Tóm tắt:
Mục tiêu của bài viết này nhằm nghiên cứu các yếu tố ảnh hưởng đến sự hài lòng (SHL) của sinh viên với chất lượng dạy học trực tuyến tại các trường đại học ngoài công lập trên địa bàn Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh (TP. HCM), từ đó nâng cao chất lượng học tập của sinh viên cũng như nâng cao hiệu quả giảng dạy tại các cơ sở giáo dục đại học trên địa bàn TP. HCM. Bài viết kết hợp phương pháp nghiên cứu định tính và định lượng thông qua bảng câu hỏi được cấu trúc sẵn với quy mô mẫu nghiên cứu là 468 quan sát được xử lý và phân tích bằng phần mềm SPSS và AMOS. Kết quả nghiên cứu cho thấy, đặc điểm giảng viên, nội dung giảng dạy, chất lượng hệ thống, dịch vụ hỗ trợ, thiết kế khóa học và điều kiện học tập có tác động tích cực đến SHL của sinh viên với chất lượng giảng dạy trực tuyến. Từ kết quả nghiên cứu, nhóm tác giả đề xuất một số hàm ý quản trị nhằm khắc phục một số hạn chế đối với hình thức dạy trực tuyến, qua đó đưa ra các giải pháp phù hợp đối với công tác giảng dạy. Điều này sẽ góp phần tạo cơ sở cho việc đẩy mạnh công tác giảng dạy kết hợp giữa phương pháp dạy trực tuyến và phương pháp giảng dạy trực tiếp nhằm nâng cao hiệu quả học tập của sinh viên.
Tài liệu tham khảo:
- Ahern, T. C., & Repman, J. (1994). The effects of technology on online education. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 26(4), 537-546.
- Arbaugh, J. B., & Duray, R. (2002). Technological and structural characteristics, student learning and satisfaction with web-based courses: An exploratory study of two on-line MBA programs. Management learning, 33(3), 331-347.
- Bearden, W. O., & Oliver, R. L. (1985). The role of public and private complaining in satisfaction with problem resolution. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 19(2), 222-240.
- Bhowmik, S., & Bhattacharya, M. D. (2021). Factors influencing online learning in higher education in the emergency shifts of COVID 19. The Online Journal of Distance Education and e-Learning, 9(1), 74-83.
- Bhuasiri, W., Xaymoungkhoun, O., Zo, H., Rho, J. J., & Ciganek, A. P. (2012). Critical success factors for e-learning in developing countries: A comparative analysis between ICT experts and faculty. Computers & Education, 58(2), 843-855.
- Bhuasiri, W., Xaymoungkhoun, O., Zo, H., Rho, J. J., & Ciganek, A. P. (2012). Critical success factors for e-learning in developing countries: A comparative analysis between ICT experts and faculty. Computers & Education, 58(2), 843-855.
- Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). E-learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning. john Wiley & sons.
- Collis, B. (1995). Networking and distance learning for teachers: A classification of possibilities. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 4(2), 117-135.
- Ehlers, U. D. (2004). Quality in e-learning from a learner's perspective. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning, 7(1).
- Elumalai, K. V., Sankar, J. P., Kalaichelvi, R., John, J. A., Menon, N., Alqahtani, M. S. M., & Abumelha, M. A. (2021). Factors affecting the quality of e-learning during the COVID-19 pandemic from the perspective of higher education students. COVID-19 and Education: Learning and Teaching in a Pandemic-Constrained Environment, 189.
- Gamage, D., Fernando, S., & Perera, I. (2014). Factors affecting to effective eLearning: Learners Perspective. Scientific Research Journal (SCIRJ), 2(5), 42-48.
- Glen, P., & McManus, M. (2013). Geeks & Non-Geeks. From Contraxioms to Collaboration in Higher Education. EDUCAUSE Review, 48(3), 20-22.
- Hadullo, K., Oboko, R., & Omwenga, E. (2018). Factors affecting asynchronous e-learning quality in developing countries university settings. International journal of Education and Development using ICT, 14(1).
- Harasim, L. (2000). Shift happens: Online education as a new paradigm in learning. The Internet and higher education, 3(1-2), 41-61.
- Harvey, L., Green, D., & Burrows, A. (1993). Assessing quality in higher education: a transbinary research project. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 18(2), 143-148.
- Kotler, P. (2012). Kotler on marketing. Simon and Schuster.
- Kumar, H. N., Manjunath, S. J., & Kumar, G. A. (2012). Role of UIDAI in financial inclusion. International Journal of Managment, IT and Engineering, 2(10), 627-637.
- Lee, S. M., Lim, M. H., Jung, J. Y., Hwang, Y. S., & Kim, S. H. (2010). Recognition and performance of preschool teachers on children's oral health in Seoul. Journal of Korean society of Dental Hygiene, 10(3), 449-457.
- Maheshwari, G., & Thomas, S. (2017). An analysis of the effectiveness of the constructivist approach in teaching business statistics. Informing Science, 20, 83–97.
- Martínez-Argüelles, M. J., & Batalla-Busquets, J. M. (2016). Perceived service quality and student loyalty in an online university. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(4), 264-279.
- Mohammadi, H. (2015). Investigating users’ perspectives on e-learning: An integration of TAM and IS success model. Computers in human behavior, 45, 359-374.
- Nichols, M. (2003). A theory for eLearning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 6(2), 1-10.
- Oblinger, E. D. U. C. A. U. S. E., Oblinger, J., Roberts, G., McNeely, B., Windham, C., Hartman, J., ... & Kvavik, R. (2005). Educating the net generation (Vol. 272). Brockport Bookshelf, Book.
- Oh, E. G., Chang, Y., & Park, S. W. (2020). Design review of MOOCs: Application of e-learning design principles. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 32, 455-475.
- Oliver, R. L., & Westbrook, R. A. (1993). Profiles of consumer emotions and satisfaction in ownership and usage. The Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behavior, 6, 12-27.
- Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. (1985). A conceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research. Journal of Marketing, 49(4), 41-50.
- Pham, L., Limbu, Y. B., Bui, T. K., Nguyen, H. T., & Pham, H. T. (2019). Does e-learning service quality influence e-learning student satisfaction and loyalty? Evidence from Vietnam. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), 1-26.
- Phipps, R., & Merisotis, J. (2000). Quality on the Line: Benchmarks for Success in Internet-Based Distance Education.
- 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.
- Salman, N., Mustafa, M. S., Al-Shaalan, A., & Al-Mannai, M. (2021). Technological Environmental Education in the Arab World: Case of Kingdom of Bahrain. In 2021 Third International Sustainability and Resilience Conference: Climate Change (pp. 95-100). IEEE.
- Seddon, P. B. (1997). A respecification and extension of the DeLone and McLean model of IS success. Information systems research, 8(3), 240-253.
- Selim, H. M. (2007). Critical success factors for e-learning acceptance: Confirmatory factor models. Computers & education, 49(2), 396-413.
- Spreng, R. A., & Mackoy, R. D. (1996). An empirical examination of a model of perceived service quality and satisfaction. Journal of retailing, 72(2), 201-214.
- Webster, J., & Hackley, P. (1997). Teaching effectiveness in technology-mediated distance learning. Academy of management journal, 40(6), 1282-1309.
- Yew, O. F., & Jambulingam, M. (2015). Critical success factors of e-learning implementation at educational institutions. J. Interdiscip. Res. Educ. 5(1).
- Zeithaml, V. A. (2000). Service quality, profitability, and the economic worth of customers: what we know and what we need to learn. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 28, 67-85.
Abstract:
This article aims to analyze the factors affecting student satisfaction with the quality of online teaching at non-public universities in Ho Chi Minh City (HCMC), thereby improving students' learning quality and teaching efficiency at higher education institutions in the city. HCM. The article combines qualitative and quantitative research methods through a pre-structured questionnaire with a sample size of 468 observations processed and analyzed using SPSS and AMOS software. The research results show that the characteristics of lecturers, teaching content, system quality, support services, course design, and learning conditions positively affect student satisfaction with online teaching. From the research results, the authors propose some administrative implications to overcome some limitations of online teaching, thereby offering appropriate solutions for teaching. This study will create a basis for promoting online and face-to-face teaching methods to improve student learning efficiency.