The Impact of User Satisfaction in the Use of E-Learning Systems in Higher Education: A CB-SEM Approach
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55151/ijeedu.v5i3.91Keywords:
Information Quality, System Quality, Service Quality, Structural Equation Modeling, Student SatisfactionAbstract
The primary objective of this research is to thoroughly investigate the intricate dynamics and collective influence of essential elements within the e-learning domain. Examining the interdependencies and combined effects of technology system quality, information quality, and support services on user satisfaction. This study investigates the key factors affecting user satisfaction in e-learning at Universitas Negeri Makassar, focusing on the roles of Information Quality, System Quality, and Service Quality. Survey data from 231 diverse students were analyzed using a Likert scale questionnaire, with Structural Equation Modeling via IBM AMOS. The findings aim to reveal how these quality dimensions impact user satisfaction, potentially guiding enhancements in e-learning system design. A comprehensive study examining e-learning systems conclusively found that System Quality, Information Quality, and Service Quality are pivotal factors influencing user satisfaction. Improving system functionality, ensuring the accuracy and relevance of information, and delivering high-quality service were all significantly correlated with higher satisfaction levels among users. This underscores the critical need for educational institutions to prioritize these aspects to enhance the e-learning experience. The research presents strong evidence that educational institutions can significantly boost user satisfaction by focusing on the quality of the system, information, and services provided in e-learning platforms. These findings provide actionable insights for decision-makers in the education sector, suggesting that investments in these areas will likely yield positive outcomes in user engagement and satisfaction with e-learning systems.
References
V. Florjancic and D. Lesjak, “E-learning and study effectiveness,” J. Comput. Inf. Syst, vol. 49, pp. 40–47, 2009.
A. K. Singh, M. A. Yusoff, and N. Oo, “A comparative study between traditional learning and e-learning,” in Proceedings of Teaching and Learning Open Forum 2009, 2009, pp. 1–7.
D. Keržič et al., “Academic student satisfaction and perceived performance in the e-learning environment during the COVID-19 pandemic: Evidence across ten countries,” PLoS One, vol. 16, no. 10, p. e0258807, 2021.
C. Goi and P. Y. Ng, “E-learning in Malaysia: Success factors in implementing e-learning program,” Int. J. Teach. Learn. High. Educ., vol. 20, no. 2, 2008.
T. C. Reeves, “The impact of media and technology in schools,” J. J. Art Des. Educ., vol. 2, pp. 58–63, 1998.
E. Dahlstrom, J. D. Walker, and C. Dziuban, “ECAR study of undergraduate students and information technology,” 2013.
R. Varma, “Women in information technology: A case study of undergraduate students in a minority-serving institution,” Bull. Sci. Technol. Soc., vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 274–282, 2002.
T. Chen, L. Peng, B. Jing, C. Wu, J. Yang, and G. Cong, “The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on user experience with online education platforms in China,” Sustainability, vol. 12, no. 18, p. 7329, 2020.
R. Oppermann, “User-interface design,” Handb. Inf. Technol. Educ. Train., pp. 233–248, 2002.
G. Maheshwari, “Factors affecting students’ intentions to undertake online learning: an empirical study in Vietnam,” Educ. Inf. Technol., vol. 26, no. 6, pp. 6629–6649, 2021.
Y.-C. Kuo, A. E. Walker, K. E. E. Schroder, and B. R. Belland, “Interaction, Internet self-efficacy, and self-regulated learning as predictors of student satisfaction in online education courses,” internet High. Educ., vol. 20, pp. 35–50, 2014.
A. Parasuraman, V. A. Zeithaml, and L. Berry, “SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality,” 1988, vol. 64, no. 1, pp. 12–40, 1988.
B. Schneider and S. S. White, Service quality: Research perspectives, vol. 107. Sage, 2004.
Y.-S. Wang, H.-Y. Wang, and D. Y. Shee, “Measuring e-learning systems success in an organizational context: Scale development and validation,” Comput. Human Behav., vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 1792–1808, 2007.
T.-H. Wang, “Developing an assessment-centered e-Learning system for improving student learning effectiveness,” Comput. Educ., vol. 73, pp. 189–203, 2014.
T.-H. Wang, “What strategies are effective for formative assessment in an e‐learning environment?,” J. Comput. Assist. Learn., vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 171–186, 2007.
F. D. Davis, “Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology,” MIS Q., pp. 319–340, 1989.
F. D. Davis, R. P. Bagozzi, and P. R. Warshaw, “User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models,” Manage. Sci., vol. 35, no. 8, pp. 982–1003, 1989.
T. Mulla, S. Munir, and V. Mohan, “An exploratory study to understand faculty members’ perceptions and challenges in online teaching,” Int. Rev. Educ., pp. 1–27, 2023.
F. Li, H. Lu, M. Hou, K. Cui, and M. Darbandi, “Customer satisfaction with bank services: The role of cloud services, security, e-learning and service quality,” Technol. Soc., vol. 64, p. 101487, 2021.
E. Alqurashi, “Predicting student satisfaction and perceived learning within online learning environments,” Distance Educ., vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 133–148, 2019.
B. Johnson and L. Christensen, Educational research: Quantitative and qualitative approaches. Allyn & Bacon, 2000.
J. R. Fraenkel and N. E. Wallen, How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education, 7th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Higher Education, 2009.
J. W. Creswell, A concise introduction to mixed methods research. SAGE publications, 2021.
J. W. Creswell, Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2002.
J. R. Fraenkel, N. E. Wallen, and H. H. Hyun, How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education, 7th ed., vol. 7. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1993.
V. Venkatesh and F. D. Davis, “A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies,” Manage. Sci., vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 186–204, 2000.
A. Bhattacherjee, “Understanding information systems continuance: An expectation-confirmation model,” MIS Q., pp. 351–370, 2001.
D. Gefen and D. W. Straub, “The relative importance of perceived ease of use in IS adoption: A study of e-commerce adoption,” J. Assoc. Inf. Syst., vol. 1, no. 1, p. 8, 2000.
W. H. Delone and E. R. McLean, “The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: a ten-year update,” J. Manag. Inf. Syst., vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 9–30, 2003.
D. Gefen and M. Keil, “The impact of developer responsiveness on perceptions of usefulness and ease of use: An extension of the technology acceptance model,” Acm sigmis database database Adv. Inf. Syst., vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 35–49, 1998.
M. Igbaria and M. Tan, “The consequences of information technology acceptance on subsequent individual performance,” Inf. Manag., vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 113–121, 1997.
W. J. Doll and G. Torkzadeh, “The measurement of end-user computing satisfaction,” MIS Q., pp. 259–274, 1988.
B. H. Wixom and P. A. Todd, “A theoretical integration of user satisfaction and technology acceptance,” Inf. Syst. Res., vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 85–102, 2005.
V. Venkatesh and H. Bala, “Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions,” Decis. Sci., vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 273–315, 2008.
P. B. Seddon, “A respecification and extension of the DeLone and McLean model of IS success,” Inf. Syst. Res., vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 240–253, 1997.
A. Hanif, F. Q. Jamal, and M. Imran, “Extending the technology acceptance model for use of e-learning systems by digital learners,” Ieee Access, vol. 6, pp. 73395–73404, 2018.
P. M. Bentler and C.-P. Chou, “Practical issues in structural modeling,” Sociol. Methods Res., vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 78–117, 1987.
B. M. Byrne, Structural equation modeling with LISREL, PRELIS, and SIMPLIS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Psychology Press, 2013.
B. Kutlu and A. Alkaya, “Measuring the DeLone and McLean model Of information systems success applied to banking sector of Turkey,” Int. J. Adv. Comput. Eng. Netw., vol. 3, no. 8, pp. 2106–2320, 2015.
S. Petter and E. R. McLean, “A meta-analytic assessment of the DeLone and McLean IS success model: An examination of IS success at the individual level,” Inf. Manag., vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 159–166, 2009.
D. Al-Fraihat, M. Joy, and J. Sinclair, “Evaluating E-learning systems success: An empirical study,” Comput. Human Behav., vol. 102, pp. 67–86, 2020.
P. Ifinedo and N. Nahar, “ERP systems success: an empirical analysis of how two organizational stakeholder groups prioritize and evaluate relevant measures,” Enterp. Inf. Syst., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 25–48, 2007.
Y. Gong and M. Janssen, “Measuring process flexibility and agility,” in Proceedings of the 4th international conference on theory and practice of electronic governance, 2010, pp. 173–182.
M. H. Riandi, H. Respati, and S. Hidayatullah, “Conceptual model of user satisfaction as mediator of e-learning services and system quality on students’ individual performance,” Int. J. Res. Eng. Sci. Manag., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 60–65, 2021.
J. A O’Brien and G. M Marakas, “Introduction to Information Systems.” 2010.
C.-S. Ong, M.-Y. Day, and W.-L. Hsu, “The measurement of user satisfaction with question answering systems,” Inf. Manag., vol. 46, no. 7, pp. 397–403, 2009.
S. Negash, T. Ryan, and M. Igbaria, “Quality and effectiveness in web-based customer support systems,” Inf. Manag., vol. 40, no. 8, pp. 757–768, 2003.
G. Kaisara and S. Pather, “The e-Government evaluation challenge: A South African Batho Pele-aligned service quality approach,” Gov. Inf. Q., vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 211–221, 2011.
N. Gorla, T. M. Somers, and B. Wong, “Organizational impact of system quality, information quality, and service quality,” J. Strateg. Inf. Syst., vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 207–228, 2010.
M. Stodnick and P. Rogers, “Using SERVQUAL to measure the quality of the classroom experience,” Decis. Sci. J. Innov. Educ., vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 115–133, 2008.
R. E. Mayer, “Using multimedia for e‐learning,” J. Comput. Assist. Learn., vol. 33, no. 5, pp. 403–423, 2017.
L. Pham, S. Williamson, and R. Berry, “Student perceptions of e-learning service quality, e-satisfaction, and e-loyalty,” Int. J. Enterp. Inf. Syst., vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 19–40, 2018.
Y.-F. Kuo, C.-M. Wu, and W.-J. Deng, “The relationships among service quality, perceived value, customer satisfaction, and post-purchase intention in mobile value-added services,” Comput. Human Behav., vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 887–896, 2009.
L. Hu and P. M. Bentler, “Cut-off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives,” Struct. Equ. Model. a Multidiscip. J., vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1–55, 1999.
G. D. Garson, Structural Equation Modeling, Blue Book. Asheboro, North Corolina: Statistical Associates Publishing, 2012.
K. G. Jöreskog and D. Sörbom, LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. Scientific Software International, 1993.
G. D. Garson, Partial Least Squares: Regression & structural equation modeling. Asheboro, USA: Statistical Publishing Associates, 2016.
J. J. Hox and T. M. Bechger, “An introduction to structural equation modeling,” 2007.
B. Wheaton, B. Muthen, D. F. Alwin, and G. F. Summers, “Assessing reliability and stability in panel models,” Sociol. Methodol., vol. 8, pp. 84–136, 1977.
E. G. Carmines, “Analyzing models with unobserved variables,” Soc. Meas. Curr. issues, vol. 80, 1981.
R. E. Schumacher and R. G. Lomax, A Beginner’s Guide to Structural Equation Modeling: Third Edition, 3rd ed. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2010.
J. S. Tanaka and G. J. Huba, “A general coefficient of determination for covariance structure models under arbitrary GLS estimation,” Br. J. Math. Stat. Psychol., vol. 42, no. 2, pp. 233–239, 1989.
J. H. Steiger and J. C. Lind, “Statistically based tests for the number of common factors,” 1980.
M. W. Browne and R. Cudeck, “Alternative ways of assessing model fit,” Sage Focus Ed., vol. 154, p. 136, 1993.
L. J. Williams and E. O’Boyle Jr, “The myth of global fit indices and alternatives for assessing latent variable relations,” Organ. Res. Methods, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 350–369, 2011.
F. Chen, P. J. Curran, K. A. Bollen, J. Kirby, and P. Paxton, “An empirical evaluation of the use of fixed cut-off points in RMSEA test statistic in structural equation models,” Sociol. Methods Res., vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 462–494, 2008.
L. R. Tucker and C. Lewis, “A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis,” Psychometrika, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 1–10, 1973.
P. M. Bentler and L. T. Hu, “Evaluating model fit,” in Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications, Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 1995, pp. 76–99.
P. M. Bentler, “SEM with simplicity and accuracy,” J. Consum. Psychol., vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 215–220, 2010, doi: 10.1016/j.jcps.2010.03.002.
T. A. Brown, Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research, 2nd ed. New York: The Guilford Press, 2015.
K. A. Bollen, “A new incremental fit index for general structural equation models,” Sociol. Methods Res., vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 303–316, 1989.
S. A. Mulaik, L. R. James, J. Van Alstine, N. Bennett, S. Lind, and C. D. Stilwell, “Evaluation of goodness-of-fit indices for structural equation models.,” Psychol. Bull., vol. 105, no. 4, pp. 430–445, 1989.
L. James, S. Mulaik, and J. M. Brett, Causal analysis: Assumptions, models, and data. Beverly Hills: Sage publications, 1982.
K. A. Bollen, J. S. Long, and K. G. Jöreskog, Testing structural equation models, vol. 154. Sage, 1993.
R. P. Bagozzi and Y. Yi, “On the evaluation of structural equation models,” J. Acad. Mark. Sci., vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 74–94, 1988.
J.-C. Hong, K.-H. Tai, M.-Y. Hwang, Y.-C. Kuo, and J.-S. Chen, “Internet cognitive failure relevant to users’ satisfaction with content and interface design to reflect continuance intention to use a government e-learning system,” Comput. Human Behav., vol. 66, pp. 353–362, 2017.
R. Wang, L. Chen, and I. Solheim, “Modeling dyslexic students’ motivation for enhanced learning in E-learning systems,” ACM Trans. Interact. Intell. Syst., vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 1–34, 2020.
X. Wang, W. Chen, H. Qiu, A. Eldurssi, F. Xie, and J. Shen, “A Survey on the E-learning platforms used during COVID-19,” in 2020 11th IEEE Annual Information Technology, Electronics and Mobile Communication Conference (IEMCON), 2020, pp. 808–814.
H.-M. Huang, S.-S. Liaw, and C.-M. Lai, “Exploring learner acceptance of the use of virtual reality in medical education: a case study of desktop and projection-based display systems,” Interact. Learn. Environ., vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 3–19, 2016.
J.-H. Wu and Y.-M. Wang, “Measuring KMS success: A respecification of the DeLone and McLean’s model,” Inf. Manag., vol. 43, no. 6, pp. 728–739, 2006.
S.-H. Liu, H.-L. Liao, and J. A. Pratt, “Impact of media richness and flow on e-learning technology acceptance,” Comput. Educ., vol. 52, no. 3, pp. 599–607, 2009.
J.-H. Wu, R. D. Tennyson, and T.-L. Hsia, “A study of student satisfaction in a blended e-learning system environment,” Comput. Educ., vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 155–164, 2010.
A. Y. Alsabawy, A. Cater-Steel, and J. Soar, “Determinants of perceived usefulness of e-learning systems,” Comput. Human Behav., vol. 64, pp. 843–858, 2016.
W. A. Cidral, T. Oliveira, M. Di Felice, and M. Aparicio, “E-learning success determinants: Brazilian empirical study,” Comput. Educ., vol. 122, pp. 273–290, 2018.
R. S. Sumi and G. Kabir, “Satisfaction of e-learners with electronic learning service quality using the servqual model,” J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex., vol. 7, no. 4, p. 227, 2021.
U. Haryaka, F. Agus, and A. H. Kridalaksana, “User satisfaction model for e-learning using smartphone,” Procedia Comput. Sci., vol. 116, pp. 373–380, 2017.
G. J. Udo, K. K. Bagchi, and P. J. Kirs, “Using SERVQUAL to assess the quality of e-learning experience,” Comput. Human Behav., vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 1272–1283, 2011.
P. Dangaiso, F. Makudza, and H. Hogo, “Modelling perceived e-learning service quality, student satisfaction and loyalty. A higher education perspective,” Cogent Educ., vol. 9, no. 1, p. 2145805, 2022.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Copyright of the published article belongs to the authors and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 (CC BY SA) International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See the Effect of Open Access).
