1

Students’ Engagement, Satisfaction, and Difficulties Encountered

in the Utilization of Google Classroom

(Flejoles, Rex. P. and Perlas, Helen N.)

ABSTRACT

This study was conducted to determine students’ engagement in Google classroom as well as

their satisfaction and difficulties encountered in utilizing the said application. This involved

29 students, 12 from Bachelor of Secondary Education major in Biological Science (BSEd)

3C and 17 from Bachelor of Science in Information Technology (BSIT) 3G, of Iloilo Science

and Technology University Miagao Campus. Students’ engagement was based on their

participation in the eight (8) assigned activities. Students’ satisfaction was based on their

responses to instrument prepared by the researchers. This instrument contained 18 items

based on the ISO/IEC 25010 model. While, difficulties encountered was based on the

problems they listed down. BSEd 3C students’ engagement was found to be higher than that

of the BSIT 3G students. Both groups of students had at least high satisfaction of the Google

classroom’s functional suitability and usability. Poor internet connection was the mostly

identified difficulty encountered by them.

 2

Introduction

Various learning environment may be chosen to a certain class. Great Schools

Partnership (2013) defined learning environment as diverse physical locations, contexts, and

cultures in which students learn. The choice of environment depends on many factors such as

teacher knowledge, learning styles, and available resources. With today’s interconnected and

technology-driven world, learning environment may virtual, online, or remote (P21, n.d.).

In relation, blended learning may be chosen as a learning environment. It is a

combination of face-to-face learning activities with a mixture of online (Bart as cited in

Naidoo, 2012). Online learning is associated with distance education and e-learning.

E-learning theory (Mayer, Sweller, Moreno) consists of cognitive science principles that

describe how electronic educational technology can be used and designed to promote

effective learning (David, 2015). Rodgers (2008) claimed that developing e-learning teaching

strategies may improve teaching effectiveness and academic achievement.

Online activities may be implemented in many ways. But, any computer-based

learning may result to unhappiness among involved students if implemented with insufficient

support (Overfield & Bryan-Lluka, 2003). Learning Management System (LMS), which

allow communication and interaction between teachers and students in virtual spaces (de

Oliveira, de Almeida Cunha, & Nakayama, 2016), is available as an option. As an example,

Google classroom may be utilized.

Google classroom streamlines assignment, boosts collaboration, and fosters seamless

communication (Google, n.d.) in teaching-learning process. Among its features include

creating of questions, assignments, and announcements from teachers. In response, students

may post answers and upload files. However, like any system the appreciation of its quality
 3

differs from person to person, such as a student may be reluctant to utilize its features if some

issues are encountered (Lambert, 2016).

ISO/IEC 25010, a software product quality model, determines quality characteristics

when evaluating the properties of a software product (“ISO/IEC 25010”, n.d.). It has eight (8)

characteristics, namely: functional suitability, performance efficiency, compatibility,

usability, reliability, security, maintainability, and portability. The functional suitability and

usability could be easily evaluated by most of the users. Functional suitability refers to the

degree to which a system provides functions that meet stated and implied needs (“Functional

suitability”, n.d.). It has three (3) sub-characteristics, namely: functional completeness,

functional correctness, and functional appropriateness. While, usability refers to which a

system can be used to achieve goals with effectiveness, efficiency, and satisfaction in a

specified context of use (“Usability”, n.d.).

Taking advantage of benefits of technology and believing in the advantages of

e-learning, this study was conducted. Figure 1 shows the conceptual framework of the study.

The independent variable is the section, while the dependent variables are engagement in

Google classroom, satisfaction of the Google classroom’s functional suitability and usability,

and difficulties encountered in utilizing Google classroom.

 4

Independent Variable Dependent Variables

Engagement in Google Classroom

Satisfaction of Google Classroom’s

Section Functional Suitability
BSEd 3C
BSIT 3G Satisfaction of Google Classroom’s
Usability

Difficulties Encountered in Utilizing

Google Classroom

Figure 1. Conceptual framework of the

study

Statement of the Problem

This study focused on determining students’ engagement in Google classroom as well

as their satisfaction and difficulties encountered in utilizing the said application. Specifically,

this study aimed to answer the following questions:

1. What are students’ engagement in Google classroom and their satisfaction of the

Google classroom’s functional suitability and usability when taken as an entire group and

when grouped according to section?

2. What are difficulties encountered by the students in utilizing Google classroom?

3. Are there significant differences in students’ engagement in Google classroom as

well students’ satisfaction of the Google classroom’s functional suitability and usability

when grouped according to section?

 5

4. Are there significant relationships among the students’ engagement in Google

classroom, students’ satisfaction of the Google classroom’s functional suitability, and

students’ satisfaction of the Google classroom’s usability?

Hypotheses

In line with the aforementioned problems, the following null hypotheses were tested

at the 0.05 level of significance.

1. There are no significant differences in students’ engagement in Google classroom

as well as students’ satisfaction of the Google classroom’s functional suitability and usability

when grouped according to section.

2. There are no significant relationships among the students’ engagement in Google

classroom, students’ satisfaction of the Google classroom’s functional suitability, and

students’ satisfaction of the Google classroom’s usability.

Method

Descriptive research design was employed in this study.

Participants

This study involved two sections of Iloilo Science and Technology University

(ISAT U) Miagao Campus students who were officially enrolled during the Second

Semester, Academic Year 2017-2018. These sections were Bachelor of Secondary Education

major in Biological Science (BSEd) 3C and Bachelor of Science in Information Technology

(BSIT) 3G. Out of 54 students, only 29 had complete data necessary in the analysis. Data

from 12 out of 24 BSEd 3C students enrolled in ICT2 (Multimedia in Science) and 17 out of

30 BSIT 3G students enrolled in CS10 (Web Information Systems) were included.

 6

Materials

Two online classes were created in Google classroom, one for the BSEd 3C and

another for the BSIT 3G. Each class was provided with eight (8) activities, 6 activities were

uploading of files while two (2) were quizzes. Students’ engagement was based on their

participation in the assigned activities.

Mean was used to determine the students’ engagement and described based on the

following scale arbitrarily assigned by the researchers: “very low” for a mean range of

0.00-1.60, “low” for a mean range of 1.61-3.20, “average” for a mean range of 3.21-4.80,

“high” for a mean range of 4.81-6.40, and “very high” for a mean range of 6.41-8.00.

To determine students’ satisfaction of the Google classroom’s functional suitability

and usability, researchers-made questionnaire was prepared. The instrument used contains 18

questions based on the ISO/IEC 25010 (Software Product Quality) model. Out of the eight

(8) main characteristics identified in the model, only two (2) characteristics were covered in

the instrument: functional suitability with three (3) sub-characteristics and usability with six

(6) sub-characteristics. The choice took into consideration those characteristics that may be

clearly experienced by the students who served as evaluators. Functional suitability includes

the following sub-characteristics: functional completeness, functional correctness, and

functional appropriateness. While usability has the following sub-characteristics:

appropriateness recognisability, learnability, operability, user error protection, user interface

aesthetics, and accessibility.

Two (2) corresponding statements were phrased for each sub-characteristic. Each

statement is answerable by strongly disagree, disagree, slightly disagree, slightly agree,

agree, and strongly agree with the weight of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 respectively. Mean was used
 7

to determine the students’ satisfaction of Google classroom’s functional suitability and

usability and described based on the following scale arbitrarily assigned by the researchers:

“very low” for a mean range of 1.00-2.00, “low” for a mean range of 2.01-3.00, “average”

for a mean range of 3.01-4.00, “high” for a mean range of 4.01-5.00, and “very high” for a

mean range of 5.01-6.00. Performing the reliability test using the data from the respondents,

the obtained Cronbach's alpha value for the functional suitability was 0.861 (0.861 based on

standardized items). While, the obtained Cronbach’s alpha value for the usability was 0.939

(0.939 based on standardized items).

Lastly, to determine students’ difficulties encountered in using the Google classroom,

they were asked to write them down.

Results and Discussion

Table 1 shows students’ engagement in Google classroom and their satisfaction of the

Google classroom’s functional suitability and usability. Students’ engagement when taken as

an entire group was “average”. When grouped according to section, BSEd 3C students’

engagement was “very high”, while BSIT 3G students’ engagement was “low”. As to Google

classroom’s functional suitability, students’ satisfaction when taken as an entire group and

when grouped according to section was consistently “high”. In terms of Google classroom’s

usability, students’ satisfaction when taken as an entire group was “high”. When grouped

according to section, BSEd 3C students’ satisfaction was “very high”, while only “high”

among BSIT 3G students.

 8

Table 1

Students’ Engagement and Satisfaction

Parameters M Description sd

Students’ Engagement

Entire Group 4.59 Average 2.47

BSEd 3C 7.00 Very High 1.54

BSIT 3G 2.88 Low 1.27

Students’ Satisfaction on Functional Suitability

Entire Group 4.74 High 0.74

BSEd 3C 4.97 High 0.32

BSIT 3G 4.57 High 0.90

Students’ Satisfaction on Usability

Entire Group 4.79 High 0.76

BSEd 3C 5.13 Very High 0.37

BSIT 3G 4.55 High 0.87

Table 2 shows students’ difficulties encountered in utilizing Google classroom. The

most encountered problem was poor internet connection.

 9

Table 2

Students’ Difficulties Encountered in Utilizing Google Classroom

Difficulties encountered f %

Poor internet connection 21 72

Unavailability of the Internet connection 9 31

Uncomfortable with some features 9 31

Less familiarity of the application 7 24

Unrecalled login credential 5 17

Poor feature of the application 4 14

Table 3 shows the difference in students’ engagement and students’ satisfaction on

the functional suitability and usability of the Google classroom. Significant difference was

found in the engagement of BSEd 3C (M=7.00, sd=1.54) and BSIT 3G (M=2.88, sd=1.27),

t(27)=7.887, p=0.000. This means that BSEd 3C students were more engaged in Google

classroom than BSIT 3G students. As to Google classroom’s functionality, no significant

difference was found in students’ satisfaction between BSEd 3C (M=4.97, sd=0.32) and

BSIT 3G (M=4.57, sd=0.90), t(27)=1.475, p=0.152. This result shows that BSEd 3C students’

satisfaction of the Google classroom’s functional suitability was the same as that of BSIT

3G. In terms of the Google classroom’s usability, significant difference was found in

students’ satisfaction between BSEd 3C (M=5.13, sd=0.37) and BSIT 3G (M=4.55,

sd=0.87), t(27)=2.144, p=0.041. This result suggests that BSEd 3C students’ satisfaction of the

Google classroom’s functional suitability was higher than that of BSIT 3G.
 10

Table 3

The t-test Results on Students’ Engagement and Satisfaction

Parameters M t(27) p

Students’ Engagement

BSEd 3C 7.00 7.887 .000

BSIT 3G 2.88

Students’ Satisfaction on Functional Suitability

BSEd 3C 4.97 1.475 .152

BSIT 3G 4.57

Students’ Satisfaction on Usability

BSEd 3C 5.13 2.144 .041

BSIT 3G 4.55

Table 4 shows the correlation among students’ engagement and satisfaction.

Significant relationship was found between students’ engagement and students’ satisfaction

of the Google classroom’s functional suitability, r(29)=0.374, p=0.046. Also, significant

relationship was observed between students’ engagement and students’ satisfaction of the

Google classroom’s usability, r(29)=0.503, p=0.005. Finally, significant difference existed

between students’ satisfaction of the Google classroom’s functional suitability and usability,

r(29)=0.870, p=0.000.
 11

Table 4

The Pearson Correlation Results among Students’ Engagement and Satisfaction

Parameters r(29) p

Students’ Engagement .374 .046

Functional Suitability Satisfaction

Students’ Engagement .503 .005

Usability Satisfaction

Functional Suitability Satisfaction .870 .000

Usability Satisfaction

Conclusion and Recommendations

BSEd 3C students were more engaged than BSIT 3G students. This may be attributed

to becoming soon-to-be teachers of the former. They might have felt the importance of

participation in the learning activities regardless of a strategy chosen by a teacher. Students

must be encouraged to involve actively in online activities. Greater online interaction has a

positive impact on performance (Rodgers, 2008).

However, organizational factor such as infrastructure influence the learning process

(Nayak & Suesaowaluk, 2007). In this study, poor Internet connection obviously created

difficulties among students. To minimize such a problem on poor Internet connection,

schools that intend to utilize any online system must provide sufficient Internet account.

Alternatively, students are encouraged to acquire their own Internet connection.

Google classroom’s functional suitability and usability were highly commended by

the students. Such system provides relevant and implied features, hence considered to be of
 12

good quality. Moreover, it shows effectiveness and efficiency expected by the users.

However, perspectives of users in terms of usability differ, as in this case between Education

students and IT students. To reinforce the results of this study, similar study is recommended

involving more students and increasing the number of sections.

Direct, significant relationships exist among engagement, satisfaction on functional

suitability, and satisfaction on usability. As one is more engaged to system, he or she is more

satisfied, and vice versa. Furthermore, as one is becoming more satisfied of a system’s

functional suitability, he or she is also satisfied of its usability, and vice versa. In order to

increase appreciation of the use of Google classroom and similar system, student should

utilize it more often for them to be more familiar of its features and find ease and comfort in

using it. For teachers, he or she may consider including more activities for students to be

more engaged to the system.

References

David, L. (2015). E-learning theory (Mayer, Sweller, Moreno). Learning Theories. Retrieved

from https://www.learning-theories.com/e-learning-theory-mayer-sweller-

moreno.html

de Oliveira, P. C., de Almeida Cunha, C. J. C, & Nakayama, M. K. (2016). Learning

management systems (LMS) and e-learning management: An integrative review and

research agenda. Journal of Information Systems and Technology Management,

13(2). Retrieved from http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1807-

17752016000200157
 13

Functional suitability. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://iso25000.com/index.php/en/iso-25000-

standards/iso-25010

Google (n.d.). Classroom. Retrieved from https://edu.google.com/k-12-solutions/classroom/?

modal_active=none

Great Schools Partnership (2013). Learning Environment. Retrieved from

https://www.edglossary.org/learning-environment/

ISO/IEC 25010. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://iso25000.com/index.php/en/iso-25000-

standards/iso-25010

Lambert, C. (2016). Problem with Google classroom assignment importing [Web log post].

Retrieved from https://help.classcraft.com/hc/en-us/community/posts/214016168-

Problem-with-Google-Classroom-assignment-importing

Naidoo, P. (2012). Blended and authentic learning with the net generation: A workd

integrated learning perstpective. Scholarly Journal of Business Administration, 2(3),

42-47

Nayak, M. K. & Suesaowaluk, P. (2007). Advantages and disadvantages of elearning

management system. Proceedings in the Fourth International Conference on

eLearning for Knowleged-Based Society, Bangkok, Thailand.

Overfield, J. A. & Bryan-Lluka, L. (2003). An evaluation of factors affecting computer-based

learning in haemostasis: A cultural experience. BEE, 1(1). Retrieved from

http://bio.ltsn.ac.uk/journal/vol1/beej-1-9.htm

P21 (n.d.). 21st Century Learning Environments. Retrieved from

http://www.p21.org/storage/documents/le_white_paper-1.pdf
 14

Rodgers, T. (2008). Student engagement in the e-learning process and the impact on their

grades. International Journal of Cyber Society and Education, 1(2), 143-156

Usability. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://iso25000.com/index.php/en/iso-25000-standards/iso-

25010?limit=3&start=3

Appendices

The following six (6) items were prepared to determine students’ satisfaction of the

Google classroom’s functional suitability.

 I can say that the application contains the necessary features to help me learn the

subject.

 I can say that the application contains all the intended functions and capabilities to

help me learn the subject.

 I can say that the application generates correct results on online examinations.

 I find the application responsive to the commands I initiated.

 I am provided with information relevant to the subject.

 I am provided with relevant functions and corresponding capabilities.

While, the following 12 items were prepared to determine students’ satisfaction of the

Google classroom’s usability.

 I can easily determine whether the application is appropriate to my learning of the

subject.

 I can easily know the intended use of this application.

 I can easily learn how to use the application.

 I am satisfied with the features and capabilities of this application

 15

 I am guided by the given information on how to use this application.

 I can use the application without much effort.

 I am provided with corresponding confirmation to commands I initiated.

 I am prompted with corresponding feedback to my inappropriate inputs.

 I find the interface of this application pleasing to my eyes.

 I find the format of texts and other objects satisfying.

 I can access the contents in different ways.

 I can easily access the information and features.