Student satisfaction with online learning:
Lessons from organizational behavior
ABSTRACT
Learning and educational effectiveness are national issues, and online education has
become a major sub-topic during the last decade as enrollment in online courses continues to
increase. Therefore, there is an increasing need to understand factors that af
satisfaction with online learning and its impact on continued learning, retention, and student
recruitment. This paper explores the relationship between the organizational behavior concepts
of worker motivation and job satisfaction that might
satisfaction and student satisfaction with online learning. Parallels between job satisfaction and
student satisfaction are identified and a model is proposed for future research.
Keywords: Online learning, e-lea
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page
Student satisfaction with online learning:
Lessons from organizational behavior
Jollean K. Sinclaire
Arkansas State University
Learning and educational effectiveness are national issues, and online education has
topic during the last decade as enrollment in online courses continues to
increase. Therefore, there is an increasing need to understand factors that affect student
satisfaction with online learning and its impact on continued learning, retention, and student
recruitment. This paper explores the relationship between the organizational behavior concepts
of worker motivation and job satisfaction that might be useful in identifying links between job
satisfaction and student satisfaction with online learning. Parallels between job satisfaction and
student satisfaction are identified and a model is proposed for future research.
learning, distance education, student satisfaction, motivation
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page 1
Learning and educational effectiveness are national issues, and online education has
topic during the last decade as enrollment in online courses continues to
fect student
satisfaction with online learning and its impact on continued learning, retention, and student
recruitment. This paper explores the relationship between the organizational behavior concepts
be useful in identifying links between job
satisfaction and student satisfaction with online learning. Parallels between job satisfaction and
student satisfaction, motivation
INTRODUCTION
Work is a necessary activity that most people must engage in for much of their lives to
support themselves and their families; however, motivation and job satisfaction vary for
workers and specific types of work. Some workers are motivated by a sense of accomplishment,
some by helping others, and others by personal fulfilment. Some people work because it helps
them keep busy, or feel useful, or because it allows them to mee
provides opportunities to make new friends. Others like to work because they like doing a variety
of tasks, experiencing new things, or because it offers the opportunity for improvement and
learning. And some people like to
Organizational behaviorists have found that personality, personal values, and
psychological needs as well as other factors influence both the types of work people choose and
the satisfaction they derive from work. The field of organizational behavior focuses on factors
that influence job satisfaction for the purpose of improving worker satisfaction and thereby
improving job performance.
Some aspects of working to complete a college degree can be v
organizational behavior theory, as this paper will explore. E
motivate students to achieve college
managers who seek to motivate employees. Student
outcome of the learning process and a requirement for successful learning. Student satisfaction is
linked to improved academic performance as well as continued learning (Sloan, n.d.), the
decision to take additional classes (Booker & Rebmon, 2005) and the recruitment of future
students.
Online Learning
Educational effectiveness and learning are national issues, and online education has
become a major topic in the last decade as
education. Based on data from 2,500 colleges and universities, the annual Sloan Report describes
recent online enrollment in significant numbers: Over 4.6 million students, mostly at the under
graduate level, were enrolled in at least one online course in 2008. As a percent of total
enrollment, online enrollment has increased from 9.6 percent in 2002 to 25.3 percent in 2008
(Allen & Seaman, 2010)
Ubiquitous technology, growth in internet usage, and stu
their schedules and circumstances drive a growth rate for online courses and online programs
that currently exceeds the growth rate for overall higher education (Allen & Seaman, 2010).
(Howell, Williams & Lindsay, 2003).
The Sloan Consortium defines a traditional course as one using no online technology; a
web-facilitated course as one in which web
course; a blended/hybrid course as one in which a sub
online; and an online course as one in which most or all of the content is delivered online (Allen
& Seaman 2008).
There are three compelling reasons for interest in student satisfaction. First, the Sloan
Consortium’s “Five Pillars of Quality Online Education,” declares student satisfaction to be the
most important key to continuing learning (Sloan, n.d.). And there is evidence that student
satisfaction is positively related to retention and a decision to take one or more additional co
(Booker & Rebmon, 2005). Lastly, student satisfaction is important because satisfied students
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page
Work is a necessary activity that most people must engage in for much of their lives to
selves and their families; however, motivation and job satisfaction vary for
workers and specific types of work. Some workers are motivated by a sense of accomplishment,
some by helping others, and others by personal fulfilment. Some people work because it helps
them keep busy, or feel useful, or because it allows them to meet a lot of people, or because it
provides opportunities to make new friends. Others like to work because they like doing a variety
of tasks, experiencing new things, or because it offers the opportunity for improvement and
learning. And some people like to work because it gives them power or influence over others.
Organizational behaviorists have found that personality, personal values, and
psychological needs as well as other factors influence both the types of work people choose and
derive from work. The field of organizational behavior focuses on factors
that influence job satisfaction for the purpose of improving worker satisfaction and thereby
Some aspects of working to complete a college degree can be viewed through the lens of
organizational behavior theory, as this paper will explore. Educators are often challenged to
motivate students to achieve college-level work in ways similar to those experienced by
managers who seek to motivate employees. Student satisfaction can be viewed both as an
outcome of the learning process and a requirement for successful learning. Student satisfaction is
linked to improved academic performance as well as continued learning (Sloan, n.d.), the
lasses (Booker & Rebmon, 2005) and the recruitment of future
Educational effectiveness and learning are national issues, and online education has
become a major topic in the last decade as higher education institutions change to favor distance
Based on data from 2,500 colleges and universities, the annual Sloan Report describes
recent online enrollment in significant numbers: Over 4.6 million students, mostly at the under
level, were enrolled in at least one online course in 2008. As a percent of total
enrollment, online enrollment has increased from 9.6 percent in 2002 to 25.3 percent in 2008
Ubiquitous technology, growth in internet usage, and student need for courses that meet
their schedules and circumstances drive a growth rate for online courses and online programs
that currently exceeds the growth rate for overall higher education (Allen & Seaman, 2010).
(Howell, Williams & Lindsay, 2003).
e Sloan Consortium defines a traditional course as one using no online technology; a
facilitated course as one in which web-based technology is used to facilitate a face
course; a blended/hybrid course as one in which a substantial portion of content is delivered
online; and an online course as one in which most or all of the content is delivered online (Allen
There are three compelling reasons for interest in student satisfaction. First, the Sloan
Quality Online Education,” declares student satisfaction to be the
most important key to continuing learning (Sloan, n.d.). And there is evidence that student
satisfaction is positively related to retention and a decision to take one or more additional co
(Booker & Rebmon, 2005). Lastly, student satisfaction is important because satisfied students
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page 2
Work is a necessary activity that most people must engage in for much of their lives to
selves and their families; however, motivation and job satisfaction vary for both
workers and specific types of work. Some workers are motivated by a sense of accomplishment,
some by helping others, and others by personal fulfilment. Some people work because it helps
t a lot of people, or because it
provides opportunities to make new friends. Others like to work because they like doing a variety
of tasks, experiencing new things, or because it offers the opportunity for improvement and
work because it gives them power or influence over others.
Organizational behaviorists have found that personality, personal values, and
psychological needs as well as other factors influence both the types of work people choose and
derive from work. The field of organizational behavior focuses on factors
that influence job satisfaction for the purpose of improving worker satisfaction and thereby
iewed through the lens of
ducators are often challenged to
level work in ways similar to those experienced by
satisfaction can be viewed both as an
outcome of the learning process and a requirement for successful learning. Student satisfaction is
linked to improved academic performance as well as continued learning (Sloan, n.d.), the
lasses (Booker & Rebmon, 2005) and the recruitment of future
Educational effectiveness and learning are national issues, and online education has
higher education institutions change to favor distance
Based on data from 2,500 colleges and universities, the annual Sloan Report describes
recent online enrollment in significant numbers: Over 4.6 million students, mostly at the under-
level, were enrolled in at least one online course in 2008. As a percent of total
enrollment, online enrollment has increased from 9.6 percent in 2002 to 25.3 percent in 2008
dent need for courses that meet
their schedules and circumstances drive a growth rate for online courses and online programs
that currently exceeds the growth rate for overall higher education (Allen & Seaman, 2010).
e Sloan Consortium defines a traditional course as one using no online technology; a
based technology is used to facilitate a face-to-face
content is delivered
online; and an online course as one in which most or all of the content is delivered online (Allen
There are three compelling reasons for interest in student satisfaction. First, the Sloan
Quality Online Education,” declares student satisfaction to be the
most important key to continuing learning (Sloan, n.d.). And there is evidence that student
satisfaction is positively related to retention and a decision to take one or more additional courses
(Booker & Rebmon, 2005). Lastly, student satisfaction is important because satisfied students
represent a public relations asset for a college or university. If students are viewed as customers
of college education, their satisfaction is important to
need for more understanding of factors that affect student satisfaction with online learning.
Organizational Behavior
The field of organizational behavior (OB) is concerned with psychosocial, interpersonal,
and behavioral dynamics in the workplace. Because OB and education have analogous desired
outcomes (i.e., job performance and student performance, job satisfaction and student
satisfaction, employee retention and student retention), this paper considers how
may provide insight into factors that affect student satisfaction. The focus of this paper is an
examination of organizational variables relating to the motivation and satisfaction of people at
work to consider how those variables may impact th
satisfaction with online courses. In light of the desired outcomes of student satisfaction and
student retention, a question that should interest faculty members teaching in online
environments and administrators co
performance management practices be used to impact student satisfaction with online learning?
This paper attempts to answer this question with a literature review that explores
potential linkages between motivation and worker satisfaction concepts and theories of
organizational behavior and student satisfaction. The result is a research model that may be
useful to analyze the structure and content of online courses to identify characteristics of course
design that result in student satisfaction. The findings will help guide the development of course
management practices for online courses.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follow. Section 2 reviews literature on
student satisfaction. Section 3 reviews literature on the OB concepts of motivation and job
satisfaction. Section 4 provides a summary of conclusions and sugges
STUDENT SATISFACTION
In response to institutional concerns about the quality of courses and
need to understand student perceptions, many authors have examined the topic of student
satisfaction with their higher educational experience. The literature includes research on student
satisfaction with traditional, hybrid, and online co
across diverse populations of students. For this paper, 34 studies of student satisfaction were
reviewed to identify determinants generally recognized as important to student perception of
overall satisfaction with the learning experience. Appendix A provides a summary of the studies
organized by course format that range from traditional to online, and various hybrid formats.
In the review of literature for this paper, it was noted that many studies on student
satisfaction fail to define satisfaction. Of
student satisfaction. Of those definitions, most are grounded in marketing literature (Elliott &
Shin, 2002; Mai, 2005; O’Leary & Quinlan, 2007; Thurmond, Wamb
2002); one is grounded in social cognitive theory (Wu, Tennyson & Hsia, 2010).
In research on student satisfaction in a traditional learning environment that incorporates
online elements, Sweeney and Ingram (2001) define satisfacti
and accomplishment in the learning environment” (p. 57). Reporting on satisfaction in a blended
or hybrid learning environment, Wu et al. (2010) define satisfaction as “the sum of a student’s
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page
represent a public relations asset for a college or university. If students are viewed as customers
of college education, their satisfaction is important to recruitment efforts. There is therefore a
need for more understanding of factors that affect student satisfaction with online learning.
The field of organizational behavior (OB) is concerned with psychosocial, interpersonal,
d behavioral dynamics in the workplace. Because OB and education have analogous desired
outcomes (i.e., job performance and student performance, job satisfaction and student
satisfaction, employee retention and student retention), this paper considers how
may provide insight into factors that affect student satisfaction. The focus of this paper is an
examination of organizational variables relating to the motivation and satisfaction of people at
work to consider how those variables may impact the design of online education and student
satisfaction with online courses. In light of the desired outcomes of student satisfaction and
student retention, a question that should interest faculty members teaching in online
environments and administrators concerned with retention is: Can organizational behavior
performance management practices be used to impact student satisfaction with online learning?
This paper attempts to answer this question with a literature review that explores
een motivation and worker satisfaction concepts and theories of
organizational behavior and student satisfaction. The result is a research model that may be
useful to analyze the structure and content of online courses to identify characteristics of course
design that result in student satisfaction. The findings will help guide the development of course
management practices for online courses.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follow. Section 2 reviews literature on
n 3 reviews literature on the OB concepts of motivation and job
satisfaction. Section 4 provides a summary of conclusions and suggestions for future research.
In response to institutional concerns about the quality of courses and programs and the
need to understand student perceptions, many authors have examined the topic of student
satisfaction with their higher educational experience. The literature includes research on student
satisfaction with traditional, hybrid, and online courses for graduate and undergraduate students
across diverse populations of students. For this paper, 34 studies of student satisfaction were
reviewed to identify determinants generally recognized as important to student perception of
with the learning experience. Appendix A provides a summary of the studies
organized by course format that range from traditional to online, and various hybrid formats.
In the review of literature for this paper, it was noted that many studies on student
atisfaction fail to define satisfaction. Of 34 studies reviewed, only six provide definitions of
student satisfaction. Of those definitions, most are grounded in marketing literature (Elliott &
Shin, 2002; Mai, 2005; O’Leary & Quinlan, 2007; Thurmond, Wambach, Connors and Frey,
2002); one is grounded in social cognitive theory (Wu, Tennyson & Hsia, 2010).
In research on student satisfaction in a traditional learning environment that incorporates
online elements, Sweeney and Ingram (2001) define satisfaction as, “the perception of enjoyment
and accomplishment in the learning environment” (p. 57). Reporting on satisfaction in a blended
or hybrid learning environment, Wu et al. (2010) define satisfaction as “the sum of a student’s
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page 3
represent a public relations asset for a college or university. If students are viewed as customers
recruitment efforts. There is therefore a
need for more understanding of factors that affect student satisfaction with online learning.
The field of organizational behavior (OB) is concerned with psychosocial, interpersonal,
d behavioral dynamics in the workplace. Because OB and education have analogous desired
outcomes (i.e., job performance and student performance, job satisfaction and student
satisfaction, employee retention and student retention), this paper considers how OB concepts
may provide insight into factors that affect student satisfaction. The focus of this paper is an
examination of organizational variables relating to the motivation and satisfaction of people at
e design of online education and student
satisfaction with online courses. In light of the desired outcomes of student satisfaction and
student retention, a question that should interest faculty members teaching in online
organizational behavior
performance management practices be used to impact student satisfaction with online learning?
This paper attempts to answer this question with a literature review that explores
een motivation and worker satisfaction concepts and theories of
organizational behavior and student satisfaction. The result is a research model that may be
useful to analyze the structure and content of online courses to identify characteristics of course
design that result in student satisfaction. The findings will help guide the development of course
The remainder of this paper is organized as follow. Section 2 reviews literature on
n 3 reviews literature on the OB concepts of motivation and job
tions for future research.
programs and the
need to understand student perceptions, many authors have examined the topic of student
satisfaction with their higher educational experience. The literature includes research on student
urses for graduate and undergraduate students
across diverse populations of students. For this paper, 34 studies of student satisfaction were
reviewed to identify determinants generally recognized as important to student perception of
with the learning experience. Appendix A provides a summary of the studies
organized by course format that range from traditional to online, and various hybrid formats.
In the review of literature for this paper, it was noted that many studies on student
34 studies reviewed, only six provide definitions of
student satisfaction. Of those definitions, most are grounded in marketing literature (Elliott &
ach, Connors and Frey,
2002); one is grounded in social cognitive theory (Wu, Tennyson & Hsia, 2010).
In research on student satisfaction in a traditional learning environment that incorporates
on as, “the perception of enjoyment
and accomplishment in the learning environment” (p. 57). Reporting on satisfaction in a blended
or hybrid learning environment, Wu et al. (2010) define satisfaction as “the sum of a student’s
behavioral beliefs and attitudes that result from aggregating all the benefits that a student
receives from using the blended system” (p.
In research on student satisfaction with online learning, definitions of student satisfaction
are scarce. O’Leary and Quinlan (2007) provid
“an emotional response that can be induced by actual product, service, or process quality or some
combination of product and service quality” (p. 135). In this study, a SERVQUAL marketing
instrument is used to measure satisfaction. A similar marketing approach is taken by Thurmond
et al. (2002) that describes student satisfaction as “a concept that reflects outcomes and
reciprocity that occur between students and an instructor” (p. 176.
The Sloan Consortium, an association of institutions and organizations committed to
quality online education, provides this definition of student satisfaction: “Students are successful
in the learning experience and are pleased with their experience” (Moore, 2009, p. 74). T
comparable to the definition provided by Sweeney and Ingram (2001): “The perception of
enjoyment and accomplishment in the learning environment,” in that both focus on accomplish
ment and success in learning, and pleasure and enjoyment with the expe
The current paper adopts the definition of student satisfaction as the perception of
enjoyment and accomplishment in the learning environment (Sweeney & Ingram, 2001) such
that satisfaction is perceived to result from accomplishment as well as enj
student satisfaction is both an enjoyable and a successful experience.
Theories used in research on student satisfaction
In the review of the literature for the current study, it was noted that most research on
student satisfaction uses atheoretical attitude
studies summarized in Appendix A, only six consider a theory in relation
satisfaction. Several use OB theories and measures for student satisfaction.
In research in a traditional learning environment, DeShields, Kara and Kaynak (2005) use
Herzberg’s two-factor theory (motivators/satisfiers, hygiene factors/dissatisfiers) to examine
student satisfaction. In this study, survey data from business students show faculty
and classes are key factors (motivators) for satisfaction). Also considering student satisfaction in
a traditional learning environment, Cao, Griffin and Bai (2009) link constructivism (i.e., learning
occurs through interaction) with three typ
literature: learner-instructor, learner
interaction had a strong effect on student satisfaction with course web sites.
An early study on factors affec
from OB to student satisfaction and the desire to stay in school, citing Hackman and Oldham’s
(1975) theory of motivation. This theory links task characteristics to three psychological states:
experienced meaningfulness, experienced responsibility for work out
results; these states lead to increased performance, lower absenteeism and turnover, and higher
satisfaction. Noting that Hackman and Oldham’s (1975) theory “holds fo
responsibility and challenging work” (p.4), Rosseau (1976) finds task character
positively related to student satisfaction and the desire to stay in school. Task characteristics
describes task identity (a whole piece of
others (interaction), variety, learning, and task significance.
In research on student satisfaction in a hybrid or blended learning environment, Wu et al.
(2010) use social-cognitive theory (Bandura,
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page
udes that result from aggregating all the benefits that a student
receives from using the blended system” (p. 157).
In research on student satisfaction with online learning, definitions of student satisfaction
are scarce. O’Leary and Quinlan (2007) provide a marketing definition of student satisfaction as
“an emotional response that can be induced by actual product, service, or process quality or some
combination of product and service quality” (p. 135). In this study, a SERVQUAL marketing
sed to measure satisfaction. A similar marketing approach is taken by Thurmond
et al. (2002) that describes student satisfaction as “a concept that reflects outcomes and
reciprocity that occur between students and an instructor” (p. 176.
um, an association of institutions and organizations committed to
quality online education, provides this definition of student satisfaction: “Students are successful
in the learning experience and are pleased with their experience” (Moore, 2009, p. 74). T
comparable to the definition provided by Sweeney and Ingram (2001): “The perception of
enjoyment and accomplishment in the learning environment,” in that both focus on accomplish
ment and success in learning, and pleasure and enjoyment with the experience.
The current paper adopts the definition of student satisfaction as the perception of
enjoyment and accomplishment in the learning environment (Sweeney & Ingram, 2001) such
that satisfaction is perceived to result from accomplishment as well as enjoyment. Therefore,
student satisfaction is both an enjoyable and a successful experience.
Theories used in research on student satisfaction
In the review of the literature for the current study, it was noted that most research on
es atheoretical attitude-based questionnaires to measure satisfaction. Of
studies summarized in Appendix A, only six consider a theory in relationship to student
satisfaction. Several use OB theories and measures for student satisfaction.
in a traditional learning environment, DeShields, Kara and Kaynak (2005) use
factor theory (motivators/satisfiers, hygiene factors/dissatisfiers) to examine
student satisfaction. In this study, survey data from business students show faculty
and classes are key factors (motivators) for satisfaction). Also considering student satisfaction in
a traditional learning environment, Cao, Griffin and Bai (2009) link constructivism (i.e., learning
occurs through interaction) with three types of interaction identified from distance education
instructor, learner-learner, learner-content. In that study, synchronous
interaction had a strong effect on student satisfaction with course web sites.
An early study on factors affecting student satisfaction by Rosseau (1976) links concepts
from OB to student satisfaction and the desire to stay in school, citing Hackman and Oldham’s
(1975) theory of motivation. This theory links task characteristics to three psychological states:
fulness, experienced responsibility for work outcomes, and knowledge of
results; these states lead to increased performance, lower absenteeism and turnover, and higher
man and Oldham’s (1975) theory “holds for individuals who value
responsibility and challenging work” (p.4), Rosseau (1976) finds task characteristics to be
positively related to student satisfaction and the desire to stay in school. Task characteristics
describes task identity (a whole piece of work), skill variety, autonomy, feedback, dealing with
others (interaction), variety, learning, and task significance.
In research on student satisfaction in a hybrid or blended learning environment, Wu et al.
cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986) citing its relevance to understanding and
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page 4
udes that result from aggregating all the benefits that a student
In research on student satisfaction with online learning, definitions of student satisfaction
e a marketing definition of student satisfaction as
“an emotional response that can be induced by actual product, service, or process quality or some
combination of product and service quality” (p. 135). In this study, a SERVQUAL marketing
sed to measure satisfaction. A similar marketing approach is taken by Thurmond
et al. (2002) that describes student satisfaction as “a concept that reflects outcomes and
um, an association of institutions and organizations committed to
quality online education, provides this definition of student satisfaction: “Students are successful
in the learning experience and are pleased with their experience” (Moore, 2009, p. 74). This is
comparable to the definition provided by Sweeney and Ingram (2001): “The perception of
enjoyment and accomplishment in the learning environment,” in that both focus on accomplish-
The current paper adopts the definition of student satisfaction as the perception of
enjoyment and accomplishment in the learning environment (Sweeney & Ingram, 2001) such
oyment. Therefore,
In the review of the literature for the current study, it was noted that most research on
based questionnaires to measure satisfaction. Of 34
ship to student
in a traditional learning environment, DeShields, Kara and Kaynak (2005) use
factor theory (motivators/satisfiers, hygiene factors/dissatisfiers) to examine
student satisfaction. In this study, survey data from business students show faculty performance
and classes are key factors (motivators) for satisfaction). Also considering student satisfaction in
a traditional learning environment, Cao, Griffin and Bai (2009) link constructivism (i.e., learning
es of interaction identified from distance education
content. In that study, synchronous
ting student satisfaction by Rosseau (1976) links concepts
from OB to student satisfaction and the desire to stay in school, citing Hackman and Oldham’s
(1975) theory of motivation. This theory links task characteristics to three psychological states:
comes, and knowledge of
results; these states lead to increased performance, lower absenteeism and turnover, and higher
r individuals who value
istics to be
positively related to student satisfaction and the desire to stay in school. Task characteristics
work), skill variety, autonomy, feedback, dealing with
In research on student satisfaction in a hybrid or blended learning environment, Wu et al.
1986) citing its relevance to understanding and
predicting human behavior and identifying methods by which behavior may be changed. In that
study , interaction provided the greatest contribution to performance expecta
provided the greatest contribution to learner satisfaction.
Determinants of student satisfaction
The research reviewed for the current paper identifies determinants of student satisfaction
that may be classified in six categories: faculty, institution, individual student facto
interaction/ communication factors, course factors, and learning environment
classification shown in Table 1 (Appendix)
online education framework (Moore, 2009) that identifies five factor
student satisfaction with online learning: 1) Satisfaction with interaction with peers and
instructors; 2) A match between actual and expected learning experiences; 3) Satisfaction with
advising, registration, and access to materia
campus; 4) Satisfactory orientation for how to learn online; and 5) Outcomes of online learning
that are useful for career and profession development as well as academic development.
In summary, student satisfaction with online learning is linked to interaction and
communication, course design, the learning environment, and individual student factors of
computer self-efficacy and the ability to control individual learning pace. Additionally, Moore
(2009) identifies useful outcomes and a satisfactory orientation for how to learn online as factors
that result in student satisfaction with online learning.
JOB SATISFACTION
Job satisfaction has been a topic of sustained interest for many years. The study of job
satisfaction is of interest to many because it is associated with important attitudes, behaviors and
organizational effectiveness. Job satisfaction is linked to menta
predictor of organizational citizenship (Bateman & Organ, 1983), absenteeism (Locke, 1983),
turnover (Griffeth, Hom & Gaertner, 2000), and productivity (performance). An early definition
of job satisfaction was offered by
perception of one’s job as fulfilling or allowing the fulfillment of one’s important job values”
(Locke 1976 p. 1342).
A more succinct definition is offered by Spector (1997), who reminds reade
people love to work while others do not and work only because they must. This author defines
job satisfaction as “the degree to which people like their jobs” (p. vii). This paper adopts a
commonly accepted definition of job satisfaction as “a
from an evaluation of its character
While noting that job satisfaction is “one of the most frequently studied concepts in work
and organizational psychology,” Bussing, Biss
“one of the most theory-free concepts measured against meth
organizational research.” In this respect, research on job satisfaction is similar to research on
student satisfaction that uses atheoretical attitude
Theories of motivation and job satisfaction
Theories of motivation form the basis for models of job satisfaction. Among highly
regarded O.B. motivational theories a
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page
predicting human behavior and identifying methods by which behavior may be changed. In that
study , interaction provided the greatest contribution to performance expectations which
tribution to learner satisfaction.
Determinants of student satisfaction
The research reviewed for the current paper identifies determinants of student satisfaction
that may be classified in six categories: faculty, institution, individual student facto
interaction/ communication factors, course factors, and learning environment factors. This
classification shown in Table 1 (Appendix) is supported by the Sloan Consortium’s quality in
online education framework (Moore, 2009) that identifies five factors that result in overall
student satisfaction with online learning: 1) Satisfaction with interaction with peers and
instructors; 2) A match between actual and expected learning experiences; 3) Satisfaction with
advising, registration, and access to materials that is as good as that found on the traditional
campus; 4) Satisfactory orientation for how to learn online; and 5) Outcomes of online learning
that are useful for career and profession development as well as academic development.
atisfaction with online learning is linked to interaction and
communication, course design, the learning environment, and individual student factors of
efficacy and the ability to control individual learning pace. Additionally, Moore
dentifies useful outcomes and a satisfactory orientation for how to learn online as factors
that result in student satisfaction with online learning.
Job satisfaction has been a topic of sustained interest for many years. The study of job
satisfaction is of interest to many because it is associated with important attitudes, behaviors and
organizational effectiveness. Job satisfaction is linked to mental and physical health and can be a
predictor of organizational citizenship (Bateman & Organ, 1983), absenteeism (Locke, 1983),
turnover (Griffeth, Hom & Gaertner, 2000), and productivity (performance). An early definition
of job satisfaction was offered by Locke as: “The pleasurable emotional state resulting from the
perception of one’s job as fulfilling or allowing the fulfillment of one’s important job values”
A more succinct definition is offered by Spector (1997), who reminds reade
people love to work while others do not and work only because they must. This author defines
job satisfaction as “the degree to which people like their jobs” (p. vii). This paper adopts a
commonly accepted definition of job satisfaction as “a positive feeling about one’s job resulting
from an evaluation of its characteristics” (Robbins & Judge, 2009, p. 31).
While noting that job satisfaction is “one of the most frequently studied concepts in work
and organizational psychology,” Bussing, Bissels, Fuchs and Perrar (1999, p. 1000) claim it is
free concepts measured against methodological standards in the field of
zational research.” In this respect, research on job satisfaction is similar to research on
tisfaction that uses atheoretical attitude-based questionnaires to measure satisfaction.
Theories of motivation and job satisfaction
Theories of motivation form the basis for models of job satisfaction. Among highly
regarded O.B. motivational theories are Maslow’s (1943 ) need-hierarchy theory, Vroom’s
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page 5
predicting human behavior and identifying methods by which behavior may be changed. In that
tions which
The research reviewed for the current paper identifies determinants of student satisfaction
that may be classified in six categories: faculty, institution, individual student factors,
factors. This
is supported by the Sloan Consortium’s quality in
s that result in overall
student satisfaction with online learning: 1) Satisfaction with interaction with peers and
instructors; 2) A match between actual and expected learning experiences; 3) Satisfaction with
ls that is as good as that found on the traditional
campus; 4) Satisfactory orientation for how to learn online; and 5) Outcomes of online learning
that are useful for career and profession development as well as academic development.
atisfaction with online learning is linked to interaction and
communication, course design, the learning environment, and individual student factors of
efficacy and the ability to control individual learning pace. Additionally, Moore
dentifies useful outcomes and a satisfactory orientation for how to learn online as factors
Job satisfaction has been a topic of sustained interest for many years. The study of job
satisfaction is of interest to many because it is associated with important attitudes, behaviors and
l and physical health and can be a
predictor of organizational citizenship (Bateman & Organ, 1983), absenteeism (Locke, 1983),
turnover (Griffeth, Hom & Gaertner, 2000), and productivity (performance). An early definition
“The pleasurable emotional state resulting from the
perception of one’s job as fulfilling or allowing the fulfillment of one’s important job values”
A more succinct definition is offered by Spector (1997), who reminds readers that some
people love to work while others do not and work only because they must. This author defines
job satisfaction as “the degree to which people like their jobs” (p. vii). This paper adopts a
positive feeling about one’s job resulting
While noting that job satisfaction is “one of the most frequently studied concepts in work
els, Fuchs and Perrar (1999, p. 1000) claim it is
odological standards in the field of
zational research.” In this respect, research on job satisfaction is similar to research on
based questionnaires to measure satisfaction.
Theories of motivation form the basis for models of job satisfaction. Among highly
hierarchy theory, Vroom’s
(1964) expectancy theory, Locke’s (1976) goal setting theory, Locke and Latham’s (1990) high
expectancy theory, Adams’ (1965) equity theory, and McClelland’s (1961) theory of needs.
Models of job satisfaction include Herzberg’s two
Snyderman, 1959), and Hackman and Oldhams’s (1975) job characteristics model. These
theories and models are considered here to identify factors that affect job satisfaction that may be
relevant to student satisfaction.
According to Maslow (1943), individuals are motivated to satisfy a basic set of needs that
are hierarchical in nature. That is, physiological needs, safety or security needs, social needs,
esteem needs, and self-actualization needs
(physiological, safety) are satisfied externally while higher level needs (social, esteem, self
actualization and autonomy) are satisfied internally. The major premise of Maslow’s theory is
that as needs becomes satisfied they lose their potential as a motivator. The contribution of
Maslow’s theory to organizational behavior is the premise of appealing to individual needs to
motivate employees. The idea is to link employee needs to desired performance. For exam
appeal to an employee’s need for esteem, a manager would communicate oppor
recognition for satisfactory job performance in order to impro
self-worth.
Expectancy theory proposed by Vroom (1964) focuses on outc
individual needs stating that effort, performance and motivation must be linked in order for a
person to be motivated. The theory is formulated: Motivation = Valence × Expectancy. Valence
is the importance that an individual places on the
increased effort leads to increased performance. The third construct is instrumentality, the belief
that a good performance results in a valued outcome. According to expec
employee can be motivated to a higher level of performance when he or she believes effort leads
to performance, performance leads to organizational rewards, and organizational rewards lead to
the satisfaction of personal goals. This theory is perceived by some to be of limit
because of issues with the performance
other factors such as seniority and skill level.
The equity theory of motivation concerns the perception of fairness. The premise of
equity theory (Adams, 1965) is that individuals are motivated by their beliefs about the fairness
of a reward structure relative to the inputs required to receive the reward. That is, people
compare job inputs (e.g., effort, loyalty, hard work commitment) and outcome
recognition, salary, benefits) relative to those of others. This theory argues that positive
outcomes (high levels of motivation) result when employees perceive their treatment to be fair.
A criticism of equity theory is that it does not recognize
A theory of motivation developed by Locke (1968) proposes that intentions to work
toward a goal are a major source of work motivation (i.e., goals and intentions control human
behavior). According to this theory, spec
The variables relevant to the goal
expectancies, self-efficacy and goal commitment. In later research on work motivation and
satisfaction, Locke and Latham (1990) present a model that depicts high goals and high
expectancy (self-efficacy) leading to high performance, which leads to rewards, satisfaction, and
commitment to future goals. They offer that high goals and high self
persist longer and exert more effort. They further suggest this model offers insight that should be
valuable to educators due to the widely recognized fact that American students are less educated
and less capable than their Asian counterpa
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page
(1964) expectancy theory, Locke’s (1976) goal setting theory, Locke and Latham’s (1990) high
expectancy theory, Adams’ (1965) equity theory, and McClelland’s (1961) theory of needs.
ion include Herzberg’s two-factor theory (Herzberg, Mausner &
Snyderman, 1959), and Hackman and Oldhams’s (1975) job characteristics model. These
theories and models are considered here to identify factors that affect job satisfaction that may be
According to Maslow (1943), individuals are motivated to satisfy a basic set of needs that
are hierarchical in nature. That is, physiological needs, safety or security needs, social needs,
actualization needs are fulfilled sequentially. Lower level needs
(physiological, safety) are satisfied externally while higher level needs (social, esteem, self
actualization and autonomy) are satisfied internally. The major premise of Maslow’s theory is
es satisfied they lose their potential as a motivator. The contribution of
Maslow’s theory to organizational behavior is the premise of appealing to individual needs to
motivate employees. The idea is to link employee needs to desired performance. For exam
appeal to an employee’s need for esteem, a manager would communicate opportunities for
recognition for satisfactory job performance in order to improve the employee’s sense of
Expectancy theory proposed by Vroom (1964) focuses on outcomes rather than
individual needs stating that effort, performance and motivation must be linked in order for a
person to be motivated. The theory is formulated: Motivation = Valence × Expectancy. Valence
is the importance that an individual places on the expected outcome; expectancy is the belief that
increased effort leads to increased performance. The third construct is instrumentality, the belief
that a good performance results in a valued outcome. According to expectancy theory, an
ivated to a higher level of performance when he or she believes effort leads
to performance, performance leads to organizational rewards, and organizational rewards lead to
the satisfaction of personal goals. This theory is perceived by some to be of limit
because of issues with the performance-reward relationship such that rewards may be linked to
other factors such as seniority and skill level.
The equity theory of motivation concerns the perception of fairness. The premise of
ry (Adams, 1965) is that individuals are motivated by their beliefs about the fairness
of a reward structure relative to the inputs required to receive the reward. That is, people
compare job inputs (e.g., effort, loyalty, hard work commitment) and outcomes (e.g.,
recognition, salary, benefits) relative to those of others. This theory argues that positive
outcomes (high levels of motivation) result when employees perceive their treatment to be fair.
A criticism of equity theory is that it does not recognize individual differences in perception.
A theory of motivation developed by Locke (1968) proposes that intentions to work
toward a goal are a major source of work motivation (i.e., goals and intentions control human
behavior). According to this theory, specific goals lead to higher performance than general goals.
The variables relevant to the goal-performance relationship are feedback (knowledge of results),
efficacy and goal commitment. In later research on work motivation and
n, Locke and Latham (1990) present a model that depicts high goals and high
efficacy) leading to high performance, which leads to rewards, satisfaction, and
commitment to future goals. They offer that high goals and high self-efficacy lead
persist longer and exert more effort. They further suggest this model offers insight that should be
valuable to educators due to the widely recognized fact that American students are less educated
and less capable than their Asian counterparts. Locke and Latham (1990) claim their model
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page 6
(1964) expectancy theory, Locke’s (1976) goal setting theory, Locke and Latham’s (1990) high
expectancy theory, Adams’ (1965) equity theory, and McClelland’s (1961) theory of needs.
factor theory (Herzberg, Mausner &
Snyderman, 1959), and Hackman and Oldhams’s (1975) job characteristics model. These
theories and models are considered here to identify factors that affect job satisfaction that may be
According to Maslow (1943), individuals are motivated to satisfy a basic set of needs that
are hierarchical in nature. That is, physiological needs, safety or security needs, social needs,
are fulfilled sequentially. Lower level needs
(physiological, safety) are satisfied externally while higher level needs (social, esteem, self-
actualization and autonomy) are satisfied internally. The major premise of Maslow’s theory is
es satisfied they lose their potential as a motivator. The contribution of
Maslow’s theory to organizational behavior is the premise of appealing to individual needs to
motivate employees. The idea is to link employee needs to desired performance. For example, to
tunities for
ve the employee’s sense of
omes rather than
individual needs stating that effort, performance and motivation must be linked in order for a
person to be motivated. The theory is formulated: Motivation = Valence × Expectancy. Valence
expected outcome; expectancy is the belief that
increased effort leads to increased performance. The third construct is instrumentality, the belief
tancy theory, an
ivated to a higher level of performance when he or she believes effort leads
to performance, performance leads to organizational rewards, and organizational rewards lead to
the satisfaction of personal goals. This theory is perceived by some to be of limited practical use
reward relationship such that rewards may be linked to
The equity theory of motivation concerns the perception of fairness. The premise of
ry (Adams, 1965) is that individuals are motivated by their beliefs about the fairness
of a reward structure relative to the inputs required to receive the reward. That is, people
s (e.g.,
recognition, salary, benefits) relative to those of others. This theory argues that positive
outcomes (high levels of motivation) result when employees perceive their treatment to be fair.
individual differences in perception.
A theory of motivation developed by Locke (1968) proposes that intentions to work
toward a goal are a major source of work motivation (i.e., goals and intentions control human
ific goals lead to higher performance than general goals.
performance relationship are feedback (knowledge of results),
efficacy and goal commitment. In later research on work motivation and
n, Locke and Latham (1990) present a model that depicts high goals and high
efficacy) leading to high performance, which leads to rewards, satisfaction, and
efficacy lead individuals to
persist longer and exert more effort. They further suggest this model offers insight that should be
valuable to educators due to the widely recognized fact that American students are less educated
rts. Locke and Latham (1990) claim their model
supports the reason for this disparity, that much less is demanded of American students in terms
of a shorter academic year, shorter work week, shorter work day, less time in class doing actual
work, and less homework.
McClelland’s motivational needs theory (1961) describes three types of motivational
needs that are found in varying degrees in all employees: the need for achievement, the need for
affiliation, and the need for authority and power. According to t
need for achievement have a strong need for feedback on their achievement and prefer to work
alone, while those with a high need for affiliation need relationships with others and prefer work
that provides personal interaction. People with a high need for power prefer to organize the
efforts of others and seek opportunities to lead.
These theories of motivation have informed a number of models of job satisfaction. One
such model that may be relevant to student satisfaction is
job attitudes. This theory asserts that factors that lead to job satisfaction are different from factors
that lead to job dissatisfaction such that motivating factors (i.e., achievement, recognition, the
work itself, responsibility, advancement, growth) lead to satisfaction while hygiene factors
(company policy and administration, supervision, work conditions, pay, relationships with
superiors and peers) lead to dissatisfaction. Motivating factors that determine sati
intrinsic to the work itself while hygiene factors that determine dissatisfaction are extrinsic to the
work. Herzberg’s theory differentiates between physical and psychological needs and identifies
cognitive growth as a major psychological ne
suggests that work be “enriched” to provide employees with the opportunity for psychological
growth and offers “vertical job loading” as a method of job enrichment.
A second model of job satisfaction that ma
Hackman and Oldham’s (1975) job characteristics model. This model offers a strategy for
change that can help organizations achieve their goals for higher quality work, and at the same
time, meet the needs of employees for a more meaningful and satisfactory work experience. In
this model, the core job dimensions of skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy,
and feedback affect three psychological states: meaningfulness of work, responsibility for
outcomes, and knowledge of results. Hackman and Oldham propose that increased levels of
these three psychological states lead to higher employee motivation, higher satisfaction, and
higher performance, and lower absenteeism and lower turnover. Hackman and Oldha
enrichment” as a way to addresses employee growth needs with action steps that lead to
increased motivation, satisfaction and productivity.
While the theories of motivation and models of job satisfaction evaluated for the current
paper provide guidance on motivating and managing workers in a traditional (face
environment, it is not clear how these theories may apply to remote workers. Research on
telecommuting and the management of employees who are located remotely from their
managers, highlights differences such that traditional managerial practices are no longer
appropriate (Tapscott & Capston, 1993).
management for virtual organizations that requires electronic interaction and increasi
communication.
In research on virtual organizations, Staples, Hulland and Higgins (1999) explore factors
that influence the effectiveness of remote workers, including employee performance as well as
employee attitudes toward the remote work an
theory (Bandura, 1977) is offered as a suitable theory for understanding what organizations and
managers can do to improve the effectiveness of remote workers who have considerable
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page
supports the reason for this disparity, that much less is demanded of American students in terms
of a shorter academic year, shorter work week, shorter work day, less time in class doing actual
McClelland’s motivational needs theory (1961) describes three types of motivational
needs that are found in varying degrees in all employees: the need for achievement, the need for
affiliation, and the need for authority and power. According to this theory, people with a high
need for achievement have a strong need for feedback on their achievement and prefer to work
alone, while those with a high need for affiliation need relationships with others and prefer work
n. People with a high need for power prefer to organize the
efforts of others and seek opportunities to lead.
These theories of motivation have informed a number of models of job satisfaction. One
such model that may be relevant to student satisfaction is Herzberg’s (1959) two
job attitudes. This theory asserts that factors that lead to job satisfaction are different from factors
that lead to job dissatisfaction such that motivating factors (i.e., achievement, recognition, the
bility, advancement, growth) lead to satisfaction while hygiene factors
(company policy and administration, supervision, work conditions, pay, relationships with
superiors and peers) lead to dissatisfaction. Motivating factors that determine sati
intrinsic to the work itself while hygiene factors that determine dissatisfaction are extrinsic to the
entiates between physical and psychological needs and identifies
cognitive growth as a major psychological need that can be fulfilled through work. Herzberg
suggests that work be “enriched” to provide employees with the opportunity for psychological
growth and offers “vertical job loading” as a method of job enrichment.
A second model of job satisfaction that may be relevant to student satisfaction is
Hackman and Oldham’s (1975) job characteristics model. This model offers a strategy for
change that can help organizations achieve their goals for higher quality work, and at the same
es for a more meaningful and satisfactory work experience. In
this model, the core job dimensions of skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy,
and feedback affect three psychological states: meaningfulness of work, responsibility for
mes, and knowledge of results. Hackman and Oldham propose that increased levels of
these three psychological states lead to higher employee motivation, higher satisfaction, and
higher performance, and lower absenteeism and lower turnover. Hackman and Oldha
enrichment” as a way to addresses employee growth needs with action steps that lead to
increased motivation, satisfaction and productivity.
While the theories of motivation and models of job satisfaction evaluated for the current
e guidance on motivating and managing workers in a traditional (face
environment, it is not clear how these theories may apply to remote workers. Research on
telecommuting and the management of employees who are located remotely from their
s, highlights differences such that traditional managerial practices are no longer
appropriate (Tapscott & Capston, 1993). Beyers (1995) decribes the changing nature of
management for virtual organizations that requires electronic interaction and increasi
In research on virtual organizations, Staples, Hulland and Higgins (1999) explore factors
that influence the effectiveness of remote workers, including employee performance as well as
employee attitudes toward the remote work and the organization. In this study, self
theory (Bandura, 1977) is offered as a suitable theory for understanding what organizations and
managers can do to improve the effectiveness of remote workers who have considerable
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page 7
supports the reason for this disparity, that much less is demanded of American students in terms
of a shorter academic year, shorter work week, shorter work day, less time in class doing actual
McClelland’s motivational needs theory (1961) describes three types of motivational
needs that are found in varying degrees in all employees: the need for achievement, the need for
his theory, people with a high
need for achievement have a strong need for feedback on their achievement and prefer to work
alone, while those with a high need for affiliation need relationships with others and prefer work
n. People with a high need for power prefer to organize the
These theories of motivation have informed a number of models of job satisfaction. One
Herzberg’s (1959) two-factor theory of
job attitudes. This theory asserts that factors that lead to job satisfaction are different from factors
that lead to job dissatisfaction such that motivating factors (i.e., achievement, recognition, the
bility, advancement, growth) lead to satisfaction while hygiene factors
(company policy and administration, supervision, work conditions, pay, relationships with
superiors and peers) lead to dissatisfaction. Motivating factors that determine satisfaction are
intrinsic to the work itself while hygiene factors that determine dissatisfaction are extrinsic to the
entiates between physical and psychological needs and identifies
ed that can be fulfilled through work. Herzberg
suggests that work be “enriched” to provide employees with the opportunity for psychological
y be relevant to student satisfaction is
Hackman and Oldham’s (1975) job characteristics model. This model offers a strategy for
change that can help organizations achieve their goals for higher quality work, and at the same
es for a more meaningful and satisfactory work experience. In
this model, the core job dimensions of skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy,
and feedback affect three psychological states: meaningfulness of work, responsibility for
mes, and knowledge of results. Hackman and Oldham propose that increased levels of
these three psychological states lead to higher employee motivation, higher satisfaction, and
higher performance, and lower absenteeism and lower turnover. Hackman and Oldham offer “job
enrichment” as a way to addresses employee growth needs with action steps that lead to
While the theories of motivation and models of job satisfaction evaluated for the current
e guidance on motivating and managing workers in a traditional (face-to-face)
environment, it is not clear how these theories may apply to remote workers. Research on
telecommuting and the management of employees who are located remotely from their
s, highlights differences such that traditional managerial practices are no longer
Beyers (1995) decribes the changing nature of
management for virtual organizations that requires electronic interaction and increasingly direct
In research on virtual organizations, Staples, Hulland and Higgins (1999) explore factors
that influence the effectiveness of remote workers, including employee performance as well as
d the organization. In this study, self-efficacy
theory (Bandura, 1977) is offered as a suitable theory for understanding what organizations and
managers can do to improve the effectiveness of remote workers who have considerable
autonomy. Self-efficacy theory identifies four sources of information that are used by
individuals when forming self-efficacy judgments: past experience, vicaroius experience,
evaluative feedbck, and physiological/emotional states (Bandura, 1977). Additionally, self
efficacy judgments are positively influenced by vicarious experience (modelling) and evaluative
feedback (Bandura, 1977).
Additional research by Staples (2001) identifies communication as a significant factor in
performance and job satisfaction for remote workers. This study finds more frequent
communication between remote workers and their managers results in higher levels of cognition
based trust that leads to increased performance and higher job satisfaction. Cognit
describes trust based on evidence of competence and responsibility.
Determinants of job satisfaction
Factors that affect job satisfaction may be classified as individual fact
zational factors. Table 2 (Appendix)
by the theories of motivation and job characteristics models reviewed for the current study.
CONCLUSIONS
Job satisfaction and student satisfaction are similar in that both imply a positve feeling or
sense of enjoyment; both imply a sense of accomplishment; and many of the factors that lead to
job satisfaction are the same factors that lead to student satisfaction. Factors affecting job
satisfaction include relationships (Herzberg, 1975) and feedback (Ha
Locke & Latham, 1990); factors affecting student satisfaction include interaction (Cao, et al.,
2009; Su et al., 2010; and Stein et al., 2005) and communication (Parayitam et al., 2007;
Wuensch et al., 2008; O’Leary & Quinlan, 2007;
efficacy is related to job satisfaction in a traditional work environment (Locke & Latham, 1990);
information technology self-efficacy and remote work self
in a remote work environment (Staples et al., 1999); and
student satisfaction in an online learning environment (Puzziferro, 2008; Wu et al., 2010).
To summarize, student satisfaction with online learning is linked to interaction a
communication, course design, the learning environment, and individual student factors of
computer self-efficacy and the ability to control an individual learning pace. Additionally, Moore
(2009) identifies useful outcomes and a satisfactory orientation
that result in student satisfaction with online learning. The determinants of student satisfaction
with online learning are strikingly similar to the determinants of job satisfaction. Team
management practices that impac
factors that impact student satisfaction with online learning. Job design factors are similar to
course design factors, and work environment factors similar to learning environment factors.
Autonomy is similar to the ability to control one’s learning pace in online learning. Self
factors are relevant to both job satisfaction and student satisfaction with online learning.
Table 3 (Appendix) summarizes motivation factors that affect sati
environments: a traditional work environment, a remote work environ
learning environment. In traditional and remote work environments, external factors are
controllable by management. In an online learning environm
by instructors and administrators.
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page
heory identifies four sources of information that are used by
efficacy judgments: past experience, vicaroius experience,
evaluative feedbck, and physiological/emotional states (Bandura, 1977). Additionally, self
ents are positively influenced by vicarious experience (modelling) and evaluative
Additional research by Staples (2001) identifies communication as a significant factor in
mance and job satisfaction for remote workers. This study finds more frequent
communication between remote workers and their managers results in higher levels of cognition
based trust that leads to increased performance and higher job satisfaction. Cognit
describes trust based on evidence of competence and responsibility.
Determinants of job satisfaction
Factors that affect job satisfaction may be classified as individual factors or organi
zational factors. Table 2 (Appendix) summarizes factors that impact job satisfaction as identified
by the theories of motivation and job characteristics models reviewed for the current study.
Job satisfaction and student satisfaction are similar in that both imply a positve feeling or
se of enjoyment; both imply a sense of accomplishment; and many of the factors that lead to
job satisfaction are the same factors that lead to student satisfaction. Factors affecting job
ships (Herzberg, 1975) and feedback (Hackman & Oldham, 1975;
Locke & Latham, 1990); factors affecting student satisfaction include interaction (Cao, et al.,
2009; Su et al., 2010; and Stein et al., 2005) and communication (Parayitam et al., 2007;
Wuensch et al., 2008; O’Leary & Quinlan, 2007; Dennen et al., 2007; and Staples, 2010). Self
efficacy is related to job satisfaction in a traditional work environment (Locke & Latham, 1990);
efficacy and remote work self-efficacy are related to job satisfaction
ork environment (Staples et al., 1999); and computer self-efficacy is related to
student satisfaction in an online learning environment (Puzziferro, 2008; Wu et al., 2010).
To summarize, student satisfaction with online learning is linked to interaction a
communication, course design, the learning environment, and individual student factors of
efficacy and the ability to control an individual learning pace. Additionally, Moore
(2009) identifies useful outcomes and a satisfactory orientation for how to learn online as factors
that result in student satisfaction with online learning. The determinants of student satisfaction
with online learning are strikingly similar to the determinants of job satisfaction. Team
management practices that impact job satisfaction are similar to interaction and communication
factors that impact student satisfaction with online learning. Job design factors are similar to
course design factors, and work environment factors similar to learning environment factors.
tonomy is similar to the ability to control one’s learning pace in online learning. Self
factors are relevant to both job satisfaction and student satisfaction with online learning.
summarizes motivation factors that affect satisfaction across three
traditional work environment, a remote work environment, and an online
learning environment. In traditional and remote work environments, external factors are
controllable by management. In an online learning environment, external factors are controllable
by instructors and administrators.
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page 8
heory identifies four sources of information that are used by
efficacy judgments: past experience, vicaroius experience,
evaluative feedbck, and physiological/emotional states (Bandura, 1977). Additionally, self-
ents are positively influenced by vicarious experience (modelling) and evaluative
Additional research by Staples (2001) identifies communication as a significant factor in
mance and job satisfaction for remote workers. This study finds more frequent
communication between remote workers and their managers results in higher levels of cognition-
based trust that leads to increased performance and higher job satisfaction. Cognition-based trust
ors or organi-
actors that impact job satisfaction as identified
by the theories of motivation and job characteristics models reviewed for the current study.
Job satisfaction and student satisfaction are similar in that both imply a positve feeling or
se of enjoyment; both imply a sense of accomplishment; and many of the factors that lead to
job satisfaction are the same factors that lead to student satisfaction. Factors affecting job
man & Oldham, 1975;
Locke & Latham, 1990); factors affecting student satisfaction include interaction (Cao, et al.,
2009; Su et al., 2010; and Stein et al., 2005) and communication (Parayitam et al., 2007;
Dennen et al., 2007; and Staples, 2010). Self-
efficacy is related to job satisfaction in a traditional work environment (Locke & Latham, 1990);
efficacy are related to job satisfaction
efficacy is related to
student satisfaction in an online learning environment (Puzziferro, 2008; Wu et al., 2010).
To summarize, student satisfaction with online learning is linked to interaction and
communication, course design, the learning environment, and individual student factors of
efficacy and the ability to control an individual learning pace. Additionally, Moore
for how to learn online as factors
that result in student satisfaction with online learning. The determinants of student satisfaction
with online learning are strikingly similar to the determinants of job satisfaction. Team
t job satisfaction are similar to interaction and communication
factors that impact student satisfaction with online learning. Job design factors are similar to
course design factors, and work environment factors similar to learning environment factors.
tonomy is similar to the ability to control one’s learning pace in online learning. Self-efficacy
factors are relevant to both job satisfaction and student satisfaction with online learning.
sfaction across three
ment, and an online
learning environment. In traditional and remote work environments, external factors are
ent, external factors are controllable
The internal and external factors common to traditional and remote work environments
and online learning environments suggest that man
organizations to improve job satisfaction and performance can perhaps be transferred to and used
effectively in online learning to improve student satisfaction and performance. Moreover,
managerial actions that improve self
improving self-efficacy in an online learning environment, thereby improving student
satisfaction and achievement.
Figure 1 illustrates a proposed research model that links management practices from OB
motivation theories to student satisfa
that include continuing learning, student achievement, retention, and an improved insti
image (i.e., positive public relations). The model suggests that specific management practices
may prove effective in improving student satisfaction with online learning. For example,
designing course content to make coursework challenging, interesting and relevant is parallel to
managing aspects of the work itself (Herzberg, 1959) and to job enrich
variety and task significance (Hackman & Oldham, 1975) and task complexity (Locke &
Latham, 1990). Additionally, the model suggests that communication and interaction practices in
online learning are parallel to the manage
Oldham, 1975; Locke & Latham, 1990) and modeling best practices (Staples, 1999). Moreover,
self-efficacy may be improved by specific management practices of training to improve remote
work self-efficacy (Staples, 1999).
The model is based on limited evidence from research on remote work en
therefore, additional research is required to confirm links between management practices in
traditional environments that effectively impact satisfaction and performa
practices in remote work environments as they may impact satisfaction and performance in that
environment. Additionally, future research will survey students in both environments to test
propositions relating to the effectiveness of OB
satisfaction.
Figure 1. Parallel model of OB
REFERENCES
Adams, J.S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (ed.),
social psychology, New York: Academic Press.
Transfer of management practices from traditional work environments to remote work environments
Management practices from OB motivation theories
Management practices from OB motivation theories
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page
The internal and external factors common to traditional and remote work environments
and online learning environments suggest that management techniques and practices used in
nizations to improve job satisfaction and performance can perhaps be transferred to and used
effectively in online learning to improve student satisfaction and performance. Moreover,
managerial actions that improve self-efficacy in work environments may be effective in
efficacy in an online learning environment, thereby improving student
Figure 1 illustrates a proposed research model that links management practices from OB
tion theories to student satisfaction with online learning that leads to the desired outcomes
that include continuing learning, student achievement, retention, and an improved insti
image (i.e., positive public relations). The model suggests that specific management practices
may prove effective in improving student satisfaction with online learning. For example,
designing course content to make coursework challenging, interesting and relevant is parallel to
managing aspects of the work itself (Herzberg, 1959) and to job enrichment concepts of skill
variety and task significance (Hackman & Oldham, 1975) and task complexity (Locke &
Latham, 1990). Additionally, the model suggests that communication and interaction practices in
online learning are parallel to the management practices of direction and feedback (Hackman &
Oldham, 1975; Locke & Latham, 1990) and modeling best practices (Staples, 1999). Moreover,
efficacy may be improved by specific management practices of training to improve remote
999).
The model is based on limited evidence from research on remote work en
therefore, additional research is required to confirm links between management practices in
traditional environments that effectively impact satisfaction and performance and management
practices in remote work environments as they may impact satisfaction and performance in that
environment. Additionally, future research will survey students in both environments to test
propositions relating to the effectiveness of OB management practices in improving student
Figure 1. Parallel model of OB motivation in online learning
Adams, J.S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (ed.), Advances in experimental
, New York: Academic Press.
Transfer of management practices from traditional work environments to remote work environments
Improved job satisfaction
Improved job performance
Improved student satisfaction with online learning
Continuing learning Student achievement Retention Improved institutional reputation
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page 9
The internal and external factors common to traditional and remote work environments
ment techniques and practices used in
nizations to improve job satisfaction and performance can perhaps be transferred to and used
effectively in online learning to improve student satisfaction and performance. Moreover,
effective in
efficacy in an online learning environment, thereby improving student
Figure 1 illustrates a proposed research model that links management practices from OB
ction with online learning that leads to the desired outcomes
that include continuing learning, student achievement, retention, and an improved institutional
image (i.e., positive public relations). The model suggests that specific management practices
may prove effective in improving student satisfaction with online learning. For example,
designing course content to make coursework challenging, interesting and relevant is parallel to
ment concepts of skill
variety and task significance (Hackman & Oldham, 1975) and task complexity (Locke &
Latham, 1990). Additionally, the model suggests that communication and interaction practices in
ices of direction and feedback (Hackman &
Oldham, 1975; Locke & Latham, 1990) and modeling best practices (Staples, 1999). Moreover,
efficacy may be improved by specific management practices of training to improve remote
The model is based on limited evidence from research on remote work environments;
therefore, additional research is required to confirm links between management practices in
nce and management
practices in remote work environments as they may impact satisfaction and performance in that
environment. Additionally, future research will survey students in both environments to test
management practices in improving student
Advances in experimental
Transfer of management practices from traditional work environments to remote work environments
Improved institutional reputation
Allen, I.E., & Seaman, J. (2008). Staying the Course: Online Education
2008. Retrieved July 24, 2009, from http://www.sloan
staying_course
Allen, I.E., & Seaman, J. (2010). Learning on Demand: Online Education in the United States,
2009. Retrieved June 9, 2009 from
http://sloanconsortium.org/publications/survey/pdf/learningondemand.pdf.
Alves, H., & Raposo, M. (2007). Conceptual Model of Student Satisfaction in Higher Education.
Total Quality Management, 18
Arbaugh, J.B. (2001). How instructor Immediacy Behaviors Af
Learning in Web-Based Courses.
Astin, A.W. (1993). Assessment for excellence: The philosophy and practice of assessment and
evaluation in higher education.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Psychological Review, 84
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognition theory.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control.
Bateman, T.S., & Organ, D.W. (1983). Job Satisfaction and the Good Soldier: The Relationship
between Affect and Employee ‘Citizenship’,
587-595.
Beard, L.A. & Harper, C. (2002). Student perceptions of Online versus On Campus Instruction.
Education, 122, 658-663.
Beqiri, M.S., Chase, N.M., & Biskha, A. (2010). Online Course Delivery: An Empirical
Investigation of Factors Affecting Student Sa
Business. 85(2), 95-100.
Beyers, M. (1995). Is There a Future for Man
Black, G. (2002). A Comparison of Traditional, Online and Hybrid Methods of Course Delivery.
Journal of Business Administration Online, 1
Block, A., Udermann, B., Felix, M., Reineke, D., & Murray, S.R. (2008). Achievement and
Satisfaction in an Online versus a Traditional Health and Wellness Course.
Online Learning and Teaching, 4
http://jolt.merlot.org/vol4no1/block0308.pdf
Booker, Q.E., & Rebman, C.E. (2005). E
Loyalty for Online Program Success.
Bussing, A., Bissels, T., Fuchs, V., and Perrar, K. (1999). A Dynamic Model of Work
Satisfaction: Qualitative Approaches.
Cao, Q., Griffing, T.E., & Bai, X. (2009). The Importance of Synchronous Interaction for
Student Satisfaction with Course Web
20(3), 331-338.
Dennen, V.P., Darabi, A.A., & Smith, L.J. (2007). Instructor
Courses: The Relative Perceived Importance of Particular Instructor Actions on
Performance and Satisfaction.
DeShields, O.W., Jr., Kara, A.,& Kaynak. E. (2005). Determinants of Business Student
Satisfaction and Retention in Higher Education: Applying Herzberg’s two
International Journal of Educational Man
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page
Allen, I.E., & Seaman, J. (2008). Staying the Course: Online Education in the United States,
2008. Retrieved July 24, 2009, from http://www.sloan-c.org/publications/survey/
Allen, I.E., & Seaman, J. (2010). Learning on Demand: Online Education in the United States,
2009. Retrieved June 9, 2009 from
consortium.org/publications/survey/pdf/learningondemand.pdf.
Alves, H., & Raposo, M. (2007). Conceptual Model of Student Satisfaction in Higher Education.
Total Quality Management, 18(5), 571-588.
Arbaugh, J.B. (2001). How instructor Immediacy Behaviors Affect Student Satisfaction and
Based Courses. Business Communication Quarterly, 64
Assessment for excellence: The philosophy and practice of assessment and
evaluation in higher education. Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press.
efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.
Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognition theory.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman Press.
Bateman, T.S., & Organ, D.W. (1983). Job Satisfaction and the Good Soldier: The Relationship
between Affect and Employee ‘Citizenship’, Academy of Management Journal, Dec.,
Beard, L.A. & Harper, C. (2002). Student perceptions of Online versus On Campus Instruction.
663.
Beqiri, M.S., Chase, N.M., & Biskha, A. (2010). Online Course Delivery: An Empirical
Investigation of Factors Affecting Student Satisfaction. Journal of Education for
Beyers, M. (1995). Is There a Future for Management? Nursing Management, 26
Black, G. (2002). A Comparison of Traditional, Online and Hybrid Methods of Course Delivery.
siness Administration Online, 1(1).
Block, A., Udermann, B., Felix, M., Reineke, D., & Murray, S.R. (2008). Achievement and
Satisfaction in an Online versus a Traditional Health and Wellness Course.
Online Learning and Teaching, 4(1). Retrieved July 9, 2010, from
http://jolt.merlot.org/vol4no1/block0308.pdf
Booker, Q.E., & Rebman, C.E. (2005). E-Student Retention: Factors Affecting Customer
Loyalty for Online Program Success. Issues in Information Systems, 1(1), 183
Fuchs, V., and Perrar, K. (1999). A Dynamic Model of Work
Satisfaction: Qualitative Approaches. Human Relations, 52(8), 999-1027.
Cao, Q., Griffing, T.E., & Bai, X. (2009). The Importance of Synchronous Interaction for
Student Satisfaction with Course Web Sites. Journal of Information Systems Education,
Dennen, V.P., Darabi, A.A., & Smith, L.J. (2007). Instructor-Learner Interaction in Online
Courses: The Relative Perceived Importance of Particular Instructor Actions on
sfaction. Distance Education, 28(1), 65-79.
DeShields, O.W., Jr., Kara, A.,& Kaynak. E. (2005). Determinants of Business Student
Satisfaction and Retention in Higher Education: Applying Herzberg’s two
International Journal of Educational Management, 19(2), 128-139.
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page 10
in the United States,
c.org/publications/survey/
Allen, I.E., & Seaman, J. (2010). Learning on Demand: Online Education in the United States,
consortium.org/publications/survey/pdf/learningondemand.pdf.
Alves, H., & Raposo, M. (2007). Conceptual Model of Student Satisfaction in Higher Education.
fect Student Satisfaction and
Business Communication Quarterly, 64(4), 42-54.
Assessment for excellence: The philosophy and practice of assessment and
efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognition theory.
New York: Freeman Press.
Bateman, T.S., & Organ, D.W. (1983). Job Satisfaction and the Good Soldier: The Relationship
Academy of Management Journal, Dec.,
Beard, L.A. & Harper, C. (2002). Student perceptions of Online versus On Campus Instruction.
Beqiri, M.S., Chase, N.M., & Biskha, A. (2010). Online Course Delivery: An Empirical
Journal of Education for
Nursing Management, 26(1), 24-25.
Black, G. (2002). A Comparison of Traditional, Online and Hybrid Methods of Course Delivery.
Block, A., Udermann, B., Felix, M., Reineke, D., & Murray, S.R. (2008). Achievement and
Satisfaction in an Online versus a Traditional Health and Wellness Course. Journal of
Student Retention: Factors Affecting Customer
1(1), 183-189.
Fuchs, V., and Perrar, K. (1999). A Dynamic Model of Work
1027.
Cao, Q., Griffing, T.E., & Bai, X. (2009). The Importance of Synchronous Interaction for
Journal of Information Systems Education,
Learner Interaction in Online
Courses: The Relative Perceived Importance of Particular Instructor Actions on
DeShields, O.W., Jr., Kara, A.,& Kaynak. E. (2005). Determinants of Business Student
Satisfaction and Retention in Higher Education: Applying Herzberg’s two-factor theory.
Elliott, K.M., & Shin, D. (2002). Student Satisfaction: an alternative approach to assessing this
important concept. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 24
Gibson, A. (2010). Measuring Business Student Satisfacti
Major Predictors. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 32
Gibson, J.W. (2008). A Comparison of Student Outcomes and Student Satisfaction in Three
MBA Human Resource Management Classes based on Trad
Journal of College Teaching and Learning, 5
Glass, J., & Sue, V. (2008). Student Preferences, Satisfaction, and Perceived Learning in an
Online Mathematics Class.
July 9, 2010, from http://jolt.merlot.org/ vol4no3/ glass_0908.pdf
Griffeth, R.W., Hom, P.W., & Gaertner, S. (2000). A Meta
Correlates of Employee Turnover: Update, Moderator Tests and Research Implications
for the Next Millennium.
Hackman, J.R., & Oldham, G.R. (1975). Development of the job diagnostic survey.
Applied Psychology, 60, 159
Herzberg, D., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, (1959).
Herzberg, F. (1968). One More Time: How Do You Motivate Employees?
Review, 46(1), 53-62.
Johnson, S.D., Aragon, S.R., Shaik, N., & Palma
Online versus Face-to-Face Instruction. Proceedings of the W
WWW and Internet, Honolulu, Hawaii. Retrieved July 8, 2010, from
http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED448722.pdf
Karatas, S., & Simsek, N. (2009). Comparisons of Internet
Systems Based on “Equivalency of Experiences” According to Students’ Academic
Achievements and Satisfaction.
65-74.
Lim, J., Kim, M., Chen, S.S., & Ryder, C.E. (2008). An Empirical Investigation of Student
Achievement and Satisfaction in Different Learning Environments.
Instructional Psychology, 35
Locke, E.A. (1983). The Nature and Causes of Job Satisfaction. In M.
Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology,
Locke, E.A., & Latham, G.P. (1990). Work Motivation and Satisfaction: Light at the End of the
Tunnel. Psychological Science, 1
Mai, L. (2005). A Comparative Study between UK and US: Student Satisfaction in Higher
Education and its Influential Factors.
Maki, R.H., Maki, W.S., Patterson, M., & Whittaker, P.D. (2000). Evaluations of a Web
Introductory Psychology Course: I. Learning and Satisfaction in On
Courses. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 32(2), 230
Maslow, A.H. (1943). A Theory of Human Motivation.
McClelland, D.C. (1961). The Achieving Society.
Moore, J.C. (2009). A Synthesis of Sloan
Asynchronous Learning Networks, 13
Moore, M.G. (1993). Towards a theory of indepen
Education, 44(9), 661-679.
Moro-Egido, A.I., & Panades, J. (2010). An Analysis of Student Satisfaction: Full
Time Students. Social Indicators Research, 96
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page
Elliott, K.M., & Shin, D. (2002). Student Satisfaction: an alternative approach to assessing this
Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 24
Gibson, A. (2010). Measuring Business Student Satisfaction: A Review and Summary of the
Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 32
Gibson, J.W. (2008). A Comparison of Student Outcomes and Student Satisfaction in Three
MBA Human Resource Management Classes based on Traditional vs. Online Learning.
Journal of College Teaching and Learning, 5(8).
Glass, J., & Sue, V. (2008). Student Preferences, Satisfaction, and Perceived Learning in an
Online Mathematics Class. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 4(3). Retrieved
July 9, 2010, from http://jolt.merlot.org/ vol4no3/ glass_0908.pdf
Griffeth, R.W., Hom, P.W., & Gaertner, S. (2000). A Meta-analysis of Antecedents and
Correlates of Employee Turnover: Update, Moderator Tests and Research Implications
um. Journal of Management, 26(3), 463-488.
Hackman, J.R., & Oldham, G.R. (1975). Development of the job diagnostic survey.
159-170.
Herzberg, D., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, (1959). The Motivation to Work, New York: Wiley.
Herzberg, F. (1968). One More Time: How Do You Motivate Employees? Harvard Business
Johnson, S.D., Aragon, S.R., Shaik, N., & Palma-Rivas, N. (1999). Comparative Analysis of
Face Instruction. Proceedings of the World Conference on the
WWW and Internet, Honolulu, Hawaii. Retrieved July 8, 2010, from
http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED448722.pdf
, N. (2009). Comparisons of Internet-Based and Face-to-Face Learning
Systems Based on “Equivalency of Experiences” According to Students’ Academic
Achievements and Satisfaction. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education,
en, S.S., & Ryder, C.E. (2008). An Empirical Investigation of Student
Achievement and Satisfaction in Different Learning Environments. Journal of
Instructional Psychology, 35(2), 113-119.
Locke, E.A. (1983). The Nature and Causes of Job Satisfaction. In M.D. Dunnette (ed.),
Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1297-1349. New York: Wiley.
Locke, E.A., & Latham, G.P. (1990). Work Motivation and Satisfaction: Light at the End of the
Psychological Science, 1(4), 240-246.
. A Comparative Study between UK and US: Student Satisfaction in Higher
Education and its Influential Factors. Journal of Marketing Management, 21,
Maki, R.H., Maki, W.S., Patterson, M., & Whittaker, P.D. (2000). Evaluations of a Web
uctory Psychology Course: I. Learning and Satisfaction in On-Line Versus Lecture
Courses. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 32(2), 230
Maslow, A.H. (1943). A Theory of Human Motivation. Psychological Review, July. 370
The Achieving Society. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Moore, J.C. (2009). A Synthesis of Sloan-C Effective Practices: December 2009.
Asynchronous Learning Networks, 13(4), 73-97.
Moore, M.G. (1993). Towards a theory of independent learning and teaching. Journal of Higher
679.
Egido, A.I., & Panades, J. (2010). An Analysis of Student Satisfaction: Full
Social Indicators Research, 96(2).
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page 11
Elliott, K.M., & Shin, D. (2002). Student Satisfaction: an alternative approach to assessing this
Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 24(2).
on: A Review and Summary of the
Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 32(3), 251-259.
Gibson, J.W. (2008). A Comparison of Student Outcomes and Student Satisfaction in Three
itional vs. Online Learning.
Glass, J., & Sue, V. (2008). Student Preferences, Satisfaction, and Perceived Learning in an
(3). Retrieved
analysis of Antecedents and
Correlates of Employee Turnover: Update, Moderator Tests and Research Implications
Hackman, J.R., & Oldham, G.R. (1975). Development of the job diagnostic survey. Journal of
New York: Wiley.
Harvard Business
Rivas, N. (1999). Comparative Analysis of
orld Conference on the
Face Learning
Systems Based on “Equivalency of Experiences” According to Students’ Academic
The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 10(1),
en, S.S., & Ryder, C.E. (2008). An Empirical Investigation of Student
Journal of
D. Dunnette (ed.),
New York: Wiley.
Locke, E.A., & Latham, G.P. (1990). Work Motivation and Satisfaction: Light at the End of the
. A Comparative Study between UK and US: Student Satisfaction in Higher
ment, 21, 859-878.
Maki, R.H., Maki, W.S., Patterson, M., & Whittaker, P.D. (2000). Evaluations of a Web-Based
Line Versus Lecture
Courses. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 32(2), 230-39.
July. 370-396.
New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
C Effective Practices: December 2009. Journal of
Journal of Higher
Egido, A.I., & Panades, J. (2010). An Analysis of Student Satisfaction: Full-Time vs. Part-
O’Leary, P.F., & Quinlan, T.J. (2007)
Satisfaction and Achievement of Online Students.
Education, 21(3), 133-143.
Parayitam, S., Desai, K., & Phelps, L.D. (2007). The Effect of Teacher Communication and
Course Content on Student Satisfaction and Effectiveness.
Leadership Journal, 11(3), 91
Pintrich, P., & deGroot (1990). Motivational and self
room academic performance.
Ponzurick, T.G., France, K.R., & Logar, C.M. (2000). Delivering Graduate Marketing
Education: An Analysis of Face
Marketing Education, 22,
Powell, D.C. (2007). Student Satisfaction with Distance Learning MPA Program: A Preliminary
Comparison of On-Campus and Distance Learning Students’ Satisfaction with MPA
Courses. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 3
http://jolt.merlot.org/vol3no1/p
Puzziferro, M. (2008). Online Technologies Self
Predictors of Final Grade and Satisfaction with College
American Journal of Distance Education, 22,
Richardson, J.C., & Swan, K. (2003). Examining Social Presence in Online Courses in relation
to Students’ Perceived Learning and Satisfaction.
Networks, Puzziferro, M. (2008). Online Technologies Self
Learning as Predictors of Final Grade and Satisfaction in College
The American Journal of Distance Education, 22,
Robbins, S.P. & Judge, T.A. (2009).
Prentice Hall.
Rosseau, D.M. (1976). The Relationship of Task Characteristics to Attitudes, Absenteeism,
Stress and Performance among College Students.
& Welfare, National Institute of Education.
www.eric.ed.gov.
Russell, T.L. (2001). The No Significant Difference Phenomenon as Reported in 355 Research
Reports, Summaries and Papers. The International Distance Education Certification
Center (IDECC): Montgomery, AL.
Ryan, R. (2000). Student Assessment Comparison of Lecture and Onlin
Equipment and Methods Class.
83.
Shunk, D.H. (2005). Self-Regulated Learning: the Educational Legacy of Paul R. Pintrich.
Educational Psychologist 40
Sloan (n.d.). The 5 Pillars of Quality Online Education. The Sloan Consortium. Retrieved
October 29, 2008 from http://www.sloan
Spector, P.E. (1997). Job Satisfaction: Application, Assessment, Causes, and Consequences.,
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Staples, D.S., Hulland, J.S., & Higgins, C.A. (1999). A Self
Management of Remote Workers in Virtual Organizations.
10(6), 758-776.
Staples, D.S. (2001). A Study of Remote Workers and Their Differ
Workers. Journal of End-
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page
O’Leary, P.F., & Quinlan, T.J. (2007). Learner-Instructor Telephone Interaction: Effects on
Satisfaction and Achievement of Online Students. The American Journal of Distance
143.
Parayitam, S., Desai, K., & Phelps, L.D. (2007). The Effect of Teacher Communication and
rse Content on Student Satisfaction and Effectiveness. Academy of Educational
(3), 91-105.
Pintrich, P., & deGroot (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of class
room academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82 (March), 33
Ponzurick, T.G., France, K.R., & Logar, C.M. (2000). Delivering Graduate Marketing
Education: An Analysis of Face-to-Face versus Distance Education. Journal of
Marketing Education, 22, 180-187.
tisfaction with Distance Learning MPA Program: A Preliminary
Campus and Distance Learning Students’ Satisfaction with MPA
Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 3(1). Retrieved July 9, 2010, from
http://jolt.merlot.org/vol3no1/powell.htm
Puzziferro, M. (2008). Online Technologies Self-Efficacy and Self-Regulated Learning as
Predictors of Final Grade and Satisfaction with College-Level Online Courses.
American Journal of Distance Education, 22, 72-89.
K. (2003). Examining Social Presence in Online Courses in relation
to Students’ Perceived Learning and Satisfaction. Journal of Asynchronous Learning
Puzziferro, M. (2008). Online Technologies Self-Efficacy and Self
ors of Final Grade and Satisfaction in College-Level Online Courses.
The American Journal of Distance Education, 22, 72-89.
Robbins, S.P. & Judge, T.A. (2009). Organizational Behavior. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson
e Relationship of Task Characteristics to Attitudes, Absenteeism,
Stress and Performance among College Students. U.S. Department of Health, Education
& Welfare, National Institute of Education. Retrieved June 8, 2010, from
The No Significant Difference Phenomenon as Reported in 355 Research
Reports, Summaries and Papers. The International Distance Education Certification
Center (IDECC): Montgomery, AL.
Ryan, R. (2000). Student Assessment Comparison of Lecture and Online Construction
Equipment and Methods Class. Technological Horizons in Education (T.H.E.), 27
Regulated Learning: the Educational Legacy of Paul R. Pintrich.
Educational Psychologist 40(2).
Quality Online Education. The Sloan Consortium. Retrieved
October 29, 2008 from http://www.sloan-c.org/5pillars.
Spector, P.E. (1997). Job Satisfaction: Application, Assessment, Causes, and Consequences.,
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Staples, D.S., Hulland, J.S., & Higgins, C.A. (1999). A Self-Efficacy Theory Explanation for the
Management of Remote Workers in Virtual Organizations. Organizational Science,
Staples, D.S. (2001). A Study of Remote Workers and Their Differences from Non
-User Computing, 13(2), 3-14.
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page 12
Instructor Telephone Interaction: Effects on
The American Journal of Distance
Parayitam, S., Desai, K., & Phelps, L.D. (2007). The Effect of Teacher Communication and
Academy of Educational
regulated learning components of class-
(March), 33-40.
Ponzurick, T.G., France, K.R., & Logar, C.M. (2000). Delivering Graduate Marketing
Journal of
tisfaction with Distance Learning MPA Program: A Preliminary
Campus and Distance Learning Students’ Satisfaction with MPA
(1). Retrieved July 9, 2010, from
Regulated Learning as
Level Online Courses. The
K. (2003). Examining Social Presence in Online Courses in relation
Journal of Asynchronous Learning
Efficacy and Self-Regulated
Level Online Courses.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson
e Relationship of Task Characteristics to Attitudes, Absenteeism,
U.S. Department of Health, Education
Retrieved June 8, 2010, from
The No Significant Difference Phenomenon as Reported in 355 Research
Reports, Summaries and Papers. The International Distance Education Certification
e Construction
Technological Horizons in Education (T.H.E.), 27(6), 78-
Regulated Learning: the Educational Legacy of Paul R. Pintrich.
Quality Online Education. The Sloan Consortium. Retrieved
Spector, P.E. (1997). Job Satisfaction: Application, Assessment, Causes, and Consequences.,
Efficacy Theory Explanation for the
Organizational Science,
ences from Non-Remote
Stein, D.S., Wanstreet, C.E., Calvin, J., Overtoom, C., & Wheaton, J.E. (2005). Bridging the
Transactional Distance Gap in Online Learning Environments.
Distance Education, 19(2), 108
Sweeney, J.C., & Ingram. D. (2001). A Comparison of Traditional and Web
Marketing Education: An Exploratory Study. Journal of Marketing Education, 23(1),
55-62.
Tapscott, D., & Caston, A. (1993).
Technology, New York: McGraw
Thurmond, V.A., Wambach, K., Connors, H.R., & Frey, B.B.
Satisfaction: Determining the Impact of a Web
Student Characteristics. The American Journal of Distance Education, 16
Vamosi, A.R., Pierce, B.G., & Slotkin, M.H. (2004). Dista
Course – Student Satisfaction and Perceptions of Efficacy.
Business, 79, 360-366.
Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and Motivation.
Walker, C.E., & Kelly. E. (2007). Online Instr
Peeves. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 8
Wisan, G., Nazma, S., & Pscherer, C.P., Jr. (2001). Comparing online and face
instruction at a large virtual university: Data and issues
Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association for Institutional Research,
Long Beach, CA. Retrieved June 15, 2010, at
http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED456790.pdf
Wu, H., Tennyson, R.D., & Hsia, T. (2010). A Study of
Learning System Environment.
Wuensch, K.L. (2009). How Technology Affects Student Perceptions of Course Quality.
Distance Education Report, 13(17), Sep. 1, 2009.
Wuensch, K.L., Azia, E.O., Kishore, M., & Tabrizi, M.H.N. (2008). Pedagogical Characteristics
of Online and Face-to-Face Classes.
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page
Stein, D.S., Wanstreet, C.E., Calvin, J., Overtoom, C., & Wheaton, J.E. (2005). Bridging the
Transactional Distance Gap in Online Learning Environments. The American Journal of
(2), 108-118.
Sweeney, J.C., & Ingram. D. (2001). A Comparison of Traditional and Web-Based Tutorials in
Marketing Education: An Exploratory Study. Journal of Marketing Education, 23(1),
Tapscott, D., & Caston, A. (1993). Paradigm Shift: The New Promise of Information
New York: McGraw-Hill.
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
The American Journal of Distance Education, 16
Vamosi, A.R., Pierce, B.G., & Slotkin, M.H. (2004). Distance Learning in Accounting Principles
Student Satisfaction and Perceptions of Efficacy. Journal of Education for
Work and Motivation. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Walker, C.E., & Kelly. E. (2007). Online Instruction: Student Satisfaction, Kudos, and Pet
The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 8(4), 309-319.
Wisan, G., Nazma, S., & Pscherer, C.P., Jr. (2001). Comparing online and face-to
instruction at a large virtual university: Data and issues in the measurement of quality.
Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association for Institutional Research,
Long Beach, CA. Retrieved June 15, 2010, at
http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED456790.pdf
Wu, H., Tennyson, R.D., & Hsia, T. (2010). A Study of Student Satisfaction in a Blended E
Learning System Environment. Computers and Education, 55, 155-164.
Wuensch, K.L. (2009). How Technology Affects Student Perceptions of Course Quality.
Distance Education Report, 13(17), Sep. 1, 2009.
a, E.O., Kishore, M., & Tabrizi, M.H.N. (2008). Pedagogical Characteristics
Face Classes. International Journal on E-Learning, 7
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page 13
Stein, D.S., Wanstreet, C.E., Calvin, J., Overtoom, C., & Wheaton, J.E. (2005). Bridging the
The American Journal of
Based Tutorials in
Marketing Education: An Exploratory Study. Journal of Marketing Education, 23(1),
Shift: The New Promise of Information
(2002). Evaluation of Student
Based Environment by Controlling for
The American Journal of Distance Education, 16(3), 169-189.
nce Learning in Accounting Principles
Journal of Education for
uction: Student Satisfaction, Kudos, and Pet
to-face
in the measurement of quality.
Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association for Institutional Research,
Student Satisfaction in a Blended E-
Wuensch, K.L. (2009). How Technology Affects Student Perceptions of Course Quality.
a, E.O., Kishore, M., & Tabrizi, M.H.N. (2008). Pedagogical Characteristics
Learning, 7(3), 523-532.
Student satisfaction with online
APPENDIX
Table 1. Summary of determinants of student satisfaction
Determinants of Student
Satisfaction Course Format Studies
1 Interaction Traditional Cao, Griffin & Bai (2009)
Interaction Hybrid Wu, Tennyson & Hsia (2010)
Interaction Online Stein, Wanstreet, Calvin, Overtoom &
Wheaton (2005)
Communication Traditional Parayitam, Desai & Phelps (2007)
Communication Traditional &
online
Wuensch, Azia, Kishore & Tabrizi (2008)
Communication Online O’Leary & Quinlan (2007)
Communication Online Dennen, Darabi & Smith (2007)
2 Course design Online Stein, Wanstreet, Calvin, Overtoom &
Wheaton (2005)
Course content Traditional Parayitam, Desai & Phelps (2007)
Course content Online Walker & Kelly (2007)
Courses Traditional DeShields, Kara & Kaynak (2005)
3 Learning environment Online Thurmond, Wambach, Connors & Frey
(2002)
4 Computer self-efficacy Online Puzziferro (2008)
Computer self-efficacy Online Wu, Tennyson & Hsia (2010)
Ability to set individual
learning pace
Hybrid Beard & Harper (2002)
Learning strategies Online Puzziferro (2008)
5 Faculty performance Traditional DeShields, Kara & Kaynak (2005)
Knowledgeable faculty Traditional Elliott & Shin (2002)
6 Impression of school
Impression of quality
education
Traditional Mai (2005)
University image
Perceived value
Traditional Alves & Raposo (2007)
Table 2. Summary of determinants of job satisfaction in a traditional environment
Determinants of Job
Individual Factors High expectancy, self
Effort, persistence
Goal commitment
Ability
Achievement
Recognition
The work itself
Responsibility
Advancement
Growth
Autonomy
Responsibility for
Organizational
Factors
High goals
Feedback
Task complexity
Rewards
Recognition
Policy and administration
Supervision
Work conditions
Rewards
Relationships
Task significance
Feedback
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page
Table 2. Summary of determinants of job satisfaction in a traditional environment
Determinants of Job Satisfaction
High expectancy, self-efficacy
Effort, persistence
Goal commitment
Locke & Latham (1990)
Achievement
Recognition
The work itself
Responsibility
Advancement
Herzberg (1968)
Autonomy
Responsibility for outcomes
Hackman & Oldham (1975)
High goals
Feedback
Task complexity
Rewards
Locke & Latham (1990)
Recognition
Policy and administration
Supervision
Work conditions
Rewards
Relationships
Herzberg (1975)
Task significance
Feedback
Hackman & Oldham (1975)
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page 15
Table 2. Summary of determinants of job satisfaction in a traditional environment
Locke & Latham (1990)
Hackman & Oldham (1975)
Locke & Latham (1990)
Hackman & Oldham (1975)
Table 3. Motivation factors in work and online learning environments
Environment Studies
Traditional
Work
Environment
Herzberg (1959)
Hackman and Oldham
(1975)
Locke and Latham (1990)
Remote
Work
Environment
Staples (1999, 2001)
Online
Learning
Environment
Stein et al. (2005)
Wu et al. (2010)
O’Leary & Quinlan
(2007)
Dennen et al. (2007)
Stein et al. (2005)
Thurmond et al. (2002)
Puzziferro (2008)
Moore (2009)
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page
Table 3. Motivation factors in work and online learning environments
External Factors Internal Factors
Herzberg (1959) The work itself
Advancement
Supervision
Work conditions
Relationships
Responsibility
Achievement
Hackman and Oldham Skill variety
Task significance
Feedback
Responsibility
Task identity
Locke and Latham (1990) Specific high goals
Direction
Feedback
Task complexity
High expectancy
Self-efficacy
Effort
Persistence
Task strategies
Goal commitment
Staples (1999, 2001) Modeling best practices
Interaction
Communication
Training to improve
remote-work self-
efficacy
IT self-efficacy
Remote work self
efficacy
Stein et al. (2005)
Wu et al. (2010)
Interaction
O’Leary & Quinlan
Dennen et al. (2007)
Communication
Stein et al. (2005) Course design, content
Thurmond et al. (2002) Learning environment
Puzziferro (2008) Computer self
efficacy
Learning strategies
Orientation to online
learning
Useful outcomes
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page 16
Internal Factors
Responsibility
Achievement
Responsibility
Task identity
High expectancy
efficacy
Persistence
Task strategies
Goal commitment
efficacy
Remote work self-
efficacy
Computer self-
efficacy
Learning strategies
Table 4. Summary of Recent Studies of Student Satisfaction
Course Format
Studies Definition of Student Satisfaction
Traditional Elliott & Shin (2002)
“Refers to the favorability of a student’s subject evaluation of the various outcomes and experiences associated with education”
Traditional Mai (2005)
“Satisfaction is typically measured as an overall feeling or as satisfaction with elements of the transaction”
Traditional DeShields, Kara and Kaynak (2005)
Not defined
Traditional Alves and Raposo (2007)
Not defined
Traditional Parayitam, Desai, Phelps (2007)
Not defined
Traditional Moro-Egido and Panades (2010)
Not defined
Traditional Gibson, A. (2010)
Not defined
Traditional using course web site
Cao, Griffin and Bai (2009)
Not defined
Traditional using online tutorials
Sweeney and Ingram (2001)
“the perception of enjoyment and accomplishment in the learning environment”
Traditional and online
Johnson, Aragon, Shaik and Palma-Rivas (1999)
Not defined
Traditional and online
Navarro and Shoemaker (2000)
Not defined
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page
Summary of Recent Studies of Student Satisfaction
Student Satisfaction Theory Method Research Results
favorability of a student’s subject evaluation of the various outcomes and experiences associated with education”
None 1805 survey responses from undergraduates. Used SSI inventory (Noel-Levitz) to survey 1805 undergraduates Calculated an overall satisfaction score by measuring 20 educational attributes.
Compared student satisfaction (SS) based on single item response to SS based on multiconclude a composite score overall SS has more diagnostic value. Identified highly significant variables that impact overall SS: top four are excellence of instruction in major; able to get desired classes; knowledgeable advisor; knowledgeable faculty
Satisfaction is typically measured as an overall feeling or as satisfaction with elements of the
None 332 survey responses from students in US and UK (comparison of SS between US and UK using SERVQUAL)
Overall impression of school and overall impression of quality of education are strong predictors of SS
Herzberg’s two-factor theory (satisfiers and motivators)
143 survey responses from undergraduate business students
Faculty and clasfactors affecting SS, but not advising staff
None 2687 survey responses from students in Portugal
University’s image (not defined) influences satisfaction as does perceived value
None 4196 survey responses from undergraduate and graduate students
Perceived communication style and course content positively related to SS with teacher and perceived teacher effectiveness
None Survey responses from 116 students recently graduated with Bachelor’s degrees in Spain
Part-time students (with partjobs) experience lower SS than full-time students; women are more satisfied than men; are related to higher SS
None Summary of 11 previous studies on business student satisfaction
Identified 9 significant factors affecting SS with higher educational experience
Constructivism – individuals construct their own knowledge by interaction with the world.
102 survey responses from 102 students (88% CIT majors plus CIT minors)
Synchronous online interaction had strong effect on SS
“the perception of enjoyment and accomplishment in the learning environment”
None 42 survey responses SS highest in traditional tutorial
None 38 survey responses from graduate students
No significant different for overall course rating
None Graduate and undergraduate students
No significant difference in SS
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page 17
Research Results
Compared student satisfaction (SS) based on single item response to SS based on multi-item response to conclude a composite score for overall SS has more diagnostic value. Identified highly significant variables that impact overall SS: top four are excellence of instruction in major; able to get desired classes; knowledgeable advisor; knowledgeable faculty Overall impression of school and
impression of quality of education are strong predictors of
Faculty and classes are major factors affecting SS, but not advising staff
University’s image (not defined) influences satisfaction as does perceived value Perceived communication style and course content positively related to SS with teacher and perceived teacher effectiveness
time students (with part-time jobs) experience lower SS than
time students; women are more satisfied than men; higher grades are related to higher SS Identified 9 significant factors affecting SS with higher educational experience Synchronous online interaction had strong effect on SS
SS highest in traditional tutorial
No significant different for overall course rating
No significant difference in SS
Traditional and online
Ponzurick, France and Logar (2000)
Not defined
Traditional and online
Ryan (2000)
Not defined
Traditional and online
Wisan, Nazma and Pscherer (2001)
Not defined
Traditional and online
Block, Udermann, Felix, Reineke and Murray (2008)
Not defined
Traditional and online
Gibson, J.W. (2008)
Not defined
Traditional and online
Wuensch, Azia, Kishore and Tabrizi (2008) Wuensch (2009)
Not defined
Traditional and online
Karatas and Simsek (2009)
Not defined
Traditional, online and hybrid
Black (2002)
Not defined
Traditional, online and hybrid
Lim, Kim, Chen and Ryder (2008)
Not defined
Traditional and hybrid
Powell (2007)
Not defined
Online and hybrid
Bequri, Chase and Bishka (2010)
Not defined
Hybrid Beard and Harper (2002)
Not defined
Hybrid Vamosi, Pierce and Slotkin (2004)
Not defined
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page
None 143 survey responses from MBA students
Traditional students were more satisfied (course content, course format); online students were lesssatisfied
None Survey responses from 26 traditional and 14 online students
No significant difference in SS
None 567 survey responses from graduates (an alumni survey)
For students taking 1courses, SS higher in facecourses; for students taking 4 or more online courses; SS higher in online course.
None 37 survey responses from students
SS similar in both online and traditional (no significant difference)
None 38 survey responses from [14] traditional and [24] online students
No difference in SS
None 1601 survey responses from students at 46 institutions in 26 states
Reports “the unanticipated finding was that frequency of email contact with the instructor was the best predictor of satisfaction”
None 60 survey responses from 30 traditional and 30 online students
No difference in SS
None 116 survey responses from students
Hybrid course had higher SS.
None Survey responses from 153 undergraduate students
Students in hybrid group had higher SS than those in traditional group
None 190 survey responses from 90 students in hybrid and 100 students in traditional class
SS levels are similar (no significant difference)
None 240 survey responses from undergraduate and graduate students
SS with online courses lower than SS with hybrid courses; higher SS with graduate students than undergraduate
None 42 surveys responses from graduate students
Students satisfied with format that allowed them to set individual learning pace but dissatisfied with online interaction
None 2 sections of undergraduate students
Satisfaction with online portion of course was lower significant
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page 18
Traditional students were more satisfied (course content, course format); online students were less
No significant difference in SS
For students taking 1-3 online courses, SS higher in face-to-face courses; for students taking 4 or more online courses; SS higher in online course. SS similar in both online and traditional (no significant
difference in SS
Reports “the unanticipated finding was that frequency of email contact with the instructor was the best predictor of satisfaction”
No difference in SS
Hybrid course had higher SS.
Students in hybrid group had than those in traditional
SS levels are similar (no significant
SS with online courses lower than SS with hybrid courses; higher SS with graduate students than undergraduate
Students satisfied with format that allowed them to set individual learning pace but dissatisfied with online interaction
Satisfaction with online portion of course was lower – difference was
Hybrid Wu, Tennyson and Hsia (2010)
Satisfaction with blended e-learning system defined as “the sum of student’s behavioral beliefs and attitudes that result from aggregating all the benefits that a student receives from using the blended elearning system.”
Online Thurmond, Wambach, Connors and Frey (2002)
Quotes Guolla, 1999, “the concept of satisfaction reflects outcomes of reciprocity that occur between students and an instructor”
Online O’Leary and Quinlan (2007)
“An emotional response that can be induced by actual product, service, or process quality or some combination of product and service quality”
Online Arbaugh (2001)
Not defined
Online Richardson and Swan (2003)
Not defined
Online Stein, Wanstreet, Calvin, Overtoom and Wheaton (2005)
Not defined
Online Dennen, Darabi and Smith (2007)
Not defined
Online Walker and Kelly (2007)
Not defined
Online Puzziferro (2008)
Not defined
Online Glass and Sue (2008)
Not defined
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page
Satisfaction with learning
system defined as “the sum of student’s behavioral beliefs and
at result from aggregating all the benefits that a student receives from using the blended e-learning system.”
Social-cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986)
212 survey responses from [84] traditional and [128] online students in Taiwan who had opportunity to take hybrid course
Social interaction provides most contribution to performance expectations and learning climate, thus more contribution to learner satisfaction. Other determinants include computer selfsystem functionality and content feature.
Quotes Guolla, 1999, “the concept of satisfaction reflects
reciprocity that occur between students and
Input-Environment –Outcome model (Astin, 1992)
120 survey responses from graduate students
SS is influenced by online environment rather than student characteristics; students are generally satisfied with online learning; students more likely to work in online teams/groups likely to be less satisfied
“An emotional response that can be induced by actual product, service, or process quality or some combination of product and service
None 197 survey responses from online students using SERVQUAL to measure learner-instructor telephone interaction
Single telephone call at beginning of term had no effect on satisfaction
None 390 survey responses from MBA classes to measure perception of course quality and likelihood of taking future courses via the internet.
Verbal immediacy (communication) and attitude toward course software positively associated with course satisfaction
None 97 survey responses from online students
Perceived social presence yields satisfaction with instructor
Moore’s (1993) theory of transactional distance
34 survey responses from online students
Satisfaction with course (structure) and satisfaction with interaction positively related to satisfaction with knowledge gained
None Review of rating guidelines on instructor and student perception of instructor actions that result in satisfaction
SS linked to interpersonal communication needs
None 304 survey responses from undergraduate and graduate online students
Identified 4 significant factors:Satisfaction with reading assignmentsIdeal time for feedbackRealistic time for feedbackSatisfaction with length of program
Self-efficacy (Bandura, 1997) and theory of self-regulated learning (Pintrich & deGroot, 1990)
815 survey responses from online students
Cognitive learning strategies and resource management strategies increase satisfaction with course
None 55 survey responses from undergraduate and graduate students
Students in online course wersatisfied (82% rated course good or outstanding overall)
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page 19
Social interaction provides most contribution to performance expectations and learning climate, thus more contribution to learner satisfaction. Other determinants include computer self-efficacy, system functionality and content
SS is influenced by online environment rather than student characteristics; students are generally satisfied with online learning; students more likely to work in online teams/groups likely to be less satisfied Single telephone call at beginning of term had no effect on satisfaction
Verbal immediacy (communication) and attitude toward course software positively associated with course satisfaction
Perceived social presence yields satisfaction with instructor
Satisfaction with course design (structure) and satisfaction with interaction positively related to satisfaction with knowledge gained
SS linked to interpersonal communication needs
Identified 4 significant factors: Satisfaction with reading assignments Ideal time for feedback Realistic time for feedback Satisfaction with length of program Cognitive learning strategies and resource management strategies increase satisfaction with course
Students in online course were satisfied (82% rated course good or outstanding overall)
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page
Research in Higher Education Journal
Student satisfaction with online, Page 20