The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Multi-dimensional students’ evaluation of e-learning systems in the higher education context: An empirical investigation
Open accessAbstract
There has been little research on assessment of learning management systems (LMS) within educational organizations as both a web-based learning system for e-learning and as a supportive tool for blended learning environments. This study proposes a conceptual e-learning assessment model, hexagonal e-learning assessment model (HELAM) suggesting a multi-dimensional approach for LMS evaluation via six dimensions: (1) system quality, (2) service quality, (3) content quality, (4) learner perspective, (5) instructor attitudes, and (6) supportive issues. A survey instrument based on HELAM has been developed and applied to 84 learners. This sample consists of students at both undergraduate and graduate levels who are users of a web-based learning management system, U-Link, at Brunel University, UK. The survey instrument has been tested for content validity, reliability, and criterion-based predictive validity. The analytical results strongly support the appropriateness of the proposed model in evaluating LMSs through learners' satisfaction. The explanatory factor analysis showed that each of the six dimensions of the proposed model had a significant effect on the learners' perceived satisfaction. Findings of this research will be valuable for both academics and practitioners of e-learning systems.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
An Index of Factorial Simplicity
Kaiser, H. F. (1974) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02291575 · Cited by 14,898
The DeLone and McLean Model of Information Systems Success: A Ten-Year Update
(2003) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.1080/07421222.2003.11045748 · Cited by 11,791
Reliability and Validity Assessment
Carmines, E., & Zeller, R. (1979) · doi:10.4135/9781412985642 · Cited by 5,884
Sun, P.-C., Tsai, R. J., Finger, G., Chen, Y.-Y., & Yeh, D. (2008) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2006.11.007 · Cited by 2,726
Critical success factors for e-learning acceptance: Confirmatory factor models
Selim, H. M. (2007) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2005.09.004 · Cited by 1,055
Cited by
Howard, M. C. (2016) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2015.1087664 · Cited by 1,349
Evaluating E-learning systems success: An empirical study
Al-Fraihat, D., Joy, M., Masa'deh, R., & Sinclair, J. (2020) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2019.08.004 · Cited by 1,350
Investigating users’ perspectives on e-learning: An integration of TAM and IS success model
Mohammadi, H. (2015) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.07.044 · Cited by 779
Four key challenges to the design of blended learning: A systematic literature review
Boelens, R., De Wever, B., & Voet, M. (2017) · Educational Research Review · doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2017.06.001 · Cited by 698
E-learning, M-learning and D-learning: Conceptual definition and comparative analysis
Kumar Basak, S., Wotto, M., & Bélanger, P. (2018) · E-Learning and Digital Media · doi:10.1177/2042753018785180 · Cited by 658
Metadata
- Authors
- Ozkan, S., & Koseler, R.
- Venue
- Computers & Education
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2009-12
- Volume
- 53
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1285-1296
- ISSN
- 0360-1315 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2147316766
- Cited by
- 655
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 94.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Multi-dimensional students’ evaluation of e-learning systems in the higher education context: An empirical investigation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.06.011
- The paper
- Ozkan, S., & Koseler, R. (2009). Multi-dimensional students’ evaluation of e-learning systems in the higher education context: An empirical investigation. Computers & Education. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.06.011
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.