Factors Contributing to Undergraduate Students' Satisfaction and Continuance Intention of the Chaoxing Learning Platform in Yibin, China
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14456/au-ejir.2025.20Keywords:
Learning platform, Satisfaction, Continued Use Intention, Undergraduate, YibinAbstract
Purpose: This study identified key factors influencing undergraduate students' satisfaction and continuance intention to use the Chaoxing Learning Platform in Yibin, China. The conceptual framework illustrated the cause-and-effect relationships between System Quality (SQ), Information Quality (IQ), Perceived Usefulness (PU), Confirmation (COF), Subjective Norm (SN), Satisfaction (SAT), and Continuance Intention (CI). Research design, data and methodology: The researcher employed a quantitative approach (n=500) to distribute questionnaires to undergraduate students from the School of Mechanical Engineering at Sichuan University of Science & Engineering in Yibin, Sichuan Province, China. The study utilized non-probability sampling techniques, including judgmental sampling to select four target grades, quota sampling to determine the sample size, and convenience sampling for data collection and online questionnaire distribution. Data analysis was performed using structural equation modeling (SEM) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to assess model fit, reliability, and construct validity. Results: The results indicated that System Quality, Information Quality, Perceived Usefulness, and Confirmation significantly impacted Satisfaction. Additionally, Satisfaction and Subjective Norm significantly influenced Continuance Intention. Conclusions: It is recommended that university administrators and platform developers focus on improving factors such as system quality, information quality, and perceived usefulness. Additionally, promoting social influence through instructor and peer engagement can enhance student satisfaction and encourage the long-term use of the Chaoxing Learning Platform.
References
Agudo-Peregrina, Á. F., Hernández-García, Á., & Pascual-Miguel, F. J. (2014). Behavioral intention, use behavior, and the acceptance of electronic learning systems: Differences between higher education and lifelong learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 34, 301-314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.035
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
Al-Fraihat, D., Joy, M., Masa’deh, R., & Sinclair, J. (2020). Evaluating e-learning systems success: An empirical study. Computers in Human Behavior, 102, 67-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.08.004
Al-Samarraie, H., Teng, B. K., Alzahrani, A. I., & Alalwan, N. (2018). E-learning continuance satisfaction in higher education: A unified perspective from instructors and students. Studies in Higher Education, 43(11), 2003-2019.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2017.1298088
Anthony, B., Kamaludin, A., Romli, A., Mat Raffei, A. F., Nincarean, D. A. E., Abdullah, A., Ming, G. L., Shukor, N. A., Nordin, M. S., & Baba, S. (2019). Exploring the role of blended learning for teaching and learning effectiveness in institutions of higher learning: An empirical investigation. Education and Information Technologies, 24(6), 3433-3466.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09941-z
Anthony, B., Kamaludin, A., Romli, A., Raffei, A. F. M., Phon, D. N. A. L. E., Abdullah, A., & Ming, G. L. (2022). Blended learning adoption and implementation in higher education: A theoretical and systematic review. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 27(2), 531-578. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-020-09477-z
Awang, Z. (2012). Research methodology and data analysis (2nd ed.). UiTM Press.
Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238-246.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238
Bhattacherjee, A. (2001). Understanding information systems continuance: An expectation-confirmation model. MIS Quarterly, 25(3), 351-370. https://doi.org/10.2307/3250921
Chang, C. (2013). Exploring the determinants of e-learning systems continuance intention in academic libraries. Library Management, 34(1/2), 40-55. https://doi.org/10.1108/01435121311298261
Cheng, Y.-M. (2014). Extending the expectation-confirmation model with quality and flow to explore nurses’ continued blended e-learning intention. Information Technology & People, 27(3), 230-258. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-01-2013-0024
Cheung, R., & Vogel, D. (2013). Predicting user acceptance of collaborative technologies: An extension of the technology acceptance model for e-learning. Computers & Education, 63, 160-175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.003
Chiu, C.-M., Hsu, M.-H., Sun, S.-Y., Lin, T.-C., & Sun, P.-C. (2005). Usability, quality, value, and e-learning continuance decisions. Computers & Education, 45(4), 399-416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2004.06.001
Chiu, C.-M., & Wang, E. T. G. (2008). Understanding web-based learning continuance intention: The role of subjective task value. Information & Management, 45(3), 194-201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2008.02.003
Chopra, G., Madan, P., Jaisingh, P., & Bhaskar, P. (2019). Effectiveness of e-learning portal from students’ perspective: A structural equation model (SEM) approach. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 16(2), 94-116.
https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-05-2018-0027
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (1992). Information systems success: The quest for the dependent variable. Information Systems Research, 3(1), 60-95. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.3.1.60
DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (2003). The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: A ten-year update. Journal of Management Information Systems, 19(4), 9-30. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2003.11045748
DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (2016). Information systems success measurement. Foundations and Trends® in Information Systems, 2(1), 1-116. https://doi.org/10.1561/2900000005
Fauzi, M. A. (2022). E-learning in higher education institutions during COVID-19 pandemic: Current and future trends through bibliometric analysis. Heliyon, 8(5), e09433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09433
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312
Francis, M. K., Wormington, S. V., & Hulleman, C. (2019). The costs of online learning: Examining differences in motivation and academic outcomes in online and face-to-face community college developmental mathematics courses. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2054. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02054
Goldie, J. G. S. (2016). Connectivism: A knowledge learning theory for the digital age? Medical Teacher, 38(10), 1064-1069. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2016.1173661
Hamad, F., Shehata, A., & Al Hosni, N. (2024). Predictors of blended learning adoption in higher education institutions in Oman: Theory of planned behavior. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21(1), 13.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00443-8
Hassanzadeh, A., Kanaani, F., & Elahi, S. (2012). A model for measuring e-learning systems success in universities. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(12), 10959-10966. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2012.03.028
Holsapple, C. W., & Lee-Post, A. (2006). Defining, assessing, and promoting e-learning success: An information systems perspective. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 4(1), 67-85.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4609.2006.00102.x
Jo, H. (2022). Determinants of continuance intention towards e-learning during COVID-19: An extended expectation-confirmation model. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 42(1), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2022.2140645
Kumar, A., Krishnamurthi, R., Bhatia, S., Kaushik, K., Ahuja, N. J., Nayyar, A., & Masud, M. (2021). Blended learning tools and practices: A comprehensive analysis. IEEE Access, 9, 85151-85197.https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3085844
Kumar, J. A., Bervell, B., Annamalai, N., & Osman, S. (2020). Behavioral intention to use mobile learning: Evaluating the role of self-efficacy, subjective norm, and WhatsApp use habit. IEEE Access, 8, 208058-208074.
https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3037925
Lee, M.-C. (2010). Explaining and predicting users’ continuance intention toward e-learning: An extension of the expectation–confirmation model. Computers & Education, 54(2), 506-516. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.002
Lee-Post, A. (2009). e-Learning success model: An information systems perspective. The Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 7(1), 61-70.
Lin, H.-F. (2007). Measuring online learning systems success: Applying the updated DeLone and McLean model. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 10(6), 817-820. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2007.9948
Liu, S.-H., Liao, H.-L., & Pratt, J. A. (2009). Impact of media richness and flow on e-learning technology acceptance. Computers & Education, 52(3), 599-607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.11.002
Martin, F., & Bolliger, D. U. (2018). Engagement matters: Student perceptions on the importance of engagement strategies in the online learning environment. Online Learning, 22(1). https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i1.1092
Mirabolghasemi, M., Shasti, R., & Hosseinikhah Choshaly, S. (2021). An investigation into the determinants of blended learning satisfaction from EFL learners’ perspective. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 18(1), 69-84. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-07-2020-0117
Ohanu, I. B., Shodipe, T. O., Ohanu, C. M.-G., & Anene-Okeakwa, J. E. (2023). System quality, technology acceptance model and theory of planned behaviour models: Agents for adopting blended learning tools. E-Learning and Digital Media, 20(3), 255-281. https://doi.org/10.1177/20427530221108031
Ozkan, S., & Koseler, R. (2009). Multi-dimensional evaluation of e-learning systems in the higher education context: An empirical investigation of a computer literacy course. 2009 39th IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, 1-6.
https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2009.5350590
Petter, S., & McLean, E. R. (2009). A meta-analytic assessment of the DeLone and McLean IS success model: An examination of IS success at the individual level. Information & Management, 46(3), 159-166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2008.12.006
Po-An Hsieh, J. J., & Wang, W. (2007). Explaining employees’ extended use of complex information systems. European Journal of Information Systems, 16(3), 216-227. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000663
Roca, J. C., Chiu, C.-M., & Martínez, F. J. (2006). Understanding e-learning continuance intention: An extension of the technology acceptance model. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 64(8), 683-696.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2006.01.003
Roca, J. C., & Gagné, M. (2008). Understanding e-learning continuance intention in the workplace: A self-determination theory perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(4), 1585-1604. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2007.06.001
Rui-Hsin, K., & Lin, C.-T. (2018). The usage intention of e-learning for police education and training. Policing: An International Journal, 41(1), 98-112. https://doi.org/10.1108/PIJPSM-10-2016-0157
Sabah, N. M. (2020). Motivation factors and barriers to the continuous use of blended learning approach using Moodle: Students’ perceptions and individual differences. Behaviour & Information Technology, 39(8), 875-898.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929x.2019.1623323
Sasono, H. A., Pramana, E., & Zaman, P. C. (2023). Continuance intention on gamification in e-learning using extended expectation-confirmation model. EDUTEC: Journal of Education and Technology, 6(4), 704-724.
https://doi.org/10.29062/edu.v6i4.684
Sharma, S., Mukherjee, S., Kumar, A., & Dillon, W. R. (2005). A simulation study to investigate the use of cutoff values for assessing model fit in covariance structure models. Journal of Business Research, 58(7), 935-943.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2003.10.007
Sica, C., & Ghisi, M. (2007). The Italian versions of the Beck Anxiety Inventory and the Beck Depression Inventory–II: Psychometric properties and discriminant power. In M. A. Lange (Ed.), Leading‐edge psychological tests and testing research (pp. 27–50). Nova Science Publishers.
Sichuan University of Science and Engineering, Academic Affairs Office. (2024). Internal student population statistics by grade level, School of Mechanical Engineering. Unpublished institutional data.
Sujood, S., Siddiqui, S., Nafees, S., & Bano, N. (2023). User's intention towards the use of digital libraries: A post-COVID-19 scenario. Digital Library Perspectives, 39(4), 470-495. https://doi.org/10.1108/DLP-12-2022-0105
Sun, H., & Zhang, P. (2006). The role of moderating factors in user technology acceptance. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 64(2), 53-78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2005.04.013
Sun, J. C., & Rueda, R. (2012). Situational interest, computer self-efficacy, and self-regulation: Their impact on student engagement in distance education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(2), 191-204.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01157.x
Sun, P.-C., Tsai, R. J., Finger, G., Chen, Y.-Y., & Yeh, D. (2008). What drives a successful e-learning? An empirical investigation of the critical factors influencing learner satisfaction. Computers & Education, 50(4), 1183-1202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.11.007
Suzianti, A., & Paramadini, S. A. (2021). Continuance intention of e-learning: The condition and its connection with open innovation. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 7(1), 97.
https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7010097
Taghizadeh, S. K., Rahman, S. A., Nikbin, D., Alam, M. M. D., Alexa, L., Ling Suan, C., & Taghizadeh, S. (2022). Factors influencing students’ continuance usage intention with online learning during the pandemic: A cross-country analysis. Behaviour & Information Technology, 41(9), 1998-2017. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2021.1912181
Teng, Y., & Wang, X. (2021). The effect of two educational technology tools on student engagement in Chinese EFL courses. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18(1), 27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00263-0
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186-204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926
Wu, J.-H., Tennyson, R. D., & Hsia, T.-L. (2010). A study of student satisfaction in a blended e-learning system environment. Computers & Education, 55(1), 155-164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.12.012
Wu, J.-H., & Wang, Y.-M. (2006). Measuring KMS success: A respecification of the DeLone and McLean’s model. Information & Management, 43(6), 728-739. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2006.05.002
Xiao, J. (2019). Digital transformation in higher education: Critiquing the five-year development plans (2016–2020) of 75 Chinese universities. Distance Education, 40(4), 515-533. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2019.1680272
Yang, H.-H., & Su, C.-H. (2017). Learner behaviour in a MOOC practice-oriented course: An empirical study integrating TAM and TPB. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(5).
https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i5.2991
Yu, Z., Xu, W., & Sukjairungwattana, P. (2022). Meta-analyses of differences in blended and traditional learning outcomes and students’ attitudes. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 926947. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.926947
Yuen, A. H. K., & Ma, W. W. K. (2008). Exploring teacher acceptance of e‐learning technology. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 36(3), 229-243. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598660802232779
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Yuezhen Tao
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
A separate Copyright Form will be sent to authors whose paper is accepted for publication.
