| Literature DB >> 34712797 |
Bassam Al-Shargabi1, Omar Sabri2, Shadi Aljawarneh3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The e-learning system has gained a phenomenal significance than ever before in the present COVID-19 crisis. The E-learning delivery mechanisms have evolved to enhanced levels facilitating the education delivery with greater penetration and access to mass student population worldwide. Nevertheless, there is still scope to conduct further research in order to innovate and improve higher quality delivery mechanism using the state-of-the-art information and communication technologies (ICT) available today. In the present pandemic crisis all the stakeholders in the higher education system, i.e., the governments, institutions, and the students expect seamless and efficient content delivery via e-learning platforms. This study proposes the adoption of the e-learning system by the integration of the model proposed by Delon and Mcclean "Information System Success Model" in Jazan University, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) and further attempts to identify the factors affecting E-learning applications' success among the students.Entities:
Keywords: DeLone and McLean Model; E-learning; E-readiness; IS success Model; Saudi universities; Stsudent’s Satisfaction; adoption of e-learning; higher education; online-learning
Year: 2021 PMID: 34712797 PMCID: PMC8507483 DOI: 10.7717/peerj-cs.723
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PeerJ Comput Sci ISSN: 2376-5992
Figure 1Updated DeLone and McLean information system success model (ISSM).
Figure 2The theoretical framework for measuring of e-learning system students’ satisfaction.
The adoption of an E-learning system with an Information system success model perspective in the literature review.
| Literature | The result | Year | Factors |
|---|---|---|---|
| ( | The study showed that the education quality and service quality in ISSM has positive effects on student’s satisfaction while using e-learning. | 2020 | Performance Expectancy; Effort System quality, information quality and service quality affects user satisfaction and actual usage |
| ( | This model provides an elucidation to the incongruous literature outcomes regarding the overall user consummation quality | 2019 | System quality, information quality and service quality, user satisfaction, and actual usage |
| ( | The findings of this study revealed that the quality of the information is the most proper indicator of students´ satisfaction, while satisfaction is the most applicable determining factor of perceived learning results. | 2020 | Course quality, system quality, information quality, and corresponding impacts. |
| ( | An eminence attributes model for MSNs for higher education learning environment was suggested in this study. | 2019 | System quality, information quality, network quality, service quality, user satisfaction, and behavioral intention to use. |
| ( | The result of this study revealed that quality factors (course content quality, system quality, and service quality) have a positive and significant impact on students’ satisfaction with e-learning system quality. | 2020 | SD phase, MLD phase, LCD phase |
| ( | The objective of this study was to test the acceptance factors for Canvas learning management system for the students of a private university in Nigeria. | 2018 | System quality, information quality, service quality, user satisfaction, behavioral intention, and actual usage |
| ( | This was the first ever kind of study endeavored to analyze the acceptance of e-learning by the lecturers with the implementation of Information System Success and Technology Adoption Models in a University in Ghana. | 2020 | System quality, perceived usefulness, service quality, information quality, lecturers’ satisfaction, intention to use, and actual usage |
| ( | The findings of this study showed that e-learning advantages can be effectively executed and clarified by its independent variables based on the information system model. | 2016 | System quality, information quality, service quality, user satisfaction, and behavioral intention |
| ( | This study tested the predetermined IS success model in an e-learning context, which is a strictly involuntary use setting. The investigation of this study provided empirical proof to support an alternative DSS assessment model that can replace “system use” as the pivotal element of IS success model, with “perceived usefulness” | 2013 | System quality, perceived usefulness, service quality |
| ( | The results of this study showed that e-learning student satisfaction was impacted by service quality, information quality, and quality of education. Simultaneously, the intention to use is impacted by the quality of education. Likewise, user satisfaction and intention to use e-learning influence the real use of e-learning. This study is explored to aid leaders of higher education to more readily understand the adequacy of using e-learning by students. | 2021 | System quality, information quality, network quality, and service quality, user satisfaction, and behavioral intention to use. |
| ( | Study results showed that the main indicators of students' continued intention to use E-learning systems are Perceived Benefits, Perceived Satisfaction, and Academic Motivation. The impact of each Task-technology fit, Performance expectancy, Knowledge Quality, and Information Quality on student's Perceived Satisfaction with utilizing E-learning systems was also additionally critical. | 2017 | System quality, perceived usefulness, service quality, information quality, lecturers’ satisfaction, intention to use, and actual usage |
| ( | This study aimed to break down factors like compatibility, complexity, relative advantage, system quality, information quality, and service quality that drive adult workers in adopting an e-learning system in their learning process in Jordanian government universities. As a result, the Ministry of Higher Education in Jordan needs to have rules to help higher learning organizations to carry out e-learning effectively and proficiently by utilizing one of the successful IS models | 2014 | System quality, perceived usefulness, and service quality |
The demographic characteristics of the respondents.
| Attributes | Category | Total | Male | Female | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| % |
| % |
| % | ||
| Age groups | Less than 20 | 111 | 19.54 | 81 | 14.26 | 30 | 5.28 |
| 21–30 | 375 | 66.02 | 165 | 29.05 | 210 | 36.97 | |
| 31–40 | 45 | 7.92 | 27 | 4.75 | 18 | 3.17 | |
| 41–50 | 36 | 6.34 | 36 | 6.34 | 0 | 0.00 | |
| 51 and above | 1 | 0.18 | 1 | 0.18 | 0 | 0.00 | |
| Education | First year | 52 | 9.15 | 28 | 4.93 | 24 | 4.23 |
| Second year | 72 | 12.68 | 39 | 6.87 | 58 | 10.21 | |
| Third year | 178 | 31.34 | 98 | 17.25 | 80 | 14.08 | |
| Fourth year | 154 | 27.11 | 90 | 15.85 | 64 | 11.27 | |
| Fifth Year | 58 | 10.21 | 35 | 6.16 | 23 | 4.05 | |
| Sixth year | 28 | 4.93 | 17 | 2.99 | 11 | 1.94 | |
Summary of descriptive analysis.
| Constructs | Items | Mean | Std. deviation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Information quality | IQ1 | 2.25 | 1.210 |
| IQ2 | 1.83 | 0.961 | |
| IQ3 | 2.09 | 1.105 | |
| IQ4 | 1.89 | 0.915 | |
| System quality | SQ1 | 2.40 | 1.284 |
| SQ2 | 1.87 | 0.986 | |
| SQ3 | 2.37 | 1.275 | |
| SQ4 | 2.00 | 1.198 | |
| Service quality | SerQ1 | 2.17 | 1.112 |
| SerQ2 | 2.42 | 1.123 | |
| SerQ3 | 2.31 | 1.028 | |
| SerQ4 | 2.48 | 1.079 | |
| Student satisfaction | StS1 | 2.15 | 1.310 |
| StS2 | 2.05 | 1.394 | |
| StS3 | 2.08 | 1.377 | |
| StS4 | 2.11 | 1.223 | |
| System use | Su1 | 2.08 | 1.377 |
| Su2 | 2.11 | 1.223 | |
| Net benefits to ELS | NBELS1 | 1.63 | 1.033 |
| NBELS2 | 1.79 | 1.067 | |
| NBELS3 | 1.95 | 1.074 | |
| NBELS4 | 2.00 | 1.316 |
Summary of reliability analysis.
| Items | Loadings | Reliability and convergent validity of the model | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cronbach alpha-item wise | Factor loadings-item wise | Cronbach’s alpha | Dillon-Goldstein’s rho | Eigen value-1 | Eigen value-2 | Average variance extracted (AVE) | R2 | |
| Information quality | ||||||||
| IQ1 | 0.97 | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.86 | 2.72 | 0.60 | 0.68 | 0.00 |
| IQ2 | 0.98 | 0.90 | ||||||
| IQ3 | 0.98 | 0.83 | ||||||
| IQ4 | 0.98 | 0.73 | ||||||
| System quality | ||||||||
| SQ1 | 0.98 | 0.87 | 0.91 | 0.91 | 3.14 | 0.33 | 0.79 | 0.70 |
| SQ2 | 0.97 | 0.88 | ||||||
| SQ3 | 0.97 | 0.90 | ||||||
| SQ4 | 0.97 | 0.90 | ||||||
| Service quality | ||||||||
| SerQ1 | 0.98 | 0.91 | 0.94 | 0.94 | 3.40 | 0.30 | 0.62 | 0.35 |
| SerQ2 | 0.98 | 0.92 | ||||||
| SerQ3 | 0.98 | 0.95 | ||||||
| SerQ4 | 0.98 | 0.91 | ||||||
| Student satisfaction | ||||||||
| Sts1 | 0.97 | 094 | 0.97 | 0.97 | 3.64 | 0.15 | 0.91 | 0.90 |
| Sts2 | 0.97 | 0.96 | ||||||
| Sts3 | 0.97 | 0.96 | ||||||
| Sts4 | 0.97 | 0.95 | ||||||
| System use | ||||||||
| Su1 | 0.97 | 0.94 | 0.88 | 0.94 | 1.79 | 0.21 | 0.89 | 0.69 |
| Su2 | 0.97 | 0.95 | ||||||
| Net benefit to use ELS | ||||||||
| NBLS1 | 0.98 | 0.84 | 0.91 | 0.91 | 3.12 | 0.43 | 0.78 | 0.75 |
| NBLS2 | 0.97 | 0.88 | ||||||
| NBLS3 | 0.98 | 0.93 | ||||||
| NBLS4 | 0.97 | 0.89 | ||||||
Summary of correlation results.
| Latent constructs | Information quality | System quality | Service quality | System use | Student satisfaction | Net benefit to use ELS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Latent constructs | 1 | |||||
| Latent constructs | 0.758 | 1 | ||||
| Latent constructs | 0.589 | 0.725 | 1 | |||
| Latent constructs | 0.839 | 0.886 | 0.639 | 1 | ||
| Latent constructs | 0.815 | 0.782 | 0.584 | 0.906 | 1 | |
| Latent constructs | 0.733 | 0.788 | 0.620 | 0.851 | 0.836 | 1 |
Summary of regression analysis.
| Path co-efficient and model quality assessment | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Path | Hypotheses | Path weight beta | Hypothesizes acceptance results | Decision | Direct effect | Indirect effect | Total effect | Relationship | |
| iq -> seq | Higher the information quality, higher the service quality | <0.001 | 0.59 | YES | Supported | 0.59 | 0.00 | 0.59 | Moderate |
| iq -> sq | Higher the information quality, higher the system quality | <0.001 | 0.52 | YES | Supported | 0.52 | 0.25 | 0.77 | High |
| iq -> su | Higher the information quality, higher the system use | <0.001 | 0.52 | YES | Supported | 0.52 | 0.27 | 0.79 | High |
| iq -> ss | Higher the information quality, higher the student satisfaction | <0.001 | 0.19 | YES | Supported | 0.19 | 0.65 | 0.84 | High |
| seq -> sq | Higher the service quality, higher the system quality | <0.001 | 0.42 | YES | Supported | 0.42 | 0.00 | 0.42 | Moderate |
| seq -> su | Higher the service quality, higher the system use | <0.001 | 0.06 | YES | Supported | 0.06 | 0.13 | 0.19 | Low |
| sq -> su | Higher the system quality, higher the system use | <0.001 | 0.31 | YES | Supported | 0.31 | 0.00 | 0.31 | Moderate |
| sq -> ss | Higher the system quality, higher the student satisfaction | <0.001 | 0.46 | YES | Supported | 0.46 | 0.11 | 0.57 | Moderate |
| su -> ss | Higher the system use, higher the student satisfaction | <0.001 | 0.38 | YES | Supported | 0.38 | 0.00 | 0.38 | Moderate |
| su -> nf | Higher the system use, higher the net benefit to ELS | <0.001 | 0.36 | YES | Supported | 0.36 | 0.20 | 0.56 | Moderate |
| ss -> nf | Higher the student satisfaction, higher the net benefit to ELS | <0.001 | 0.53 | YES | Supported | 0.53 | 0.00 | 0.53 | Moderate |
Note:
p-Value obtained is too low such as (2.00E−69, 1.18E−47, etc.) to be reported.