Assessing the usability of a visual tool for the definition of e-learning processes. Journal of Visual Languages & Computing, 19(6), 721–737. doi:10.1016/j.jvlc.2008.01.003
   Google Scholar
• Coyne, E., Frommolt, V., Rands, H., Kain, V., & Mitchell, M. (2018). Simulation videos presented in a blended learning platform to improve Australian nursing students’ knowledge of family assessment. Nurse Education Today, 66, 96–102. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2018.04.012
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Datu, J. A. D., Yang, W., Valdez, J. P. M., & Chu, S. K. W. (2018). Is Facebook involvement associated with academic engagement among Filipino university students? A cross-sectional study. Computers & Education, 125, 246–253. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2018.06.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delahunty, J. (2018). Connecting to learn, learning to connect: Thinking together in asynchronous forum discussion. Linguistics and Education, 46, 12–22. doi:10.1016/j.linged.2018.05.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deng, R., Benckendorff, P., & Gannaway, D. (2020). Learner engagement in MOOCs: Scale development and validation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(1), 245–262. doi:10.1111/bjet.12810
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeVellis, R. F. (2016). Scale development: Theory and applications (Vol. 26). Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Ding, L., Kim, C., & Orey, M. (2017). Studies of student engagement in gamified online discussions. Computers & Education, 115, 126–142. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2017.06.016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Donker, A. S., De Boer, H., Kostons, D., Van Ewijk, C. D., & van der Werf, M. P. (2014). Effectiveness of learning strategy instruction on academic performance: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 11, 1–26. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2013.11.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dutot, V. (2015). Factors influencing near field communication (NFC) adoption: An extended TAM approach. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 26(1), 45–57. doi:10.1016/j.hitech.2015.04.005
   Google Scholar
• Ene, E., & Upton, T. A. (2018). Synchronous and asynchronous teacher electronic feedback and learner uptake in ESL composition. Journal of Second Language Writing, 41, 1–13. doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2018.05.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erjongmanee, S. (2017, April 25–28). Assessment of how Thai generation-Z students gain understanding in engineering courses: Case study. IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), Athens, Greece. IEEE. doi:10.1109/EDUCON.2017.7943006
   Google Scholar
• Etehadi, B., & Karatepe, O. M. (2019). The impact of job insecurity on critical hotel employee outcomes: The mediating role of self-efficacy. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 28(6), 665–689. doi:10.1080/19368623.2019.1556768
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Finnegan, C., Morris, L. V., & Lee, K. (2008). Differences by course discipline on student behavior, persistence, and achievement in online courses of undergraduate general education. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 10(1), 39–54. doi:10.2190/CS.10.1.d
   Google Scholar
• Fisher, R. A. (1925, July). Theory of statistical estimation. Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 22(5), 700–725. doi:10.1017/S0305004100009580
   Google Scholar
• Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. doi:10.1177/002224378101800104
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. doi:10.3102/00346543074001059
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilboy, M. B., Heinerichs, S., & Pazzaglia, G. (2015). Enhancing student engagement using the flipped classroom. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 47(1), 109–114. doi:10.1016/j.jneb.2014.08.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gold, A. H., Malhotra, A., & Segars, A. H. (2001). Knowledge management: An organizational capabilities perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(1), 185–214. doi:10.1080/07421222.2001.11045669
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graham, M. C., & Jones, N. (2011). Improving business performance with web 2.0 technologies. Journal of Business Excellence, 2(1), 12–17.
   Google Scholar
• Gray, J. A., & DiLoreto, M. (2016). The effects of student engagement, student satisfaction, and perceived learning in online learning environments. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 11(1), 1–20.
   Google Scholar
• Greene, S. (1993). The role of task in the development of academic thinking through reading and writing in a college history course. Research in the Teaching of English, 27(1), 46–75.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hair, J. F., Anderson Jr, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: Global edition (7th ed.). Pearson Education.
   Google Scholar
• Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (1998). Multivariate data analysis (Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 207–219). Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Hair, J. F., Henseler, J., Dijkstra, T. K., & Sarstedt, M. (2014). Common beliefs and reality about partial least squares: comments on Rönkkö and Evermann.
   Google Scholar
• Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139–152. doi:10.2753/MTP1069-6679190202
   Google Scholar
• Hamari, J., Shernoff, D. J., Rowe, E., Coller, B., Asbell-Clarke, J., & Edwards, T. (2016). Challenging games help students learn: An empirical study on engagement, flow and immersion in game-based learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 170–179. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.045
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hart, C. (2012). Factors associated with student persistence in an online program of study: A review of the literature. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 11(1), 19–42.
   Google Scholar
• Hasan, B. (2006). Effectiveness of computer training: The role of multilevel computer self-efficacy. Journal of Organizational and End User Computing, 18(1), 50–68. doi:10.4018/joeuc.2006010103
   Google Scholar
• Hatlevik, O. E., Throndsen, I., Loi, M., & Gudmundsdottir, G. B. (2018). Students’ ICT self-efficacy and computer and information literacy: Determinants and relationships. Computers & Education, 118, 107–119. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2017.11.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henrie, C. R., Halverson, L. R., & Graham, C. R. (2015). Measuring student engagement in technology-mediated learning: A review. Computers & Education, 90, 36–53. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2015.09.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A New criterion for Assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. doi:10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sinkovics, R. R. (2009). The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. In R. R. Sinkovics & P. N. Ghauri (Eds.), New challenges to international marketing (Vol. 20, Advances in International Marketing, pp. 277–319). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. doi:10.1108/S1474-7979(2009)0000020014
   Google Scholar
• Hew, J.-J., Lee, V.-H., Ooi, K.-B., & Wei, J. (2015). What catalyses mobile apps usage intention: An empirical analysis. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 115(7), 1269–1291. doi:10.1108/IMDS-01-2015-0028
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hew, K. F., Huang, B., Chu, K. W. S., & Chiu, D. K. (2016). Engaging Asian students through game mechanics: Findings from two experiment studies. Computers & Education, 92, 221–236. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2015.10.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holmes, A. F., & Rasmussen, S. J. (2018). Using Pinterest to stimulate student engagement, interest, and learning in managerial accounting courses. Journal of Accounting Education, 43, 43–56. doi:10.1016/j.jaccedu.2018.03.001
   Google Scholar
• Hope, J. (2016). Get your campus ready for generation Z. Student Affairs Today, 19(7), 1–7. doi:10.1002/say.30253
   Google Scholar
• Howard, S. K., Ma, J., & Yang, J. (2016). Student rules: Exploring patterns of students’ computer-efficacy and engagement with digital technologies in learning. Computers & Education, 101, 29–42. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2016.05.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hu, L.-t., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in Covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3(4), 424–453. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.3.4.424
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hu, S., Kuh, G. D., & Li, S. (2008). The effects of engagement in inquiry-oriented activities on student learning and personal development. Innovative Higher Education, 33(2), 71–81. doi:10.1007/s10755-008-9066-z
   Google Scholar
• Iglesias-Pradas, S., Hernández-García, Á, Chaparro-Peláez, J., & Prieto, J. L. (2021). Emergency remote teaching and students’ academic performance in higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic: A case study. Computers in Human Behavior, 119, 106713. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2021.106713
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jamet, E., Gonthier, C., Cojean, S., Colliot, T., & Erhel, S. (2020). Does multitasking in the classroom affect learning outcomes? A naturalistic study. Computers in Human Behavior, 106, 106264. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2020.106264
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Järvelä, S., & Renninger, K. (2014). Designing for learning: Interest, motivation, and engagement. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 668–685). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jill, M. D., Wang, D., & Mattia, A. (2019). Are instructor generated YouTube videos effective in accounting classes? A study of student performance, engagement, motivation, and perception. Journal of Accounting Education, 47, 63–74. doi:10.1016/j.jaccedu.2019.02.002
   Google Scholar
• Jin, G., & Wang, Y. (2019). The influence of gratitude on learning engagement among adolescents: The multiple mediating effects of teachers’ emotional support and students’ basic psychological needs. Journal of Adolescence, 77, 21–31. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2019.09.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• John, S. P. (2013). Influence of computer self-efficacy on information technology adoption. International Journal of Information Technology, 19(1), 1–13.
   Google Scholar
• Jung, Y., & Lee, J. (2018). Learning engagement and persistence in massive open online courses (MOOCS). Computers & Education, 122, 9–22. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2018.02.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kember, D., Leung, D. Y., & Kwan, K. (2002). Does the use of student feedback questionnaires improve the overall quality of teaching? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(5), 411–425. doi:10.1080/0260293022000009294
   Google Scholar
• Kim, D., Park, Y., Yoon, M., & Jo, I. H. (2016). Toward evidence-based learning analytics: Using proxy variables to improve asynchronous online discussion environments. The Internet and Higher Education, 30, 30–43. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2016.03.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, J. S., Erdem, M., Byun, J., & Jeong, H. (2011). Training soft skills via e-learning: International chain hotels. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 23(6), 739–763. doi:10.1108/09596111111153457
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, T. D., Yang, M. Y., Bae, J., Min, B. A., Lee, I., & Kim, J. (2017). Escape from infinite freedom: Effects of constraining user freedom on the prevention of dropout in an online learning context. Computers in Human Behavior, 66, 217–231. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.09.019
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kimbark, K., Peters, M. L., & Richardson, T. (2017). Effectiveness of the student success course on persistence, retention, academic achievement, and student engagement. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 41(2), 124–138. doi:10.1080/10668926.2016.1166352
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kock, N. (2015). Common method bias in PLS-SEM: A full collinearity assessment approach. International Journal of e-Collaboration (Ijec), 11(4), 1–10. doi:10.4018/ijec.2015100101
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, J., Song, H. D., & Hong, A. J. (2019). Exploring factors, and indicators for measuring students’ sustainable engagement in e-learning. Sustainability, 11(4), 985. doi:10.3390/su11040985
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, F., Qi, J., Wang, G., & Wang, X. (2014). Traditional classroom vs e-learning in higher education: Difference between students’ behavioral engagement. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET, 9(2), 48–51. doi:10.3991/ijet.v9i2.3268
   Google Scholar
• Lin, L. C., Hung, I. C., & Chen, N. S. (2019). The impact of student engagement on learning outcomes in a cyber-flipped course. Educational Technology Research and Development, 67(6), 1573–1591. doi:10.1007/s11423-019-09698-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, M., Liu, L., & Liu, L. (2018). Group awareness increases student engagement in online collaborative writing. The Internet and Higher Education, 38, 1–8. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2018.04.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lohmöller, J.-B. (1989). Latent variable path modeling with partial least squares. Physica.
   Google Scholar
• Lu, H., Hu, Y. P., & Gao, J. J. (2016). The effects of computer self-efficacy, training satisfaction and test anxiety on attitude and performance in computerized adaptive testing. Computers & Education, 100, 45–55. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2016.04.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacKenzie, S. B., Podsakoff, P. M., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2011). Construct measurement and validation procedures in MIS and behavioral research: Integrating new and existing techniques. MIS Quarterly, 35(2), 293–334. doi:10.2307/23044045
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mancilla, R. L., Polat, N., & Akcay, A. O. (2017). An investigation of native and nonnative English speakers’ levels of written syntactic complexity in asynchronous online discussions. Applied Linguistics, 38(1), 112–134. doi:10.1093/applin/amv012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Markus, K. A. (2012). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling by Rex B. Kline. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 19(3), 509–512. doi:10.1080/10705511.2012.687667
   Google Scholar
• Meir, E. I., & Gati, I. (1981). Guidelines for item selection in inventories yielding score profiles. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 41(4), 1011–1016. doi:10.1177/001316448104100409
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moos, D. C., & Azevedo, R. (2009). Learning with computer-based learning environments: A literature review of computer self-efficacy. Review of Educational Research, 79(2), 576–600. doi:10.3102/0034654308326083
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murillo-Zamorano, L. R., Sánchez, J. Á. L., & Godoy-Caballero, A. L. (2019). How the flipped classroom affects knowledge, skills, and engagement in higher education: Effects on students' satisfaction. Computers & Education, 141, 103608. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103608
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Survey of Student Engagement. (2015). Engagement insights: Survey findings on the quality of undergraduate education. Center for Postsecondary Research, Indiana University, Annual Results. 2015, 16p.
   Google Scholar
• Neroni, J., Meijs, C., Gijselaers, H. J., Kirschner, P. A., & de Groot, R. H. (2019). Learning strategies and academic performance in distance education. Learning and Individual Differences, 73, 1–7. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2019.04.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ng, S. F., Azlan, M. A. K., Kamal, A. N. A., & Manion, A. (2020). A quasi-experiment on using guided mobile learning interventions in ESL classrooms: Time use and academic performance. Education and Information Technologies, 25(6), 4699–4719. doi:10.1007/s10639-020-10191-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oluwajana, D., & Adeshola, I. (2021). Does the student's perspective on multimodal literacy influence their behavioural intention to use collaborative computer-based learning? Education and Information Technologies, 26, 5613–5635. doi:10.1007/s10639-021-10526-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oluwajana, D., Adeshola, I., & Clement, S. (2021). Does the use of a web-based collaborative platform reduce cognitive load and influence project-based student engagement? Current Psychology. doi:10.1007/s12144-021-02145-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oriol-Granado, X., Mendoza-Lira, M., Covarrubias-Apablaza, C. G., & Molina-López, V. M. (2017). Positive emotions, autonomy support and academic performance of university students: The mediating role of academic engagement and self-efficacy. Revista de Psicodidáctica (English ed.), 22(1), 45–53. doi:10.1387/RevPsicodidact.14280
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ozkan, M., & Solmaz, B. (2015). Mobile addiction of generation z and its effects on their social lifes:(An application among university students in the 18-23 age group). Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 205, 92–98. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.09.027
   Google Scholar
• Park, J. H., & Choi, H. J. (2009). Factors influencing adult learners’ decision to drop out or persist in online learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 12(4), 207–217.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paswan, A. K., & Young, J. A. (2002). Student evaluation of instructor: A nomological investigation using structural equation modeling. Journal of Marketing Education, 24(3), 193–202. doi:10.1177/0273475302238042
   Google Scholar
• Phan, T., McNeil, S. G., & Robin, B. R. (2016). Students’ patterns of engagement and course performance in a massive open online course. Computers & Education, 95, 36–44. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2015.11.015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33–40. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.33
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63(1), 539–569. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pursel, B. K., Zhang, L., Jablokow, K. W., Choi, G. W., & Velegol, D. (2016). Understanding MOOC students: Motivations and behaviours indicative of MOOC completion. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32(3), 202–217. doi:10.1111/jcal.12131
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rashid, T., & Asghar, H. M. (2016). Technology use, self-directed learning, student engagement and academic performance: Examining the interrelations. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 604–612. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.084
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rickes, P. C. (2016). Generations in flux: How gen Z will continue to transform higher education space. Planning for Higher Education, 44(4), 21.
   Google Scholar
• Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Becker, J.-M. (2015). “SmartPLS 3.” Boenningstedt: SmartPLS GmbH, http://www.smartpls.com
   Google Scholar
• Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Will, A. (2005). SmartPLS 2.0 (beta).
   Google Scholar
• Robinson, C. C., & Hullinger, H. (2008). New benchmarks in higher education: Student engagement in online learning. Journal of Education for Business, 84(2), 101–109. doi:10.3200/JOEB.84.2.101-109
   Google Scholar
• Rodríguez-Triana, M. J., Prieto, L. P., Holzer, A., & Gillet, D. (2020). Instruction, student engagement, and learning outcomes: A case study using anonymous Social media in a face-to-face classroom. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 13(4), 718–733. doi:10.1109/TLT.2020.2995557
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodrigues, H., Almeida, F., Figueiredo, V., & Lopes, S. L. (2019). Tracking e-learning through published papers: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 136, 87–98. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2019.03.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shahabadi, M. M., & Uplane, M. (2015). Synchronous and asynchronous e-learning styles and academic performance of e-learners. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 176, 129–138. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.453
   Google Scholar
• Shatto, B., & Erwin, K. (2016). Moving on from millennials: Preparing for generation Z. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 47(6), 253–254. doi:10.3928/00220124-20160518-05
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shatto, B., & Erwin, K. (2017). Teaching millennials and generation Z: Bridging the generational divide. Creative Nursing, 23(1), 24–28. doi:10.1891/1078-4535.23.1.24
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shea, P., Pickett, A. M., & Pelz, W. E. (2003). A follow-up investigation of teaching presence in the SUNY networks. Journal of Asychronous Learning Networks, 7(2), 61–80.
   Google Scholar
• Shernoff, D. J., Kelly, S., Tonks, S. M., Anderson, B., Cavanagh, R. F., Sinha, S., & Abdi, B. (2016). Student engagement as a function of environmental complexity in high school classrooms. Learning and Instruction, 43, 52–60. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2015.12.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shin, N. (2003). Transactional presence as a critical predictor of success in distance learning. Distance Education, 24(1), 69–86. doi:10.1080/01587910303048
   Google Scholar
• Soffer, T., Kahan, T., & Livne, E. (2017). E-assessment of online academic courses via students' activities and perceptions. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 54, 83–93. doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2016.10.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soper, D. S. (2020). A-priori sample size calculator for structural equation models [Software]. http://www.danielsoper.com/statcalc
   Google Scholar
• Supapon, S. (2017). Application of contemplative education in medical education. Thammasat Medical Journal, 17(3), 280–286.
   Google Scholar
• Tai, L. (2005). Corporate e-learning: How e-learning is created in three large corporations.
   Google Scholar
• Tenenhaus, M., Vinzi, V. E., Chatelin, Y. M., & Lauro, C. (2005). PLS path modeling. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 48(1), 159–205. doi:10.1016/j.csda.2004.03.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Topu, F. B., & Goktas, Y. (2019). The effects of guided-unguided learning in 3d virtual environment on students’ engagement and achievement. Computers in Human Behavior, 92, 1–10. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2018.10.022
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Unsworth, N., Brewer, G. A., & Spillers, G. J. (2009). There’s more to the working memory capacity—fluid intelligence relationship than just secondary memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16(5), 931–937. doi:10.3758/PBR.16.5.931
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Urbach, N., & Ahlemann, F. (2010). Structural equation modeling in information systems research using partial least squares. Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application, 11(2), 5–40.
   Google Scholar
• Urbach, N., Smolnik, S., & Riempp, G. (2010). An empirical investigation of employee portal success. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 19(3), 184–206. doi:10.1016/j.jsis.2010.06.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Uden, J. M., Ritzen, H., & Pieters, J. M. (2013). I think I can engage my students. Teachers’ perceptions of student engagement and their beliefs about being a teacher. Teaching and Teacher Education, 32, 43–54. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2013.01.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Uden, J. M., Ritzen, H., & Pieters, J. M. (2014). Engaging students: The role of teacher beliefs and interpersonal teacher behavior in fostering student engagement in vocational education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 37, 21–32. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2013.08.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watted, A., & Barak, M. (2018). Motivating factors of MOOC completers: Comparing between university-affiliated students and general participants. The Internet and Higher Education, 37, 11–20. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2017.12.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• We Are Social, & DataReportal, & Hootsuite. (2020, January 30). Global digital population as of January 2020 (in billions) [Graph]. In Statista. Retrieved April 6, 2020, from https://www.statista.com/statistics/617136/digital-population-worldwide/
   Google Scholar
• Wetzels, M., Odekerken-Schröder, G., & Van Oppen, C. (2009). Using PLS path modeling for assessing hierarchical construct models: Guidelines and empirical illustration. MIS Quarterly, 33(1), 177–195. doi:10.2307/20650284
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wheeler, S. (2012). e-Learning and digital learning. In N. M. Seel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the sciences of learning (pp. 1109–1111). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Wigfield, A., & Guthrie, J. T. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 403–422). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Willging, P. A., & Johnson, S. D. (2009). Factors that influence students’ decision to dropout of online courses. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 13(3), 115–127.
   Google Scholar
• Wong, C. H., Tan, G. W. H., Hew, T. S., & Ooi, K. B. (2016). Can mobile TV be a new revolution in the television industry? Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 764–776. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.10.021
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wong, C. H., Tan, G. W. H., Tan, B. I., & Ooi, K. B. (2015). Mobile advertising: The changing landscape of the advertising industry. Telematics and Informatics, 32(4), 720–734. doi:10.1016/j.tele.2015.03.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yeşilyurt, E., Ulaş, A. H., & Akan, D. (2016). Teacher self-efficacy, academic self-efficacy, and computer self-efficacy as predictors of attitude toward applying computer-supported education. Computers in Human Behavior, 64, 591–601. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.07.038
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yoo, S. J., & Huang, W. D. (2016). Can e-learning system enhance learning culture in the workplace? A comparison among companies in S outh K orea. British Journal of Educational Technology, 47(4), 575–591. doi:10.1111/bjet.12240
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• You, J. W., & Song, Y. H. (2013). Probing the interaction effects of task value and academic self-efficacy on learning engagement and persistence in an e-learning course. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 13(3), 91–112.
   Google Scholar
• Zander, L., Brouwer, J., Jansen, E., Crayen, C., & Hannover, B. (2018). Academic self-efficacy, growth mindsets, and university students’ integration in academic and social support networks. Learning and Individual Differences, 62, 98–107. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2018.01.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, Z. V., & Hyland, K. (2018). Student engagement with teacher and automated feedback on L2 writing. Assessing Writing, 36, 90–102. doi:10.1016/j.asw.2018.02.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zheng, Y., & Yu, S. (2018). Student engagement with teacher written corrective feedback in EFL writing: A case study of Chinese lower-proficiency students. Assessing Writing, 37, 13–24. doi:10.1016/j.asw.2018.03.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar