
A predictive study of student satisfaction in online education programs
ARTICLE
Yu-Chun Kuo, Jackson State University ; Andrew Walker, Brian Belland, Utah State University ; Kerstin Schroder, University of Alabama at Birmingham
IRRODL Volume 14, Number 1, ISSN 1492-3831 Publisher: Athabasca University Press
Abstract
This paper is intended to investigate the degree to which interaction and other predictors contribute to student satisfaction in online learning settings. This was a preliminary study towards a dissertation work which involved the establishment of interaction and satisfaction scales through a content validity survey. Regression analysis was performed to determine the contribution of predictor variables to student satisfaction. The effects of student background variables on predictors were explored. The results showed that learner-instructor interaction, learner-content interaction, and Internet self-efficacy were good predictors of student satisfaction while interactions among students and self-regulated learning did not contribute to student satisfaction. Learner-content interaction explained the largest unique variance in student satisfaction. Additionally, gender, class level, and time spent online per week seemed to have influence on learner-learner interaction, Internet self-efficacy, and self-regulation.
Citation
Kuo, Y.C., Walker, A., Belland, B. & Schroder, K. (2013). A predictive study of student satisfaction in online education programs. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 14(1), 16-39. Athabasca University Press. Retrieved May 17, 2022 from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/49084/.
Keywords
References
View References & Citations Map- Allen, M., Bourhis, J., Burrell, N., & Mabry, E. (2002). Comparing student satisfaction with distance education to traditional classrooms in higher education: A metaanalysis. The American Journal of Distance Education, 16(2), 83-97.
- Allen, I.E., & Seaman, J. (2008). Staying the course: Online education in the United States, 2008. Retrieved from http://www.sloanc.org/publications/survey/pdf/staying_the_course.pdf
- Allen, I.E., & Seaman, J. (2010). Class differences: Online education in the United States, 2010. Retrieved from http://sloanconsortium.org/sites/default/files/class_differences.pdf
- An, Y.J., & Reigeluth, C.M. (2008). Problem-based learning in online environments. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 9(1), 1–16.
- Anderson, T. (2003). Modes of interaction in distance education: Recent developments and research questions. In M.G. Moore& W.G. Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of distance education (pp. 129-144). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
- Anderson, T.D., & Garrison, D.R. (1995). Transactional issues in distance education: The impact of design in audioteleconferencing. The American Journal of Distance Education, 9(2), 27-45.
- Artino, A.R. (2007). Online military training: Using a social cognitive view of motivation and self-regulation to understand students’ satisfaction, perceived learning, and choice. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 8(3), 191-202.
- Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.
- Bandura, A. (1988). Self-regulation of motivation and action through goal systems. In V. Hamilton, G.H. Bower, & N.H. Frijda (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on emotion and motivation (pp. 37-61). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer
- Bernard, R.M., Abrami, P.C., Borokhovski, E., Wade, C.A., Tamim, R.M., Surkes, M.A., & Bethel, E.C. (2009). A meta-analysis of three types of interaction treatments in distance education. Review of Educational Research, 79(3), 12431289.
- Bolliger, D.U., & Martindale, T. (2004). Key factors for determining student satisfaction in online courses. International Journal on E-Learning, 3(1), 61-67.
- Bray, E., Aoki, K., & Dlugosh, L. (2008). Predictors of learning satisfaction in Japanese online distance learners. International Review of Research in Open& Distance Learning, 9(3), 1-24.
- Brockett, R.G., & Hiemstra, R. (1991). Self-direction in adult learning: Perspectives on theory, research, and practice. New York, NY: Routledge.
- Brown, B.W., & Liedholm, C.E. (2002). Can web courses replace the classroom in principles of microeconomics? American Economics Review, 92(2), 444-448.
- Burnett, K. (2001). Interaction and student retention, success and satisfaction in webbased learning. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED459798)
- Chejlyk, S. (2006). The effects of online course format and three components of student perceived interactions on overall course satisfaction. Dissertation Abstracts International, 67(04). (UMI No. 3213421).
- Choy, S., McNickle, C., & Clayton, C. (2002). Learner expectations and experiences: An examination of student views of support in online learning. Leabrook, SA: Australian National Training Authority.
- Cohen, R.J., & Swerdlik, M.E. (2004). Psychological testing and assessment: An introduction to tests and measurements. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
- Corno, L. (1986). The metacognitive control components of self-regulated learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 11(4), 333-346.
- Corno, L., & Mandinach, E.B. (1983). The role of cognitive engagement in classroom learning and motivation. Educational Psychologist, 18(2), 88-108.
- Chu, R.J., & Chu, A.Z. (2010). Multi-level analysis of peer support, Internet selfefficacy and e-learning outcomes: The contextual effects of collectivism and group potency. Computer& Education, 55, 145-154.
- Debourgh, G. (1999). Technology is the tool, teaching is the task: Student satisfaction in distance learning. Paper presented at the Society for Information and Technology& Teacher Education International Conference, San Antonio, TX.
- Eastin, M.S., & LaRose, R. (2000). Internet self-efficacy and the psychology of the digital divide. Retrieved from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol6/issue1/eastin.html
- Giossos, Y., Koutsouba, M., Lionarakis, A., & Skavantzos, K. (2009). Reconsidering Moore’s
- Hillman, C.A., Willis, D.J., & Gunawardena, C.N. (1995). Learner-interface interaction in distance education: An extension of contemporary models and strategies for practitioners. American Journal of Distance Education, 8(2), 30-42.
- Hodges, C.B. (2008). Self-efficacy in the context of online learning environments: A review of the literature and directions for research. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 20(3/4), 7-25.
- Johnson, S.D., Aragon, S.R., Shaik, N., & Palma-Rivas, N. (2000). Comparative analysis of learner satisfaction and learning outomes in online and face-to-face learning environments. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 11(1), 29-49.
- Jung, I., Choi, S., Lim, C., & Leem, J. (2002). Effects of different types of interaction on learning achievement, satisfaction and participation in web-based instruction. Innovations in Education& Teaching International, 39(2), 153-162.
- Kaminski, K., Switzer, J., & Gloeckner, G. (2009). Workforce readiness: A study of university students’ fluency with information technology. Computers& Education, 53(2), 228-233.
- Keeler, L.C. (2006). Student satisfaction and types of interaction in distance education courses. Dissertation Abstracts International, 67(09). (UMI No. 3233345).
- Keller, J.M. (1983). Motivational design of instruction. In C. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: An overview of their current status (pp. 386-434). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
- Koseke, G.F., & Koseke, R.D. (1991). Student burnout as a mediator of the stressoutcome relationship. Research in Higher Education, 32(4), 415-431.
- Kuo, Y.C., Eastmond, J.N., Schroder, K.E.E., & Bennett, L.J. (2009). Student perceptions of interactions and course satisfaction in a blended learning
- Lee, H.W., Kim, K.Y., & Grabowski, B.L. (2010). Improving self-regulation, learning strategy use, and achievement with metacognitive feedback. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58, 629-648. Doi:10.1007/s11423-0109153-6
- Moore, M.G. (1989). Three types of interactions. The American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1-6.
- Moore, M.G., & Kearsley, G. (1996). Distance education: A systems view. New York, NY: Wadsworth.
- Noel-Levitz. (2011). National online learners priorities report. Retrieved from https://www.noellevitz.com/upload/Papers_and_Research/2011/PSOL_report%202011.pdf
- Northrup, P., Lee, R., & Burgess, V. (2002). Learner perceptions of online interaction. Paper presented at ED-MEDIA 2002 World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia& Telecommunications, Denver, CO.
- Olmstead, J. (2007). Program development, implementation and evaluation: Lessons learned at the University of Wisconsin-Stout. Techniques, 82(6), 22-23.
- Parsad, B., & Lewis, L. (2008). Distance education at degree-granting postsecondary institutions: 2006-07.
- Pintrich, P.R., & De Groot, E.V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33-40.
- Pintrich, P.R., Smith, D.A., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W.J. (1993). Reliability and predictive validity of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ). Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53(3), 801-813.
- Reinhart, J., & Schneider, P. (2001). Student satisfaction, self-efficacy, and the perception of the two-way audio/video distance learning environment: A
- Roach, V., & Lemasters, L. (2006). Satisfaction with online learning: A comparative descriptive study. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 5(3), 317-332.
- Rodriguez Robles, F.M. (2006). Learner characteristic, interaction and support service variables as predictors of satisfaction in Web-based distance education. Dissertation Abstracts International, 67(07). (UMI No. 3224964).
- Puzziferro, M. (2006). Online technologies self-efficacy, self-regulated learning, and experiential variables as predictors of final grade and satisfaction in collegelevel online courses. Dissertation Abstracts International, 66(12). (UMI No. 3199984)
- Puzziferro, M. (2008). Online technologies self-efficacy and self-regulated learning as predictors of final grade and satisfaction in college-level online courses. American Journal of Distance Education, 22(2), 72-89.
- Sahin, I. (2007). Predicting student satisfaction in distance education and learning environments. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED496541).
- Stevens, J.P. (2002). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- Thurmond, V.A. (2003). Examination of interaction variables as predictors of students’ satisfaction and willingness to enroll in future web-based courses while controlling for student characteristics. Retrieved from http://www.bookpump.com/dps/pdf-b/1121814b.pdf
- Thurmond, V.A., & Wambach, K. (2004). Understanding interactions in distance education: A review of the literature. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 1(1), 9-26.
- Thompson, L.F., Meriac, J.P., & Cope, J.G. (2002). Motivating online performance: The influences of goal setting and internet self-efficacy. Social Science Computer Review, 20(2), 149-160.
- Wagner, E.D. (1994). In support of a functional definition of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 8(2), 6-29.
- Yukselturk, E., & Yildirim, Z. (2008). Investigation of interaction, online support, course structure and flexibility as the contributing factors to students’ satisfaction in an online certificate program. Educational Technology& Society, 11(4), 51-65.
- Zimmerman, B.J. (1989). A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(3), 329-339.
- Zimmerman, B.J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1986). Development of a structured interview for assessing student use of self-regulated learning strategies. American Educational Research Journal, 23(4), 614-628.
- Zimmerman, B.J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1988). Construct validation of a strategy model of student self-regulated learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(3), 284-290.
- Zimmerman, B.J., & Schunk, D.H. (1989). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theory, research, and practice. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.
Suggest Corrections to ReferencesCited By
View References & Citations Map-
Incorporating student population differences for effective online education: A content-based review and integrative model
William H. Money & Benjamin P. Dean
Computers & Education Vol. 138, No. 1 (September 2019) pp. 57–82
-
How Did Graduate Students of Education Major Perceive Ground Rules in Online Discussions?
Yu-mei Wang, University of Alabama at Birmingham, United States
Journal of Interactive Learning Research Vol. 30, No. 1 (2019) pp. 5–25
-
Tracking e-learning through published papers: A systematic review
Helena Rodrigues, Filomena Almeida, Vanessa Figueiredo & Sara L. Lopes, Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL), Portugal
Computers & Education Vol. 136, No. 1 (July 2019) pp. 87–98
-
MOOC learners’ demographics, self-regulated learning strategy, perceived learning and satisfaction: A structural equation modeling approach
Kun Li
Computers & Education Vol. 132, No. 1 (April 2019) pp. 16–30
-
Building Online Success at a Midwestern University: Identifying Students' Perceptions of Online Courses and Instructors
Lisa Madsen, Mary Bowne, Jessica Meendering, Melissa Wuellner & John Howard, South Dakota State University, United States
E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2017 (Oct 17, 2017) pp. 943–947
-
Student Voices on the Roles of Instructors in Asynchronous Learning Environments in the 21st Century
Pilar Gmez-Rey & Elena Barbera, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya; Francisco Fernndez-Navarro, Universidad Loyola Andaluca
The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning Vol. 18, No. 2 (Apr 04, 2017)
-
How people learn in an asynchronous online learning environment: The relationships between graduate students’ learning strategies and learning satisfaction | Comment apprennent les gens dans un environnement d’apprentissage en ligne asynchrone
Beomkyu Choi
Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology / La revue canadienne de l’apprentissage et de la technologie Vol. 42, No. 1 (Apr 14, 2016)
-
Are Online Media Production Courses Viable? A Survey of Student Interest and Attitude
Mark Piwinsky, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, United States; Brittany Fleming, Slippery Rock University, United States; Lacey Fulton, Clarion University, United States; Jay Start, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, United States
E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2016 (Nov 14, 2016) pp. 209–216
-
Student Perceptions of Online Practicum
Gabrielle Wilcox & Jennifer Lock, University of Calgary, Canada
E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2014 (Oct 27, 2014) pp. 2059–2064
-
A Case Study of Learner Interaction in Web-based Learning
Yu-Chun Kuo, Jackson State University, United States
E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2013 (Oct 21, 2013) pp. 363–369
These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.