Feelings of satisfaction in mature students of financial accounting in a virtual learning environmentan experience of measurement in higher education

  1. Teresa C. Herrador-Alcaide 1
  2. Montserrat Hernández-Solís 1
  3. Ramon Sanguino Galván
  1. 1 Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia
    info

    Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia

    Madrid, España

    ROR https://ror.org/02msb5n36

Revista:
International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education

ISSN: 2365-9440

Año de publicación: 2019

Número: 16

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.1186/S41239-019-0148-Z DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education

Resumen

Currently, the usefulness of ICT (Information and Communication Technologies) in the teaching-learning process has not been discussed; unlike distance learning, these new tools are used via technologies. The current approach to social development, supported by the exercise of innovation, learning and research, is undeniable. Within this framework, student satisfaction regarding blended e-learning has been studied. However, in distance university models, which are supported by virtual platforms, it is necessary to ask ourselves the following question: are students satisfied when they are not in a face-to-face classroom environment? The objective of this study is to analyse students ’ perceptions of their satisfaction levels in a virtual learning environment. In this evaluation, the students ’ generic skills were also considered, as well as their perception of the learning environment. The findings of the analysis seem to reveal that students have a high perception of satisfaction, considering students ’ perception and learning experience as a proxy of the feeling of satisfaction. Students ’ perceptions of the virtual learning environment and of their own skill, which also takes on high values, could have some type of effect on their overall satisfaction. A significant finding is that students with a high positive perception of their generic skills are also satisfied with the learning process and with the virtual learning environment. The validity of the three construct designed to measure the latent variables — feelings of satisfaction, acceptance of the virtual learning environment and students ’ self-perception on their generic skills — ensures their usefulness as variables of measurement.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Al Ghamdi, A., Samarji, A., & Watt, A. (2016). Essential considerations in distance education in KSA: Teacher immediacy in a virtual teaching and learning environment. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 6(1), 17.
  • Alsadoon, H. (2017). Students’ perceptions of E-assessment at Saudi Electronic University. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, (1), 16, 147-153.
  • Al-Samarraie, H., Teng, B. K., Alzahrani, A. I., & Alalwan, N. (2017). E-learning continuance satisfaction in higher education: A unified perspective from instructors and students. Studies in Higher Education, 3(11), 2003-2019.
  • Arbaugh, J. B. (2000). Virtual classroom characteristics and student satisfaction with internet-based MBA courses. Journal of Management Education, 24(1), 32–54.
  • Boza, A., & Toscano, M. (2012). Motivos, actitudes y estrategias de aprendizaje: aprendizaje motivado en alumnos universitarios. Profesorado. Revista de Currículum y Formación del Profesorado, 16(1), 125–142.
  • Brecht, H. D. (2012). Learning from online video lectures.
  • Brecht, H. D., & Ogilby, S. M. (2008). Enabling a comprehensive teaching strategy: Video lectures. Journal of Information Technology Education, 7, 71–86.
  • Byrne, M., Flood, B., & Willis, P. (2002). The relationship between learning approaches and learning outcomes: A study of Irish accounting students. Accounting Education, 11(1), 27–24.
  • Cabero, J., Llorente, C., & Puentes, A. (2010). La satisfacción de los estudiantes en red en la formación semipresencial, Comunicar, V. XVIII, n° 35 (pp. 149–157).
  • Cano González, R. (2009). Tutoría universitaria y aprendizaje por competencias ¿Cómo lograrlo? Revista Electrónica Interuniversitaria de Formación del Profesorado, 28(12-1), 181–204.
  • Cassidy, S. (2016). Virtual learning environments as mediating factors in student satisfaction with teaching and learning in higher education. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching, 5(1), 113.
  • Castillo, A.,. S. (2008). Tutoría de la UNED ante los nuevos retos de la convergencia europea. Revista Interuniversitaria de Formación del Profesorado, (61), 139–165.
  • Chang, C. T., Hajiyev, J., & Su, C. R. (2017). Examining the students’ behavioral intention to use e-learning in Azerbaijan? The general extended technology acceptance model for e-learning approach. Computers & Education, 111, 128–143.
  • Chen, C. C., & Jones, K. T. (2007). Blended learning vs. traditional classroom settings: Assessing effectiveness and student perceptions in an MBA accounting course. Journal of educators online, 4(1), n1.
  • Chen, I. Y., Chen, N. S., & Kinshuk (2009). Examining the factors influencing participants’ knowledge sharing behavior in virtual learning communities. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 12(1), 134.
  • Chen, K. T. C. (2017). Examining EFL instructors’ and students’ perceptions and acceptance toward M-learning in higher education. Universal Access in the Information Society, 16(4), 967–976.
  • Chiu, C. M., Hsu, M. H., & Sun, S. Y. (2005). Usability, quality, value and e-learning continuance decisions. Computers & Education, 45, 399–416.
  • Conati, C. (2002). Probabilistic assessment of user's emotions in educational games. Journal of Applied Artificial Intelligence, 16(7/8), 555–575.
  • Cortina-Pérez, B. (2008). Teaching and learning English through WebCT tools: Promoting digital scaffolding. The International Jour nal of Technology Knowledge and Society, 2(5), 129–138.
  • Enoch, Y., & Soker, Z. (2006). Age, gender, ethnicity and the digital divide: University students’ use of web-based instruction. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 21(2), 99–110.
  • Frías-Navarro, D. (2014). Apuntes de SPSS. Universidad de Valencia, Spain, Retrieved from http://www.uv.es/friasnav/ ApuntesSPSS.pdf (2014 may 5).
  • Gámiz-Sánchez, V., & Gallego-Arrufat, M. J. (2016). Modelo de análisis de metodologías didácticas semipresenciales en Educación Superior. Educación XX1, 19(1), 39–61. https://doi.org/10.5944/EducXX1.13946.
  • Garrison, D. R., & Anderson, T. (2005). El e-learning en el siglo XXI: Investigación y práctica. Barcelona: Octaedro.
  • George, D., & Mallery, P. (2003). SPSS for windows step by step: A simple guide and reference. 11.0 update, (4th ed., ). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
  • Hall, M., Ramsay, A., & Raven, J. (2004). Changing the learning environment to promote deep learning approaches in first-year accounting students. Accounting Education, 13(4), 489–505.
  • Harnar, M. A., Brown, S. W., & Mayall, H. J. (2000). Measuring the effect of distance education of the learning experience: Teaching accounting via Picturetel. International Journal of Instructional Media, 27(1), 37.
  • Henderson, M., Selwyn, N., & Aston, R. (2017). What works and why? Student perceptions of ‘useful’ digital technology in university teaching and learning. Studies in Higher Education, 42(8), 1567–1579.
  • Herrador-Alcaide, T. C., & Hernández-Solís, M. (2016). Educación Digital Contable mediante Redes de Innovación: Una Medición de su Impacto. Digital Education Review, (29), 247–264.
  • Herrador-Alcaide, T. C., & Hernández-Solís, M. (2017). Numerical-technological skills and work experience in the perceived usefulness in an accounting virtual learning environment. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 16(3), 116–131.
  • Holtzblatt, M., & Tschakert, N. (2011). Expanding your accounting classroom with digital video technology. Journal of Accounting Education, 29(2), 100–121.
  • Hurtado, M. D. M. D., & Lara, L. Á. C. (2015). Efectividad del aprendizaje cooperativo en contabilidad: una contrastación empírica. Revista de Contabilidad, 18(2), 138–147.
  • Johnston, J., Killion, J., & Oomen, J. (2005). Student satisfaction in the virtual classroom. The Internet Journal of Allied Health Sciences and Practice, 3(2), 6.
  • Kang, M., Park, M., Jung, J., & Park, H. (2009). The effect of interaction and learning presence on learning outcome in webbased project learning. Journal of Educational Information and Media, 15, 67–85.
  • Kavanagh, M. H., & Drennan, L. (2008). What skills and attributes does an accounting graduate need? Evidence from student perceptions and employer expectations. Accounting & Finance, 48(2), 279–300.
  • Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P., & Jochems, W. (2003). Identifying the pitfalls for social interaction in computer-supported collaborative learning environments: A review of the research. Computers in Human Behavior, 19, 335–353.
  • Kurelovic, E. K. (2016). Advantages and limitations of usage of open educational resources in small countries. International Journal of Research in Education and Science (IJRES), 2(1), 136–142.
  • Levy, M. (2007). Technologies in use for second language learning. The Modern Language Journal, 93(s1), 769–782.
  • Li, N., Marsh, V., Rienties, B., & Whitelock, D. (2016). Online learning experiences of new versus continuing learners: A largescale replication study. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 1e16. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2016.1176989.
  • Loewnthal, K. M. (1996). An introduction to psychological tests and scales. London: UCL Press.
  • Martínez, P., Pérez, J., & Martínez, M. (2016). Las TIC y el entorno virtual para la tutoría universitaria. Educación XX1, 19(1), 287–310. https://doi.org/10.5944/EducXX1.13942.
  • Martínez-Cerdá, J. F., Torrent-Sellens, J., & González-González, I. (2018). Promoting collaborative skills in online university: Comparing effects of games, mixed reality, social media, and other tools for ICT-supported pedagogical practices. Behaviour & Information Technology, 37(10-11), 1055-1071.
  • Martins, L. L., & Kellermanns, F. W. (2004). A model of business school students’ acceptance of a web-based course management system. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3(1), 7–26.
  • Mensah, F. S. (2017). Ghanaian tertiary students’ use of ICT. Global Journal of Human-Social Science Research, 1(9).
  • Monereo, C. (2007). Hacia un nuevo paradigma del aprendizaje estratégico: la mediación social, el yo, y las emociones. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 5(13), 497–534.
  • Navimipour, N. J., & Zareie, B. (2015). A model for assessing the impact of e-learning systems on employees’ satisfaction. Computers in Human Behavior, 53, 475–485.
  • Nunnally, J. C. (1967). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw Hill.
  • Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory, (2nd ed., ). New York: McGraw Hill.
  • Oosterhoff, A., Conrad, R. M., & Ely, D. P. (2008). Assessing learners online. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall.
  • Palacios, T. M. B., & Galván, R. S. (2003). Gestión del conocimiento y estrategia. Revista Madri+ d, (19), 4.
  • Pituch, K. A., & Lee, Y. (2006). The influence of system characteristics on e-learning use. Computers & Education, 47, 222–244.
  • Potter, B. N., & Johnston, C. G. (2006). The effect of interactive on-line learning systems on student learning outcomes in accounting. Journal of Accounting Education, 24(1), 16–34.
  • Requena, B. E. S. (2016). Las TIC y la Educación Social en el siglo XXI. EDMETIC, 5(1), 8–24.
  • Richardson, J. C., Maeda, Y., Lv, J., & Caskurlu, S. (2017). Social presence in relation to students’ satisfaction and learning in the online environment: A meta-analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 402–417.
  • Rodríguez, G., & Ibarra, M. S. (2011). e-Evaluación orientada al e-aprendizaje estratégico en educación superior. Madrid: Narcea.
  • Santos, I. M., & Ali, N. (2012). Exploring the uses of mobile phones to support informal learning. Education and Information Technologies, 17(2), 187–203. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-011-9151-2.
  • Sharples, M. (2000). The design of personal mobile technologies for lifelong learning. Computers & Education, 34(3–4), 177–193.
  • Soto, F. J., & Fernández, J. J. (2003). Realidades y retos de inclusión digital. Comunicación y Pedagogía, n°, (192), 34–40.
  • Stanley, T., & Edwards, P. (2005). Interactive multimedia teaching of accounting information system (AIS) cycles: Student perceptions and views. Journal of Accounting Education, 23(1), 21–46.
  • Swain, J., & Hammond, C. (2011). The motivations and outcomes of studying for part-time mature students in higher education. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 30(5), 591–612.
  • Tett, L. (2004). Mature working-class students in an ‘elite’university: Discourses of risk, choice and exclusion. Studies in the Education of Adults, 36(2), 252–264.
  • United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO). (2002). Forum
  • Van Raaij, E. M., & Schepers, J. J. (2008). The acceptance and use of a virtual learning environment in China. Computers & Education, 50(3), 838–852.
  • Van Rhijn, T., Lero, D., Bridge, K., & Fritz, V. (2016). Unmet needs: Challenges to success from the perspectives of mature university students.
  • Van Wyk, M. M. (2017). Exploring student teachers’ views on eportfolios as an empowering tool to enhance self-directed learning in an online teacher education course. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 42(6), 1.
  • Viberg, O., & Grönlund, Å. (2013). Cross-cultural analysis of users’ attitudes toward the use of mobile devices in second and foreign language learning in higher education: A case from Sweden and China. Computers & Education, 69, 169–180.
  • Violante, M. G., & Vezzetti, E. (2015). Virtual interactive e-learning application: An evaluation of the student satisfaction. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 23(1), 72–91.
  • Wu, J. H., Tennyson, R. D., & Hsia, T. L. (2010). A study of student satisfaction in a blended e-learning system environment. Computers & Education, 55(1), 155–164.
  • Wu, J. H., & Wang, S. C. (2005). What drives mobile commerce? An empirical evaluation of the revised technology acceptance model. Information & Management, 42, 719–729.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet