Analyzing Student Satisfaction with Synchronous E-Learning on Robotic Process Automation Application for Finance in Guangdong, China
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Purpose: This study aims to investigate student satisfaction with synchronous E-learning on robotic process automation (RPA) application for finance in Guangdong, China. Research design, data, and methodology: This study employed the Instrumental Organizational Culture (IOC) tool to assess effectiveness, with Cronbach's α coefficient used for reliability (n=30). Multiple Linear Regression (MLR) analysis was conducted on valid questionnaires from 80 students at the School of Accounting, Zhanjiang University of Science and Technology to confirm significant relationships between variables. Following this, a 16-week strategic plan involving 30 students was implemented. Quantitative data from the current and expected situations were compared using paired-sample t-tests. Results: Statistical validation confirmed the hypotheses regarding the correlation between course design quality, instructor attributes, interactive attributes, perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and student satisfaction. The research findings demonstrate significant changes in both current and expected variables. Conclusions: The course design quality, instructor attributes, interactive attributes, perceived usefulness, and perceived ease of use are critical factors affecting student satisfaction with synchronous E-learning on the RPA financial robot application course offered by the School of Accounting, Zhanjiang University of Science and Technology.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The submitting author warrants that the submission is original and that she/he is the author of the submission together with the named co-authors; to the extend the submission incorporates text passages, figures, data, or other material from the work of others, the submitting author has obtained any necessary permission.
Articles in this journal are published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY What does this mean?). This is to get more legal certainty about what readers can do with published articles, and thus a wider dissemination and archiving, which in turn makes publishing with this journal more valuable for you, the authors.
References
Adobor, H., & Daneshfar, A. (2006). Management simulations: Determining their effectiveness. Journal of Management Development, 25(2), 151-168. https://doi.org/10.1108/02621710610645135
Aggarwal, M. (2016). On learning of choice models with interactive attributes. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 28(10), 2697-2708.
https://doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2016.2563434
Barat, S., Rajamma, R. K., Rajamma, R., Zolfagharian, M. A., & Ganesh, G. (2009). Student course perceptions: A perceived-ease-of-use--perceived-usefulness framework. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 15(2), 25-35. https://digitalcommons.fairfield.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1148&context=business-facultypubs
Bhattacherjee, A. (2001). Understanding information systems continuance: An expectation-confirmation model. MIS Quarterly, 25(3), 351-370. https://doi.org/10.2307/3250921
Cai, M., & Zhao, X. (2023). Incorporating evaluation into learning: Exploration of online course design. Modern Educational Technology, 33(4), 83-91.
Cheng, Y.-M. (2020). Students' satisfaction and continuance intention of the cloud-based e-learning system: roles of interactivity and course quality factors. Education + Training, 62(9), 1037-1059. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-10-2019-0245
Daultani, Y., Goswami, M., Kumar, A., & Pratap, S. (2021). Perceived outcomes of e-learning: identifying key attributes affecting user satisfaction in higher education institutes. Measuring Business Excellence, 25(2), 216-229. https://doi.org/10.1108/MBE-07-2020-0110
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2632151
Doyle, W. (1986). Classroom organization and management. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching (pp. 392-431). Macmillan.
Gashi, A., Zhushi, G., & Krasniqi, B. (2022). Exploring determinants of student satisfaction with synchronous e-learning: evidence during COVID-19. International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 41(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJILT-05-2022-0118
Gashi, L., Kastrati, Z., & Pireva, K. (2021). Investigating the effectiveness of online learning platforms in higher education: A case study during the COVID-19 pandemic. Education and Information Technologies, 26(6), 6881-6900. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10563-6
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2014). Multivariate Data Analysis (7th Ed.). Pearson Education.
Huang, P., Wang, C., Tseng, Y., & Wang, R. (2011). The impact of curriculum design on learning satisfaction. Journal of Information and Optimization Sciences, 32(3), 637-655. https://doi.org/10.1080/02522667.2011.10700077
Kobayashi, K. (2019). Interactivity: A potential determinant of learning by preparing to teach and teaching. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 2755-2755. https://doi.org/10.3389/FPSYG.2018.02755
Liang, J., Jiang, R., & Cao, J. (2023). On "student-centered" curriculum design principles. Journal of Yangzhou University (Higher Education Study), 27(2), 43-51.
https://doi.org/10.19411/j.cnki.1007-8606.2023.02.005
Liaw, 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
Lim, Y. K., Lee, S., & Kim, D. J. (2011). Interactivity attributes for expression-oriented interaction design. International Journal of Design, 5(3), 113-128. https://doi.org/10.1145/1518701.1518719
Liu, I. F., Chen, M. C., Sun, Y. S., Wible, D., & Kuo, C. H. (2010). Extending the TAM model to explore the factors that affect intention to use an online learning community. Computers & Education, 54(2), 600-610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.009
Liu, Y., Wu, M., & Sun, Z. (2015). A study on the relationship between students' technology acceptance, learning methods, and learning efficacy in an electronic textbook environment. Open Education Research, 21(1), 105-113. https://doi.org/10.13966/j.cnki.kfjyyj.2015.01.012
Lü, L. (2020). Connotation and implementation of big concept course design. Educational Research, 41(10), 53-61.
Mei, H., Tang, X., Li, J., & Zhang, L. (2019). Exploring the determinants of user satisfaction in mobile learning: A system success perspective. Educational Technology Research and Development, 67(4), 783-799. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09695-7
Nguyen, T., & Nguyen, T. M. (2020). Factors influencing students’ intention to use online learning: An integrated model of technology acceptance and theory of planned behavior. Education and Information Technologies, 25(6), 6573-6595. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10399-6
Nicholas, U. E., Peter, U. O., & Subodh, K. (2021). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use in ICT support and use for teachers. IETE Journal of Education, 62(1), 12-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/09747338.2021.1908177
Nikou, S., & Maslov, I. (2023). Finnish university students' satisfaction with e-learning outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Educational Management, 37(1), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-04-2022-0166
Özgüngör, S., & Duru, E. (2015). Course and instructor characteristics distinguishing highest and lowest student ratings of instructors. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 15(61), 118-136. https://doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2015.61.7
Peng, L. (2023). Practice of WeChat public platform-assisted Java programming course teaching [Master's thesis]. Northeast Normal University.
Qiang, L. (2013). Analysis of students' acceptance of Alibaba College online training based on the technology acceptance model [Master's thesis]. Fudan University.
Raza, S. A., & Irfan, M. (2018). Students' evaluation of teacher attributes: Implications for quality in higher education. Bulletin of Education and Research, 40(1), 197-214.
Sidelinger, R. J., & Bolen, D. M. (2016). Instructor credibility as a mediator of instructors’ compulsive communication and student communication satisfaction in the college classroom. Communication Research Reports, 33(1), 24-31. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2015.1117438
Sturmey, P., Dalfen, S. R., & Fienup, D. M. (2015). Inter-teaching: A systematic review. European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 16(1), 121-130. https://doi.org/10.1080/15021149.2015.1069655
Vyas, B. A., & Shirur, R. S. (2022). A study on satisfaction among undergraduate studentsin bagalkot. International Journal of Engineering Applied Sciences and Technology, 7(5), 104-111.
Xie, L., Ren, X., & Wang, D. (2020). Exploring the impact of digital technology on business model innovation: The mediating role of innovation strategy. Journal of Business Research, 123, 124-136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.09.046
Yang, G. (2016). Factors influencing MOOC users' continuous usage behavior. Open Education Research, 22(1), 100-111. https://doi.org/10.13966/j.cnki.kfjyyj.2016.01.012
Yang, Q., Shui, G., Li, Z., & You, B. (2003). Survey on Satisfaction of University Students in Chongqing. Probe, 1(2), 92-94. https://doi.org/10.16501/j.cnki.50-1019/d.2003.01.028
Zhao, J. (2020). What is good course design? Journal of Higher Education, 41(9), 84-87.