# Exploring the Determinants of Service Quality of Cloud E-Learning System for Active System Usage
## 4 Analysis and Findings
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline  & & \(n\) & \% \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Gender} & Male & 178 & 37.6 \\  & Female & 296 & 62.4 \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Age (in Years)} & Under 18 & 84 & 17.7 \\  & 18–21 & 176 & 37.1 \\  & 22–25 & 142 & 30.0 \\  & Above 25 & 72 & 15.2 \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{E-Learning Experience (in Years)} & Less than 1 & 266 & 56.1 \\  & 1–2 & 129 & 27.2 \\  & 3–5 & 54 & 11.4 \\  & More than 5 & 25 & 5.3 \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Types of E-Learning System} & Basics & 134 & 28.3 \\  & Blended-1 & 166 & 35.0 \\ \cline{1-1}  & Blended-2 & 21 & 4.4 \\ \cline{1-1}  & Blended-3 & 25 & 5.3 \\ \cline{1-1}  & Full E-Learning & 128 & 27.0 \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Area of Study} & Medical and Health Science & 143 & 30.2 \\ \cline{1-1}  & Engineering and Computer Science & 205 & 43.2 \\ \cline{1-1}  & Humanities and Social Sciences & 126 & 26.6 \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Daily use of E-Learning (in hours)} & Less than 1 & 80 & 16.9 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 1–2 & 183 & 38.6 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 3–4 & 107 & 22.6 \\ \cline{1-1}  & More than 4 & 104 & 21.9 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Demographic profile of respondents. level for retaining any construct item. Finally, in a proposed model for E-Learning service efficiency, all constructs were kept in their initial state. To evaluate the validity of the model Cronbach's alpha was calculated and to examine internal consistency composite reliability and average variance were calculated and depicted in Table 2. Composite reliability and Cronbach's alpha were greater than 0.70, indicating that they met the minimum [42] criterion for further investigation. For the proposed E-Learning service quality model, all constructs were found to be valid. Average variance extracted for all constructs was greater than 0.50 and met the standard inclusion criteria [43]. Therefore, all five constructs were considered as deemed suitable for assessing E-Learning service quality. The result of the Cornell-Larcker criteria illustrates that the value in the diagonal is higher as compared to the other values of the same constructs, as shown in Table 3. Heterotrait-Monotrait (HTMT) analysis was used to evaluate discriminant validity, as suggested by [44]. The association between the same construct in a different time frame is known as HTMT correlation. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Constructs**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Items**} & **Outer** & **Cronbach’s** & **Composite** & **Average** \\  & & **Loading** & **Alpha** & **Reliability** & **Variance** \\  & & **OL**\(\geq\) **0.70** & **\(\alpha\)\(\geq\) 0.70** & **CR**\(\geq\) **0.70** & **AVE**\(\geq\) **0.50** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Actual System Usage} & ASU1 & 0.691 & & & \\  & ASU2 & 0.857 & & & \\  & ASU3 & 0.876 & 0.896 & 0.925 & 0.712 \\  & ASU4 & 0.801 & & & \\  & ASU5 & 0.807 & & & \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Information Quality} & INQ1 & 0.744 & & & \\  & INQ2 & 0.810 & & & \\  & INQ3 & 0.805 & 0.867 & 0.903 & 0.651 \\  & INQ4 & 0.820 & & & \\  & INQ5 & 0.809 & & & \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Perceived Ease of Use} & PEU1 & 0.817 & & & \\  & PEU2 & 0.834 & & & \\  & PEU3 & 0.827 & 0.929 & 0.946 & 0.779 \\  & PEU4 & 0.810 & & & \\  & PEU5 & 0.864 & & & \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Reliability} & REL1 & 0.822 & & & \\  & REL2 & 0.842 & & & \\  & REL3 & 0.824 & 0.877 & 0.916 & 0.734 \\  & REL4 & 0.781 & & & \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Social Influence} & SOI1 & 0.839 & & & \\  & SOI2 & 0.836 & & & \\  & SOI3 & 0.838 & & & \\  & SOI4 & 0.834 & & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Factor analysis (OU), reliability (\(\alpha\)), composite reliability (CR) and average variance extracted (AVE).