MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311783145 · doi:10.5267/j.ijdns.2022.11.003

Evaluation of factors affecting university students' satisfaction with e-learning systems used dur-ing Covid-19 crisis: A field study in Jordanian higher education institutions

2022· article· en· W4311783145 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ra’ed Masa’deh, Dmaithan Almajali, Ala’aldin Alrowwad, Rami S. Alkhawaldeh, Sufian Khwaldeh, Bader Yousef Obeidat

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Data and Network Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOrganizational and Employee Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLoyaltyPsychologyStructural equation modelingCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Knowledge managementInformation systemQuality (philosophy)E learningHigher educationApplied psychologyUsabilityComputer scienceMedical educationMathematics educationMarketingEducational technologyEngineeringBusinessHuman–computer interactionMachine learningPolitical scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

E-learning results from the integration of technology and education and has become an effective learning medium today. E-learning courses and systems with various services are on the rise owing to its importance. E-learning systems should be evaluated to assure successful delivery, effective usage, and positive impacts on learners. A holistic model that identifies various levels of success on a vast range of success determinants was proposed. The model was empirically validated using data obtained from 724 e-learning student users in Jordan. Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) was used in data analyses. Results showed that perceived usefulness of information systems, user training, system quality, and management support have positive effects on user’s behavioral intention; whereas perceived ease of use has not. Also, SEM displayed that user behavioral intention has a positive effect on information systems use, use on student satisfaction, and the latter on student loyalty. Machine Learning (ML) methods produce high correlation values reaching up to 80% in predicting Behavior Intention (BI) from the input factors, and student loyalty from student satisfaction factors. This indicates that the ML are promising techniques to forecast the future targets based on the input independent features.

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)0.004
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations27
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Data and Network ScienceSame topicOrganizational and Employee PerformanceFrench-language works237,207