Technical College Students’ Practical Performance Anxiety during Online Learning: Difference in Gender and Average Time of Online Learning
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Practical Performance Anxiety
2.2. Influencing Factors of PPA in Online Learning: Gender and Online Learning Time
2.2.1. Gender
2.2.2. Average Time of Online Learning
2.3. Purpose of the Study
3. Methods
3.1. Data Collection and Participants
3.2. Instruments
3.2.1. The Scale of Practical Performance Anxiety in Online Courses without Hands-on Demonstration (PPAOC-without-HD)
3.2.2. The Scale of Practical Performance Anxiety in Online Courses with Hands-on Demonstration (PPAOC-with-HD)
3.3. Reliability and Validity Analysis
3.4. Data Analysis
4. Results
4.1. Overall Level of PPAOC-without-HD and PPAOC-with-HD for College Students in Online Learning
4.2. Differences in PPAOC-without-HD and PPAOC-with-HD in Terms of Gender and Online Learning Time
4.3. Gender
4.4. Average Time of Online Learning
5. Discussion
5.1. Overall Level of College Students’ PPAOC-without-HD and PPAOC-with-HD in Online Learning
5.2. Females Have Higher Levels of PPAOC-without-HD and PPAOC-with-HD Than Males in Online Learning
5.3. PPAOC-with-HD Varied Significantly among Average Time Students Received Online Learning
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Su, H. Educational Assessment of the Post-Pandemic Age: Chinese Experiences and Trends Based on Large-Scale Online Learning. Educ. Meas. Issues Pract. 2020, 39, 37–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Crawford, J.; Cifuentes-Faura, J. Sustainability in higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review. Sustainability 2022, 14, 1879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chabbott, C.; Sinclair, M. SDG 4 and the COVID-19 emergency: Textbooks, tutoring, and teachers. Prospects 2020, 49, 51–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cifuentes-Faura, J.; Obor, D.O.; To, L.; Al-Naabi, I. Cross-cultural impacts of COVID-19 on higher education learning and teaching practices in Spain, Oman, Nigeria and Cambodia: A cross-cultural study. J. Univ. Teach. Learn. Pract. 2021, 18, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marinoni, G.; van’t Land, H. The impact of COVID-19 on global higher education. Int. High. Educ. 2020, 102, 7–9. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, C.Y.; Zhao, H. The Impact of COVID-19 on Anxiety in Chinese University Students. Front. Psychol. 2020, 11, 1168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hedges, S. Statistics student performance and anxiety: Comparisons in course delivery and student characteristics. Stat. Educ. Res. J. 2017, 16, 320–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rapp-McCall, L.; Anyikwa, V.A. Active learning strategies and instructor presence in an online research methods course: Can we decrease anxiety and enhance knowledge? Adv. Soc. Work. 2016, 17, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Al-Ghareeb, A.; McKenna, L.; Cooper, S. The influence of anxiety on student nurse performance in a simulated clinical setting: A mixed methods design. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. 2019, 98, 57–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Finneran, C.M.; Zhang, P. A person-artefact-task (PAT) model of flow antecedents in computer-mediated environments. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 2003, 59, 475–496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hong, J.-C.; Tai, K.H.; Hwang, M.Y.; Kuo, Y.C. Internet cognitive failure affects learning progress as mediated by cognitive anxiety and flow while playing a Chinese antonym synonym game with interacting verbal–analytical and motor-control. Comput. Educ. 2016, 100, 32–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hong, J.-C.; Cao, W.; Liu, X.; Tai, K.-H.; Zhao, L. Personality traits predict the effects of Internet and academic self-efficacy on practical performance anxiety in online learning under the COVID-19 lockdown. J. Res. Technol. Educ. 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shearer, J.N. Anxiety, nursing students, and simulation: State of the science. J. Nurs. Educ. 2016, 55, 551–554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Thai, N.T.T.; Wever, B.D.; Valcke, M. Face-to-face, blended, flipped, or online learning environment? Impact on learning performance and student cognitions. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 2020, 36, 397–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaufmann, R.; Buckner, M.M. Revisiting ‘power in the classroom’: Exploring online learning and motivation to study course content. Interact. Learn. Environ. 2019, 27, 402–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wongwatkit, C.; Panjaburee, P.; Srisawasdi, N.; Seprum, P. Moderating effects of gender differences on the relationships between perceived learning support, intention to use, and learning performance in a personalized e-learning. J. Comput. Educ. 2020, 7, 229–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, B.; Bastedo, K.; Howard, W. Exploring design elements for online STEM courses: Active learning, engagement & assessment design. Online Learn. 2018, 22, 59–75. [Google Scholar]
- Schlafer, S.; Pedersen, K.; Jrgensen, J.N.; Kruse, C. Hands-on live demonstration vs. video-supported demonstration of an aesthetic composite restoration in undergraduate dental teaching. J. Dent. Educ. 2021, 85, 802–811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ashok, D.S. Development of a new mindset for eLearning pedagogy: For the teacher and the learner. Curr. Issues Emerg. Elearning 2014, 1, 21–37. [Google Scholar]
- Faura-Martínez, U.; Lafuente-Lechuga, M.; Cifuentes-Faura, J. Sustainability of the Spanish university system during the pandemic caused by COVID-19. Educ. Rev. 2021, 74, 645–663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alismaiel, O.A.; Cifuentes-Faura, J.; Al-Rahmi, W.M. Social Media Technologies Used for Education: An Empirical Study on TAM Model During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Front. Educ. 2022, 7, 882831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Donelan, H.; Kear, K. Creating and collaborating: Students’ and tutors’ perceptions of an online group project. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distance Learn. 2018, 19, 37–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Putwain, D.W.; Becker, S.; Symes, W.; Pekrun, R. Reciprocal relations between students’ academic enjoyment, boredom, and achievement over time. Learn. Instr. 2018, 54, 73–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brady, S.T.; Hard, B.M.; Gross, J.J. Reappraising test anxiety increases academic performance of first-year college students. J. Educ. Psychol. 2018, 110, 395–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marchand, G.C.; Gutierrez, A.P. The role of emotion in the learning process: Comparisons between online and face-to-face learning settings. Internet High. Educ. 2012, 15, 150–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pekrun, R.; Frenzel, A.C.; Goetz, T.; Perry, R.P. The control-value theory of achievement emotions: An integrative approach to emotions in education. In Emotion in Education; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2007; pp. 13–36. [Google Scholar]
- Oh, Y.; Lee, S.M. The effects of online interactions on the relationship between learning-related anxiety and intention to persist among e-learning students with visual impairment. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn. 2016, 17, 89–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, J.H.; Huang, C.Q.; Han, Z.M.; He, T.; Li, M. Investigating the Influence of Interaction on Learning Persistence in Online Settings: Moderation or Mediation of Academic Emotions? Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Eysenck, M.W.; Derakshan, N.; Santos, R.; Calvo, M.G. Anxiety and cognitive performance: Attentional control theory. Emotion 2007, 7, 336–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hoshino, T.; Tanno, Y. Trait anxiety and impaired control of reflective attention in working memory. Cogn. Emot. 2016, 30, 369–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dupley, L.; Hossain, S.; Ghosh, S. Performance anxiety amongst trauma and orthopaedic surgical trainees. Surgeon 2020, 18, 33–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Celik, V.; Yesilyurt, E. Attitudes to technology, perceived computer self-efficacy and computer anxiety as predictors of computer supported Education. Comput. Educ. 2013, 60, 148–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gold, A.; Pendergast, P.M.; Ormand, C.J.; Budd, D.A.; Mueller, K.J. Improving spatial thinking skills among undergraduate geology students through short online training exercises. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2018, 40, 2205–2225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Master, A.; Cheryan, S.; Meltzoff, A.N. Computing whether she belongs: Stereotypes undermine girls’ interest and sense of belonging in computer science. J. Educ. Psychol. 2016, 108, 424–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reilly, D.; Neumann, D.L.; Andrews, G. Gender differences in spatial ability: Implications for STEM education and approaches to reducing the gender gap for parents and educators. In Visual-Spatial Ability in STEM: Transforming Research into Practice, 1st ed.; Khine, M.S., Ed.; Springer International: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 195–224. [Google Scholar]
- Stieff, M.; Dixon, B.L.; Ryu, M.; Kumi, B.C.; Hegarty, M. Strategy training eliminates sex differences in spatial problem solving in a stem domain. J. Educ. Psychol. 2014, 106, 390–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cahill, L. Why sex matters for neuroscience. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2006, 7, 477–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Park, C.W.; Kim, D.G. Exploring the roles of social presence and gender difference in online learning. Decis. Sci. J. Innov. Educ. 2020, 18, 291–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marimuthu, R.; Chone, L.S.; Heng, L.T.; Nah, E.A.; Fen, O.S. Comparing the Online Learning Strategies of Male and Female Diploma Students of an English Language Course. Procedia-Soc. Behav. Sci. 2013, 90, 626–633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- McSporran, M.; Young, S. Does gender matter in online learning? Res. Learn. Technol. 2001, 9, 3–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Buelow, J.R.; Barry, T.; Rich, L.E. Supporting learning engagement with online students. Online Learn. 2018, 22, 313–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Stovall, I. Engagement. Online Learning [Electronic Version]. UIS Community of Practice for E-Learning. 2013. Available online: http://otel.uis.edu/copel/EngagementandOnlineLearning.ppt (accessed on 15 August 2021).
- Firat, M.; Öztürk, A.; Güneş, İ.; Çolak, E.; Beyaz, M.; Büyük, K. How e-learning engagement time affects academic achievement in e-learning environments. A large-scale study of open and distance learners. Open Prax. 2019, 11, 129–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mu, S.; Chai, S.; Wang, H.; Chen, Y. Real-time analysis method and application of engagement in online independent learning. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 92100–92109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xiong, Y.; Li, H.; Kornhaber, M.L.; Suen, H.K.; Pursel, B.; Goins, D.D. Examining the relations among student motivation, engagement, and retention in a MOOC: A structural equation modeling approach. Glob. Educ. Rev. 2015, 2, 23–33. [Google Scholar]
- Yang, J.C.; Lin, M.Y.D.; Chen, S.Y. Effects of anxiety levels on learning performance and gaming performance in digital game-based learning. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 2018, 34, 324–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, W.; Wang, Y.; Yang, L.; Wang, C. Suspending classes without stopping learning: China’s education emergency management policy in the COVID-19 outbreak. J. Risk Financ. Manag. 2020, 13, 55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gustad, L.T.; Chaboyer, W.; Wallis, M. Performance of the faces anxiety scale in patients transferred from the ICU. Intensive Crit. Care Nurs. 2005, 21, 355–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pekrun, R.; Goetz, T.; Titz, W.; Perry, R.P. Academic emotions in students’ self-regulated learning and achievement: A program of qualitative and quantitative research. Educ. Psychol. 2002, 37, 91–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hair, J.F.; Black, W.C.; Babin, B.J.; Anderson, R.E.; Tatham, R.L. Multivariate Data Analysis, 7th ed.; Pearson Education Inc.: London, UK, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Kline, R.B. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, 3rd ed.; The Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2011; p. 47. [Google Scholar]
- Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Mark. Res. 1981, 18, 39–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huberty, C.J.; Petoskey, M.D. Multivariate analysis of variance and covariance. In Handbook of Applied Multivariate Statistics and Mathematical Modeling; Tinsley, H., Brown, S., Eds.; Academic Press: New York, NY, USA, 2000; Volume 11, pp. 182–208. [Google Scholar]
- Dörnyei, Z. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics: Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Methodologies; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Riquelme, V.C.; Maureira, N.C.; Navarro, C.V.; Puente, C.T. Anxiety to online learning: Relationship with attitude, gender, environment, and mental health in university students. Rev. Digit. Investig. Docencia Univ.-Ridu 2021, 15, e1284. [Google Scholar]
- Caspi, A.; Chajut, E.; Saporta, K. Participation in class and in online discussions: Gender differences. Comput. Educ. 2008, 50, 718–724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guiller, J.; Durndell, A. Students’ linguistic behaviour in online discussion groups: Does gender matter? Comput. Hum. Behav. 2007, 23, 2240–2255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ulmanen, S.; Soini, T.; Pietarinen, J.; Pyhältö, K. The anatomy of adolescents’ emotional engagement in schoolwork. Soc. Psychol. Educ. 2016, 19, 587–606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pekrun, R. A social-cognitive, control-value theory of achievement emotions. Adv. Psychol. 2000, 131, 143–163. [Google Scholar]
Variables | N (%) | PPAOC-without-HD M (SD) | PPAOC-with-HD M (SD) | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Gender | Male | 226 (47.7) | 12.24 (2.05) | 11.51 (2.71) |
Female | 248 (52.3) | 13.32 (2.58) | 12.42 (3.25) | |
Average time of online learning | ≤2 h | 64 (13.5) | 13.72 (2.24) | 13.02 (2.70) |
2–4 h | 252 (53.2) | 12.84 (2.11) | 12.27 (2.74) | |
4–6 h | 107 (22.6) | 12.70 (2.25) | 11.35 (3.21) | |
≥6 h | 51 (10.8) | 11.76 (3.52) | 10.67 (3.76) | |
Overall | 474 | 12.81 (2.39) | 11.99 (3.04) |
Gender | ≤2 h | 2–4 h | 4–6 h | ≥6 h |
---|---|---|---|---|
Male | 32 (14.16%) | 106 (46.90%) | 65 (28.76%) | 23 (10.18%) |
Female | 33 (13.31%) | 158 (63.71%) | 42 (16.94%) | 15 (6.05%) |
Independent Variable | Dependent Variable | F | Sig. | ηp2 |
---|---|---|---|---|
Gender | PPAOC-without-HD | 25.350 | 0.000 | 0.051 |
PPAOC-with-HD | 10.739 | 0.001 | 0.022 |
Independent Variable | Dependent Variable | F | Sig. | ηp2 |
---|---|---|---|---|
Online learning time | PPAOC-without-HD | 1.077 | 0.359 | 0.007 |
PPAOC-with-HD | 3.717 | 0.012 | 0.024 |
Online Learning Time | Mean Difference (I, J) | Sig. | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
PPAOC-without-HD | ≤2 h (I) | 2–4 h (J) | 0.878 * | 0.025 |
≤2 h (I) | 4–6 h (J) | 1.018 * | 0.020 | |
≤2 h (I) | ≥6.1 h (J) | 1.954 * | 0.000 | |
2–4 h (I) | 4–6 h (J) | 0.140 | 0.947 | |
2–4 h (I) | ≥6 h (J) | 1.077 * | 0.009 | |
4–6 h (I) | ≥6 h (J) | 0.936 | 0.063 | |
PPAOC-with-HD | ≤2 h (I) | 2–4 h (J) | 0.750 | 0.228 |
≤2 h (I) | 4–6 h (J) | 1.670 * | 0.001 | |
≤2 h (I) | ≥6 h (J) | 2.349 * | 0.000 | |
2–4 h (I) | 4–6 h (J) | 0.920 * | 0.025 | |
2–4 h (I) | ≥6 h (J) | 1.600 * | 0.001 | |
4–6 h (I) | ≥6 h (J) | 0.680 | 0.488 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Zhang, X.; Zhou, F.; Xu, J. Technical College Students’ Practical Performance Anxiety during Online Learning: Difference in Gender and Average Time of Online Learning. Sustainability 2022, 14, 8218. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14138218
Zhang X, Zhou F, Xu J. Technical College Students’ Practical Performance Anxiety during Online Learning: Difference in Gender and Average Time of Online Learning. Sustainability. 2022; 14(13):8218. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14138218
Chicago/Turabian StyleZhang, Xu, Fangyi Zhou, and Jinlei Xu. 2022. "Technical College Students’ Practical Performance Anxiety during Online Learning: Difference in Gender and Average Time of Online Learning" Sustainability 14, no. 13: 8218. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14138218
APA StyleZhang, X., Zhou, F., & Xu, J. (2022). Technical College Students’ Practical Performance Anxiety during Online Learning: Difference in Gender and Average Time of Online Learning. Sustainability, 14(13), 8218. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14138218