Virtual interactive E-learning application: An evaluation of the student satisfaction

Computer Applications in Engineering Education

Volumn 23, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 72-91

  Violante, Maria Grazia ^a   Vezzetti, Enrico ^a  

^a POLITECNICO DI TORINO   (Italy)

Author keywords

E learning; Electroencephalogram; Kano's model; Learner satisfaction; Web based interactive application

Indexed keywords

BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING; BIOMEDICAL EQUIPMENT; COMPUTER AIDED INSTRUCTION; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; ENGINEERING EDUCATION; LEARNING SYSTEMS; SOCIAL NETWORKING (ONLINE); STUDENTS; THREE DIMENSIONAL COMPUTER GRAPHICS; WEBSITES;

E-LEARNING APPLICATION; INTERACTIVE APPLICATIONS; INTERACTIVE LEARNING; KANO'S MODEL; LEARNER SATISFACTION; STUDENT SATISFACTION; STUDENTS' SATISFACTION; WEB-BASED LEARNING ENVIRONMENT;

E-LEARNING;

EID: 84920920786     PISSN: 10613773     EISSN: 10990542     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/cae.21580     Document Type: Article

References (86)

1. http://ltinewsline.com/ (accessed April 2012)
2. http://sloanconsortium.org/5pillars (accessed December 2012)
3. http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ (accessed April 2012)
4. http://www.viewpoint.com/technologies/enliven.shtml (accessed April 2012)
5. http://www.webd.gazi.edu.tr/about.html (accessed April 2012)
6. http://www.webmd.com/default.htm (accessed April 2012)
7. M. Nichols,Atheory for eLearning, Educ Technol Soc 6 (2003), 1-10.
8. M. Barak and Y. J. Dori, Enhancing undergraduate students' chemistry understanding through project-based learning in an IT environment. Sci Educ 89 (2005), 117-139.
9. W. Horton, Designing web-based training: How to teach anyone anything anywhere anytime, Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, 2000.
10. J-N. Sun and Y-c. Hsu, An experimental study of learner perceptions of the interactivity of web-based instruction, Interact Comput 24 (2012), 35-48.
11. P. Northrup, A framework for designing interactivity into web-based instruction, Educ Technol 41 (2001), 31-39.
12. T. K. Borsook and N. Higginbotham-Wheat, Interactivity: What is it and what can it do for computer-based instruction? Educ Technol 31 (2001), 11-17.
13. C. Huang, Designing high-quality interactive multimedia learning modules, Comput Med Imaging Graph 29 (2005), 223-233.
14. K. L. Peck, The design, development & evaluation of instructional software, Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc., Indianapolis, IN, 1988.
15. R. E. Mayer, Multimedia learning, Psychol Learn Motiv 41 (2002), 85-139.
16. P. Chandler and R. Mayer, When learning is just a click away: Does simple user interaction foster deeper understanding of multimedia messages, J Educ Psychol 93 (2001), 390-397.
17. S. Schwan and R. Riempp, The cognitive bene fits of interactive videos: Learning to tie nautical knots, Learn Instr 14 (2004), 293-305.
18. F.-W. Tung and Y.-S. Deng, Designing social presence in e-learning environments: Testing the effect of interactivity on children, Interact Learn Environ 14 (2006), 251-264.
19. R. H. Kay and L. Knaack, Assessing learning, quality and engagement in learning objects: The learning object evaluation scale for students (LOES-S), Educ Technol Res Dev 57 (2009), 147-168.
20. P.-Y. Wang, B. K. Vaughn, and M. Liu, The impact of animation interactivity on novices' learning of introductory statistics, Comput Educ 56 (2011), 300-311.
21. M. G. Moore, Editorial: Three types of interaction. Am J Dist Educ 3 (1989), 1-7.
22. R. Moreno and R. E. Mayer, Role of guidance, reflection, and interactivity in an agent-based multimedia game, J Educ Psychol 97 (2005), 117-128.
23. R. Kristof and A. Satran, Interactivity by design, Adobe Press, Mountain View, CA, 1995.
24. F. D. Salajan, S. Perschbacher, M. Cash, R. Talwar, W. El-Badrawy and G. J. Mount, Learning with web-based interactive objects: An investigation into student perceptions of effectiveness, Comput Educ 53 (2009), 632-643.
25. P. Barker, Designing interactive learning, in Design and production of multimedia and simulation-based learning material, T. Jong and L. Sarti (eds), Springer, Netherlands, 1994, pp 1-30.
26. R. Sims, Interactivity:A forgotten art? Comput Hum Behav 13 (1997), 157-180.
27. M. Turčáni and M. Magdin, The impact of interactivity on students' results when passing through an e-learning course. DIVAI 2012, 2012.
28. J. D. Bransford, A. L. Brown, and R. R. Cocking, How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school, National Research Council, National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 2000.
29. B. Tversky, J. B. Morrison, and M. Betrancourt, Animation: can it facilitate? Int J Hum Comput Stud 57 (2002), 247-262.
30. V. Thurmond and K. Wambach, Towards an understanding of interactions in distance education, Online J Nurs Inform (OJNI) 8 (2004). Available at http://ojni.org/8-2/interactions.htm
31. F.Williams, R. E. Rice, and E. M. Rogers, Research methods and the new media, Free Press, New York and London, 1988.
32. D. Karahoca, ̄. Dulda, A. Karahoca, A. Yücel, B. Gulluoglu and E. Arifoglu, Interactive e-content development for vocational and technical education, Procedia Soc Behav Sci 2 (2010), 5842-5849.
33. S. Domagk, R. N. Schwartz, and J. L. Plass, Interactivity in multimedia learning: An integrated model, Comput Hum Behav 26 (2010), 1024-1033.
34. J. Mareš, Obrazové materiály a e-learning. Information and Communication Technology in Education, University of Ostrava, Ostrava, 2011, pp 17-34.
35. R. Moreno and A. Valdez, Cognitive load and learning effects of having students organize pictures and words in multimedia environments: The role of student interactivity and feedback, Educ Technol Res Dev 53 (2005), 35-45.
36. H.-H. Teo, L.-B. Oh, C. Liu and K.-K. Wei, An empirical study of the effects of interactivity on web user attitude, Int J Hum Comput Stud 58 (2003), 281-305.
37. S.-S. Liaw, Investigating students' perceived satisfaction, behavioral intention, and effectiveness of e-learning: A case study of the Blackboard system, Comput Educ 51 (2008), 864-873.
38. S. Ozkan and R. Koseler, Multi-dimensional students' evaluation of e-learning systems in the higher education context: An empirical investigation, Comput Educ 53 (2009), 1285-1296.
39. K.-S. Hong, K.-W. Lai, and D. Holton, Students' satisfaction and perceived learning with a web-based course, Educ Technol Soc 6 (2003), 116-124.
40. J. Arbaugh, Managing the on-line classroom: A study of technological and behavioral characteristics of web-based MBA courses, J High Technol Manag Res 13 (2002), 203-223.
41. Z. L. Berge, Evaluating web-based training programs, in Web-based training, H. K. Badrul (Ed.), Web-based training, Educational Technology Publications, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 2001, pp. 515-522.
42. M. Jiang and E. Ting, Course design, instruction, and students ' online behaviors: A study of instructional variables and students' perceptions of online learning, Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA, April 13-17, 1998.
43. B. H. Khan, Managing e-learning strategies: Design, delivery, implementation and evaluation, Information Science Pub., Hershey, PA, c2005.
44. Y. Levy, Comparing dropouts and persistence in e-learning courses, Comput Educ 48 (2007), 185-204.
45. D. Y. Shee and Y.-S.Wang, Multi-criteria evaluation of the web-based e-learning system: Amethodology based on learner satisfaction and its applications, Comput Educ 50 (2008), 894-905.
46. S.-K. Wang and T. C. Reeves, The effects of a web-based learning environment on student motivation in a high school earth science course, Educ Technol Res Dev 55 (2007), 169-192.
47. G. Piccoli, R. Ahmad, and B. Ives, Web-based virtual learning environments: A research framework and a preliminary assessment of effectiveness in basic IT skills training, MIS Q 25 (2001), 401-426.
48. J. Webster and P. Hackley, Teaching effectiveness in technology-mediated distance learning, Acad Manag J (1997), 1282-1309.
49. C. L. Dillon and C. N. Gunawardena, A framework for the evaluation of telecommunications-based distance education. 17th Congress of the International Council for Distance Education, Open University, Milton Keynes, 1995.
50. D. E. Leidner and S. L. Jarvenpaa, The information age confronts education: Case studies on electronic classrooms, Inf Syst Res 4 (1993), 24-54.
51. E. Islas, M. Pérez, G. Rodriguez, I. Paredes, I. Ávila, and M. Mendoza, E-learning tools evaluation and roadmap development for an electrical utility. JTAER, 2 (2007), 63-75.
52. S. Kim and M. Lee, Validation of an evaluation model for learning management systems, J Comput Assist Learn 24 (2008), 284-294.
53. S.-S. Liaw, H.-M. Huang, and G.-D. Chen, Surveying instructor and learner attitudes toward e-learning, Comput Educ 49 (2007), 1066-1080.
54. T. Volery and D. Lord, Critical success factors in online education, Int J Educ Manag 14 (2000), 216-223.
55. C.W. Holsapple and A. Lee-Post, Defining, assessing, and promoting e-learning success: An information systems perspective, Decis Sci J Innovative Educ 4 (2006), 67-85.
56. H. M. Selim, Critical success factors for e-learning acceptance: Confirmatory factor models, Comput Educ 49 (2007), 396-413.
57. P.-C. Sun, R. J. Tsai, G. Finger, Y.-Y. Chen and D. Yeh, What drives a successful e-learning? An empirical investigation of the critical factors influencing learner satisfaction, Comput Educ 50 (2008), 1183-1202.
58. B. R. Barbero, C. M. Pedrosa, and E. G. Maté, Assessment of 3D viewers for the display of interactive documents in the learning of graphic engineering, Educ Technol Soc 15 (2012), 167-180.
59. M. G. Violante and E. Vezzetti, Implementing a new approach for the design of an e-learning platform in engineering education, Comput Appl Eng Educ (2012). doi: 10.1002/cae.21564
60. N.W. John, The impact ofWeb3D technologies on medical education and training, Comput Educ 49 (2007), 19-31.
61. S. Gerdprasert, T. Pruksacheva, B. Panijpan and P. Ruenwongsa, Development of a web-based learning medium on mechanism of labour for nursing students, Nurse Educ Today 30 (2010), 464-469.
62. A. Holobar, M. Divjak, D. Korošec and D. Zazula, Training scenario prototyping for VR-based simulation of neonatal decision-making, Comput Appl Eng Educ 15 (2007), 317-328.
63. A. Holobar, M. Divjak, I. Prelog, D. Korošec and D. Zazula, A distributed virtual reality-based system for neonatal decision-making training, Comput Appl Eng Educ 15 (2007), 329-339.
64. J. E. Gallagher, K. A. Dobrosielski-Vergona, R. G.Wingard and T. M. Williams, Web-based vs. Traditional classroom instruction in gerontology: A pilot study, J Dent Hyg 79 (2005), 7-7(1).
65. S. Settapat, T. Achalakul, and M. Ohkura, Web-based 3D medical image visualization framework for biomedical engineering education, Comput Appl Eng Educ (2011). doi: 10.1002/cae.20548
66. G. Devedzic, B. Ristic, M. Stefanovic, S. Cukovic and T. Lukovic, Development of 3d parametric model of human spine and simulator for biomedical engineering education and scoliosis screening, Comput Appl Eng Educ 20 (2012), 434-444.
67. K. S. Jang, S. Y. Hwang, S. J. Park, Y. M. Kim and M. J. Kim, Effects of a web-based teaching method on undergraduate nursing students' learning of electrocardiography, J Nurs Educ 44 (2005), 35.
68. L.-H. Chen and Y.-F. Kuo, Understanding e-learning service quality of a commercial bank by using Kano's model, Total Qual Manag 22 (2011), 99-116.
69. W. H. Delone, The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: a ten-year update, J Manag Inf Syst 19 (2003), 9-30.
70. S. Taylor and P. A. Todd, Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models, Inf Syst Res 6 (1995), 144-176.
71. M. Igbaria, N. Zinatelli, P. Cragg, and A. L. M. Cavaye, Personal computing acceptance factors in small firms: a structural equation model, MIS Q 21 (1997), 279-305.
72. P. B. Seddon, A respecification and extension of the DeLone and McLean model of IS success, Inf Syst Res 8 (1997), 240-253.
73. M. Gelderman, The relation between user satisfaction, usage of information systems and performance, Inf Manag 34 (1998), 11-18.
74. A. Rai, S. S. Lang, and R. B. Welker, Assessing the validity of IS success models: An empirical test and theoretical analysis, Inf Syst Res 13 (2002), 50-69.
75. C.-M. Chiu, M.-H. Hsu, S.-Y. Sun, T.-C. Lin and P.-C. Sun, Usability, quality, value and e-learning continuance decisions, Comput Educ 45 (2005), 399-416.
76. P. G. Patterson and R. A. Spreng, Modelling the relationship between perceived value, satisfaction and repurchase intentions in a business-to- business, services context: an empirical examination, Int J Serv Ind Manag 8 (1997), 414-434.
77. A. C. Van Riel, V. Liljander, and P. Jurriens, Exploring consumer evaluations of e-services: a portal site, Int J Serv Ind Manag 12 (2001), 359-377.
78. N. Kano, N. Seraku, F. Takahashi and S. Tsuji, Attractive quality and must-be quality, J Jpn Soc Qual Control 14 (1984), 39-48.
79. Y.-S. Wang, Assessment of learner satisfaction with asynchronous electronic learning systems, Inf Manag 41 (2003), 75-86.
80. K. Matzler and H. H. Hinterhuber, How to make product development projects more successful by integrating Kano's model of customer satisfaction into quality function deployment, Technovation 18 (1998), 25-38.
81. X.-X. Shen, K. C. Tan, and M. Xie, An integrated approach to innovative product development using Kano's model and QFD, Eur J Innov Manag 3 (2000), 91-99.
82. C. Berger, R. Blauth, D. Boger, C. Bolster, G. Burchill, W. DuMouchel, F. Pouliot, R. Richter, A. Rubinoff and D. Shen, Kano's methods for understanding customer-defined quality, Cent Qual Manag J 2 (1993), 3-36.
83. L. H. Chen and H. C. Lin, Integrating Kano's model into E-learning satisfaction. in Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, 2007 IEEE International Conference on 2007. IEEE.
84. S. Trinidad, J. Aldridge, and B. Fraser, Development, validation and use of the online learning environment survey, Australas J Educ Technol 21 (2005), 60-81.
85. M. J. Rosenberg, E-learning: Strategies for delivering knowledge in the digital age, Vol. 9, McGraw-Hill, New York, 2001.
86. M. Driscoll, Web-based training: Creating e-learning experiences, Second edition 2010, 2002 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Published by Pfeiffer, San Francisco, CA.