The Motivation Threshold: Examining the Impact of E-Learning Motivation on Academic Achievement in Higher Education

Abstract

This study examines the relationship between students’ motivation toward e-learning and their academic achievement in Indian higher education. It also investigates whether motivation differs across gender and academic stream (Arts and Science). Data were collected from 600 undergraduate students from five districts of Haryana using the Motivation to Learn Online Questionnaire (MLOQ). Pearson correlation, independent samples t-tests, and one-way ANOVA were employed for data analysis. The findings revealed a significant moderate positive correlation between motivation and academic achievement (r = .41, p < .01). ANOVA results further indicated significant differences in academic performance across motivation levels (F = 52.62, p < .001, η² = .15), with highly motivated students outperforming both moderately and low-motivated peers. These results suggest that higher levels of motivation toward e-learning are associated with better academic performance. No significant differences were observed in overall motivation across gender or academic stream. However, subscale analysis indicated that female students reported higher extrinsic goal orientation and perceived instructor support, while Science students demonstrated higher intrinsic goal orientation and social engagement than Arts students. Overall, the findings highlight the importance of strong motivational engagement in e-learning environments. The study suggests that higher education institutions should incorporate motivational support strategies, self-regulated learning practices, and robust digital infrastructure to enhance students’ engagement and academic success in online learning contexts.

Keywords

• Academic achievement
• Higher education
• Online learning environments
• Gender differences
• Discipline-based differences
• Student motivation
• E-learning

References

1. Adam, M. S., Abd Hamid, J., Khatibi, A., & Ferdous Azam, S. M. (2023). Autonomous motivation in blended learning: Effects of teaching presence and basic psychological need satisfaction. Learning and Motivation, 84, 101908. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2023.101908
2. Alj, Z., & Bouayad, A. (2024). The impact of motivation on MOOC retention rates: A systematic review. Emerging Science Journal, 8, 118–146. https://doi.org/10.28991/ESJ-2024-SIED1-08
3. Alrefaee, S., Afzal, K. M., Alrefaee, Y. M. H. A., & Haimed, S. (2025). A bibliometric analysis of online education research in India (2014–2024): Trends, patterns, and future directions. Discover Education, 4, Article 276. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-025-00677-2
4. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall.
5. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman.
6. Bond, M. (2023). Schools and emergency remote education during the COVID-19 pandemic: A living rapid systematic review. Educational Technology & Society, 26(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.30191/ETS.202301_26(1).0001
7. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
8. Dhawan, S. K. (2020). Online learning: A panacea in the time of COVID-19 crisis. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 49(1), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239520934018

9. Edwards, O. V., & Dai, T. (2023). Differential relations among expectancy, task value, engagement, and academic performance: The role of generation status. Frontiers in Education, 7, 1033100. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.1033100
10. Ferrer, J., Ringer, A., Saville, K., Parris, M. A., & Kashi, K. (2022). Students’ motivation and engagement in higher education: The importance of attitude to online learning. Higher Education, 83(2), 317–338. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-020-00657-5
11. Fowler, S. (2007). The Motivation to Learn Online Questionnaire. University of Georgia, Athens, GA. Fowler, S. (2018). The motivation to learn online questionnaire (Doctoral dissertation). University of Georgia. Retrieved from https://getd.libs.uga.edu/pdfs/fowler_kevin_s_201805_phd.pdf
12. Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410–8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
13. García-Machado, J. J., Martínez-Ávila, M., Dospinescu, N., & others. (2024). How the support that students receive during online learning influences their academic performance. Education and Information Technologies, 29, 20005–20029. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12639-6
14. Hartnett, M. (2016). Motivation in online education. Springer. https://doi: 10.1007/978-981-10-0700-2
15. Ma, H., & Ismail, L. (2025). Bibliometric analysis and systematic review of digital competence in education. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 12, 185. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-04401-1
16. Martin, F., & Bolliger, D. U. (2018). Engagement matters: Student perceptions on the importance of engagement strategies in the online learning environment. Online Learning, 22(1), 205–222. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i1.1092
17. Mekheimer, M. A. (2025). Technological self-efficacy, motivation, and contextual factors in advanced EFL e-learning: A mixed-methods study of strategy use and satisfaction. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 12(1), Article 677. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-04947-0
18. Ong, C.-S., & Lai, J.-Y. (2006). Gender differences in perceptions and relationships among dominants of e-learning acceptance. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(5), 816–829. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2004.03.006
19. Prakasha, S. G., Pramod Kumar MPM, & Srilakshmi, R. (2023). Student engagement in online learning during COVID-19. Journal of E-Learning and Knowledge Society, 19(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.20368/1971-8829/1135500 Reeve, J. (2018). Understanding motivation and emotion (7th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
20. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2020). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology,61,101860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101860
21. Scherer, R., Siddiq, F., & Tondeur, J. (2019). The technology acceptance model (TAM): A meta-analytic structural equation modeling approach to explaining teachers’ adoption of digital technology in education. Computers & Education, 128, 13–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.09.009
22. Schunk, D. H., & DiBenedetto, M. K. (2020). Motivation and social cognitive theory. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 60, 101832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.101832
23. Singh, H., Singh, V. V., Gupta, A. K., & Kapur, P. K. (2024). Assessing e-learning platforms in higher education with reference to student satisfaction: A PLS-SEM approach. International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, 15, 4885–4896. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13198-024-02497-3
24. Yang, Y., Chen, J., & Zhuang, X. (2025). Self-determination theory and the influence of social support, self-regulated learning, and flow experience on student learning engagement in self-directed e-learningFrontiersinPsychology,16,Article1545980. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1545980
25. Zeng, Y., Zhang, W., Wei, J., & Zhang, W. (2023). The association between online class-related enjoyment and academic achievement of college students: A multi-chain mediating model. BMC Psychology, 11, 349. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-023-01390-
26. Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50031-7