Factors Impacting Student Satisfaction with Blended Learning in English Courses: A Case Study of a Higher Vocational and Technical University in Sichuan, China
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background and Aim: This study investigates key factors influencing student satisfaction with blended English learning at a higher vocational and technical college in Sichuan, China. Against the backdrop of digital transformation in vocational education, the research focuses on five variables: system quality, information quality, course design quality, perceived ease of use, and perceived usefulness. Grounded in the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and Information Systems Success Theory, the study aims to validate their mechanisms of impact on satisfaction and enhance blended learning outcomes through strategic interventions. It particularly examines the practical application of the U-Campus platform in language courses, providing empirical insights for optimizing vocational education models.
Materials and Methods: A mixed-methods approach was employed, combining 90 valid questionnaires and 12 in-depth interviews with first-year students from three colleges (Materials Engineering, Economics & Management, and Arts). The questionnaire utilized a 29-item 5-point Likert scale, validated through expert content validity checks (IOC > 0.6) and reliability tests (Cronbach’s α > 0.7). A 16-week strategic intervention was implemented, with Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) revealing that course design quality (β = 0.290) and perceived usefulness (β = 0.282) were the strongest predictors of satisfaction, explaining 61.7% of variance (R² = 0.617). Paired t-tests confirmed significant post-intervention improvements across all variables (e.g., system quality mean increased from 3.81 to 4.02, p < .001), demonstrating the feasibility of pedagogical optimization.
Results: Findings reveal that system quality, information quality, and course design quality positively influence perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness, which subsequently impact student satisfaction. Course design quality (CDQ) and perceived usefulness (PU) were the strongest predictors of student satisfaction. The strategic interventions implemented led to significant improvements in these areas.
Conclusion: To improve student satisfaction in blended learning, institutions should focus on enhancing system functionality, optimizing course design, and increasing the perceived usefulness of learning activities. Future research should expand to additional vocational universities to enhance generalizability.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright on any article in the International Journal of Sociologies and Anthropologies Science Reviews is retained by the author(s) under the under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Permission to use text, content, images, etc. of publication. Any user to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose. But do not use it for commercial use or with the intent to benefit any business.
References
Al-Fraihat, D., Joy, M., & Sinclair, J. (2020). Evaluating the quality of e-learning platforms: A comprehensive review of the literature. Education and Information Technologies, 25(1), 1049–1075. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09910-0
Baker, R. S., Smith, L. A., & Rosé, C. P. (2019). Classifying student engagement from edtech interaction data. In Proceedings of the 9th International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference (pp. 180–189). https://doi.org/10.1145/3303772.3303777
Cheng, Y. M. (2019). How does task-technology fit influence cloud-based e-learning continuance and impact? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 35(5), 563–572. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12351
Cheng, Y. M. (2020). Students’ satisfaction and continuance intention of the cloud-based e-learning system: Roles of interactivity and course quality factors. Interactive Learning Environments, 28(6), 754–772. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1570884
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555
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/10.1080/07421222.2003.11045781
Etikan, I. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11
Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001
Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2008). Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles, and guidelines. Jossey-Bass.
Graham, C. R. (2006). Blended learning systems: Definition, current trends, and future directions. In C. J. Bonk & C. R. Graham (Eds.), The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs (pp. 3–21). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer Publishing.
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1995). Multivariate data analysis (4th ed.). Prentice Hall.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2014). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Pearson Education Limited.
Hsu, C. L., & Lu, H. P. (2004). Why do people use social networking sites? Computers in Human Behavior, 27(6), 2405–2416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.07.003
Jiang, L., & Zhang, X. (2017). The influence of course design quality on student satisfaction in blended English learning. Education Research Monthly, 9, 32–36.
Lee, M. C., Lin, H. Y., & Chen, C. P. (2019). Understanding e-learning continuance intention: A model extension from the expectation-confirmation model. International Journal of Online Pedagogy and Course Design, 9(3), 25–40.
Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 22(140), 1–55.
Mirabolghasemi, M., Amini, M., & Moghaddam, N. A. (2021). An investigation into the determinants of blended learning satisfaction from EFL learners’ perspective. Journal of Language and Translation, 11(2), 23–36. https://doi.org/10.22363/jlt.2021.11.2.23
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Oliver, R. L. (1993). A conceptual model of service quality and service satisfaction: Compatible goals, different concepts. Advances in Services Marketing and Management, 2, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1069-0964(09)02003-1
Roca, J. C., Chiu, C. M., & Martínez, F. J. (2006). Understanding e-learning continuance intention: An extension of the Technology Acceptance Model. Computers & Education, 48(3), 16–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.01.004
Rovinelli, R. J., & Hambleton, R. K. (1977). On the use of content specialists in the assessment of criterion-referenced test item validity. Dutch Journal of Educational Research, 2(2), 49–60.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
Shroff, R. H., Vogel, D. R., Coombes, J., & Lee, F. (2011). Student e-learning intrinsic motivation: A qualitative analysis. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 29(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.02902
Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008). Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences, 39(2), 273–315. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x
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
Waltz, C. F., Strickland, O. L., & Lenz, E. R. (2010). Measurement in nursing and health research (4th ed.). Springer Publishing Company.
Wang, H., & Wang, S. (2017). Predicting mobile hotel reservation adoption: Insight from a perceived value standpoint. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 66, 41–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2017.06.010
Wang, Z., & Sun, X. (2021). Improving English proficiency through blended learning in Chinese vocational education. Modern Educational Technology, 31(4), 45–53.
Zhang, D., Zhao, J. L., Zhou, L., & Nunamaker, J. F. (2020). Can e-learning replace traditional learning? Communications of the ACM, 47(3), 74–79. https://doi.org/10.1145/1761000.1761010
Zhang, H., Li, Y., & Zhang, W. (2022). An empirical study on the effect of blended learning in Chinese universities using U-Campus. Chinese E-Learning Journal, 19(2), 20–28.
Zhang, M., Zhao, X., & Venkatesh, V. (2019). Predicting the performance of business processes: A method based on process instance features and user behavior. Information & Management, 56(7), 103144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2019.03.004
Zhao, Y., & Breslow, L. (2013). The impact of an online master's degree on students’ perceptions of the usefulness of blended learning. Distance Education, 34(2), 166–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2013.795179
