The Relation of E-learning with the Perception of a Constructive Environment: The Mediating Role of Learner and Teacher Abilities

Document Type : Original Article


Department of Educational Psychology, Kerman Branch, Islamic Azad University, Kerman, Iran


Background: With the beginning of the 21st century, the necessity of transformation in education has become clear to everyone, and technology is the starting point of this transformation. The current research was conducted with the aim of investigating the relationship of e-learning with the perception of a constructive environment with the mediating role of learner and teacher abilities in high schools of Kerman city. 
Methods: This correlational study was performed using structural equation model between from 2021 to July 2020. The samples were 150 high school principals, experts, teachers, and students of Kerman city high schools in 2021 who were selected via convenience sampling. of these, 30 were experts and school teachers, and 120 subjects were high school students. The research tool was a 45-questions researcher-made questionnaire of the factors related to the enrichment of online education and a questionnaire of the perception of the constructivist learning environment based on the facts and Karsheki (2014). The face validity of the researcher-made questionnaire was confirmed based on the experts’ opinions, and the exploratory factor analysis confirmed the 4-factor structure of the questionnaire. The reliability of the questionnaire was confirmed based on the calculation of Cronbach’s alpha coefficient. Data analysis was done using structural equation modeling method in AMOS software. 
Results: Using structural equation modeling, the relationship between family structure, educational system, learner ability, teacher ability, and perception of constructivist learning environment was investigated. The values of path coefficients and indirect effects showed that family structure with path coefficient (0.45) and educational system with path coefficient (0.18) indirectly influenced the perception of constructivist environment through the ability of the students. Also, the educational system with path coefficient (0.26) indirectly influenced the perception of constructivist environment through the teacher’s ability. The mean and standard deviation of the sample group’s scores in the variables of learner ability, teacher ability, and perception of constructivist learning environment were 27.39 and 4.10, 21.37 and 4.08, and 79.05 and 7.79, respectively. These variables included different dimensions that had a score range between 2 to 10, 2 to 4, and 10 to 50. 
Conclusion: Designing and managing various processes of the online learning system, keeping in mind the empowerment of various dimensions related to this system, namely knowledge, learner, teacher, and family.


  1. Mehni S, Chahartangi F, Tahergorabi M, Dastyar N, Mehralizadeh A, Amirmijani A. Relationship between Kolb’s Learning Styles and Readiness for E-learning: A Cross-sectional Study in the Covid-19 Pandemic. Interdisciplinary Journal of Virtual Learning in Medical Sciences. 2023;14(2):99-107. doi: 10.30476/ijvlms.2023.97515.1200
  2. Flores MA, Barros A, Simão AM, Pereira D, Flores P, Fernandes E, Costa L, Ferreira PC. Portuguese higher education students’ adaptation to online teaching and learning in times of the COVID-19 pandemic: personal and contextual factors. Higher Education. 2022 Jun;83(6):1389-408.
  3. Caladine R, editor. Enhancing e-learning with media-rich content and interactions. IGI Global; 2008 Apr 30.
  4. Nezhadiyan E, Keshavarz H, Gholamali Lavasani M. The Impact of online training of Positive Thinking Skills on Social Adjustment and Alexithymia in Transsexual Students. Interdisciplinary Journal of Virtual Learning in Medical Sciences, 2022; 13(4): 247-255.
  5. Matin Far K, Kian M. On the Efficacy of an Integrated Curriculum of Social Studies and Art in Improving Academic Performance of Students in the Social Studies Course. Journal of Curriculum Research. 2021; 10 (2): 20-8. doi: 10.22099/JCR.2021.6046
  6. Egielewa P, Idogho PO, Iyalomhe FO, Cirella GT. COVID-19 and digitized education: Analysis of online learning in Nigerian higher education. E-learning and Digital Media. 2022;19 (1):19-35. doi:/10.1177/20427530211022808
  7. Mkrttchian V, editor. Handbook of Research on Estimation and Control Techniques in E-Learning Systems. IGI Global; 2015 Dec 22.
  8. Esposito A. Research ethics in emerging forms of online learning: issues arising from a hypothetical study on a MOOC. Electronic Journal of e-Learning. 2012 Aug 1;10(3):pp286-296.
  9. Sayaf AM, Alamri MM, Alqahtani MA, Alrahmi WM. Factors influencing university students’ adoption of digital learning technology in teaching and learning. Sustainability. 2022;14(1):493-510.
  10. Gao H, Ou Y, Zhang Z, Ni M, Zhou X, Liao L. The relationship between family support and e-learning engagement in college students: the mediating role of e-learning normative consciousness and behaviors and self-efficacy. Frontiers in psychology. 2021 Feb 4;12:573779.
  11. Raza SA, Khan KA. Knowledge and innovative factors: how cloud computing improves students’ academic performance. Interactive Technology and Smart Education. 2022;19(2):161-83.
  12. Taghiyareh F. Key selection criteria of e-learning authoring tools. Quarterly Journal of research and planning in higher education. 2023;13(1):75-89.
  13. Wright DR, Fitzpatrick KM. Social capital and adolescent violent behavior: Correlates of fighting and weapon use among secondary school students. Social Forces. 2006 Mar 1;84(3):1435-53. Doi. Org/ 10.1353/sof. 2006.0077
  14. Jamalnia S. Investigating restless leg syndrome and its severity in nursing students. Nursing development in health. 2018;8(2):25-30.
  15. Leone S, editor. Synergic integration of formal and informal e-learning environments for adult lifelong learners. IGI Global; 2013 Oct 31.
  16. Galanti TM, Baker CK, Morrow-Leong K, Kraft T. Enriching TPACK in mathematics education: using digital interactive notebooks in synchronous online learning environments. Interactive Technology and Smart Education. 2021 Oct 4;18(3):345-61.
  17. Sadeghi SH. E-learning practice in higher education: A mixed-method comparative analysis. Springer International Publishing; 2018.
  18. Hooper S, Hannafin MJ. The effects of group composition on achievement, interaction, and learning efficiency during computer-based cooperative instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development. 1991 Sep;39(3):27-40.27-40.
  19. Xu J. A person-centered approach to teacher motivation towards information technology: integrating achievement goal and expectancy-value perspectives. Educational technology research and development. 2022;70(2):397-417.
  20. Pourkarimi J, Alimardani Z. Phenomenological Analysis of the Factors Affecting Interactions in the E-Learning Environment. Research in School and Virtual Learning. 2021;8(3):27-40.
  21. Dolighan T, Owen M. Teacher efficacy for online teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic. Brock Education Journal. 2021 Mar 10;30(1):95-114. doi org/ 26522/BROCKED.V30I1.851
  22. Oppermann E, Hummel T, Anders Y. Preschool teachers’ science practices: Associations with teachers’ qualifications and their self-efficacy beliefs in science. Early Child Development and Care. 2021 Apr 4;191(5):800-14.
  23. Engelmann K, Bannert M, Melzner N. Do self-created metacognitive prompts promote short-and long-term effects in computer-based learning environments?. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning. 2021 Dec;16(1):1-21.
  24. Haghayeghi M, Kareshki H. Construction and Validation of a Questionnaire to Measure the Students’ Perceptions of Social Constructivist Learning Environments. Educational measurement and evaluation studies. 2015 Dec 1;5(11):91-119.
  25. Ghasemi V. Structural equation modeling in social research using amos graphics. Publisher: Sociologists.
  26. Falahi M, Khalifeh G, Qhasemi Sameni M. The Collaborative Learning in the e-Learning Environments. Nama Journal of Educational Studies 2017; 9:31-39.