Reviewing and examining the effective factors impacting on the accessibility of Shahid Beheshti university’s courseware

Vardasbi, F.; RezaeiZadeh, M.; Khorasani, A.; Alikhani, P.

doi:10.22061/jte.2018.3030.1769

Document Type : Original Research Paper

Authors

¹ Department of Higher Education, Faculty of Educational Sciences& Psychology, ShahidBeheshti University, Tehran. Iran

² Department of Higher Education, Faculty of Educational Sciences & Psychology, ShahidBeheshti University, Tehran. Iran

https://doi.org/10.22061/jte.2018.3030.1769

Abstract

Background and Objectives:Universities play an important role in society. They are centers of innovation, attract and nurture talent, create and share new knowledge, and are of great value in the national and regional economies. Thus, declining government budgets and increasing global competition for qualified staff and students have led universities to provide better conditions for providing education in a variety of ways. On the other hand, communication technologies have paved the way for distance learning by offering new methods of education. Therefore, with the development of the Internet and multimedia technologies and their use in educational programs, a kind of educational model called e-learning has been created. In e-learning, due to the existence of the World Wide Web, all stages of education have benefited from what the Internet has provided. In the web space, a variety of features such as online class notes and lecture materials, dynamic online Q & A systems, classroom preparation for exams, games and real-life simulations for educators and learners are provided. In order to present and manage activities in the e-learning environment, a software program called Learning Management System (LMS) is used, which provides facilities for sharing educational materials, sending notifications related to each lesson, presenting and performing assignments, providing users with online communication with each other, conducting evaluations, and evaluating results. Accessibility is one of the important indicators in obtaining students' and teachers' interest in a courseware. Therefore, the present study aimed to identify the effective factors impacting on the accessibility of Shahid Beheshti University’s courseware.
Method and Materials: Accordingly, a qualitative phenomenology research has been implemented. The population of this study is undergraduate students of the Faculty of Education and Psychology of Shahid Beheshti University in Tehran who had an experience of working with the courseware. 15 Participants were selected using purposeful sampling method. Semi-structured interviews were conducted for data gathering until the theoretical saturation was achieved. The findings were analyzed using Strauss and Corbin coding method at two open and axial coding levels.
Findings: According to the findings from 15 interviews, six categories including: the weakness of quick access to the content of discussions, the lack of off-line access to the discussions, not suitable access to the content on multiple platforms, lack of ability to display online users, the weakness in access to discussions of the previous groups; and lack of student access to their performance results, were identified.
Conclusion: The main result of this research is to highlight the importance of the "availability" indicator for learning management tools and systems and also to determine the factors affecting this important indicator. If the designers and implementers of learning management systems in schools and universities are interested in improving the management function of their curriculum, it is necessary to pay proper attention to these six factors. Processes and components in courseware need to be changed so that they can be "more accessible" to their stakeholders by considering the above six factors. These factors could help e-learning administrators and designers to provide a better and more qualified experience for their students and faculties.

Keywords

20.1001.1.20080441.1397.12.2.2.8

Main Subjects

Electronic learning- virtual

References

[1] Ellis R, Goodyear P. Students' experiences of e-learning in higher education: the ecology of sustainable innovation. US: Routledge; 2013.

[2] Lim DH, Morris ML. Learner and instructional factors influencing learning outcomes within a blended learning environment. Journal of Educational Technology & Society. 2009; 12(4): 282.

[3] Gonen S, Basaran B. Learning objects and their applications. In P. Ghislandi, (Ed.), eLearning-theories, design, xoftware and applications (pp. 109-129). New York: InTech; 2012.

[4] Anderson T. (Ed.). The theory and practice of online learning. Canada: Athabasca University Press; 2008.

[5] Lonn S, Teasley SD. Saving time or innovating practice: Investigating perceptions and uses of Learning Management Systems. Computers & Education. 2009; 53(3), 686-694.

[6] Ally M. Foundations of educational theory for online learning. Theory and Practice of Online Learning. 2004; 2: 15-44.

[7] Aydin CC, Tirkes G. Open source learning management systems in e-learning and Moodle. In Proceedings of IEEE
EDUCON 2010 - IEEE Engineering Education 2010 (pp.593–600), Madrid; 2010.

[8] Khan BH. A framework for web-based learning, In B. H. Khan, (Eds.), web-based training (pp. 75-98). New Jersey: Educational technology publication; 2001.

[9] Islam AN. Sources of satisfaction and dissatisfaction with a learning management system in post-adoption stage: A critical incident technique approach. Computers in Human Behavior. 2014; 30: 249-261.

[10] Zamzuri ZF, Manaf M, Yunus Y, Ahmad A. Student perception on security requirement of e-learning services. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2013; 90: 923-930.

[11] Dobre I. Learning Management Systems for higher education-an overview of available options for higher education organizations. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2015; 180: 313-320.

[12] Berking P, Gallagher S. Choosing a learning management system. Choosing a Learning Management System, Advanced Distributed Learning (ADL) Co-Laboratories (pp. 40–62); 2013.

[13] Minović M, Štavljanin V, Milovanović M, Starčević D. Usability issues of e-learning systems: Case-study for Moodle learning management system.Paper presented at the On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems: OTM 2008 Workshops, Monterrey, Mexico; 2008.

[14] Downes S. Nine rules for good technology, In A. B. Shostak, (Ed.), The cyber union handbook: Transforming labor through computer technology (pp. 57-61). New York: Routledge; 2000.

[15] Fathema N, Shannon D, Ross M. Expanding the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to examine faculty use of learning Management Systems (LMSs) in higher education institutions. Journal of Online Learning & Teaching. 2015; 11(2): 210-232.

[16] McIntosh D. Vendors of learning management and e-learning products. Trimeritus eLearningSolutions Inc; 2014.

[17] Nikolić N, Savić G, Segedinac M, Konjović Z. Migration from Sakai to Canvas. The Proceedings of the 4thInternational Conference on Information Society and Technology(ICIST) (366 – 370). Kopaonik, Serbia; 2014.

[18] Almarashdeh I. Sharing instructors experience of learning management system: A technology perspective of user satisfaction in distance learning course. Computers in Human Behavior. 2016;63: 249-255.

[19] Asoodar M, Vaezi S, Izanloo B. Framework to improve e-learner satisfaction and further strengthen e-learning implementation. Computers in Human Behavior. 2016;63: 704-716.

[20] Jafari SM, Salem SF, Moaddab MS, Salem SO. Learning Management System (LMS) success: An investigation among the university students. The Proceedings of 2015 IEEE Conference on e-Learning, e-Management and e-Services (IC3e) (pp. 64-69). US: IEEE; 2001.

[21] Islam AN. Investigating e-learning system usage outcomes in the university context. Computers & Education. 2013;69: 387-399.

[22] Basioudis IG, De Lange P, Suwardy T, Wells P. Accounting students' perceptions of a Learning Management System: An international comparison. Accounting Research Journal. 2012; 25(2): 72-86.

[23] Weaver D, Spratt C, Nair CS. Academic and student use of a learning management system: Implications for quality. Australasian Journal 0f Educational Technology. 2008;24(1): 30-41.

[24] Rahmanpoor M, Nasr esfahani A. Study requirements for the use of learning management system in higher education from the viewpoint of professors. Information and Communication Technology in Educational Sciences. 2016; 6(4): 39-58. Persian.

[25] Jamshidikia S, Fazelian P, Khoshneshin Z. Evaluating the Learning Management System at the University of Tehran Electronic Learning Center. Information and Communication Technology in Educational Sciences. 2015; 6(1): 19-35. Persian.

[26] Creswell JW. Qualitative inquiry and research design : choosing among five approaches (H. Danaeefard & H. Kazemi, Trans.). Tehran: Saffar; 2007. Persian.

[27] Noori A, Mehrmohammadi M. A model for applying Grounded Theory in educational studies. Journal of Curriculum Studies. 2012; 6(23): 8-35. Persian.

[28] Cho W, Jung Y, Im JH. Students' evaluation of learning management systems in the personal computer and smartphone computing environments. International Journal of Mobile Communications. 2014; 12(2): 142-159.

[29] Gibbs D, Gosper M. The upside-down-world of e-learning. Journal of Learning Design. 2012; 1(2): 46-54.