The relationship between motivation, learning strategies and choice of environment whether traditional or including an online component

This study examined how students’ achievement goals, self-efficacy and learning strategies influenced their choice of an online, hybrid or traditional learning environment. One hundred thirty-two post-secondary students completed surveys soliciting their preferences for learning environments, reasons for their preference, their motivational orientation towards learning and learning strategies used. Findings indicated that most students preferred traditional learning environments. This preference was based on how well the environment matched their personal learning style and engaged them as students. Discriminant analyses indicated significant differences in motivational beliefs and learning strategies; students who preferred traditional environments showed a mastery goal orientation and greater willingness to apply effort while learning. Students who preferred less traditional environments presented as more confident that they could manage a non-traditional class. These findings have implications for understanding students’ motivation for learning in diverse educational settings.  One of the profound impacts of technological innovations in education is that of offering undergraduate and graduate classes online (Allen et al, 2004). Online education is Portions of this research were presented at the International Association for Development of the Information Society (IADIS) International Conference on Cognition and Exploratory Learning in Digital Age (CELDA), Freiburg, Germany, October 2008. British Journal of Educational Technology Vol 41 No 3 2010 349–364 doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00993.x   2006). This situation is clearly distinguished from more traditional learning environments in which no technological mediation of communication between teacher and students is required (see Berge & Collins, 1995; Hiltz, 1994; Kuehn, 1994; Tallent-Runnels et al). Research pertaining to why students may prefer an online education environment versus a more traditional classroom is notably sparse. Findings within the motivation literature, as related to education, have suggested that contributors to students’ learning preferences include their goals for learning (Ames, 1992), their self-efficacy or perceived competence in learning (Bandura, 1997) and their specific strategies for learning (Pintrich, Wolters & Baxter, 2000). However, explication of how students’ motivational beliefs and learning strategies influence their choice of learning environment when an online component is introduced is lacking. This lack is notable given current trends in higher education course offerings. This study was designed to address this gap and examined factors that contributed to individuals’ choice of a particular type of learning environment be it online exclusively, hybrid or traditional in nature. Learners’ motivation has been consistently linked to successful learning. For example, Galusha (1997) noted that knowledge about students’ motivation may help educators determine which students are likely to participate in and benefit from online education. Similarly, Tallent-Runnels et al (2006) asserted that an understanding of learners’ motivation is the key for effective instructional design. However, we know little about the motivational beliefs and learning strategies of online education learners. We do know that within traditional settings, students’ ability to sustain or increase their willingness to engage in and complete academic activities has been viewed as important for understanding learning and performance (Wolters, 1999). Studies on motivation and learning strategies also have shown that students’ motivational beliefs and learning strategies are related to involvement in learning (eg, Pintrich & Schunk, 2002; Pintrich et al, 2000; Schunk & Pajares, 2002; Zimmerman, 1989). For example, learning among mastery-oriented students results in more analytic processing of the information; students who are performance oriented process information in a more superficial manner (Ames, 1992). Motivation in the present study was defined in terms of achievement goals and selfefficacy. Achievement goals are concerned with the reasons or purposes for engaging in academic-related tasks. According to achievement goal theory, there are two contrasting goals: mastery goals and performance goals that explain the ‘why’ of engaging in academic-related tasks. Mastery goals refer to learners’ desires to increase their knowledge, understanding, competence and appreciation of the educational materials (Ames, 1992). Performance goals are concerned with learners’ desires to outperform others to demonstrate competence (performance approach) or to avoid demonstrating incompetence (performance avoidance) (Elliot & Church, 1997; Middleton & Midgley, 1997). A mastery goal is concerned with improving one’s competence. Individuals who hold 350 British Journal of Educational Technology Vol 41 No 3 2010   As such, these students are intrinsically motivated, exert greater effort in their learning, and use effective and varied learning strategies (Ames & Archer, 1988; Dweck & Leggett, 1988). In contrast, students holding performance goals (approach or avoidance) are concerned with outperforming others and how they are perceived by others. These students are often less engaged in their learning, avoid challenges and are usually extrinsically motivated (Ames & Archer; Dweck & Leggett). Self-efficacy is another motivational construct that has ramifications for learning. Specifically, self-efficacy refers to students’ perceptions about their ability to complete a specific task (Bandura, 1986, 1997). An established finding is that self-efficacy is a strong predictor of academic performance and course satisfaction in traditional classrooms. Findings also show that students with high academic self-efficacy are more flexible in their use of learning strategies than those with low academic self-efficacy (Bandura, 1997). How students use learning strategies is part of what is referred to as self-regulated learning (Pintrich et al, 2000), which concerns students’ use of cognitive strategies and metacognition. Strategies of self-regulated learning have been categorised into cognitive engagement, metacognitive strategies and resource management (Pintrich & Garcia, 1994). Cognitive engagement refers to the mental effort students invest in monitoring their comprehension of new material (Corno & Mandinach, 1983). Metacognitive knowledge pertains to students’ knowledge of themselves as learners, strategies to use for different tasks and when to use these strategies (Pintrich et al; Schneider & Pressley, 1997). Resource management refers to the behavioural component of selfregulated learning and entails using techniques such as time management. Overall, self-regulated learners are proactive and persistent in their learning (Schunk & Zimmerman, 1994), as they show proficiency monitoring and modifying their strategies to achieve their goals (Zimmerman, 1989). Similarly, they show adaptive motivational beliefs and attitudes that are likely to lead to successful learning. Clearly, motivational beliefs and learning strategies influence academic outcomes. However, research addressing learners’ motivation and learning strategies in the selection of a particular learning environment remains limited. In fact, from a motivational perspective, little is known about the type of students who are attracted to certain learning environments and why. Accordingly, this study examined the types of motivation and learning strategies reported by undergraduate and postgraduate students who preferred either online, hybrid or traditional classroom environments and their reasons for those preferences.