Student Satisfaction with Online Learning: A Multigroup Analysis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26594/register.v8i2.2804Keywords:
Internet Quality, User Interface Quality, Delivery Quality, Perceived Experience, Voluntarily ParticipationAbstract
The Coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic “forced” students to attend online classes roughly from mid-March 2020. This situation, which caused universities, among other institutions, to deal with an overnight change in course delivery from traditional face-to-face to online mode, has resulted in many students facing difficulties. They must cope with the available infrastructure, unstable and limited Internet connection, course delivery, and their self-discipline. Male and female students may have different preferences regarding technology use. This study focused on student satisfaction with the above situation and determined whether a difference exists between male and female students using Technology Acceptance Model as the main theoretical background. Seven hypotheses were proposed and tested with the whole dataset and comparisons between the two groups. Due to the strict health protocol, an online survey was employed using Google Form to collect data. Respondents were 327 undergraduate students from one higher institution in Yogyakarta, comprising 140 male and 187 female students. The population consisted of undergraduate students who have been attending online classes since March 2022. A multigroup analysis was performed using SmartPLS 3.3.3. Results indicated no gender difference in all hypothesized relationships. The theoretical contribution can be seen from the use of Internet Quality, User Interface Quality, and Delivery Quality as the three exogenous variables of the proposed model. The practical contribution is that technology designers must pay attention to the different preferences of user groups.
References
J. Y. Wu and T. Cheng, “Who is better adapted in learning online within the personal learning environment? Relating gender differences in cognitive attention networks to digital distraction,” Comput. Educ., vol. 128, pp. 312–329, January 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2018.08.016.
A. Alghamdi, A. C. Karpinski, A. Lepp, and J. Barkley, “Online and face-to-face classroom multitasking and academic performance: Moderated mediation with self-efficacy for self-regulated learning and gender,” Comput. Hum. Behav., vol. 102, pp. 214–222, January 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2019.08.018.
S. S. Man, S. Alabdulkarim, A. H. S. Chan, and T. Zhang, “The acceptance of personal protective equipment among Hong Kong construction workers: An integration of technology acceptance model and theory of planned behavior with risk perception and safety climate,” J. Safety Res., vol. 79, pp. 329–340, December 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.jsr.2021.09.014.
R. Ibrahim, N. S. Leng, R. C. M. Yusoff, G. N. Samy, S. Masrom, and Z. I. Rizman, “E-learning acceptance based on technology acceptance model (TAM),” J. Fundam. Appl. Sci., vol. 9, no. 4S, p. 871, 2018, doi: 10.4314/jfas.v9i4S.50.
M. Rizun and A. Strzelecki, “Students’ acceptance of the covid-19 impact on shifting higher education to distance learning in Poland,” Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, vol. 17, no. 18, pp. 1–19, 2020, doi: 10.3390/ijerph17186468.
N. M. Almusharraf and S. H. Khahro, “Students Satisfaction with Online Learning Experiences during the COVID-19 Pandemic,” Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Learn., vol. 15, no. 21, pp. 246–267, 2020, doi: 10.3991/ijet.v15i21.15647.
S. Ghaderizefreh and M. L. Hoover, “Student satisfaction with online learning in a blended course,” Int. J. Digit. Soc., vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 1393–1398, 2018, doi: 10.20533/ijds.2040.2570.2018.0172.
M. Casile, J. G. Gerard, and M. Soto-Ferrari, “Gender differences in self-efficacy, acceptance, and satisfaction in business simulations,” Int. J. Manag. Educ., vol. 19, no. 2, p. 100473, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.ijme.2021.100473.
ISO, “ISO 9241-210: 2019, Ergonomic of human-system interaction - Part 210: Human-centered design for interactive systems”. 2019.
M. Maqableh and M. Alia, “Evaluation online learning of undergraduate students under lockdown amidst COVID-19 Pandemic: The online learning experience and students’ satisfaction,” Child. Youth Serv. Rev., vol. 128, p. 106160, September 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2021.106160.
A. Bossman and S. K. Agyei, “Technology and instructor dimensions, e-learning satisfaction, and academic performance of distance students in Ghana,” Heliyon, vol. 8, no. 4, p. e09200, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09200.
D. L. Schacter, D. T. Gilbert, and D. M. Wagner, Psychology, 2nd ed. New York: Worth Publisher, 2011.
M. A. Ansari and P. Tamta, “A Study of University Student’s Perceptions towards e-Learning,” vol. 263145, no. 2001, pp. 1–12, 2017 [Online]. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320347145_A_Study_of_University_Student’s_Perceptions_towards_e-Learning.
M. V. Mahajan and R. Kalpana, “A study of students’ perception about e-learning,” Indian J. Clin. Anat. Physiol., vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 501–507, 2020, doi: 10.18231/2394-2126.2018.0116.
D. Kozlova and M. Pikhart, “The use of ICT in higher education from the perspective of the university students,” Procedia Comput. Sci., vol. 192, pp. 2309–2317, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2021.08.221.
L. Yekefallah, P. Namdar, R. Panahi, and L. Dehghankar, “Factors related to students’ satisfaction with holding e-learning during the Covid-19 pandemic based on the dimensions of e-learning,” Heliyon, vol. 7, no. 7, p. e07628, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07628.
P. I. Santosa, “Student engagement with online tutorial: A perspective on flow theory,” Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Learn., vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 60-67, 2016, doi: 10.3991/ijet.v10i1.4348.
C. M. Ringle, W. Sven, and J.-M. Becker, “SmartPLS 3,” Boenningstedt, 2015 [Online]. Available: http://www.smartpls.com.
J. F. Hair, G. T. M. Hult, C. M. Ringle, and M. Sarstedt, A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), 2nd ed. California: SAGE Publications, Inc., 2017.
J. F. Hair Jr., L. M. Matthews, R. L. Matthews, and M. Sarstedt, “PLS-SEM or CB-SEM: Updated guidelines on which method to use,” Int. J. Multivariate Data Analysis., vol. 1, no. 2, p. 107, 2017, doi: 10.1504/IJMDA.2017.10008574.
D. Eshun Yawson and F. Amofa Yamoah, “Gender variability in e-learning utility essentials: Evidence from a multi-generational higher education cohort,” Comput. Hum. Behav., vol. 114, p. 106558, January 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2020.106558.
H. Kizgin, A. Jamal, Y. K. Dwivedi, and N. P. Rana, “The impact of online vs. offline acculturation on purchase intentions: A multigroup analysis of the role of education,” J. Bus. Res., vol. 130, pp. 724–735, June 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.05.011.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Paulus Insap Santosa
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Please find the rights and licenses in Register: Jurnal Ilmiah Teknologi Sistem Informasi. By submitting the article/manuscript of the article, the author(s) agree with this policy. No specific document sign-off is required.
1. License
The non-commercial use of the article will be governed by the Creative Commons Attribution license as currently displayed on Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
2. Author(s)' Warranties
The author warrants that the article is original, written by stated author(s), has not been published before, contains no unlawful statements, does not infringe the rights of others, is subject to copyright that is vested exclusively in the author and free of any third party rights, and that any necessary written permissions to quote from other sources have been obtained by the author(s).
3. User/Public Rights
Register's spirit is to disseminate articles published are as free as possible. Under the Creative Commons license, Register permits users to copy, distribute, display, and perform the work for non-commercial purposes only. Users will also need to attribute authors and Register on distributing works in the journal and other media of publications. Unless otherwise stated, the authors are public entities as soon as their articles got published.
4. Rights of Authors
Authors retain all their rights to the published works, such as (but not limited to) the following rights;
Copyright and other proprietary rights relating to the article, such as patent rights,
The right to use the substance of the article in own future works, including lectures and books,
The right to reproduce the article for own purposes,
The right to self-archive the article (please read out deposit policy),
The right to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the article's published version (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal (Register: Jurnal Ilmiah Teknologi Sistem Informasi).
5. Co-Authorship
If the article was jointly prepared by more than one author, any authors submitting the manuscript warrants that he/she has been authorized by all co-authors to be agreed on this copyright and license notice (agreement) on their behalf, and agrees to inform his/her co-authors of the terms of this policy. Register will not be held liable for anything that may arise due to the author(s) internal dispute. Register will only communicate with the corresponding author.
6. Royalties
Being an open accessed journal and disseminating articles for free under the Creative Commons license term mentioned, author(s) aware that Register entitles the author(s) to no royalties or other fees.
7. Miscellaneous
Register will publish the article (or have it published) in the journal if the article’s editorial process is successfully completed. Register's editors may modify the article to a style of punctuation, spelling, capitalization, referencing and usage that deems appropriate. The author acknowledges that the article may be published so that it will be publicly accessible and such access will be free of charge for the readers as mentioned in point 3.
Editorial Board
Author Guidelines
Focus and Scope
Online Submissions
Author Fees 
Journal History
