A structural equation model of predictors of online learners’ engagement and satisfaction
Open accessAbstract
This study investigated the structural relationships among online learners’ teaching, social and cognitive presence, engagement, and satisfaction. Data were collected from graduate students enrolled in an online graduate program at a large Midwestern public university through online surveys. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to analyze the data. According to the results, teaching presence, cognitive presence, emotional engagement, behavioral engagement, and cognitive engagement were significant predictors of satisfaction and these determinants explained 88% of the variance in satisfaction. The results indicate that the dominant determinant of the satisfaction was teaching presence, which had direct and indirect effects on satisfaction. Moreover, the study revealed significant predictors of emotional, behavioral, cognitive and agentic engagement. Implications are discussed in terms of theoretical insights, practices for online learning environments, and further research directions.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
CP can be a strong predictor of students' emotional, cognitive, and behavioral engagement.
“CP can be a strong predictor of students' emotional, cognitive, and behavioral engagement”
From Exploring Relationships Between Undergraduate Students’ Perceived Community of Inquiry, Engagement, and Shared Metacognition in Asynchronous Online Courses (2026) · cites this paper as Kucuk & Richardson, 2019
TP may significantly influence emotional and agentic engagement.
“TP may significantly influence emotional and agentic engagement”
From Exploring Relationships Between Undergraduate Students’ Perceived Community of Inquiry, Engagement, and Shared Metacognition in Asynchronous Online Courses (2026) · cites this paper as Kucuk & Richardson, 2019
Emotional engagement was influenced by the availability of instructor feedback or activity choice.
“Our results also diverged from Kucuk and Richardson (2019), who found that emotional engagement was influenced by the availability of instructor feedback or activity choice.”
From Exploring Relationships Between Undergraduate Students’ Perceived Community of Inquiry, Engagement, and Shared Metacognition in Asynchronous Online Courses (2026) · cites this paper as Kucuk and Richardson (2019)
CP plays a central role in relation to learner engagement in asynchronous online courses.
“Similarly to previous research, our study confirmed the central role of CP in relation to learner engagement in asynchronous online courses (Kucuk & Richardson, 2019 ; Law et al., 2019 ; Yulian et al., 2025 ).”
From Exploring Relationships Between Undergraduate Students’ Perceived Community of Inquiry, Engagement, and Shared Metacognition in Asynchronous Online Courses (2026) · cites this paper as Kucuk & Richardson, 2019
Cites
School Engagement: Potential of the Concept, State of the Evidence
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543074001059 · Cited by 12,581 · cited 5× · see citing works
“Specifically, emotional engagement refers to students’ having high interest and positive emotions towards teachers, peers, the course, and the learning experience (Fredricks et al., 2004).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialCritical Inquiry in a Text-Based Environment: Computer Conferencing in Higher Education
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (1999) · The Internet and Higher Education · doi:10.1016/s1096-7516(00)00016-6 · Cited by 6,619 · see citing works
Practical issues in structural modeling
BENTLER, P. M., & CHOU, C.-P. (1987) · Sociological Methods & Research · doi:10.1177/0049124187016001004 · Cited by 5,804 · see citing works
ASSESSING TEACHING PRESENCE IN A COMPUTER CONFERENCING CONTEXT
Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, R., & Archer, W. (2001) · Online Learning · doi:10.24059/olj.v5i2.1875 · Cited by 1,885 · see citing works
The effectiveness of online and blended learning: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature
Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., & Baki, M. (2013) · Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education · doi:10.1177/016146811311500307 · Cited by 1,638 · see citing works
Shea, P., Sau Li, C., & Pickett, A. (2006) · The Internet and Higher Education · doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2006.06.005 · Cited by 740 · see citing works
Measuring Student Engagement in the Online Course: The Online Student Engagement Scale (OSE)
Dixson, M. D. (2015) · Online Learning · doi:10.24059/olj.v19i4.561 · Cited by 707 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Regarding online courses, engagement is one of the key factors affecting students’ persistence and improving learning efficiency (Dennen, Darabi, & Smith, 2007; Dixon, 2015; Kuh, 2003; Robinson & Hullinger, 2008).”
BackgroundNew Benchmarks in Higher Education: Student Engagement in Online Learning
Robinson, C. C., & Hullinger, H. (2008) · Journal of Education for Business · doi:10.3200/joeb.84.2.101-109 · Cited by 618 · see citing works
A systematic review of the Community of Inquiry survey
Stenbom, S. (2018) · The Internet and Higher Education · doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2018.06.001 · Cited by 225 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Online learner engagement: Conceptual definitions, research themes, and supportive practices
Martin, F., & Borup, J. (2022) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520.2022.2089147 · Cited by 220 · see citing works
Olesova, L., Sadaf, A., & Yan, W. (2026) · Technology, Knowledge and Learning · doi:10.1007/s10758-026-09953-y · Cited by 4 · see citing works
- Authors
- Kucuk, S., & Richardson, J. C.
- Affiliations
- Purdue University West Lafayette (US)
- Venue
- Online Learning
- Publisher
- The Online Learning Consortium
- Published
- 2019-06-01
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 2
- ISSN
- 1092-8235 (ISSN-L)
- 2472-5730
- 2472-5749
- OpenAlex
- W2947645025
- Cited by
- 155
- References
- 9
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 10
- FWCI
- 39.80
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Online Learning (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Purdue University
- Türkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma Kurumu
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Online Learning and Analytics
- Social Sciences › Education › Technology-Enhanced Education Studies
- Keywords
- student engagement, student satisfaction, teaching presence, social presence, cognitive presence, emotional engagement, behavioral engagement, cognitive engagement, agentic engagement, graduate students, online graduate programs
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
