See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/282812888

Empirical study of student satisfaction in e-learning system environment

Article  in  Technics Technologies Education Management · January 2011

CITATIONS READS

20 5,066

6 authors, including:

Darko Stefanović Miodrag Drapsin

University of Novi Sad University of Novi Sad
69 PUBLICATIONS   1,754 CITATIONS    50 PUBLICATIONS   281 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Izet Radjo Patrik Drid

University of Travnik University of Novi Sad
177 PUBLICATIONS   460 CITATIONS    212 PUBLICATIONS   1,320 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Mitochondria-targeted nutraceuticals in health and disease View project

Designing an Joint Master in Cybersecurity (DJM-CYBER) View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Patrik Drid on 13 October 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 technics technologies education management
Empirical study of student
satisfaction in e-learning system
environment
Darko Stefanovic 1, Miodrag Drapsin 2, Jelena Nikolic 1, Danijela Scepanovic 3, Izet Radjo4, Patrik Drid5
1
Faculty of Technical Sciences, University of Novi Sad, Serbia,
2
Medical Faculty University of Novi Sad, , Serbia,
3
Ministry of Education and Science, Serbia,
4
Faculty of Sport and Physical Education, University of Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina,
5
Faculty of Sport and Physical Education, University of Novi Sad, Serbia.
Abstract
Information and communication technology
(ICT) can improve the operational processes of any
business and the education industry is no exception.
Today, ICT plays a major role in many pedagogical
activities, such as instructional delivery, material
preparation, class communication and evaluation.
Electronic learning (e-learning) environments offer
the possibilities for communication, interaction and
multimedia material delivery that enhance learn-
er-directed learning, especially in higher educa-
tion. Universities in Serbia have been successfully
implemented a variety of open (distance) learning
activities, but e-learning research and practices, in
general, are relatively new and limited. Little is
known about why many e-learners stop their learn-
ing after their initial experience.
This study proposed an integrated model with
four dimensions: instructor dimension, course di-
mension, technology dimension and environmen-
tal dimension. A survey was conducted to inves-
tigate the potential factors which are in the field
of the university or faculty management and have
impact on e-learner satisfaction. The question-
naire was used as an instrument for data collection
and the subjects of this study were the students
who were enrolled in the online learning cours-
es. The results revealed that instructor response
timeliness, e-learning course flexibility, e-learn-
ing course quality, technology quality, Internet
quality, diversity in assessment and interaction
in e-learning environment are the critical factors
affecting e-learners’ satisfaction. The results pre-
1152
sented in this paper can help universities or facul-
ties to adopt e-learning technology, and to reduce
the risk of fail during implementation process or
system exploitation. Furthermore, researchers can
use the findings of this study as a basis to initiate
other related studies in the e-learning area.
Key words: E-learning, E-learner satisfaction,
Higher education
1. Introduction
Learning is an active process of building knowl-
edge and skills through practice within a supportive
community. It comprises not only a process of con-
tinual personal development and enrichment, but
also the possibility of rapid and radical conceptual
change. Traditional, classroom context of learning
typically occurs in a teacher-directed instructional
context with face-to-face interaction in a live syn-
chronous environment. In contrast to this form of
instruction, is an approach that promotes learner-
directed learning where teaching and learning are
no longer restricted to traditional classrooms [1,2].
With emerging Internet commercialization and the
expansion of information communication technolo-
gies (ICT), online or electronic learning (e-learning)
environments offer the possibilities for communi-
cation, interaction and multimedia material deliv-
ery that enhance learner-directed learning [3]. ICT
has increasingly influenced higher education. From
playing a supplementary role, it now has permeated
core teaching and learning in universities and other
organizations with training requirements.
Volume 6 / Number 4 / 2011
 technics technologies education management
E-learning is the learning style empowered
by digital technology, most frequently refer-
ring to learning via the Internet. In recent years,
e-learning has become a major phenomenon and
widely adopted as a promising solution by many
universities to offer learning-on-demand opportu-
nities to students in order to improve the teaching
process. The e-learning concept is depicted with
several tantamount, like flexible Internet environ-
ment, distributed computing, virtual learning en-
vironment and general distance learning etc. The
use of different words is according to the context
in which they are used. Literature explains and
defines the word of e-learning in many differ-
ent ways. There are so many synonymous of e-
learning like, open-courseware, advanced distrib-
uted learning, Internet based learning, web-based
learning, e-education, open-learning, virtual edu-
cation, virtual learning environment [4].
The use of e-learning become essential for
higher education institutions and they are consid-
ering and accepting this fact in order to compete
with other organizations and for meeting financial
stability. The other reason of implementing this
new learning paradigm in educational institutions
by higher education officials is for enhancing stu-
dents learning experiences and for the improved
learning outcomes and abilities. The major exam-
ple of e-learning implementation is Massachusetts
Institute of Technology (MIT). MIT is offering its
programs both in face-to-face and in online mode,
and trying to convince other institutions about
strategic significance of e-learning [5].
The goal of e-learning is to increase the qual-
ity of learning activities by re-using and sharing
information and knowledge, while the learner can
determine his own pace [6,7]. E-learning offers
instructors and students a flexible learning setting
in terms of time and location. Learning does not
require students to being physically present in the
same place as an instructor nor at the same time
[8]. Academics and practitioners alike consider e-
learning systems to be a valuable knowledge shar-
ing and transfer tool.
Many factors, such as the infrastructure, qual-
ity of support systems, quality of content and as-
sessment, and peer support networks, may influ-
ence the e-learning experience [9,10,11,12,13]. In
fact, planning and designing e-learning courses is
Volume 6 / Number 4 / 2011
a complex task that includes many factors [14,15].
Thus, universities and teachers need to consider
these factors to provide their students with effec-
tive learning environments.
The benefits of such systems cannot be realized
if learners, the main beneficiary of any education-
al environment, do not accept or use the system
in an appropriate manner [16,7]. It is therefore
important to investigate the drivers or determi-
nants of e-learning success. The satisfaction of the
learner is inevitable for successful implementation
of e-learning environment. Satisfaction is widely
accepted as a desirable outcome of any product
or service experience and is the most explored
construct in the history of marketing scholarship.
Generally, satisfaction is a factor used to monitor
the product or service quality and also to predict
customer loyalty and other behavioral conse-
quences [17].
E-learning success can be defined through mul-
tiple perspectives. One way to define success is
through outcome factors such as enhanced learn-
ing, time savings, and academic success [18,19].
Another perspective on e-learning success consid-
ers system delivery factors such as the degree of
use of the e-learning system and its adoption [20].
User satisfaction has proved to be a reliable proxy
for the success of an IT-based initiative [21]. Since
e-learning initiatives are strongly tied to ICT, stu-
dents’ satisfaction is an important outcome of
e-learning [21]. This research is focusing on po-
tential factors which are in the field of the univer-
sity or faculty management and have impact on
e-learner satisfaction. The results presented in this
paper can help universities or faculties to adopt e-
learning technology, and to reduce the risk of fail
during implementation process or system exploi-
tation. Furthermore, researchers can use the find-
ings of this study as a basis to initiate other related
studies in the e-learning area.
This paper is structured as follows. First, previ-
ous research, related literature and factors influ-
encing e-learners’ satisfaction in e-learning envi-
ronments are discussed. Second, a research model
proposed by this study is described. Third, the pro-
cedure of collecting data, the targeted population,
and results of the study are presented. And finally,
the results are analyzed and discussed.
1153
 technics technologies education management

2. Goal mation system research clearly shows that user sat-

The aim of this research is to investigate the
extent to which is e-learning environment in use
at state universities in Serbia, what is the level
of e-learner’ satisfaction with offered e-learning
environment and how can universities, or facul-
ties, raise the level of e-learners’ satisfaction. This
research is focusing only on state universities in
Serbia and trying to determine the potential fac-
tors that may affect students' satisfaction with the
offered e-learning environment.
Little is known about why some users stop their
online learning after their initial experience. Infor-
isfaction is one of the most important factors in as-
sessing the success of system implementation [23].
Many researchers in previous research have iden-
tified important variables dealing with e-learning.
Among them, the technology acceptance model
[24,25,26], and the expectation and confirmation
model [27,28] have partially contributed to under-
standing e-learning success. These models tended
to focus on technology. A summary of the literature
relevant to all the factors vital to the activities of
e-learning, and affecting learners’ satisfaction with
e-learning is presented below in Table 1. Four di-
mensions are used to assess the factors which are in

Table 1. Previous research about the critical factors that affect learners’ satisfaction

1154 Volume 6 / Number 4 / 2011

 technics technologies education management
the field of the university or faculty management,
including instructor dimension, course dimension,
technology dimension and environmental dimen-
sion. Under the four dimensions previously identi-
fied, eight factors were involved.
Based on the previous research a theoretical
model is designed. In total, nine variables are dis-
cussed; eight variables within four dimensions are
independent variables, namely: instructor response
timeliness and instructor attitude toward e-learning
in instructor dimension, e-learning course flexibility
and e-learning course quality in course dimension,
technology quality and Internet quality in technolo-
gy dimension and diversity in assessment and class
discussion in environment dimension. The e-learner
satisfaction is discussed as a dependent variable. In
total, eight hypotheses are proposed, and supported
via literature, for testing each variable relationship
with dependent variable.
Instructor dimension:
Hypothesis 1. Instructor response timeliness
will positively influence e-learner satisfaction
with e-learning.
Previous research indicated that instructors’
timely response significantly influences e-learn-
ers’ satisfaction [9,29]. The rationale is that when
learners face problems in an online course, timely
assistance from the instructor encourages learn-
ers to continue their learning [6]. Soon, Sook,
Jung, and Im point out that instructors’ failing to
respond to students’ problems in time has a nega-
tive impact on students’ learning [30]. Therefore,
if an instructor is capable of handling e-learning
activities and responding to students’ needs and
problems promptly, learning satisfaction will im-
prove [9,29].
Hypothesis 2. Instructor attitudes toward e-
learning will positively influence e-learner satis-
faction with e-learning.
The successful implementation of e-learning
environment is purely based on the teacher’s at-
titude towards e-learning. Volery and Lord have
shown that instructor friendly behavior with stu-
Volume 6 / Number 4 / 2011
dents, understandability of student problems,
proper understanding of ICT, persuasion of inter-
action between students are the factors that leads
towards students satisfaction [31]. Liaw, Huang,
and Chen explains that when teachers are more in-
terested in the use of new e-learning technology
then it is obvious that they have more constructive
behavioral intent to use that [32]. It’s not the issue
of technology implementation, it’s the teacher in-
struction method that plays a vital role in the suc-
cessful implementation of e-learning technology
and also affects learners’ satisfaction in this new
environment [31]. The effectiveness of online sys-
tem is strongly based on the instructor’s attitude,
dealings with students and perception about new
technology. Webster and Hackley, and Piccoli et al.
find that instructors’ attitudes toward e-learning or
IT positively influence results of e-learning since
instructors are major actors in learning activities
[33,34]. Dillon and Gunawardena state instruc-
tors’ attitudes toward distance learning should be
considered in system evaluation in order to expli-
cate online course user behaviors effectively and
thoroughly [35].
Course dimension:
Hypothesis 3. E-learning course flexibility will
positively influence e-learner satisfaction with e-
learning.
E-learning has removed the barrier of physi-
cal class attendance. The most attractive feature
of e-learning according to students and teachers,
both is its flexibility of location, time and meth-
ods [36,9]. E-learning came with new virtual (any
where, any time, any place) class concept [9,31].
The relational intimacy becomes more in online
environment as compared to face-to-face learning.
Time independence and flexibility in the course
helps the students to communicate according to
their flexible time and place. In addition, elimina-
tion of physical barriers enables more dynamic
interaction that fosters establishment of construc-
tive learning and opportunities for cooperative
learning [37]. Moreover, its virtuality eliminates
awkwardness associated with face-to-face com-
munication in traditional classrooms.
1155
 technics technologies education management
Hypothesis 4. E-learning course quality will
positively influence e-learner satisfaction with e-
learning.
When considering implementation of any new
environment, the level of quality comes first.
Quality of course content is the most important
attribute that leads towards student’s satisfaction
and successful implementation of e-learning and
makes a very strong influence on the satisfaction
level of students who are studying in e-learning
environment and also for the students who are en-
couraged to take this mode of study. The unique-
ness of e-learning environment includes the online
interactive discussion forums, chat sessions among
learners and instructors, multimedia presentations
of course material and other useful material from
the universities covering that particular topic. All
of these characteristics motivate the students to
continue using this learning environment [34].
Technology dimension:
Hypothesis 5. Technology quality will posi-
tively influence e-learner satisfaction with e-learn-
ing.
To achieve successful implementation and
student satisfaction towards e-learning, quality
of technological attributes need to be excellent.
Therefore, the higher the quality and reliability in
ICT, the higher the learning effects will be [33,34].
Hypothesis 6. Internet quality will positively
influence e-learner satisfaction with e-learning.
Quality of the system that includes proper
maintenance of software and hardware recourses
plays an essential role in the satisfaction of stu-
dents with e-learning. The important technical as-
pects that need to be considered for successful e-
learning environment are the quality, media rich-
ness and reliability of technology. The quality of
Internet is essential for both the synchronous and
asynchronous delivery system along with the ac-
cess of material any time with any server problem.
The irritation with technological problems may
be disguising more basic foundation of frustra-
1156
tion. When proper assistance is available for the
use of e-learning, the reluctance level will become
low. Proper availability of technical resource and
administrative support positively influence stu-
dent’s satisfaction towards e-learning [32]. When
students don’t face any login and logout problem,
with continue interaction with teacher their satis-
faction will be improved.
Environmental dimension:
Hypothesis 7. Diversity in assessment will
positively influence e-learner satisfaction with e-
learning.
Thurmond et al. state that environmental vari-
ables such as diversity in assessment and class dis-
cussion influence e-learning satisfaction consider-
ably [29]. The use of different evaluation methods
in an e-learning system causes users to think that
a connection is established between them and the
instructors, and their learning efforts are properly
assessed [6]. Therefore, this study assumes that if
an e-learning system provides more or diversified
assessment tools and methods, e-learners’ satis-
faction will increase because of feedback from the
assessment.
Hypothesis 8. Interaction in e-learning envi-
ronment will positively influence e-learner satis-
faction with e-learning.
Many researchers agree that interactive instruc-
tional design is an essential factor for learning
satisfaction and success [38,39,40]. According to
Moore [41], there are three kinds of interactions in
learning activities: students with teachers, students
with materials, students with students. Teaching
styles, especially interactions between teachers
and students, play a decisive role in learning activ-
ities [42,43,33]. Without conspicuous interactions
between teachers and students, learners are more
prone to distractions and difficulty concentrating
on the course materials [44]. Because e-learning
can proceed in almost any place, it requires better
concentration than in traditional face-to-face inter-
actions [45]. Interaction mechanisms in e-learning
environments should be properly designed to im-
Volume 6 / Number 4 / 2011
 technics technologies education management
prove frequency, quality, and promptness of inter-
actions which could affect e-learner satisfaction.
E-learner satisfaction is widely used in evaluat-
ing effects of learning environments and activities
both academically and practically [46,47,6]. This
study intends to assess e-learning effects through
measuring learner satisfaction and investigate the
preceding factors’ which are in the field of the uni-
versity or faculty management and have impact
on e-learner satisfaction. Based on the discussion
in this section, the research model is presented in
Figure 1.
Figure 1. Dimensions and variables discussed in
context of e-learner satisfaction with offered e-
learning environment
3. Methods
We conducted a series of interviews, in person
or by phone, with universities or faculties officials
to investigate the extent to which is e-learning en-
vironment in use at state universities in Serbia. Par-
ticipation in this study was accepted by fifty-four
faculty officials from six state universities. Twenty-
two contacted faculty officials have refused to par-
ticipate in this research. About 37% of the respon-
dents stated that use some kind of Learning Man-
agement System (LMS) at theirs faculties. Nearly
95% of them use LMS Moodle and 45% of those
who stated that use some kind of LMS uses this sys-
tem for more than half of their courses.
For the second part of this study questionnaire
items were developed based on the previous re-
search and used as a survey instrument. For each
variable there was different number of items. A
7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 as strongly
Volume 6 / Number 4 / 2011
disagree to 7 as strongly agree is used for the mea-
surement and all the respondents were asked to
mark only one option. A pilot test for the reliabil-
ity and validity of the instruments was conducted
with 27 e-learners who have experience with e-
learning. Some items were revised or deleted, ac-
cording to the results from the pilot tests, to im-
prove validity and reliability. The final version of
the questionnaire with its sources is presented in
table 2. Participants in the pilot test were excluded
from the subsequent study.
Data collection procedure
E-learner volunteers enrolled in 12 different
e-learning courses at two state faculties in Serbia
participated in the second part of this study. A to-
tal of 300 surveys were distributed by email. The
initial and follow-up mailing generated 143 usable
responses, resulting in a response rate of 47.67%
which suggested that respondents found the topic
interesting and relevant. Table 3 summarizes de-
scriptive statistics of the respondents. The subjects
were nearly evenly men and women, with only
slightly more women responding than men. Near-
ly 70% of the participants were between 20 and 22
years old. Thirty-nine respondents (27.27%) were
first time taking e-learning, whereas ten (6.99%)
had taken three or more courses. One hundred and
three learners (72.03%) considered themselves to
have intermediate level computer skills and nine-
ty-nine (69.23%) considered themselves to have
intermediate level Internet skills. Furthermore,
the perceived learner satisfaction with e-learning
courses, according to the survey responses, was
fairly high with a mean score of almost 5.0.
This research used Statistical Package for the
Social Sciences version 16 (SPSS v.16.0) for the
statistical analysis. Data were analyzed using step-
wise multiple regression analysis using eight vari-
ables (instructor response timeliness, Instructor
attitude toward e-learning, e-learning course flex-
ibility, e-learning course quality, technology qual-
ity, Internet quality, diversity in assessment and in-
teraction in e-learning environment) as regressors,
and perceived e-learner satisfaction as regress.
1157
 technics technologies education management
Table 2. Questionnaire items and sources
4. Results and data analysis
A stepwise multiple regression analysis was
conducted to prove the significance of the vari-
ables. This research used the condition index (C.I.)
to assess the multi co-linearity among independent
variables in the model. The value of 26.848 indi-
cated no severe multi co-linearity problem among
the regressors. Then we used the Durbin-Watson
statistic for detecting serial correlation. The value
1158
of 1.912 (less than 2) indicated the autocorrelation
problem does not exist [50].
Reliability was examined using Cronbach’s
Alpha values for each variable. As presented in
Table 4, all of these were above 0.9, suggesting
high internal consistency. The reliability of each
factor was as follows: perceived e-learner satisfac-
tion = 0.948; instructor attitude toward e-learning
= 0.991; e-learning course flexibility = 0.992; e-
learning course quality = 0.978; technology qual-
Volume 6 / Number 4 / 2011
 technics technologies education management

ity = 0.976; Internet quality = 0.965 and interac-
tion in e-learning environment = 0.927.
Table 3. Demographic profile and descriptive sta-
tistics (n = 143)
Table 4. Means, standard deviation, correlation a and reliabilities b among study variables (n = 143)
Table 4 presents the means, standard devia-
tions, and correlations between variables. The in-
structor response timeliness variable (r = 0.671, p
< 0.01) has the highest correlation to the dependent
variable. Other independent variables that signifi-
cantly correlated with the dependent variable are:
instructor attitude toward e-learning (r = 0.578, p
< 0.01); e-learning course flexibility (r = 0.666,
p < 0.01); e-learning course quality (r = 0.573, p
< 0.01); technology quality (r = 0.507, p < 0.01);
Internet quality (r = 0.530, p < 0.01); diversity in
assessment (r = 0.522, p < 0.01) and interaction in
e-learning environment (r = 0.613, p < 0.01). All
the factors exhibited significant relationships with
e-learner satisfactions.
As mentioned earlier, a stepwise multiple re-
gression analysis was conducted to test the hy-
potheses. Eight influential variables were applied
as independent variables, while e-learner satis-
faction was used as a dependent variable. Table

Table 5. Stepwise multiple regression analysis results (n = 143)

Volume 6 / Number 4 / 2011 1159

 technics technologies education management
5 presents the results of stepwise multiple regres-
sion analysis. Among eight independent variables,
seven are considered to have critical relationships
with e-learner satisfaction with p-values less than
0.05. Only instructor attitude toward e-learning
have no critical influence on learner satisfaction
according to this test.
Hypotheses 1 and 2 examined the links be-
tween the instructor dimension and e-learner satis-
faction. Instructor response timeliness has a strong
positively significant influence on e-learners’ sat-
isfaction (β = 0.322, p < .001). The other variable,
instructor attitude toward e-learning in Hypothesis
2 is insignificant and failed to be supported.
Hypotheses 3 and 4 examined the effects of the
course dimension. E-learning course flexibility
and e-learning course quality have significant ef-
fect on e-learners’ satisfaction. Both Hypotheses 3
and 4 are supported.
Hypotheses 5 and 6 examined the relationship
between the technology dimension and e-learn-
er satisfaction. The results show that these two
variables have positive influence on perceived e-
learner satisfaction. Therefore, both Hypotheses 5
and 6 are supported by this test.
Hypotheses 7 and 8 examined the links be-
tween the environmental dimension and e-learner
satisfaction. Both diversity in assessment and in-
teraction in e-learning environment have positive
influence on e-learners’ satisfaction indicating that
hypotheses 7 and 8 are supported by this test.
Table 6 summarizes the results of all hypoth-
eses testing.
Table 6. Results of the hypotheses testing
5. Discussion
About one-third of state faculties in Serbia have
implemented some kind of LMS, most commonly
LMS Moodle. According to this study, students
are satisfied with offered e-learning environment.
1160
Stepwise multiple regression analysis proved
that seven variables have critical relationships
with e-learner satisfaction. The results suggest-
ed that 79.9% (adjusted R2 = 79.9%, F-value =
81.663, p < .001) of the e-learner satisfaction’s
variance can be explained by those seven critical
variables. There is a reasonable level of represen-
tativeness in the selected predictor variables and
symbolically, a prediction formula of the model
can be presented as follows:
ELS = (IRT)w1 + (ECF)w2 + (ECQ)w3 + (TQ)w4 +
(IQ)w5 + (DA)w6 + (IEL)w7.
In the formula, ELS is the e-learner satisfac-
tion; IRT is the instructor response timeliness;
ECF is the e-learning course flexibility; ECQ is
the e-learning course quality; TQ is the technol-
ogy quality; IQ is the Internet quality; DA is the
diversity in assessment; IEL is the interaction in e-
learning environment; and w1, w2, w3, w4, w5, w6,
and w7 are empirically determined weights.
Instructor dimension:
Teaching online differs from face-to-face educa-
tion. Professional expertise should not be the sole
criterion in selecting online instructors. Instructor
response timeliness proved to be statistically very
significant, no response or unreasonable delays in
responding to e-learner’ requests or questions defi-
nitely will contribute to e-learner satisfaction. In an
e-learning environment, students may be very im-
patient waiting response on their questions or re-
quests. Instructors’ attitudes toward e-learning did
not prove to be statistically significant to e-learner
satisfaction. The results of this research failed to
correspond to previous findings [6,54]. Differences
can be explained with no obligation for existence
of e-learning courses on state universities in Serbia.
Only those teachers who are devoted to e-learning
are held those courses. The insignificant effect
exhibited in this research doesn’t suggest that in-
structor attitude toward e-learning is not important,
it simply implies that instructor attitude toward e-
learning in the e-learning environment is satisfac-
tory to e-learners. Since they did not experience
difficulties during the learning process, it is difficult
for them to exhibit concerns about instructor atti-
tude toward e-learning.
Volume 6 / Number 4 / 2011
 technics technologies education management
Course dimension:
Course flexibility and quality are both proven to
be significant in this research. Flexibility and qual-
ity of an e-learning course is a strong indication
of student satisfaction. This result corresponds to
previous findings that e-learning course flexibility
and quality played an important role in e-learners’
satisfaction [6,51]. E-learning is not constrained by
space, time and location; therefore, students have a
high degree of flexibility and opportunity to effec-
tively balance their other activities with e-learning
courses. Faculties with online learning should ex-
plore the advantage of this virtual environment and
design courses with maximum flexibility to accom-
modate students’ needs. Also, they should take into
account the quality of an e-learning course which
includes overall course design, teaching materials,
interactive discussion arrangements, etc.
Technology dimension:
Factors, technology and Internet quality have
a significant effect on e-learner satisfaction. Most
e-learning systems are constructed in a high-speed
network environment where software and hard-
ware are superior to those of non-e-learning en-
vironment for parallel processing of multimedia
streaming data. Findings in this research suggest
that technology is important. In e-learning envi-
ronments, poor technology with slow response
time or frequent technical difficulties will definite-
ly discourage learners from taking online courses.
Environmental dimension:
Factors involved in environmental dimen-
sion, diversity in assessment and interaction in
e-learning environment have a significant impact
on e-learner satisfaction. A variety of assessment
methods enable instructors to be more effective
and motivate e-learner to do their best in different
evaluation schemes so as to proceed with e-learn-
ing activities seriously and effectively.
6. Conclusion
While traditional learning methods, such as lec-
tures and project work, remain dominant in higher
education, universities are investing considerable
resources in e-learning technology, to support tra-
Volume 6 / Number 4 / 2011
ditional methods with access to complementary
electronic information and possibilities to com-
municate. The potential advantage of using this
technology in connection with on-site courses is
that it supports flexibility, through resources that
facilitate learning anytime and anywhere. Howev-
er, the basic nature of e-learning technology is that
it enables teachers and students with possibilities,
not with a “ready to use” resource.
In Serbia, e-learning has been adopted in ed-
ucation for a variety of purposes, especially in
higher education. Most universities use e-learning
environment as a supplementary tool to enhance
in-class instruction. E-learners in this study learn
mainly in the traditional classroom structure but
also have courses in e-learning environment.
This research identifies critical factors which
are in the field of the university or faculty man-
agement influencing e-learners’ satisfaction. An
integrated model developed from previous studies
consisting of eight factors in four dimensions is
presented to guide this research. With a 47.67%
response rate, a total of 143 valid questionnaires
were collected. A stepwise multiple regression
analysis was conducted to study the data. The re-
sults indicated that instructor response timeliness,
e-learning course flexibility, e-learning course
quality, technology quality, Internet quality, di-
versity in assessment and interaction in e-learning
environment are the critical factors affecting e-
learners’ satisfaction. Together, these seven fac-
tors are able to explain 79.9% of the variance of
user satisfaction.
The findings can provide more insights into
how to implement successful e-learning systems
within the organizations. The presented research
instrument with good reliability and validity can
also provide researchers with a tool for measuring
the e-learning systems success dimensions, and
a basis for explaining, justifying, and comparing
differences among the results.
This research represents a systemic effort to in-
corporate elements of e-learning, but it is not with-
out limitations. First, the research model which
cover a variety of factors influencing e-learners’
satisfaction, might not be comprehensive due to
the limitations of time and resources. Second, the
dependent variable of this study is a single indica-
tor, e-learner satisfaction. Some researchers sug-
1161
 technics technologies education management
gest that learning performance and student scores
should also be considered as dependent variables
[52,34,53]. Finally, the statistical methods used in
this study are based on traditional assumptions,
thus our results are established with these assump-
tions as a base.
All universities should have a flexible institu-
tional structure to integrate e-learning technology
in their setup for the better and improved learning
outcomes. The universities which are not utilizing
technological resource will be left behind in global-
ization race. The results of this study can be useful
for the educational institutions before implement-
ing e-learning environment. Administration should
consider the factors that have been pointed out in
this study, for successful implementation.
Acknowledgement
Research for this article was conducted un-
der the project "Improving the competitiveness
of Serbia in the process of joining the European
Union, Ministry of Science of Serbia, no. 47028,
for the period 2011th-2014th year.
References
1. Zhang, D., & Nunamaker, J. F. (2003). Powering
e-learning in the new millennium: an overview of
e-learning and enabling technology. Information
Systems Frontiers, 5(2), 207–218.
2. Wang, Y., Wang, H., Shee, D. (2007). Measuring e-
learning systems success in an organizational con-
text: Scale development and validation. A Comput-
ers in Human Behavior 23, p. 1792–1808.
3. Wu, J.H., Tennyson, R.D., Hsia, T.L., and Liao,
Y.W. (2008). Analysis of E-Learning Innovation
and Core Capability Using a Hypercube Model.
Computers in Human Behavior 24, p. 1851–1866.
4. Govindasamy, T. (2002). Successful implementa-
tion of e-learning pedagogical considerations. The
Internet and Higher Education, 4, 287–299.
5. Wu, J. P., Tsai, R. J., Chen, C. C., & Wu, Y. C.
(2006). An integrative model to predict the con-
tinuance use of electronic learning systems: hints
for teaching. International Journal on E-Learning,
5(2), 287–302.
1162
6. Sun P-C., Tsai R.J., Finger G., Chen Y-Y. & Y.
Dowming (2008), What drives a successful e-
Learning? An empirical investigation of the criti-
cal factors influencing learner satisfaction, Com-
puters & Education, Vol. 50 (4), pp 1183-1202.
7. Lin H-F. (2007), Measuring Online Learning Sys-
tems Success: Applying the Updated DeLone and
McLean Model, Cyber Psychology & Behavior,
Vol. 10 (6), pp. 817-820.
8. Walker, S. L. (2005). Development of the Dis-
tance Education Learning Environments Survey
(DELES) for higher education. The Texas Journal
of Distance Learning, 2 (1), 1-16.
9. Arbaugh, J. B. (2000). Virtual classroom char-
acteristics and student satisfaction with internet-
based MBA courses. Journal of Management Edu-
cation, 24(1), 32–54.
10. Areti, V. (2006). Satisfying distance education
students of the Hellenic Open University. E-men-
tor, 2 (14), 1-12.
11. Bender, D. M., Wood, B. J., & Vredevoogd, J. D.
(2004). Teaching time: Distance education versus
classroom instruction. The American Journal of
Distance Education, 18 (2), 103-114.
12. Roberts, T. G., Irani, T. A., Telg, R. W., & Lundy,
L. K. (2005). The development of an instrument
to evaluate distance education courses using
student attitudes. The American Journal of Dis-
tance Education, 19 (1), 51-64.
13. Trinidad, S. & Pearson, J. (2004). Implementing
and evaluating e-learning environments. In R. At-
kinson, C. McBeath, D. Jonas-Dwyer, R. Phillips,
(Eds.), Beyond the comfort zone: Proceedings
of the 21st ASCILITE Conference (pp. 895-903).
Perth, Australia: Australasian Society for Com-
puters in Learning in Tertiary Education.
14. Pearson, J., & Trinidad, S. (2005). OLES: An
instrument for refining the design of e-learning
environments. Journal of Computer Assisted
Learning, 21, 396-404.
15. Trinidad, S., Aldridge, J., & Fraser, B. (2005). De-
velopment, validation and use of the Online Learn-
ing Environment Survey. Australasian Journal of
Educational Technology, 21 (1), 60-81.
16. Pavlou P. (2003), Consumer Acceptance of Elec-
tronic Commerce: Integrating Trust and Risk
with the Technology Acceptance Model, Interna-
tional Journal of Electronic Commerce Vol. 7 (3),
pp. 101 – 134.
Volume 6 / Number 4 / 2011
 technics technologies education management
17. Fullerton, G., Taylor, S. (2002), "Mediating, in-
teractive, and non-linear effects in service quality
and satisfaction with services research", Cana-
dian Journal of Administrative Sciences, Vol. 19
No.2, pp.124-36.
18. Davies, J., & Graff. M. (2005). Performance
in e-learning: Online participation and student
grades. British Journal of Educational Technol-
ogy, 36, 657-663.
19. Garrison, D. R. & Anderson, T. (2003) E-
Learning in the 21 st Century: A Framework for
Research and Practice, Taylor & Francis, New
York.
20. Holsapple, C., & Lee-Post, A. (2006). Defining,
Assessing, and Promoting E-Learning Success:
An Information Systems Perspective. Decision
Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 4, 67-
85.
21. Bailey, J.E. & Pearson, S.W. (1983). Develop-
ment of a tool for measuring and analyzing com-
puter user satisfaction. Management science, 29,
530-545.
22. Goda, Y. (2008). Factors Affecting Learners’
Overall Satisfaction in e-Learning as a Wholis-
tic Evaluation in Japan. In K. McFerrin et al.
(Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information
Technology & Teacher Education International
Conference 2008 (pp. 389-394). Chesapeake, VA:
AACE.
23. DeLone W. H. and McLean E. R. (1992). In-
formation Systems Success: The Quest for the
Dependent Variable’, Information Systems Re-
search, 3 (1): 60-95.
24. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1977). Attitude–behav-
ior relations: a theoretical analysis and review of
empirical research. Psychological Bulletin, 84,
888–918.
25. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R.
(1989). User acceptance of computer technology:
A comparison of two theoretical models. Man-
agement Science, 35(8), 982–1003.
26. Oliver, R. L. (1980). A cognitive model for the
antecedents and consequences of satisfaction.
Journal of Marketing Research, 17, 460–469.
27. Lin, Cathy S., Wu, S., & Tsai, R. J. (2005). Inte-
grating perceived playfulness into expectation-
confirmation model for web portal context. Infor-
mation & Management, 42, 683–693.
Volume 6 / Number 4 / 2011
28. Wu, J. P., Tsai, R. J., Chen, C. C., & Wu, Y. C.
(2006). An integrative model to predict the con-
tinuance use of electronic learning systems: hints
for teaching. International Journal on E-Learn-
ing, 5(2), 287–302.
29. Thurmond, V. A., Wambach, K., & Connors, H.
R. (2002). Evaluation of student satisfaction: de-
termining the impact of a web-based environment
by controlling for student characteristics. The
American Journal of Distance Education, 16(3),
169–189.
30. Soon, K. H., Sook, K. I., Jung, C. W., & Im, K.
M. (2000). The effects of Internet-based distance
learning in nursing. Computers in Nursing,
18(1), 19–25.
31. Volery, T., & Lord, D. (2000). Critical success
factors in online education. The International
Journal of
32. Educational Management, 14(5), 216–223.
33. Liaw, S., Huang, S., & Chen, G., (2007).Surveying
instructor and learner attitudes toward e-learning.
Computers & Education, 49, 1066–1080.
34. Webster, J., & Hackley, P. (1997). Teaching effec-
tiveness in technology-mediated distance learn-
ing. Academy of Management Journal, 40(6).
35. Piccoli, G., Ahmad, R., & Ives, B. (2001). Web-
Based Virtual Learning Environments: A Re-
search Framework and a Preliminary Assessment
of Effectiveness in Basic IT Skills Training. MIS
Quarterly, 25, (4) 401-426.
36. Dillon, C. L., & Gunawardena, C. N. (1995). A
framework for the evaluation of telecommuni-
cations-based distance education. In D. Sewart
(Ed.). 17th world congress of the international
council for distance education (Vol. 2, pp. 348–
351). Milton Keynes, UK: Open University.
37. Arbaugh, J. B. (2002). Managing the on-line
classroom: a study of technological and behav-
ioral characteristics of web-based MBA courses.
Journal of High Technology Management Re-
search, 13, 203–223.
38. Salmon, G. (2000). Computer mediated confer-
encing for management learning at the open uni-
versity.Management Learning, 31, 491–502.
39. Hong, K. S. (2002). Relationships between stu-
dents’ and instructional variables with satisfac-
tion and learning from a Web-based course. In-
ternet and Higher Education, 5, 267–281.
1163
 technics technologies education management

40. Jiang, M., & Ting, E. (1998). Course design, in- 51. Gujarati, D. N. (2003). Basic econometrics (4th
struction, and students’ online behaviors: A study ed.). McGraw-Hill, NY: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
of instructional variables and student perceptions
52. Arbaugh, J. B., & Duray, R. (2002). Technologi-
of online learning. In Paper presented at the annu-
cal and structural characteristics, student learn-
al meeting of the American Educational Research
ing and satisfaction with web-based courses – An
Association, San Diego, CA, April 13–17, 1988.
exploratory study of two on-line MBA programs.
41. Schwartz, R. A. (1995). The virtual university. Management Learning, 33(3), 331–347
American Society for Engineering Education
53. Leidner, D. E., & Fuller, M. (1997). Improving
Prism, 5(4), 22–26.
student learning of conceptual information: GSS
42. Moore, M. G. (1989). Three types of interaction. supported collaborative learning vs. individual
The American Journal of Distance Education, constructive learning. Decision Support Systems,
3(2), 1–6. 20(2), 149–163.
43. Borbely, E. (1994). Challenges and opportuni- 54. Vogel, D. R., Davison, R. M., & Shroff, R. H.
ties in extending the classroom and the campus (2001). Socio-cultural learning: a perspective on
via digital compressed Video. In R. Mason & P. GSS-enabled global education. Communications
bacsich (Eds.), ISDN: Applications in education of the AIS, 7, 1–39.
and training (pp. 65–82). London: Institution of
55. Smeets, E. (2005). Does ICT contribute to power-
Electrical Engineers.
ful learning environments in primary education?
44. Lachem, C., Mitchell, J., & Atkinson, R. (1994). Computers & Education, 44, 343–355.
ISDN-based videoconferencing in Australian ter-
tiary education. In R. Mason & P. Bacsich (Eds.),
ISDN: Applications in education and training Corresponding author
(pp. 99–113). London: Institution of Electrical Darko Stefanovic,
Engineers. University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Technical
45. Isaacs, E. A., Morris, T., Rodriguez, T. K., & Tang, Sciences, Novi Sad,
J. C. (1995). A comparison of face-to-face and Serbia,
distributed presentations. In R. R. Katz, R. Mack, E-mail: darkoste@gmail.com
L. Marks, M. B. Rosson, & J. Nelson (Eds.), Pro-
ceedings of the association for computing machin-
ery (ACM) special interest group on computers
and human interaction (CHI) 95 conference (pp.
354–361). New York: ACM Press.
46. Kydd, C. T., & Ferry, D. L. (1994). Case study:
Managerial use of video conferencing. Informa-
tion & Management, 27, 369–375.
47. Alavi, M. (1994). Computer-mediated collab-
orative learning: an empirical evaluation. MIS
Quarterly, 18(2), 159–174.
48. Wang, Y. S. (2003). Assessment of learner sat-
isfaction with asynchronous electronic learning
systems. Information & Management, 41, 75–86.
49. Soong, B. M. H., Chan, H. C., Chua, B. C., &
Loh, K. F. (2001). Critical success factors for on-
line course resources. Computers & Education,
36(2).
50. Amoroso, D. L., & Cheney, P. H. (1991). Testing
a causal model of end-user application effective-
ness. Journal of Management Information Sys-
tems, 8(1), 63–89.

1164 Volume 6 / Number 4 / 2011

View publication stats