Factors associated with learning outcome of BSN in a blended learning environment

References

• Abowd, G., da Graca, P. M., Kerimbaev, B., Ishiguro, Y., & Guzdial, M. (1999). Anchoring discussions in lecture: An approach to collaboratively extending classroom digital media.Dissertation Paper, Computer Support for Collaborative Learning, Palo Alto, CA.
   Google Scholar
• Aiken, R. L. (2000). Psychological testing and assessment.Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
   Google Scholar
• Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Allmark, P. (2005). Can the study of ethics enhance nursing practice? Journal of Advanced Nursing, 51,618–624.
   Google Scholar
• American Association of Colleges of Nursing. (2008). Essentials of a baccalaureate education for nursing practice.Washington, DC: AACN.
   Google Scholar
• Ammouri, A. A., & Neuberger, G. (2008). The perception of risk of heart disease scale: Development and psychometric analysis. Journal of Nursing Measurement,16(2), 83–97.
   Google Scholar
• Bartlett, J. E., Kotrlik, J. W., & Higgins, C. C. (2001). Organizational research: Determining appropriate sample size in survey research. Information Technology, Learning, and Performance Journal,19(1), 43–50.
   Google Scholar
• Berge, Z. L. (2000). Designing discussion questions for online, adult learning. Educational Technology,40(5), 53–56.
   Google Scholar
• Blankson, J., & Kyei-Blankson, L. (2008). Nontraditional students’ perception of a blended course: Integrating synchronous online discussion and face-to-face instruction. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 19(3), 421–438.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, A. H., & Green, T. (2009). Time students spend reading threaded discussions in online graduate courses requiring asynchronous participation. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 10(6), 51–64.
   Google Scholar
• Casterle, B. D., Grypdonck, M., Vuylsteke-Wauters, M., & Janssen, P. J. (1997). Nursing students’ responses to ethical dilemmas in nursing practice. Nursing Ethics, 4(1),12–28.
   Google Scholar
• Choi, I., Land, S. M., & Turgeon, A. J. (2005). Scaffolding peer-questioning strategies to facilitate metacognition during online small group discussion. Instructional Science,33(5–6),483–511.
   Google Scholar
• Colesca, S. E., Dobrica, L., & Alpopi, C. (2009). Students outcomes and perceptions in a blended learning format. Metalurgia International, 8, 222–229.
   Google Scholar
• Contreras, L. C. (2004). Predicting computer self-confidence from demographic and personality variables. (Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 5(3), 173–181.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, A., Tschudin, V., & de Raeve, L. (2006). Essentials of teaching and learning in nursing ethics.Philadelphia: Churchill Livingstone-Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Dziubanm, C. D., Hartman, J., Juge, F., Moskal, P. D., & Sorg, S. (2005). Blended learning: Online learning enters the mainstream. In C. J. Bonk & C. Graham (Eds.), Handbook of blended learning environment: Global perspectives, local designs(pp. 127–148). San Francisco: Pfeiffer.
   Google Scholar
• Eastman, J. K., & Swift, C. O. (2001). New horizons in distance education: The online learner-centered marketing class. Journal of Marketing Education, 23,25–35.
   Google Scholar
• Fetsco, T., & McClure, J. (2005). Educational psychology: An integrated approach to classroom decisions.Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
   Google Scholar
• Field, A. (2005). Discovering statistics using SPSS.London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Frankola, K. (2001). Why online learners drop out. Workforce, 80,53–60.
   Google Scholar
• Garnham, C., & Kaleta, R. (2002). Introduction to hybrid courses. Teaching with Technology Today,8(6). Accessed September 14, 2010 at http://www.uwsa.edu/ttt/articles/garnham.htm
   Google Scholar
• Gorgulu, R. S., & Dinc, L. (2007). Ethics in Turkish nursing education programs. Nursing Ethics,14(6), 741–752.
   Google Scholar
• Halinski, R. S., & Feldt, L. S. (1970). The selection of variables in multiple regression analyses. Journal of Educational Measurement,7(3), 151–158.
   Google Scholar
• Havard, B., Du, J., & Olinzock, A. (2005). Deep learning: The knowledge, methods, and cognition process in instructor led online discussion. The (Quarterly Review of Distance Education,6(2), 125–135.
   Google Scholar
• Hermans, C. M., Haytko, D. L., & Mott-Stenerson, B. (2009). Student satisfaction in web-enhanced learning environments. Journal of Instructional Pedagogies, 1,82–100. Accessed July 14, 2010, from http://aabri.com/manu-scripts/09147.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Holenko, M., & Hoic-Bozic, N. (2008). Using online discussions in a blended learning course. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning,2(2), 18–23.
   Google Scholar
• Hsu, L. L. (2010). Metacognitive inventory for nursing students in Taiwan: Instrument development and testing. Journal of Advanced Nursing,66(11), 2573–2581.
   Google Scholar
• Ireland, J., Martindale, S., Johnson, N., Adams, D., Eboh, W., & Mowatt, E. (2009). Blended learning in education: Effects on knowledge and attitude. British Journal of Nursing,18(2), 124–130.
   Google Scholar
• Itzkan, S. J. (1994). Assessing the future of telecomputing environments: Implications for instruction and administration. The Computer Teacher, 22(4), 60–64.
   Google Scholar
• Ketefian, S. (1999). Legal and ethical issues: Ethics content in nursing education. Journal of Professional Nursing, 15(3), 138.
   Google Scholar
• Kline, P. (1993). The handbook of psychological test construction.London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• LaRose, R., Gregg, J., & Eastin, M. (1998). Audiographic telecourses for the web: An experiment. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 4(2). Accessed September 1, 2010, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol4/issue2/larose.html
   Google Scholar
• Lim, D. H., & Morris, M. L. (2009). Learner and instructional factors influencing learning outcomes within a blended learning environment. Educational Technology & Society,12(4), 282–293.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, D. E., & Kunce, J. T. (1973). Prediction and statistical overkill revisited. Measurement and Evaluation in Guidance, 6(3), 157–163.
   Google Scholar
• Nolan, P. W., & Markert, D. (2002). Ethical reasoning observed: A longitudinal study of nursing students. Nursing Ethics, 9(3), 243–258.
   Google Scholar
• Online Learning Department. (2005). Blended learning pilot project – Final report for the academic 2004–2005.Accessed August 6, 2010, from https://ritdml.rit.edu/bitstream/handle/1850/276/BL%20Pilot%20 Final°/o20Report°/o2003–04.pdf?sequence = 1.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Parsons, S., Barker, P. J., & Armstrong, A. E. (2001). The teaching of health care ethics to students of nursing in the UK: A pilot study. Nursing Ethics,8(1), 45–55.
   Google Scholar
• Rohlf, F. H., & Bertocci, R. J. (2005). Pedagogy for medical ethics in practice: A reasonable approach for health care practitioners. Perspective on Physician Assistant Education,16(1), 37–40.
   Google Scholar
• Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1996). Adaptation and understanding: A case for new cultures of schooling. In S. Vosniadou, E. DeCorte, R. Glaser, & H. Mandl (Eds.), International perspectives on the design of technology-supported learning environments(pp. 149–163). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19,460–475.
   Google Scholar
• Sigler, E. A., & Tallent-Runnels, M. K. (2006). Examining the validity of scores from an instrument designed to measure metacogni-tion of problem solving. The Journal of General Psychology, 133,257–276.
   Google Scholar
• Stansfield, M. H., McLellan, E., & Connolly, T. M. (2004). Enhancing student performance in online learning and traditional face-to-face class delivery. Journal of Information Technology Education, 3,173–188.
   Google Scholar
• Swanson, H. L. (1992). The relationship between metacognition and problem solving in gifted children. Roeper Review,15(1), 43–48.
   Google Scholar
• Troha, F. J. (2002). Bulletproof instructional design: A model for blended learning. A Refereed Journal of the United States Distance Learning Association,16(5). Accessed June 5, 2010, from http://www.usdla.org/html/journal/MAY02_Issue/article03.html
   Google Scholar
• Turner, S. L., & Bechtel, G. A. (1998). The effectiveness of guided design on ethical decision making and moral reasoning among community nursing students. Nursing Connections, 11, 69–74.
   Google Scholar
• Twigg, C. A. (2003). New models for online learning: Improving learning and reducing costs. EDUCAUSEReview,38(5), 28–38. Accessed September 14, 2010, from http://www.edu-cause.edu/ir/library/pdf/erm0352.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Vukman, K. B. (2005). Developmental differences in metacognition and their connections with cognitive development in adulthood. Journal of Adult Development,12(4), 211–221.
   Google Scholar
• Vonderwell, S., Liang, X., & Alderman, K. (2007). Asynchronous discussion and assessment of online learning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 39(3), 309–328.
   Google Scholar
• Warren, C. M. J. (2008). The use of online asynchronous discussion forums in the development of deep learning among postgraduate real estate students.Paper presented at the meeting of CIB International Conference on Building Education and Research. Kandalama, Sri Lanka, 11–15.
   Google Scholar
• Yushau, B. (2006). The effects of blended e-learn-ing on mathematics and computer attitudes in pre-calculus algebra. The Montana Mathematics Enthusiast, 3(2), 176–183.
   Google Scholar
• Zhao, J. (2008). An examination of students’ perception of blended e-learning in Chinese higher education. Edutainment,LNCS, 5093,162–170.
   Google Scholar
• Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Student differences in self-regulated learning: Relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82,52–59.
   Google Scholar
• Zulkiply, N., Kabit, M. R., & Ghani, K. A. (2008). Metacognition: What roles does it play in students’ academic performance. The International Journal of Learning, 15,97–105.
   Google Scholar