Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

E-Learning Implementation in South Korea: Integrating Effectiveness and Legitimacy Perspectives

  • Published:
Information Systems Frontiers Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

E-learning has the potential to transform public education. Based on a theoretical framework that integrates effectiveness and social legitimacy perspectives, this paper examines e-learning implementation in South Korea, and attributes its success to policies and efforts that address and manage both e-learning technology’s effectiveness and its social legitimacy. The effectiveness of e-learning is enhanced by building efficient e-learning infrastructure, and making continuous standardization efforts, while social legitimacy is gained by establishing a sound regulatory system, applying a socially appropriate online pedagogy, raising public awareness, and building e-learning communities. The results offer valuable lessons for other countries that intend to implement e-learning in the educational sector.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alavi, M., & Gallupe, R. B. (2003). Using information Technology in Learning: Case studies in business and management education programs. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 2(2), 139–153. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMLE.2003.9901667.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, A., Huttenlocher, D., Kleinberg, J., & Leskovec, J. (2014). Engaging with massive online courses. Proceedings of the 23rd international conference on World wide web, 687-698. https://doi.org/10.1145/2566486.2568042.

  • Bates, T. (2001). National strategies for e-learning in post-secondary education and training, International Institute for Educational Planning (Vol. 70): Unesco Paris.

  • Benner, M. J., & Tushman, M. L. (2003). Exploitation, exploration, and process management: The productivity dilemma revisited. Academy of Management Review, 28(2), 238–256. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2003.9416096.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bukhari, T. Z., Khan, J., Shahzadi, I., & Khalid, A. (2014). Mediating role of motivation to learn in determining e-learning outcomes: A conceptual study. International Journal of Information, Business & Management, 6(2), 179–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, R. (2002). Web-based learning versus traditional management development methods. Singapore Management Review, 24(2), 59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Costa, G. J. M., & Silva, N. S. A. (2010). Knowledge versus content in e-learning: A philosophical discussion. Information Systems Frontiers, 12(4), 399–413.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Demirkan, H., Goul, M., & Gros, M. (2010). A reference model for sustainable E-learning service systems: Experiences with the Joint University/Teradata consortium. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 8(1), 151–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P. J. (1991). Constructing an organizational field as a professional project: US art museums, 1920-1940. The new institutionalism in organizational analysis, 267, 292.

    Google Scholar 

  • Downey, S., Wentling, R. M., Wentling, T., & Wadsworth, A. (2005). The relationship between national culture and the usability of an e-learning system. Human Resource Development International, 8(1), 47–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engel, S. S., Crandall, J., Basch, C. E., Zybert, P., & Wylie-Rosett, J. (1997). Computer-assisted diabetes nutrition education increases knowledge and self-efficacy of medical students. The Diabetes Educator, 23(5), 545–549.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eom, S. B., & Ashill, N. (2016). The determinants of students’ perceived learning outcomes and satisfaction in university online education: An update. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 14(2), 185–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Francis, B., Mauriello, S. M., Phillips, C., Englebardt, S., & Grayden, S. K. (2000). Assessment of online continuing dental education in North Carolina. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 20(2), 76–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, J. M., Salasche, S. J., & Harris, R. B. (2001). Can internet-based continuing medical education improve Physicians' skin Cancer knowledge and skills? Journal of General Internal Medicine, 16(1), 50–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hiltz, S. R., & Turoff, M. (2005). Education goes digital: The evolution of online learning and the revolution in higher education. Communications of the ACM, 48(10), 59–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holsapple, C. W., & Lee-Post, A. (2006). Defining, assessing, and promoting e-learning success: An information systems perspective. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 4(1), 67–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, C. S., & Aldrich, H. E. (1998). The second ecology: Creation and evolution of organizational communities. Research in Organizational Behavior, 20, 267–301.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iacovou, C. L., Benbasat, I., & Dexter, A. S. (1995). Electronic data interchange and small organizations: Adoption and impact of technology. MIS Quarterly, 19, 465–485.

    Google Scholar 

  • ITU. (2017). IDI 2017 Rank - ICT Development Index 2017. Retrieved from http://www.itu.int/net4/ITU-D/idi/2017/

  • Keegan, D., Lõssenko, J., Mázár, I., Michels, P. F., Paulsen, M. F., Rekkedal, T., ... Zarka, D. (2007). E-learning initiatives that did not reach targeted goals. Bekkestua: NKI Forlaget. Retrieved March, 26, 2008.

  • KELIA. (2003). Education Information Technology and Standardization Trend Seminar Information - Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Energy. Retrieved from http://www.kelia.org/lu/cop/bbs/BBSMSTR_000000000001/selectBoardArticle.do

  • KELIA. (2007). Presentation of international standardization of educational information (JTC1 / SC36). Retrieved from http://www.kelia.org/lu/cop/bbs/BBSMSTR_000000000001/selectBoardArticle.do

  • KERIS. (2001). Adopting education in the information age: A White Paper. Retrieved from http://lib.keris.or.kr/bbs/list/6?pn=2

  • KERIS. (2002). Adopting education in the information age: A White Paper. Retrieved from http://lib.keris.or.kr/bbs/list/6?searchKind=title&searchKey=2002&dateFrom=&dateTo=&oi=title&os=asc&countPerPage=10

  • KERIS. (2005). Adopting education in the information age: A White Paper. Retrieved from http://lib.keris.or.kr/bbs/list/6?searchKind=title&searchKey=2005&dateFrom=&dateTo=&oi=title&os=asc&countPerPage=10

  • KERIS. (2006). Adopting education in the information age: A White Paper. Retrieved from http://lib.keris.or.kr/bbs/list/6?searchKind=title&searchKey=2006&dateFrom=&dateTo=&oi=title&os=asc&countPerPage=10

  • KERIS. (2012). Adopting education in the information age: A White Paper. Retrieved from http://lib.keris.or.kr/bbs/list/6?searchKind=title&searchKey=2012&dateFrom=&dateTo=&oi=title&os=asc&countPerPage=10

  • KERIS. (2016). Adopting education in the information age: A White Paper. KERIS white Paper, 1. Retrieved from http://lib.keris.or.kr/bbs/list/6?searchKind=title&searchKey=2016&dateFrom=&dateTo=&oi=title&os=asc&countPerPage=10

  • Kim, K.-J., & Bonk, C. J. (2006). The future of online teaching and learning in higher education. Educause Quarterly, 29(4), 22–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, C.-J., & Santiago, R. (2005). Construction of e-learning environments in Korea. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 108–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, H. K., & Myers, M. D. (1999). A sets of principles for conducting and evaluting interpretive field studies in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 23(1), 67–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, M.-C. (2010). Explaining and predicting users’ continuance intention toward e-learning: An extension of the expectation–confirmation model. Computers & Education, 54(2), 506–516.

    Google Scholar 

  • McClelland, B. (2001). Digital learning and teaching: Evaluation of developments for students in higher education. European Journal of Engineering Education, 26(2), 107–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moon, I. (2006). Megastudy's academic star power : With cramming courses almost a necessity for college-bound Koreans, this company is raking it in by putting power profs on the web. Business Week - Bloomberg. Retrieved from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2006-04-11/megastudys-academic-star-power

  • Motiwalla, L., & Tello, S. (2000). Distance learning on the internet: An exploratory study. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(4), 253–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mousannif, H., Khalil, I., & Kotsis, G. (2013). Collaborative learning in the clouds. Information Systems Frontiers, 15(2), 159–165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neumann, P. G. (1998). Risks of E-education. Communications of the ACM, 41(10), 136–136. https://doi.org/10.1145/286238.286255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NIA. (2001). National Informatiztion White Paper. Retrieved from http://www.nia.or.kr/site/nia_kor/ex/bbs/View.do?cbIdx=44086&bcIdx=440&parentSeq=440

  • NIA. (2002). National Informatiztion White Paper. Retrieved from http://www.nia.or.kr/site/nia_kor/ex/bbs/View.do?cbIdx=44086&bcIdx=441

  • NIA. (2012). National Informatiztion White Paper. Retrieved from http://nia.or.kr/site/nia_kor/ex/bbs/View.do?cbIdx=44086&bcIdx=9710&parentSeq=9710

  • NIA. (2014). National Informatiztion White Paper. Retrieved from http://nia.or.kr/site/nia_kor/ex/bbs/View.do?cbIdx=44086&bcIdx=15183&parentSeq=15183

  • NSO. (2013). Statistics reports - private Education Retrieved from http://kosis.kr/statHtml/statHtml.do?orgId=101&tblId=DT_1PE103&vw_cd=MT_ZTITLE&list_id=O151&seqNo=&lang_mode=ko&language=kor&obj_var_id=&itm_id=&conn_path=MT_ZTITLE

  • Ojwang, C. O. (2012). E-learning readiness and e-learning adoption among public secondary schools in Kisumu County. Kenya: University of Nairobi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pantazis, C. (2002). Maximizing E-learning to train the 21st century workforce. Public Personnel Management, 31(1), 21. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=6413253&lang=ko&site=ehost-live–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paris, P. G. (2004). E-learning: A study on secondary Students' attitudes towards online web assisted learning. International Education Journal, 5(1), 98–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, W. W., & DiMaggio, P. J. (2012). The new institutionalism in organizational analysis: University of Chicago Press.

  • Raj, R. (2011). Evaluating the innovation of online learning systems in higher education. International Journal of Management Cases, 13(4), 12–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romiszowski, A. J. (2004). How's the e-learning baby? Factors leading to success or failure of an educational technology innovation. Educational Technology, 44(1), 5–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romiszowski, A. J. (2016). Designing instructional systems: Decision making in course planning and curriculum design: Routledge.

  • Russell, T. L. (1999). The no significant difference phenomenon: A comparative research annotated bibliography on technology for distance education: As reported in 355 research reports, summaries and papers: North Carolina State University.

  • Savenye, W. C., Olina, Z., & Niemczyk, M. (2001). So you are going to be an online writing instructor: Issues in designing, developing, and delivering an online course. Computers and Composition, 18(4), 371–385.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and organizations (Vol. 2): Sage Thousand Oaks, CA.

  • Shah, D. (2018). By The Numbers: MOOCS in 2017 : How has the MOOC space grown this year? Get the facts, figures, and pie charts. mooc-roundup. Retrieved from https://www.class-central.com/report/mooc-stats-2017/

  • Šorgo, A., Verčkovnik, T., & Kocijančič, S. (2010). Information and communication technologies (ICT) in biology teaching in Slovenian secondary schools. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 6(1), 37–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sridhar, S. (2005). E-government--A proactive participant for e-learning in higher education. Journal of American Academy of Business, Cambridge, 7(1), 258–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Srivastava, S. C., & Teo, T. S. H. (2006). Understanding, assessing and conducing interpretative management research. Bangalore, June: IIMB Management Review.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taha, M. (2014). Investigating the success of E-learning in secondary schools: The case of the Kingdom of Bahrain. Citeseer.

  • Teh, G. P. (1999). Assessing student perceptions of internet-bases online learning environments. International Journal of Instructional Media, 26(4), 397.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teo, H.-H., Wei, K. K., & Benbasat, I. (2003). Predicting intention to adopt interorganizational linkages: An institutional perspective. MIS Quarterly, 27, 19–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thong, J. Y. (1999). An integrated model of information systems adoption in small businesses. Journal of Management Information Systems, 15(4), 187–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO. (2004). The first UNESCO prize for use of ICT in education rewards. Retrieved from http://portal.unesco.org/ci/en/ev.php-URL_ID=23666&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_ SECTION=201.Html.

  • UNESCO. (2011). UNESCO Prize for Use of ICT in Education rewards Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/new/en/media-services/single-view/news/2011_unesco_king_hamad_bin_isa_al_khalifa_prize_for_use_of_ict_in_education_rewards_projects_from_germany_and_republic_of_korea/

  • Upadhyaya, K., & Mallik, D. (2013). E-learning as a socio-technical system: An insight into factors influencing its effectiveness. Bus Perspect Res, 2(1), 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wan, Z., Compeau, D., & Haggerty, N. (2012). The effects of self-regulated learning processes on e-learning outcomes in organizational settings. Journal of Management Information Systems, 29(1), 307–340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, M. (2011). Integrating organizational, social, and individual perspectives in web 2.0-based workplace e-learning. Information Systems Frontiers, 13(2), 191–205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, L. C. C., & Bagaka, J. G. (2002). Understanding the dimensions of self-exploration in web-based learning environments. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(3), 364–373.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Y.-S., Wang, H.-Y., & Shee, D. Y. (2007). Measuring e-learning systems success in an organizational context: Scale development and validation. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(4), 1792–1808. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2005.10.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • West, D. M. (2004). E-government and the transformation of service delivery and citizen attitudes. Public Administration Review, 64(1), 15–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2004.00343.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, J.-H., Tennyson, R. D., Hsia, T.-L., & Liao, Y.-W. (2008). Analysis of E-learning innovation and core capability using a hypercube model. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(5), 1851–1866.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods. Beverly Hills: Sage publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, D., & Nunamaker, J. F. (2003). Powering e-learning in the new millennium: An overview of e-learning and enabling technology. Information Systems Frontiers, 5(2), 207–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, D., Zhao, J. L., Zhou, L., & Nunamaker Jr., J. F. (2004). Can e-learning replace classroom learning? Communications of the ACM, 47(5), 75–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, M. A., & Zeitz, G. J. (2002). Beyond survival: Achieving new venture growth by building legitimacy. Academy of Management Review, 27(3), 414–431.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by National Research Foundation of South Korea (2015S1A5B5A02012445).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore

    Thompson S. H. Teo

  2. International Competitive Bidding Institute, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST), 85 Hoegiro, Dongdaemun-gu, 02455, Seoul, South Korea

    Sojung Lucia Kim

  3. American Express, Singapore, Singapore

    Li Jiang

Authors
  1. Thompson S. H. Teo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sojung Lucia Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Li Jiang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sojung Lucia Kim.

Appendices

Appendix 1

Table 3 Principles for conducting interpretive studies
Full size table

Appendix 2 - Interview Protocol (Sample Questions)

General questions

  1. 1.

    How is the progress of e-learning in your country or school?

  2. 2.

    What is your opinion of e-learning?

  3. 3.

    What role does MOE play?

  4. 4.

    Do you think the management of e-learning in school is effective? Please explain.

Student-specific questions

  1. 1.

    When did you start using e-learning websites and which websites do you use?

  2. 2.

    Does your school use e-learning for your lecture during school time? If so, how does the school use it? Please explain.

  3. 3.

    How do you use e-learning websites? Do you have a learning plan or have you developed any learning habits in using the websites? Do your teachers, parents and friends help or influence your use of these websites and if so, how? Please explain.

  4. 4.

    How do you like EBS or other learning websites? Which functions (for example, video clips, radio, Q&A or discussion forums) of the websites do you use most and which do you like most? Why?

  5. 5.

    To what extent do you think that e-learning websites improve your learning? Have you ever encountered any problems in using e-learning?

  6. 6.

    How else do you think these websites can be helpful to you? How do you think they can be improved?

National agency-specific questions

  1. 1.

    What is the main motivation for the e-learning master plan?

  2. 2.

    Who initiated or championed the e-learning implementation?

  3. 3.

    Who are the key players in the e-learning implementation?

  4. 4.

    What are the key challenges faced?

  5. 5.

    How was each challenge resolved?

  6. 6.

    How did you assess the success of the e-learning implementation? What is its impact?

  7. 7.

    What are the future plans for the e-learning implementation? In your opinion, what is the next step to leverage the success of this project (e-learning master plan)?

  8. 8.

    What is the feedback from stakeholders so far? Any unexpected feedback?

Appendix 3

Table 4 Archival data
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Teo, T.S.H., Kim, S.L. & Jiang, L. E-Learning Implementation in South Korea: Integrating Effectiveness and Legitimacy Perspectives. Inf Syst Front 22, 511–528 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-018-9874-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-018-9874-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation