Factorial Components Affecting Students’ Perceived Learning Outcomes and Satisfaction in Principles of Marketing Course: Implications for ASEAN Qualifications
Keywords:
Principles of Marketing, Factor Analysis, Perceived Learning Outcomes, Learning Satisfaction, Learning Motivation, Teaching Quality, Educational TechnologyAbstract
This study aimed to examine the levels of personal factors related to teaching and learning in the Principles of Marketing course and to analyze the key components influencing students’ perceived learning outcomes and satisfaction. A quantitative research design was employed, using a questionnaire as the primary data collection instrument. Convenience sampling was applied to select 400 undergraduate students enrolled in the Principles of Marketing course. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), with Principal Component Analysis and Varimax rotation. The results of the data suitability test showed that the KMO value was .907 and Bartlett’s Test was statistically significant, indicating the appropriateness of the dataset for factor analysis. The analysis extracted eight principal components: (1) teaching quality and learning environment; (2) motivation and learning skills; (3) support and prior knowledge; (4) learning outcomes and satisfaction; (5) assessment system; (6) active learning behaviors; (7) content quality and relevance; and (8) instructional media and educational technology. The findings highlight that successful learning in the Principles of Marketing course does not stem from a single factor but results from an interplay among teacher-related, learner-related, content-related, environmental, and technological dimensions. Among these, teaching quality and the learning environment emerged as the most influential components. The study provides valuable insights for enhancing instructional practices and strengthening course quality assurance in higher education.
References
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives (Complete ed.). Longman.
ASEAN Secretariat. (2015). ASEAN Economic Community Blueprint 2025. ASEAN Secretariat.
Astin, A. W. (1993). What matters in college? Four critical years revisited. Jossey-Bass.
Ausubel, D. P. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Bandura, A. (2020). Social cognitive theory and learning performance. Global Journal of Education, 5(1), 101-115.
Bernardo, A. B. I. (2018). Harmonizing higher education at the regional level. Higher Education Research & Development, 37(7), 1373-1386.
Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university. McGraw-Hill.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 5-31.
Carter, J. G. (2016). Marketing education in Thailand: A nationalistic perspective or an ASEAN community focus? Journal of International Education in Business, 9(1), 22-38.
Choi, H., & Lee, S. (2024). Learning motivation and academic performance of university students in hybrid learning. Educational Technology Review, 3(2), 55-70.
Corong, E., & Aguiar, A. (2019). Economic impact of skilled labor mobility within the ASEAN Economic Community. In E. Gentile (Ed.), Skilled labor mobility and migration (pp. 57-88). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage Learning.
Jaweng, R. E. (2025). Legal frameworks for workforce mobility and employment regulations in ASEAN. The International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations, 41(2), 115-132. https://doi.org/10.1080/0023656X.2025.2507010
Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39(1), 31-36.
Kriengsak, L. (2022). The relationship between satisfaction and perceived learning outcomes in a management course. Journal of Business Administration and Social Sciences, 4(1), 45-60.
Kuroiwa, Y. (2021). The ASEAN Economic Community and ASEAN economic integration. Journal of Asian Economics, 74, 101300. https://doi.org/10.1080/24761028.2021.1891702
Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed). Cambridge University Press. Office of the Secretariat of the Council of Education. (2020). National Qualifications Framework with the ASEAN Qualifications Framework. Ministry of Education.
Piaget, J. (1970). Science of education and the psychology of the child. Orion Press.
Pichit, R. (2024). Guidelines for developing learning assessment systems in the digital era. Journal of Professional Educational Innovation, 5(1), 10-25.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667-686.
Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33-40.
Reigeluth, C. M., & Carr-Chellman, A. A. (Eds.). (2009). Instructional-design theories and models: Volume III: Building a common knowledge base. Taylor & Francis.
Smith, J., & Jones, A. (2021). High school background and university marketing course success. International Journal of Higher Education, 10(3), 200-215.
Sutthichai, S. (2023). Quality management and service excellence in higher education: A framework for student satisfaction. Journal of Learning and Innovation, 6(1), 45-62.
Zhao, G., Wang, Q., Wu, L., & Dong, Y. (2022). Exploring the structural relationship between university support, students’ technostress, and burnout in technology-enhanced learning. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 31, 463-473.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64-70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2
