Post Graduate Students Readiness for Elearning (A Case Study at the College of Distance Education, University of Cape Coast)

Download Article

DOI: 10.21522/TIJAR.2014.03.01.Art008

Authors : Valentina Arkorful, Nelly Abaidoo


The use of eLearning is changing teaching and learning processes from the sage on the stage to the guide on the side approach. Students can easily access their study materials on an eLearning platform regardless of time and space through digital means. In this research, Post Graduate students of the College of Distance Education (CoDE) of the university of Cape Coast, offering Business and Education programmes were assessed on their readiness for the use of the College of Distance Education’s eLearning platform. A total number of 60 students enrolled for the 2015-2016 Academic Year using the eLearning platform were sampled for the study. A questionnaire was administered to all of the students to assess their perceived self efficacy in the use of ICT tools, their attitude towards eLearning and the perceived barriers to the use of an eLearning platform. Research findings showed that most students had a positive attitude towards the use of ICT tools and were ready to use the eLearning platform.


[1] Attwell, G. (2007). The Personal Learning Environments - the future of eLearning?, eLearning Papers, 2(1).

[2] Bates, A. W. (2005). Technology, e-learning and distance education (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge Falmer.

[3] Cruthers, M. (2008). Education technology gives teachers a wider reach. ETNI, 5. Retrieved October 10, 2015, from

[4] Czubaj, C. A. (2004). Literature review: Reported educator concerns regarding cyberspace curricula. Education, 124(4), 676–683.

[5] Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2002). The paradox of achievement: The harder you push, the worse it gets. In J. Aronson (Ed.), Improving academic achievement (pp. 61-87). New York: Academic Press.

[6] Deniz, L. (2007). İlköğretim Okullarında Görev Yapan Sınıf ve Alan Öğretmenlerinin Bilgisayar Tutumları. The Turkish ELearning Journal of Educational Technology, 4(4).

[7] Evans, T. (2000). Flexible delivery and flexible learning: developing flexible learners? In V. Jakupec, & J. Garrick (Eds.), Flexible learning, human resource and organizational development (pp. 211–224) London: Routledge.

[8] Habitzel, K., Mark, T., Stehno, B., & Prock, S. (2006). Micro-learning; Emerging concepts, practices and technologies after e-learning. Proceeding of Micro learning 2005 Learning & Working in New Media, In conference Series: Innsbruck University press:

[9] Kadel, R. (2005). How teacher attitude affect technology. Learning and Leading with Technology, 39(5), 34-47.

[10] Kozma, R. (2008). National Policies that Connect ICT-Based Education reform to Economic and Social Development, Human Technology, 1(2), 117-156.

[11] Larreamendy-Joerns, J., & Leinhardt, G. (2006). Going the distance with eLearning education. Review of Educational Research, 76(4), 567-605.

[12] McVay, M. (2001). How to be a successful distance learning student: Learning on the Internet. New York: Prentice Hall.

[13] OECD (2009). Education at a glance: OECD Indicators, Paris: OECD Publishing.

[14] Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research, 66(4), 543-578.

[15] Pelgrum, W. & Law, N. (2000). ICT in education around the world: Trends, problems and prospects, Paris: UNESCO, International Institute for Educational Planning.

[16] Saadé, R. G., & Kira, D. (2009). Computer anxiety in e-learning: the effect of computer self-efficacy. Journal of Information Technology Education, 8, 177-191.

[17] Schunk, D., Pintrich, M., & Meece, L. (2008). Self-efficacy and education and instruction. In J. E. Maddux (Ed.), Self-efficacy, adaptation, and adjustment: Theory, research, and application (pp. 281-303). New York, NY: Plenum Pres.

[18] Schunk, D. H., Pintrich, P. R., & Meece, J. L. (2008). Motivation in education (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.

[19] Smith, P. J. (2005). Preparedness for flexible delivery among vocational learners. Distance Education, 21(1), 29–48.

[20] Smith, P. J., Murphy, K. L., & Mahoney, S. E. (2003). Towards identifying factors underlying readiness for eLearning learning: an exploratory study. Distance Education, 24(1), 57–67.

[21] Swan, K. (2004). Learning eLearning: a review of current research on issues of interface, teaching presence and learner characteristics. Paper presented at the Elements of Quality ELearning Education, Needham, MA.

[22] Tsai, C. C., & Lin, C. C. (2004). Taiwanese adolescents’ perceptions and attitudes regarding the Internet: exploring gender differences. Adolescence, 39, 725–734.

[23] Tsai, M. J., & Tsai, C. C. (2003). Information searching strategies in web-based science learning: the role of Internet self-efficacy. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 40(1), 43–50.

[24] UNESCO. (2004). Open and distance learning: Trends, policy, and strategy considerations. Paris: UNESCO.

[25] Varank, I. (2006). A comparison of a computer based and a lecture based computer literacy course: A Turkish case, Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 2(3), 112-123.

[26] Warner, D., Christie, G., & Choy, S. (1998). Readiness of VET clients for flexible delivery including on-line learning. Brisbane: Australian National Training Authority.

[27] Watkins, J. F., & Leigh, S. (2004). Education Evolution: The Need to Keep Pace with Development of K-12 ELearning Learning. Naperville, IL: Learning Point Associates.

[28] Yildirim, S. (2000). Current utilization of ICT in Turkish basic education schools: A review of

[29] Teacher's ICT use and barriers to integration. International Journal of Instructional Media, Vol. 34, No.2, pp. 171-86.

[30] Yuen, H. K., & Ma, W. K. (2001). Gender differences in teacher computer acceptance. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10(3), 365-382.