Exploring the Factors Associated with Undergraduate Students’ Online Learning Anxiety: Development of the Online Learner Anxiety Scale
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v26i3.2810Keywords:
online learning anxiety, factor analysis, validity, reliability, online learningAbstract
The purpose of this research was to explore the factors associated with online learning anxiety by carefully designing, developing, and providing preliminary validity and reliability evidence of a scale to measure undergraduate students’ online learning anxiety. We created a conceptual framework to organize the literature surrounding online learning anxiety and used this framework to develop an initial item pool of 30 items. The researchers recruited N = 297 undergraduate student participants from four public universities in the southeastern United States from whom we collected and analyzed data for descriptive statistics, internal consistency reliability, exploratory factor analysis, and correlational analysis. Following systematic analytic procedures, we arrived at a three-factor model explaining approximately 65% of the variability in these data and retained 24 items in the final model with minimal cross-loadings in the pattern matrix. We labeled the identified factors as (1) online learner feelings of negativity and inadequacy, (2) online learner apprehension towards personal communication, and (3) online learner discomfort with instructor capacity and communication. The final instrument was named the Online Learner Anxiety Scale (OLAS). Scores on the OLAS were correlated with five other measures hypothesized to relate to online learning anxiety thereby providing stronger construct validity evidence. The OLAS was found to produce reliable scores that can be validly inferred as measures of online learning anxiety among undergraduate students in institutions of higher education. These findings are discussed and framed in light of current literature on online learning and possible future research directions.
References
Abdous, M. H. (2019). Influence of satisfaction and preparedness on online students’ feelings of anxiety. The Internet and Higher Education, 41, 34–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IHEDUC.2019.01.001
Alibak, M., Talebi, H., & Neshat-Doost, H.-T. (2019). Development and validation of a test anxiety inventory for online learning students. Journal of Educators Online, 16(2), 10–25. https://doi.org/10.9743/JEO.2019.16.2.2
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2016). Online report card: Tracking online education in the United States. Babson Survey Research Group, Babson College.
APA Dictionary of Psychology. (n.d.). Anxiety. Retrieved May 5, 2021, from https://dictionary.apa.org/anxiety
Autman, H., & Kelly, S. (2017). Reexamining the writing apprehension measure. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, 80(4), 516–529. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329490617691968
Baker, C. (2010). The impact of instructor immediacy and presence for online student affective learning, cognition, and motivation. Journal of Educators Online, 7(1), n1.
Benson, A. D. (2002). Using online learning to meet workforce demand: A case study of stakeholder influence. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 3(4), 443–452.
Bolliger, D. U., & Halupa, C. (2012). Student perceptions of satisfaction and anxiety in an online doctoral program. Distance Education, 33(1), 81–98. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2012.667961
Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56(2), 81–105. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046016
Carliner, S. (2004). An overview of online learning (2nd ed.). European Business Review, 16. https://doi.org/10.1108/09555340410561723
Cinquin, P.-A., Guitton, P., & Sauzéon, H. (2019). Online e-learning and cognitive disabilities: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 130, 152–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.12.004
Conrad, D. L. (2002). Engagement, excitement, anxiety, and fear: Learners’ experiences of starting an online course. American Journal of Distance Education, 16(4), 205–226. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15389286AJDE1604_2
Cutri, R. M., & Mena, J. (2020). A critical reconceptualization of faculty readiness for online teaching. Distance Education, 41(3), 361–380. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2020.1763167
Devane, C. L., Chiao, E., Franklin, M., & Kruep, E. J. (2005). Anxiety disorders in the 21st
century: Status, challenges, opportunities, and comorbidity with depression. The American Journal of Managed Care, 11(12 Suppl), S344–S353.
Hammond, J. R. (2006). Predictors of persistence in distance education (Publication No. 567) [Doctoral Dissertation, University of Louisville]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. https://doi.org/10.18297/etd/567
Hauser, R., Paul, R., & Bradley, J. (2012). Computer self-efficacy, anxiety, and learning in online versus face to face medium. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 11, 141–154. https://doi.org/10.28945/1633
Heckel, C., & Ringeisen, T. (2019). Pride and anxiety in online learning environments: Achievement emotions as mediators between learners’ characteristics and learning outcomes. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 35(5), 667–677. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12367
Helms, J. L. (2014). Comparing student performance in online and face-to-face delivery modalities. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v18i1.348
Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. Educause Review, 27, 1–12.
Hohlfeld, T. N., Ritzhaupt, A. D., & Barron, A. E. (2010). Development and validation of the student tool for technology literacy (ST2L). Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(4), 361–389. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2010.10782556
Hohlfeld, T. N., Ritzhaupt, A. D., & Barron, A. E. (2013). Are gender differences in perceived and demonstrated technology literacy significant? It depends on the model. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61(4), 639–663. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-013-9304-7
Huggins, A. C., Ritzhaupt, A. D., & Dawson, K. (2014). Measuring Information and Communication Technology Literacy using a performance assessment: Validation of the Student Tool for Technology Literacy (ST2L). Computers & Education, 77, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.04.005
Lowenthal, P., Bauer, C., & Chen, K. Z. (2015). Student perceptions of online learning: An analysis of online course evaluations. American Journal of Distance Education, 29(2), 85–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2015.1023621
Madley, S., Ritzhaupt, A. D., Huggins, A. C., Ruggles, K. & Wilson, M. (April, 2015). Development and validation of the Abbreviated Technology Anxiety Scale (ATAS) Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
Martin, F., Budhrani, K., Kumar, S., & Ritzhaupt, A. (2019). Award-winning faculty online teaching practices: Roles and competencies. Online Learning, 23(1), 184–205. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v23i1.1329
Martin, F., Budhrani, K., & Wang, C. (2019). Examining faculty perception of their readiness to teach online. Online Learning, 23(3), 97–119.
Martin, F., Sun, T., & Westine, C. D. (2020). A systematic review of research on online teaching and learning from 2009 to 2018. Computers & Education, 159, 104009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104009
McInnerney, J., & Roberts, T. (2004). Online learning: Social interaction and the creation of a sense of community. Educational Technology and Society, 7, 73–81.
Moore, M. G. (1989). Three types of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1 – 7. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923648909526659
Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (2011). Distance education: A systems view of online learning. Cengage Learning.
Moore, M. (1993). Theory of transactional distance. In D. Keegan (Ed.), Theoretical principles of distance education (pp. 22–38). Routledge.
Nepon, J., Belik, S., Bolton, J., & Sareen, J. (2010). The relationship between anxiety disorders and suicide attempts: Findings from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions. Depression & Anxiety, 27(9), 791–798. https://doi.org/10.1002/da.20674
Pekrun, R., Frenzel, A. C., Goetz, T., & Perry, R. P. (2007). Chapter 2—The control-value theory of achievement emotions: An integrative approach to emotions in education. In P. A. Schutz & R. Pekrun (Eds.), Emotion in Education (pp. 13–36). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012372545-5/50003-4
Pekrun, R., & Stephens, E. J. (2012). Academic emotions. In APA educational psychology handbook, Vol 2: Individual differences and cultural and contextual factors (pp. 3–31). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/13274-001
Ritzhaupt, A. D., Liu, F., Dawson, K., & Barron, A. E. (2013). Differences in student information and communication technology literacy based on socio-economic status, ethnicity, and gender: Evidence of a digital divide in Florida schools. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 45(4), 291–307. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2013.10782607
Saadé, R. G., & Kira, D. (2009). Computer anxiety in e-learning: The effect of computer self-efficacy. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 8(1), 177–191. https://doi.org/10.28945/166
Saadé, R. G., Kira, D., Mak, T., & Nebebe, F. (2017, June). Anxiety & performance in online learning. In InSITE 2017: Informing Science+ IT Education Conferences: Vietnam (pp. 147–157). https://doi.org/10.28945/3736
Slovák, P., & Fitzpatrick, G. (2015). Teaching and developing social and emotional skills with technology. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 22(4), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1145/2744195
Spitzer, R. L., Kroenke, K., Williams, J. B. W., & Löwe, B. (2006). A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: The GAD-7. Archives of Internal Medicine, 166(10), 1092–1097. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.166.10.1092
Zembylas, M. (2008). Adult learners’ emotions in online learning. Distance Education, 29(1), 71–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587910802004852
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
As a condition of publication, the author agrees to apply the Creative Commons – Attribution International 4.0 (CC-BY) License to OLJ articles. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
This licence allows anyone to reproduce OLJ articles at no cost and without further permission as long as they attribute the author and the journal. This permission includes printing, sharing and other forms of distribution.
Author(s) hold copyright in their work, and retain publishing rights without restrictions