A Comparison of Motivational Value Orientations in Traditional

Classroom Setting and E-learning Courses

Murat Yücelen
Social Sciences Institute, MBA Programs
İstanbul Bilgi University, Turkey
myuce@bilgi.edu.tr

Şebnem Kuzulugil
Department of Public Relations
Istanbul Bilgi University, Turkey
sebnemk@bilgi.edu.tr

Abstract: Universities and management educators have introduced and incorporated a number of
new and innovative e-learning technologies to increase flexibility in course offerings and to enhance
student learning experiences. However, there is need for systematic research in Turkey to examine the
value of using the technology to facilitate learning and student satisfaction. This study investigates the
effects of sub cultural differences on a number of learning outcomes including the student’s perception
of the quality of their learning and overall satisfaction in traditional classroom settings and in e-
learning courses. The authors have tried to identify the characteristics of sub cultures that prefer and
persist in an e-learning environment, and those who prefer the traditional classroom setting. Study
results indicate that there are significant differences between those students who prefer and persist in
an e-learning environment and those who prefer the traditional face-to-face classroom setting.

Keywords: Online Education, Cultural Values, Educational Satisfaction, Achievement Orientation,

Sub-Cultures.

Introduction

Due to fast advances in internet communication technology, the past decade has seen an
increasing number of online education programs and software applications developed at every
level of business life as well as in academia. By 2006 there were more than 1.2 million
students enrolled in online courses only in the US, constituting %7 of the whole student body
(Rovai et al., 2007, p.1). Leading technology companies such as IBM and HP utilize online
tools not only to facilitate communication among their employees but also to train them in
various respects of their work life. Parallel to the world, there is a growing interest in online
education in Turkey, as well. In fact, according to recent research, %7.2 of internet users use
it for education and these are mostly university students (Karakuş et al., 2006, p. 8). On the
other hand, the same research states that almost %56 of the urban population has not heard of
online education, and only %4.8 has ever taken an online course (ibid, p.9). Another
A COMPARISON OF MOTIVATIONAL VALUE ORIENTATIONS

significant finding of the same study is that most people (%42.5) prefer a classroom
environment, whereas %36.6 prefer a blended environment which is composed of classroom
and online learning, and a minority of %19.4 prefers online education (ibid, p.11). These
results, albeit relatively low, point to the fact that there exists a demand for online education
and there is ample room for the development and implementation of such programs in Turkish
educational life. Such programs have been offered in Turkey since 1997 by academic
institutions in the form of graduate and vocational studies as well as by private companies for
certification especially in the IT sector.

With the advent of a multitude of online learning opportunities and formats in academic and
business life, much research has been carried out regarding various aspects of online
education. Some of this research has focused on motivational factors behind the selection of
e-learning versus traditional face to face education (Richardson, 2000; Carrell & Menzel,
2001); Rovai et al., 2007), some others have investigated personal characteristics as a medium
of program selection (Boyd, 2004; Yücelen et al., 2006), and some have attempted to clarify
the link between online education and achievement (Haynes & Dillon, 1999; Summers et al.,
2005; Kickul & Kickul, 2006). Another aspect of the research is aimed at examining the
relationship between cultural characteristics and the effectiveness of e-learning systems
(Branch, 1997; Adeoye & Wentling, 2007).

Turkey is a country where marked sub cultural differences exist due to rapid industrialization
and long standing efforts to modernize a traditional culture. Various segments of the society
have responded to these efforts at varying degrees. The geographic situation of the country
between East and West has also contributed to a culture that incorporates a duality of values.
The e-learning system designs in Turkey are primarily exported from the West. Previous
research has reported that e-learning systems often appear to be tailored to the needs of a
particular cultural group, recognizing the specific learning needs, preferences and styles of a
single perhaps homogeneous group of learners. This finding has more pronounced
consequences in a highly heterogeneous population. Without knowledge of possible sub
cultural differences, e-learning designers and educators would naturally assume that all
students in a course would respond to stimuli and approach the learning process in a similar
manner.

Yücelen & Kuzulugil 2

A COMPARISON OF MOTIVATIONAL VALUE ORIENTATIONS

In this paper, the aim is to investigate the antecedents pertinent to online and on-site MBA
program selection by means of distinguishing between the cultural values of program
participants. To this effect a survey has been prepared based on Schwartz’s cultural values
scale. The main cultural values questioned consist of conformity, tradition, benevolence,
universalism, self-direction, stimulation, hedonism, achievement, power and security.

Research Questions and Hypotheses

While the concept of culture has mostly been used to compare national cultures, some
research that try to identify differences of values within the same culture exist (Kozan, 2002;
Lenartowics & Roth, 2001; Peppas, 2002). At the beginning of the study we presupposed that
there were distinct subcultures-subgroups with different value orientations- within the
national Turkish culture.

Hypothesis 1:
There are distinct subcultures within the sample of graduate Turkish students.

These subcultures with different motivational value orientations are likely to have different
approaches to education and self-development. These differences are expected to manifest
themselves in the students’ choice of program setting, i.e. eMBA or MBA.

Hypothesis 2:
There is a significant difference between subcultures with respect to their preferred
program settings.

Earlier research has shown that in terms of their orientations and approaches to studying,
distance-learning students resemble older campus-based students and differ from younger
campus-based students (Richardson, 2005). Therefore;

Hypothesis 3:
e-MBA students shall be older than campus-based MBA students.

Yücelen et al (2006) have found that perception of peers was significantly more important for
campus based students than for distance-learning students. Based on this finding, we
hypothesized that privacy and self direction would be more important for eMBA students than
for MBA students.

Yücelen & Kuzulugil 3

A COMPARISON OF MOTIVATIONAL VALUE ORIENTATIONS

Hypothesis 4:
There is a significant difference between e-MBA and MBA students with respect to
privacy and self-direction.

Earlier research (Rovai et al, 2007) provides evidence that e-learning students possess
stronger intrinsic motivation than campus-based students. Based on these findings, we
presupposed that eMBA and MBA students would have different achievement and
stimulation dimension scores, as defined by Schwartz (1994). Therefore;

Hypothesis 5:
There is a significant difference between eMBA and MBA students with respect to
achievement and stimulation.

Sampling

The sampling universe consists of students attending online and on-site MBA programs. For
the purpose of this study, the target population was defined as students at Istanbul Bilgi
University MBA Programs, namely Bilgi eMBA (the online program offered both in English
and in Turkish) and Bilgi MBA (the on-site program offered only in English). The target
population was limited to students who have completed at least their first semester and who
were either still enrolled in the programs or have graduated recently.

Among Bilgi eMBA students, 250 people were contacted and a total of 122 valid responses
were received. Among Bilgi MBA students, 150 people were contacted with a return of 50
valid responses. The total return rate amounted to 43 percent.

Instrument

The Schwartz Motivational Values Survey was obtained directly from the author complete
with the scoring and scaling directions. Additional demographic questions were added,
together with questions regarding the rate of success, level of satisfaction and the preferred
choice of program setting.

Motivational values survey includes 57 values, 5 questions are related to satisfaction and
learning outcomes, and 11 questions designed to collect demographic data. The answers to the
questions in Motivational Values Survey were collected on a 9 point Likert Scale where 0 =

Yücelen & Kuzulugil 4

A COMPARISON OF MOTIVATIONAL VALUE ORIENTATIONS

Not important at all, 3 = Important and 6 = Very important. Two additional items are -1 =
Against my principles and 7 = As a guiding principle. The demographic, satisfaction and
learning outcome questions were either open ended or intervallic choices were given to
respondents.

Results

The respondents’ gender was relatively more evenly distributed in the MBA program in
comparison with the eMBA program. A majority of the respondents were in the 26 to 30 age
range and mostly married. About one third of the respondents had an average income around
2000-3000 YTL/month. (Table 1).

Table 1: Demographic Data

MBA eMBA (Eng) eMBA (Tur)

Gender
Female 20 (40.8%) 29 (38.7%) 13 (27.7%)
Male 29 (59.2%) 46 (61.3%) 34 (72.3%)
Total 49 75 47
Age
21-25 14 (28.0%) 16 (21.3%) 3 (6.4%)
26-30 27 (54.0%) 29 (38.7%) 22 (46.8%)
31-35 7 (14.0%) 22 (29.3%) 12 (25.5%)
36-40 1 (2.0%) 6 (8.0%) 6 (12.8%)
41+ 1 (2.0%) 2 (2.7%) 4 (8.5%)
Total 50 75 47
Marital status
Married 41 (82.0%) 39 (52.0%) 22 (46.8%)
Single 9 (18.%) 36 (48.0%) 24 (51.1%)
Other 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (2.1%)
Total 50 75 47
Income
0-1000 YTL 3 (6.1%) 3 (4.1%) 1 (2.1%)
1001-2000 YTL 11 (22.5%) 12 (16.4%) 11 (23.4%)
2001-3000 YTL 13 (26.5%) 27 (37.0%) 14 (29.8%)
3001-4000 YTL 5 (10.2%) 16 (21.9%) 6 (12.8%)
4001-5000 YTL 5 (10.2%) 6 (8.2%) 5 (10.6%)
5000+ YTL 12 (24.5%) 9 (12.3%) 10 (21.3%)
Total 49 73 47
Position
Top management 7 (15.2%) 13 (17.6%) 5 (10.9%)
Middle mgmt 20 (43.5%) 27 (36.5%) 23 (50.0 %)
Technical expert 12 (26.1%) 15 (20.3%) 12 (26.1%)
Supervisor 1 (2.2%) 2 (2.7%) 0
Non-manager 3 (6.5%) 13 (17.6%) 5 (10.9%)
Other 3 (6.5%) 4 (5.4%) 1 (2.2%)
Total 46 74 46

Yücelen & Kuzulugil 5

A COMPARISON OF MOTIVATIONAL VALUE ORIENTATIONS

The first hypothesis was the existence of distinct subcultures among the sample. The data set
of 172 responses to Schwartz Motivational Values Survey formed the basis of identifying the
subcultures within the sample. A cluster analysis was conducted which yielded two clusters of
respondents, supporting our first hypothesis.

The clusters obtained were then used in a discriminant analysis of the values represented in
the survey. This enabled the identification of the values best describing the clusters, thus
making it possible to label and describe the clusters as subcultures. The discriminant analysis
yielded one discriminant function (p=0.05) which correctly classified more than 97% of the
cases into clusters (which was expected because the clusters were derived from the same set
of values in the first place. The strong results only serve as an internal validity check.)
Examining the clusters in terms of the highest discriminant function loadings for the clusters
reveal that;

Cluster 1: Embedded harmonious: People who value world peace, national security and
tradition. Along with these values, these respondents also place a high value on self-
discipline, having a varied life, choosing their own goals and seeking pleasure. This cluster
generally overlaps Schwartz’s Harmony and Embeddedness dimensions, yet includes some
items from the Mastery dimension as well.

Cluster 2: Autonomous: People who value honesty, open-mindedness, real friendship and
enjoy life. Autonomous cluster places minimal value on tradition. This cluster overlaps to a
certain extent with Schwartz’s Autonomy dimension and also includes items from the
Egalitarianism dimension.

The respondents of the survey were asked about the program they were enrolled in and the
type of setting (distance/in-class) they would prefer if they had a chance to repeat their MBA
program. Out of 50 MBA respondents, 48 (96.0%) stated that they would prefer campus-
based training while only 2 were undecided. On the other hand, 47 (38.8%) of the eMBA
respondents showed a preference toward campus-based training. ANOVA shows that the
groups have significantly different setting preferences (Table 2).

Yücelen & Kuzulugil 6

A COMPARISON OF MOTIVATIONAL VALUE ORIENTATIONS

Table 2: ANOVA
Preferred Sum of
Setting Squares df
Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups 11.949 1 11.949 43.162 .000**
Within Groups 46.787 169 .277
Total 58.737 170

Preferred Setting was coded as a nominal variable, so comparing the means with non-
parametric tests revealed that the two clusters were significantly different on their preferred
educational setting when three outlier cases were removed from the data set (Tables 3, 4 and
5), thus supporting our second hypothesis.

Table 3: Ranks

Cluster Number
of Case N Mean Rank Sum of Ranks
Preferred Setting 1 63 67.10 4227.00
2 79 75.01 5926.00
Total 142
Table 4: Nonparametric test statistics a

Preferred
Setting
Mann-Whitney U 2211.000
Wilcoxon W 4227.000
Z -1.308
Asymp. Sig. (2-
.191
tailed)
a Grouping Variable: Cluster Number of Case

Table 5: Moses Test Statistics a

Preferred
Setting
Observed
Control Group 99
Span
Sig. (1-tailed) .000**
Trimmed Control
69
Group Span
Sig. (1-tailed) .000**
Outliers Trimmed from each End
3
a Grouping Variable: Cluster Number of Case

To test our third hypothesis, we compared MBA and eMBA students for differences in age.
The frequency of age intervals provided in Table 1 show that eMBA students tend to be older

Yücelen & Kuzulugil 7

A COMPARISON OF MOTIVATIONAL VALUE ORIENTATIONS

than MBA students. T-tests showed a significant difference for age in the two groups (Table
6). Hence Hypothesis 3 is supported.

Table 6: Group statistics and t-test results for Age

Progra Std.
m N Mean Deviation
Age MBA 122 2.48 1.077
eMBA 50 1.96 .832

Levene's Test for

Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed)
Age Equal variances
9.538 .002 3.426 117.100 .001**
not assumed

A significant difference in privacy value (v21) between the means of MBA and eMBA
students was found for the two programs but not for the self-direction dimension (Table 7). So
our fourth hypothesis is partially supported.

Table 7: t-test for Privacy (v21) and Self-Direction

Std.
Program N Mean Deviation
v21-Privacy MBA 50 4.42 1.703
eMBA 121 5.12 1.664
Self- MBA
50 5.54 .800
Direction
eMBA 122 5.436 1.086

Levene's Test for

Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means

F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed)

v21- Equal
Privacy variances .015 .904 -2.469 169 .015**
assumed
Self- Equal
Direction variances
7.990 .005 .703 122.593 .483
not
assumed

To test our final hypothesis, we ran a t-test comparing Achievement and Stimulation scores of
MBA and eMBA students (Table 8).

Yücelen & Kuzulugil 8

A COMPARISON OF MOTIVATIONAL VALUE ORIENTATIONS

Table 8: t-test for Stimulation and Achievement

Program N Mean Std. Deviation

Stimulation MBA 50 4.2067 1.193
eMBA 122 3.8060 1.649
Achievement MBA 50 4.8650 1.013
eMBA 122 5.0137 1.255

Levene's Test for

Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
Sig. (2-
F Sig. t df tailed)
Stimulation Equal
124.75
variances not 6.315 .013 1.779 .078
1
assumed
Achievement Equal
variances 3.566 .061 -.744 170 .458
assumed

Taking into consideration the finding that not all eMBA students are happy with their choice
of program setting and more than one third (38.8%) would prefer campus-based setting if
given the chance, we conducted the analyses for hypotheses four and five for the preferred
program setting (Table 9). This analysis again provided a partial support; there is a significant
difference of Privacy (v21) scores between those who prefer e-learning and campus-based
learning, but no difference regarding self-direction dimension score.

Table 9: t-test for Preferred Program Setting

Preferred
Setting N Mean Std. Deviation
SelfDirection MBA 95 5.50 .954
eMBA 68 5.49 1.021
Stimulation MBA 95 4.20 1.272
eMBA 68 3.66 1.761
Achievement MBA 95 4.98 1.115
eMBA 68 5.12 1.179
v21-Privacy MBA 95 4.64 1.725
eMBA 67 5.28 1.516

Yücelen & Kuzulugil 9

A COMPARISON OF MOTIVATIONAL VALUE ORIENTATIONS

Levene's Test
for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
Sig. (2-
F Sig. t df tailed)
SelfDirection Equal
variances .420 .518 .110 161 .913
assumed
Stimulation Equal
114.97
variances not 10.800 .001 2.165 .032**
5
assumed
Achievement Equal
variances .010 .920 -.781 161 .436
assumed
v21-Privacy Equal
variances 3.063 .082 -2.449 160 .015**
assumed

Hypothesis five was not supported again. The two groups with different preferred educational
settings do not differ on Achievement scores but differ on Stimulation scores. The interesting
point is, contrary to our expectations, those who prefer campus-based learning had a
significantly higher mean Stimulation score.

Additional analysis revealed some findings not included in the adhoc hypotheses. We found
some differences between English and Turkish language program students in terms of
motivational value dimensions (Table 10). Findings indicate that students who prefer the
Turkish language program tend to be more conformist, have stronger traditional traits and
place more value on security.

Table 10: t-test for English and Turkish programs

Std.
Program N Mean Deviation
Conformity Turkish 47 4.8759 1.10019
English 125 4.2633 1.17587
Tradition Turkish 47 3.4681 1.71199
English 125 2.8928 1.40880
Security Turkish 47 5.4883 1.14185
English 125 4.8648 1.14781

Yücelen & Kuzulugil 10

A COMPARISON OF MOTIVATIONAL VALUE ORIENTATIONS

Levene's Test for

Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
Sig. (2-
F Sig. t df tailed)
Conformity Equal
variances .429 .514 3.097 170 .002**
assumed
Tradition Equal
variances 2.793 .097 2.246 170 .026**
assumed
Security Equal
variances .226 .635 3.179 170 .002**
assumed

Our analysis also revealed that the subcultures we identified differed significantly (p=0.05) in
terms of gender and income level. This finding led us to investigate the differences between
genders in terms of motivational value dimensions. T-test results show that females tend to
score higher on 7 of the 10 value dimensions, namely; Conformity, Tradition, Benevolence,
Universalism, Self-Direction, Achievement and Security.

Table 11: t-test for Dimensions and Gender

Sex N Mean Std. Deviation

Conformity Female 62 4.7836 1.05705
Male 109 4.2179 1.20718
Tradition Female 62 3.4742 1.47548
Male 109 2.8422 1.46010
Benevolence Female 62 5.2419 1.04784
Male 109 4.7127 1.07435
Universalism Female 62 5.2140 1.01827
Male 109 4.7321 1.16034
SelfDirection Female 62 5.6823 .90087
Male 109 5.3261 1.04282
Achievement Female 62 5.2890 1.09589
Male 109 4.7706 1.19327
Security Female 62 5.3629 1.13083
Male 109 4.8711 1.15105

Yücelen & Kuzulugil 11

A COMPARISON OF MOTIVATIONAL VALUE ORIENTATIONS

Levene's Test
for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
Sig. (2-
F Sig. t df tailed)
Conformity Equal
variances 3.091 .081 3.078 169 .002**
assumed
Tradition Equal
variances .000 .993 2.711 169 .007**
assumed
Benevolence Equal
variances .033 .856 3.124 169 .002**
assumed
Universalism Equal
variances 1.101 .296 2.726 169 .007**
assumed
SelfDirection Equal
variances 1.859 .175 2.252 169 .026**
assumed
Achievement Equal
variances .068 .795 2.811 169 .006**
assumed
Security Equal
variances .256 .614 2.703 169 .008**
assumed

Conclusion

In this study, student motivational values affecting online and on-site education were
examined through the use of a questionnaire conducted at Istanbul Bilgi University MBA and
e-MBA programs.

While the concept of culture has mostly been used to compare national cultures, some
research that tries to identify differences of values within the same culture exist (Kozan, 2002;
Lenartowics & Roth, 2001; Peppas, 2002). At the beginning of the study we presupposed that
there were distinct subcultures - subgroups with different value orientations - within the
national Turkish culture. Our expectation was to find three or four subcultures in line with
Kozan’s (2002) study. Running a cluster analysis based on values of the Schwartz
Motivational Values survey, we found two distinct clusters that we named Embedded
harmonious and Autonomous. According to recent research almost %56 of the urban
population has not heard of online education, and only %4.8 has ever taken an online course
(Karakuş et al., 2006, p. 9). This finding may explain our failure in finding more subcultures;
our sample consists of MBA students who already have a certain motivation to pursue higher

Yücelen & Kuzulugil 12

A COMPARISON OF MOTIVATIONAL VALUE ORIENTATIONS

education. Future research with a more heterogenous sample may reveal more than two
distinct subcultures.

Investigating the differences between genders in terms of motivational value dimensions, we

found that females tend to score higher on Conformity, Tradition, Benevolence, Universalism,
Self-Direction, Achievement and Security.

The respondents of the survey were asked about the program they were enrolled in and the
type of setting (distance/in-class) they would prefer if they had a chance to repeat their MBA
program. 96% of the MBA students stated that they would again prefer campus-based training
while 39% of the eMBA students showed a preference toward campus-based training,
indicating they are not fully satisfied with their choice. We also found that eMBA students
tend to be older than MBA students, and place more value on privacy. There were no
differences between eMBA and MBA students with respect to performance (GPA) and
satisfaction.

Additional analysis revealed some findings not included in the adhoc hypotheses. Our
findings indicate that students who prefer the Turkish program tend to be more conformist,
have stronger traditional traits and place more value on security. It is hoped that the results of
this study will be beneficial and useful for further research to develop effective and efficient
online learning systems in Turkey.

References

Adeoye B. & Wentling R.M. (2007). “The Relationship Between National Culture and the
Usability of an E-Learning System,” International Journal on E-Learning, Vol. 6(1), pp. 119-
146

Aygün Z.K. & İmamoğlu E.O. (2002). “Value Domains of Turkish Adults and University
Students,” The Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 142(3), pp.333-351.

Borg, M.O. & Shapiro, S. L. (1996). “Personality Type And Student Performance In
Principles of Economics,” The Journal of Economic Education, Vol. 27(1), pp. 3-25.

Boyd, Drick (2004). “The Characteristics of Successful Online Students,” New Horizons in
Adult Education, Vol. 18(2).

Branch, R. M. (1997). “Educational Technology Frameworks That Facilitate Culturally

Pluralistic Instruction,” Educational Technology, Vol. 37(2), 38–41.

Yücelen & Kuzulugil 13

A COMPARISON OF MOTIVATIONAL VALUE ORIENTATIONS

Carrell, L. & Menzel, K.E. (2001). “Variations in Learning, Motivation, and Perceived
Immediacy Between Live and Distance Education Classrooms,” Communication Education,
Vol. 50(3), pp. 230-240.

Diaz, D. & Cartnal, R. (1999). “Students’ Learning Styles in Two Classes: Online Distance
Learning and Equivalent On-Campus,” College Teaching, Vol. 47(4), pp. 130-135.

Filbeck, G. & Smith, L. L. (1996). “Learning Styles, Teaching Strategies, and Predictors of
Success in Corporate Finance,” Financial Practice and Education, Vol. 6(1), pp. 74-85.

Haynes, K.J.M. & Dillon, C. (1999). “Distance Education: Learning Outcomes, Interaction,
and Attitudes,” Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, Vol. 33 (1), pp.
33-45.

Kickul G. & Kickul J. (2006). “Closing the Gap: Impact of Student Proactivity and Learning
Goal Orientation on E-Learning Outcomes”, International Journal on E-Learning, Vol. 5(3),
pp. 361-372

Kozan M K. (2002). “Subcultures and conflict management style”, Management International

Review, Vol. 42(1), pp. 89-105

Lenartowics T., Roth K. (2001). “Does Subculture Within a Country Matter? A Cross-Culture
Study of Motivational Domains and Business Performance in Brazil,” Journal of
International Business Studies, Vol. 32(2), pp. 305-325.

Merisotis, J. P., & Phipps, R. A. (1999). “What’s the Difference? Outcomes of Distance vs.
Traditional Classroom-Based Learning”, Change, Vol. 31(3), pp. 12-17.

Peppas S.C. (2002). Subcultural Approaches to Management: A Comparative Study of

African and Euro-American Values,” Cross Cultural Management, Vol. 9(2), pp. 45-64.

Richardson, J. T. E. (2000). Researching Student Learning: Approaches to Studying in

Campus-Based and Distance Education. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Richardson J.T.E. (2005). Students’ Perceptions of Academic Quality and Approaches to

Studying in Distance Education,” British Educational Research Journal, Vol. 31(1), pp. 7–27.

Roblyer, M. (1999). “Is Choice Important in Distance Learning? A Study of Student Motives
For Taking Internet-Based Courses at the High School and Community College Levels,”
Journal of Research on Computing in Education, Vol. 32 (1), pp. 157-71.

Rovai A. P., Ponton M. K., Wighting M.J. & Baker J.D. (2007). “A Comparative Analysis of
Student Motivation in Traditional Classroom and E-Learning Courses”, International Journal
on E-Learning, Vol. 6(3), pp. 413-432

Schwartz, S. H. (1994). “Beyond Individualism/Collectivism: New Cultural Dimensions of

Values,” In U. Kim, H.C. Triandis, C. Kagitcibasi, S-C. Choi, & G. Yoon (Eds.),
Individualism and collectivism: Theory, method and applications (pp. 85-119). Newbury
Park, CA: Sage.

Yücelen & Kuzulugil 14

A COMPARISON OF MOTIVATIONAL VALUE ORIENTATIONS

Summers, Jessica J., Alexander Waigandt, and Tiffany A. Whittaker (2005). “A Comparison
of Student Achievement and Satisfaction in an Online Versus a Traditional Face-to-Face
Statistics Class,” Innovative Higher Education, Vol. 29, No. 3.

Yücelen M., Yükseltürk O. & Jular J.S. (2006). Impact Of Student Characteristics On The
Program Choice: A Comparison of Online and On-Site MBA Education. 2nd International
Open & Distance Learning Symposium Proceedings. Eskişehir: Anadolu University Press.

Yücelen & Kuzulugil 15