Modeling factors for industryexperts’ intention to participate in online scaffolding

  • Authors

    • Aznur Hajar Abdullah
    • Neo Tse. Kian
    • . .
    https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i3.35.29294

    Received date: May 16, 2019

    Accepted date: May 16, 2019

    Published date: April 19, 2026

  • Structural Empowerment, Trust, ICT Anxiety, Perceived Ease of Use, Online Scaffolding.

  • Abstract

    The participation of industry experts in problem-based learning (PBL) activities helps in improving university students’ problem solving skills considering industry experts have more experiential knowledge. Online scaffolding, a form of assistance provided by industry experts via myriad use of ICT applications allows knowledge to be transcendent beyond the classroom boundaries is seen as an opportunity to improve deterioration of problem solving skills among university students. This study intends to investigate factors that may affect the intention of industry experts to provide structural empowerment of resources, information, support and opportunity for learning in online scaffolding. Modeling the right factors via the application of empowerment theory may help to improve understanding on factors that may motivate or hinder industry experts to provide the structural empowerment. Necessary national education policy can be formulated for higher education institutions (HEIs) prior inviting industry experts to be part in online PBL initiative. Based on existing literature, trust, ICT anxiety and perceived ease of use are identified as factors that may influence industry experts to provide structural empowerment.

  • References

    1. Majid, A, (2014). Pembelajaran tematik terpadu. Bandung: PT Remaja Rosdakarya.
    2. Amichai-Hamburger, Y., McKenna, K. Y. A., & Tal, S. A. (2008). E-empowerment: Empowerment by the Internet. Computers in Hu-man Behavior, 24(5), 1776–1789.
    3. Avolio, J. (1998). Perceptions of empowering teaching behaviors and nursing students’ self-efficacy for professional nursing practice. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Western Ontario.
    4. Bixler, B. A. (2007). The effects of scaffolding student's problem-solving process via question prompts on problem solving and intrin-sic motivation in an online learning environment (Doctoral disserta-tion, The Pennsylvania State University).
    5. Blueprint, M. E. (2013). Blueprint 2013–2025. Ministry of Educa-tion Malaysia.
    6. Compeau, D. R., & Higgins, C. A. (1995). Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS quarterly, 189-211.
    7. Embi, M. A. (2011). E-Learning in Malaysian higher education in-stitutions: Status, trends, & challenges. Department of Higher Edu-cation Ministry of Higher Education.
    8. Fono, D., & Raynes-Goldie, K. (2005). Hyperfriendship and be-yond: Friendship and social norms on Livejournal, Association of Internet Researchers (AOIR-6), and Chicago.
    9. Ge, X., & Land, S. M. (2003). Scaffolding students’ problem-solving processes in an ill-structured task using question prompts and peer interactions. Educational Technology Research and Devel-opment, 51(1), 21-38.
    10. Holton, D., & Clarke, D. (2006). Scaffolding and metacognition. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 37(2), 127–143.
    11. Jin, S. A. A. (2012). “To disclose or not to disclose, that is the ques-tion”: A structural equation modeling approach to communication privacy management in e-health. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(1), 69–77.
    12. Jonassen, D., Strobel, J., & Lee, C. B. (2006). Everyday problem solving in engineering: Lessons for engineering educators. Journal of engineering education, 95(2), 139-151.
    13. Kanter, R.M. (1977). Men and Women of the Corporation. New York: Basic Books.
    14. Hatcher, S., & Laschinger, H. K. (1995). Staff nurses' perceptions of job empowerment and level of burnout: a test of Kanter's theory of structural power in organizations. Canadian Journal of Nursing Administration, 9(2), 74-94.
    15. Ledwell, E. A., Andrusyszyn, M. A., & Iwasiw, C. L. (2006). Nurs-ing Students' Empowerment in Distance Education: Testing Kan-ter's Theory. Journal of distance education, 21(2), 78.
    16. Marthandan, G., Jayashree, S., & Yelwa, H. (2013). Acquiring Key Competencies in Malaysia. In Proceedings of 23rd International Business Research Conference. Marriott Hotel, Melbourne, Austral-ia.
    17. Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integra-tive model of organizational trust. Academy of management review, 20(3), 709-734.
    18. Mostelfelder., Al-sulaiti, A. S. (2015). Antecedents of Structural Empowerment and the Relationship between Structural Empower-ment and Performance. Proceedings of the 9th Asia-Pacific Busi-ness Research Conference.
    19. Neo, M., Neo, K. T. K., Tan, H. Y.-J., Kwok, W.-J., & Lai, C.-H. (2012). Problem-solving in a Multimedia Learning Environment: The MILE@HOME Project. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sci-ences, 64, 26–33.
    20. Pata, K., Sarapuu, T., & Lehtinen, E. (2005). Tutor scaffolding styles of dilemma solving in network-based role-play. Learning and Instruction, 15(6), 571-587.
    21. Petronio, S. (2002). Boundaries of privacy. State University of New York Press, Albany, NY.
    22. Salter, M. B. (2013). Crowdsourcing: Student-Driven Learning Us-ing Web 2.0 Technologies in an Introduction to Globalization. Journal of Political Science Education, 9(3), 362–365.
    23. Salo, J., & Karjaluoto, H. (2007). A conceptual model of trust in the online environment. Online Information Review, 31(5), 604-621.
    24. Savin-Baden, M. (2000). Problem-based learning in higher educa-tion: Untold stories. McGraw-Hill International.
    25. Savery, J. R. (2006). Overview of problem-based learning: Defini-tions and distinctions. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 1(1), 3.
    26. Sinclair, B. (2000) Learner autonomy: The next phase? In B. Sin-clair, I. McGrath and T. Lamb (eds.) Learner autonomy, teacher au-tonomy: Future directions. London: Longman. 4-14.
    27. Siu, H. M., Laschinger, H. K. S., & Vingilis, E. (2005). The effect of problem-based learning on nursing students' perceptions of em-powerment. Journal of nursing education, 44(10), 459-469.
    28. Spreitzer, G. M. (1995). Psychological empowerment in the work-place: Dimensions, measurement, and validation. Academy of Man-agement Journal, 38(5), 1442–1465.
    29. Van Raaij, E. M., & Schepers, J. J. (2008). The acceptance and use of a virtual learning environment in China. Computers & Education, 50(3), 838-852.
    30. Wagner, J. I., Cummings, G., Smith, D. L., Olson, J., Anderson, L., & Warren, S. (2010). The relationship between structural empower-ment and psychological empowerment for nurses: a systematic re-view. Journal of nursing management, 18(4), 448-462.
    31. Zimmerman, M. A. (1995). Psychological empowerment: Issues and illustrations. American journal of community psychology, 23(5), 581-599.

  • Downloads

  • How to Cite

    Hajar Abdullah, A., Tse. Kian, N., & ., . (2026). Modeling factors for industryexperts’ intention to participate in online scaffolding. International Journal of Engineering and Technology, 7(3.35), 188-191. https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i3.35.29294