Promoting Interaction to Enhance Student Perceived Learning and Satisfaction in a Large e-Flipped Accounting Classroom
Abstract
This research was conducted to investigate the effects of an e-flipped classroom in promoting interaction to enhance students’ perceived learning and satisfaction in a large accounting course. This research examines how e-flipped education, which incorporates pre- and in-class activities, affects students’ perceptions of their learning and satisfaction by encouraging learner-content, learner-instructor, and learner-learner interaction. Students enrolled in a second-year management accounting course made up the respondents. A questionnaire with seven indicators presenting each variable was used to gather data. The findings of this study revealed that all three interactions (i.e., learner-content, learner-instructor, and learner-learner interaction) were significant determinants of perceived student learning in the in-class activities, while only learner-content and learner-instructor interactions were the significant determinants of the student perceived learning in the pre-class activities. This study also shows that all three interactions significantly determined students’ satisfaction in both the pre-class and in-class activities. Moving forward, a well-designed online course with appropriate interactive activities is vital in promoting a supportive online learning experience.
Downloads
References
Alqurashi, E. (2019). Predicting student satisfaction and perceived learning within online learning environments. Distance Education, 40(1), 133–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2018.1553562
Astin, A. W. (1993). What matters in college: Four critical years revisited. Jossey-Bass.
Barbera, E., Clara, M., & Linder-Vanberschot, J. A. (2013). Factors influencing student satisfaction and perceived learning in online courses. E-Learning and Digital Media, 10(3), 226–235. https://doi.org/10.2304/elea.2013.10.3.226
Battalio, J. (2007). Interaction online: A reevaluation. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 8(4), 339–352.
Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Borokhovski, E., Wade, C. A., Tamim, R., Surkes, M. A., & Bethel, E. C. (2009). A meta-analysis of three types of interaction treatments in distance education. Review of Educational Research, 79(3), 1243–1289. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654309333844
Bickle, M. C., Rucker, R. D., & Burnsed, K. A. (2019). Online learning: Examination of attributes that promote student satisfaction. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 22(1), 1. https://ojdla.com/archive/spring221/bickle_rucker_burnsed221.pdf
Bolliger, D. U., & Martindale, T. (2004). Key factors for determining student satisfaction in online courses. International Journal on E-Learning, 3(1), 61–67.
Chan, S.-Y., Lam, Y. K., & Ng, T. F. (2018). Student’s perception on the initial experience of the flipped classroom in pharmacy education: Are we ready? Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 57(1), 62–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2018.1541189
Chejlyk, S. (2006). The effects of online course format and three components of student perceived interactions on overall course satisfaction. Capella University. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/117746/
Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice. American Association for Higher Education (AAHE) Bulletin, 39(7), 3–7. http://www.lonestar.edu/multimedia/sevenprinciples.pdf
Conrad, D. L. (2002). Engagement, excitement, anxiety, and fear: Learners’ experiences of starting an online course. The American Journal of Distance Education, 16(4), 205–226. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15389286AJDE1604_2
Croxton, R. A. (2014). The role of interactivity in student satisfaction and persistence in online learning. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 10(2), 314–325.
Dixson, M. D. (2012). Creating effective student engagement in online courses: What do students find engaging?. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 10(2), 1–13. https://scholarworks.iu.edu/journals/index.php/josotl/article/view/1744
Eom, S. B., Wen, H. J., & Ashill, N. (2006). The determinants of students’ perceived learning outcomes and satisfaction in university online education: An empirical investigation. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 4(2), 215–235. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4609.2006.00114.x
Fredericksen, E., Pickett, A., Shea, P., Pelz, W., & Swan, K. (2000). Factors influencing faculty satisfaction with asynchronous teaching and learning in the SUNY learning network. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 4(3). https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v4i3.1897
Fredericksen, E., Swan, K., Pelz, W., Pickett, A., & Shea, P. (2000). Student satisfaction and perceived learning with online courses - Principles and examples from the SUNY learning network. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Network, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v4i2.1899
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
Garner, B., & Chan, M. (2019). Student perceptions of learning and engagement in a flipped versus lecture Course. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, 82(3), 357-369. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329490619833173
Gilboy, M. B., Heinerichs, S., & Pazzaglia, G. (2015). Enhancing student engagement using the flipped classroom. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 47(1), 109–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneb.2014.08.008
Goh, C. F., Leong, C. M., Kasmin, K., Hii, P., & Tan, O. (2017). Students’ experiences, learning outcomes and satisfaction in e-learning. Journal of E-Learning and Knowledge Society, 13, 117–128. https://doi.org/10.20368/1971-8829/1298
Gray, J. A., & DiLoreto, M. (2016). The effects of student engagement, student satisfaction, and perceived learning in online learning environments. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 11, 98–119.
Hamdan, K. M., Al-Bashaireh, A. M., Zahran, Z., Al-Daghestani, A., Al-Habashneh, S., & Shaheen, A. M. (2021). University students’ interaction, internet self-efficacy, self-regulation and satisfaction with online education during pandemic crises of COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2). International Journal of Educational Management, 35(3), 713–725. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-11-2020-0513
Hiltz, S. R. (1988). Teaching in a Virtual Classroom. A Virtual Classroom on EIES: Final Evaluation Report. (Vol. 2). New Jersey Institute of Technology.
Ismail, S. S., & Abdulla, S. A. (2019). Virtual flipped classroom: New teaching model to grant the learners knowledge and motivation. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 9(2), 168–183. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.478
Keeler, L. C. (2006). Student satisfaction and types of interaction in distance education courses. Colorado State University. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/121209
Knapp, N. F. (2018). Increasing interaction in a flipped online classroom through video conferencing. TechTrends, 62(6), 618–624. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-018-0336-z
Kuo, Y.-C. (2014). Accelerated online learning: Perceptions of interaction and learning outcomes among African American students. The American Journal of Distance Education, 28(4), 241–252. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2014.959334
Kuo, Y.-C., Walker, A. E., Belland, B. R., & Schroder, K. E. E. (2013). A predictive study of student satisfaction in online education programs. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 14(1), 16–39. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v14i1.1338
Kuo, Y.-C., Walker, A. E., Schroder, K. E. E., & Belland, B. R. (2014). Interaction, internet self-efficacy, and self-regulated learning as predictors of student satisfaction in online education courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 20, 35–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.10.001
Li, F., & Jhang, F.-H. (2020). The relationship between interaction and student satisfaction with online learning in social work undergraduates in China. Proceedings of the 2020 6th International Conference on Social Science and Higher Education (ICSSHE 2020), 505, 23-27. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.201214.004
Mabrito, M. (2001). Facilitating interactivity in an online business writing course. Business Communication Quarterly, 64(3), 81–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/108056990106400308
McCormack, V. (2010). Increasing teacher candidate responses through the application of Voice- Thread. International Journal of Arts and Sciences, 3(11), 160–165. http://www.openaccesslibrary.org/images/RLN147_Virginia_McCormack.pdf
Meyer, K. A. (2014). Student engagement in online learning: What works and why. ASHE higher education report, 40(6), 1–114. https://doi.org/10.1002/aehe.20018
Moore, J. (2014). Effects of online interaction and instructor presence on students’ satisfaction and success with online undergraduate public relations courses. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 69(3), 271–288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077695814536398
Moore, M. G. (1989). Editorial: Three types of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923648909526659
Moore, M. G. (1991). Editorial: Distance education theory. American Journal of Distance Education, 5(3), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923649109526758
Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (1996). Distance education: A systems view. Wadsworth.
Noel-Levitz, R. (2018). 2018 National Student Satisfaction and Priorities Report. Ruffalo Noel Levitz. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED606626.pdf
Parahoo, S., Santally, M., Rajabalee, Y., & Harvey, H. (2015). Designing a predictive model of student satisfaction in online learning. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/08841241.2015.1083511
Parahoo, S. K., Harvey, H. L., & Tamim, R. M. (2013). Factors influencing student satisfaction in universities in the Gulf region: does gender of students matter? Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 23(2), 135–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/08841241.2013.860940
Phillips, C., & O’Flaherty, J. (2019). Evaluating nursing students’ engagement in an online course using flipped virtual classrooms. Student Success, 10(1), 59–71. https://doi.org/10.5204/ssj.v10i1.1098
Playfoot, D. (2023). Flipped Classrooms in Undergraduate Statistics: Online Works Just Fine. Teaching of Psychology, 50(3), 243-247. https://doi.org/10.1177/00986283211046319
Rawas, H., Bano, N., & Alaidarous, S. (2020). Comparing the effects of individual versus group face-to-face class activities in flipped classroom on student’s test performances. Health Professions Education, 6(2), 153–161.
Salas-Rueda, R.-A., De-La-Cruz-Martínez, G., Alvarado-Zamorano, C., & Prieto-Larios, E. (2022). The collaborative wall: A technological means to improving the teaching-learning process about physics. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 12(4), 205–231. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.1167
Sher, A. (2009). Assessing the relationship of student-instructor and student-student interaction to student learning and satisfaction in web-based online learning environment. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 8(2), 102–120.
Stöhr, C., Demazière, C., & Adawi, T. (2020). The polarizing effect of the online flipped classroom. Computers & Education, 147, 103789. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103789
Tuovinen, J. (2000). Multimedia distance education interactions. Educational Media International, 37(1), 16–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/095239800361473
Walker, C. E., & Kelly, E. (2007). Online instruction: Student satisfaction, kudos, and pet peeves. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 8(4), 309–319.
Wong, E. M. L. (2023a). Investigating the influence of motivational strategies on accounting students’ metacognitive self-regulated learning: The case of e-flipped classrooms. In E. Meletiadou (Ed.), Handbook of research on redesigning teaching, learning, and assessment in the digital era (pp. 106–122). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-6684-8292-6.ch006
Wong, E. M. L. (2023b). Learning engagement activities in promoting student interactions and perceived online learning experience during the Covid-19 pandemic. In J. Keengwe & J. Gikandi (Eds.), Competence-based curriculum and e-learning in higher education (pp. 51–83). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-6684-6586-8.ch003
Wong, E. M. L., Yap, C. Y. L., & Md Deni, A. R. (2019). Promoting student engagement using flipped classroom in large introductory financial accounting class. In Proceedings of the 2019 3rd International Conference on Education and E-Learning (ICEEL ‘19), USA (pp. 61–66). https://doi.org/10.1145/3371647.3371658
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors are confirming that they are the authors of the submitted article, which will be published online in the Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal (for short: CEPS Journal) by University of Ljubljana Press (University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Education, Kardeljeva ploščad 16, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia). The Author’s/Authors’ name(s) will be evident in the article in the journal. All decisions regarding layout and distribution of the work are in the hands of the publisher.
- The Authors guarantee that the work is their own original creation and does not infringe any statutory or common-law copyright or any proprietary right of any third party. In case of claims by third parties, authors commit themselves to defend the interests of the publisher, and shall cover any potential costs.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
