open, digital, online, education, distance education

Students' Satisfaction Forecasting Factors of the Hellenic Open University


Theodoros Iliou
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6925-1340
Androniki Tamvakis
George Anastassopoulos
Yiannis Giossos
Abstract

The purpose of this research was to investigate whether certain factors could predict the satisfaction of students of the Hellenic Open University (HOU) from their studies and the results were compared with corresponding surveys conducted for other universities. Based on the data collected from the questionnaire and in accordance with the results of the Ali, Ramay & Shahzad (2011) survey, the conclusion is that the majority of students attending HOU’s distance education programs are pleased at a fairly high percentage of student performance, of the quality of the curriculum and the studentstudent interaction. In terms of gender, statistical analysis did not show a significant gender impact on the average satisfaction rates of students, but showed significant differences in age. More specifically, the satisfaction of the interaction with the teacher consultant is increasing for students in the age group over 50 and the performance of the counseling professor differs for those over the age of 50 from those under the age of 40. Researchers' views differ in relation to the importance of age but this may have to do with the sample of research. In our survey, 98% of the students were over 30 years of age, while in Shehab's study 15% of her sample was under 20 years of age. The findings of the survey showed a strong correlation of student satisfaction with program evaluation, moderate positive correlation of student satisfaction with teacher performance and weak positive correlation of student satisfaction with studentprofessor, while in the study of Ali, Ramay & Shahzad (2011) there is a strong correlation of student satisfaction with teacher performance and program evaluation and moderate correlation with student-teacher interaction.

In order to investigate the prognosis of the independent variable (students satisfaction) from the three factors mentioned above, the statistical method of stepwise regression was used and findings show that the program evaluation was responsible for 34% of the satisfaction variance, while the other variables introduced later did not interpret an extra percentage of the variance of pleasure. These results contradict the study by Ali, Ramay & Shahzad (2011), where all three factors contribute greatly to the interpretation-prediction of student satisfaction. The conclusion is that the satisfaction of students depends to a large extent on the evaluation of the program and more specifically on whether the students acquire valuable learning experiences from the group counseling meetings if the work they have done is useful, if the educational material is useful and adequate, if the objectives of the thematic unit were clear and understandable, if the processes of control and evaluation of their learning paths were pedagogically correct and finally if the planned hours of study was adequate to meet the student needs. All the above factors can be used by education managers and the relevant ministry to facilitate the learning process by using an effective teaching methodology and to provide methods and techniques to improve the quality of education provided by the HOU, improve the institution of distance learning in Greece in order to respond more to the interests and requirements of the students, to facilitate the adaptation of the student to the educational environment, as well as to facilitate the adaptation of the environment to the needs and characteristics of the student leading to achieve the purposes and objectives of education and student satisfaction is high.

Article Details
  • Section
  • Section 1
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
Ali, A., Ramay, M. I., & Shahzad, M. (2011). Key factors for determining student satisfaction in distance learning courses: A study of Allama Iqbal Open University (AIOU) Islamabad, Pakistan. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education-TOJDE, 12(2), 114-127.
Arbaugh, J. B. (2000). Virtual classroom characteristics and student satisfaction with internetbased MBA courses. Journal of Management Education, 24, 32-54.
Borich, G. (1988). Effective teaching methods. London: Merrill Publishing Company.
Burden, P. R., & Byrd, D. M. (1994). Methods effective teaching. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Ching K., Murphy D., & Jenkins W., (2002) The teacher's role in supporting a learner-centred learning environment: voices from a group of part time postgraduate students in Hong Kong, International Journal of lifelong education, vol. 21, No. 5 (September - October 2002), pp. 462-473.
Cooper, J. M. (1999). Classroom teaching skills. New York: Houghton Mifflin.
Danielson, C. (1996). Enhancing professional practice: a framework for teaching. Alexandria, ASCD.
Elliott, K. & Healy, M. (2001). Key factors influencing student satisfaction related to recruitment and retention. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 10: 1-11.
Garcl a-Aracil, A. (2009). European graduates’ level of satisfaction with higher education. Journal of Higher Education, 57(1): 1-21.
Harris, B.M. & Hill, J. (1982). Developmental teacher evaluation kit. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Dev. Lab.
Huang, H. (2002). Students' perceptions in an online mediated environment. International Journal of Instructional Media 29, 405-422.
Kauchak, D., & Eggen, P. D. (1994). Learning & teaching: Research-based methods. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
King, J. C., & Doerfert, D. L. (2000). Interaction in the distance education setting. Ανακτήθηκε 20 Ιανουαρίου 2018, από http://www.ssu.missouri.edu/ssu/aged/naerm/s-e-4.htm
Kuh, G. & Hu, S. (2001). The effects of student-faculty interaction in the 1990s. Review of Higher Education, 24(3): 309-332.
Marzo-Navarro, M., Iglesias, M. & Torres, M. (2005). A new management element for universities: satisfaction with the offered courses. International Journal of Educational Management, 19(6): 505-526.
Moore, M. G. (1989). Three types of interaction. Στο: Harry, K., Hohn, M., & Keegan, D., (Eπιμ.), Distance education: New perspectives (pp. 12-24). London: Routledge.
Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (1996). Distance education: A systems view. Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Muirhead, B. (2001). Interactivity research studies. Educational Technology & Society, 4(3). Ανακτήθηκε 20 Ιανουαρίου, 2018, από http://ifets.ieee.org/periodical/vol_3_2001/muirhead.html
Myers, C. B., & Myers, K. L. (1995). Effective teaching practices. Στο: Study Guide for the Professional Educator: A new Introduction to Teaching and Schools (pp. 82-115). Boston: Wadsworth.
Phipps. R., & Merisotis, J. (1999). What's the difference? A review of contemporary research on the effectiveness of distance learning in higher education. Washington DC: The Institute for Higher Education Policy.
Saphier, J., & Gower, R. (1987). The skilful teacher: Building your teaching skills. Carlisle, MA: Research for Better Teaching.
Shehab. S.A.J. (2007). Undergraduate Learners’ Perceptions of Blended Learning and its Relationship with Some Demographic and Experiential Variables at the Arab Open University- Bahrain Branch. Retrieved at 5 April, 2013 from: http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED500044.pdf.
Sherry, L. (1996). Issues in distance learning. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 1, 337-365. Ανακτήθηκε 9 Ιανουαρίου, 2018, από http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~lsherry/pubs/issues.html
Sojkin, B., Bartkowiak, P. & Skuza, A. (2012). Determinants of higher education choices and student satisfaction: the case of Poland. Higher Education, 63(5): 565-81.
Soo, K., & Bonk, C. (1998). Interaction: What does it mean in online distance education? Τόμ. 2. Στο: Ottrnann, Τ., & Tornek, Ι. (Eπιμ.), Proceedings of ED-MEDIA/ED-TELECOM 98 AACE Freiburg, Germany. Ανακτήθηκε 9 Φεβρουαρίου, 2013, από http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/
Thatch, E. C., & Murphy, K. (1995). Competencies for distance education Professionals. Educational Technology Research and Development, 43 (1), 57-72.
Weerasinghe, S, & Fernando, R. (2017). Students’ Satisfaction in Higher Education Literature Review. American Journal of Educational Research, 5(5): 533-539. doi: 10.12691/education-5-5-9.
Wong, H. K., & Wong, M. T. (1998). How to be an effective teacher: The first days of school. Mountain View, CA: Harry Wong Publications.
Ανδρεαδάκης, Ν. (2009-2010). Αποτελεσματικός εκπαιδευτικός. Ρόδος: Πανεπιστημιακές σημειώσεις. Πανεπιστήμιο Αιγαίου.
Ικανοποίηση. 2018. Στο Λεξικό της Νέας Ελληνικής Γλώσσας. Προσπελάστηκε στις 4/1/2018 από: http://www.greek-language.gr/greekLang/modern_greek/tools/lexica/triantafyllides/search.html?lq=ικανοποίηση&dq=
Most read articles by the same author(s)