Designing a predictive model of student satisfaction in online learning

References

• Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2008). Staying the course: Online education in the United States, 2008, The Sloan consortium. Babson Survey Research Group, 23 p. Retrieved from http://www.sloanc.
   Google Scholar
• Alves, H., & Raposo, M. (2009). The measurement of the construct satisfaction in higher education. The Service Industries Journal, 29(2), 203–218. doi: 10.1080/02642060802294995
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arambewela, R., & Hall, J. (2009). An empirical model of international student satisfaction. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 21(4), 555–569. doi: 10.1108/13555850910997599
   Google Scholar
• Barnett, M. L., Jermier, J. M., & Lafferty, B. A. (2006). Corporate reputation: The definitional landscape. Corporate Reputation Review, 9(1), 26–38. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.crr.1550012
   Google Scholar
• Beqiri, M. S., Chase, N. M., & Bishka, A. (2009). Online course delivery: An empirical investigation of factors affecting student satisfaction. Journal of Education for Business, 85(2), 95–100. doi: 10.1080/08832320903258527
   Google Scholar
• Bolliger, D. U., & Martindale, T. (2004). Key factors for determining student satisfaction in online courses. International Journal on E-Learning, 3(1), 61–67.
   Google Scholar
• Bray, E., Aoki, K., & Dlugosh, L. (2008). Predictors of learning satisfaction in Japanese online distance learners. International Review of Research in Open & Distance Learning, 9(3), 1–24.
   Google Scholar
• Butcher, K., Sparks, B., & O'Callaghan, F. (2001). Evaluative and relational influences on service loyalty. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 12(4), 310–327. doi: 10.1108/09564230110405253
   Google Scholar
• Cronin, J. J. Jr., & Taylor, S. A. (1992). Measuring service quality: A re-examination and extension. Journal of Marketing, 56(3), 33–55. doi: 10.2307/1252296
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Croxton, R. A. (2014). The role of interactivity in student satisfaction and persistence in online learning. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 10(2), 314–325.
   Google Scholar
• Debourgh, G. (1999). Technology is the tool, teaching is the task: Student satisfaction in distance learning. Paper presented at the Society for Information and Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, San Antonio, TX.
   Google Scholar
• Einarson, M. K., & Matier, M. W. (2005). Exploring race differences in correlates of seniors’ satisfaction with undergraduate education. Research in Higher Education, 46(6), 641–676. doi: 10.1007/s11162-004-4138-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Endres, M. L., Chowdhury, S., Frye, C., & Hurtubis, C. A. (2009). The multifaceted nature of online MBA student satisfaction and impacts on behavioral intentions. Journal of Education for Business, 84(5), 304–312. doi: 10.3200/JOEB.84.5.304-312
   Google Scholar
• Farahmandian, S., Minavand, H., & Afshardost, M. (2013). Perceived service quality and student satisfaction in higher education. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 12(4), 65–74. doi: 10.9790/487X-1246574
   Google Scholar
• Firdaus, A. (2005). The development of HEdPERF: A new measuring instrument of service quality for the higher education sector. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 30, 569–581.
   Google Scholar
• Gibson, A. (2010). Measuring business student satisfaction: A review and summary of the major predictors. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 32(3), 251–259. doi: 10.1080/13600801003743349
   Google Scholar
• Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Helgesen, O., & Nesset, E. (2007). Images, satisfaction and antecedents: Drivers of student loyalty? A case study of a Norwegian university college. Corporate Reputation Review, 10(1), 38–59. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.crr.1550037
   Google Scholar
• Hollenbeck, C. R., Mason, C. H., & Song, J. H. (2011). Enhancing student learning in marketing courses: An exploration of fundamental principles for website platforms. Journal of Marketing Education, 33(2), 171–182. doi: 10.1177/0273475311410850
   Google Scholar
• Ivankova, N. V., & Stick, S. L. (2007). Students’ persistence in a distributed doctoral program in educational leadership in higher education: A mixed methods study. Research in Higher Education, 48(1), 93–135. doi: 10.1007/s11162-006-9025-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Turner, L. A. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), 112–133. doi: 10.1177/1558689806298224
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuo, Y. C., Walker, A. E., Belland, B. R., & Schroder, K. E. (2013). A predictive study of student satisfaction in online education programs. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 14(1), 16–39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuo, Y. K., & Ye, K. D. (2009). The causal relationship between service quality, corporate image and adults’ learning satisfaction and loyalty: A study of professional training programmes in a Taiwanese vocational institute. Total Quality Management, 20(7), 749–762. doi: 10.1080/14783360903037085
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LeBlanc, G., & Nguyen, N. (1997). Searching for excellence in business education: An exploratory study of customer impressions of service quality. International Journal of Educational Management, 11(2), 72–79.
   Google Scholar
• Letcher, D. W., & Neves, J. S. (2010). Determinants of undergraduate business student satisfaction. Research in Higher Education Journal, 6(1), 1–26.
   Google Scholar
• McFarland, D., & Hamilton, D. (2005). Factors affecting student performance and satisfaction: Online versus traditional course delivery. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 46(2), 25–32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore, M. G. (1989). Three types of transaction. In M. G. Moore & G. C. Clark (Eds.), Readings in principles of distance education (pp. 100–105). University Park: The Pennsylvania State University.
   Google Scholar
• Newman, S., & Jahdi, K. (2009). Marketisation of education: Marketing, rhetoric and reality. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 33(1), 1–11. doi: 10.1080/03098770802638226
   Google Scholar
• O'Driscoll, F. (2012). What matters most: An exploratory multivariate study of satisfaction among first year hotel/hospitality management students. Quality Assurance in Education, 20(3), 237–258. doi: 10.1108/09684881211240303
   Google Scholar
• Oliver, R. L. (1999). Whence consumer loyalty? Journal of Marketing, 63(Special Issue), 33–44. doi: 10.2307/1252099
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parahoo, S. K., Harvey, H. L., & Tamim, R. M. (2013). Factors influencing student satisfaction in universities in the Gulf region: Does gender of students matter? Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 23(2), 135–154. doi: 10.1080/08841241.2013.860940
   Google Scholar
• Parahoo, S. K., & Tamim, R. M. (2012). Determinants of student satisfaction in higher education: An empirical study in Dubai. International Journal of Services, Economics and Management, 4(4), 282–297. doi: 10.1504/IJSEM.2012.050949
   Google Scholar
• Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1988). Servqual. Journal of retailing, 64(1), 12–40.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Platt, C. A., Raile, A. N., & Yu, N. (2014). Virtually the same? Student perceptions of the equivalence of online classes to face-to-face classes. Journal of Online Learning & Teaching, 10(3), 489–503.
   Google Scholar
• Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 539–569. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Santally, M., Sungkur, R., Fagoonee, I., Halkhoree, R., Swarts, & P. Mikkonen, J. (2013). Assessment of environmental, institutional and individual leadership capacity needs for the knowledge society in Mauritius. Global e-Schools and Communities Initiative, (pp. 10–21). Retrieved from http://www.gesci.org/assets/files/ALICT_Mauritius_Sit.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Sher, A. (2009). Assessing the relationship of student-instructor and student-student interaction to student learning and satisfaction in web-based online learning environment. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 8(2), 102–120.
   Google Scholar
• Sivadas, E., & Baker-Prewitt, J. L. (2000). An examination of the relationship between service quality, customer satisfaction, and customer loyalty. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 28(2), 73–82. doi: 10.1108/09590550010315223
   Google Scholar
• Sultan, P., & Wong, H. Y. (2012). Service quality in a higher education context: An integrated model. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 24(5), 755–784. doi: 10.1108/13555851211278196
   Google Scholar
• Sung, M., & Yang, S. U. (2009). Student–university relationships and reputation: A study of the links between key factors fostering students’ supportive behavioral intentions towards their university. Higher Education, 57(6), 787–811. doi: 10.1007/s10734-008-9176-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomas, E. H., & Galambos, N. (2004). What satisfies students? Mining student-opinion data with regression and decision-tree analysis. Research in Higher Education, 45(3), 251–269. doi: 10.1023/B:RIHE.0000019589.79439.6e
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thurmond, V. A., Wambach, K., Connors, H. R., & Frey, B. B. (2002). Evaluation of student satisfaction: Determining the impact of a web-based environment by controlling for student characteristics. The American Journal of Distance Education, 16(3), 169–190. doi: 10.1207/S15389286AJDE1603_4
   Google Scholar
• Vidaver-Cohen, D. (2007). Reputation beyond the rankings: A conceptual framework for business school research. Corporate Reputation Review, 10(4), 278–304. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.crr.1550055
   Google Scholar
• Walker, C. E., & Kelly, E. (2007). Online instruction: Student satisfaction, kudos, and pet peeves. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 8(4), 309–319.
   Google Scholar
• Yukselturk, E., & Yildirim, Z. (2008). Investigation of interaction, online support, course structure and flexibility as the contributing factors to students’ satisfaction in an online certificate program. Educational Technology & Society, 11(4), 51–65.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar