Exploring Factors Affecting Graduate Students’ Satisfaction toward E-Learning in the Era of the COVID-19 Crisis
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
Model Development
- To investigate the factors affecting students’ satisfaction with e-learning during the COVID-19 crisis;
- To test multiple mediations: (a) student factors and (b) system quality between course evaluation, instructor’s performance, and student satisfaction;
- To test the mediation of course evaluation between instructor’s performance and system quality with student satisfaction;
- To examine serial mediation between the instructor’s performance and student satisfaction via course evaluation and system quality.
3. Methodology
3.1. Research Design and Setting
3.2. Sample Size
3.3. Sampling and Procedures
3.4. Instruments
3.5. Ethical Approval and Consent to Participate
3.6. Statistical Data Analysis
3.6.1. Descriptive Statistics
3.6.2. PLS–SEM
4. Results
4.1. Descriptive Statistics Results
4.2. Measurement Model Analysis Results
4.2.1. Convergent Validity
4.2.2. Discriminant Validity
Fornell–Larcker Criterion
Heterotrait–Monotrait Ratio of Correlations (HTMT)
4.3. Structural Model
4.3.1. Direct Hypotheses
Instructor’s Performance (IP)→Student Factors (SFs)
Student Factors (SFs)→Student Satisfaction (SS)
4.3.2. Single Mediation
4.3.3. Serial Mediation
5. Discussion
5.1. Instructor’s Performance (IP)
5.2. Student Factors (SFs)
5.3. System Quality (SQ)
5.4. Course Evaluation (CE)
6. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Turnbull, D.; Chugh, R.; Luck, J. Learning Management Systems: An Overview. In Encyclopedia of Education and Information Technologies; Tatnall, A., Ed.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar]
- Fares, Z.E.A.; Al-Tammemi, A.B.; Gadelrab, H.F.; Lin, C.-Y.; Aljaberi, M.A.; Alhuwailah, A.; Roubi, M.L. Arabic COVID-19 Psychological Distress Scale: Development and initial validation. BMJ Open 2021, 11, e046006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aljaberi, M.A.; Alareqe, N.A.; Qasem, M.A.; Alsalahi, A.; Noman, S.; Al-Tammemi, A.; Ibrahim, M.M.I. Rasch Modeling and Multilevel Confirmatory Factor Analysis for the Usability of the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R) During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Lancet 2021, 1, 240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abiddine, F.Z.E.; Aljaberi, M.A.; Gadelrab, H.F.; Lin, C.-Y.; Muhammed, A. Mediated effects of insomnia in the association between problematic social media use and subjective well-being among university students during COVID-19 pandemic. Sleep Epidemiol. 2022, 2, 100030. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aristovnik, A.; Keržič, D.; Ravšelj, D.; Tomaževič, N.; Umek, L. Impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Life of Higher Education Students: A Global Perspective. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adeyeye, B.; Ojih, S.E.; Bello, D.; Adesina, E.; Yartey, D.; Ben-Enukora, C.; Adeyeye, Q. Online Learning Platforms and Covenant University Students’Academic Performance in Practical Related Courses during COVID-19 Pandemic. Sustainability 2022, 14, 878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Finlay, M.J.; Tinnion, D.J.; Simpson, T. A virtual versus blended learning approach to higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic: The experiences of a sport and exercise science student cohort. J. Hosp. Leis. Sport Tour. Educ. 2022, 30, 100363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Crawford, J.; Cifuentes-Faura, J. Sustainability in Higher Education during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review. Sustainability 2022, 14, 1879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Faura-Martínez, U.; Lafuente-Lechuga, M.; Cifuentes-Faura, J. Sustainability of the Spanish university system during the pandemic caused by COVID-19. Educ. Rev. 2022, 74, 645–663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harishini, S.; Lubna Ali, M.; Asra, A. Challenges associated with e- learning among esl undergraduates in Malaysia: A conceptual framework. Int. J. Manag. Hum. Sci. 2020, 4, 30–38. [Google Scholar]
- Chung, E.; Subramaniam, G.; Dass, L.C. Online learning readiness among university students in Malaysia amidst COVID-19. Asian J. Univ. Educ. 2020, 16, 46–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Widodo, A.; Nursaptini, N.; Novitasari, S.; Sutisna, D.; Umar, U. From face-to-face learning to web base learning: How are student readiness. Prem. Educ. J. Pendidik. Dasar Dan Pembelajaran 2020, 10, 149–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Manochehr, N.-N. The Influence of Learning Styles on Learners in E-Learning Environments: An Empirical Study. Comput. High. Educ. Econ. Rev. 2006, 18, 10–14. [Google Scholar]
- Kumar, P.; Saxena, C.; Baber, H. Learner-content interaction in e-learning-the moderating role of perceived harm of COVID-19 in assessing the satisfaction of learners. Smart Learn. Environ. 2021, 8, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goh, C.; Leong, C.; Kasmin, K.; Hii, P.; Tan, O. Students’ Experiences, Learning Outcomes and Satisfaction in e-Learning. J. E-Learn. Knowl. Soc. 2017, 13, 117–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kranzow, J. Faculty Leadership in Online Education: Structuring Courses to Impact Student Satisfaction and Persistence. MERLOT J. Online Learn. Teach. 2013, 9, 131–139. [Google Scholar]
- Moore, J. Effects of Online Interaction and Instructor Presence on Students’ Satisfaction and Success with Online Undergraduate Public Relations Courses. J. Mass Commun. Educ. 2014, 69, 271–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sher, A. Assessing the Relationship of Student-Instructor and Student-Student Interaction to Student Learning and Satisfaction in Web-based Online Learning Environment. J. Interact. Online Learn. 2009, 8, 102–120. [Google Scholar]
- Mohd Satar, N.S.; Morshidi, A.H.; Dastane, O. Success factors for e-Learning satisfaction during COVID-19 pandemic lockdown. Int. J. Adv. Trends Comput. Sci. Eng. 2020, 9, 2278–3091. [Google Scholar]
- Joel, S.M.; Christina, R. Key factors in learners’ satisfaction with the e-learning system at the University of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Australas. J. Educ. Technol. 2018, 34, 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Uzir, M.U.H.; Al Halbusi, H.; Thurasamy, R.; Thiam Hock, R.L.; Aljaberi, M.A.; Hasan, N.; Hamid, M. The effects of service quality, perceived value and trust in home delivery service personnel on customer satisfaction: Evidence from a developing country. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2021, 63, 102721. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aljaberi, M.A.; Juni, M.H.; Al-Maqtari, R.A.; Lye, M.S.; Saeed, M.A.; Al-Dubai, S.A.R.; Kadir Shahar, H. Relationships among perceived quality of healthcare services, satisfaction and behavioural intentions of international students in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: A cross-sectional study. BMJ Open 2018, 8, e021180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pham, L.; Limbu, Y.B.; Bui, T.K.; Nguyen, H.T.; Pham, H.T. Does e-learning service quality influence e-learning student satisfaction and loyalty? Evidence from Vietnam. Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ. 2019, 16, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aladwan, F.; Awamrah, A. The Extent to Which Students Have Sufficient Awareness of E-Learning and its Relation to Self-Studying and Academic Achievement. Mod. Appl. Sci. 2018, 12, 137–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yacob, A.; Kadir, A.; Zainudin, O.; Zurairah, A. Student Awareness Towards E-Learning In Education. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2012, 67, 93–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coldwell-Neilson, J.; Craig, A.; Goold, A. Student Perspectives of Online Learning; Springer: Boston, MA, USA, 2006; pp. 97–107. [Google Scholar]
- Al-rahmi, W.M.; Othman, M.S.; Mi Yusuf, L. Exploring the Factors that Affect Student Satisfaction through Using E-Learning in Malaysian Higher Education Institutions. Mediterr. J. Soc. Sci. 2015, 6, 299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baber, H. Social interaction and effectiveness of the online learning–A moderating role of maintaining social distance during the pandemic COVID-19. Asian Educ. Dev. Stud. 2021, 11, 159–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Picciano, A.G. Theories and Frameworks for Online Education: Seeking an Integrated Model. Online Learn. 2017, 21, 166–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Herrington, J.; Reeves, T.C.; Oliver, R. Authentic Learning Environments. In Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology; Spector, J., Merrill, M., Elen, J., Bishop, M., Eds.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Yengin, İ.; Karahoca, D.; Karahoca, A.; Yücel, A. Roles of teachers in e-learning: How to engage students & how to get free e-learning and the future. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2010, 2, 5775–5787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, P.-C.; Tsai, R.J.; Finger, G.; Chen, Y.-Y.; Yeh, D. What drives a successful e-Learning? An empirical investigation of the critical factors influencing learner satisfaction. Comput. Educ. 2008, 50, 1183–1202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gunawardena, C.N. Social Presence Theory and Implications for Interaction and Collaborative Learning in Computer Conferences. Int. J. Educ. Telecommun. 1995, 1, 147–166. [Google Scholar]
- Gunawardena, C.N.; Zittle, F.J. Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer-mediated conferencing environment. Am. J. Distance Educ. 1997, 11, 8–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sung, E.; Mayer, R.E. Five facets of social presence in online distance education. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2012, 28, 1738–1747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Argyris, C. Understanding Organizational Behavior; Dorsey Press: Homewood, IL, USA, 1960. [Google Scholar]
- Picciano, A. Beyond Student Perceptions: Issues of Interaction, Presence, and Performance in an Online Course. Online Learn. 2002, 6, 21–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marks, R.B.; Sibley, S.D.; Arbaugh, J.B. A Structural Equation Model of Predictors for Effective Online Learning. J. Manag. Educ. 2005, 29, 531–563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wilson, T.; Whitelock, D. Monitoring the on-line behaviour of distance learning students. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 1998, 14, 91–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cao, W.; Dua, X.; Wang, X. An Empirical Research on Responsibilities of Teacher-student Psychological Contract in Institutions of Higher Education. High. Educ. Explor. 2007, 6. [Google Scholar]
- Cao, W.; Zhang, J.; Guo, J. Empirical Study on the Differences of the Psychological Contract’s Contents Between the Teachers and Students in Three Colleges. High. Educ. Explor. 2008, 6, 116–120. [Google Scholar]
- Cifuentes-Faura, J.; Obor, D.O.; To, L.; Al-Naabi, I. Cross-Cultural Impacts of COVID-19 on Higher Education Learning and Teaching Practices in Spain, Oman, Nigeria and Cambodia: A Cross-Cultural Study. J. Univ. Teach. Learn. Pract. 2021, 18, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marinioni, G.; van’t Land, H. The Impact of COVID-19 on Global Higher Education. Int. High. Educ. 2020, 102, 7–9. Available online: https://ejournals.bc.edu/index.php/ihe/article/view/14593.
- Giray, G. An assessment of student satisfaction with e-learning: An empirical study with computer and software engineering undergraduate students in Turkey under pandemic conditions. Educ. Inf. Technol. 2021, 26, 6651–6673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Elshami, W.; Taha, M.H.; Abuzaid, M.; Saravanan, C.; Al Kawas, S.; Abdalla, M.E. Satisfaction with online learning in the new normal: Perspective of students and faculty at medical and health sciences colleges. Med. Educ. Online 2021, 26, 1920090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Weerasinghe, I.S.; Fernando, R.L. Students’ satisfaction in higher education. Am. J. Educ. Res. 2017, 5, 533–539. [Google Scholar]
- Nasir, M.K.M. The influence of social presence on students’ satisfaction toward online course. Open Prax. 2020, 12, 485–493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Law, K.M.; Geng, S.; Li, T. Student enrollment, motivation and learning performance in a blended learning environment: The mediating effects of social, teaching, and cognitive presence. Comput. Educ. 2019, 136, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Muzammil, M.; Sutawijaya, A.; Harsasi, M. Investigating student satisfaction in online learning: The role of student interaction and engagement in distance learning university. Turk. Online J. Distance Educ. 2020, 21, 88–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Flanigan, A.E.; Akcaoglu, M.; Ray, E. Initiating and maintaining student-instructor rapport in online classes. Internet High. Educ. 2022, 53, 100844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- AlAjmi, Q.; Al-Sharafi, M.A.; Yassin, A.A. Behavioral Intention of Students in Higher Education Institutions Towards Online Learning During COVID-19. In Emerging Technologies During the Era of COVID-19 Pandemic; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2021; pp. 259–274. [Google Scholar]
- Rfeqallah, M.; Kasim, R.; Al-Sharafi, M.A. Conceptualizing a Model for Using Social Media as a Learning Tool and Its Effect on Academic Performance: The Moderating Effect of Self-Regulation. In Proceedings of the 2021 International Conference on Intelligent Technology, System and Service for Internet of Everything (ITSS-IoE), Sana’a, Yemen, 1–2 November 2021; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Luo, N.; Zhang, M.; Qi, D. Effects of different interactions on students’ sense of community in e-learning environment. Comput. Educ. 2017, 115, 153–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dennen, V.P.; Aubteen Darabi, A.; Smith, L.J. Instructor-Learner Interaction in Online Courses: The relative perceived importance of particular instructor actions on performance and satisfaction. Distance Educ. 2007, 28, 65–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Spies, A.R.; Wilkin, N.E.; Bentley, J.P.; Bouldin, A.S.; Wilson, M.C.; Holmes, E.R. Instrument to measure psychological contract violation in pharmacy students. Am. J. Pharm. Educ. 2010, 74, 107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bordia, S.; Hobman, E.V.; Restubog, S.L.D.; Bordia, P. Advisor-Student Relationship in Business Education Project Collaborations: A Psychological Contract Perspective. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 2010, 40, 2360–2386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zakariah, Z.; Alias, N.; Abd Aziz, M.N.; Ismail, N.Z. E-Learning awareness in a higher learning institution in Malaysia. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2012, 67, 621–625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ke, F.; Kwak, D. Constructs of Student-Centered Online Learning on Learning Satisfaction of a Diverse Online Student Body: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 2013, 48, 97–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sivanisswary, K.; Lubna Ali, M. Predictive factors associated with online learning during COVID-19 pandemic in Malaysia: A conceptual framework. Int. J. Manag. Hum. Sci. 2020, 4, 19–29. [Google Scholar]
- Okpechi, P.; Denwigwe, C.; Asuquo, P.; Abuo, C.; Unimna, F. Awareness and utilization of e-learning resources by trainee counsellors of counselling education in Calabar, Nigeria. Int. J. Educ. Technol. Learn. 2018, 3, 45–51. [Google Scholar]
- Lee, J.-W. Online support service quality, online learning acceptance, and student satisfaction. Internet High. Educ. 2010, 13, 277–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Machado-Da-Silva, F.N.; Meirelles, F.d.S.; Filenga, D.; Brugnolo Filho, M. Student satisfaction process in virtual learning system: Considerations based in information and service quality from Brazil’s experience. Turk. Online J. Distance Educ. 2014, 15, 122–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Turk, M.; Heddy, B.C.; Danielson, R.W. Teaching and social presences supporting basic needs satisfaction in online learning environments: How can presences and basic needs happily meet online? Comput. Educ. 2022, 180, 104432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shin, W.S.; Kang, M. The use of a mobile learning management system at an online university and its effect on learning satisfaction and achievement. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn. 2015, 16, 110–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Strong, R.; Irby, T.L.; Wynn, J.T.; McClure, M.M. Investigating Students’ Satisfaction with eLearning Courses: The Effect of Learning Environment and Social Presence. J. Agric. Educ. 2012, 53, 98–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Landrum, B.; Bannister, J.; Garza, G.; Rhame, S. A class of one: Students’ satisfaction with online learning. J. Educ. Bus. 2021, 96, 82–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kuo, Y.-C.; Walker, A.E.; Belland, B.R.; Schroder, K.E. A predictive study of student satisfaction in online education programs. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn. 2013, 14, 16–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, F.-Y.; Tsai, M.-J.; Chiou, G.-L.; Lee, S.W.-Y.; Chang, C.-C.; Chen, L.-L. Instructional suggestions supporting science learning in digital environments based on a review of eye tracking studies. J. Educ. Technol. Soc. 2018, 21, 28–45. [Google Scholar]
- Zabadi, A.M.; Al-Alawi, A.H. University students’ attitudes towards e-learning: University of Business & Technology (UBT)-Saudi Arabia-Jeddah: A case study. Int. J. Bus. Manag. 2016, 11, 286–295. [Google Scholar]
- Olum, R.; Atulinda, L.; Kigozi, E.; Nassozi, D.R.; Mulekwa, A.; Bongomin, F.; Kiguli, S. Medical education and E-learning during COVID-19 pandemic: Awareness, attitudes, preferences, and barriers among undergraduate medicine and nursing students at Makerere University, Uganda. J. Med. Educ. Curric. Dev. 2020, 7, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vate-U-Lan, P. Psychological impact of e-learning on social network sites: Online students’ attitudes and their satisfaction with life. J. Comput. High. Educ. 2020, 32, 27–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bair, D.E.; Bair, M.A. Paradoxes of online teaching. Int. J. Scholarsh. Teach. Learn. 2011, 5, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al-Samarraie, H.; Saeed, N. A systematic review of cloud computing tools for collaborative learning: Opportunities and challenges to the blended-learning environment. Comput. Educ. 2018, 124, 77–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eom, S.B.; Ashill, N. The determinants of students’ perceived learning outcomes and satisfaction in university online education: An update. Decis. Sci. J. Innov. Educ. 2016, 14, 185–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Borch, I.; Sandvoll, R.; Risør, T. Discrepancies in purposes of student course evaluations: What does it mean to be “satisfied”? Educ. Assess. Eval. Account. 2020, 32, 83–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Almaiah, M.A.; Alyoussef, I.Y. Analysis of the effect of course design, course content support, course assessment and instructor characteristics on the actual use of E-learning system. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 171907–171922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ali, A.; Ahmad, I. Key Factors for Determining Student Satisfaction in Distance Learning Courses: A Study of Allama Iqbal Open University. Contemp. Educ. Technol. 2011, 2, 118–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Borch, I.; Sandvoll, R.; Risør, T. Student course evaluation documents: Constituting evaluation practice. Assess. Eval. High. Educ. 2022, 47, 169–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Creswell, J.W. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches; Sage Publications, Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Hair, J.; Black, W.; Babin, B.; Anderson, R. Multivariate Data Analysis; Prentice Hall: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Swan, K. Learning effectiveness: What the research tells us. Elem. Qual. Online Educ. Pract. Dir. 2003, 4, 13–47. [Google Scholar]
- Cohen, J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed.; Routledge: London, UK, 1988. [Google Scholar]
- Kline, R.B. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling; Guilford Publications: New York, NY, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Afzaal Ali, M.I.R.M.S. Key Factors for Determining Student Satisfaction in Distance Learning Courses: A Study of Allama Iqbal Open University (AIOU) Islamabad, Pakistan. Malays. J. Distance Educ. 2010, 12, 33–51. [Google Scholar]
- Short, J.; Williams, E.; Christie, B. The Social Psychology of Telecommunications; Wiley: Toronto, Canada; London, UK; New York, NY, USA, 1976. [Google Scholar]
- Arbaugh, J.B. Virtual Classroom Characteristics and Student Satisfaction with Internet-Based MBA Courses. J. Manag. Educ. 2000, 24, 32–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Johnson, S.D.; Aragon, S.R.; Shaik, N. Comparative Analysis of Learner Satisfaction and Learning Outcomes in Online and Face-to-Face Learning Environments. J. Interact. Learn. Res. 2000, 11, 29–49. [Google Scholar]
- William, H.D.; Ephraim, R.M. The DeLone and McLean Model of Information Systems Success: A Ten-Year Update. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 2003, 19, 9–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tallent-Runnels, M.K.; Lan, W.Y.; Fryer, W.; Thomas, J.A.; Cooper, S.; Wang, K. The relationship between problems with technology and graduate students’ evaluations of online teaching. Internet High. Educ. 2005, 8, 167–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hayes, A.; Coutts, J. Use Omega Rather than Cronbach’s Alpha for Estimating Reliability. Commun. Methods Meas. 2020, 14, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ringle, C.M.; Wende, S.; Becker, J.-M. SmartPLS 3. In Boenningstedt: SmartPLS GmbH; Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH): Hamburg, Germany, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Black, W.; Babin, B.J. Multivariate data analysis: Its approach, evolution, and impact. In The Great Facilitator; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 121–130. [Google Scholar]
- Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Mark. Res. 1981, 18, 39–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. J. Mark. Res. 1981, 18, 382–388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hair, J.F.; Hult, G.T.M.; Ringle, C.; Sarstedt, M. A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM); Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Henseler, J.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2015, 43, 115–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Selig, J.P.; Preacher, K.J. Monte Carlo Method for Assessing Mediation: An Interactive Tool for Creating Confidence Intervals for Indirect Effects; Vanderbilt University: Nashville, TN, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Tabachnick, B.; Fidell, L. Using Multivariate Statistics, 6th ed.; Pearson International: London, UK, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Brown, T.A. Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research; Guilford Publications: New York, NY, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
Variable | Type | Frequency | Percentage |
---|---|---|---|
Gender | Male | 79 | 30.6 |
Female | 179 | 69.4 | |
Marital Status | Single | 188 | 72.9 |
Married | 70 | 27.1 | |
Age categories | 18–24 years old | 134 | 51.9 |
25–34 years old | 78 | 30.2 | |
35–44 years old | 46 | 17.8 | |
Living | Rural | 23 | 8.9 |
Urban | 150 | 58.1 | |
Suburban | 85 | 32.9 | |
Academic Status | Diploma | 70 | 27.1 |
Master’s | 23 | 8.9 | |
Doctorate degree | 10 | 3.9 | |
Bachelor’s degree | 155 | 60.1 |
Cronbach’s Alpha ≥0.70 | rho_A ≥0.70 | Composite Reliability ≥0.70 | McDonald’s ω ≥ 0.70 | AVE ≥0.50 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Course Evaluation | 0.868 | 0.871 | 0.901 | 0.869 | 0.603 |
Instructor’s Performance | 0.769 | 0.787 | 0.853 | 0.776 | 0.594 |
Student Factors | 0.757 | 0.770 | 0.861 | 0.770 | 0.676 |
Student–Instructor Interaction | 0.754 | 0.756 | 0.835 | 0.755 | 0.503 |
Students’ Awareness of _Online Learning | 0.930 | 0.932 | 0.939 | 0.905 | 0.544 |
Students’ Satisfaction | 0.931 | 0.937 | 0.944 | 0.932 | 0.708 |
Students’ Social Presence | 0.911 | 0.915 | 0.927 | 0.894 | 0.559 |
System Quality |
Variables | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Course Evaluation 1 | 0.777 | |||||||
Instructor’s Performance 2 | 0.524 | 0.771 | ||||||
Student Factors 3 | 0.488 | 0.461 | 0.822 | |||||
Student–Instructor Interaction 4 | 0.363 | 0.362 | 0.544 | 0.709 | ||||
Students’ Awareness of _Online Learning 5_ | 0.332 | 0.277 | 0.708 | 0.159 | 0.738 | |||
Students’ Satisfaction 6 | 0.238 | 0.227 | 0.481 | 0.122 | 0.625 | 0.841 | ||
Students’ Social Presence 7 | 0.332 | 0.383 | 0.802 | 0.277 | 0.487 | 0.3721 | 0.748 | |
System Quality 8 | 0.137 | 0.149 | 0.225 | 0.050 | 0.2666 | 0.213 | 0.206 | 1 |
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Course Evaluation (CE) | ||||||||
Instructor’s Performance (IP) | 0.879 | |||||||
Student factors (SFs) | 0.867 | 0.888 | ||||||
Student–Instructor Interaction (SII) | 0.730 | 0.770 | 1.010 | |||||
Students’ Awareness of Online Learning | 0.640 | 0.615 | 0.982 | 0.465 | ||||
Students’ Satisfaction (SS) | 0.527 | 0.538 | 0.799 | 0.399 | 0.839 | |||
Students’ Social Presence (SSP) | 0.695 | 0.733 | 1.065 | 0.622 | 0.755 | 0.651 | ||
System Quality (SQ) | 0.396 | 0.446 | 0.536 | 0.254 | 0.535 | 0.468 | 0.474 |
N | Hypotheses | β ≥ 0.15 | Standard Deviation | T ≥ 1.946 | p ≤ 0.05 | LL 2.5% | UL 97.5% | Decision | ƞ |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
H1 | IP→SF | 0.680 | 0.044 | 15.342 | 0.000 | 0.583 | 0.756 | Supported | 0.462 |
H2 | SF→SS | 0.620 | 0.101 | 6.108 | 0.000 | 0.395 | 0.792 | Supported | 0.384 |
H3 | IP→CE | 0.725 | 0.037 | 19.365 | 0.000 | 0.639 | 0.784 | Supported | 0.525 |
H4 | CE→SQ | 0.369 | 0.074 | 4.988 | 0.000 | 0.225 | 0.499 | Supported | 0.136 |
H5 | SQ→SS | 0.171 | 0.057 | 2.999 | 0.003 | 0.065 | 0.277 | Supported | 0.0292 |
H6 | IP→SS | −0.007 | 0.080 | 0.082 | 0.935 | −0.178 | 0.150 | Rejected | ne |
H7 | CE→SS | −0.003 | 0.100 | 0.031 | 0.975 | −0.210 | 0.191 | Rejected | ne |
Hypotheses | Original Sample | Standard Deviation | T Statistics | p Values | LL | UL | Decision |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(IP)-> (CE)-> (SQ) H8 | 0.268 | 0.056 | 4.790 | 0.000 | 0.164 | 0.372 | Supported |
(IP)-> (CE)-> (SS) H9 | −0.002 | 0.073 | 0.030 | 0.976 | −0.154 | 0.135 | Rejected |
(IP)-> (SF)-> (SS) H10 | 0.422 | 0.080 | 5.242 | 0.000 | 0.268 | 0.577 | Supported |
(CE)-> (SQ)-> (SS) H11 | 0.063 | 0.023 | 2.769 | 0.006 | 0.026 | 0.113 | Supported |
(IP)-> (CE)-> (SQ)-> (SS) H12 | 0.046 | 0.017 | 2.660 | 0.008 | 0.016 | 0.082 | Supported |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Mohammed, L.A.; Aljaberi, M.A.; Amidi, A.; Abdulsalam, R.; Lin, C.-Y.; Hamat, R.A.; Abdallah, A.M. Exploring Factors Affecting Graduate Students’ Satisfaction toward E-Learning in the Era of the COVID-19 Crisis. Eur. J. Investig. Health Psychol. Educ. 2022, 12, 1121-1142. https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe12080079
Mohammed LA, Aljaberi MA, Amidi A, Abdulsalam R, Lin C-Y, Hamat RA, Abdallah AM. Exploring Factors Affecting Graduate Students’ Satisfaction toward E-Learning in the Era of the COVID-19 Crisis. European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education. 2022; 12(8):1121-1142. https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe12080079
Chicago/Turabian StyleMohammed, Lubna Ali, Musheer A. Aljaberi, Asra Amidi, Rasheed Abdulsalam, Chung-Ying Lin, Rukman Awang Hamat, and Atiyeh M. Abdallah. 2022. "Exploring Factors Affecting Graduate Students’ Satisfaction toward E-Learning in the Era of the COVID-19 Crisis" European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education 12, no. 8: 1121-1142. https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe12080079