Volume 4, Issue 4 (December 2025)
IJER 2025, 4(4): 1-17 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Khodarahmi S, Hassanirad T, Safari N, Hafezi H. (2025). Construction and Validation of Online Teaching Literacy Questionnaire in Online Teachers. IJER. 4(4), 1-17. doi:10.22034/ijer.4.4.23
URL: http://ijer.hormozgan.ac.ir/article-1-464-en.html
URL: http://ijer.hormozgan.ac.ir/article-1-464-en.html
1- Assistant Professor, Department of Education, Payame Noor University(PNU), Tehran, Iran. , skh1361@pnu.ac.ir
2- Assistant Professor, Department of Education, Payame Noor University(PNU), Tehran, Iran.
2- Assistant Professor, Department of Education, Payame Noor University(PNU), Tehran, Iran.
Abstract: (1163 Views)
Objective: Given the absence of standardized tools for assessing online teaching literacy, this study aimed to validate an Online Teaching Literacy Questionnaire (OTLQ) designed for online educators. The primary objective was to examine the reliability and validity of the OTLQ as an instrument to measure online teaching literacy among online professors.
Methods: This descriptive-survey and evaluative research followed an instrument-development approach. The study sample consisted of 345 online professors, selected through random sampling. Participants completed the Online Teaching Literacy Questionnaire. The instrument’s validity was evaluated through content validity, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Reliability was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha and test–retest methods.
Results: Findings from factor analysis indicated that the factor structure demonstrated an acceptable fit with the data, and all goodness-of-fit indices supported the proposed model. Reliability analyses revealed Cronbach’s alpha and test–retest coefficients above 0.70, indicating strong internal and external consistency.
Conclusions: The results confirm that the Online Teaching Literacy Questionnaire possesses satisfactory psychometric properties. It can therefore be considered a valid and reliable instrument for measuring online teaching literacy among online educators.
Methods: This descriptive-survey and evaluative research followed an instrument-development approach. The study sample consisted of 345 online professors, selected through random sampling. Participants completed the Online Teaching Literacy Questionnaire. The instrument’s validity was evaluated through content validity, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Reliability was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha and test–retest methods.
Results: Findings from factor analysis indicated that the factor structure demonstrated an acceptable fit with the data, and all goodness-of-fit indices supported the proposed model. Reliability analyses revealed Cronbach’s alpha and test–retest coefficients above 0.70, indicating strong internal and external consistency.
Conclusions: The results confirm that the Online Teaching Literacy Questionnaire possesses satisfactory psychometric properties. It can therefore be considered a valid and reliable instrument for measuring online teaching literacy among online educators.
Type of Study: Original |
Subject:
Educational Studies
Received: 2025/07/16 | Accepted: 2025/10/7 | Published: 2025/12/19
Received: 2025/07/16 | Accepted: 2025/10/7 | Published: 2025/12/19
References
1. Alem, F., Plaisent, M., Zuccaro, C., & Bernard, P. (2016). Measuring e-learning readiness concept: Scale development and validation using structural equation modeling. International Journal of e-Education, e-Business, e-Management and e-Learning, 6(4). [DOI:10.17706/ijeeee.2016.6.4.193-207]
2. Al-Fraihat, D., Joy, M., Masa' deh, R., & Sinclair, J. (2020). Evaluating e-learning systems success: An empirical study. Computers in Human Behavior, 102, 67-86. [DOI:10.1016/j.chb.2019.08.004]
3. Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2008). E-Learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons. [DOI:10.1002/9781119239086]
4. Conley, D. T. (2007). Toward a more comprehensive conception of college readiness. Eugene, OR: Educational Policy Improvement Center.
5. Engin, M. (2017). Analysis of students' online learning readiness based on their emotional intelligence level. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 5, 32-40. [DOI:10.13189/ujer.2017.051306]
6. Essa, G. A., & Magalhães, R. (2018). Barriers to implementing e-learning: A Kuwaiti case study. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 16(1), 120-133. [DOI:10.1080/14767724.2017.1390664]
7. Gašević, D., Dawson, S., & Siemens, G. (2015). Let's not forget: Learning analytics are about learning. TechTrends, 59(1), 64-71. [DOI:10.1007/s11528-014-0822-x]
8. Gunn, H. (2016). Virtual libraries supporting student learning. School Libraries Worldwide, 8, 27-37. [DOI:10.29173/slw7108]
9. Hagos, Y., & Negash, S. (2014). The adoption of e-learning systems in low income countries: The case of Ethiopia. International Journal for Innovation Education and Research, 2(10), 79-84. [DOI:10.31686/ijier.vol2.iss10.249]
10. Hidayat, D. R., & Hamrat, N. (2020). Psychometric properties and construct validity of Online Learning Readiness Scale (OLRS) Indonesian version. In 2020 6th International Conference on Education and Technology (ICET) (pp. 97-101). [DOI:10.1109/ICET51153.2020.9276592]
11. Holley, D. (2016). Which room is the virtual seminar in please? Education + Training, 44(3), 112-121. [DOI:10.1108/00400910210424283]
12. Hong, J. C., Lee, Y. F., & Ye, J. H. (2021). Procrastination predicts online self-regulated learning and online learning ineffectiveness during the coronavirus lockdown. Personality and Individual Differences, 174, 110673. [DOI:10.1016/j.paid.2021.110673]
13. Hung, M.-L., Chou, C., Chen, C.-H., & Own, Z.-Y. (2010). Learner readiness for online learning: Scale development and student perceptions. Computers & Education, 55(3), 1080-1090. [DOI:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.05.004]
14. James, M. L. (2012). Delivering the MBA via the Internet: Where do we begin? Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 1, 41-46.
15. Morris, L., Wu, S., & Finnegan, C. (2005). Predicting retention in online general education courses. The American Journal of Distance Education, 19(1), 23-36. [DOI:10.1207/s15389286ajde1901_3]
16. Mutiaradevi, R. (2009). Measuring e-learning readiness in the Forestry Research and Development Agency of Indonesia [Master's thesis]. Victoria University of Wellington. http://hdl.handle.net/10063/1067
17. Mutuku, C. K., & Mathooko, P. (2014). Effects of organizational communication on employee motivation: A case study of Nokia Siemens Networks Kenya. International Journal of Social Sciences and Project Planning Management, 1(3), 28-62.
18. Njenga, J. K. (2018). Sociocultural paradoxes and issues in e-learning use in higher education Africa. [Publication details incomplete.] [DOI:10.1080/14767724.2017.1390664]
19. Oketch, H. A. (2014). E-learning readiness assessment model in Kenya's higher education institutions: A case study of University of Nairobi. University of Nairobi, 5(6), 29-41.
20. Oye, N. D., Iahad, N. A., Madar, M. G., & Rahim, A. b. (2012). The impact of e-learning on students' performance in tertiary institutions. International Journal of Computer Networks and Wireless Communications (IJCNWC), 2(2), 121-130.
21. Pardo, A., & Siemens, G. (2014). Ethical and privacy principles for learning analytics. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(3), 438-450. [DOI:10.1111/bjet.12156]
22. Raj, S. (2004). Distance education (2nd ed.). Delhi, India: Publishing House Delhi.
23. Rosé, C. P., Ferschke, O., Tomar, G., Yang, D., Howley, I., Aleven, V., Siemens, G., Crosslin, M., Gašević, D., & Baker, R. (2015). Challenges and opportunities of dual-layer MOOCs: Reflections from an edX deployment study. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL 2015, Vol. 2, pp. 848-851). International Society of the Learning Sciences.
24. Sabah, N. M. (2013). Students' attitude and motivation towards e-learning. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Applied Sciences Gaza-Palestine (pp. 1-6).
25. Salloum, S. A., Al-Emran, M., Shaalan, K., & Tarhini, A. (2019). Factors affecting the e-learning acceptance: A case study from UAE. Education and Information Technologies, 24(1), 509-530. [DOI:10.1007/s10639-018-9786-3]
26. Siemens, G. (2008). Learning and knowing in networks: Changing roles for educators and designers. ITFORUM for Discussion, 27(1), 1-26.
27. Siemens, G. (2012). Orientation: Sensemaking and wayfinding in complex distributed online information environments (Doctoral dissertation, University of Aberdeen).
28. Siemens, G., & Gašević, D. (2012). Guest editorial - Learning and knowledge analytics. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 15(3), 1-2.
29. Siemens, J. C., Smith, S., Fisher, D., Thyroff, A., & Killian, G. (2015). Level up! The role of progress feedback type for encouraging intrinsic motivation and positive brand attitudes in public versus private gaming contexts. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 32, 1-12. [DOI:10.1016/j.intmar.2015.07.001]
30. Siemens, L., Althaus, C., Stange, C., Seaborne, K., & Doner, S. (2010, June). Privacy, security and confidentiality on student engagement in online learning environments: The University of Victoria experience. In Congress 2010 - Canadian Society for the Study of Higher Education.
31. Smith, P. J., Murphy, K. L., & Mahoney, S. E. (2003). Towards identifying factors underlying readiness for online learning: An exploratory study. Distance Education, 24(1), 57-67. [DOI:10.1080/01587910303043]
32. Thomas, D. (2021). The relationship among academic dishonesty, e-learning readiness, and procedural justice. Human Behavior, Development and Society, 22(3). ISSN 2651-1762.
33. Watkins, R., Leigh, D., & Triner, D. (2004). Assessing readiness for e-learning. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 17(4), 66-79. [DOI:10.1111/j.1937-8327.2004.tb00321.x]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons - Attribution 4.0 International. |
