The Effects of Student Engagement, Student Satisfaction, and

Perceived Learning in Online Learning Environments This

manuscript has been peer-reviewed, accepted, and endorsed by the
National Council of Professors of Educational Administration
(NCPEA) as a significant contribution to the scholarship and practice
of school administration and K-12 education. Julie A. Gray University
of West Florida Melanie DiLoreto University of West Florida Studies
have shown that course organization and structure, student
engagement, learner interaction, and instructor presence have
accounted for considerable variance in student satisfaction and
perceived learning in online learning environments through a range
of pathways, although no research to date has tested the
mediational relationship identified. This study expanded upon the
existing literature about online learning and the variables that
influence student satisfaction and perceived learning. The
researchers investigated the relationships among course
structure/organization, learner interaction, student engagement,
and instructor presence on student satisfaction and perceived
learning. The results of this study were intended to inform practice
related to increasing retention and improving the quality of online
teaching and learning. NCPEA International Journal of Educational
Leadership Preparation, Vol. 11, No. 1– May, 2016 ISSN: 2155-9635
© 2016 National Council of Professors of Educational Administration
Introduction “The landscape of distance education is changing”
(Eom, Ashill, & Wen, 2006, p. 215). As more universities are offering
online courses it is important for faculty to consider the changing
aspects of online learning environments, including course structure,
learner interaction, and instructor presence (Allen & Seaman, 2015).
One study in particular provided a model upon which to develop and
build this study (Eom et al., 2006), although our study varied in
methodology. For this study we investigated the effects of each of
these aspects in relation to student perceptions of their learning
and satisfaction. We further hypothesized that student engagement
would be a mediating variable. We hope the findings of this study
will inform practices related to increasing retention and improving
the quality of online teaching and learning. There were four primary
objectives of this research study. First, the researchers reviewed
existing studies and surveys about online learning environments,
student engagement, course structure, learner interaction,
instructor presence, and student perceptions of their satisfaction
and improved learning in such environments. Second, a new
instrument, the Student Learning and Satisfaction in Online
Learning Environments (SLS-OLE), was developed after a pilot study
and factor analyses were conducted (DiLoreto & Gray, 2015). Once
the data were determined to be valid and reliable, the SLS-OLE was
shared with all students enrolled in an online graduate program at a
regional comprehensive university in the southeast of the United
States (Gray & DiLoreto, 2015). Next, the data collected from this
questionnaire were interpreted to explore the relationships among
course structure and organization, learner interaction, and
instructor presence which have been reported to affect student
satisfaction and perceived learning in online learning environments
(Eom et al., 2006). Finally, the researchers investigated the
mediating effects, if any, that student engagement had on student
satisfaction and perceived learning (see Figure 1). Review of the
Literature This study investigated the relationships of course
structure, learner interaction (with each other and the instructor),
and instructor presence, considering a previous study by Eom et al.
(2006) as a model upon which to expand. Using structural equation
modeling to examine the “determinants of students’ satisfaction
and their perceived learning outcomes” (p. 216), Eom et al. (2006)
concluded that course structure, instructor feedback, self-
motivation, learning style, interaction, and instructor facilitation
significantly impacted student satisfaction. However, they
concluded that only instructor feedback and learning style
significantly affected perceived learning outcomes. They also
determined that student satisfaction was a significant predictor of
learning outcomes. Similarly, Richardson and Swan (2003)
concluded that students with high overall perceptions of social
presence scored high in terms of perceived learning and perceived
satisfaction with the instructor. They suggested that it is important
to focus on the interaction that takes place between students and
instructors. Thus, active learning and student engagement is
imperative for increased student learning and ultimately retention.
According to Swan (2001), clarity of design, interaction with
instructors, and active discussion among course participants
significantly influenced students’ satisfaction and perceived
learning. While there have been many studies about student
engagement in online learning environments, Kuh and his
colleagues described student self-reported learning gains, improved
social skills, and greater engagement in the learning process (Hu &
Kuh, 2001; Kuh & Hu, 2001; Kuh & Vesper, 2001). Chen, Lambert,
and Guidy (2010) further explored the effects of student
engagement based upon the items on the National Survey of
Student Engagement (NSSE) instrument (2008). As students are
expected to work more collaboratively with classmates, students’
perception of their engagement in their learning and participation in
courses increased (Duderstadt, Atkins, & Hoeweling, 2002;
Thurmond & Wambach, 2004). Course Structure and Organization
Course structure and organization include the development and
design of the course resources, curriculum, instructional strategies
and methodologies, course schedule, and overall planning of a
course before, during, and after a course is taught (Garrison,
Anderson, & Archer, 2000). Also known as instructional
management, course development should establish the “explicit
and implicit structural parameters and organizational guidelines” of
the course (Garrison et al., 2000, p. 101). Instructors provide details
about course expectations for assignments, due dates, guidelines,
assessment rubrics, and resources in order to facilitate students’
academic success and sustained learning (Author, 2015a). Viewed as
a critical variable that influences student perceptions about online
courses, course structure includes the objectives and expectations
of the course in order to accommodate and promote student
learning (Moore, 1991). Course infrastructure should be logically
organized, user-friendly, and detailed about the student learning
objectives (Eom et al., 2006). “Teachers need the expertise to
develop a class structure that stimulates social interaction and
affirms rigorous academic standards, while fostering independent
learning skills” (Muirhead, 2004, p. 50). If instructors lack the
technological skills to develop engaging courses, then course
designers may be considered to provide additional training,
support, and guidance (Vargas, 2014). Students’ perceptions of the
overall usability of the course are likely correlated to student
satisfaction and learning. In other words, the more organized and
logical the course layout, the more likely students will be satisfied
with their learning in the course (Eom et al., 2006). Jaggars and Xu
(2016) summarized the findings of several studies about online
course quality. They found that quality courses contained the
following characteristics: clearly written objectives, well-organized
content, variety of opportunities for interpersonal interaction, and
effective use of technology (Jaggars & Xu, 2016).