This study investigates the determinants of students’ satisfaction in an asynchronous learning environment using seven key considerations: the e-learning environment, student–content interaction, student and student interaction, student–teacher interaction, group cohesion and timely participation, knowledge of Internet usage, and satisfaction. The empirical data were gathered through structured questionnaires from 500 students who took courses in an asynchronous learning environment and the analysis was done using structural equation modeling. Framed along the positivist paradigm, deductive epistemology, exploratory research design, the study showed that all the seven variables served as robust antecedents of students’ satisfaction in an asynchronous learning environment.
AibinuA. A.Al-LawatiA. M. (2010) Using PLS-SEM technique to model construction organizations’ willingness to participate in e-bidding. Automation in Construction19(16): 714–724.
2.
AllenM.BourhisJ.BurrellN.MabryE. (2002) Comparing student satisfaction with distance education to traditional classrooms in higher education: A meta-analysis. The American Journal of Distance Education16(2): 83–97.
3.
AllyM. (2011) Foundations of educational theory for online learning. In: AndersonT. (ed.) The theory and practice of online learning, Edmonton, Canada: AU Press.
4.
AndersonT. (2011) The theory and practice of online learning, Edmonton, Canada: AU Press.
5.
BolligerD. U.WasilikO. (2009) Factors influencing faculty satisfaction with online teaching and learning in higher education. Distance Education30(1): 103–116.
6.
BookerQ. E.RebmanC. E. (2005) E-student retention: Factors affecting customer loyalty for online program success. Issues in Information Systems1(1): 183–189.
7.
Bonk, C. J., & Reynolds, T. H. (1997). Learner-centered Web instruction for higher-order thinking, teamwork, and apprenticeship. Web-based instruction, 167–178.
8.
BorupJ.WestR.GrahamC. (2012) Improving online social presence through asynchronous video. Internet and Higher Education15(3): 195–203.
9.
Branon, R. F., & Essex, C. (2001). Synchronous and asynchronous communication tools in distance education. TechTrends, 45(1), 36–36.
10.
ChinW. W. (2010) How to write up and report PLS analyses. In: VinziV.ChinW. W.HenselerJ.WangH. (eds) Handbook of Partial Least Squares: Concepts, methods and applications, London, England: Springer, pp. 665–690.
11.
Clark, J. (2001). Stimulating collaboration and discussion in online learning environments. The Internet and Higher Education, 4(2): 119–124.
12.
CohenL.ManionL.MorrisonK. (2011) Research methods in education, 7th ed. New York, NY: Routledge.
13.
CollisB.MoonenJ. (2001) Flexible learning in a digital world: Experiences and expectations, London, England: Routledge.
14.
CreswellJ. (2008) Educational research: Planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research, 3rd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
15.
CronbachL. J. (1951) Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika16: 297–334.
16.
DeNeuiD. L.DodgeT. L. (2006) Asynchronous learning networks and student outcomes: The utility of online learning components in hybrid courses. Journal of Instructional Psychology33(4): 256.
17.
DziubanC.MoskalP.BrophyJ.SheaP. (2007) Student satisfaction with asynchronous learning. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks11(1): 87–95.
18.
ElliottK. M.ShinD. (2002) Student satisfaction: An alternative approach to assessing this important concept. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management24(2): 197–209.
19.
EomS. B.WenH. J.AshillN. (2006) The determinants of students’ perceived learning outcomes and satisfaction in university online education: An empirical investigation. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education4(2): 215–235.
20.
FergusonR. (2012) Learning analytics: Drivers, developments and challenges. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning4(5&6): 304–317.
21.
FornellC.LarckerD. F. (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurements error. Journal of Marketing Research18: 39–50.
22.
GarrisonD. R. (2004) Student role adjustment in online communities of inquiry: Model and instrument validation. Journal for Asynchronous Learning Networks8: 61–74.
23.
GeisserS. (1975) The predictive sample reuse method with applications. Journal of American Statistical Association70: 320–328.
24.
HairJ. F. J.HultG. T. M.RingleC.SarstedtM. (2014) A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
25.
HairJ. F.RingleC. M.SarstedtM. (2011) PLS-SEM: Indeed, a Silver Bullet. The Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice19(2): 139–152.
26.
Halkias, D., & Mills, G. T. (2008). Distance education in support of lifelong learning: The case of the hellas alive web platform in building Greek language learning communities. Proceedings of the 12th WSEAS international conference on computers, Heraklion, Greece, 57–60.
27.
HenselerJ.RingleC. M.SinkovicsR. (2009) The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. Advances in International Marketing20: 277–319.
28.
HoC. H.SwanK. (2007) Evaluating online conversation in an asynchronous learning environment: An application of Grice’s cooperative principle. The Internet and Higher Education10(1): 3–14.
29.
HongK. (2002) Relationships between students’ and instructional variables with satisfaction and learning from a Web-based course. Internet and Higher Education5: 267–281.
30.
HrastinskiS. (2008) Asynchronous and synchronous e-learning. Educause Quarterly31(4): 51–55.
31.
HrastinskiS. (2009) A theory of online learning as online participation. Computers and Education52(1): 78–82.
32.
JohnsonG. M. (2006) Synchronous and asynchronous text-based CMC in educational contexts: A review of recent research. Tech Trends50(4): 46–53.
33.
JohnsonG. M.HowellA. J.CodeJ. R. (2005) Online discussion and college student learning: Toward a model of influence. Technology, Pedagogy and Education14(1): 61–76.
34.
KeatingS. B. (2015) Curriculum development and evaluation in nursing, New York, NY: Springer.
35.
Kelly, B. (n.d.). Synchronous and asynchronous learning tools: 15 strategies for engaging online students using real-time chat, threaded discussions and blogs. Faculty Focus Special Report. Retrieved from www.FacultyFocus.com.
36.
KockN. (2013) WarpPLS 4.0 user manual, Laredo, TX: ScriptWarp Systems.
37.
KolbA. Y.KolbD. A. (2005) Learning styles and learning spaces: Enhancing experiential learning in higher education. Academy of Management Learning & Education4(2): 193–212.
38.
KooryM. A. (2003) Differences in learning outcomes for the online and F2F versions of ‘An Introduction to Shakespeare’. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks7(2): 18–35.
39.
LeeL.PetterS.FayardD.RobinsonS. (2011) On the use of partial least squares path modeling in accounting research. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems12: 305–328.
40.
LiawS. S. (2008) Investigating students’ perceived satisfaction, behavioral intention, and effectiveness of e-learning: A case study of the Blackboard system. Computers & Education51(2): 864–873.
41.
MaiL. (2005) A comparative study between UK and US: Student satisfaction in higher education and its influential factors. Journal of Marketing Management21: 859–878.
42.
MuilenburgL. Y.BergeZ. L. (2001) Barriers to distance education: A factor analytic study. The American Journal of Distance Education15: 7–22.
43.
OckerR. J.YaverbaumG. J. (1999) Asynchronous computer-mediated communication versus face-to-face collaboration: Results on student learning, quality and satisfaction. Group Decision and Negotiation8: 427–440.
44.
O’LearyP. F.QuinlanT. J. (2007) Learner-instructor telephone interaction: Effects on satisfaction and achievement of online students. The American Journal of Distance Education21(3): 133–143.
45.
PiagetJ.InhelderB. (1969) The psychology of the child, New York, NY: Basic Books.
46.
ReedI. (2008) Justifying sociological knowledge: From realism to interpretation, Washington, DC: American Sociological Association.
47.
RovyB.EssexC. (2001) Synchronous and asynchronous communication tools in distance education. Tech Trends45: 36–42.
48.
SackneyL.MergelB. (2007) Contemporary learning theories, instructional design and leadership. In: BurgerJ. M.WebberC. F.KlinckP. (eds) Intelligent leadership, Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
49.
SarstedtM.RingleC. M.SmithD.ReamsR.HairJ. F. (2014) Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM): A useful tool for family business researchers. Journal of Family Business Strategy5: 105–115.
50.
SinclaireJ. K. (2011) Student satisfaction with online learning: Lessons from organizational behavior. Research in Higher Education Journal11: 1–20.
51.
SoH. J.BrushT. A. (2008) Student perceptions of collaborative learning, social presence and satisfaction in a blended learning environment: Relationships and critical factors. Computers & Education51(1): 318–336.
52.
StoneM. (1974) Cross-validatory choice and assessment of statistical predictions. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B36: 111–147.
53.
TaberK. S. (2011) Constructivism as educational theory: Contingency in learning, and optimally guided instruction. In: HassaskhahJ. (ed.) Educational theory, New York, NY: Nova.
54.
Tenenhaus, M., Amato, S., & Esposito Vinzi, V. (2004, June 9–11). A global goodness-of-fit index for PLS structural equation modelling. Proceedings of the XLII Societa' Italiana di Statistica (SIS) Scientific Meeting, CLEUP, Padova, 739–742.
55.
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), 169–189.
56.
UrbachN.AhlemannF. (2010) Structural equation modeling in information systems research using partial least squares. Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application11: 5–40.
57.
Van AalstJ. (2006) Rethinking the nature of online work in asynchronous learning networks. British Journal of Educational Technology37: 279–288.
58.
Waltonen-MooreS.StuartD.NewtonE.OswaldR.VaronisE. (2006) From virtual strangers to a cohesive online learning community: The evolution of online group development in a professional development course. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education14(2): 287.
59.
WangM. (2004) Correlational analysis of student visibility and performance in online learning. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks8(4): 71–82.
60.
WetzelsM.Odekerken-SchröderG.van OppenC. (2009) Using PLS path modeling for assessing hierarchical construct models: Guidelines and empirical illustration. MIS Quarterly33: 177–195.
61.
WuD.HiltzS. R. (2004) Predicting learning from asynchronous online discussions. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks8(2): 139–152.
62.
WuH.TennysonR. D.HsiaT. (2010) A study of student satisfaction in a blended e-learning system environment. Computers and Education55: 155–164.
