THE EFFECT OF INTERACTION ON LEARNER SATISFACTION WITH OPEN DISTANCE LEARNING
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55197/qjssh.v5i5.443Keywords:
learner-platform interaction, instructor-learner interaction, learner-learner interaction, learner-content interactionAbstract
Understanding the rules and characteristics of online teaching is of great importance in ensuring the teaching effectiveness of open and distance education. Assessing students’ online learning satisfaction is crucial, as it not only reflects the “learner-centered” approach but also serves as a vital measure of the quality of online teaching in open universities, particularly in the context of the Internet. One significant characteristic of open distance learning is the “separation of teaching and learning”, which can lead to feelings of loneliness among learners, ultimately affecting their online learning experience and outcomes. In this study, we conducted an electronic questionnaire survey involving 1,419 learners from an open university in China. The research aimed to explore the predictive effects of four types of interaction-learner-instructor interaction, learner-learner interaction, learner-content interaction and learner-platform interaction-on learner satisfaction. Using Pearson correlation analysis and stepwise regression analysis, our findings indicate that three types of interaction-learner-platform interaction, instructor-learner interaction, and learner-learner interaction-positively influence distance learning satisfaction. These results underscore the importance of fostering meaningful interactions in online learning environments to enhance learner engagement and satisfaction, thereby contributing to the overall effectiveness of open and distance education programs.
References
Alavi, M., Leidner, D.E. (2001): Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: Conceptual foundations and research issues. – MIS Quarterly 29p.
Anderson, T. (2004): Teaching in an online learning context. – Theory and Practice of Online Learning 24p.
Battalio, J. (2007): Interaction online: A reevaluation. – Quarterly Review of Distance Education 8(4): 339-352.
Bawa, P. (2016): Retention in online courses: Exploring issues and solutions-A literature review. – Sage Open 6(1): 11p.
Bernard, R.M., Abrami, P.C., Borokhovski, E., Wade, C.A., Tamim, R.M., Surkes, M.A., Bethel, E.C. (2009): A meta-analysis of three types of interaction treatments in distance education. – Review of Educational Research 79(3): 1243-1289.
Garrison, D.R., Anderson, T., Archer, W. (1999): Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. – The Internet and Higher Education 2(2-3): 87-105.
Garrison, D.R., Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005): Facilitating cognitive presence in online learning: Interaction is not enough. – The American Journal of Distance Education 19(3): 133-148.
Hattie, J., Timperley, H. (2007): The power of feedback. – Review of Educational Research 77(1): 81-112.
Jiang, M., Ting, E. (2000): A study of factors influencing students’ perceived learning in a web-based course environment. – International Journal of Educational Telecommunications 6(4): 317-338.
Kuo, Y.C., Walker, A.E., Schroder, K.E., Belland, B.R. (2014): Interaction, Internet self-efficacy, and self-regulated learning as predictors of student satisfaction in online education courses. – The Internet and Higher Education 20: 35-50.
Kurucay, M., Inan, F.A. (2017): Examining the effects of learner-learner interactions on satisfaction and learning in an online undergraduate course. – Computers & Education 115: 20-37.
Martin, F., Sun, T., Westine, C.D. (2020): A systematic review of research on online teaching and learning from 2009 to 2018. – Computers & Education 159: 18p.
Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., Jones, K. (2009): Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. – US Department of Education 94p.
Mohammadi, M.K., Mohibbi, A.A., Hedayati, M.H. (2021): Investigating the challenges and factors influencing the use of the learning management system during the Covid-19 pandemic in Afghanistan. – Education and Information Technologies 26: 5165-5198.
Moore, M.G. (1989): Three types of interaction. – American Journal of Distance Education 3(2): 1-7.
Ngan, O.M.Y., Tang, T.L.H., Chan, A.K.Y., Chen, D.M., Tang, M.K. (2018): Blended learning in anatomy teaching for non-medical students: An innovative approach to the health professions education. – Health Professions Education 4(2): 149-158.
Picciano, A.G. (2021): Theories and frameworks for online education: Seeking an integrated model. – In A Guide to Administering Distance Learning, Brill 24p.
Swan, K. (2001): Virtual interaction: Design factors affecting student satisfaction and perceived learning in asynchronous online courses. – Distance Education 22(2): 306-331.
Thurmond, V.A., Wambach, K., Connors, H.R., Frey, B.B. (2002): Evaluation of student satisfaction: Determining the impact of a web-based environment by controlling for student characteristics. – The American journal of distance education 16(3): 169-190.
Tinmaz, H., Lee, J.H. (2020): An analysis of users’ preferences on learning management systems: a case on German versus Spanish students. – Smart Learning Environments 7(1): 17p.
Zhu, C. (2012): Student satisfaction, performance, and knowledge construction in online collaborative learning. – Journal of Educational Technology & Society 15(1): 127-136.