Students’ Satisfaction with E-learning Platforms in Bosnia and Herzegovina

Abstract

This paper presents an empirical study of multidimensional relations in e-learning. The research is focused on students’ satisfaction with the usage of e-learning. Data for this survey were collected on the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina. By using random sample method, eleven higher education institutions in BIH were selected and the survey questionnaires were sent to their students. The collected data from students were analyzed and confirmed by applying confirmative factor analysis. The structural equations model was used to test the model. The obtained results have shown that Metacognitive strategies variable directly affects the students’ satisfaction when using e-learning, while students’ self-efficacy and goal setting variables indirectly affect the student’s satisfaction, along with the environment structuring and social dimensions. The given results from this research will help other higher education institutions to improve their e-learning platforms in e-learning and by doing so students will continue to use these platforms. The conducted research has given guidelines for the development of this type of learning.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

References

  1. Ale, K., Loh, Y. A.-C., & Chib, A. (2017). Contextualized-OLPC education project in rural India: measuring learning impact and mediation of computer self-efficacy. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(3), 769–794. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-017-9517-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2016). Online report card: Tacking online education in the United States. Newburyport, MA: Babson Survey Research Group.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Apaydin, M., & Hossary, M. (2017). Achieving metacognition through cognitive strategy instruction. International Journal of Educational Management, 31(6), 696–717. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-05-2016-0130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Baghurst, T., Tapps, T., & Kensinger, W. (2015). Setting goals for achievement in physical education settings. Strategies, A Journal for Physical and Sport Educators, 28(1), 27–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/08924562.2014.980876.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bakir, S. (2014). 5th Grade students’ opinions about active learning environment. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 3553–3558. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.801.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bognar, B., Gajger, V., & Ivić, V. (2016). Constructivist e-learning in higher education. Croatian Journal of Education, 18(S1), 31–46. https://doi.org/10.15516/cje.v18i0.2221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Borup, J., Graham, C. R., & Davies, R. S. (2013). The nature of adolescent learner interaction in a virtual high school setting. Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 29(2), 153–167. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2012.00479.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Burnette, J. L., O’Boyle, E. H., VanEpps, E. M., Pollack, J. M., & Finkel, E. J. (2013). Mind-sets matter: A meta-analytic review of implicit theories and self-regulation. Psychological Bulletin, 139(3), 655–701. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029531.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Callaghan, R. (2018). Developing mobile teaching practice: A collaborative exploration process. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 23(2), 331–350. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-017-9319-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Chen, Y.-C. (2014). An empirical examination of factors affecting college students’ proactive stickiness with a web-based English learning environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 31, 159–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.040.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Chien, T.-C. (2012). Computer self-efficacy and factors influencing e-learning effectiveness. European Journal of Training and Development, 36(7), 670–686. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090591211255539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Chiu, Y.-L., Liang, J.-C., & Tsai, C.-C. (2013). Internet-specific epistemic beliefs and self-regulated learning in online academic information searching. Metacognition and Learning, 8(3), 235–260. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-013-9103-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Cohen, A., & Baruth, O. (2017). Personality, learning, and satisfaction in fully online academic courses. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.030.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Cui, G., Lockee, B., & Meng, C. (2013). Building modern online social presence: A review of social presence theory and its instructional design implications for future trends. Education and Information Technologies, 18, 661–685. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-012-9192-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. DeMink-Carthew, J., Olofson, M. W., LeGeros, L., Netcoh, S., & Hennessey, S. (2017). An analysis of approaches to goal setting in middle grades personalized learning environments. Reaearch in Middle Level Education Online, 40(10), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/19404476.2017.1392689.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Djouad, T., & Mille, A. (2018). Observing and understanding an on-line learning activity: A model-based approach for activity indicator engineering. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 23(1), 41–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-017-9337-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Efklides, A. (2011). Interactions of metacognition with motivation and affect in self-regulated learning: The MASRL model. Educational Psychologist, 46(1), 6–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2011.538645.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ejubović, A., & Puška, A. (2019). Impact of self-regulated learning on academic performance and satisfaction of students in the online environment. Knowledge Management and E-Learning, 11(3), 345–363. https://doi.org/10.34105/j.kmel.2019.11.018.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Gaeta, M., Mangione, G. R., Orciuoli, F., & Salerno, S. (2013). Ambient e-Learning: A metacognitive approach. Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing, 4(1), 141–154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-012-0111-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Hsia, J.-W., Chang, C.-C., & Tseng, A.-H. (2014). Effects of individuals’ locus of control and computer self-efficacy on their e-learning acceptance in high-tech companies. Behaviour and Information Technology, 33(1), 51–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2012.702284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Hunga, M.-L., Chou, C., Chen, C.-H., & Own, Z.-Y. (2010). Learner readiness for online learning: Scale development and student perceptions. Computers and Education, 55(3), 1080–1090. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.05.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Jan, S. K. (2015). The relationships between academic self-efficacy, computer self-efficacy, prior experience, and satisfaction with online learning. American Journal of Distance Education, 29(1), 30–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2015.994366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Johnson, R. D., Gueutal, H., & Falbe, C. M. (2009). Technology, trainees, metacognitive activity and e-learning effectiveness. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 24(6), 545–566. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940910974125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Karlen, Y. (2016). Perceived learning environments and metacognitive strategy knowledge at the upper secondary school level. Journal for Educational Research Online, 8(2), 212–232. https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-126535.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Kauffman, H. (2015). A review of predictive factors of student success in and satisfaction dwith online learning. Research in Learning Technology, 23, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v23.26507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Ke, F., & Kwak, D. (2013). 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, 48(1), 97–122. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.48.1.e.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Khlaisang, J., & Songkram, N. (2019). Designing a virtual learning environment system for teaching twenty-first century skills to higher education students in ASEAN. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 24(1), 41–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-017-9310-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Kirmizi, O. (2014). Self-regulated learning strategies employed by regular, evening, and distance education English language and literature students. The Anthropologist, 18(2), 447–460. https://doi.org/10.1080/09720073.2014.11891563.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Kisac, I., & Budak, Y. (2014). Metacognitive strategies of the university students with respect to their perceived self-confidence levels about learning. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 3336–3339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.759.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Kistner, S., Rakoczy, K., Otto, B., Dignath-van Ewijk, C., Büttner, G., & Klieme, E. (2010). Promotion of self-regulated learning in classrooms: Investigating frequency, quality, and consequences for student performance. Metacognition and Learning, 5(2), 157–171. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-010-9055-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Kuo, Y.-C., Walker, A. E., Schroder, K. E. E., & Belland, B. R. (2014). Interaction, Internet self-efficacy, and self-regulated learning as predictors of student satisfaction in online education courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 20, 35–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.10.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Larbi-Siaw, O., & Owusu-Agyeman, Y. (2016). Miscellany of students’ satisfaction in an asynchronous learning environment. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 45(4), 456–475. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239516667499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Leigh Bruhn, A., Fernando, J., McDaniel, S., & Troughton, L. (2017). Putting behavioral goal-setting research into practice. Beyond Behavior, 26(2), 66–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/1074295617711208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Li, N., Marsh, V., & Rienties, B. (2016). Modelling and managing learner satisfaction: Use of learner feedback to enhance blended and online learning experience. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 14(2), 216–242. https://doi.org/10.1111/dsji.12096.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Li, Y., Yang, H. H., Cai, J., & MacLeod, J. (2017). College students’ computer self-efficacy, intrinsic motivation, attitude, and satisfaction in blended learning environments. In S. Cheung, L. Kwok, W. Ma, L. K. Lee, & H. Yang (Eds.), Blended learning. New challenges and innovative practices (pp. 65–73). Geneva: ICBL. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59360-9_6.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Lii, P., & Kuo, F.-I. (2016). Innovation-oriented supply chain integration for combined competitiveness and firm performance. International Journal of Production Economics, 174, 142–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.01.018.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Lin, C.-H., Zheng, B., & Zhang, Y. (2017). Interactions and learning outcomes in online language courses. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(3), 730–748. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Lu, J., & Churchill, D. (2014). The effect of social interaction on learning engagement in a social networking environment. Interactive Learning Environments, 22(4), 401–417. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2012.680966.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Martinez-Lopez, R., Yot, C., Tuovila, I., & Perera-Rodríguez, V. H. (2017). Online self-regulated learning questionnaire in a Russian MOOC. Computers in Human Behavior, 75, 966–974. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.06.015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Moeller, A. J., Theiler, J. M., & Wu, C. (2011). Goal setting and student achievement: A longitudinal study. The Modern Language Journal, 96(2), 153–169. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2011.01231.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Nebel, S., Schneider, S., Schledjewski, J., & Rey, G. D. (2017). Goal-setting in educational video games comparing goal-setting theory and the goal-free effect. Simulation and Gaming, 48(1), 98–130. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878116680869.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Negretti, R., & Kuteeva, M. (2011). Fostering metacognitive genre awareness in L2 academic reading and writing: A case study of pre-service English teachers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 20(2), 95–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2011.02.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Odaci, H. (2013). The role of computer self-efficacy, self-esteem, and subjective well-being in predicting research self-efficacy among postgraduate students. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 22(4), 399–406. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-012-0039-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Parahoo, S. K., Santally, M. I., Rajabalee, Y., & Lea, Harvey H. (2016). Designing a predictive model of student satisfaction in online learning. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 26(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/08841241.2015.1083511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Pellas, N., & Kazanidis, I. (2014). The impact of computer self-efficacy, situational interest and academic self-concept in virtual communities of inquiry during the distance learning procedures through Second Life. World Wide Web, 17(4), 695–722. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11280-013-0266-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Poortvliet, P. M., & Darnon, C. (2010). Toward a more social understanding of achievement goals, the interpersonal effects of mastery and performance goals. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19(5), 324–328. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721410383246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Puška, A., & Ejubović, A. (2016). Quality enhancement through determining the gap between the expectations and perceptions of students: EMPIRICA college case study. Proceedings of the Faculty of Economics in East Sarajevo, 12, 23–36. https://doi.org/10.7251/ZREFIS1612023P.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Puška, A., Maksimović, A., & Stojanović, I. (2018). Improving organizational learning by sharing information through innovative supply chain in agro-food companies from Bosnia and Herzegovina. Operational Research in Engineering Sciences: Theory and Applications, 1(1), 76–90. https://doi.org/10.31181/oresta19012010175p.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Rahyuda, A., Syed, J., & Soltani, E. (2014). The role of relapse prevention and goal setting in training transfer enhancement. Human Resource Development Review, 13(4), 413–436. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484314533337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Ratten, V. (2013). Cloud computing: A social cognitive perspective of ethics, entrepreneurship, technology marketing, computer self-efficacy and outcome expectancy on behavioural intentions. Australasian Marketing Journal, 21(3), 137–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ausmj.2013.02.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Richardson, J. C. (2017). Social presence in relation to students’ satisfaction and learning in the online environment: A meta-analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 402–417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Saleem, H., Beaudry, A., & Croteau, A.-M. (2011). Antecedents of computer self-efficacy: A study of the role of personality traits and gender. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(5), 1922–1936. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.04.017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Shen, C.-Y., & Liu, H.-C. (2011). Metacognitive skills development: A web-based approach in higher education. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(2), 140–150.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Sun, J. C.-Y., & Rueda, R. (2012). Situational interest, computer self-efficacy and self-regulation: Their impact on student engagement in distance education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(2), 191–204. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01157.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Tsai, Y-h, Lin, C-h, Hong, J-c, & Tai, K-h. (2018). The effects of metacognition on online learning interest and continuance to learn with MOOCs. Computers and Education, 121, 18–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.02.011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Ustunel, H. H., & Tokel, S. T. (2018). Distributed scaffolding: Synergy in technology-enhanced learning environments. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 23(1), 129–160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-017-9299-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Van Horne, S., Curran, M., Smith, A., VanBuren, J., Zahrieh, D., Larsen, R., et al. (2018). Facilitating student success in introductory chemistry with feedback in an online platform. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 23(1), 21–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-017-9341-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Waheed, M., Kaur, K., & Kumar, S. (2016). What role does knowledge quality play in online students’ satisfaction, learning and loyalty? An empirical investigation in an e-learning context. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32(6), 561–575. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Weaver, S. O. (2012). The effects of metacognitive strategies on academic achievement, metacognitive awareness, and satisfaction in an undergraduate online education course. Ph.D. dissertation. University of South Alabama.

  60. Wilson, H. K., & Cotgrave, A. (2016). Factors that influence students’ satisfaction with their physical learning environments. Structural Survey, 34(3), 256–275. https://doi.org/10.1108/SS-01-2016-0004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Wu, J.-Y. (2015). University students’ motivated attention and use of regulation strategies on social media. Computers and Education, 89, 75–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.08.016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Xia, B. S. (2017). An in-depth analysis of learning goals in higher education: evidence from the programming education. Journal of Learning Design, 10(2), 25–34. https://doi.org/10.5204/jld.v10i2.287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Zhou, Q., Lee, C. S., & Joanna Sin, S.-C. (2017). Using social media in formal learning: Investigating learning strategies and satisfaction. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 54(1), 472–482. https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.2017.14505401051.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Zohar, A., & Dori, Y. J. (2012). Introduction. In A. Zohar & Y. J. Dori (Eds.), Metacognition in science education: Trends in current research (pp. 1–19). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Adis Puška.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Puška, A., Puška, E., Dragić, L. et al. Students’ Satisfaction with E-learning Platforms in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Tech Know Learn 26, 173–191 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-020-09446-6

Download citation

Keywords

  • E-learning
  • Students’ satisfaction
  • Structural equations model