Managing students’ attitude, learning engagement, and stickiness towards e-learning post-COVID-19 in Australian universities: a perceived qualities perspective

References

• Abou N, M., Nachouki, M., & Ankit, A. (2012). Evaluating student satisfaction with blended learning in a gender-aggregated environment. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 11, 185–200. https://doi.org/10.28945/1692
   Google Scholar
• Adeoye, I. A., Adanikin, A. F., & Adanikin, A. (2020). COVID-19 and E-learning: Nigeria tertiary education system experience. International Journal of Research and Innovations in Applied Science, 5(1), 28–31.
   Google Scholar
• Adewole-Odeshi, E. (2014). Attitude of students towards E-learning in south-west Nigerian universities: An application of Technology Acceptance Model. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal), 15(1), 1035. Retrieved 9 February, 2021, from https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2504&context=libphilprac.
   Google Scholar
• Ahmad, T., Alvi, A., & Ittefaq, M. (2019). The use of social media on political participation among university students: An analysis of survey results from rural Pakistan. Sage Open, 9(3), 2158244019864484. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019864484
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Al-Adwan, A. S., Albelbisi, N. A., Hujran, O., Al-Rahmi, W. M., & Alkhalifah, A. (2021). Developing a holistic success model for sustainable e-learning: A structural equation modeling approach. Sustainability, 13(16), 9453. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13169453
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Al-Fraihat, D., Joy, M., Masa'deh, R., & Sinclair, J. (2020). Evaluating E-learning systems success: An empirical study. Computers in Human Behaviour, 102, 67–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.08.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Al-Joodeh, M., Aziz, N., Mojtaba, P., & Mohammed, L. (2017). Mediating role of student satisfaction on the relationship between educational quality, service quality and the adoption of E-learning. Journal of Economic and Management Perspective, 11(3), 1772–1779.
   Google Scholar
• Aldholay, A., Abdullah, Z., Isaac, O., & Mutahar, A. M. (2020). Perspective of Yemeni students on use of online learning. Information Technology & People, 33(1), 106–128. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-02-2018-0095
   Google Scholar
• Ali, M., Amir, H., & Ahmed, M. (2021). The role of university switching costs, perceived service quality, perceived university image and student satisfaction in shaping student loyalty. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 1122 (ahead-of-print).
   Google Scholar
• Ali, W. (2020). Online and remote learning in higher education institutes: a necessity in light of COVID-19 pandemic. Higher Education Studies, 10(3), 16–25. https://doi.org/10.5539/hes.v10n3p16
   Google Scholar
• Alkhattabi, M., Neagu, D., & Cullen, A. (2011). Assessing information quality of e-learning systems: A web mining approach. Computers in Human Behaviour, 27(2), 862–873. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.11.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alsabswy, A. Y., Cater-Steel, A., & Soar, J. (2013). IT infrastructure services as a requirement for e-learning system success. Computers & Education, 69, 431–451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.035
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amiruddin, N. H., Ariffin, A. M., & Aziz, N. A. (2021). Virtual travel community: does information quality matters? International Journal of Business Continuity and Risk Management, 11(2-3), 263–276. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJBCRM.2021.116285
   Google Scholar
• Baby, A., & Kannammal, A. (2020). Network Path Analysis for developing an enhanced TAM model: A user-centric e-learning perspective. Computers in Human Behaviour, 107, 106081. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.07.024
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bao, Z., & Huang, T. (2018). Exploring stickiness intention of B2C online shopping malls: A perspective from information quality. International Journal of Web Information Systems, 14(2), 177–192. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJWIS-10-2017-0071
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baragash, R. S., & Al-Samarraie, H. (2018). Blended learning: Investigating the influence of engagement in multiple learning delivery modes on students’ performance. Telematics and Informatics, 35(7), 2082–2098. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2018.07.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barratt, J. M., & Duran, F. (2021). Does psychological capital and social support impact engagement and burnout in online distance learning students? The Internet and Higher Education, 51(4), 100821. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2021.100821
   Google Scholar
• Bazelais, P., Doleck, T., & Lemay, D. J. (2018). Investigating the predictive power of TAM: A case study of CEGEP students’ intentions to use online learning technologies. Education and Information Technologies, 23(1), 93–111. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-017-9587-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boas, T. C., Christenson, D. P., & Glick, D. M. (2020). Recruiting large online samples in the United States and India: Facebook, mechanical turk, and qualtrics. Political Science Research and Methods, 8(2), 232–250. https://doi.org/10.1017/psrm.2018.28
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bremer, C. (2012). Enhancing e-learning quality through the application of the AKUE procedure model. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28(1), 15–26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00444.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brumini, G., Špalj, S., Mavrinac, M., Biocina-Lukenda, D., Strujic, M., & Brumini, M. (2014). Attitudes towards e-learning amongst dental students at the universities in Croatia. European Journal of Dental Education, 18(1), 15–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/eje.12068
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byrne, B. M. (2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS, EQS, and LISREL: Comparative approaches to testing for the factorial validity of a measuring instrument. International Journal of Testing, 1(1), 55–86. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327574IJT0101_4
   Google Scholar
• Cakır, R., & Solak, E. (2015). Attitude of Turkish EFL learners towards e-learning through TAM model. Procedia-Social and Behavioural Sciences, 176, 596–601. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.515
   Google Scholar
• Chaka, C. (2020). Higher education institutions and the use of online instruction and online tools and resources during the COVID-19 outbreak - an online review of selected U.S. and SA's universities. Research Square, 1, 1–46.
   Google Scholar
• Chao, H. C., Lai, C. F., Chen, S. Y., & Huang, Y. M. (2014). A M-Learning content recommendation service by exploiting mobile social interactions. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 7(3), 221–230. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2014.2323053
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, C. F., & Tsai, D. (2007). How destination image and evaluative factors affect behavioural intentions? Tourism Management, 28(4), 1115–1122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2006.07.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, Y., & Lin, Z. (2018). Fashionability vis-à-vis rationality: Investigating factors driving users'e-tourism website stickiness. Current Issues in Tourism, 21(1), 41–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2015.1055714
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheng, Y. (2012). Effects of quality antecedents on e-learning acceptance. Internet Research, 22(3), 361–390. https://doi.org/10.1108/10662241211235699
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheng, P., & Ding, R. (2021). The effect of online review exercises on student course engagement and learning performance: A case study of an introductory financial accounting course at an international joint venture university. Journal of Accounting Education, 54, 100699.
   Google Scholar
• Chikazhe, L., Makanyeza, C., & Kakava, N. Z. (2022). The effect of perceived service quality, satisfaction and loyalty on perceived job performance: perceptions of university graduates. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 32(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/08841241.2020.1793442
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chin, W. W., Thatcher, J. B., & Wright, R. T. (2012). Assessing common method bias: Problems with the ULMC technique. MIS Quarterly, 36(3), 1003–1019. https://doi.org/10.2307/41703491
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chiou, J. S., & Droge, C. (2006). Service quality, trust, specific asset investment, and expertise: Direct and indirect effects in a satisfaction-loyalty framework. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(4), 613–625. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070306286934
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chou, T. C. (2014). A scale of university students’ attitudes toward e-learning on the Moodle system. International Journal of Online Pedagogy and Course Design, 4(3), 49–65. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijopcd.2014070104
   Google Scholar
• Cidral, W. A., Oliveira, T., Di Felice, M., & Aparicio, M. (2018). E-learning success determinants: Brazilian empirical study. Computers & Education, 122, 273–290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.12.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coates, H. (2006). Student engagement in campus-based and online education. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Coffey, M., & Gibbs, G. (2001). The evaluation of the student evaluation of educational quality questionnaire (SEEQ) in UK higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 26(1), 89–93.
   Google Scholar
• Conrad, C., Deng, Q., Caron, I., Shkurska, O., Skerrett, P., & Sundararajan, B. (2022). How student perceptions about online learning difficulty influenced their satisfaction during Canada's Covid-19 response. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(3), 534–557. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13206
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Darawong, C., & Sandmaung, M. (2019). Service quality enhancing student satisfaction in international programs of higher education institutions: a local student perspective. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 29(2), 268–283. https://doi.org/10.1080/08841241.2019.1647483
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis, F. D. (1987). User acceptance of information systems: the technology acceptance model (TAM). University of Michigan.
   Google Scholar
• DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (2003). The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: a ten-year update. Journal of Management Information Systems, 19(4), 9–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2003.11045748
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deschenes, M. F., Goudreau, J., Fontaine, G., & Charette, M. (2019). Theoretical foundations of educational strategies used in e-learning environments for developing clinical reasoning in nursing students: A scoping review. Nurse Education in Practice, 41, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2019.102632
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dessart, L., Veloutsou, C., & Morgan-Thomas, A. (2016). Capturing consumer engagement: duality, dimensionality and measurement. Journal of Marketing Management, 32(5-6), 399–426. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2015.1130738
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dickinger, A. d. S. B. (2013). Website performance and behavioural consequences: A formative measurement approach. Journal of Business Research, 66(6), 771–777. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.09.017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DiStefano, C., & Hess, B. (2005). Using confirmatory factor analysis for construct validation: An empirical review. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 23(3), 225–241. https://doi.org/10.1177/073428290502300303
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eduard, E., & Lucian, L. (2020). Is Romanian prepared for e-learning during the COVID-19 pandemic? Sustainability, 12(13), 1–2.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Efiloğlu Kurt, Ö. (2019). Examining an e-learning system through the lens of the information systems success model: Empirical evidence from Italy. Education and Information Technologies, 24(2), 1173–1184. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9821-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ehlers, U. D. (2004). Quality in e-learning from a learner's perspective. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning, 7(1), 1–10.
   Google Scholar
• El Alfy, S., & Abukari, A. (2020). Revisiting perceived service quality in higher education: uncovering service quality dimensions for postgraduate students. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 30(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/08841241.2019.1648360
   Google Scholar
• Elliot, S., Li, G., & Choi, C. (2013). Understanding service quality in a virtual travel community environment. Journal of Business Research, 66(8), 1153–1160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.03.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ewing, L. A. (2021). Rethinking higher education post COVID-19. In The Future of Service Post-COVID-19 Pandemic, Volume 1. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Fan, Y., Chen, J., Shirkey, G., John, R., Wu, S. R., Park, H., & Shao, C. (2016). Applications of structural equation modeling (SEM) in ecological studies: An updated review. Ecological Processes, 5(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13717-016-0044-6
   Google Scholar
• Farrell, A. M., & Rudd, J. M. (2009). Factor analysis and discriminant validity: A brief review of some practical issues. ANZMAC 2009 conference proceedings.
   Google Scholar
• Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1977). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Fredericks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• García, P., Amandi, A., Schiaffino, S., & Campo, M. (2007). Evaluating Bayesian networks’ precision for detecting students’ learning styles. Computers & Education, 49(3), 794–808. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.11.017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis (7th ed). Pearson Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Hair, J. F., Howard, M. C., & Nitzl, C. (2020). Assessing measurement model quality in PLS-SEM using confirmatory composite analysis. Journal of Business Research, 109, 101–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.11.069
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henrie, C. R., Halverson, L. R., & Graham, C. R. (2015). Measuring student engagement in technology-mediated learning: A review. Computers & Education, 90, 36–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.09.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hollebeek, L. D., Glynn, M. S., & Brodie, R. J. (2014). Consumer brand engagement in social media: Conceptualisation, scale development and validation. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 28(2), 149–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2013.12.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hsu, C. L., & Lin, J. C. (2016). Effect of perceived value and social influences on mobile app stickiness and in-app purchase intention. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 108, 42–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.04.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hu, P. J. H., & Hui, W. (2012). Examining the role of learning engagement in technology-mediated learning and its effects on learning effectiveness and satisfaction. Decision Support Systems, 53(4), 782–792. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2012.05.014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang, L., Jia, L., & Song, J. (2015). Antecedents of user stickiness and loyalty and their effects on users' group-buying repurchase intention. The twenty first Americas conference on information systems, Puerto Rico.
   Google Scholar
• Indreica, E. S., & Cazan, A. M. (2016). Time management, constellation of interests and students’ attitude towards e-learning platform. Education, 21(14), 32–38.
   Google Scholar
• Israel, G. D. (1992). Sampling the evidence of extension program impact. Program evaluation and organisational development, IFAS, University of Florida. PEOD-5. October.
   Google Scholar
• Jakubowski, T. G., & Dembo, M. H. (2004). The relationship of self-efficacy, identity style, and stage of change with academic self-regulation. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 35(1), 7–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/10790195.2004.10850165
   Google Scholar
• Jiang, G., Liu, F., Liu, W., Liu, S., Chen, Y., & Xu, D. (2021). Effects of information quality on information adoption on social media review platforms: Moderating role of perceived risk. Data Science and Management, 1(1), 13–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsm.2021.02.004
   Google Scholar
• Jovi, M., Kostic, S. M., & Neskovic, E. (2017). Factors affecting students attitudes towards e-learning. Management, 22(2), 73–80.
   Google Scholar
• Jordan, P. J., & Troth, A. C. (2020). Common method bias in applied settings: The dilemma of researching in organizations. Australian Journal of Management, 45(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/0312896219871976
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kerres, M. (2020). Against all odds: education in Germany coping with COVID-19. Post-digital Science Education, 2(3), 690–694.
   Google Scholar
• Khan, M., Parvaiz, G., Bashir, N., Imtiaz, S., & Bae, J. (2022). Students’ key determinant structure towards educational technology acceptance at universities, during COVID 19 lockdown: Pakistani perspective. Cogent Education, 9(1), https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2039088
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khan, M., Sarmad, M., Ullah, S., & Bae, J. (2020). Education for sustainable development in humanitarian logistics. Journal of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management, 10(4), 573–602. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHLSCM-03-2020-0022
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, G., Shin, B., & dan Kwon, O. (2012). Investigating the value of sociomaterialism in conceptualizing IT capability of a firm. Journal of Management Information Systems, 29(3), 327–362. https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222290310
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, S., Baek, T. H., Kim, Y. K., & Yoo, K. (2016). Factors affecting stickiness and word of mouth in mobile applications. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 10(3), 177–192. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIM-06-2015-0046
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, S., Lee, J., Yoon, S. H., & Kim, H. W. (2022). How can we achieve better e-Learning success in the new normal? Internet Research, 33(1), 410–441. https://doi.org/10.1108/INTR-05-2021-0310
   Google Scholar
• Kline, P. (2014). An easy guide to factor analysis. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Kordrostami, M., & Seitz, V. (2022). Faculty online competence and student affective engagement in online learning. Marketing Education Review, 32(3), 240–254. https://doi.org/10.1080/10528008.2021.1965891
   Google Scholar
• Leach, V., Tonkin, E., Lancastle, D., & Kirk, M. (2016). A strategy for implementing genomics into nursing practice informed by three behaviour change theories. International Journal of Nursing Practice, 22(3), 307–315. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijn.12431
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, J., Zo, H., & Lee, H. (2014). Smart learning adoption in employees and HRD managers. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(6), 1082–1096. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12210
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, A., Atiquil Islam, Y. M., & Gu, X. (2021). Factors engaging college students in online learning: An investigation of learning stickiness. SAGE Open, 11(4), 215824402110591. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211059181
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liaw, S. S. (2008). Investigating students’ perceived satisfaction, behavioral intention, and effectiveness of e-learning: A case study of the Blackboard system. Computers & Education, 51(2), 864–873. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.09.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lien, C. H., Cao, Y., & Zhou, X. (2017). Service quality, satisfaction, stickiness, and usage intentions: An exploratory evaluation in the context of WeChat services. Computers in Human Behavior, 68, 403–410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.11.061
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin, J. C. (2007). Online stickiness: its antecedents and effect on purchasing intention. Behaviour & Information Technology, 26(6), 507–516. https://doi.org/10.1080/01449290600740843
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lu, H., Liu, S., Huang, W., & Mou, J. (2021). Challenges and opportunities for information systems research during and after coronavirus. Pacific Asia Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 13(2), 1–12.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luo, N., Zhang, M., & Qi, D. (2017). Effects of different interactions on students’ sense of community in e-learning environment. Computers & Education, 115, 153–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.08.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahmood, S. (2020). Instructional strategies for online teaching in COVID-19 pandemic. Human Behaviour and Emerging Technology, 3(1), 199–203.
   Google Scholar
• Mandreza, F., & Natalie, C. (2019). Learning styles and attitude towards e-learning among university undergraduate students in international program in Bangkok Thailand. Human Sciences, 11(1), 118–129.
   Google Scholar
• Manwaring, K. C., Larsen, R., Graham, C. R., Henrie, C. R., & Halverson, L. R. (2017). Investigating student engagement in blended learning settings using experience sampling and structural equation modeling. The Internet and Higher Education, 35, 21–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2017.06.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marjanovic, U., Delić, M., & Lalic, B. (2016). Developing a model to assess the success of e-learning systems: Evidence from a manufacturing company in transitional economy. Information Systems and e-Business Management, 14(2), 253–272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10257-015-0282-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, L. (2020). Foundations for good practice: The student experience of online learning in Australian higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic. Australian Government Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency.
   Google Scholar
• Martinez-Arguelles, M., Castan, J., & Juan, A. (2010). How do students measure service quality in e-learning? A case study regarding an internet-based university. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 8(2), 151–160.
   Google Scholar
• Mohammadi, H. (2015). Investigating users’ perspectives on e-learning: An integration of TAM and IS success model. Computers in Human Behavior, 45, 359–374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.07.044
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore, J. L., Dickson-Deane, C., & Galyen, K. (2011). e-learning, online learning, and distance learning environments: Are they the same? The Internet and Higher Education, 14(2), 129–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.10.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ng, S. C., Sweeney, J. C., & Plewa, C. (2020). Customer engagement: A systematic review and future research priorities. Australasian Marketing Journal, 28(4), 232–252.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nicolaou, A., Ibrahim, M., & van Heck, E. (2013). Information quality, trust, and risk perceptions in electronic data exchanges. Decision Support Systems, 54(2), 986–996. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2012.10.024
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nunkoo, R., Teeroovengadum, V., Thomas, P., & Leonard, L. (2017). Integrating service quality as a second-order factor in a customer satisfaction and loyalty model. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 29(12), 2978–3005. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-11-2016-0610
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oakley, B., Poole, D., & Nestor, M. (2016). Creating a sticky MOOC. Online Learning, 20(1), 13–24. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v20i1.731
   Google Scholar
• Panigrahi, R., Srivastava, P. R., & Panigrahi, P. K. (2021). Effectiveness of e-learning: the mediating role of student engagement on perceived learning effectiveness. Information Technology & People. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-07-2019-0380.
   Google Scholar
• Pansari, A., & Kumar, V. (2017). Customer engagement: The construct, antecedents, and consequences. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45(3), 294–311. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-016-0485-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peltier, J. W., Schibrowsky, J. A., & Drago, W. (2007). The interdependence of the factors influencing the perceived quality of the online learning experience: A causal model. Journal of Marketing Education, 29(2), 140–153. https://doi.org/10.1177/0273475307302016
   Google Scholar
• Pervan, M., Curak, M., & Pavic Kramaric, T. (2018). The influence of industry characteristics and dynamic capabilities on firms’ profitability. International Journal of Financial Studies, 6(1), 4–15. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijfs6010004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petter, S., DeLone, W., & McLean, E. (2008). Measuring information systems success: models, dimensions, measures, and interrelationships. European Journal of Information Systems, 17(3), 236–263. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2008.15
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pérez-Aróstegui, M. N., Bustinza-Sánchez, F., & Barrales-Molina, V. (2015). Exploring the relationship between information technology competence and quality management. Business Research Quarterly, 18(1), 4–17.
   Google Scholar
• Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioural research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 885(879), 1025–1037.
   Google Scholar
• Prasetyo, Y. T., Ong, A. K. S., Concepcion, G. K. F., Navata, F. M. B., Robles, R. A. V., Tomagos, I. J. T., Young, M. N., Diaz, J. F. T., Nadlifatin, R., & Redi, A. N. P. (2021). Determining factors affecting acceptance of e-learning platforms during the COVID-19 pandemic: integrating extended technology acceptance model and DeLone & McLean IS success model. Sustainability, 13(83655), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13158365
   Google Scholar
• Putri, W. K., & Pujani, V. (2019). The influence of system quality, information quality, e-service quality and perceived value on Shopee consumer loyalty in Padang City. The International Technology Management Review, 8(1), 10–15. https://doi.org/10.2991/itmr.b.190417.002
   Google Scholar
• Rabaa’i, A. A. (2009). Assessing information systems success models: Empirical comparison (Research in Progress). In 20th Australian conference on information systems, 2–4 December 2009, Melbourne, Australia.
   Google Scholar
• Raes, A., Vanneste, P., Pieters, M., Windey, I., Norgate, W., & Depaepe, F. (2020). Learning and instruction in the hybrid virtual classroom: An investigation of students’ engagement and the effect of quizzes. Computers & Education, 143, 103682. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103682
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rajabalee, Y. B., & Santally, M. I. (2020). Learner satisfaction, engagement and performances in an online module: Implications for institutional e-learning policy. Education and Information Technologies, 26(3), 2623–2656.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reinartz, W., Haenlein, M., & Henseler, J. (2009). An empirical comparison of the efficacy of covariance-based and variance-based SEM. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 26(4), 332–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2009.08.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reisetter, M., LaPointe, L., & Korcuska, J. (2007). The impact of altered realities: Implications of online delivery for learners’ interactions, expectations, and learning skills. International Journal of E-Learning, 6(1), 55–79.
   Google Scholar
• Resti Fitriani, W., Hidayanto, A. N., Sandhyaduhita, P. I., Purwandari, B., & Kosandi, M. (2019). Determinants of continuance intention to Use open data website: An insight from Indonesia. Pacific Asia Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 11(2), 5–14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rhema, A., & Miliszewska, I. (2014). Analysis of student attitudes towards e-learning: The case of engineering students in Libya. Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 11, 169–190. https://doi.org/10.28945/1987
   Google Scholar
• Riham, A. (2015). Manage perceived e-learning quality in Egyptian context. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 28(5-6), 600–613. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2015.1103174
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robinson, A., & Cook, D. (2018). “Stickiness”: gauging students’ attention to online learning activities. Information and Learning Science, 119(7/8), 460–468. https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-03-2018-0014
   Google Scholar
• Robinson, L. (2017). Embracing online education: Exploring options for success. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 27(1), 99–111. https://doi.org/10.1080/08841241.2016.1261978
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations: Modifications of a model for telecommunications. Die diffusion von innovationen in der telekommunikation, 25–38.
   Google Scholar
• Roni, S. M., Merga, M. K., & Morris, J. E. (2020). Conducting quantitative research in education. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Roy, S. K., Lassar, W. M., & Butaney, G. T. (2014). The mediating impact of stickiness and loyalty on word-of-mouth promotion of retail websites. European Journal of Marketing, 48(9/10), 1828–1849. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-04-2013-0193
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryan, E., & Poole, C. (2019). Impact of virtual learning environment on students’ satisfaction, engagement, recall, and retention. Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences, 50(3), 408–415. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmir.2019.04.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sabeh, H. N., Husin, M. H., Kee, D. M. H., Baharudin, A. S., & Abdullah, R. (2021). A systematic review of the DeLone and McLean model of information systems success in an E-learning context (2010–2020). IEEE Access, 9, 81210–81235. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3084815
   Google Scholar
• Salas-Pilco, S. Z., Yang, Y., & Zhang, Z. (2022). Student engagement in online learning in Latin American higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(3), 593–619. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13190
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• San-Martín, S., Jiménez, N., Rodríguez-Torrico, P., & Piñeiro-Ibarra, I. (2020). The determinants of teachers’ continuance commitment to e-learning in higher education. Education and Information Technologies, 25(4), 3205–3225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10117-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schleicher, A., & Reimers, F. (2020). Schooling disrupted, schooling rethought: How the COVID-19 pandemic is changing education, OECD. https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/view/?ref=133_133390-1rtuknc0hi&title=Schooling-disruptedschooling-rethought-How-the-Covid-19-pandemic-is-changing-education.
   Google Scholar
• Schneider, B., Krajcik, J., Lavonen, J., Salmela-Aro, K., Broda, M., Spicer, J., Bruner, J., Moeller, J., Linnansaari, J., Juuti, K., & Viljaranta, J. (2016). Investigating optimal learning moments in U.S. and Finnish science classes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(3), 400–421. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21306
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seng, E., & Ling, T. (2013). A statistical analysis of education service quality dimensions on business school students’ satisfaction. International Education Studies, 6(8), 136–146.
   Google Scholar
• Shelton, K. (2011). A review of paradigms for evaluating the quality of online education programs. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 14(1), 27–39.
   Google Scholar
• Shroff, R. H., Deneen, C. C., & Ng, E. M. (2011). Analysis of the technology acceptance model in examining students’ behavioural intention to use an e-portfolio system. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(4), 16–26. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.940
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sicari, S., Rizzardi, A., Miorandi, D., & Coen-Porisini, A. (2017). Security towards the edge: Sticky policy enforcement for networked smart objects. Information Systems, 71, 78–89.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh, S., & Jasial, S. S. (2021). Moderating effect of perceived trust on service quality – student satisfaction relationship: evidence from Indian higher management education institutions. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 31(2), 280–304. https://doi.org/10.1080/08841241.2020.1825029
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, S. 2013. Determining sample size: How to ensure you get the correct sample size. E-Book (c) Qualtrics Online Sample. https://www.qualtrics.com/experiencemanagement/research/determine-sample-size/ (accessed on 29 December 2022).
   Google Scholar
• Smith, S. (2020). Determining sample size: How to ensure you get the correct sample size. E-Book (c) Qualtrics online sample. 2013. Retrieved 29 December, 2020, from https://www.qualtrics.com/experiencemanagement/research/determine-sample-size/.
   Google Scholar
• Stefanovic, D., Spasojevic, I., Havzi, S., Lolic, T., & Ristic, S. (2020). Information systems success models in the e-learning context: A systematic literature review. In Annals of DAAAM and Proceedings of the International DAAAM Symposium, 31, 555–564.
   Google Scholar
• Styck, K. M., Malecki, C. K., Ogg, J., & Demaray, M. K. (2021). Measuring COVID-19-related stress among 4th through 12th grade students. School Psychology Review, 50(4), 530–545. https://doi.org/10.1080/2372966X.2020.1857658
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tan, F. B., & Chou, P. C. (2008). The relationship between mobile service quality, perceived technology compatibility, and users’ perceived playfulness in the context of mobile information and entertainment services. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 24(7), 649–671. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447310802335581
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor, S., & Todd, P. (1995). Decomposition and crossover effects in the theory of planned behavior: A study of consumer adoption intentions. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 12(2), 137–155.
   Google Scholar
• Thornton, K. (2021). Learning through COVID-19: New Zealand secondary principals describe their reality. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 49(3), 393–409.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsao, W. Y. (2014). Enhancing competitive advantages: The contribution of mediator and moderator on stickiness in the LINE. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 21(6), 933–941. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2014.08.011
   Google Scholar
• Turner, R. (2020). Plans To scrap face-to-face lectures and exams at Curtin University spark concern from academics. Abc.net.au. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-11-27/curtin-university-in-wa-phasing-out-lectures-by-end-of-next-year/12923772.
   Google Scholar
• Uğur, N. G., & Turan, A. H. (2018). RETRACTED ARTICLE: E-learning adoption of academicians: a proposal for an extended model. Behaviour & Information Technology, 37(4), 393–405. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2018.1437219
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• UNESCO. (2020). COVID-19 educational disruption and response, United Nations, 2020. Policy Brief: Education during COVID-19 and beyond, p. 26.
   Google Scholar
• United Nations. (2020). Policy brief: Education during COVID-19 and beyond, www.un.org/sites/un2.un.org/files/sg_policy_brief_covid-19_and_education_august_2020.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Uppal, M. A., Ali, S., & Gulliver, S. R. (2018). Factors determining e-learning service quality. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49(3), 412–426. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12552
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vnouckova, L., Urbancova, H., & Smolova, H. (2017). Factors describing studentś perception on education quality standards. Journal on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education and Science, 10(4), 109–115. https://doi.org/10.7160/eriesj.2017.100403
   Google Scholar
• Walji, S., Deacon, A., Small, J., & Czerniewicz, L. (2016). Learning through engagement: MOOCs as an emergent form of provision. Distance Education, 37(2), 208–223. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2016.1184400
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watty, K. (2006). Want to know about quality in higher education? Ask an academic. Quality in Higher Education, 12(3), 291–301. https://doi.org/10.1080/13538320601051101
   Google Scholar
• Wong, K. T., Osman, R., Goh, S. C., & Rahmat, M. K. (2013). Understanding student teachers’ behavioural intention to use technology: Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) Validation and Testing. International Journal of Instruction, 6(1), 89–104.
   Google Scholar
• Wong, L. (2012). Student attitudes towards e-learning: the first year accounting experience. Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 9, 195–207. https://doi.org/10.28945/1616
   Google Scholar
• Wu, B., & Chen, X. (2017). Continuance intention to use MOOCs: Integrating the technology acceptance model (TAM) and task technology fit (TTF) model. Computers in Human Behavior, 67, 221–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.10.028
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, D., Lavonen, J. M., & Niemi, H. (2018). Online learning engagement: Factors and results-evidence from literature. Themes in ELearning, 11(1), 1–22.
   Google Scholar
• Yang, R., Mubarak, S., Wibowo, S., & Rahamathulla, M. (2021). Assessing the effects of perceived qualities on e-learning students’ attitude, learning engagement, and stickiness during COVID-19. PACIS 2021 Proceedings. 204.
   Google Scholar
• Yang, R., & Wibowo, S. (2022). User trust in artificial intelligence: A comprehensive conceptual framework. Electronic Markets, 32(4), 2053–2077. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-022-00592-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, R., Wibowo, S., Mubarak, S., & Rahamathulla, M. (2022). How do students’ personality traits affect their academic performance and stickiness towards e-learning?: The moderating effect of students’ engagement. PACIS 2022 Proceedings. 48.
   Google Scholar
• Yang, Y., & Cornelius, L. F. (2004). Students’ perceptions towards the quality of online education: a qualitative approach. Association for Educational Communications and Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Zainuddin, Z., Shujahat, M., Chu, S.K.W., Haruna, H., & Farida, R., (2019). The effects of gamified flipped instruction on learner performance and need satisfaction: A study in a low-tech setting. Information and Learning Sciences, 120(11), 789–802.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zaman, U., Aktan, M., Baber, H., & Nawaz, S. (2021). Does forced-shift to online learning affect university brand image in South Korea? Role of perceived harm and international students’ learning engagement. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 1–25, ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1080/08841241.2021.1998285
   Google Scholar
• Zhang, M., Guo, L., Hu, M., & Liu, W. (2017). Influence of customer engagement with company social networks on stickiness: mediating effect of customer value creation. International Journal of Information Management, 37(3), 229–240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2016.04.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, L., Shao, Z., Zhao, T., & Brown, S. A. (2020). The role of mobile social application in stimulating learning stickiness in blended learning. PACIS 2020 Proceedings (p. 235).
   Google Scholar