Toward High-Quality Adult Online Learning: A Systematic Review of Empirical Studies
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Research Method
2.1. Database Searching
2.2. Identifying Exclusion and Inclusion Criteria
2.3. Article Screening
2.4. Data Extraction
2.5. Literature Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Holistic Analysis of the Included Literature
3.1.1. Published Year Analysis
3.1.2. Burstiness Words Analysis
3.1.3. Keyword Co-Occurrence Analysis
3.2. An In-depth Analysis of the Included Literature
3.2.1. Adults’ Individual Characteristics
3.2.2. External Factors Affecting Adult Online Learning
3.2.3. Internal Factors Affecting Adult Online Learning
3.2.4. Examined Online Learning Strategies for Adults
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- UNESCO. Embracing a culture of lifelong learning: Contribution to the Futures of Education initiative; report; a transdisciplinary expert consultation. Available online: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000374112 (accessed on 26 December 2021).
- Sun, P.-C.; Tsai, R.J.; Finger, G.; Chen, Y.-Y.; Yeh, D. What drives a successful e-Learning? An empirical investigation of the critical factors influencing learner satisfaction. Comput. Educ. 2008, 50, 1183–1202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dabbagh, N.; Castaneda, L. The PLE as a framework for developing agency in lifelong learning. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 2020, 68, 3041–3055. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- UNESCO. COVID-19 Impact on Education: From Disruption to Recovery. Available online: https://en.unesco.org/covid19/educationresponse (accessed on 5 January 2021).
- Ang, J.; Zhang, H. Investigation and Analysis of Online Teaching in Higher Vocational Colleges during the COVID-19 Epidemic. In proceeding of 2021 9th International Conference on Information and Education Technology (ICIET), Okayama, Japan, 27–29 March 2021; pp. 252–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kwapong, O.A.T.F. E-learning experiences of adults during COVID-19 outbreak: The moderating effect of gender. J. Adult Contin. Educ. 2021; [Early Access]. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, L.; Liu, K.; Zhao, J. Development of Online Flipped Blended Teaching Mode in Higher Vocational Education during COVID-19 outbreak: A Case Study. In proceeding of 2020 Ninth International Conference of Educational Innovation through Technology (EITT) 2020, Porto, Portugal, 13–17 December 2020; pp. 193–198. [Google Scholar]
- Huckle, J. Teacher Education for Sustainability in Network Society: Combining Digital and Sustainability Literacies. J. Teach. Educ. Sustain. 2012, 14, 130–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Abedini, A.; Abedin, B.; Zowghi, D. Adult learning in online communities of practice: A systematic review. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 2021, 52, 1663–1694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Choi, H.J.; Park, J.-H. Testing a path-analytic model of adult dropout in online degree programs. Comput. Educ. 2018, 116, 130–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, K.; Choi, H.; Cho, Y.H. Becoming a competent self: A developmental process of adult distance learning. Internet High. Educ. 2018, 41, 25–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xing, W.; Du, D. Dropout Prediction in MOOCs: Using Deep Learning for Personalized Intervention. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 2018, 57, 547–570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Christidou, V.; Hatzinikita, V.; Gravani, M. Pedagogic Practices Promoted by Distance Learning Educational Material on Adult Education. Procedia—Soc. Behav. Sci. 2012, 46, 1988–1996. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lin, P.-C.; Hou, H.-T.; Wang, S.-M.; Chang, K.-E. Analyzing knowledge dimensions and cognitive process of a project-based online discussion instructional activity using Facebook in an adult and continuing education course. Comput. Educ. 2013, 60, 110–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Youde, A. I don’t need peer support: Effective tutoring in blended learning environments for part-time, adult learners. High Educ. Res. Dev. 2020, 39, 1040–1054. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ilgaz, H.; Gülbahar, Y. A snapshot of online learners: E-Readiness, e-Satisfaction and expectations. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn. 2015, 16, 171–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cercone, K. Characteristics of Adult Learners with Implications for Online Learning Design. AACE J. 2008, 2, 137–159. [Google Scholar]
- Ekmekci, O. Being There: Establishing Instructor Presence in an Online Learning Environment. High. Educ. Stud. 2013, 3, 29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arghode, V.; Brieger, E.W.; McLean, G.N. Adult learning theories: Implications for online instruction. Eur. J. Train. Dev. 2017, 41, 593–609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hong, Q.N.; Pluye, P. Systematic reviews: A brief historical overview. Educ. Inf. 2018, 34, 261–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pluye, P.; Quan, N.H.; Bush, P.L.; Vedel, I. Opening-up the definition of systematic literature review: The plurality of worldviews, methodologies and methods for reviews and syntheses. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2016, 73, 2–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, C. Science Mapping: A Systematic Review of the Literature. J. Data Inf. Sci. 2017, 2, 1–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chen, C. CiteSpace: A practical guide for mapping scientific literature; Nova Science Publishers: Hauppauge, NY, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Page, M.J.; McKenzie, J.E.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Shamseer, L.; Tetzlaff, J.M.; Akl, E.A.; Brennan, S.E.; et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Int. J. Surg. 2021, 88, 105906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jin, B.; Kim, J.; Baumgartner, L.M. Informal Learning of Older Adults in Using Mobile Devices: A Review of the Literature. Adult Educ. Q. 2019, 69, 120–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Richardson, J.; King, E. Adult students in higher education—Burden or boon? J. High Educ. 1998, 69, 65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zuo, Z.; Cheng, J.; Guo, H.; Li, Y. Knowledge mapping of research on strategic mineral resource security: A visual analysis using CiteSpace. Resour. Policy 2021, 74, 102372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, X.; Li, H. Hot topics detection of discipline of Library and Information: By analyzing a large scale of co-keywords based on network embedding. New Century Libr. 2021, 4, 88–96. [Google Scholar]
- Coryell, J.E.; Clark, M.C. One Right Way, Intercultural Participation, and Language Learning Anxiety: A Qualitative Analysis of Adult Online Heritage and Nonheritage Language Learners. Foreign Lang Ann 2009, 42, 483–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- González-Gómez, F.; Guardiola, J.; Rodríguez, M.; Alonso, M.M. Gender differences in e-learning satisfaction. Comput. Educ. 2012, 58, 283–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Venkatesh, V.; Morris, M.G.; Davis, G.B.; Davis, F.D. User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. Mis. Quart. 2003, 27, 425–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chang, C.; Liang, C.; Shu, K.; Chiu, Y. Alteration of Influencing Factors of e-Learning Continued Intention for Different Degrees of Online Participation. Int. Rev. Res. Open Dis. 2015, 16, 33–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Diep, N.A.; Cocquyt, C.; Zhu, C.; Vanwing, T. Predicting adult learners’ online participation: Effects of altruism, performance expectancy, and social capital. Comput. Educ. 2016, 101, 84–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coleman, J.A.; Furnborough, C. Learner characteristics and learning outcomes on a distance Spanish course for beginners. System 2010, 38, 14–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- DiBiase, D.; Kidwai, K. Wasted on the Young? Comparing the Performance and Attitudes of Younger and Older US Adults in an Online Class on Geographic Information. J. Geogr. High. Educ. 2010, 34, 299–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leen, E.A.; Lang, F.R. Motivation of computer based learning across adulthood. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2013, 29, 975–983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Park, J.; Choi, H.J. Factors Influencing Adult Learners’ Decision to Drop Out or Persist in Online Learning. Educ. Technol. Soc. 2009, 12, 207–217. [Google Scholar]
- Ke, F.; Xie, K. Toward deep learning for adult students in online courses. Internet High. Educ. 2009, 12, 136–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xiong, J.; Zuo, M. Older adults’ learning motivations in massive open online courses. Educ. Gerontol. 2019, 45, 82–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheng, B.; Wang, M.; Moormann, J.; Olaniran, B.A.; Chen, N. The effects of organizational learning environment factors on e-learning acceptance. Comput. Educ. 2012, 58, 885–899. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheng, B.; Wang, M.; Yang, S.J.; Kinshuk; Peng, J. Acceptance of competency-based workplace e-learning systems: Effects of individual and peer learning support. Comput. Educ. 2011, 57, 1317–1333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lai, H. Investigating older adults’ decisions to use mobile devices for learning, based on the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. Interact. Learn Envir. 2020, 28, 890–901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Poong, Y.S.; Yamaguchi, S.; Takada, J.-I. Investigating the drivers of mobile learning acceptance among young adults in the World Heritage town of Luang Prabang, Laos. Inf. Dev. 2016, 33, 57–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Knowles, M.S. The Modern Practice of Adult Education: From Pedagogy to Andragogy; Association Press: New York, NY, USA, 1980. [Google Scholar]
- Blieck, Y.; Kauwenberghs, K.; Zhu, C.; Struyven, K.; Pynoo, B.; DePryck, K. Investigating the relationship be-tween success factors and student participation in online and blended learning in adult education. J. Comput. Assist. Lear. 2019, 35, 476–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, Y.; Choi, J. A structural equation model of predictors of online learning retention. Internet High. Educ. 2013, 16, 36–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ruey, S. A case study of constructivist instructional strategies for adult online learning. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 2010, 41, 706–720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, S.; Kingshuk; Yao, Y.; Ya, N. Adoption of mobile social media for learning among Chinese older adults in senior citizen colleges. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 2021, 69, 3413–3435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ge, Z.-G. Exploring e-learners’ perceptions of net-based peer-reviewed English writing. Int. J. Comput. Collab. Learn. 2011, 6, 75–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, C.-T.; Chuang, S.-S. A Study of Digital Learning for Older Adults. J. Adult Dev. 2018, 26, 149–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eynon, R.; Malmberg, L. Lifelong learning and the Internet: Who benefits most from learning online? Brit. J. Educ. Technol. 2021, 52, 569–583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, B.W.; Lee, W.G.; Shon, J.G.; Lee, B.R. Influencing factors in OER usage of adult learners in Korea. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn. 2015, 16, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lai, H. The Influence of Adult Learners’ Self-Directed Learning Readiness and Network Literacy on Online Learning Effectiveness: A Study of Civil Servants in Taiwan. Educ. Technol. Soc. 2011, 14, 98–106. [Google Scholar]
- de Palo, V.; Limone, P.; Monacis, L.; Ceglie, F.; Sinatra, M. Enhancing e-learning in old age. Aust. J. Adult Learn. 2018, 58, 88–109. [Google Scholar]
- Diep, N.A.; Cocquyt, C.; Zhu, C.; Vanwing, T.; de Greef, M. Effects of core self-evaluation and online interaction quality on adults’ learning performance and bonding and bridging social capital. Internet High Educ. 2017, 34, 41–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boelens, R.; Voet, M.; De Wever, B. The design of blended learning in response to student diversity in higher education: Instructors’ views and use of differentiated instruction in blended learning. Comput. Educ. 2018, 120, 197–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hood, N.; Littlejohn, A.; Milligan, C. Context counts: How learners’ contexts influence learning in a MOOC. Comput. Educ. 2015, 91, 83–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Arrosagaray, M.; Gonzalez-Peiteado, M.; Pino-Juste, M.; Rodriguez-Lopez, B. A comparative study of Spanish adult students’ attitudes to ICT in classroom, blended and distance language learning modes. Comput. Educ. 2019, 134, 31–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Park, Y.; Heo, G.M.; Lee, R. Blogging for Informal Learning: Analyzing Bloggers’ Perceptions Using Learning Perspective. Educ. Technol. Soc. 2011, 14, 149–160. [Google Scholar]
- Donavant, B.W. The New, Modern Practice of Adult Education Online Instruction in a Continuing Professional Education Setting. Adult Educ. Quart. 2009, 59, 227–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cocquyt, C.; Zhu, C.; Diep, A.N.; De Greef, M.; Vanwing, T. Examining the role of learning support in blended learning for adults’ social inclusion and social capital. Comput. Educ. 2019, 142, 103610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kuo, Y.-C.; Belland, B.R. An exploratory study of adult learners’ perceptions of online learning: Minority students in continuing education. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 2016, 64, 661–680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ge, Z. Cyber Asynchronous versus Blended Cyber Approach in Distance English Learning. Educ. Technol. Soc. 2012, 15, 286–297. [Google Scholar]
- Piper, A.M.; Brewer, R.; Cornejo, R. Technology learning and use among older adults with late-life vision impairments. Universal Access Inf. 2017, 16, 699–711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lai, H. Factors Affecting Knowledge Acquisition among Adult Workers in Online Informal Learning Activities. Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ. 2018, 14, 505–515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Remedios, R.; Richardson, J.T.E. Achievement goals and approaches to studying: Evidence from adult learners in distance education. Distance Educ. 2013, 34, 271–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vanslambrouck, S.; Zhu, C.; Pynoo, B.; Thomas, V.; Lombaerts, K.; Tondeur, J. An in-depth analysis of adult students in blended environments: Do they regulate their learning in an ‘old school’ way? Comput. Educ. 2019, 128, 75–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rakap, S. Impacts of Learning Styles and Computer Skills on Adult Students’ Learning Online. Turk. Online J. Educ. Technol. 2010, 9, 108–115. [Google Scholar]
- Zembylas, M. Adult learners’ emotions in online learning. Distance Educ. 2008, 29, 71–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Agrusti, G.; Dobson, S. A closer look: Evaluating online resources for adult refugees. CADMO 2017, 25, 7–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Merriam, S.B.; Baumgartner, L.M. Learning in adulthood: A comprehensive guide; John Wiley & Sons: Indianapolis, IN, USA, 2020; pp. 82–103. [Google Scholar]
- Pham, M.; Singh, K.; Jahnke, I. Socio-technical-pedagogical usability of online courses for older adult learners. Interact. Learn. Environ. 2021; [Early Access]. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guldberg, K.; Pilkington, R. A community of practice approach to the development of non-traditional learners through networked learning. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 2006, 22, 159–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McDougall, J. The quest for authenticity: A study of an online discussion forum and the needs of adult learners. Aust. J. Adult Learn. 2015, 55, 94–113. [Google Scholar]
- Ke, F. Examining online teaching, cognitive, and social presence for adult students. Comput. Educ. 2010, 55, 808–820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Makrakis, V.; Kostoulas-Makrakis, N. Course Curricular Design and Development of the M.Sc. Programme in the Field of Ict in Education for Sustainable Development. J. Teach. Educ. Sustain. 2012, 14, 5–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Makrakis, V.; Larios, N.; Kaliantzi, G. ICT-Enabled Climate Change Education for Sustainable Development Across the School Curriculum. J. Teach. Educ. Sustain. 2012, 14, 54–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Theme Specification | Potential Key Subject Terms | Other Filter Parameters |
---|---|---|
Adult learning, senior learning, elderly learning | mobile device, technology, smartphone, tablet, social media, social network, Internet, online, app, We-Media, Moocs, open resource, online community, ICT | Since 2005; literature type “articles” |
Code Items | Introduction |
---|---|
Researcher and publication date | For simplicity, we put the two items together (e.g., Park et al., 2009). |
Research method | Research methods were coded as quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods |
Sample information | We extracted as much information about the sample as possible, including the age, number, and work background of the participants (if mentioned). |
Main findings | We would summarize the empirical findings in the paper, but untested exploratory models or theoretical frameworks based on the evidence are not included. |
Main Keywords. | Co-Current Keywords |
---|---|
Technology | Professional development, performance, internet use, internet self-efficacy, information |
Model | Performance, information technology, usage, technology acceptance, gender difference |
Teacher | Playfulness, readiness, support, community, discussion |
Participation | Community, motivation, satisfaction, efficacy, management |
Performance | Information technology, model, competence, experience, cognitive load theory |
Usage | Technology acceptance, perception, attitude, gender, community |
Education | Teacher, knowledge, outcome, satisfaction, life |
People | Adult, intention, perception, internet use, model |
Technology acceptance | Model, satisfaction, usage, efficacy, information |
Knowledge | User experience, participation, age, management, usage |
Type of Influencing Factors | Main Factors Mentioned | References |
---|---|---|
Individual characteristics | Prior experience | [33,57,58] |
Gender | [33,34,59] | |
Age | [36,37,58] | |
Educational level | [33,37,57] | |
Race | [60] | |
External factors | Physical constraints | [10,16,37] |
Family and organizational support | [37,40] | |
Learning support | [61] | |
Interaction | [15,45] | |
Evaluation | [16,47] | |
Course format, type, structure, etc. | [38,62,63] | |
Technology characteristics | [32,64] | |
Institutional management | [45] | |
Internal factors | Digital skills | [51,53,65] |
Scholastic aptitude | [10] | |
Locus of control | [46] | |
Achievement goals | [66] | |
Core self-evaluation | [55] | |
Self-regulation skills | [54,57,67] | |
Learning styles/preferences | [68] | |
Anxiety | [48,69] | |
Perceived usefulness | [40,43,48] | |
Perceived ease of use | [43,48,52] | |
Self-efficacy | [43,50] |
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
Lu, Y.; Hong, X.; Xiao, L. Toward High-Quality Adult Online Learning: A Systematic Review of Empirical Studies. Sustainability 2022, 14, 2257. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14042257
Lu Y, Hong X, Xiao L. Toward High-Quality Adult Online Learning: A Systematic Review of Empirical Studies. Sustainability. 2022; 14(4):2257. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14042257
Chicago/Turabian StyleLu, Yefeng, Xiaocui Hong, and Longhai Xiao. 2022. "Toward High-Quality Adult Online Learning: A Systematic Review of Empirical Studies" Sustainability 14, no. 4: 2257. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14042257
APA StyleLu, Y., Hong, X., & Xiao, L. (2022). Toward High-Quality Adult Online Learning: A Systematic Review of Empirical Studies. Sustainability, 14(4), 2257. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14042257