Author(s)

Xinyue Li ¹

Affiliation(s)

¹ Graduate School of Business and Advanced Technology Management, Assumption University, 592/3 Soi Ramkhamhaeng 24 Ramkhamhaeng Rd., Bangkok, Thailand

Corresponding Author

Xinyue Li

ABSTRACT

This study examines the factors influence learner' self-efficacy, such as perceived behavioral control and motivation, as well as moderating effects of gender, disciplines, and social influences. Blended learning reform in China was first stared in engineering majors and developed relatively mature, which became one of the models for other majors` reform. Blended learning has been a major goal of higher education curriculum reform in recent years, whereas the role students play in it is not discussed enough in China, including their subjective feelings and emotions, such as self-efficacy. Data was collected through an online questionnaire from a total of 500 undergraduates from Chengdu who have had blended learning experiences in the past year. Results indicate that both perceived behavioral control and motivation are significant predictors of self-efficacy. Gender plays a significant moderating role, while disciplines does not. When gender, disciplines, and social influence were considered together, influences from family and teachers and peers exerted different moderating effects, respectively.

KEYWORDS

Blended Learning, Self-Efficacy, Engineering, Gender, Social Influence

CITE THIS PAPER

Xinyue Li, A Study on Self-efficacy of Undergraduates in Blended Learning in Chengdu, China--The Moderating Effects of Gender, Disciplines and Social Influences. Applied & Educational Psychology (2022) Vol. 3: 1-18. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.23977/appep.2022.030501.

REFERENCES

[1] Xinhua News Agency. (2022, August 2). Building a new form of higher education through digitalisation. Presentation by the Director of Higher Education, Ministry of Education. Retrieved November 10, 2022, from https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1740009396480767736&wfr=spider&for=pc
[2] O'Byrne, W. I., & Pytash, K. E. (2015). Hybrid and blended learning. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 59(2), 137–140. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.463 
[3] Onguko, B., Jepchumba, L., & Gaceri, P. (2013). “For us it was a learning experience.” European Journal of Training and Development, 37(7), 615–634. https://doi.org/10.1108/ejtd-10-2012-0052
[4] Hameed, S., Mellor, J., Badii, A., Patel, N., & Cullen, A. J. (2007). Factors mediating the routinisation of e-learning within a traditional university education environment. International Journal of Electronic Business, 5(2), 160. 
[5] Zainuddin, Z., & Perera, C. J. (2017). Exploring students’ competence, autonomy and relatedness in the flipped classroom pedagogical model. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 1–12. 
[6] Saad, I. (2017). The role of cooperative learning method in teaching of science subject at elementary school level: an experimental study. Bulletin of Education and Research, 39(2).
[7] Ho, V.-T., Nakamori, Y., Ho, T.-B., & Lim, C. P. (2014). Blended learning model on hands-on approach for in-service secondary school teachers: Combination of e-learning and face-to-face discussion. Education and Information Technologies, 21(1), 185–208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-014-9315-y
[8] Siddiqui, S., Soomro, N. N., & Thomas, M. (2020). Blended learning source of satisfaction of psychological needs. Asian Association of Open Universities Journal, 15(1), 49–67. https://doi.org/10.1108/aaouj-11-2019-0054
[9] K. K., S., & Maskari, A. A. (2019). Student engagement in Blended Learning Instructional Design: An analytical study. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: Gulf Perspectives, 15(2), 61–79.
[10] Asaqli, E. (2020). Online education: A change or an alternative? Creative Education, 11(11), 2384–2403. 
[11] Ganesh, M. P., López-Cabarcos, M. Á., & Vázquez-Rodríguez, P. (2019). Are self-leaders more willing to mentor others? A study among Indian and Spanish University Teachers. Cross Cultural & Strategic Management, 26(2), 223–245. https://doi.org/10.1108/ccsm-04-2017-0047
[12] Zhang, X., Liu, S., Wang, L., Zhang, Y., & Wang, J. (2019). Mobile Health Service Adoption in China. Online Information Review, 44(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1108/oir-11-2016-0339
[13] Mafabi, S., Nasiima, S., Muhimbise, E. M., Kasekende, F., & Nakiyonga, C. (2017). The mediation role of intention in knowledge sharing behavior. VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems, 47(2), 172–193. https://doi.org/10.1108/vjikms-02-2016-0008
[14] Leonard, L. N. K., Cronan, T. P., & Kreie, J. (2004). What influences IT ethical behavior intentions—planned behavior, reasoned action, perceived importance, or individual characteristics? Information & Management, 42(1), 143–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2003.12.008
[15] San Martín, S., & Jiménez, N. H. (2011). Online buying perceptions in Spain: Can gender make a difference? Electronic Markets, 21(4), 267–281. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-011-0074-y 
[16] Tai, W. T. (2006). Effects of training framing, general self‐efficacy and training motivation on trainees' training effectiveness. Personnel Review, 35(1), 51–65. https://doi.org/10.1108/00483480610636786
[17] Leone, C., Lim, J. S., Stern, A., Charles, J., Black, S., & Baecker, R. (2017). Communication technology adoption among older adult veterans: the interplay of social and cognitive factors. Aging & Mental Health, 22(12), 1666–1677. https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2017.1381946
[18] Aharony, N., & Gazit, T. (2019). Factors affecting students’ information literacy self-efficacy. Library Hi Tech, 37(2), 183–196. https://doi.org/10.1108/lht-10-2018-0154
[19] Jungert, T., Koestner, R. F., Houlfort, N., & Schattke, K. (2013). Distinguishing source of autonomy support in relation to workers' motivation and self-efficacy. The Journal of Social Psychology, 153(6), 651–666. 
[20] Schunk, D. H., & Mullen, C. A. (2012). Self-efficacy as an engaged learner. Handbook of Research on Student Engagement, 219–235. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_10
[21] Ganesh, M. P., López-Cabarcos, M. Á., & Vázquez-Rodríguez, P. (2019). Are self-leaders more willing to mentor others? A study among Indian and Spanish University Teachers. Cross Cultural & Strategic Management, 26(2), 223–245. https://doi.org/10.1108/ccsm-04-2017-0047
[22] Drumm, L. (2019). Folk pedagogies and pseudo-theories: How lecturers rationalise their Digital teaching. Research in Learning Technology, 27. https://doi.org/10.25304/rlt.v27.2094
[23] Venkatesh, V., & Morris, M. G. (2000). Why don't men ever stop to ask for directions? Gender, social influence, and their role in technology acceptance and usage behavior. MIS Quarterly, 24(1), 115. 
[24] Shao, Z., & Chen, K. (2020). Understanding individuals' engagement and continuance intention of moocs: The effect of interactivity and the role of gender. Internet Research, 31(4), 1262–1289. https://doi.org/10.1108/intr- 10- 2019-0416
[25] Zander, L., Höhne, E., Harms, S., Pfost, M., & Hornsey, M. J. (2020). When grades are high but self-efficacy is low: Unpacking the confidence gap between girls and boys in Mathematics. Frontiers in Psychology, 11. https:// doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.552355 
[26] Hägg, G., Politis, D., & Alsos, G. A. (2022). Does gender balance in entrepreneurship education make a difference to prospective start-up behaviour? Education + Training. https://doi.org/10.1108/et-06-2021-0204
[27] Opie, T. R., Livingston, B., Greenberg, D. N., & Murphy, W. M. (2018). Building gender inclusivity: Disentangling the influence of classroom demography on classroom participation. Higher Education, 77(1), 37–58. https://doi. org/10.1007/s10734-018-0245-2
[28] Foung, D., & Chen, J. (2019). Discovering disciplinary differences: Blending data sources to explore the student online behaviors in a university English course. Information Discovery and Delivery, 47(2), 106–114. https://doi.org/10.1108/idd-10-2018-0053
[29] Alam, M. Z., Bilal, A. R., Sabir, S., & Kaleem, M. A. (2020). Role of engineering major in entrepreneurial intentions of engineering students: A case of Pakistan. Education + Training, 62(7/8), 965–978. https://doi.org/ 10.1108/et-06-2019-0134
[30] Lai Mooi, T. (2006). Self‐efficacy and student performance in an accounting course. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting, 4(1), 129–146. https://doi.org/10.1108/19852510680001586 https://doi.org/10.1108/ mrr-03-2017-0062
[31] Mafabi, S., Nasiima, S., Muhimbise, E. M., Kasekende, F., & Nakiyonga, C. (2017). The mediation role of intention in knowledge sharing behavior. VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems, 47(2), 172–193. https://doi.org/10.1108/vjikms-02-2016-0008
[32] Taylor, D. G., Voelker, T. A., & Pentina, I. (2011).Towards the acceptance of RSS to support learning: an empirical study to validate the technology acceptance model in Lebanon. International Journal of Mobile Marketing, 6(2), 60–70.
[33] Chereau, P., & Meschi, P.-X. (2021). Deliberate practice of entrepreneurial learning and self-efficacy: The moderating effect of entrepreneurial parental environment as role modeling. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 29(3), 461–483. https://doi.org/10.1108/jsbed-07-2021-0277
[34] Chinnasee, P., Sukonthasab, S., & Lawthong, N. (2020). Development of a health literacy hypertension test in Thailand. Journal of Health Research, 34(6), 475–483. https://doi.org/10.1108/jhr-05-2019-0096
[35] Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (1989). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs.
[36] Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2014). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
[37] Jones, P., Jones, A., Packham, G., Thomas, B., & Miller, C. (2007). It's all in the mix: The evolution of a blended e‐learning model for an undergraduate degree. Journal of Systems and Information Technology, 9(2), 124–142. https://doi.org/10.1108/13287260710839210
[38] Poon, J. (2012). Use of blended learning to enhance the student learning experience and engagement in property education. Property Management, 30(2), 129–156. https://doi.org/10.1108/02637471211213398 
[39] Karimi, S., J.A. Biemans, H., Lans, T., Chizari, M., & Mulder, M. (2014). Effects of role models and gender on students’ entrepreneurial intentions. European Journal of Training and Development, 38(8), 694–727. https://doi.org/10.1108/ejtd-03-2013-0036
[40] Pelegrini, G. C., & Moraes, G. H. (2021). Does gender matter? A university ecosystem, self-efficacy and entrepreneurial intention analysis in Brazilian universities. Gender in Management: An International Journal, 37(2), 271–286. https://doi.org/10.1108/gm-01-2021-0007 
[41] Park, H. (2015). Student perceptions of the benefits of drama projects in University EFL. English Teaching: Practice & Critique, 14(3), 314–334. https://doi.org/10.1108/etpc-06-2015-0047
[42] Siddiqui, S., Soomro, N. N., & Thomas, M. (2020). Blended learning source of satisfaction of psychological needs. Asian Association of Open Universities Journal, 15(1), 49–67. https://doi.org/10.1108/aaouj-11-2019-0054
[43] Jones, P., Jones, A., Packham, G., Thomas, B., & Miller, C. (2007). It's all in the mix: The evolution of a blended e‐learning model for an undergraduate degree. Journal of Systems and Information Technology, 9(2), 124–142. https://doi.org/10.1108/13287260710839210
[44] Foung, D., & Chen, J. (2019). Discovering disciplinary differences: Blending data sources to explore the student online behaviors in a university English course. Information Discovery and Delivery, 47(2), 106–114. https://doi.org/10.1108/idd-10-2018-0053
[45] Biglan, A. (1973). The characteristics of subject matter in different academic areas. Journal of Applied Psychology, 57(3), 195–203. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0034701
[46] Aharony, N., & Gazit, T. (2019). Factors affecting students’ information literacy self-efficacy. Library Hi Tech, 37(2), 183–196. https://doi.org/10.1108/lht-10-2018-0154
[47] Poon, J. (2014). A cross-country comparison on the use of blended learning in property education. Property Management, 32(2), 154–175. https://doi.org/10.1108/pm-04-2013-0026 

Sponsors, Associates, and Links

---

• Advances in Educational Technology and Psychology
  
  
• Curriculum and Teaching Methodology
  
  
• Transactions on Comparative Education
  
  
• Advances in Vocational and Technical Education
  
  
• Adult and Higher Education