Learners’ Perceived Self-Efficacy, Engagement, and Satisfaction in Online Learning of Accounting and Auditing University Students
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52296/vje.2022.200-
Downloads
How to Cite
Abstract
The development of online learning is inevitable in the digital age and the Covid-19 pandemic context. The benefits and limitations of online learning are studied along with solutions to improve its efficiency. This study investigated how students’ perceived self-efficacy affects their learning online learning environment based on learner characteristics. With the data collected from 401 accounting and auditing students, the study evaluated the measurement model and tested the research hypotheses with the structural equation model (SEM), SPSS 20 and Amos 24. The finding validates that the level of online student engagement can be classified as: engagement for learning and engagement for social interaction. The results of the SEM analysis show a significant positive influence of online students’ perceived self-efficacy on their engagement in learning and on the satisfaction of students majoring in accounting and auditing. These findings contribute to the existing literature and practice that provide a framework for higher education to propose appropriate solutions to promote online learning or blended learning.
Downloads
References
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2007). Making the grade: Online education in the United States, 2006. The Sloan Consortium.
Ally, M. (2004). Foundations of educational theory for online learning. Theory and Practice of Online Learning, 2, 15-44.
Angelino, L. M., Williams, F. K., & Natvig, D. (2007). Strategies to engage online students and reduce attrition rates. Journal of Educators Online, 4(2), 1-14.
Baloran, E. T., & Hernan, J. T. (2021). Course satisfaction and student engagement in online learning amid COVID-19 pandemic: A structural equation model. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 22(4), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.1002721
Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 248-287.
Bandura, A. (2005). The evolution of social cognitive theory. In K. G. Smith & M. A.. Hitt (Eds.), Great Minds in Management (pp. 9-35). Oxford University Press.
Bhattacherjee, A. (2012). Social science research: Principles, methods, and practices (2nd Edition). CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.
Vu, T. T. B., Tran, N.-M., Do, M. T., & Nguyen, T. H. N. (2020). Impact of accounting resources on quality of accounting information system: Evidence from Vietnamese small and medium enterprises. ACRN Journal of Finance and Risk Perspectives, 9(1-14). https://doi.org/10.35944/jofrp.2020.9.1.001
Bolliger, D. U., & Martin, F. (2018). Instructor and student perceptions of online student engagement strategies. Distance Education, 39(4), 568-583. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2018.1520041
Chang, S. J., Van Witteloostuijn, A., & Eden, L. (2010). From the Editors: Common method variance in international business research. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(2), 178-184. https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2009.88
Dixson, M. D. (2010). Creating Effective Student Engagement in Online Courses: What Do Students Find Engaging? Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 10(2), 1-13.
Dixson, M. D. (2015). Measuring student engagement in the online course: The Online Student Engagement scale (OSE). Online Learning, 19(4). https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v19i4.561
Dyment, J., Stone, C., & Milthorpe, N. (2020). Beyond busy work: rethinking the measurement of online student engagement. Higher Education Research & Development, 39(7), 1440-1453. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1732879
Elshami, W., Taha, M. H., Abuzaid, M., Saravanan, C., Al Kawas, S., & Abdalla, M. E. (2021). Satisfaction with online learning in the new normal: perspective of students and faculty at medical and health sciences colleges. Medical Education Online, 26(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2021.1920090
Gray, J. A., & DiLoreto, M. (2016). The effects of student engagement, student satisfaction, and perceived learning in online learning environments. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 11(1). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1103654
Gunzler, D. D., & Morris, N. (2015). A tutorial on structural equation modeling for analysis of overlapping symptoms in co‐occurring conditions using MPlus. Statistics in Medicine, 34(24), 3246-3280. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.6541
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2014). Multivariate Data Analysis (7th Edition). Essex: Pearson Education Limited.
Hannon, J., & D’Netto, B. (2007). Cultural diversity online: Student engagement with learning technologies. International Journal of Educational Management, 21(5), 418-432. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513540710760192
Hensley, A., Hampton, D., Wilson, J. L., Culp-Roche, A., & Wiggins, A. T. (2021). A Multicenter Study of Student Engagement and Satisfaction in Online Programs. Journal of Nursing Education, 60(5), 259-264. https://doi.org/10.3928/01484834-20210420-04
Hu, M., & Li, H. (2017). Student engagement in online learning: A review. Paper presented at the 2017 International Symposium on Educational Technology (ISET).
Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39(1), 31-36.
Kuh, G. D. (2009a). The national survey of student engagement: Conceptual and empirical foundations. New Directions for Institutional Research, 141, 5-20. https://doi.org/10.1002/ir.283
Kuh, G. D. (2009b). What student affairs professionals need to know about student engagement. Journal of College Student Development, 50(6), 683-706. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.0.0099
Lam, L. (2012). An Investigation of the Factors Influencing Students’ Engagement in Learning Through Using Facebook as Part of Online Learning Platform. Paper presented at the International Conference on e-Learning.
Lee-Post, A. (2009). e-Learning Success Model: an Information Systems Perspective. Electronic Journal of E-learning, 7(1), 61-70. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ867103
Liaw, S.-S. (2008). Investigating students’ perceived satisfaction, behavioral intention, and effectiveness of e-learning: A case study of the Blackboard system. Computers & Education, 51(2), 864-873. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.09.005
Meyer, K. A. (2014). Student engagement in online learning: What works and why. ASHE Higher Education Report, 40(6), 1-114. https://doi.org/10.1002/aehe.20018
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd Edition). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Rabe-Hemp, C., Woollen, S., & Humiston, G. S. (2009). A comparative analysis of student engagement, learning, and satisfaction in lecture hall and online learning settings. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 10(2), 207. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/103633
Robinson, C. C., & Hullinger, H. (2008). New benchmarks in higher education: Student engagement in online learning. Journal of Education for Business, 84(2), 101-109. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOEB.84.2.101-109
Siemens, G. (2004). Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1).
Sriwiyanti, Saefudin, W., & Yusoff, S. H. M. (2021). Self-efficacy and student engagement in online learning during pandemic. Global Journal of Educational Research and Management, 1(4), 219-231.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using Multivariate Statistics. Boston, MA: Pearson Education. Inc.
Ursachi, G., Horodnic, I. A., & Zait, A. (2015). How reliable are measurement scales? External factors with indirect influence on reliability estimators. Procedia Economics and Finance, 20, 679-686. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(15)00123-9
Wolverton, C. C., Hollier, B. N. G., & Lanier, P. A. (2020). The impact of computer self efficacy on student engagement and group satisfaction in online business courses. Electronic Journal of E-learning, 18(2), 175‑188. https://doi.org/10.34190/EJEL.20.18.2.006
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Vietnam Journal of Education
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
