Content uploaded by Hafiz Muhammad Wasif Rasheed
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Hafiz Muhammad Wasif Rasheed on Oct 10, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
ACADEMIC PAPER
The relationship between e-learning and academic
performance of students
Hafiz Muhammad Wasif Rasheed
1
| Yuanqiong He
1
| Junaid Khalid
2
|
Hafiz Muhammad Usman Khizar
3
| Suhail Sharif
3
1
School of Management Department (Business
Administration), Huazhong University of
Science and Technology (HUST), Wuhan,
China
2
School of Management, University of Science
and Technology China (USTC), Hefei, China
3
Department of Management Science, Islamia
University of Bahawalpur (IUB), Bahawalpur,
Pakistan
Correspondence
Hafiz Muhammad Wasif Rasheed, School of
Management, Department (Business
Administration), Huazhong University of
Science and Technology (HUST),
Wuhan, China.
Email: wasifrasheed211@gmail.com
The purpose of this paper is to investigate the relationship of service quality dimen-
sions (tangibility, responsiveness, assurance, reliability, empathy, and e-learning) on
student's academic performance through student motivation, and student satisfac-
tion. Primary data were collected from 384 participants studying in higher education
institutes (HEI's) in the Punjab province of Pakistan and the research model was
empirically tested. The findings reveal that all service quality dimensions (tangibility,
responsiveness, assurance, reliability, empathy, and e-learning) are positively associ-
ated with student's academic performance through student's motivation and student
satisfaction. This study makes a substantial contribution to the literature of service
quality, by adding a novel dimension “e-learning”into the most renowned and fre-
quently used SERVQUAL (tangibility, reliability, empathy, assurance, and responsive-
ness) model. By doing so we not only establish the link between e-learning and
student's academic performance through student satisfaction and student motivation
but also extended the SERVQUAL model by incorporating an important
neglected area.
1|INTRODUCTION
The educational sector is one of the most important parts of the econ-
omy. Now a day's competition has increased within the education sec-
tor. Therefore academicians and researchers are emphasizing their
attention toward the educational sector (Ahmed et al., 2010; Uzelac,
Gligori
c, & Krcˇo, 2018). In this time of globalization & technological
revolution, education is considered as the priority for every human
being. It assumes a vital part in the advancement of human capital and
is connected with individuals' prosperity and opportunity for better
living (Battle & Lewis, 2002; Boateng, Asare, Manu, Sefah, &
Adomako, 2020). The education sector has turned into an industry in
most of the nations of the world, particularly in the UK, UAE, Malaysia,
etc., and this element is also affected in different parts of the world
particularly the nations with tuition based systems (DeShields, Kara, &
Kaynak, 2005; Ijaz, Irfan, Shahbaz, Awan, & Sabir, 2011; Tanveer &
Hassan, 2020). The solid educational frameworks which have a power-
ful and skilled organization, give more prominent results to the stu-
dents and are ready to give high-quality services, those higher
education institutions (HEIs) regularly appreciate high talented stu-
dents (Ali, Jusof, Ali, Mokhtar, & Salamat, 2009; Espinoza, González,
McGinn, Castillo, & Sandoval, 2019; Hasan, Malik, & Khan, 2013).
In the last decade, the higher education commission (HEC) has
made progressive advancement in promoting higher education in
Pakistan and presently-122 universities in the private and public sec-
tor have 318,281 students enrolled and registered with the HEC.
Now the HEC is focusing on advanced quality education in the coun-
try and many universities or colleges have received quality manage-
ment principles as a key to achieving and implementing ISO principles
as an initial move toward quality to exceed expectations.
The service quality model has five dimensions, these dimensions
are, tangibility, responsiveness, assurance, reliability, and empathy.
SERVQUAL dimensions are widely accepted and used by researchers
in several industries. Many researchers have investigated service qual-
ity in various dimensions of educational set up, like Hill (1995) investi-
gated the use of service quality in higher education Anderson (1995)
used SERVQUAL to evaluate the quality of administration department
in educational set up; Banwet and Datta (2002) studied the impact of
Received: 13 July 2020 Revised: 3 September 2020 Accepted: 13 September 2020
DOI: 10.1002/pa.2492
J Public Affairs. 2020;e2492. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/pa © 2020 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd 1of7
https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.2492
service quality in a library. This stream of research has focused on the
impact of SERVQUAL dimensions on multiple areas, whereas, the cur-
rent age is moving toward technological advancements. In today's
environment, no HEI can prosper without the implementation of elec-
tronic facilities to satisfy their student's needs of learning. E-learning
may bridge distances in rural areas for accessibility to the latest infor-
mation in medical education and reduce the need to teach theory-
based, on-site classes where there are a limited number of medical
teachers (Barteit et al., 2020). The quality of e-learning systems has
received a considerable amount of research attention and a large
number of researchers have attempted to identify e-learning success
factors to maximize the effectiveness of these systems (Al-Fraihat,
Joy, & Sinclair, 2020; Ali & Ahmad, 2011; Fathema, Shannon, &
Ross, 2015; Mohammadi, 2015; Mtebe & Raphael, 2018).
This study makes a substantial contribution to the literature of ser-
vice quality, by adding a novel dimension “e-learning”into the most
renowned and frequently used SERVQUAL (tangibility, reliability,
empathy, assurance, and responsiveness) model. By doing so we not
only establish the link between e-learning and student's academic per-
formance through student satisfaction and student motivation but also
extended the SERVQUAL model by incorporating a neglected area. It
measures the universality of SERVQUAL across diverse industries and
backgrounds. Moreover, it justifies the concept that service quality is
the antecedent of students' satisfaction & motivation. The main pur-
pose of the study was to investigate the student's performance toward
service quality at the higher educational institutions in Pakistan.
2|THEORY AND HYPOTHESIS
DEVELOPMENT
2.1 |Service quality and student performance
in HEIs
Student performance is normally measured by CGPA which is associ-
ated with class and subject-related achievement (Robbins et al., 2004).
Further the most widely recognized measure of student performance
in the writing on school results; GPA is the only measure of student
performance used as a part of the literature on Facebook (Junco,
2015). The performance of the student should be improved in the
presence of proper learning facilities for the students. There is a posi-
tive relationship between the guidance provided by parents and
teachers to the students' academic performance. Moreover, aware-
ness of one's capacities and capabilities is also linked with higher per-
formance (Mushtaq & Khan, 2012).
Caro, González, and Mira (2014) contended that there are many
papers focused on the student performance indicators of individual
students for particular subjects or actually for a complete year. A few
elements are analyzed and compared to enhance the students' aca-
demic performance. Alwagait, Shahzad, and Alim (2015) reported the
positive impact of social media usage on students' academic perfor-
mance, capacity to captivate, and the impact on their lives, in nations,
for example, the USA, Nigeria, and Pakistan.
There are two types of factors or variables that influence the per-
formance of the students. These factors are external & internal fac-
tors. They strongly influence students' academic performance.
Classroom internal elements include student's capability in English,
class size, class timetables, test results, textbooks, homework, learning
facilities, the environment of the class, and instructor role in class,
innovation used as a piece of the class, and exams systems. Outside
classroom variables or components fuse extracurricular activities, fam-
ily issues, work, and budgetary issues, social and distinctive issues.
Research shows that a student's academic performance relies upon
many factors. For example, learning facilities, gender & age differ-
ences, and so forth that can influence a student's academic perfor-
mance (Hansen, 2000).
Garvin (1988) defines service quality as “An overall evaluation of
the goodness or badness of a product or service.”Grönroos (1993)
also identify service quality as “The perceived quality of service will be
the outcome of an evaluation process where consumers compare
expectations with the service they perceive they have it.”Based on
findings in the service quality literature, (Annamdevula &
Bellamkonda, 2016a, 2016b) define service quality in higher education
as “the difference between what a student expects to receive and
his/her perceptions of actual delivery.”First of all Anantharanthan
Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry (1985) introduced the 10 dimen-
sions of SERVQUAL as competence, reliability, access, responsiveness,
courtesy, communication, security, credibility, understanding the cus-
tomers & tangibles. Later, then (Ananthanarayanan Parasuraman,
Zeithaml, & Berry, 1988) modify the 10 dimensions to 5 dimensions as
reliability, assurance, empathy, responsiveness, and tangibles, which
have been broadly in measuring the quality of service in many indus-
tries. Most of the previous work has focused on validating the five
dimensions of SERVQUAL model. While neglecting the other ele-
ments that can enhance service quality in current age. Technology
usage in today's dynamic environment is ubiquitous, therefore it is
suggested to broaden the service quality model by adding e-learning.
E-learning refers to “The delivery of education (all activities rele-
vant to instructing, teaching, and learning) through various electronic
media (George & Lal, 2019; Koohang & Harman, 2005). E-learning is
an important factor as service providers should focus on the ease of
student's education. The electronic medium could be the Internet,
intranets, extranets, satellite TV, video/audiotape, and/or CD ROM.”
All these innovations are giving a chance to the learners to commu-
nicate with educators and different learners effectively and effi-
ciently. E-learning offers additional doors open for intelligence in the
middle of students and tutors amid substance delivery (Wagner,
Hassanein, & Head, 2008). Previous literature reported that e-
learning is positively associated with performance (Jabarullah &
Hussain, 2019; Rachmawati, Octavia, Herawati, & Sinaga, 2019;
Rakic et al., 2020). Based on the above rationale we proposed the
following hypothesis.
H1 There is a positive relationship between service quality dimen-
sions (tangibility, responsiveness, assurance, reliability, empa-
thy, and e-learning) and students' performance.
2of7 RASHEED ET AL.
2.2 |Mediating role of student motivation
Motivation is usually believed as an inner state of desire or needs that
triggers a person to do something to satisfy them. Motivation is
referred to as the force that accounts for the selection, direction,
arousal, and continuation of behavior (Li & Pan, 2009). According to
Afzal, Ali, Aslam Khan, and Hamid (2010), student's motivation is the
component that leads students' state of mind toward the learning
phase. Many studies have been led to testing the part of student
motivation to academic performance and distinctive meanings of stu-
dent motivation have been utilized by different researches. Author
additionally expressed that motivation to learning is reliant on long
time, a quality connection in learning, and promise to the methodol-
ogy of learning. According to Shell et al. (2020) that increasing student
motivation will be positively correlated with student performance.
Based on the above rationale we proposed the following hypothesis.
H2 There is a positive relationship between service quality dimen-
sions (tangibility, responsiveness, assurance, reliability, empa-
thy, and e-learning) and students' motivation.
H3 There is a positive relationship between students' motivation and
student's academic performance.
H4 The relationship between service quality dimensions (tangibility,
responsiveness, assurance, reliability, empathy, and e-learning)
and student's academic performance is partially mediated
through student's motivation.
2.3 |Mediating role of student satisfaction
Student satisfaction”can be described in many ways. Kayastha
(2011) & Browne, Kaldenberg, Browne, and Brown (1998) examined
and found that satisfaction of the student was determined by evaluat-
ing the quality of coursework & other instructive module practices
and diverse elements or components related to the college and uni-
versity. Teachers must treat students with affectively and sensitivity,
and aid should be given when necessary. Even simple listening is
appreciated. (Elliott & Healy, 2001) suggested that the satisfaction of
the student is a transient mentality, got from the appraisal of the good
education service. Grossman (1999) talked about that student could
be managed like a customer or a client inside the higher school and in
light of present circumstances; the higher school serve the under-
studies on a superior priority to satisfy the students' desires and need.
Some authors reported in their studies that there is a positive signifi-
cant relationship between service quality and student satisfaction
(Chandra, Hafni, Chandra, Purwati, & Chandra, 2019; Mansori, Vaz, &
Ismail, 2014; Subrahmanyam, 2017). Based on the above rationale we
proposed the following hypothesis (Figure 1).
H5 There is a positive relationship between service quality dimen-
sions (tangibility, responsiveness, assurance, reliability, empa-
thy, and e-learning) and students' satisfaction.
H6 There is a positive relationship between students' satisfaction
and student's academic performance.
H7 The relationship between service quality dimensions (tangibility,
responsiveness, assurance, reliability, empathy, and e-learning)
and student's academic performance is partially mediated
through student's satisfaction.
3|METHODS AND MEASURES
3.1 |Participants and procedure
Nonprobability convenience sampling technique was used for data
collection. We collected data from the students of HEI's in the Punjab
province of Pakistan. Initially, 450 questionnaires were distributed
FIGURE 1 Conceptual model of the research
RASHEED ET AL.3of7
414 are received. In 414 out of which 384 questionnaires were found
useful or satisfactory with a response rate of 85.3%. Qualification
demographic variable and illustrates that most of our respondents
(150) are graduates with a percentage of 39.1% out of 384 than Mas-
ter degree holders (107) with 27.9%.
3.2 |Measures and data analysis
The questionnaire items are adopted from previously conducted stud-
ies by (Banwet & Datta, 2002), Wilkins and Balakrishnan (2013) and
Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry (1994). All variables are measured
by a 5-point Likert scale (1: Strongly Agree, 5: Strongly Disagree).
Whereas, the variable of e-learning has been made a part in this
research for the measurement of SERVQUAL consists of 7-items mea-
sured on a 5-point Likert scale. It was adopted from the study con-
ducted by Siddiqui and Sharma (2010).
Data analysis is done in two sections: the first part relates to the
demographic data of the respondents while the second part contains
the respondents' analysis answers to the questions. MS Excel 2013
and (IBM SPSS 20) is used to calculate Cronbach's alpha, Descriptive
statistics (Discreet variables and respondents ‘demographics were
ana1yzed by the use of frequencies and charts) Regression analysis.
4|RESULTS
To ensure the internal reliability of questionnaire items, Cronbach's
alpha was applied. The values of Cronbach's Alpha are SERVQUAL
0.811, (tangibility 0.761, reliability 0.871, responsiveness 0.864, assur-
ance 0.775, empathy 0.784 & e-learning 0.807), student satisfaction
0.812, student motivation 0.807 & student performance 0.783, which
is above the standard value proposed by Nunnally (2015) of 0.70, this
shows the internal reliability of research instrument and we can apply
different statistical tests and infer the results with confidence. Table 1
is showing the results of the hypothesis.
4.1 |Hypotheses testing using the linear
regression
We made use of the coefficient of determination (R
2
) as well as the
significance levels of each path coefficient to evaluate the model.
Table 1 shows that the independent variable SERVQUAL has a signifi-
cant positive impact on student performance with R
2
(.431), (β= .656,
p< .000) results show that SERVQUAL contributes 65.6% to student
performance and supporting our H1. SERVQUAL has a significant
positive impact on student motivation with R
2
(.440), (β= .664,
p< .000) which means that SERVQUAL contributes 66.4% to student
motivation and supporting our H2. Student motivation has a signifi-
cant positive impact on student performance with R
2
(.510), (β= .714,
p< .000) means that the student motivation contributes more than
71.4% to student performance and supporting our H3. SERVQUAL
has a significant positive moderate impact on student satisfaction with
R
2
(.456), (β= .675, p< .000) results show that SERVQUAL contrib-
utes more than 67.5% to student satisfaction and supporting our H5.
Student satisfaction has a significant positive impact on student per-
formance with R
2
(.363), (β= .602, p< .000) which means that
SERVQUAL contributes more than 60.2% to student performance and
supporting our H6.
4.2 |Mediation analysis
Table 2 is showing the values of the unstandardized regression coeffi-
cient and standard error for testing the Sobel online test.
Tables 3 and 4 are showing the results of the Sobel online test.
The model we used between the variables (SERVQUAL, student
satisfaction, and student performance) has partial mediation because
the significant values are remaining significant when we check the
combined effect of the independent variable and mediating variable
on the dependent variable. If the pvalue is insignificant it means
TABLE 1 Beta, R
2
, and significance value
Hypothesis Dependent variable Independent variable Standardized coefficients (β)R
2
Sig (ρ)
H1 Student performance SERVQUAL .656 .431 0.000
H2 Student motivation SERVQUAL .664 .440 0.000
H3 Student performance Student motivation .714 .510 0.000
H5 Student satisfaction SERVQUAL .675 .456 0.000
H6 Student performance Student satisfaction .602 .363 0.000
TABLE 2 Values of unstandardized regression coefficient and SE
for Sobel online test
Model variables
Unstandardized
regression coefficient SE
Student satisfaction
SERVQUAL
a
1
= 0.657 Sa
1
= 0.037
Student performance
student satisfaction
b
1
= 0.267 Sb
1
= 0.043
Student motivation
SERVQUAL
a
2
= 0.870 Sa
2
= 0.050
Student performance
student motivation
b
2
= 0.336 Sb
2
= 0.030
4of7 RASHEED ET AL.
perfect mediation. So we use the Sobel online test for checking the
mediation. The table shows that significance (p< .000) is less than
(p< .05). This means student satisfaction is the mediator between
SERVQUAL and student performance.
The model we used between the variables (SERVQUAL, student
motivation, and student performance) has partial mediation because
the values have remained significant when we check the combined
effect of the independent variable and mediating variable on the
dependent variable. If the pvalue is insignificant it's mean perfect
mediation. So we use the Sobel online test for checking the mediation.
Table: 4. Shows that significance (p< .000) is less than (p< .05).
Means student motivation is the mediator between SERVQUAL and
student performance.
5|DISCUSSION
As shown in the result, none of the (Beta coefficient) regression coef-
ficients have negative signs. Thus, our first observation is that there
are no inverse relationships between the SERVQUAL (tangibility,
responsiveness, assurance, reliability, empathy, and e-learning), stu-
dents' satisfaction, students' motivation & students' performance. The
second issue to be addressed is whether any of the SERVQUAL, stu-
dents' satisfaction, students' motivation & students' performance is
positively and significantly related to the output measure. The results
of the regression analysis show that SERVQUAL have positive signifi-
cant relationships between the dependent and independent variables.
Although student satisfaction has a low R
2
as compared to other vari-
ables but still shows a nearly strong and positive relationship with stu-
dent satisfaction (R
2
= .602, p=.000). It is evident from our findings
that SERVQUAL (tangibility, responsiveness, assurance, reliability,
empathy, and e-learning) is strongly significantly and positively related
to students' satisfaction, motivation, and performance. Student satis-
faction and motivation have also a strong impact on student
performance.
The findings of this study are consistent with the previous studies
(Chandra et al., 2019; Jabarullah & Hussain, 2019; Mansori et al., 2014;
Rachmawati et al., 2019; Rakic et al., 2020; Subrahmanyam, 2017) that
SERVQUAL is not only a multidimensional construct that is affected by
a lot of factors not currently covered by our study, but it also indicates
that certain service quality dimensions may have a stronger impact on
student satisfaction, motivation, and performance than others. This
study reveals that there is a partial mediation among the variables used
in this study. We used the online Sobel test to check the partial media-
tion. Based on this study we suggest that optimum service quality can
enhance the students' performance. It is therefore recommended that
to achieve higher student performance HEI's should provide the best
service quality by focusing on all the dimensions of SERVQUAL (tangi-
bility, responsiveness, assurance, reliability, empathy, and e-learning).
5.1 |Policy guidelines
This study mainly focuses on higher educational institutions in
Pakistan and thus provides managerial insights for them. Management
of higher educational institutions in Pakistan needs to focus nearly all
dimensions but especially on responsiveness and assurance as dis-
cussed in detail about this service quality dimension because the
behavior/attitude of the educational institutions' staff is non-
professional. Moreover, technology enhancements are very much
important considering the advancement of the technology arena and
educational demographic aspects of their customers. So the higher
educational institutions must focus the electronic/online learning and
provide the facilitation on their institutes.
This study is a profitable contribution in the Pakistani economy,
now the government is expanding the educational plans and justifies
these expenses & to get maximum returns, assessment of services
offered is necessary. This study would give guidance to future scien-
tists/scholars and would help the policymakers to consider the signifi-
cance of services offered to attain the desired results in the shape of
TABLE 3 Sobel online test
Input Test statistic SE p value
a0.657 Sobel test 5.86127417 0.02992848 0
b0.267 Aroian test 5.85300972 0.02997073 0
S
a
0.037 Goodman test 5.86957373 0.02988616 0
S
b
0.043 Reset all Calculate
TABLE 4 Sobel online test
Input Test statistic SE p value
a0.870 Sobel test 9.41768021 0.03103949 0
b0.336 Aroian test 9.40670261 0.03107571 0
S
a
0.050 Goodman test 9.42869634 0.03100323 0
S
b
0.030 Reset all Calculate
RASHEED ET AL.5of7
students' motivation, students' satisfaction & the student's
performance.
5.2 |Limitation, and future research guidelines
This study has the following limitations like sample size and limited
resources. With a large sample size and maximum resources, interest-
ing results can be obtained because the service quality perception var-
ies from person to person. Our data is based on the responses of
respondents study in higher educational institutions in Bahawalpur
City. Therefore, this fact cannot allow generalizations across the
entire higher educational institutions in the country Bottomley and
Holden (2001). We studied SERVQUAL dimensions & their effect on
student satisfaction, students' performance & student's motivation. Its
extension-scope can be increased by including more SERVQUAL
dimensions. The scope of the study should be widened and other
stakeholders should be added in the study.
6|CONCLUSION
This research addressees the gap in the literature on the relationship
between SERVQUAL, student performance, satisfaction & perfor-
mance. As the primary aim of the study, was to find out the factors
affecting students' performance toward service quality of a higher
educational institutions in Pakistan. Well renowned service quality
scale SERVQUAL was applied to the higher educational institutions in
Pakistan. Five dimensions of service quality (tangibles, assurance,
empathy, responsiveness and reliability) and by adding a new dimen-
sion of “e-learning”into the most renowned and frequently used
SERVQUAL scale, an attempt was made to find out the factors affect-
ing students' performance toward service quality of a higher educa-
tional institutions in Pakistan. The results of this study help us to
understand the relationship of SEVQUAL dimensions (tangibility,
responsiveness, assurance, reliability, empathy, and e-learning) on aca-
demic performance through student motivation and student satisfac-
tion, and thus, improve our understanding of this most prevalent
phenomena and therefore, enable HEI's to enhance students' perfor-
mance by implementing all the service quality dimensions. It is marked
that students of higher educational institutions in Pakistan are a qual-
ity conscious as it is proved in the findings of this study.
REFERENCES
Afzal, H., Ali, I., Aslam Khan, M., & Hamid, K. (2010). A study of university
students' motivation and its relationship with their academic perfor-
mance. International Journal of Business and Management,5(4), 80–88.
Ahmed, I., Nawaz, M. M., Ahmad, Z., Ahmad, Z., Shaukat, M. Z.,
Usman, A., & Ahmed, N. (2010). Does service quality affect students
performance? Evidence from institutes of higher learning. African Jour-
nal of Business Management,4(12), 2527–2533.
Al-Fraihat, D., Joy, M., & Sinclair, J. (2020). Evaluating E-learning systems
success: An empirical study. Computers in Human Behavior,102,
67–86.
Ali, A., & Ahmad, I. (2011). Key factors for determining student satisfaction
in distance learning courses: A study of Allama Iqbal Open University.
Contemporary Educational Technology,2(2), 118–134.
Ali, N., Jusof, K., Ali, S., Mokhtar, N., & Salamat, A. S. A. (2009). The factors
influencing STUDENTS' PERFORMANCE at UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI
MARA KEDAH, Malaysia. Management Science and Engineering,3(4),
81–90.
Alwagait, E., Shahzad, B., & Alim, S. (2015). Impact of social media usage
on students academic performance in Saudi Arabia. Computers in
Human Behavior,51, 1092–1097.
Anderson, E. (1995). High tech v. high touch: A case study of TQM imple-
mentation in higher education. Managing Service Quality,5(2), 48–56.
Annamdevula, S., & Bellamkonda, R. S. (2016a). Effect of student per-
ceived service quality on student satisfaction, loyalty and motivation
in Indian universities. Journal of Modelling in Management,11(2),
488–517.
Annamdevula, S., & Bellamkonda, R. S. (2016b). The effects of service
quality on student loyalty: The mediating role of student satisfaction.
Journal of Modelling in Management,11(2), 446–462. https://doi.
org/10.1108/JM2-04-2014-0031.
Banwet, D. K., & Datta, B. (2002). Effect of service quality on post-visit
intentions over time: The case of a library. Total Quality Management,
13(4), 537–546.
Barteit, S., Guzek, D., Jahn, A., Bärnighausen, T., Jorge, M. M., &
Neuhann, F. (2020). Evaluation of e-learning for medical education in
low-and middle-income countries: A systematic review. Computers and
Education,145, 103726.
Battle, J., & Lewis, M. (2002). The increasing significance of class: The rela-
tive effects of race and socioeconomic status on academic achieve-
ment. Journal of Poverty,6(2), 21–35.
Boateng, S., Asare, D., Manu, P. T., Sefah, E. A., & Adomako, J. (2020).
Relationship between Students' home background and their academic
performance: A case of some selected senior high school students in
rural districts in Ashanti region, Ghana. Journal of Education,
0022057420904370. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022057420904370.
Bottomley, P. A., & Holden, S. J. (2001). Do we really know how con-
sumers evaluate brand extensions? Empirical generalizations based on
secondary analysis of eight studies. Journal of Marketing Research,
38(4), 494–500.
Browne, B. A., Kaldenberg, D. O., Browne, W. G., & Brown, D. J. (1998).
Student as customer: Factors affecting satisfaction and assessments of
institutional quality. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education,8
(3), 1–14.
Caro, E., González, C., & Mira, J. M. (2014). Student academic performance
stochastic simulator based on the Monte Carlo method. Computers
and Education,76,42–54.
Chandra, T., Hafni, L., Chandra, S., Purwati, A. A., & Chandra, J. (2019). The
influence of service quality, university image on student satisfaction
and student loyalty. Benchmarking: An International Journal,26(5),
1533–1549. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-07-2018-0212.
DeShields, O. W., Kara, A., & Kaynak, E. (2005). Determinants of business
student satisfaction and retention in higher education: Applying Her-
zberg's two-factor theory. International Journal of Educational Manage-
ment,19(2), 128–139. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513540510582426.
Elliott, K. M., & Healy, M. A. (2001). Key factors influencing student satis-
faction related to recruitment and retention. Journal of Marketing for
Higher Education,10(4), 1–11.
Espinoza, Ó., González, L. E., McGinn, N., Castillo, D., & Sandoval, L.
(2019). Factors that affect post-graduation satisfaction of Chilean uni-
versity students. Studies in Higher Education,44(6), 1023–1038.
Fathema, N., Shannon, D., & Ross, M. (2015). Expanding the technology
acceptance model (TAM) to examine faculty use of learning manage-
ment systems (LMSs) in higher education institutions. Journal of Online
Learning and Teaching,11(2), 210–232.
6of7 RASHEED ET AL.
Garvin, D. A. (1988). Managing quality: The strategic and competitive edge,
Stuttgart, Germany: Simon and Schuster.
George, G., & Lal, A. M. (2019). Review of ontology-based recommender
systems in e-learning. Computers and Education,142, 103642.
Grönroos, C. (1993). An applied service marketing theory. European Journal
of Marketing,16(7), 30–41.
Grossman, R. P. (1999). Relational versus discrete exchanges: The role of
trust and commitment in determining customer satisfaction. Journal of
Marketing Management,9(2), 47–58.
Hansen, J. B. (2000). Student performance and student growth as measures
of success:An Evaluator's perspective.
Hasan, N., Malik, S. A., & Khan, M. M. (2013). Measuring relationship
between students' satisfaction and motivation in secondary schools of
Pakistan. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research,18(7), 907–915.
Hill, F. M. (1995). Managing service quality in higher education: The role of
the student as primary consumer. Quality Assurance in Education.,3,
10–21.
Ijaz, A., Irfan, S., Shahbaz, S., Awan, M., & Sabir, M. (2011). An empirical
model of student satisfaction: Case of Pakistani public sector business
schools. Journal of Quality and Technology Management,7(2), 91–114.
Jabarullah, N. H., & Hussain, H. I. J. E. T. (2019). The effectiveness of
problem-based learning in technical and vocational education in
Malaysia. Education+ Training,61(5), 552–567. https://doi.
org/10.1108/ET-06-2018-0129.
Junco, R. (2015). Student class standing, Facebook use, and academic per-
formance. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology,36,18–29.
Kayastha, A. (2011). A study of graduate student satisfaction towards service
quality of universities in Thailand (Masters Degree in Business Adminis-
tration) Webster University, Thailand.
Koohang, A., & Harman, K. (2005). Open source: A metaphor for e-learn-
ing. Informing Science. International Journal of an Emerging
Transdiscipline,8, 75.
Li, P., & Pan, G. (2009). The relationship between motivation and
achievement–a survey of the study motivation of English majors in
Qingdao agricultural university. English Language Teaching,2(1),
123–128.
Mansori, S., Vaz, A. F., & Ismail, Z. (2014). Service quality, satisfaction and
student loyalty in Malaysian private education. Asian Social Science,10
(7), 57–66.
Mohammadi, H. (2015). Investigating users' perspectives on e-learning: An
integration of TAM and IS success model. Computers in Human Behav-
ior,45, 359–374.
Mtebe, J. S., & Raphael, C. (2018). Key factors in learners' satisfaction with
the e-learning system at the University of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Australasian Journal of Educational Technology,34(4), 107–122. https:
//doi.org/10.14742/ajet.2993.
Mushtaq, I., & Khan, S. N. (2012). Factors affecting Students’academic
performance. Global Journal of Management and Business Research,
12(9), 16–22.
Nunnally, J. C. (2015). Psychometric Theory—25 Years Ago and Now. Edu-
cational Researcher, vol. 4, 10, (p. 7–21). Oaks, CA: SAGE. https://doi.
org/10.3102/0013189X004010007.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1985). A conceptual model
of service quality and its implications for future research. Journal of
Marketing,49(4), 41–50.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1988). Servqual: A
multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perc. Journal of Retailing,
64(1), 12.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1994). Moving forward in
service quality research: Measuring different customer-expectation
levels, comparing alternative scales, and examining the performance-
behavioral intentions link: Marketing Science Institute.
Rachmawati, R., Octavia, E., Herawati, S. D., & Sinaga, O. (2019). Culture,
environment and E-learning as factor in student performance (case
studies in management accounting study programs). Universal Journal
of Educational Research,7(4A), 72–78.
Rakic, S., Tasic, N., Marjanovic, U., Softic, S., Lüftenegger, E., & Turcin, I.
(2020). Student performance on an E-learning platform: Mixed method
approach. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning,15
(02), 187–203.
Robbins, S. B., Lauver, K., Le, H., Davis, D., Langley, R., & Carlstrom, A.
(2004). Do psychosocial and study skill factors predict college out-
comes? A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin,130(2), 261–288.
Shell, K., Holt, E., Kington, A., Mohammed, K., Black, A., Troup, C., …
Nathaniel, T. I. (2020). Motivation to learn Neuroanatomy by cadaveric
dissection is correlated with academic performance. Clinical Anatomy,
33(1), 128–135.
Siddiqui, M. H., & Sharma, T. G. (2010). Measuring the customer perceived
service quality for life insurance services: An empirical investigation.
International Business Research,3(3), 171.
Subrahmanyam, A. (2017). Relationship between service quality, satisfaction,
motivation and loyalty. Quality Assurance in Education,25,171–188.
Tanveer, M., & Hassan, S. (2020). The role of new and creative ideas in
developing industries of education, software and manufacturing in
Pakistan. Journal of Entrepreneurship Education,23(3), 1–11.
Uzelac, A., Gligori
c, N., & Krcˇo, S. (2018). System for recognizing lecture
quality based on analysis of physical parameters. Telematics and Infor-
matics,35(3), 579–594.
Wagner, N., Hassanein, K., & Head, M. (2008). Who is responsible for e-
learning success in higher education? A stakeholders' analysis. Journal
of Educational Technology and Society,11(3), 26–36.
Wilkins, S., & Balakrishnan, M. S. (2013). Assessing student satisfaction in
transnational higher education. International Journal of Educational
Management,27, 143–156.
How to cite this article: Rasheed HMW, He Y, Khalid J,
Khizar HMU, Sharif S. The relationship between e-learning
and academic performance of students. J Public Affairs. 2020;
e2492. https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.2492
RASHEED ET AL.7of7
