Journal Search Engine
Search Advanced Search Adode Reader(link)
Download PDF Export Citaion korean bibliography PMC previewer
ISSN : 2092-674X (Print)
ISSN : 2092-6758 (Online)
Asia-Pacific Collaborative education Journal Vol.6 No.1 pp.77-97

Measuring Knowledge Transfer As Learning Outcomes Using Electronic Media

Korawan Suebsom, Zulkhairi Md. Dahalin
Dr. Korawan Suebsom is a Lecturer, Faculty of Education, Nakhon Si Thammarat Rajabhat University ,
Zulkhairi Md. Dahalin is a professor of
College of Arts and Science, Universiti Utara
Received Date: April 2, 2010, Revision received Date: May 28, 2010, Accepted Date: June 11, 2010


This paper proposes using learningoutcomes as means to measure knowledgetransfer. It is based on a study toassess the effectiveness of knowledgetransfer using the knowledge managementconcept of externalization by meansof weblog access. In the knowledge era,knowledge transfer from the instructorto learners is important since the goalof educational system is the learners gainingthe knowledge through the processof knowledge transfer from the instructor.To address the assumption, the studywas conducted both quantitatively andqualitatively and collected data from therespondents. For quantitative analysis,the author surveyed measuring differentvariables targeting 326 undergraduatestudents randomly sampled, and the multiplechoice test using 5- point Likertscale. The reliability analysis wasanalyzed. For qualitative analysis, theauthor collected data from 60 students’weblog.Studies have shown that knowledgetransfer can be problematic, and an effectivetransfer of knowledge can be difficult.The difficulty arises when the transferredknowledge becomes ambiguous, disrupted(hence incomplete), and distributedall over (making it difficult tolink them together. Five hypotheses wereformulated to examine the relationshipbetween key characteristics of knowledgeand learning outcome, in addition to contentanalysis on the externalized knowledgein the form of learners’ weblogs.The findings revealed some significantresults involving the key characteristicsof knowledge. The implication from thisstudy can contribute much to the instructorsand learners in knowing whatknowledge that the instructor can transferto learners and what knowledge is gainedby learners as learning outcomes. In addition,the learning outcomes can tell theinstructor to search for the right methodologiesfor improving the knowledgetransfer to learners.


1. Introduction

 Knowledge includes both experience and understanding by learners in the educational system and the information artifacts such as homework, documents, projects and reports available within the university and the world outside (Nonaka et al.,2000; Argote et al.,2000). Knowledge can exist in two primary forms, explicit knowledge and tacit knowledge. Explicit knowledge is expressed and transferred in the form of documents and systematic methods by way, of rule and procedure (Nonaka et al, 1995; Gouza,2006). Tacit knowledge is highly personalized and hard to formalize, It is embedded in the human mind and body as ideas, experiences, insights and skills.

 Knowledge transfer is a part of knowledge management and the education knowledge transfer is significant and useful since the goal of education is to improve the abilities and skills of learners as related to professional application (Simon & Soliman, 2003). The problem of transferring knowledge, as such, includes transferring learning experiences from an individual’s memory. The success of knowledge transfer, in the educational system does not only depend on the instructors and learners but also on the factors that can cause problems in knowledge transfer such as characteristics of knowledge, and the methods of knowledge transfer used (Gouza,2006). The characteristics of knowledge transfer comprised of knowledge ambiguity, knowledge disruption and knowledge distribution (Newell,2006) and will be described in the literature review section. This study used an assessment model to provide the important feedback at each stage of the knowledge transfer process. The assessment describes the learning outcome and the feedback obtained from the transferred knowledge, which represents knowledge gained and effectiveness of knowledge transfer itself. Therefore, the purpose of this study is assessing learning outcome in knowledge transfer from the instructor to learners and investigates the key characteristics of knowledge and their relationship to learning outcomes. The next section describes the literature review.


 Knowledge transfer is important in the educational system since knowledge transfer is the process of transmitting knowledge such as experience and lesson learned from the instructor to learners. According to Kennedy (2007), the goal of education is not only the acquisition of new knowledge but also the ability to retrieve that knowledge and apply it to new and novel situations. Therefore, assessing learning outcome from learners is important in education because the learning outcome can tell the instructor the type of knowledge that is transferred to the learners and whether it will be useful to the learners in preparing themselves for studies in the classroom.

2.1 Knowledge Transfer

 Knowledge transfer involves communications between individuals in the transfer (Abilino et al.,2004). It can mediate by the technology in the translation of information. The study of knowledge transfer is necessary to understand and to see how knowledge transfer between the instructor and learners occurred so that the problems associated with the characteristics of knowledge can be better understood and hopefully resolved. (Gouza,2006).

2.2 Learning Outcomes

 According to Shuell and Farber (2001) in the educational system teaching need to be improved by measuring learners’ familiarity with technology as well as their learning activities and learning outcome on a more fine-grained and theoretically motivated level and by mean of objective measurements. For this study the learning outcome is a dependent variable which comprised of the perception of learners, the behaviors of learners (attitude and practice), the knowledge gained and the satisfaction of tools and teaching techniques. These will be described next.

2.2.1 Learners’ Perception

 Most people assume everyone sees the world the same way. This can be expected because people are not able to compare what they see to what someone else see (using language to describe visuals is inherently biased). This wildly accepted assumption however is inaccurate. There is evidence that each person’s perception of the world is different only in minor way (Mosher, 1998).

 The perception can be hearing, vision and smell, each involve different neurons of each individual (Little, 1999). However, the perception may not be what you think it is. Perception is not just a collection of inputs from our sensory system. Instead, it is the brain’s interpretation of stimuli which is based on an individual’s genetic and past experiences Therefore, perception is actually a message constructed using outside inputs, inner-neuron processes and past, relevant information stored in the brain (Mosher, 1998). While Gerzina et al., (2003) studied the correlation between learning and perception of the students in Dentistry course. They found that the students’ perception is significance to the learning system. In addition, Warren et al., (2005) studied adult learners’ perception of affective agents; they suggest that there are three factors that can improve learners’ perception in learning process. The first is learners’ perception of the agent that refers to learners’ reaction toward the agent’s: emotion, facial expression, gaze, image, voice and initial. The second factor is learners’ perception of self. This refers to learners, nervousness, anxiety, confusion, frustration and confidence while interaction with the agents. Finally, learner-agent social interaction refers to the agent’s feedback, overall nature and manner and support and encouragement.

 However, this study concentrates on the learners’ perception. After they have received the knowledge transfer from the instructor, so, the learners’ perception and the feedback from learners can help the instructor to improve the quality of knowledge transfer. Therefore, this study emphasized on the learners’ perception after they perceived knowledge from the process of knowledge transfer from the instructor. The next section will describe the attitude of learners.

2.2.2 Attitude of Learners

 According to Klausmeier (1985) attitude influence how well learners learn and how they behave, the instructor aid learners in learning the attitudes that facilitate subject matter learning and that promote healthy interpersonal relations among learners. Knowledge is precondition of attitude formation (Kaiser et al., 1999), and the level of knowledge is one of several factors affecting attitude in children (Kellert & Westervelt, 1980). A significant relationship between knowledge and attitude concerning the environment has been found in several studies (Tikka et al., 2000; Weaver, 2002). Knowledge may be only one of many predictors of attitude. There is debate on the role of knowledge in attitude formation but is beneficial to determine whether or not learning system on a student’s attitude.

 Furthermore, Hilton (2005) state that, increased knowledge of learners can lead to environmentally sensitive attitudes which may in turn yield improved decision making regarding an environmental issue-nonnative plant and their control. Attitude is important in learning management and, according to Breeze (2002) purpose attitude toward learners among Spanish university students and British university, the researcher found that the learners feel responsible for their learning and had motivated by factor other than examinations. The learners need the guidance and motivation from the instructor. They also need the classroom structure to provide discipline and the social environment to give them opportunities for interaction. At the same time the learners will change their representations of their role in the learning process and gradually attain maturity as autonomous learners. Burger and Blignaut (2004) studied the computer attitude of the students with a computer literacy. They found that the relationship between computer experience and attitude was positive. This means that as users gain more experience on computer their computer confidence and computer liking decreased while their computer anxiety increased.

 Jones and Jones (2005) a comparison of teacher and student attitude from using web-based course management software, after that the results indicated that the attitudes of both faculty and students were positive and they felt confident in their ability to use the web-based tools and considered themselves computer literate. However, the researchers suggest that the faculty significantly more than students, believed both teacher-student and student- student communication was facilitated. Therefore, students much more than faculty felt that had improved students learning. Furthermore, Gerjets and Hesse (2005) stated that attitude of learners can be expected to influence learners’ activities in interactive learning environment in terms of goals and processing strategies they will engage in when confronted with a particular learning environment. For this study the attitude means the feeling of the learners after the knowledge transfer from the instructor to learners has been finished.

 The next section will describe the practice of learners.

2.2.3 Practice of learner

 The practice of learners means the skills of learners to use the technology for supporting their study. The study emphasized on the behavior of learners and learning environment as factors that affect practice of learners. According to Lowyck et al., (2005) the major problem in learning environments is there seem to be an empirical gap between the expected effect of the environment and their actual power in terms of learning outcome. However, the behavior of learners and learning environment had influenced the skills and practice of learners when the instructor transfer knowledge to learners by using the technology, and allow the learner to apply the knowledge from their study with the project or assignment.

2.2.4 Knowledge Gain

 Knowledge gain means the knowledge that learners have understood through the process of knowledge transfer from the instructor to learners. Ibrahim et al., (2006) studied knowledge gain between students receiving structured versus student- directed learning. They found that the knowledge gained by learners from the two types of learning; receiving structured and student direct learning are different.

2.2.5 Satisfaction of Tools and Teaching Techniques That Used By the Instructor

 Martin (1991) studied the satisfaction of tools and teaching in Agricultural education. He purposes to seek the perception of practicing of students which using teaching methods, tools and considered effective of teaching, tools. He found that the quality use of tools and teaching techniques can contribute knowledge and improving learning as an equal emphasis on the use of a variety of teaching and learning methods. Tools and teaching techniques is important in the process of knowledge transfer from the instructor and learners. However, Lee and Yeap (2005) notes that the effective of tools and teaching techniques is depends on the effective facilitation of communication, and interaction among students, lectures and course management. Schmidt and Brown (2004) found that tools and teaching techniques can increase learners’ perception and can be used to enhance of quality of a combined learning environment. The satisfaction of tools and teaching techniques is directly impact the students’ outcome (Nath & Anderson, 2007). The next section describes the use of weblog as a tool to externalize knowledge in the form of learning outcome.

2.3 Using Weblog to Externalize Knowledge

 The convenient immediate online technology of weblog or “blogs” can be used in the transfer of knowledge from the instructors to learners. Weblog can facilitate learners' reflective critical thinking through the transparent use of the Internet to publish their work for self-reflection as well as for peer consideration (Perschbach, 2006). Weblog is a mechanism for learners to reflect their knowledge and feedback from the process of knowledge transfer from the instructors, and can be done anywhere and at anytime. In the research that was carried out during the second semester of 2007 to 2008, 60 students from an Innovation learning subject from Nakhon Si Thammarat Rajabhat University have developed their own blogs. These students had learned the fundamentals of using computers and had undergone introductory courses in the internet and basic computer technology. Following these courses, students were assumed to be computer literate and were competent in using technology for learning. Using this knowledge they were able to externalize the knowledge transfer from the instructors and externalize the knowledge through their blogs. The highlighting weblogs, in this study, can be described as follows. Although weblogging is a new technology, this technology enables the sharing of knowledge by both instructors and learners alike without allowing the barriers of time and place to limit learning, enabling learners to become active participants in his or her personal learning process. Additionally, the blogging learner provides and receives comments and links from others, thus creating a virtual community for knowledge gathering. Access to the resources of the world is revolutionizing the paradigm of learning (Perschbach, 2006). However, in the study of knowledge transfer, looking at the problems involved in transferring knowledge is not enough. The effectiveness of knowledge transfer from the source (the instructors) to recipient (learners) is equally important. This paper also focuses on the three key characteristics of knowledge transfer, the problems involved in knowledge transfer and factors that can affect an effective knowledge transfer from the instructors to learners. This will be discussed in the following section.

2.4 Characteristics of Knowledge

 This paper describes the three key characteristics of knowledge as the independent variables, then suggests an assessment model to assess the knowledge transfer from the instructor to learners and shows the results of assessing knowledge transfer known as learning outcomes. The transfer of knowledge occurs when knowledge transfer is diffused from one source to another by storing or sharing. The characteristics of knowledge that can cause knowledge to become problematic are knowledge ambiguity, knowledge disruption and knowledge distribution. However, several researchers have identified the characteristics of knowledge transfer as follows. According to Szulanski (1995), knowledge ambiguity can be a significant predictor of stickiness through all phases of the knowledge transfer. Simonin (1999) states that, the difficulty in learning from others relates to the degree of knowledge ambiguity. Knowledge ambiguity refers to the underlying notion of knowledge transferability, and the tacitness of knowledge, specificity of knowledge and complexity of knowledge will increase knowledge ambiguity. Manski (1999) defines that knowledge ambiguity affects decision making and he suggested that knowledge ambiguity can be treated by using nonparametric analysis to determine the nature of knowledge. Knowledge ambiguity also relates to the speed of learning, the strategy and the skills that will make it difficult to transfer knowledge, since the skills are embedded in humans and difficult to explain to others. Knowledge disruption occurs because learners come from different backgrounds, different cultures, have different perspectives and exhibit different behavior. Net Industries (2001) reported that knowledge can be disruptive when the students externalize behavior disorders such as attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, and emotional or internalizing behavior such as anxiety and depression. In addition, Hanley (1994) states that the learning environment can make knowledge become disruptive because it is necessary for the instructor to engage the students’ interest before taking on the role of assistant as student direct their own learning. Newell (2006) reported that knowledge can be disruptive, since, people had investment in their knowledge and knowledge is a source of power, therefore changes in practice that undermine one’s knowledge will be resisted. The third characteristics, knowledge distribution can cause a problem in organizations; since the organization does not capture the knowledge from the personnel mind into a database (Carley, 2002). In addition, knowledge distribution can cause problems to knowledge transfer because learners cannot possess all the body of knowledge and knowledge is distributed in several places and people use the knowledge in different processes (Newell, 2006).


 The study was both quantitative and qualitative and used the instrument to collect data from the respondents. The reliability analysis was analyzed from two parts of the instrument. The first part is independent variable and the second part is dependent variable. The independent variables are the characteristics of knowledge transfer; knowledge ambiguity, knowledge disruption and knowledge distribution. These variables were illustrated in the Cronbach alpha from .743, .682 and .897 respectively. The dependent variables are the learning outcome that consists of five variables; attitude of learners, practice of learners, knowledge gained from learners, tools and teaching techniques by the instructor and a multiple choice test. These variables were illustrated the Cronbach alpha from .712, .875, .911, .819 and .732 respectively. For the independent and dependent variables the study used 5- point Likert scale for measuring the data.

 In addition, the multiple choice test was evidenced by the four experts from NSTRU who selected the undergraduate students from last semester to answer the questions. Then the data was computed into Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) and the author selected the means of the items were ranged from 0.20 to 0.80. The multiple choice test was retained to 20 items, therefore, the results of the multiple choice test was appropriate and useful with this study. Table 1.1 illustrates the reliability of the instrument.

 Table 1 shows the reliability of all variable of the study. There are 3 independent variables via ambiguity, disruption and distribution and 5 dependent variables are attitude, practice, knowledge gain, tools/teaching and multiple choice. The study used simple random sampling (Jennings, 2001). The sample size was 326 respondents which taken from the undergraduate students at Nakahon Si Thammarat Rajabhat University (NSTRU), Songkhla Rajabhat University and Taksin University in southern Thailand. The data were analyzed show the learning outcomes from the process of knowledge transfer. The study examined and the relationship with the three key characteristics of knowledge (knowledge ambiguity, knowledge disruption and knowledge distribution) and their affect on learning outcome.

Table 1 the reliability of the instrument

 For qualitative analysis, the author collected data from 60 students’ weblog. The students designed their own blog from the open-source package supported by the University. They externalize their knowledge and feedback of knowledge transfer from the instructor into weblog during November, 2007 to the end of March, 2008. There were 898 entries during curriculum months which represented the knowledge and feedback of learners from the process of knowledge transfer.

 The data from learners’ blog were in Thai language and translated into English language by the bilingual person who are the expert in Thai and English language. After that, the data was input into the software program which used in content analysis and the data will be showed in the finding of the study.


 This study shows the research findings were contained 2 parts were quantitative data and qualitative data. Based on the quantitative data the five hypotheses have formulated as follows.

Hypothesis 1: knowledge ambiguity affects learners’ perception

 Knowledge ambiguity is one of the three key characteristics of knowledge that make knowledge transfer difficult and also affects the externalization process. This hypothesis was formulated to determine whether knowledge ambiguity affects the perception of learners. Hypothesis 1 was examined the relationship between knowledge ambiguity and learner’s perception. The study used simple regression to test this hypothesis; the model from regression analysis reported that knowledge ambiguity is significantly related to learner’s perception. The Pearson Correlation showed .618 of the relationship between knowledge ambiguity and learner’s perception. The model was significant at the p<.01 level (F=77.17, R2 =.382). Knowledge ambiguity can explained 38.2 percent of variance in learner’s perception. Accordingly, Hypothesis 1 which state that knowledge ambiguity is significantly related to learner’s perception is supported. The study provides support for Szulanski (2003) indicated that knowledge ambiguity was a statistically significant barrier to knowledge transfer and affected the learner’s perception. In addition, the complexity of knowledge had increased vague and made it difficult to understand the meaning of knowledge (Simonin, 1999). Therefore, this study can summary that in the knowledge transfer from the instructor to learner, knowledge ambiguity is difficult and made knowledge transfer problematic and affect learner’s perception.

Hypothesis 2: Knowledge disruption affects behavior of learners.

 Knowledge disruption can be the disruptive behavior of learners in using the technology influenced by the learning environment in the form of attitudes among learners. This hypothesis attempts to examine the relationship between knowledge disruption and behavior of learners. The study used a simple regression to test this hypothesis. The model from regression found that knowledge disruption was not significantly related to behavior of learners. The regression model, which relates the independent variable of knowledge disruption and independent variable of behavior of learners (attitude and practice) shows the score of the standard coefficient beta as being equal to .002 (t=.029, p>.05). It shows that knowledge disruption was not affected by behavior of learners. This means that the power of knowledge disruption to this regression equation is at a low level because during the process of knowledge transfer from the instructor to learners, the learners felt happy to use the technology in the classroom such as searching information to support their work and discuss with the instructor. Therefore, the knowledge disruption was not affect the behavior of learners in the process of knowledge transfer from the instructor to learners. Accordingly, Hypothesis 2 is not supported.

Hypothesis 3: Knowledge distribution affects knowledge gained

 Knowledge distribution can make knowledge transfer problematic and affect externalization because knowledge is distributed in several places and people having the knowledge can use the knowledge in different ways and different processes. This hypothesis attempts to investigate the effect between knowledge distribution and knowledge gained from the process of knowledge transfer. The model of a linear regression reported that the result with knowledge distribution is significantly related to knowledge gain. The model is significant at the p<.01 level (F= 276.25, R2 = .688) and explains additional 68.8 percent of variance in the knowledge gain has been influence and significantly explained by knowledge distribution. Accordingly, Hypothesis 3 is supported. This study supports Alavi and Tiwana (2002), who note that knowledge distribution becomes difficult within the process of knowledge transfer from the instructor to learners while, Charley (2002), states that knowledge distribution is a problem in the classroom since the learners are not able to possess or capture all of the knowledge from the instructor in the classroom or at any other places. Likewise Pfister et al., (2000), indicate that knowledge is distributed across different persons as well as embodied in external artifacts. Distributed knowledge is difficult for learning as activities that transfer knowledge from many sources and yield a corpus of socially shared knowledge, thus making it is difficult for learners to gain the knowledge that is needed. However, the process of knowledge transferred from the instructor is important to show the understanding of learners since understanding is one of the most cherished goals in education and transference for understanding can bring about knowledge by requiring learners to manipulate knowledge in various ways.

Hypothesis 4: Knowledge distribution affects the satisfaction of tools and teaching techniques used by the instructor.

 Knowledge distribution is important in the knowledge transfer process, likewise tools and teaching techniques used by the instructor are also important. Since, knowledge distribution is distributed in several places; it is difficult for learners to receive all the body of knowledge using the tools provided by the instructor. This hypothesis attempts to examine knowledge distribution in relation to the satisfaction of tools and teaching techniques used by the instructor. This hypothesis present the result with knowledge distribution is significantly related to tools and teaching techniques that used by the instructor. The model is significant at the p<.01 level (F= 5.73, R2 = .267) and explains additional 26.7 percent of variance in tools and teaching techniques that used by the instructor has been influence and significantly explained by knowledge distribution. Accordingly, Hypothesis 4 is supported. This result supports Siritongthaworn and Krairit (2006), who had studied the satisfaction of the tools and teaching techniques used for instruction. They indicate that students need their instructors to be understandable, to inspire trust and confidence and they want the course materials to be presented in appropriate and varied formats.

Hypothesis 5: Using weblogs in the transfer of knowledge is significantly better than using other ICT media.

 This hypothesis was formulated to determine whether there are any significant difference between two independent groups, the first group from Nakhon Si Thammarat Rajabhat University (NSTRU), using weblogs to transfer knowledge and share knowledge between the instructor and learners, and the second group using other online learning tools such as emails and whiteboards in the transfer and sharing of knowledge. The results from the analysis indicate that there is a significant difference between the weblog groups and the online learning. The results indicate that using weblogs to interact with the instructor and other learners in the classroom (M= 2.21) is significantly lower than using the other tools in transferring knowledge (M= 2.48) and p<.05.

 As mentioned above, this study discusses the learning outcome which consists of learners’ perceptions, learners ‘behaviors, knowledge gained by learners and the tools and teaching techniques used by the instructors and the influenced played by the three key characteristics of knowledge; knowledge ambiguity, knowledge disruption and knowledge distribution. The study also mention about the different of using weblog in transfer knowledge to learners with other ICT media such as email, whiteboard, chat. The next section will describe qualitative analysis.

 For qualitative analysis of the study, there are 898 documents from learners’ blog. The study used the content analysis method to analyze the document from learners ‘blog. The data was input into the software program for qualitative analysis and then generated into the form of documentation that can be described as follows. There are 2 contents of document from the blog. The first type informative news, which mean the learners’ externalize the knowledge into the weblog or some learners did not externalize the knowledge by self but wrote the knowledge into their blog by follow the other persons. The second content of document is affective content which mean the learners externalized the feedback of knowledge transfer from the instructor into their blogs. The results of document from weblog will be showed in the appendix.

 However, the results from learners’ blog found that the knowledge and feedback of the learners from the weblog are supported the quantitative study and will be useful for the instructor and learners to improve the process of knowledge transfer from the instructor to learners in the next time.

 The next section will be discussed about the implication of this study.

5. Implication for Education

 The findings above show a significant relationship between the three key characteristics of knowledge and learning outcome. This study can, therefore serve and benefit the process of knowledge transfer in the educational system in the following ways. Learners’ perceptions are influence by knowledge ambiguity. Since knowledge ambiguity is a problem in the knowledge transfer process, instructors are advised to reduce knowledge ambiguity in knowledge transfer process. For instance, when transferring knowledge to learners, the instructor must consider the meaning of the words, the vagueness of the sentences and the methods of transfer. Since, most knowledge is tacit, it will be difficult to articulate or express in words. Therefore, it is hoped that instructors find the right methodologies, in their efforts, to transfer knowledge to learners in the classroom and secondly, improve or make clear the knowledge before the transfer occurs. A strong predictor of learners’ behavior is knowledge disruption and as such it would be useful for the instructor to know the attitudes and practices of learners when using technology as a tool in transferring knowledge. Findings from this study show that most learners are positive towards the use of technology to support their studies. Therefore, finding the right attitude and practice of learners is useful for the instructors, especially in applying technology, in the classroom, to transfer knowledge to learners based on the tools the instructors has designed and also to be aware of whether the technology that the learners used is appropriate. Another strong predictor of the knowledge gained by learners is knowledge distribution. When knowledge is distributed in several places such as websites, textbooks and databases, the instructors must select the appropriate methods to transfer knowledge to the learners. The instructors need to know the prior knowledge of the learners by testing the level of knowledge of the learners - whether it is incompetent, medium or advanced level. Then the instructors need to select the appropriate technology and develop the right methods to transfer knowledge suitable at that level. Tools and teaching techniques can also influence knowledge distribution. In this study, the instructor applied e-learning as a tool for transferring knowledge to learners. The findings shows that the tools used should have the approval of the learners. If not the learners will not be comfortable with them. Among the tools used is e-learning. E-learning can motivate learners to study but some parts of e-learning will not agree with the learners especially if they are slow in retrieving information, hard in communicating with the instructors and the learners do not understand how to search the database for information. It is the finding of this study that the instructors need to create information details which are suitable for their courses. The findings reported in this study justify the important of motivation to learning outcome. The findings have implications for the teachers to transfer knowledge to learners, they could try as much as they could make more interesting course of instruction to make the learners interested in the subject. The other findings based on the analysis of learners’ weblogs are to improve the process of knowledge transfer. The content analysis findings of this study indicate that learners who favor working by themselves tend to have positive attitudes toward the information technology that transfers knowledge from the instructors to the learners. To use the information technology as tools to transfer knowledge from the instructors to learners, the instructors need to assist the learners by advising them, giving them suggestions or posing questions in ways that would enable the learners to make decisions and find out the information they need to complete particular tasks, by themselves. With this information it is hoped that learners can motivate, mange their own time and study by themselves. However, the instructors ought to design, organize and provide the instructional materials, resources and courses that can effectively integrate e-learning to the process of transferring knowledge to the learners. The results from this study suggest that the success of using e-learning as tools to transfer knowledge from the instructors to the learners is fundamentally dependent not only on the process of knowledge transfer but also in the management and performance of the technology used in the teaching and learning, in the classroom. Learners need the time to study, externalize and apply the knowledge of the technology to the assignments or the projects given by the instructors. Based on the feedback from the learners, some learners who lacked the information technology skills and knowledge did not understand the knowledge from the instructor when the instructor gave the assignment workloads. These learners lacked the confidence to externalize their knowledge to others. Some learners had negative attitudes such being confused and being doubtful of the knowledge the instructor had transferred to them by using a particular information technology as a tool to transfer knowledge. Similarly, learners felt that using computers to communicate with the instructors is difficult because of the need to use e-mails and programs such as Adobe Photoshop and Flash Media. The study suggests that the instructors should allow learners time to study and use a program before using them due to low internet speed, outdated hardware and software in transferring and externalizing knowledge in the classroom. Another issue is the low number of functioning computers for learners to use for their studies and to externalize their knowledge. One glaring benefit, of this study based on the interview data from lecturers, is the experience of lecturers using e-learning in their transfer of knowledge to learners. They are not only happy in using e-learning as tools to transfer knowledge to learners but also in integrating the process of knowledge transfer, using e-learning tools, together with face-to-face teaching. These are the findings and implications of the study. The implication is that the instructors can use technology as a tool to transfer knowledge to learners based on the reflections of learners and interviews with instructors. It can benefit and improve teaching methods.


 This study measured the learning outcomes from knowledge transfer from the instructor to learners and focused on the problem of knowledge transfer that occurred based on the three key characteristic of knowledge. The study also examined how the learning outcomes can be influenced by the three key characteristics of knowledge. The study found that there was significant relationship between the characteristics of knowledge and learning outcome. However, to extent this study, it would be valuable to do studies base on gathering qualitative data from focus groups of the instructor; by examining the methods, tools and techniques in greater depth. Finally, the study suggests that it will be beneficial if future research can explain the process of knowledge transfer by determining the right strategy for effective knowledge transfer under different transformation processes.


Table 2 weblog contents

Table 3 positive feedback of learners from weblog

Table 4 negative feedback of learners


1.Albino, V., Garavelli, A. C., & Gorgoglione, M. (2004). Organization and technology in knowledge transfer. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 11(6), 584-600.
2.Alvarez, K., Salas, E., & Garofano, C. M. (2004). An integrated model of training evaluation and effectiveness. Human Resource Development Review 3(4), 385-416.
3.Alavi. M., (1999). Knowledge management system: Issue, Challenges, and Benefits. Journal of Communications of the Association for Information System, 1(2), 1-37.
4.Carley, K.M. (2002) "Information Technology and Knowledge Distribution in C3I Teams" in Proceedings of the 2002 Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium. Conference held in Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, CA. Evidence Based Research, Vienna, VA.
5.Davenport, T. (1998). Knowledge Management in Action: Three knowledge management scenarios. Retrieved August,20, 2006, from
6.Field, A.P. (2005). Factor Analysis Using SPSS, Retrieve Febuary, 25, 2008 from
7.George D and P Mallery, 2006: SPSS for Windows- Step by Step. Pearson Education,
8.Gouza, A. (2006). Key Factor of Knowledge Transfer within University Spin-offs. Retrieve October, 30, 2006, from
9.Hair, F. J., Black, C.W., Babin J.B., Anderson E., Ralph & Tatham L. Multivariate Data Analysis sixth edition, ISBN 0-13-032929-0, Pearson Prentice Hall, 2006.
10.Hanley, S. (1994). Maryland collaborative for teacher preparation. University of Maryland. Retrieved January 18, 2008 from UMS %2BState/UMD-Projects/MCTP/Essays/ Constructivism.txt
11.Kaiser, H.F. (1974) An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39, 31-36.
12.Manski, F.C. (1999). Treatment choice under ambiguity induced by Inferential Problems, International Symposium on Imprecise probabilities and their Applications.
13.Newell, S. & Galliers, R.(2006). Knowledge Transfer and learning Problem of Knowledge Transfer Associated with trying to Short-Circuit the Learning Cycle. Journal of information and Technology Management, 2(3), 275-290.
14.Nonaka, I. & Takeuchi, H.(1995). The Knowledge-Creating Company. New York: Oxford University Press. In Wu, C.F. & Lee, Y.C. (2006). Factors Affecting Knowledge transfer and Absorptive Capacity in Multination corporations. Proceeding of Knowledge management International Conference & Exhibition (KMICE) 2006, 141-148.
15.Perez, W. (2008). Academic achievement profile and professional aspirations of undocumented students. Invited presentation at the CHIRLA California Relay for Education Forum, Los Angeles, CA.
16.Simonin, B. (1999). Ambituiy and the process of knowledge transfer in strategic alliances, Strategic Management Journal, 20, 595-623.
17.Siritongthaworn, S. 2006). Satisfaction in e-learning:the context of supplementary instruction, Journal of emeraldinsight, 23(2),76-91, Retrieve August,11,2008, from http://www.emeralinsight,com/1065 -0741.htm.
18.Shuell, T. J., & Farber, S. L. (2001). Student perceptions of technology use in college courses. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 24, 119–138.
19.Szulanski, G. (1995a). Appropriating rents from existing knowledge: Intra-firm transfer of best practice. Unpublished Empirical Dissertation Fontainebleau: INSEAD.
20.Szulanski, G.(2003). Barriers to Knowing in the Firm, Sage Publications, London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi.
21.Tran, H.T., Teresa, L.J., Patricia,H.J., Wang.D. (2006). Antecedents to knowledge transfer in higher education effective teaching, Proceeding International conference 2006: Knowledge management in Institutes of Higher Learning, 21st -23rd, February, Suan Dusit Rajabhat University.