MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Student Satisfaction with Online Learning in a Blended Course

2018· article· en· W2998296519 on OpenAlexaff
Somayeh Ghaderizefreh, Michael Hoover

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Digital Society · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCourse (navigation)Blended learningMathematics educationOnline coursePsychologyOnline learningMassive open online courseComputer scienceMultimediaEngineeringEducational technology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As online and blended learning become widespread in higher education, educators and institutions have become interested in understanding the factors that influence students' satisfaction.In this study, we used Pekrun's control-value theory of achievement emotions to examine the influence of eight characteristics of online learning on students' emotions and satisfaction with their online learning experience as well as the influence of students' emotions on their satisfaction.Twenty-nine graduate students taking a required blended course completed a series of questionnaires on characteristics of online learning, their emotions concerning their online learning, and their satisfaction with the online learning experience.The results indicated that: (1) students' reports of high understandability and illustration in the course were related to greater enjoyment and lower levels of anger, anxiety, and boredom; (2) higher levels of course expectation, difficulty, fast pace, and lack of clarity were related to greater experiences of negative emotions such as anger, anxiety, and boredom; (3) higher levels of understandability, illustration, enthusiasm, and fostering attention led to increased student satisfaction; and (4) higher levels of enjoyment and lower levels of anger and boredom increased students' satisfaction with the online learning experience.Educational implications of these results for designing online learning environments and suggestions for future research are discussed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.358 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations67
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for Digital SocietySame topicOnline and Blended LearningFrench-language works237,207