The Influence of Perceived Learning Management System Quality on Student Engagement in the Educational Technology Study Program

Abdul Rahman; Fida Fadillah; Syefa Az Zahra

doi:10.58230/josse.v3i2.819

Authors

Abdul Rahman Universitas Lambung Mangkurat
Fida Fadillah Universitas Lambung Mangkurat
Syefa Az Zahra Universitas Lambung Mangkurat

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.58230/josse.v3i2.819

Keywords:

Perceived System Quality, Learning Management System, Student Engagement, Educational Technology

Abstract

This study aims to determine the effect of the perceived quality of the Learning Management System (LMS) on student engagement in the Educational Technology Study Program. The study used a quantitative approach with a cross-sectional survey design, involving 45 students as participants, selected through purposive sampling based on having participated in learning through the Moodle-based LMS for one semester (16 meetings). Data were collected using the LMS Quality Scale (25 items, covering five dimensions, namely system quality, information quality, instructional quality, interaction quality, and learning quality) and the Online Student Engagement/OSE Scale (19 items) to measure student learning engagement. Both instruments were first pilot-tested with 42 respondents before being used in the main data collection. Data analysis included validity and reliability tests (Cronbach's Alpha), classical assumption tests (normality, linearity, and heteroscedasticity), Pearson correlation, and simple linear regression. The results showed that all instrument items were valid and reliable (Cronbach's Alpha LMS Quality Scale = 0.968; OSE Scale = 0.942). The classical assumption tests were fully met. The results of the correlation analysis showed a positive and significant relationship between perceived LMS quality and student engagement (r = 0.593; p < 0.05). The regression analysis produced the equation Y = 38.834 + 0.385X with F = 23.300 (p < 0.05) and a coefficient of determination (R²) of 0.351, which means that perceived LMS quality contributed 35.1% to the variation in student engagement, with an effect size (Cohen's f²) of 0.542 (large category). These findings confirm that LMS quality plays an important role in encouraging student engagement in technology-based learning.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Adedoyin, O. B., & Soykan, E. (2023). Covid-19 pandemic and online learning: The challenges and opportunities. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(2), 863–875. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1813180

Al Mulhem, A. (2020). Investigating the effects of quality factors and organizational factors on university students’ satisfaction of e-learning system quality. Cogent Education, 7(1), Artikel 1787004. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2020.1787004

Al-Fraihat, D., Joy, M., Masa’deh, R., & Sinclair, J. (2020). Evaluating E-learning systems success: An empirical study. Computers in Human Behavior, 102, 67–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.08.004

Alotaibi, R. S., & Alshahrani, S. M. (2022). An extended DeLone and McLean’s model to determine the success factors of e-learning platform. PeerJ Computer Science, 8, Artikel e876. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.876

Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., & Furlong, M. J. (2008). Student engagement with school: Critical conceptual and methodological issues of the construct. Psychology in the Schools, 45(5), 369–386. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20303

Bond, M., Buntins, K., Bedenlier, S., Zawacki-Richter, O., & Kerres, M. (2020). Mapping research in student engagement and educational technology in higher education: A systematic evidence map. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17(1), Artikel 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0176-8

Bozkurt, A., Jung, I., Xiao, J., Vladimirschi, V., Schuwer, R., Egorov, G., Lambert, S. R., Al-Freih, M., Pete, J., Olcott, D., Rodes, V., Aranciaga, I., Bali, M., Alvarez, A. V., Roberts, J., Pazurek, A., Raffaghelli, J. E., Panagiotou, N., de Coëtlogon, P., … Paskevicius, M. (2020). A global outlook to the interruption of education due to COVID-19 pandemic: Navigating in a time of uncertainty and crisis. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 1–126. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3878572

Costa, C., Alvelos, H., & Teixeira, L. (2012). The use of Moodle e-learning platform: A study in a Portuguese university. Procedia Technology, 5, 334–343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.protcy.2012.09.037

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (Edisi ke-5). SAGE Publications.

Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008

DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (2003). The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: A ten-year update. Journal of Management Information Systems, 19(4), 9–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2003.11045748

Dhawan, S. (2020). Online learning: A panacea in the time of COVID-19 crisis. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 49(1), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239520934018

Dixson, M. D. (2015). Measuring student engagement in the online course: The Online Student Engagement Scale (OSE). Online Learning, 19(4), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v19i4.561

Ferguson, R. (2012). Learning analytics: Drivers, developments and challenges. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 4(5/6), 304–317. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTEL.2012.051816

Field, A. (2024). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (Edisi ke-6). SAGE Publications.

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

Garrison, D. R., & Anderson, T. (2003). E-learning in the 21st century: A framework for research and practice. RoutledgeFalmer.

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (Edisi ke-8). Cengage Learning.

Henrie, C. R., Halverson, L. R., & Graham, C. R. (2015). Measuring student engagement in technology-mediated learning: A review. Computers & Education, 90, 36–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.09.005

Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020, 27 Maret). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. EDUCAUSE Review. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/3/the-difference-between-emergency-remote-teaching-and-online-learning

Hwee, J., Koh, L., Yen, R., & Kan, P. (2020). Perceptions of learning management system quality, satisfaction, and usage: Differences among students of the arts. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 36(3), 36–49. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.5284

Kahu, E. R. (2013). Framing student engagement in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 38(5), 758–773. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.598505

Kaliisa, R., Misiejuk, K., López-Pernas, S., Khalil, M., & Saqr, M. (2024). Have learning analytics dashboards lived up to the hype? A systematic review of impact on students’ achievement, motivation, participation and attitude. Dalam Proceedings of the 14th Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference (LAK '24) (hlm. 295–304). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3636555.3636884

Kuh, G. D. (2009). What student affairs professionals need to know about student engagement. Journal of College Student Development, 50(6), 683–706. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.0.0099

Martin, F., & Bolliger, D. U. (2018). Engagement matters: Student perceptions on the importance of engagement strategies in the online learning environment. Online Learning Journal, 22(1), 205–222. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i1.1092

Martin, F., Sun, T., & Westine, C. D. (2020). A systematic review of research on online teaching and learning from 2009 to 2018. Computers & Education, 159, Artikel 104009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104009

Martin, F., Wang, C., & Sadaf, A. (2018). Student perception of helpfulness of facilitation strategies that enhance instructor presence, connectedness, engagement and learning in online courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 37, 52–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2018.01.003

Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (2012). Distance education: A systems view (Edisi ke-3). Wadsworth Publishing Company.

Najmul Islam, A. K. M. (2014). Sources of satisfaction and dissatisfaction with a learning management system in post-adoption stage: A critical incident technique approach. Computers in Human Behavior, 30, 249–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.09.010

Ningsih, S., Suhardi, M., Sari, I. N., Wulan, D. S., Fadillah, M., & Amalia, N. (2025). Implementasi Learning Management System (LMS) di lingkungan pendidikan tinggi. EDUTECH: Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan Berbantuan Teknologi, 5(2), 422–432. https://doi.org/10.51878/edutech.v5i2.6370

Prabowo, H., & Bramulya Ikhsan, R. (2022). Student engagement mechanism of online learning: The effect of service quality on Learning Management System. International Journal on Informatics Visualization, 6(3), 681–687. https://doi.org/10.30830/joiv.6.3.1263

Redmond, P., Abawi, L. A., Brown, A., Henderson, R., & Heffernan, A. (2018). An online engagement framework for higher education. Online Learning Journal, 22(1), 183–204. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i1.1175

Rulinawaty, Samboteng, L., Purwanto, A. J., Kuncoro, S., Jasrial, Tahilili, M. H., Efendi, Y., & Karyana, A. (2024). Investigating the influence of the updated DeLone and McLean information system (IS) success model on the effectiveness of learning management system (LMS) implementation. Cogent Education, 11(1), Artikel 2365611. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2365611

Siemens, G. (2013). Learning analytics: The emergence of a discipline. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(10), 1380–1400. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764213498851

Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2019). Using multivariate statistics (Edisi ke-7). Pearson.

Turnbull, D., Chugh, R., & Luck, J. (2021). Learning management systems: A review of the research methodology literature in Australia and China. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 44(2), 164–178. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2020.1737002

Viberg, O., Hatakka, M., Bälter, O., & Mavroudi, A. (2018). The current landscape of learning analytics in higher education. Computers in Human Behavior, 89, 98–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.07.027