Educational Technology Research and Development

, Volume 65, Issue 6, pp 1495–1521 | Cite as

Understanding motivational system in open learning: Learners’ engagement with a Traditional Chinese-based open educational resource system

  • Wenhao David HuangEmail author
  • Chorng-Guang Wu
Research Article


Learning has embraced the “open” process in recent years, as many educational resources are made available for free online. Existing research, however, has not provided sufficient evidence to systematically improve open learning interactions and engagement in open educational resource (OER) systems. This deficiency presents two challenges to the efficacy of OER systems. First, OER users might not take full advantage of open content since their interactions and experience with open learning systems cannot be optimized. Second, this lack of interaction could discourage the overall usage of OER systems, thus impeding their sustainability. This study addressed both issues by investigating technology acceptance levels among users of an OER portal, MyOOPS, in Taiwan. The study aimed to understand how open learners might be motivated to engage with OER systems. Based on 729 valid responses, the structural equation modeling revealed a lack of learning goal structure and irrelevance of self-efficacy in participants’ motivational systems. The result prompted an urgent need to reexamine existing motivational design thinking in order to address emerging motivational challenges in open and goal-free learning environments supported by OER systems.


Open learning Motivational design Technology acceptance Self-efficacy OER 



The research team greatly appreciates the generous support from Mr. Luc Chu for this study. We also want to acknowledge hundreds of volunteers in keeping MyOOPS operational in this challenging time, in order to continuously share quality open educational resources for those in need.


  1. Abelson, H. (2008). The creation of Open CourseWare at MIT. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17, 164–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alexa (2013). reviews, site info, traffic stats, and related links. Retrieved from
  4. Alkhunaizan, A., & Love, S. (2012). What drives mobile commerce? An empirical evaluation of the revised UTAUT model. International Journal of Management and Marketing Academy, 2, 82–99.Google Scholar
  5. Ames, C. (1992). Classroom: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 261–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Astleitner, H., & Wiesner, C. (2004). An integrated model of multimedia learning and motivation. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 13, 3–21.Google Scholar
  7. Bagozzi, R. P. (2007). The legacy of the technology acceptance model and a proposal for a paradigm shift. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8, 244–254.Google Scholar
  8. Bagozzi, R. P., & Phillips, L. W. (1982). Representing and testing organizational theories: A holistic construal. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27, 459–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy. The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.Google Scholar
  10. Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: John Wiley and Sons.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bouchard, P. (2011). Network promises and their implications. Revista de Universidad y Sociedad del Conocimiento (RUSC), 8. 288 – 302. Retrieved from
  13. Bråten, I., Samuelstuen, M. S., & Strømsø, H. I. (2004). Do student’ self-efficacy beliefs moderate the effects of performance goals on self-regulatory strategy use? Educational Psychology, 24, 231–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Brislin, R. W. (1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1, 185–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Byrne, B. M. (2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  16. Campeau, D. R., & Higgins, C. A. (1995). Application of social cognitive theory to training for computer skills. Information Systems Research, 6, 118–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Carson, S. (2009). The unwalled garden: growth of the Open CourseWare Consortium. Open Learning: The Journal of Open and Distance Learning, 24, 23–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Caswell, T., Henson, S., Jensen, M., & Wiley, D. (2008). Open educational resources: enabling universal education. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning., 9, 1–11.Google Scholar
  19. Chafkin, M. (2013). Udacity’s Sebastian Thrun, godfather of free online education, changes course. Retrieved from
  20. Chiu, C.-M., & Wang, E. T. G. (2008). Understanding web-based learning continuance intention: The role of subjective task value. Information & Management, 45, 194–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. D’Antoni, S. (2009). Open educational resources: reviewing initiatives and issues. Open Learning, 24, 3–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13, 319–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1992). Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use computers in the workplace. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22, 1111–1132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Dron, J. (2007). Designing the undesignable: social software and control. Educational Technology & Society, 10, 60–71.Google Scholar
  25. Dulle, F. W., & Minishi-Majanja, M. K. (2011). The suitability of the unified Theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) model in open access adoption studies. Information Development, 27, 32–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research reading. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  27. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equations with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Foundation of Fantasy Culture and Arts (2017). Mission of Fantasy. Retrieved from
  29. Friedel, J. M., Cortina, K. S., Turner, J. C., & Midgley, C. (2010). Changes in efficacy beliefs in mathematics across the transition to middle school: Examining the effects of perceived teacher and parent goal emphases. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 102–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Galbraith, J. K. (1967). The new industrial state. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  31. Gefen, D., Straub, D. W., & Boudreau, M. (2000). Structural equation modeling and regression: Guidelines for research practice. Communications of the AIS, 4, 1–77.Google Scholar
  32. Gerbing, D. W., & Anderson, J. C. (1988). An updated paradigm for scale development incorporating unidimensionality and its assessment. Journal of Marketing Research, 25, 186–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gollwitzer, P. M. (1999). Implementation intentions. Strong effects of simple plans. American Psychologist, 54, 493–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hannafin, M., Land, S., & Oliver, K. (1999). Open learning environments: Foundations, methods, and models. In C. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models (pp. 115–140). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  35. Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2014). Students’ and instructors’ use of massive open online courses (MOOCs): Motivations and challenges. Educational Research Review, 12, 45–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hilton, J., III, Wiley, D., Stein, J., & Johnson, A. (2010). The four “R”s of openness and ALMS analysis: frameworks for open educational resources. Open Learning, 25, 37–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hu, E., Li, Y., Li, J., & Huang, W. H. (2015). Open educational resources (OER) usage and barriers: a study from Zhejiang University, China. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63, 957–974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Huang, H.-M., & Liaw, S.-S. (2007). Exploring learners’ self-efficacy, autonomy, and motivation toward e-learning. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 105, 581–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Huang, W.-H. D., Lin, M.-F. G., & Shen, W. (2012). Understanding Chinese-speaking open courseware users: A case study on user engagement in an open courseware portal in Taiwan (Opensource Opencourse Prototype System). Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 27(2), 169–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Huijser, H., Bedford, T., & Bull, D. (2008). OpenCourseWare, global access and the right to education * Real access or marketing ploy? International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 9(1), 1–4.Google Scholar
  41. Jordan, K. (2014). Initial trends in enrolment and completion of massive open online courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(1), 133–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1972). Subjective probability: A judgment of representativeness. Cognitive Psychology, 3, 430–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Keller, J. M. (1983). Motivational design of instruction. In C. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: An overview of their current status (Vol. I, pp. 383–434). London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  44. Keller, J. M. (1987a). Strategies for stimulating the motivation to learn. Performance and Instruction, 26, 1–7.Google Scholar
  45. Keller, J. M. (1987b). The systematic process of motivational design. Performance and Instruction, 26, 1–8.Google Scholar
  46. Keller, J. M. (2008). An integrative theory of motivation, volition, and performance. Technology, Instruction, Cognition, and Learning, 6, 79–104.Google Scholar
  47. Keller, J. M. (2010). Motivational design for learning and performance. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Kennett, D. J., & Keefer, K. (2006). Impact of learned resourcefulness and theories of intelligence on academic achievement of university students: An integrated approach. Educational Psychology, 26, 441–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Khalili, L., & Singh, D. (2012). Factors influencing acceptance of open access publishing among medical researchers in Iran. Libri. International Journal of Libraries and Information Services, 62, 326–354.Google Scholar
  50. Kirwan, J. R., Lounsbury, J. W., & Gibson, L. W. (2010). Self-direction in learning and personality: The big five and narrow personality traits in relation to learner self-direction. International Journal of Self-Directed Learning, 7, 21–34.Google Scholar
  51. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York City, NY: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  52. LaRose, R., de Maagd, K., Chew, H. E., Tsai, H.-Y. S., Steinfield, C., Wildman, S. S., et al. (2012). Measuring sustainable broadband adoption: An innovative approach to understanding broadband adoption and use. International Journal of Communication, 6, 2576–2600.Google Scholar
  53. Lee, Y. (2014). Diverging patterns of democratic representation in korea and taiwan: political parties and social movements. Asian Survey, 54(3), 419–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Liyanagunawardena, T. R., Adams, A. A., & Williams, S. A. (2013). MOOCs: A systematic study of the published literature 2008-2012. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 14(3), 202–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). A theory of goal setting and task performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  56. Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey. American Psychologist, 57, 705–717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. McDonald, R. P., & Ho, M.-H. R. (2002). Principles and practice in reporting structural equation analyses. Psychological Methods, 7(1), 64–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Moore, M. G. (2007). The theory of transactional distance. In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of distance education (2nd ed., pp. 89–108). London, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  59. Moore, G. C., & Benbasat, I. (1991). Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation. Information Systems Research, 2(3), 192–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw–Hill.Google Scholar
  61. OCW Consortium (2013). Consortium project showcase. Retrieved from
  62. Open Educational Quality Initiative (OPAL) (2012). Project report. Brussels: Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency. Retrieved from
  63. Pattant, J. (2005). SPSS survival manual: a step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS (2nd ed.). Crows Nest: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  64. Pavon, F., & Brown, I. (2010). Factors influencing the adoption of the World Wide Web for job-seeking in South Africa. SA Journal of Information Management, 12, 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Reigeluth, C. M., & Carr-Chellman, A. (2009). Understanding Instructional Theory. In C. M. Reigeluth & A. Carr-Chellman (Eds.), Instructional-Design Theories and Models, Volume III: Building a Common Knowledge Base. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  66. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-Determination Theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Scheiter, K., & Gerjets, P. (2007). Learner control in hypermedia environments. Educational Psychology Review, 19, 285–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Schunk, D. H. (1991). Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26(3–4), 207–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Segars, A. H. (1997). Assessing the unidimensionality of measurement: A paradigm and illustration within the context of information systems research. Omega, 25, 107–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Siemens, G. (2008). Learning and knowing in networks: Changing roles for educators and designers. ITFORUM for Discussion. Retrieved from
  71. Simpson, O. (2008). Motivating learners in open and distance learning: Do we need a new theory of learner support? Open Learning: The Journal of Open and Distance Learning, 23, 159–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Small, R. (2000). Motivation in instructional design. Teacher Librarian, 27, 29–31.Google Scholar
  73. Song, S. H., & Keller, J. M. (2001). Effectiveness of motivationally adaptive computer- assisted instruction on the dynamic aspects of motivation. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49, 5–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1996). Using multivariate statistics (3rd ed.). New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
  75. Terras, M. M., & Ramsay, J. (2015). Massive open online courses (MOOCs): Insights and challenges from a psychological perspective. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46, 472–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Thompson, R. L., Higgins, C. A., & Howell, J. M. (1991). Personal computing: Toward a conceptual model of utilization. MIS Quarterly, 15, 124–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Van Raaij, E. M., & Schepers, J. J. L. (2008). The acceptance and use of a virtual learning environment in China. Computers & Education, 50, 838–852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. VandeWalle, D. M., Cron, W. L., & Slocum, J. W. (2001). The role of goal orientation following performance feedback. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 629–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Towards a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27, 425–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., Chan, F. K. Y., Hu, P. J. -H., & Brown, S. A. (2011). Extending the two-stage information systems continuance model: Incorporating UTAUT predictors and the role of context. Information Systems, 21, 527–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Wild, J. (2012). OER engagement study: Promoting OER reuse among academics. SCORE fellowship final REPORT. Milton Keynes: Open University. Retrieved from
  82. Wiley, D. (2006). On the sustainability of open educational resources initiatives in higher education. Paper commissioned by the OECD’s Center for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI). Retrieved from
  83. William and Flora Hewlett Foundation (2010). Grants Database. Retrieved from
  84. Williams, M. D., Rana, N. P., Dwivedi, Y. K., & Lal, B. (2011). Is UTAUT really used or just cited for the sake of it? A systematic review of citations of UTAUT. ECIS Proceedings, Retrieve from
  85. Yang, P. (2013). Revitalizing roles of older adult citizens: Successful stories of project history alive. Ageing International, 38(2), 137–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Yoo, S. J., Han, S. H., & Huang, W. (2012). The roles of intrinsic motivators and extrinsic motivators in promoting e-Learning in the workplace: A case from South Korea. Computers in Human Behaviors, 28, 942–950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Educational Communications and Technology 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Education Policy, Organization and Leadership, College of EducationUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignChampaignUSA
  2. 2.Discipline of Technology Management, College of ManagementYuan-Ze UniversityTaoyuanTaiwan, Republic of China

Personalised recommendations