An elaborated model of student support to allow for gender considerations in Asian distance education


student support
quality assurance
distance learning support

How to Cite

Jung, I. (2018). An elaborated model of student support to allow for gender considerations in Asian distance education. Health Sciences: An OJS Theme Demo, 1(3). Retrieved from


Research indicates that distance education (DE) students regard learner support systems as the key element in quality provision. This study sought to identify the key concerns of Asian DE students regarding support provision in different types of DE and dual-mode providers and formulate a student support model which took account of gender issues. An online survey was conducted with 1,113 distance learners in Japan, Korea, Hong Kong SAR China, Malaysia, India, Pakistan, Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand which required them to respond to open-ended questions regarding their main concerns over the quality of distance education. Their responses were analyzed with Nvivo 2.0 based on the framework of the Atkins (2008) ARCS model of distance learner support. It was found that in assessing the quality of DE the students valued 13 types of student support across five domains: affective, reflective, cognitive, systemic, and gender-considerate. It was also confirmed that there were gender differences in the students’ perceptions of the need for student support. Building on these findings, an elaborated model for student support for Asian distance learners was developed from a systems perspective, and from this, a list of supporting strategies was proposed. 



Cole TJ, Bellizzi MC, Flegal KM, Dietz WH. Establishing a standard definition for child overweight and obesity worldwide: international survey. BMJ 2000;320(7244):1240-1243. DOI: URL:

Ng M, Fleming T, Robinson M, Thomson B, Graetz N, Margono C. Global, regional, and national prevalence of overweight and obesity in children and adults during 1980-2013: a systematic analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013. Lancet 2014;384(9945):766-781. DOI: URL:

Lim SS, Vos T, Flaxman AD, Danaei G, Shibuya K. A comparative risk assessment of burden of disease and injury attributable to 67 risk factors and risk factor clusters in 21 regions, 1990-2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. The Lancet. 2012; 380(9859):2224-2260. DOI: PMID: URL:

Martin A, Saunders DH, Shenkin SD, Sproule J. Lifestyle intervention for improving school achievement in overweight or obese children and adolescents. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2014; 3: CD009728. DOI:

Shaw KA, O`Rourke P, Mar C., Kenardy J. Psychological interventions for overweight or obesity. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2015; 2:CD003818. DOI:

Colquitt JL, Pickett K, Loverman E, Frampton GK. Surgery for weight loss in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2014; 8:CD003641. DOI:

Padwal RS, Rucker D, Li SK, Curioni C, Lau DCW. Long-term pharmacotherapy for obesity and overweight. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2003; 4:CD004094. DOI:

Al-Khudairy L, Loveman E, Colquitt JL, Mead E, Johnson RE, Fraser H, Olajide J, Murphy M, Velho RM, O’Malley C, Azevedo LB, Ells LJ, Metzendorf, MI, Rees K. Diet, physical activity and behavioural interventions for the treatment of overweight or obese adolescents aged 12 to 17 years. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 6:CD012691. DOI:

Khera R, Murad MH, Chandar AK, Dulai PS, Wang Z, Prokop LJ, Loomba R, Camilleri M, Singh S. Association of Pharmacological Treatments for Obesity With Weight Loss and Adverse Events: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA. 2016; 315(22):2424-2434. DOI:

Cheng J, Gao J, Shuai X, Wang G, Tao K. The comprehensive summary of surgical versus non-surgical treatment for obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Oncotarget. 2016; 7(26):39216-39230. DOI: PMID:

Clegg A, Colquitt J, Sidhu M, Royle P, Walker A. Clinical and cost effectiveness of surgery for morbid obesity: a systematic review and economic evaluation. International Journal of Obesity. 2003; 27:1167-1177.

Neovius M, Narbro K. Cost-effectiveness of pharmacological anti-obesity treatments: a systematic review. International Journal of Obesity. 2008; 32:1752-1763. DOI:

Loveman E, Frampton GK, Shepherd J, Picot J, Cooper K, Bryant J, Welch K, Clegg A. The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of long-term weight management schemes for adults: a systematic review. Health Technol Assess. 2011;15(2):1-182. URL: