A Framework for Evaluating Online Degree Programs through Student Satisfaction

Y

37

Models; Evaluation Methods; Online Courses; Student Satisfaction; Program Evaluation; Engineering Education; Public Colleges; College Students; Student Characteristics; College Faculty; Course Evaluation; Teacher Characteristics; Technological Literacy; Career Development

2472-5749
2472-5730

Student satisfaction is a key performance indicator in evaluating any degree program's performance. In light of the vast difference between online and traditional degree programs, factors that may significantly affect student satisfaction and thus contribute to the success of online degree programs still need to be explored. Previous literature on student satisfaction either focused on the course level or researched the factors for traditional face-to-face degree programs. This study shifts the focus to online degree programs by integrating the existing literature and proposing a new conceptual framework for evaluating online degree programs. The proposed conceptual framework includes six big categories of factors and three outcome variables related to student satisfaction. The theoretical underpinning of the conceptual framework was supported by a comprehensive literature review regarding each of the six factors. Data were collected from two online engineering degree programs in a large public university to assess the underlying relationships and identify the key factors affecting student satisfaction. This research contributes to the existing literature in the following four aspects: 1) it integrates the existing literature and proposes a new framework for evaluating online degree programs; 2) it identifies critical factors for evaluating online degree programs through student satisfaction; 3) it extends the definition and construct of student satisfaction, and assesses the construct from three dimensions; and 4) it provides suggestions to the policymakers such as school administrators and accreditation bodies. [Note: The page range (1-37) shown on the PDF is incorrect. The correct page range is 202-238.]

As Provided

2024

EJ1428203