Key Factors for Determining Student Satisfaction in Online Courses

New Search

Print Abstract

E-mail Abstract

Full Text

Save to My Collections

Export Citation

Bolliger, D.U. (2004). Key Factors for Determining Student Satisfaction in Online Courses. International Journal on E-Learning, 3(1), 61-67. Norfolk, VA: AACE.
Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/p/2226.

• Share:
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

Journal Information

International Journal on E-Learning
ISSN 1537-2456
Volume 3, Issue 1, 2004
Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)  Norfolk, VA

More Information on IJEL

Author

Doris U. Bolliger, St. Cloud State University, United States

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate key factors influencing student satisfaction with online courses. The Biner instrument (1993) was modified to accommodate questions relating to online courses. One-hundred five respondents out of a sample of 303 online learners completed the resulting Online Course Satisfaction Survey. The results indicated student satisfaction with online courses is influenced by 3 constructs: instructor variables, technical issues, and interactivity. Results indicated the instrument is a valid measure of student satisfaction with online courses

Keywords

• Research Methods
• Physical Education
• Distance Education
• Educational Technology

References

1. Aggarwal, A. (Ed.) (2000). Web-based learning and teaching technologies: Opportunities and challenges. Hershey, PA: Idea Publishing Group.
2. American Psychological Association (APA) (1997). Learner-centered psychological principles: A framework for school redesign and reform. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved August 28, 2001, from: http://www.apa.org/ed/lco.html
3. Astin, A.W. (1993). What matters in college? Four critical years revisited. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
4. Bailey, B.L., Bauman, C., & Lata, K.A. (1998). Student retention and satisfaction: The evolution of a predictive model. Paper presented at the meeting of the Association for Institutional Research Conference, Minneapolis, MN. (ERIC Document
5. Bean, J.P., & Bradley, R.K. (1986). Untangling the satisfactionperformance relationship form college students. Journal of Higher Education, 57, 393-412.
6. Belanger, F., & Jordan, D.H. (2000). Evaluation and implementation of distance learning: Technologies, tools and techniques. Hershey, PA: Idea Publishing Group.
7. Biner, P.M. (1993). The development of an instrument to measure student attitudes toward televised courses. The American Journal of Distance Education, 7(1), 62-73.
8. Biner, P.M., Dean, R.S., & Mellinger, A.E. (1994). Factors underlying distance learner satisfaction with televised college-level courses. The American Journal of Distance Education, 8(1), 60-71.
9. Bonk, C.J., & Cunningham, D.J. (1998). Searching for learnercentered, constructivist, and sociocultural components of collaborative educational learning tools. In C.J. Bonk & K.S. King (Eds.), Electronic collaborators: Learner-centered technologies for literacy, apprenticeship, and discourse (pp. 25-50). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
10. Bower, B.L., & Kamata, A. (2000). Factors influencing student satisfaction with online courses. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 4(3), 52-56.
11. Card, K.A., & Horton, L. (2000). Providing access to graduate educat ion us ing
12. Chong, S. M. (1998). Models of asynchronous computer conferencing for collaborative learning in large college classes. In C. J.
13. Chute, A.G., Thompson, M.M., & Hancock, B.W. (1999). The
14. Donahue, T.L., & Wong, E.H. (1997). Achievement motivation and college satisfaction in traditional and nontraditional students. Education, 118, 237-243. Retrieved August 28, 2001, from: InfoTrac database (Item A20479498).
15. Edwards, J.E., & Waters, L.K. (1982). Involvement, ability, performance, and satisfaction as predictors of college attrition. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 42, 1149-1152. Feenberg, A.
16. Finaly-Neumann, E. (1994). Course work characteristics and students’ satisfaction with instructions. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 21(2), 14-19.
17. Gunawardena, C.N., & Zittle, R.H. (1998). Faculty development programmes in distance education in American higher education. In C. Latchem & F. Lockwood (Eds.), Staff development in open and flexible learning (pp. 105-114). New York: Routledge. Hara, N., & Kling, R. (2000). Students’ distress with a web-based distance education course: An ethnographic study of participants’ exper iences. B loom ington, IN: Center for Soc ia l
18. Harrison, N. (1999). How to design self-directed and distance learning. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
19. Hiltz, S.R. (1993). Correlates of learning in a virtual classroom. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 39, 71-98.
20. Hobbs, V.M., & Christianson, J.S. (1997). Virtual classrooms. Educational opportunity through two-way interactive television. Basel: Technomic Publishing.
21. Jaffee, D. (1998). Institutionalized resistance to asynchronous learning networks. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks,
22. Keegan, D. (1990). Foundations of distance education (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.
23. Knox, W.E., Lindsay, P., & Kolb, M.N. (1993). Does college make
24. Maki, R.H., Maki, W.S., Patterson, M., & Whittaker, P.D. (2000). Evaluation of a web-based introductory psychology course: I. Learning and satisfaction in online versus lecture course. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 32, 230-239.
25. Mood, T.A. (1995). Distance education: An annotated bibliography. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.
26. Moore, M.G., & Kearsley, G. (1996). Distance education: A systems view. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.
27. National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (1998). Issue brief: Distance education in higher educational institutions: Incidences, audiences, and plans to expand. Retrieved October 25, 2001, from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs98/98132.html
28. National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (1999). Distance education at postsecondary education institutions: 1997-98 (NCES Publication No. 2000-013). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
29. Navarro, P. (2000). The promise-and potential pitfalls-of cyberlearning. In R. A. Cole (Ed.), Issues in web-based pedagogy (pp. 281-297). Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
30. Navarro, P., & Shoemaker, J. (2000). Performance and perceptions of distance learners in cyberspace. The American Journal of Distance Education, 14(2), 15-35.
31. Neely, L., Niemi, J.A., & Ehrhard, B.J. (1998). Classes going the distance so people don’t have to: Instructional opportunities for adult learners. T.H.E. Journal Online, 26(4). Retrieved August 28, 2001, from: http://www.thejournal.com/magazine/vault/A2039.cfm
32. Noble, D.F. (1998). Digital diploma mills: The automation of higher education. First Monday, 3(1). Retrieved October 25, 2001, from http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue3_1/noble/index.html
33. Palloff, R.M., & Pratt, K. (1999). Building learning communities in cyberspace: Effect ive strateg ies for the c lassroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
34. Powers, S.M., Davis, M., & Torrence, E. (1999). Person-environment interaction in the virtual classroom: An initial examination. Paper presented at the National Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Houston, TX. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 436 185)
35. Rahm, D., & Reed, B.J. (1998). Tangled webs in public administration: Organizational issues
36. Richards, C.N., & Ridley, D.R. (1997). Factors affecting college students’ persistence in on-line computer-managed instruction. College Student Journal, 31, 490-495.
37. Shaw, S., & Polovina, S. (1999). Practical experiences of, and lessons learnt from, internet technologies in higher education. Educational Technology & Society, 2(2). Retrieved November 02, 1999, from: http://ifets.ieee.og/periodical/vol._3_99/stephen_shaw.html
38. Smith, P.L., & Dillon, C.L. (1999). Comparing distance learning and classroom learning: Conceptual considerations. The American Journal of Distance Education, 13(2), 6-23.
39. Wegerif, R. (1998). The social dimensions of asynchronous learning networks. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 2(1). Retrieved October 25, 2001, from: http://www.aln.org/alnweb/journal/vol2_issue1/wegerif.htm
40. Wetzel, C.D., Radtke, P.H., & Stern, H.W. (1994). Instructional effectiveness of video media. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
41. Williams, W.M., & Ceci, S.J. (1997). "How’m I doing?" Problems with student ratings of instructors and courses. Change, 29, 12-23.

Also Read

• Instructors and Students Competences, Perceptions and Access to E-learning Technologies: Implications for E-learning Implementation at the Open University of Tanzania
• Strategies for teacher professional development on TPACK, Part 2
• Developing Teacher’s TPCK for Teaching Mathematics With Spreadsheets
• Supporting E-Learning with Technologies for Electronic Documents
• Usage Analysis in Learning Systems
• The Expanded Will, Skill, Tool Model : A Step toward Developing Technology Tools That Work
• Perspectives on Blended Learning in Higher Education
• A Special Passage Through Asia E-Learning
• Do Entry Characteristics of Online Learners Affect Their Satisfaction?
• Understanding Online Learning Through a Qualitative Description of Profesors and Students' Experiences

Tags