Critical factors affecting student satisfaction in a distance learning environment
and
Mar 01, 2024
About this article
Article Category: Research Article
Published Online: Mar 01, 2024
Page range: 1 - 23
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/eurodl-2023-0014
Keywords
© 2024 Evangelia Lysitsa et al., published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
ANOVA results comparing the means of variables in relation to employment status
F | Sig. | |
---|---|---|
Learner–learner interaction | 0.810 | 0.447 |
Learner–tutor interaction | 0.127 | 0.881 |
Self-regulated learning | 1.152 | 0.320 |
Student satisfaction | 3.366 | 0.038 |
Internet self-efficacy | 0.525 | 0.593 |
Variables in the equation
Variables in the equation | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
B | SE | Wald | df | Sig. | Exp(B) | ||
Step 1 |
Learner–tutor interaction | 1.175 | 0.316 | 13.792 | 1 | 0.000 | 3.238 |
Constant | -3.244 | 1.187 | 7.468 | 1 | 0.006 | 0.039 | |
Step 2 |
Learner–tutor interaction | 1.005 | 0.316 | 10.087 | 1 | 0.001 | 2.732 |
Self-regulated learning | 1.101 | 0.485 | 5.166 | 1 | 0.023 | 3.008 | |
Constant | -6.408 | 1.900 | 11.379 | 1 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
Model summary
Step | -2 Log likelihood |
---|---|
1 | 114.931 |
2 | 109.374 |
Classification table
Observed values | Predicted values | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Satisfaction | Correct classification percentage | ||||
0.00 | 1.00 | ||||
Step1 | Satisfaction | 0.00 | 7 | 21 | 25.0 |
1.00 | 4 | 90 | 95.7 | ||
Overall percentage | 79.5 | ||||
Step 2 | Satisfaction | 0.00 | 9 | 19 | 32.1 |
1.00 | 4 | 90 | 95.7 | ||
Overall percentage | 81.1 |
Socio-demographic characteristics of the students participating in the survey
Variable | Percentage (%) | ||
---|---|---|---|
Gender | Men | 58 | 48.5 |
Women | 64 | 52.5 | |
Age (years) | £30 | 19 | 15.6 |
31–40 | 55 | 45.1 | |
41–50 | 42 | 34.4 | |
>50 | 6 | 4.9 | |
Educational level | Tertiary Technical Institute (ATEI) graduates | 23 | 18.9 |
University (AEI) graduates | 71 | 58.1 | |
Master’s | 23 | 18.9 | |
PhD | 5 | 4.1 | |
Employment status | Fully employed | 96 | 78.7 |
Semi-/part-time employed | 17 | 13.9 | |
Unemployed | 9 | 7.4 | |
Previous experience in distance learning | Yes | 23 | 18.9 |
No | 99 | 81.1 |
Hosmer–Lemeshow Test
Bήμα | Chi-square | Df | Sig. |
---|---|---|---|
1 | 11.798 | 8 | 0.160 |
2 | 4.165 | 8 | 0.842 |
Mean and standard deviations
Learner–learner interaction | Learner–tutor interaction | Self-regulated learning | Student satisfaction | Internet self-efficacy | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mean | 2.53 | 3.95 | 3.55 | 3.67 | 3.77 |
Standard deviation | 0.86 | 0.77 | 0.51 | 0.91 | 0.79 |
ANOVA results comparing the means of variables in relation to the number of modules
F | p | |
---|---|---|
Learner–learner interaction | 1.061 | 0.349 |
Learner–tutor interaction | 5.993 | 0.003 |
Self-regulated learning | 2.449 | 0.091 |
Student satisfaction | 0.966 | 0.384 |
Internet self-efficacy | 1.534 | 0.220 |
Classification table Block 0
Observed values | Predicted values | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Satisfaction | Percentage correct | ||||
0 | 1 | ||||
Step 0 | Satisfaction | 0 | 0 | 28 | 0.0 |
1 | 0 | 94 | 100.0 | ||
Overall percentage | 77.0 |
Pearson correlation coefficients
Learner–learner interaction | Learner–tutor interaction | Selfregulated learning | Satisfaction | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Learner–learner interaction | Pearson correlation | 1 | |||
Sig. (two-tailed) | |||||
Learner–tutor interaction | Pearson correlation | 0.338 |
1 | ||
Sig. (two-tailed) | 0.000 | ||||
Self-Regulated learning | Pearson correlation | 0.279 |
0.294 |
1 | |
Sig. (two-tailed) | 0.002 | 0.001 | |||
Satisfaction | Pearson correlation | 0.276 |
0.465 |
0.395 |
1 |
Sig. (two-tailed) | 0.002 | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||
Internet Self-efficacy | Pearson correlation | 0.194 |
0.260 |
0.322 |
0.315 |
Sig. (two-tailed) | 0.032 | 0.004 | 0.000 | 0.000 |