Analysis of risks in a Learning Management System: A case study in the Spanish National University of Distance Education (UNED)

  1. Vázquez Cano, Esteban
  2. Sevillano García, María Luisa
Journal:
NAER: Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research

ISSN: 2254-7339

Year of publication: 2015

Volume: 4

Issue: 1

Pages: 62-68

Type: Article

DOI: 10.7821/NAER.2015.1.107 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

More publications in: NAER: Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research

Sustainable development goals

Abstract

This article presents a research that examines the university students' risk perception when using a Learning Management System called "aLF" and implemented by the Spanish National University of Distance Education (UNED) for the development of its university distance studies. The development of comprehensive Learning Management Systems for teachinglearning distance practices in the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) is a challenge for universities all around Europe. For this reason, it is necessary to analyze not only the benefits that involve these environments but the risks perceived by its users to improve teaching methods and design better user interfaces. Through a quantitative method, we test 588 students' opinions about their risks perceptions when using this LMS to study the University degree in Pedagogy. Results show that main risks are concentrated in two dimensions: dimension 1 "basic or general" with high incidence of "fear of making mistakes" and "ignorance of the course content; and dimension 2 "own and beyond students' circumstances" where it is important to stand out the risks not directly controlled by the students: "warning from the authorities for not developing the program", "isolation from teachers" and "delegation of control".

€ View funding

Funding information

Funders

Bibliographic References

  • Álvarez, M. C. (Ed.). (2001). Developing critical and imaginative thinking within electronic literacy. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
  • Ananiadou, K., & Claro, M. (2009, September). 21st century skills and competencies for new millennium learners in OECD countries. NML country survey. In The New Millennium Learners International Conference, Brussels.
  • Artino, A. R. (2008). Understanding satisfaction and continuing motivation in an online course: An extension of social cognitive, control-value theory. In Annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, NY. Retrieved from http://www.sp.uconn.edu/~aja05001/comps/documents/AERA_2008_SEM_Artino_FINAL.pdf
  • Artino, A. R., & Stephens, J. M. (2007). Bored and frustrated with online learning? Understanding achievement emotions from a social cognitive, control-value perspective. Paper presented at the Annual meeting of the Northeastern Educational Research Association, Rocky Hill, CT. Retrieved from http://www.sp.uconn.edu/~aja05001/comps/documents/NERA-07_AchEmotions_Artino%2BStephens.pdf
  • Baker, E. (2003). Reflections on technology-enhanced assessment. Assessment in Education, 10(3), 421-425. doi: 10.1080/0969594032000148226
  • Brindley, J. E., Walti, C., & Blaschke, L. M. (2009). Creating effective collaborative learning groups in an online environment. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 10(3), 1-18.
  • Curtis, D. D., & Lawson, M. J. (2001). Exploring collaborative online learning. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(1), 21-34.
  • Daniels, P. (2009). Course Management Systems and Implications for Practice. International Journal of Emerging Technologies & Society, 7(2), 97-108.
  • Dirkx, J. M., & Smith, R. O. (2004). Thinking out of a bowl of spaghetti: Learning to learn in online collaborative groups. In T. S. Roberts (Ed.), Online collaborative learning: Theory and practice (pp. 132-159). Hershey, PA: Information Science Publishing. doi: 10.4018/978-1-59140-174-2.ch006
  • Do, S., & Schallert, D. (2004). Emotions and classroom talk: Toward a model of the role of affect in students’ experiences of classroom discussions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(4), 619-634. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.96.4.619
  • Dodda, B. J., & Antonenkob, P. D (2012). Use of signaling to integrate desktop virtual reality and online learning management systems. Computers & Education, 59(4), 1099-1108. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2012.05.016
  • Ellis, R. (2009). A field guide to learning management systems. USA. American Society of Training and Development (ASTD).
  • Fletcher, G. H. (2007). Bloggers welcome here: Social networking tools appear poised to enter the school system. It’s a breakthrough long overdue. T H E Journal (Technological Horizons in Education), 34(11), 8.
  • Garrison, D., & Vaughan, N. (2008). Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles, and guidelines. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
  • Georgina, D., & Olson, M. (2008). Integration of technology in higher education: A review of faculty self-perception. The Internet and Higher Education, 11, 1-8. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2007.11.002
  • Glover, I., & Oliver, A. (2008). Hybridisation of Social Networking and Learning Environments. In J. Luca & E. Weippl (Eds.), Proceedings of the World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2008 (pp. 4951-8). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
  • Gómez, E., & Rodríguez-Marciel, C. (2012). PGDnet: a new problem-solving virtual learning environment. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43, 576–591. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01224.x
  • Hahn, J. (2008). Born digital: Understanding the first generation of digital natives. Library Journal, 133(13), 105.
  • Handa, Y. (2003). A phenomenological exploration of mathematical engagement: Approaching an old metaphor anew. For the Learning of Mathematics, 23(1), 22-29.
  • Hickey, D. T., Moore, A. L., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2001). The motivational and academic consequences of elementary mathematics environments: Do constructivist innovations and reforms make a difference? American Educational Research Journal, 38, 611-652. doi: 10.3102/00028312038003611
  • Hrastinski, S. (2006). Introducing an informal synchronous medium in a distance learning course: How is participation affected? The Internet and Higher Education, 9, 117-131. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2006.03.006
  • Jackson, L. A., Von Eye, A., Biocca, F. A., Barbatsis, G., Zhao, Y., & Fitzgerald, H. E. (2006). Does home Internet use Influence the academic performance of low income children? Developmental Psychology, 42, 429-435. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.42.3.429
  • Järvenoja, H., & Järvelä, S. (2005). How students describe the sources of their emotional and motivational experiences during the learning process: A qualitative approach. Learning, 15, 465-480.
  • Kopcha, T. J. (2012). Teachers' perceptions of the barriers to technology integration and practices with technology under situated professional development. Computers & Education, 59(4), 1109-1121. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2012.05.014
  • Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P. A., & Jochems, W. (2002).The sociability of computer-supported collaborative learning environments. Journal of Education Technology & Society, 5(1), 822.
  • Macdonald, J., & Poniatowska, B. (2011). Designing the professional development of staff for teaching online: an OU (UK) case study. Distance Education, 32(1), 119-134. doi: 10.1080/01587919.2011.565481
  • Mandler, G. (1975). Mind and emotion. New York: Wiley.
  • Moyle, K. (2010). Building innovation: Learning with technologies. Australian Education Review, 56.
  • Park, S. Y., Nam, M.-W., & Cha, S. B. (2012). University students' behavioral intention to use mobile learning: Evaluating the technology acceptance model. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43, 592-605. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01229.x
  • Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Titz, W., & Perry, R. P. (2002). Academic emotions in students' self-regulated learning and achievement: A program of qualitative and quantitative research. Educational Psychologist, 37(2), 91-105. doi: 10.1207/S15326985EP3702_4
  • Reigeluth, Ch. (2000). La teoría elaborativa: orientación para la toma de decisiones sobre el alcance y la secuenciación. In Ch. Reigeluth (Ed): Diseño de la instrucción. Teoría y modelos (pp. 449-480). Madrid: Aula XXI Santillana.
  • Roberts, T. S. (2005). Computer-supported collaborative learning in higher education: An introduction. In T. S. Roberts (Ed.), Computer-supported collaborative learning in higher education (pp. 2-3). Hershey, PA: Information Science Publishing. doi: 10.4018/978-1-59140-408-8
  • Rosen, A. (2009). E-Learning 2.0: Proven practices and emerging technologies to achieve results. New York, NY: American Management Association.
  • Rosen, Y, & Rimor, R. (2009). Using collaborative database to enhance students’ knowledge construction. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects, 5, 187-195.
  • Rosen, Y., & Salomon, G. (2007). The differential learning achievements of constructivist technology-intensive learning environments as compared with traditional ones: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 36(1), 1-14. doi: 10.2190/R8M4-7762-282U-554J
  • Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing social presence in screen text-based computer conferencing. Journal of Distance Education, 14, 51-70.
  • Rovai, A. P., & James D. (2010). Why some distance education programs fail while others succeed in a global environment. Internet and Higher Education, 13, 141-147. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.07.001
  • Rushkoff, D. (2010). Program or be Programmed. Ten Commands for a Digital Age. Or Books.
  • Sabry, K., & Baldwin, L. (2003). Web-based learning interaction and learning styles. British Journal of Educational Technology, 34, 443-454. doi: 10.1111/1467-8535.00341
  • Shih, M., Feng, J., & Tsai, C. C. (2008). Research and trends in the field of e-learning from 2001 to 2005: A content analysis of cognitive studies in selected journals. Computers & Education, 51(2), 955-967. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2007.10.004
  • Sierpinska, A., Bobos, G., & Knipping, Ch. (2008). Sources of students' frustration in preuniversity level, prerequisite mathematics courses. Instructional Science, 36, 289-320. doi: 10.1007/s11251-007-9033-6
  • Stahl, G., Koschmann, T., & Suthers, D. (2006). Computer-supported collaborative learning: An historical perspective. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 409-426). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from http://GerryStahl.net/cscl/CSCL_English.pdf
  • Traphagan, T. W., Chiang, Y. H. V., Chang, H. M., Wattanawaha, B., Lee, H., Mayrath, M. C., Woo, J., Yoon, H. J., Jee, M. J., & Resta, P. E. (2010). Cognitive, Social and Teaching Presence in a Virtual World and a Text Chat. Computers & Education, 55(3), 923-936. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.04.003
  • Warschauer, M. (2003). Technology and social inclusion: Rethinking the digital divide. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Warschauer, M., & Matuchniak, T. (2010). New technology and digital worlds: Analyzing evidence of equity in access, use, and outcomes. Review of Research in Education, 34(1), 179-225. doi: 10.3102/0091732X09349791
  • Weller, M. (2007). The distance from isolation: Why communities are the logical conclusion in e-learning. Computers and Education, 40, 148-159. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2005.04.015
  • Wu, B., & Teoh, A. P. (2008). A Comparative Analysis of Learners Interaction in the Learning Management Systems: Does National Culture Matter? AAOU Journal, 3(1), 1-16.
Data source: Dialnet