LEARNING SATISFACTION OF SECOND YEAR BPED STUDENTS

IN ONLINE EDUCATION: A SELF-SURVEY

A Thesis Proposal
Presented to the Faculty of the Teacher Education Program
Bachelor of Physical Education Major in School Physical Education
RAMON MAGSAYSAY MEMORIAL COLLEGES
General Santos City

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements in Research 1

Bachelor of Physical Education

PHOEBE KATE M. BACUS

November 2021
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Rationale

Online learning has become the new normal in many schools worldwide,

courtesy of COVID-19. Satisfaction with online learning is a significant aspect of

promoting successful educational processes. Due to safety measures as a result of

COVID-19, online learning has become a useful and practical tool for curriculum

delivery worldwide. Several advantages of online learning for learners have been

reported in the literature, including easy accessibility to knowledge, proper content

delivery, content standardization, personalized instruction, self-pacing, interactivity

and increased convenience. During the COVID-19 pandemic, online learning has

helped universities keep their doors open for students during lockdown to decrease

the spread of the disease (Taha, M.H., et. al., 2020).

COVID-19 came abruptly with little or no preparation in place in many

countries. The educational system during the COVID-19 era is characterized by a

‘new normal’. The term ‘new normal’ is described in the Urban Dictionary (2009) as a

situation that occurs after an intense change. It was first used in the business field

and other contexts to describe previously atypical life situations that have become

typical (Cahapay, M.B., 2020). Online learning has been used as an adjunct method

to augment the classical approach to teaching. The sudden transition from face-to-

face teaching to 100% online learning is courtesy of COVID-19. Numerous studies

have measured either student or faculty satisfaction with online learning before

COVID-19 (Tratnik, A., et.al., 2019).

With the increase of offerings in online learning, there has been little research

to investigate learners’ satisfaction in online learning environments (Craig et al.,

2018). Research on satisfaction levels has identified factors having a direct impact

on the satisfaction levels of online learners. Vesely, Bloom, and Sherlock (2017)

found that increased interaction between faculty and students resulted in an

increased satisfaction level for online learners.

Higher education institutions are being challenged by an increasing demand

for programs and courses. To meet this challenge, institutions have turned to

technology for assistance with the delivery of their programs. A paradigm shift in

higher education has occurred in how learning is delivered to students. Despite the

increased number of institutions providing online learning programs, one of the

largest challenges to higher education is the retention of students in online programs

(Heyman, 2010).

To the best of my knowledge, some study has simultaneously measured

student satisfaction during the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, this study will aim to

identify student satisfaction with online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Research Objective

The researcher will aim to investigate the learning satisfaction of the 2 nd year

BPED students in online education of Ramon Magsaysay Memorial Colleges during

the academic year 2021-2022.

Specifically, the researcher will seek answers to the following sub-questions:

1. What is the learning satisfaction of students in online education in terms of:

1.1. Instructors’ Satisfaction;

1.2. Technology Satisfaction;

1.3. Interaction/outcome Satisfaction; and

1.4. Overall Satisfaction?

2. Is there a significant relationship between the overall satisfaction and

satisfaction subscales among the 2nd year BPED students?

Hypothesis

There is no significant relationship between the overall satisfaction and

satisfaction subscales among the 2nd year BPED students of Ramon Magsaysay

Memorial Colleges.
Review of Related Literature

The definition of satisfaction in online learning is complex and

multidimensional and includes many factors, such as communication, student

participation in online discussions, flexibility, workload, technology support, instructor

pedagogical skills, and feedback. Satisfaction with online learning is based on three

learning theories: social cognitive theory, interaction equivalency theorem, and

social integration theory. Students construct knowledge in a social context while

interacting with others, engaging in activities, and receiving feedback. Students’

interactions with other students, instructors and content play a significant role in

satisfaction. Therefore, satisfaction with the learning experience increases as

multiple types of interactivity are used within the learning context. Engaging students

in formal extracurricular activities in addition to their academic program improves

student satisfaction. Informal faculty–peer social interaction is also valued in the

learning process (Tian, S.W., et.al., 2011).

There is a growing body of literature showing that satisfaction has a positive

relationship with student engagement and academic performance. The quality of

learning is based on faculty and student satisfaction along with learning

effectiveness, access and institutional cost-effectiveness. A previous study reported

no significant differences between welldesigned online and face-to-face learning;

however, some studies have found that participants were more satisfied with face-to-

face teaching. Other studies have reported that measuring student satisfaction in

online learning is a significant aspect of successfully promoting educational

processes for institutions, faculty and learners (Cheon, S.H., et.al., 2020).
 Because of the current global economic conditions, American higher

education institutions are being challenged in unprecedented ways (US Department

of Education, 2010). These institutions are seen as America’s way to compete by

providing a pathway to good jobs and higher earning power for Americans (Allen &

Seaman, 2010). Results from Hanna’s (2003) research showed that the demand for

higher education was not being met. To meet that demand an unattainable building

of institutions would need to occur. Valentine (1994) cited a study of higher

education administrators completed by Basom and Sherritt, which revealed that

meeting increased demands with decreasing resources, was the most pressing

issue. Johnson, Levine, Smith, and Stone (2010) identified a further critical

challenge to institutions of higher education to be that of providing high quality

courses to a growing number of online learners with decreasing resources.

Increased access to higher education through governments is motivating students to

seek out and enroll in online educational opportunities (Stewart, Bachman, &

Johnson, 2010). These challenges have resulted in changes by institutions

regarding how and when to deliver their product to the students who arrive at their

doorsteps. According to LaBay and Comm (2004) for higher educational institutions

to remain competitive, they must be offering online learning programs and courses.

In response to this increasing demand, more institutions of higher education

are offering online learning. According to Allen and Seaman (2010) online enrollment

has been growing faster than traditional face-to-face classroom instruction in recent

years. In the fall of 2009, 5,600,000 students were enrolled in at least one online

course, which represented a 21% increase over the highest online enrollment in any
previous year. Their survey determined that one in four students was taking online

courses, 54% of institutions of higher education experienced an increase demand for

online courses, 66% of institutions of higher education had an increased demand for

new online courses and programs, and 73% of higher education institutions had an

increased demand for existing online courses. These figures from the survey

revealed that there was greater competition among institutions for the online learner

and growth in the for-profit higher education sector. These challenges, increased

demand for online learning, competition for online learners, and growth in the for-

profit higher education sector will require that institutions of higher education

consider what they deliver from a new perspective.

The Sloan Consortium (2012) coined the now familiar term “asynchronous

learning networks” to convey the idea that people learn at various times and places

in everyday life (Moore, 2005). These researchers identified a quality framework and

five pillars that support quality learning environments (Moore, 2005). Pillars of

Quality are used as benchmarks for continuous improvement of teaching and

learning in institutions of higher education. Two of the pillars are cost effectiveness

and institutional commitment and student satisfaction. These pillars are reflective of

challenges being placed on institutions of higher education. Student satisfaction

reflects the satisfaction levels of students with their learning environments and cost

effectiveness and institutional commitment reflects how well institutions manage

their resources. Moore (2005) stated that 95% of all for-credit degree oriented

instruction in the country followed the Quality Framework model in their online

learning environments. The identifiable goal in student satisfaction is based on how

pleased students are with their experiences with online learning. The Cost

Effectiveness and Institutional Commitment pillar identifies goals for continuously

improving services while reducing costs. Institutions of higher education that achieve

the goals of the Pillars in turn meet the needs of students, improve the quality of

their programs, and are able to measure the satisfaction levels of their students.

Concurrently, participating institutions are transforming their processes and methods

in the delivery of quality online learning.

Online learning is changing the way in which higher education is viewed by

students and faculty and is causing a paradigm shift within each group. Craig,

Goold, Coldwell, and Mustard (2008) contended that online teaching is changing the

roles of students and teachers. Students are increasingly referred to as consumers

while demonstrating consumer-like behavior in their choice of learning environments

(Howell, Williams, & Lindsay, 2011).

Heyman (2010) contended that one of the largest challenges to providers of

online learning was that of reducing attrition rates. Research on student retention

has been conducted for many years and the focus until recently has been on the

traditional student in higher education. Increasing demand for institutions of higher

education to become more accountable to students needs requires the institutions to

conduct research into the online student satisfaction levels and the relationship to

retention (Herbert, 2006). Researchers have studied at the satisfaction levels of

students based on student characteristics, course design structure, course delivery

methods, and student expectations. Faculty responsible for the development and

design of online learning should take into account students’ satisfaction, which could
result in increased quality of online learning programs (Sampson, Leonard,

Ballenger, & Coleman, 2010). Stewart et al. (2010) suggested that most studies had

focused on demographic variables of students and few had focused on the

relationship and expectations of the online learners. In order to better serve online

students, institutions must understand how satisfied online learners are with their

educational experience (Noel-Levitz, Inc., 2009).

Institutions of higher education are facing many new challenges that include

how colleges and universities deliver their educational services. These challenges

stem in part from the development of technologies that are changing the way higher

education institutions operate. Christensen and Eyring (2011) suggested that as a

technology, online learning has been changing, including the ways in which higher

education delivers its courses, the demographics of the learners, and the

organizational structures of higher education institutions. A report by McCarthy,

Samors, the Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities, and the Alfred P.

Sloan Foundation (2009) focused on including online learning to achieve institutional

goals and missions. To capitalize on those challenges, many higher education

institutions have transformed the ways they create and deliver their educational

services. They do this by establishing online learning courses and programs.

Johnson et al. (2010) found that the role of colleges and universities had

increasingly focused on key goals and adapting teaching and learning practices to

meet the needs of current learners. Lokken and Womer (2007) reported that 70% of

the responding institutions stated that demands for online courses were exceeding
their current offerings. Colleges and universities are embracing and managing new

educational delivery challenges through the creation of online learning programs.

Changing the method of course delivery to online has required an explosion

of new technology to be created in that endeavor. Social media comprises a set of

technologies that is increasingly used by students and faculty within online learning

environments. Social media has been described as “…the potential to transform

from a way of pushing content outward to a way of inviting conversation, of

exchanging information, and of invoking unparalleled individual, industry, societal,

and even global change” (Moran, Seaman, & Tinti-Kane, 2011, p. 4).

According to Boyd and Ellison (2017) web-based services that allow

individuals to (1) construct a public or semipublic profile within a bounded system,

(2) articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection, and (3) view

and traverse their list of connections and those made by others within the system.

Smith, Caruso, and the Educause Center for Applied Research (2011)

reported that the use of social media by college students continued to remain high.

Over 90% of the student respondents from their study indicated that they used social

media on a daily basis. Moran et al. (2011) reported that more that 80% of faculty

members were incorporating some form of social media into their teaching. Faculty

members have also stated that social media represented a valuable tool for

collaborative learning.

Ali, Ramay, and Shahzad (2011) compared the associations between several

variables of online learning environment with student satisfaction. The variables

used in this relationship study were (a) instructor’s performance, (b) course

evaluation, and (c) student-instructor interaction. The sample of 245 students at

Allama Iqbal Open University completed a survey administered at the university. The

results revealed that student-instructor interaction was the strongest variable in

predicting student satisfaction, followed by instructor’s performance, and finally

course evaluations. Over 68% of the participants indicated that instructor

encouragement for them to become actively involved in course discussion was an

important factor. Once again, the researchers indicated the importance of the

instructor’s actions in the online learning environment and its relationship with

student satisfaction.

Tinti-Kane, Seaman, and Levy (2011) found that 30% of faculty members who

completed their social media use survey reported the use of social media to

communicate with students. While there have been few studies on the relationship

between social media and student satisfaction, there have been some that have

shown a positive relationship between the two. Rath (2011) completed a study to

explore the use of Twitter in an online learning environment. The study involved 39

students taking an online class that incorporated Twitter into the learning

environment. At the end of 13 weeks, the participants received a 10-question

multiple-choice survey with one open-ended question. Data from that survey

revealed that using Twitter in the course was associated with an 86% agreement

that a sense of community was created. Other findings of the study, when compared

to other social media, such as, Facebook and LinkedIn, revealed that 38% of the

participants suggested there was no uniqueness to Twitter as a social medium

(Rath, 2011). Lin and van’t Hooft (2008) researched the impact blogs have on

student satisfaction and found that the increased level of interactivity of blogs

increased the students’ learning satisfaction. Lin and van’t Hooft (2008) used mixed

methods in their study of 28 undergraduate students who were enrolled in a Taiwan

university.

Another study by Rutherford (2010) that examined the use of social media in

an online learning environment was completed. That study found a positive

correlation between students’ use of a variety of social media resources and how

students evaluated the quality of their learning experience and overall program

quality. The participants were 675 teachers in an 8-month preservice education

program. The study assessed the perceived impact of social media use on student

engagement. The survey used was similar to the National Survey of Student

Engagement (NSSE) and was delivered to the participants through an email prompt.

The social media identified by participants as being used most often for course work

collaboration included (a) email, (b) Twitter, (c) LMS, (d) Facebook, and (e) wikis.

Rutherford concluded that understanding the use of social media resources may

assist in motivating lowly engaged students.

The research shows that students want to interact with the instructor and

peers and expect this in an online learning environment. Delaney, Johnson,

Johnson, and Treslan (2010) investigated students’ perceptions of effective teaching

and how instructors demonstrated these characteristics. The responses to an open-

ended online survey from both face-to-face and online students were grouped into

nine categories of effective instructional behaviors. Both research groups identified

three effective instructional behaviors associated with the learner-instructor

interaction: approachable, engaging, and communicative and responsive. Dabbagh

(2007) described in her article about emerging characteristics and pedagogical

implications for the online learner that the instructor should focus on designing online

learning environments that engage the learner.

Multiple approaches define and assess student satisfaction. Rubin,

Fernandes & Avgerinou (2013) extended research on the Community of Inquiry

(Garrison, Anderson & Archer, 2010) which defines social, cognitive, and teaching

presence as being essential to the student learning experience and, thus, student

satisfaction. They determined that learning management system (LMS) features

greatly impact perceptions of community according to the inquiry framework. In a

related study, Mahmood, Mahmood and Malik (2012) argued that teaching presence

plays the most critical role in how students evaluate online learning.

The interaction construct plays an important role in both face-to-face and

online learning modalities (Kuo, Walker, Belland & Schroder, 2013). In fact, many

studies have found that both quantity and quality of student interactions are highly

correlated with student satisfaction in almost any learning environment. However,

investigators have noted that demographic and cultural considerations also impact

the design of appropriate interaction techniques in online learning (González-

Gómez, Guardiola, Martín Rodríguez & Montaro Alonso, 2012).

Ke and Kwak (2013) identified five elements of student satisfaction: learner

relevance, active learning, authentic learning, learner autonomy, and technology

competence. Kuo et al. (2013) determined that learner-instructor interaction and

learner-content interaction combined with technology efficacy are valid indicators of

students’ positive perceptions. However, Battalio (2007), using a criterion approach,

argued that a positive course rating requires effective learner-instructor interaction.

Keengwe, Diteeyont and Lawson-Body (2012) argued that students’

expectations influence the instructor’s design of effective technology tools in online

courses and are the key to understanding the satisfaction construct. The authors

concluded that satisfaction was most impacted by learning convenience combined

with the effectiveness of e-learning tools. Dziuban, Moskal, Brophy-Ellison and Shea

(2007) found six key elements that contribute to students’ satisfaction: an enriched

learning environment, well-defined rules of engagements, instructor commitment,

reduced ambiguity, an engaging environment, and reduced ambivalence about the

value of the course.

Preliminary studies emphasize the pivotal role that student satisfaction plays

in determining the success or failure of online education (Kuo et al., 2014; Rabin et

al., 2019; Gopal et al., 2021) opposes the completion rates, as learners’ satisfaction

reflects how they perceive their learning experiences (Kuo et al., 2014) and

interprets the quality of the course instruction (Hew et al., 2020). Interaction in a fully

online learning setting has been regarded as a critical factor that determines to the

extent which students are satisfied with their online education (Wu et al.,

2010; Cidral et al., 2018). According to Kuo et al. (2014), a high level of interaction

with the instructor, other learners, or content leads to high satisfaction and thus

reveals high engagement in online learning (Veletsianos, 2010). Similarly, lack of

interaction often leads to poor student engagement and lower student satisfaction

(Martin et al., 2018; Rahmatpour et al., 2021). It can be concluded that interaction in

online learning often translates to students’ engagement in their academic activities

before positively affecting students’ satisfaction (Kim and Kim, 2021).

On the other hand, academic self-efficacy has been indicated to have a

positive effect on students’ engagement within the self-directed distance education

nature, where students with high academic self-efficacy are more engaged in their

online studies (Jung and Lee, 2018) and more likely to experience learning

satisfaction (Artino, 2008). Academic self-efficacy, which is understood as students’

belief incapability to perform academically well during an online platform, has been

reported to be the most predictive factor of students’ satisfaction (Shen et al.,

2013; Jan, 2015). As aforementioned, prior studies indicate the significant role of

interaction (Enkin and Mejías-Bikandi, 2017), academic self-efficacy (Shen et al.,

2013), and students’ engagement in the online classrooms (Robinson and Hullinger,

2008) and their relationship to online learning satisfaction. There is a scarcity of

studies investigating the mechanisms of interaction, self-efficacy, and engagement

on students’ overall satisfaction. Hence, the extension of the existing research is

needed.

Learning satisfaction represents learners’ feelings and attitudes toward the

learning process or the perceived level of fulfilment attached to one’s desire to learn,

caused by the learning experiences (Topala and Tomozii, 2014). In the online

context, satisfaction has been found to be one of the most significant considerations

influencing the continuity of online learning (Moore and Kearsley, 2011; Parahoo et

al., 2016). Previous research on online learning has shown that learners’ satisfaction

is a critical indicator of learning achievements and the success of online learning

system implementation (Ke and Kwak, 2013). To meet learners’ real learning needs

and create an effective learning environment, a growing body of literature have been

conducted to examine various determinants of learner’s online satisfaction (Shen et

al., 2013; Hew et al., 2020; Jiang et al., 2021).

Muilenburg and Berge (2005) identified eight barriers that prevent students

from satisfactory online education: administrative and technical issues, lack of

academic and technical skills, interaction, motivation, time, and support for studies,

and accessibility and affordably of Internet usage. Similarly, Baber (2020) performed

a comparative analysis to investigate the determinants of students' learning

satisfaction on undergraduate students from South Korea and India. The study

discovered that the variables such as interaction in the classroom, student

engagement, course structure, teacher awareness, and facilitation positively

influence students' perceived learning satisfaction. Other factors, such as online

support service quality, perceived ease of use and usefulness of online platform,

computer self-efficacy, academic self-efficacy, prior experience, and online learning

acceptance, were found to significantly impact students’ online learning satisfaction

(Lee, 2010; Jan, 2015; Jiang et al., 2021).

Among the various factors that impact learners’ online learning satisfaction

and academic outcome, interaction in online learning can be seen as the key

component, and its importance and effectiveness have been also emphasized by the

theory of transactional distance (Moore, 1993; Benson and Samarawickrema, 2009).

Even though previous studies have confirmed the positive impact of interaction on

online learning satisfaction, the mechanism behind this relationship has not been

well addressed in the literature. Palmer and Holt (2009) stated that the ability and

the confidence to learn from online courses and connect and engage with others

were the main reasons in explaining online learners' satisfaction. In this regard, this

study argues that students’ academic self-efficacy and engagement in online classes

may explain the relationship between interaction and online learning satisfaction.

A cross-country study conducted by Baber (2020) during the COVID-19

pandemic revealed interaction as the most significant factor in examining students’

online learning satisfaction and learning outcomes. It is notable that interactions in

online learning have been underachieved due to technological constraints (Downing

et al., 2007), and literature on distance education has largely neglected the

significance of interaction (Bernard et al., 2009). Bernard et al. (2009) added that

interaction has not been explicitly explained or highlighted in the study of distance

education, and it is a much-needed component of online learning. Nevertheless, the

study conducted by Bali and Liu (2018) has shown that in face-to-face classes, there

is a higher degree of interaction and satisfaction than in online courses. Interaction

can be categorized into three dimensions: interaction with instructors, interaction

with peers, and interaction with content.

Many comparative studies have been carried out to prove the point to explore

whether face-to-face or traditional teaching methods are more productive or whether

online or hybrid learning is better (Lockman & Schirmer, 2020; Pei & Wu, 2019;

González-Gómez et al., 2016; González-Gómez et al., 2016). Results of the studies

show that the students perform much better in online learning than in traditional

learning. Henriksen et al. (2020) highlighted the problems faced by educators while

shifting from offline to online mode of teaching. In the past, several research studies

had been carried out on online learning to explore student satisfaction, acceptance

of e-learning, distance learning success factors, and learning efficiency (Sher, 2009;

Lee, 2014; Yen et al., 2018). However, scant amount of literature is available on the

factors that affect the students’ satisfaction and performance in online classes during

the pandemic of Covid-19 (Rajabalee & Santally, 2020). In the present study, the

authors proposed that course design, quality of the instructor, prompt feedback, and

students’ expectations are the four prominent determinants of learning outcome and

satisfaction of the students during online classes (Lee, 2014).

The Course Design refers to curriculum knowledge, program organization,

instructional goals, and course structure (Wright, 2003). If well planned, course

design increasing the satisfaction of pupils with the system (Almaiah &

Alyoussef, 2019). Mtebe and Raisamo (2014) proposed that effective course design

will help in improving the performance through learners knowledge and skills (Khan

& Yildiz, 2020; Mohammed et al., 2020). However, if the course is not designed

effectively then it might lead to low usage of e-learning platforms by the teachers

and students (Almaiah & Almulhem, 2018). On the other hand, if the course is

designed effectively then it will lead to higher acceptance of e-learning system by the

students and their performance also increases (Mtebe & Raisamo, 2014). Hence, to

prepare these courses for online learning, many instructors who are teaching
blended courses for the first time are likely to require a complete overhaul of their

courses (Bersin, 2004; Ho et al., 2006).

The second-factor, Instructor Quality, plays an essential role in affecting the

students’ satisfaction in online classes. Instructor quality refers to a professional who

understands the students’ educational needs, has unique teaching skills, and

understands how to meet the students’ learning needs (Luekens et al., 2004). Marsh

(1987) developed five instruments for measuring the instructor’s quality, in which the

main method was Students’ Evaluation of Educational Quality (SEEQ), which

delineated the instructor’s quality. SEEQ is considered one of the methods most

commonly used and embraced unanimously (Grammatikopoulos et al., 2014). SEEQ

was a very useful method of feedback by students to measure the instructor’s quality

(Marsh, 1987).

The third factor that improves the student’s satisfaction level is prompt

feedback (Kinicki et al., 2004). Feedback is defined as information given by lecturers

and tutors about the performance of students. Within this context, feedback is a

“consequence of performance” (Hattie & Timperley, 2007, p. 81). In education,

“prompt feedback can be described as knowing what you know and what you do not

related to learning” (Simsek et al., 2017, p.334). Christensen (2014) studied linking

feedback to performance and introduced the positivity ratio concept, which is a

mechanism that plays an important role in finding out the performance through

feedback. It has been found that prompt feedback helps in developing a strong

linkage between faculty and students which ultimately leads to better learning

outcomes (Simsek et al., 2017; Chang, 2011).

 The fourth factor is students’ expectation. Appleton-Knapp and Krentler

(2006) measured the impact of student’s expectations on their performance. They

pin pointed that the student expectation is important. When the expectations of the

students are achieved then it lead to the higher satisfaction level of the student

(Bates & Kaye, 2014). These findings were backed by previous research model

“Student Satisfaction Index Model” (Zhang et al., 2008). However, when the

expectations are students is not fulfilled then it might lead to lower leaning and

satisfaction with the course. Student satisfaction is defined as students’ ability to

compare the desired benefit with the observed effect of a particular product or

service (Budur et al., 2019). Students’ whose grade expectation is high will show

high satisfaction instead of those facing lower grade expectations.

Theoretical Framework

This study adopts the theory of transactional distance (Moore, 1993), most

often identified with distance learning programs (Benson and Samarawickrema,

2009). It helps identify the mechanism behind the relationship between interaction

and satisfaction. Ekwunife-Orakwue and Teng (2014) argue that although the theory

of transactional distance has been posited to explain the mechanisms in online

learning education, few studies have identified the factors from this theory to predict

a causal pathway for the mechanism of occurrence. Nevertheless, the theory

recognizes interaction as a bridge to “a psychological and communications gap” in

distance learning in promoting students’ overall satisfaction (Moore, 1993; Benson

and Samarawickrema, 2009). Hence, this study will go one step further and

suggests that satisfaction subscales may explain the mechanism behind the

relationship between overall students’ satisfaction and satisfaction subscales among

online learners, particularly the 2nd year BPED students.

Conceptual Framework

Significance of the Study

The researcher would give benefits to the following:

School Administrator: This research could be used to assist them develop a

program to boost student learning satisfaction in online physical education in the

new normal.

Teachers: The findings of this study could help them develop and implement

successful tactics and ways for dealing with student satisfaction. It will also serve as

a foundation for additional research into how to improve students' learning education

and how this may affect their learning satisfaction in physical education in the new

normal.

Students: They will also benefit from the findings of this study, as they are

the primary beneficiaries. They are the ones who will assess themselves in light of

what online education has to offer. Simultaneously, essential knowledge will be

instilled in their minds regarding the importance of conducting a learning satisfaction

survey in order to assess the impact of online education and what the school will

offer as a result of the survey.

Other Researchers: The research would be extremely beneficial to

individuals who wish to pursue the same subject of study in order to satisfy their

interest. These will provide them with some major accounts and important

hypotheses that they will need to complete their own research.

Definition of Terms

To have a common understanding on the important terms to be used, the

following terms were defined operationally:

Self-survey – The respondent of this study has the freedom to assess their learning

satisfaction in online education by answering the survey that is given. They are the

one who will measure their satisfaction without the help or thoughts of the

researcher.

Learners Satisfaction – It is a short-term mindset arising from an assessment of a

student's educational experience, services, and facilities. It promotes student

population's mental health and stability. Also, it will serve as a guide to improve

teaching and learning in online education.

Online Education - Also known as distant learning, e-learning, or online learning, is

a type of education in which teachers and students are physically separated during
teaching and various technologies are used to enhance student-teacher and

student-student communication.

CHAPTER 2

METHOD

Research Design

Research Locale

Population and Sample

Research Instrument

Statistical Tools

Ethical Consideration