TABLE 1.
Main instruments of online learning platforms and websites.
Author | Object | Sample/target | Measurement | Indicators | Category |
||
Content quality | Technical quality | Service quality |
|||||
Hassanzadeh et al., 2012 | Measurement of e-learning systems success model (MELSS) | 33 experts, and 369 instructors, students, and alumni from five universities | 5-point scale, quantitative | Technical system quality, educational system quality, content and information quality, service quality | √ | √ | √ |
ÖZkan et al., 2020 | Evaluation criteria of search engine optimization (SEO) | 70 Turkish industrial engineering departments’ websites | Quantitative form, qualitative/quantitative | Performance, design, content, meta tags, backlink, technical | √ | ||
Velasquez and Evans, 2018 | A website’s assessment spreadsheet protocol | 46 postgraduate students | A spreadsheet protocol, quantitative | Accessibility of websites, available online resources, library staff’s responses | √ | √ | √ |
Liu et al., 2011 | Evaluation criteria for Web usability of English learning websites | 160 university students and seven learning technology and English teaching experts | The derived criteria combined with a checklist, qualitative/quantitative | Web usability, learning materials, functionality of assisting language learning, technology integration, and learner preferences | √ | √ | √ |
Yang and Chan, 2008 | Set of evaluation criteria for English learning websites | Eight students and eight English teachers selected from junior high schools, 17 experts | 4-point scale, qualitative/quantitative | General information, integrated English learning, listening, speaking, reading, and writing | √ |