An investigation of the factors that influence online learners’ satisfaction with the learning experience
Pages 3807 - 3836
Abstract
Online learning environments offer flexibility for learners who would like to study at a distance. However, research informs us that online learners are usually less likely to complete the learning experience and more likely to drop out compared to learners studying in traditional face-to-face learning environments. One major factor for low completion rates emerges as learners’ satisfaction with the learning experience. The purposes of the study were to investigate the structural relationships among the factors that affect online learners’ satisfaction and to develop a structural model that explains satisfaction in online learning environments. We used social cognitive theory and the Macro Model of Motivation and Performance as theoretical frameworks and investigated the structural relationships among metacognitive self-regulation, self-efficacy for interacting with the instructor and peers, task value, learning design, perceived learning, and satisfaction with the learning experience. Participants consisted of 1297 higher education students who were enrolled in fully online courses. We adopted the structural equation modeling approach to investigate the relationships among the factors in the research model. Results revealed that self-regulation, self-efficacy, task value, and learning design had significant effects on perceived learning and satisfaction and perceived learning significantly influenced satisfaction. Moreover, learning design had a large effect on perceived learning and perceived learning mediated the relationships between satisfaction and self-efficacy, task value, and learning design. The findings have implications for designing online learning environments that incorporate learning design standards and generate greater levels of learning outcomes.
References
[1]
Abuhassna H, Al-Rahmi WM, Yahya N, Zakaria MAZM, Kosnin ABM, and Darwish M Development of a new model on utilizing online learning platforms to improve students’ academic achievements and satisfaction International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education 2020 17 1 1-23
[2]
Al-Samarraie H, Teng BK, Alzahrani AI, and Alalwan N E-learning continuance satisfaction in higher education: A unified perspective from instructors and students Studies in Higher Education 2018 43 11 2003-2019
[3]
Alanazi AA, Frey BB, Niileksela C, Lee SW, Nong A, and Alharbi F The role of task value and technology satisfaction in student performance in graduate-level online courses TechTrends 2020 64 922-930
[4]
Alavi M Computer-mediated collaborative learning: An empirical evaluation MIS Quarterly 1994 18 2 159-174
[5]
Aldholay AH, Isaac O, Abdullah Z, and Ramayah T The role of transformational leadership as a mediating variable in DeLone and McLean information system success model: The context of online learning usage in Yemen Telematics and Informatics 2018 35 5 1421-1437
[6]
Alqurashi E Predicting student satisfaction and perceived learning within online learning environments Distance Education 2019 40 1 133-148
[7]
Amoozegar A, Abdelmagid M, and Anjum T Course satisfaction and perceived learning among distance learners in Malaysian Research Universities: The impact of motivation, self-efficacy, self-regulated learning, and instructor immediacy behaviour Open Learning: The Journal of Open Distance and e-Learning Environments Research 2022
[8]
Anderson JC and Gerbing DW Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach Psychological Bulletin 1988 103 3 411-423
[9]
Anderson G, Tredway C, and Calice C A longitudinal study of nursing students’ perceptions of online course quality Journal of Interactive Learning Research 2015 26 1 5-21
[10]
Artino AR 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 2007 8 3 191-202
[11]
Asoodar M, Vaezi S, and Izanloo B Framework to improve e-learner satisfaction and further strengthen e-learning implementation Computers in Human Behavior 2016 63 704-716
[12]
Badali M, Hatami J, Farrokhnia M, and Noroozi O The effects of using Merrill’s first principles of instruction on learning and satisfaction in MOOC Innovations in Education & Teaching International 2022 59 2 216-225
[13]
Bailey D, Almusharraf N, and Hatcher R Finding satisfaction: Intrinsic motivation for synchronous and asynchronous communication in the online language learning context Education and Information Technologies 2021 26 2563-2583
[14]
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice Hall.
[15]
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman and Company.
[16]
Barbera E, Clarà M, and Linder-VanBerschot JA Factors influencing student satisfaction and perceived learning in online courses E–Learning and Digital Media 2013 10 3 226-235
[17]
Baturay MH Relationships among sense of classroom community, perceived cognitive learning and satisfaction of students at an e-learning course Interactive Learning Environments 2011 19 5 563-575
[18]
Bolliger DU and Halupa C Student perceptions of satisfaction and anxiety in an online doctoral program Distance Education 2012 33 1 81-98
[19]
Bolliger DU and Wasilik O Student satisfaction in large undergraduate courses Quarterly Review of Distance Education 2012 13 3 153-165
[20]
Bradford GR A relationship study of student satisfaction with learning online and cognitive load: Initial results The Internet and Higher Education 2011 14 4 217-226
[21]
Broadbent J and Poon WL Self-regulated learning strategies & academic achievement in online higher education learning environments: A systematic review The Internet and Higher Education 2015 27 1-13
[22]
Chiu CM, Sun SY, Sun PC, and Ju TL An empirical analysis of the antecedents of web-based learning continuance Computers & Education 2007 49 1224-1245
[23]
Cho MH and Heron ML Self-regulated learning: The role of motivation, emotion, and use of learning strategies in students’ learning experiences in a self-paced online mathematics course Distance Education 2015 36 1 80-99
[24]
Choi HJ and Park JH Testing a path-analytic model of adult dropout in online degree programs Computers & Education 2018 116 130-138
[25]
Cochran JD, Campbell SM, Baker HM, and Leeds EM The role of student characteristics in predicting retention in online courses Research in Higher Education 2014 55 27-48
[26]
Cropper, M. H., Bentley, J. P. H., & Schroder, K. (2009). How well do high-quality online courses employ Merrill’s first principles of instruction? In M. Orey, V. J. McClendon, & R. M. Branch (Eds.), Educational media and technology yearbook (pp. 121–140). Springer.
[27]
Dağhan G and Akkoyunlu B Modeling the continuance usage intention of online learning environments Computers in Human Behavior 2016 60 198-211
[28]
Eom SB Relationships among e-learning systems and e-learning outcomes: A path analysis model Human Systems Management 2011 30 229-241
[29]
Eom SB and Ashill N The determinants of students’ perceived learning outcomes and satisfaction in university online education: An update Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education 2016 14 2 185-215
[30]
Finney, S. J., & DiStefano, C. (2013). Nonnormal and categorical data in structural equation modeling. In G. R. Hancock, & R. O. Mueller (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: A second course (2 ed.). Information Age Publishing, Inc.
[31]
Frick TW, Chadha R, Watson C, Wang Y, and Green P College student perceptions of teaching and learning quality Educational Technology Research and Development 2009 57 5 705-720
[32]
Frick TW, Chadha R, Watson C, and Zlatkovska E Improving course evaluations to improve instruction and complex learning in higher education Educational Technology Research and Development 2010 58 2 115-136
[33]
Frick TW, Myers RD, and Dağlı C Analysis of patterns in time for evaluating effectiveness of first principles of instruction Educational Technology Research & Development 2022 70 1-29
[34]
Furlonger B and Gencic E Comparing satisfaction, life-stress, coping and academic performance of counselling students in on-campus and distance education learning environments Australian Journal of Guidance and Counselling 2014 24 1 76-89
[35]
Garip G, Seneviratne SR, and Iacovou S Learners’ perceptions and experiences of studying psychology online Journal of Computers in Education 2020 7 4 553-573
[36]
Green SB and Yang Y Reliability of summed item scores using structural equation modeling: An alternative to coefficient alpha Psychometrika 2009 74 1 155-167
[37]
Gunawardena CN, Linder-VanBerschot JA, LaPointe DK, and Rao L Predictors of learner satisfaction and transfer of learning in a corporate online education program The American Journal of Distance Education 2010 24 4 207-226
[38]
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage.
[39]
Hamdan KM, Al-Bashaireh AM, Zahran Z, Al-Daghestani A, AL-Habashneh S, and Shaheen AM University students’ interaction, internet self-efficacy, self-regulation and satisfaction with online education during pandemic crises of COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) International Journal of Educational Management 2021 35 3 713-725
[40]
Heckel C and Ringeisen T Pride and anxiety in online learning environments: Achievement emotions as mediators between learners’ characteristics and learning outcomes Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 2019 35 5 667-677
[41]
Henry M Online student expectations: A multifaceted, student-centered understanding of online education Student Success 2020 11 2 91-98
[42]
Henson RK and Roberts JK Use of exploratory factor analysis in published research: Common errors and some comment on improved practice Educational and Psychological Measurement 2006 66 3 393-416
[43]
Hu L and Bentler PM Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance stucture analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives Structual Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 1999 6 1 1-55
[44]
Im T and Kang M Structural relationships of factors which impact on learner achievement in online learning environment International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning 2019 20 1 111-124
[45]
İnan F, Yükseltürk E, Kuruçay M, and Flores R The impact of self-regulation strategies on student success and satisfaction in an online course International Journal on E-Learning 2016 16 1 23-32
[46]
Jan SK The relationships between academic self-efficacy, computer self-efficacy, prior experience, and satisfaction with online learning American Journal of Distance Education 2015 29 1 30-40
[47]
Jiang H, Islam AYMA, Gu X, and Spector JM Online learning satisfaction in higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic: A regional comparison between Eastern and Western Chinese universities Education and Information Technologies 2021 26 6747-6769
[48]
Joo YJ, Lim KY, and Kim EK Online university students’ satisfaction and persistence: Examining perceived level of presence, usefulness and ease of use as predictors in a structural model Computers & Education 2011 57 2 1654-1664
[49]
Joo YJ, Lim KY, and Kim J Locus of control, self-efficacy, and task value as predictors of learning outcome in an online university context Computers & Education 2013 62 149-158
[50]
Joo YJ, Oh E, and Kim SM Motivation, instructional design, flow, and academic achievement at a korean online university: A structural equation modeling study Journal of Computing in Higher Education 2015 27 28-46
[51]
Ke F and Kwak D Constructs of student-centered online learning on learning satisfaction of a diverse online student body: A structural equation modeling approach Journal of Educational Computing Research 2013 48 1 97-122
[52]
Keller JM Motivation and instructional design: A theoretical perspective Journal of Instructional Development 1979 2 4 26-34
[53]
Keller, J. M. (1983). Motivational design of instruction. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: An overview of their current status (1 vol., pp. 383–434). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
[54]
Keller, J. M. (2010). Motivational design for learning and performance: The ARCS model approach. Springer.
[55]
Kırmızı Ö The influence of learner readiness on student satisfaction and academic achievement in an online program at higher education Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology 2015 14 1 133-142
[56]
Klaus T and Changchit C Environmental factors of distance learning: An exploratory study International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education 2014 10 1 14-24
[57]
Kuo, Y. C. (2010). Interaction, internet self-efficacy, and self-regulated learning as predictors of student satisfaction in distance education courses [dissertation, Utah State University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. Logan, UT.
[58]
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 environment. World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications, Honolulu, HI, USA.
[59]
Landrum B Examining students’ confidence to learn online, self-regulation skills and perceptions of satisfaction and usefulness of online classes Online Learning 2020 24 3 128-146
[60]
Laurens-Arredondo LA and Valdés-Riquelme H M-learning adapted to the ARCS model of motivation and applied to a kinematics course Computer Applications in Engineering Education 2022 30 77-92
[61]
Lee JW Online support service quality, online learning acceptance, and student satisfaction The Internet and Higher Education 2010 13 4 277-283
[62]
Lee Y and Choi J A review of online course dropout research: Implications for practice and future research Educational Technology Research & Development 2011 59 593-618
[63]
Lee S and Koszalka TA Course-level implementation of first principles, goal orientations, and cognitive engagement: A multilevel mediation model Asia Pacific Education Review 2016 17 365-375
[64]
Lee SJ, Srinivasan S, Trail T, Lewis D, and Lopez S Examining the relationship among student perception of support, course satisfaction, and learning outcomes in online learning The Internet and Higher Education 2011 14 3 158-163
[65]
Lee Y, Choi J, and Kim T Discriminating factors between completers of and dropouts from online learning courses British Journal of Educational Technology 2013 44 2 328-337
[66]
Li K and Moore DR Motivating students in massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) using the attention, relevance, confidence, satisfaction (ARCS) model Journal of Formative Design in Learning 2018 2 102-113
[67]
Liaw SS Investigating students’ perceived satisfaction, behavioral intention, and effectiveness of e-Learning: A case study of the blackboard system Computers & Education 2008 51 2 864-873
[68]
Lin YM, Lin GY, and Laffey JM Building a social and motivational framework for understanding satisfaction in online learning Journal of Educational Computing Research 2008 38 1 1-27
[69]
Loftus J, Stavraky T, and Urquhart BL Design it yourself (DIY): In-house instructional design for online pharmacology Advances in Health Sciences Education 2014 19 645-659
[70]
Ma L and Lee CS Evaluating the effectiveness of blended learning using the ARCS model Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 2021 37 1397-1408
[71]
Maheshwari G Factors affecting students’ intentions to undertake online learning: An empirical study in Vietnam Education and Information Technologies 2021 26 6629-6649
[72]
Marks RB, Sibley SD, and Arbaugh JB Structural equation model of predictors for effective online learning Journal of Management Education 2005 29 4 531-563
[73]
Martín-Rodríguez Ó, Fernández-Molina JC, Montero-Alonso M, and González-Gómez F The main components of satisfaction with e-learning Technology Pedagogy and Education 2015 24 2 267-277
[74]
Mehall, S. (2021). Purposeful interpersonal interaction and the point of diminishing returns for graduate learners. Internet and Higher Education, 48,.
[75]
Merrill MD First principles of instruction Educational Technology Research and Development 2002 50 3 43-59
[76]
Merrill, M. D., Barclay, M., & van Schaak, A. (2008). Prescriptive principles for instructional design. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, van J. Merrienboer, & M. P. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (3 ed., pp. 173–184). Lawrance Erlbaum Associates.
[77]
Mtebe JS and Raphael C Key factors in learners’ satisfaction with the e-learning system at the University of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 2018 34 4 107-122
[78]
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2012). Mplus user’s guide (7 ed.). Muthén & Muthén.
[79]
National Center for Education Statistics – NCES (2022). Digest of Education Statistics. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d22/tables/dt22_311.15.asp.
[80]
Park JH and Choi HJ Factors influencing adult learners’ decision to drop out or persist in online learning Educational Technology & Society 2009 12 4 207-217
[81]
Patterson, B., & McFadden, C. (2009). Attrition in online and campus degree programs. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 12(2). https://ojdla.com/archive/summer122/patterson112.pdf.
[82]
Paul J and Jefferson F A comparative analysis of student performance in an online vs. face-to-face Environmental Science course from 2009 to 2016 Frontiers in Computer Science 2019 1 1-9
[83]
Pham L, Limbu YB, Bui TK, Nguyen HT, and Pham HT Does e-learning service quality influence e-learning student satisfaction and loyalty? Evidence from Vietnam International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education 2019 16 7 1-26
[84]
Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). A manual for the use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ).
[85]
Pozón-López I, Kalinic Z, Higueras-Castillo E, and Liébana-Cabanillas F A multi-analytical approach to modeling of customer satisfaction and intention to use in massive Open Online Courses (MOOC) Interactive Learning Environments 2019 28 8 1003-1021
[86]
Puška A, Puška E, Dragić L, Maksimović A, and Osmanović N Students’ satisfaction with e–learning platforms in Bosnia and Herzegovina Technology Knowledge and Learning 2020 26 173-191
[87]
Rabe-Hemp C, Woollen S, and Humiston GS A comparative analysis of student engagement, learning, and satisfaction in lecture hall and online learning settings Quarterly Review of Distance Education 2009 10 2 207-218
[88]
Rajabalee YB and Santally MI Learner satisfaction, engagement and performances in an online module: Implications for institutional e-learning policy Education and Information Technologies 2021 26 2623-2656
[89]
Reiseiter M, Lapointe L, and Korcuska J The impact of altered realties: Implications of online delivery for learners’ interactions, expectations, and learning skills International Journal on ELearning 2007 6 1 55-80
[90]
Rockinson-Szapkiw AJ, Wendt J, Wighting MJ, and Nisbet D The predictive relationship among the community of inquiry framework, perceived learning and online, and graduate students’ course grades in online synchronous and asynchronous courses International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning 2016 17 3 18-34
[91]
Rovai AP and Baker JD Gender differences in online learning: Sense of community, perceived learning, and interpersonal interactions Quarterly Review of Distance Education 2005 6 1 31-44
[92]
Russell, T. (1999). The no significant difference phenomenon. Office of Instructional Telecommunications, University of North Carolina.
[93]
Schijns JMC Measuring service quality at an online university: Using PLS-SEM with archival data Tertiary Education and Management 2021 27 2 161-185
[94]
Schunk, D. H. (2012). Learning theories: An educational perspective (6 ed.). Pearson Education, Inc.
[95]
Shen D, Cho MH, Tsai CL, and Marra R Unpacking online learning experiences: Online learning self-efficacy and learning satisfaction The Internet and Higher Education 2013 19 10-17
[96]
Shreffler MB, Cocco AR, and Shreffler JR An examination of the relationship between instruction type and course outcomes in Sport Management Courses Sport Management Education Journal 2019 13 2 53-62
[97]
Sorensen, C., & Donovan, J. (2017). An examination of factors that impact the retention of online students at a for-profit university. Online Learning, 206–221.
[98]
Summers JJ, Waigandt A, and Whittaker TA A comparison of student achievement and satisfaction in an online versus a traditional face-to-face statistics class Innovative Higher Education 2005 29 3 233-250
[99]
Sun PC, Tsai RJ, Finger G, Chen YY, and Yeh D What drives a successful e-learning? An empirical investigation of the critical factors influencing learner satisfaction Computers & Education 2008 50 4 1183-1202
[100]
Thistoll T and Yates A Improving course completions in distance education: An institutional case study Distance Education 2016 37 2 180-195
[101]
Turhangil-Erenler HH A structural equation model to evaluate students’ learning and satisfaction Computer Applications in Engineering Education 2020 28 2 254-267
[102]
Uçar H and Kumtepe AT Effects of the ARCS-V-based motivational strategies on online learners’ academic performance, motivation, volition, and course interest Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 2019 36 335-349
[103]
Um, N. H., & Jang, A. (2021). Antecedents and consequences of college students’ satisfaction with online learning. Social Behavior and Personality, 49(8),.
[104]
Venable, M. A. (2023). 2023 Online Education Trends Report. BestColleges. https://www.bestcolleges.com/research/annual-trends-in-online-education/.
[105]
Wei HC and Chou C Online learning performance and satisfaction: Do perceptions and readiness matter? Distance Education 2020 41 1 48-69
[106]
Winne, P. H. (2011). A cognitive and metacognitive analysis of self-regulated learning. In B. J. Zimmerman, & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 15–32). Routledge.
[107]
Yang CC, Tsai IC, Kim B, Cho MH, and Laffey JM Exploring the relationships between students’ academic motivation and social ability in online learning environments Internet and Higher Education 2006 9 277-286
[108]
Yavuzalp N and Bahçıvan E A structural equation modeling analysis of relationships among university students’ readiness for e-learning, self-regulation skills, satisfaction, and academic achievement Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning 2021 16 1 1-17
[109]
Yen SC, Lo Y, Lee A, and Enriquez J Learning online, offline, and in-between: Comparing student academic outcomes and course satisfaction in face-to-face, online, and blended teaching modalities Education and Information Technologies 2018 23 2141-2153
[110]
Zhou X, Chai CS, Jong M, Siu-Yung, and Xiong BX Does relatedness matter for online self-regulated learning to promote perceived learning gains and satisfaction? Asia Pacific Education Researcher 2021 30 3 205-215
[111]
Zimmerman BJ A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning Journal of Educational Psychology 1989 81 3 329-339
[112]
Zimmerman, B. J. (2011). Motivational sources and outcomes of self-regulated learning and performance. In B. J. Zimmerman, & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 49–64). Routledge.
Recommendations
Social presence in relation to students' satisfaction and learning in the online environment
Social presence, the ability to perceive others in an online environment, has been shown to impact student motivation and participation, actual and perceived learning, course and instructor satisfaction, and retention in online courses; yet very few ...
Promoting online learners' continuance intention
A model including both factors affecting flow and a chain of flow consequences is presented.Telepresence is found as the most important contributor for flow to occur in online learning.The impact of flow on continuance intention is fully mediated by ...
Factors Influencing Adult Learners?? Satisfaction in Online Learning
ICDTE '23: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Digital Technology in EducationOnline learning has been dramatically growing and accepted at an incredible rate and an increasing number of adult learners have chosen online learning as a typical method because of its convenience and flexibility. However, few studies have adopted the ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2023. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
Publisher
Kluwer Academic Publishers
United States
Publication History
Published: 27 June 2023
Accepted: 20 June 2023
Received: 17 April 2023
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 0Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)0
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 02 Feb 2025