![]() |
|
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
December 2002 |
|
Vol. 16 : No. 12< >
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
* A plus sign (+) indicates a possible combination whereas a minus sign (–) indicates no possible combination. We do not include asynchronous (e.g. cassette tapes, self-paced manuals) and synchronic (e.g. teleconferencing) distance learning resources that are not computer-mediated in this typology. We do not claim that the findings reported here are relevant to choosing among learning management systems. Rather, our purpose is more limited in scope, and analytic in nature. This paper reports on a study of student class participation, satisfaction, and communication with the teacher in one specific type of blended learning in a university class. Our analysis considers both access (the primary location where students access MyGateway) and use (low use or high use) of the learning portal (MyGateway) as key independent variables in predicting learner satisfaction, participation, and communication within distance learning classes. We focus on access because of the longstanding assumption that one of distance education’s most promising features is the way it makes learning resources flexible and available to learners regardless of location (Valore & Diehl, 1987). Access has always been an issue for distance learning, from early reliance on the postal system, distributing books, self-paced manuals and other learning materials like audio-cassettes or albums, to later reliance on the general availability of analog technologies like television and telephony. In each case, access to learning resources was important. The same concern for access to learning resources appears relevant to interactive video classes, especially those integrating learning management system portals such as MyGateway into the curriculum. For instance, roughly equal access (between the host and remote sites) to studio classrooms equipped with interactive video feeds does not ensure equal access to Internet connectivity, especially in rural areas (Irons, Jung, & Keel, 2002). On the other hand, computer-mediated communication via the Internet can also provide a base for engaged students, even at remote sites, to increase their sense of involvement by using discussion groups, chat rooms, and other asynchronous technologies (Bielema, 1996). We use access location to the learning portal, MyGateway, as an independent variable in our analysis of student satisfaction. We also focus on use because, flexibility of
access aside, the ability of learners to apply technology in support of
their learning activity depends largely on their ongoing response to using
it (Storey, Phillips, Maczewski & Wang, 2002). If using a particular
technology is not relatively straightforward and demonstrably effective in
ways that are relevant to the student’s learning activity, users (in this
case students) will not continue using the technology when presented with
other options. Thus, we predict that such students will agree with
negative statements about MyGateway and not agree with positive statements
about MyGateway.[3]
Our concern with use is different from a concern with usability per se. We
are focusing on the results of sustained exposure (high use) to a learning
management system in a blended learning class, as opposed to limited or
incidental exposure (low use). Further, our concern is for how students
perceive the learning management system to affect their participation in
the class (learning activity), satisfaction with the class, and
communication with the teacher as compared to a traditional face-to-face
class in which a learning management system is not used. MethodologyA stratified random sample (10 percent of the courses using MyGateway) was selected according to levels of faculty use of the learning management tool, MyGateway (N = 45). The courses were designated low use if faculty had logged 9 days or less in Control Panel accesses; high use if faculty had logged 10 or more days of Control Panel accesses by the middle of the semester (sample median was 8, mean 11). Questionnaires were completed in the class during the evaluation period at the end of the semester. Completed surveys by undergraduate and graduate
students numbered 666 with a 70% response rate. Students responding in
high use courses numbered 318, while 348 students in low use
courses responded. Given our interest in access, the survey also asked
students about the computing and network resources available from their
primary access location. QuestionnaireThe questionnaire for the current study consisted of
46 items, with 16 of those items designed for the data analysis reported
here using a seven point Likert scale (see Table 2). The Likert items
asked students to indicate their agreement on a seven-point scale ranging
from (1) strongly agree to (7) strongly disagree. Table 2. Questionnaire lead-ins and question text
Computers and Access for StudentsStudents were asked about their primary computer
access location and capabilities available to them. Over 60 percent
(61.6%) of the respondents reported owning a new computer (e.g., Pentium).
Slightly fewer students in low use courses than those in the
high use courses indicated having the newer computers. Only 9.8
percent of students reported that they do not own a computer. Table 3. Primary Access Location
If a student’s primary access was from off-campus, they were asked specifics about the type of Internet connection: dial-up telephone via modem, dial up with DSL, cable modem, or other. See Table 2 for connection details of both groups. Again, the two groups of students were similar, with
cable modems used a little more frequently by the high use students
than those in the low use group. Table 4. Type of Internet Connection to University Servers
Blended Learning: Location and UseWe analyze the relationship of access location and use to learner satisfaction with MyGateway by: 1. distinguishing students who primarily use it on campus from those who primarily use it off campus 2. distinguishing low use from high use classes. An independent samples t-test was used to measure
each of these independent variables’ (access location and use) predictive
power in relation to specific items from a survey instrument. The items
used in the full survey were intended to assess the learning portal from a
larger array of concerns. The items studied herein were developed to
measure the degree to which two independent variables (access and use) are
significant predictors for increased learner satisfaction
(questions 33, 35, 36, 37, 38, see Table 2), increased learning
activity (questions 9, 11 – 16, see Table 2), and increased
student/teacher communication (questions 8, 10, 17, 32, see Table 2)
in the courses studied. We examine each of these below and assume that as
the degree of satisfaction with a technology increases the more learning
activity occurs, along with increased student/teacher communication. Access Location and MyGateway Student EvaluationsOur first concern in analyzing access location is to estimate its ability to predict the responses offered by students using MyGateway. To the extent that students have to travel to campus to use computers with access to the network, we expect those students to experience disadvantage in learning activities, lower satisfaction, and poorer student/teacher communication. So, our first three hypotheses test these relationships: H1: Access to learning resources over the Internet from off-campus locations increases student participation in learning activities in blended learning classes. H2: Access to learning resources over the Internet from off-campus locations increases student satisfaction in blended learning classes. H3: Access to learning resources over the Internet from off-campus locations increases student/teacher communication in blended learning classes. Specifically, we measured the relationship of access
location (either on campus or off-campus) to students’ responses to items
involving learning activity, student satisfaction, and
student/teacher communication. Table 5. Access Location Items (independent samples t-test)
Question 35 was the only item from the survey that indicated a significant relationship (p < .05) between the access location of students and their response. Question 35, a student satisfaction item, stated: “It takes more effort to complete a course that uses online resources like MyGateway.” Judgments about the success or failure of those efforts are not predicted by access location. The type of off-campus connectivity available to the student does not affect the relationship, i.e. whether the connection was dial-up or broadband (DSL or cable modem). [4] Students accessing MyGateway from home, regardless of connectivity, were statistically more likely to disagree with Question 35. Alternatively, those students accessing MyGateway at campus locations were more likely to agree with Question 35. Thus, we find only limited support for the hypothesis that students who commute to campus to use MyGateway resources experience lower satisfaction. Qualitative comments from students on the personal benefits of using MyGateway support the notion that flexible access to materials, support staff, and teachers was a source of satisfaction. One comment in particular was instructive on this point:
Especially because [the university] is a commuter
campus, it is useful to be able to access course information, contact
instructors and stimulate “community” interaction (via discussion boards). Degree of Use and MyGateway Student EvaluationsIn addition to access location, the survey items allow us to analyze differences between students in classes with low use of MyGateway and students in classes with high use. Our working hypothesis is that increased exposure to classes using MyGateway results in higher degrees of learning activity, satisfaction, and student/teacher communication. To the degree that the hypothesis is not supported we would expect lower acceptance of blended learning courses. H3: Increased use of the learning portal increases student participation in learning activities in blended learning classes. H4: Increased use of the learning portal increases student satisfaction in blended learning classes. H5: Increased use of the learning portal increases student/teacher communication in blended learning classes. The hypotheses, simply stated, claim that the more
people use the learning portal, MyGateway, the higher their participation
in learning activities, satisfaction with their classes, and
student/teacher communication when compared to traditional classes—rather
than the other way around. Use of MyGateway in Relation to Learning ActivityEvery learning activity item measured by the
MyGateway survey indicates that students in low use classes are
more likely (p < .05) to disagree with positive statements about
learning activities in MyGateway classes. Thus, students in classes with
high use of MyGateway were more likely to review lecture notes for
clarification (Question 9), discuss ideas with other students (Question
11), actively participate in the course (Question 12), work on assignments
with other students (Question 13), complete assignments on time (Question
14), access other online materials related to course content (Question
15), and spend more time studying for the course (Question 16). Table 6. Learning Activity Items (independent samples t-test)
It is notable that even though students agreed that
they were spending more time studying for the course, they nonetheless
recognized the benefits of greater use of MyGateway in their courses.
Students responding to open-ended questions on the benefits of using
MyGateway reinforced the answers to the survey items. The two most often
mentioned benefits were the availability of grades and course materials.
The ability to easily communicate with instructors and other students was
also emphasized, along with convenience of web access. Specific pluses
mentioned included help in staying connected to the class, getting
instructor feedback quicker, increased organization and opportunities for
clarification. Use of MyGateway in Relation to Student SatisfactionTwo items related to student satisfaction with
courses using MyGateway indicate that students in low use classes
are more likely (p < .05) to disagree with positive statements
about their satisfaction with MyGateway classes. Thus, students in classes
with high use of MyGateway were more likely to agree that they are
very satisfied with the course (Question 33) and that they would like to
have MyGateway used in other courses (Question 36). Interestingly,
responses to Question 35, which are significant when measuring access
location are not significant when measuring use. Even though students who
travel to campus to use the Internet think more effort is involved, their
responses are not affected by degree of use. In comparing high and low use
groups, MyGateway has no discernable effect on re-enrollment (Question 37)
or student retention (Question 38). Table 7. Satisfaction Items
(independent samples t-test)
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Lead in Statement Headings and Survey Item Text |
|
|
Sig.
|
Mean Difference |
Std. Error Difference |
|
|
In general: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Q33 |
I am very satisfied with this course because it used MyGateway |
5.77 |
700 |
.000 |
.83 |
.14 |
|
Q35 |
It takes more effort to complete a course that uses online resources like MyGateway |
-.52 |
697 |
.604 |
-7.65 |
.15 |
|
Q36 |
I would like to have "MyGateway" used in other courses |
2.86 |
715 |
.004 |
.37 |
.13 |
|
Q37 |
I am more likely to take another course because it uses MyGateway |
1.28 |
703 |
.201 |
.20 |
.16 |
|
Q38 |
I am more likely to complete my degree because of the advantages of using MyGateway in my courses |
1.23 |
692 |
.220 |
.19 |
.16 |
Three items related to student/teacher communication
in courses using MyGateway indicate that students in low use
classes are more likely (p < .05) to disagree with statements about
their degree of communication with faculty in MyGateway classes.
|
|
Lead in Statement Headings and Survey Item Text |
|
|
Sig.
|
Mean Difference |
Std. Error Difference |
|
|
Because of using MyGateway in this class |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Q8 |
Seek clarification when I did not understand something |
4.506 |
700 |
.000 |
.62 |
.14 |
|
Q10 |
Receive instructor comments on assignments quickly |
5.603 |
700 |
.000 |
.83 |
.15 |
|
Q17 |
Communicate with my instructor |
4.859 |
701 |
.000 |
.71 |
.15 |
|
|
In general: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Q32 |
I prefer communicating with my instructor via [personal] email, outside MyGateway |
.714 |
702 |
.475 |
.11 |
.16 |
Thus, students in classes with high use of
MyGateway were more likely to agree that they were able to seek
clarification (Question 8), receive instructor comments on assignments
quickly (Question 10), and communicate with their instructor (Question
17). Additionally, students did not express (Question 32) a preference for
using their personal email to communicate with the instructor, implying
that the MyGateway learning portal’s communication resources are
sufficient.
The data presented above indicate that increased use
of the Blackboard Learning System implemented as a learning portal,
MyGateway, results in higher estimates of learning activity, higher
degrees of satisfaction, and higher student/teacher communication than in
courses not using the portal. Thus, the data from the current survey lend
support to the contention that the more students are exposed to learning
portals like MyGateway the higher their estimation of its positive
affects. We suggest that the findings here are not only applicable to the
MyGateway implementation of the Blackboard Learning System. Rather, we
contend that similar findings are likely in any learning portal
implementation when students get accustomed to using it (i.e., use it in
direct support of the course work), especially when the course consists of
a blend between traditional co-present classrooms and asynchronous,
computer-mediated learning portals like MyGateway.
Barbian, J. (2002) “Here’s Proof” online learning magazine 6,6, pp. 27-31.
Bielema, C. L. (1996) Factors affecting implementation of interactive, computer-mediated instructional techniques for instructors and learners at a distance (Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign) Dissertation Abstracts International, 57(11), 4703A.
Hara, Noriko & Kling, Rob (1999) “Students' Frustrations with a Web-Based Distance Education Course” First Monday 4, 12. Retrieved from http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue4_12/hara/index.html
Irons, L., Jung, D. & Keel, R. (2002) “Interactivity in Distance Learning: The Digital Divide and Student Satisfaction” Educational Technology & Society 5, 3, pp. 175-188. Retrieved from http://ifets.ieee.org/periodical/vol_3_2002/jung.pdf
Storey, M.A., Phillips, B., Maczewski, M. & Wang, M. (2002) “Evaluating the usability of Web-based learning tools,” Educational Technology & Society 5, 3, pp. 91-100. Retrieved from http://ifets.ieee.org/periodical/vol_3_2002/storey.pdf
Valore, L. & Diehl, G.E. (1987) The effectiveness and acceptance of home study. Washington, DC: National Home Study Council.
Larry Irons combines industry and academic livelihoods in his professional career. He is Managing Partner of I.C. Technologies, a consulting services company focused on using performance support, eLearning and communities of practice to achieve client goals. Larry has researched distance learning since the early 1990s, participating in several industry/academic/government-sponsored projects. His consulting and research interests both focus on how communication technologies are designed and used. Larry received his Ph.D. in Sociology from Washington University in St. Louis in 1992.
Larry can be contacted at:
larryi@ic-t.com
Robert Keel has taught sociology for the past 26 years. He currently is a lecturer in the Department of Sociology at the University of Missouri-St. Louis. For the past 8 years he has worked to develop Internet-based class resources for his classes at UM-St. Louis. He also works as a faculty liaison and specialist in information technology for the UM-St. Louis Information Technology Services department.
Robert can be contacted at
rok@umsl.edu.
Cheryl Bielema, Instructional Designer, manages the Faculty Resource Center, University of Missouri-St. Louis, consulting with and training faculty in the integration of technology. She collaborates with the Center for Teaching and Learning, jointly sponsoring teaching and technology workshops for faculty and staff. Bielema worked previously at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, in distance learning as well as in UI Extension. Her teaching experience is in Curriculum and Instruction and Educational Technology. Her Ph.D. is in Human Resource Development, University of Illinois.
Cheryl can be contacted at bielema@umsl.edu.
Endnotes
[1] A word on terminology is needed here. We use the term student when referring to specific characteristics of participants in the current survey who were, after all, university students. The term learner is used when discussing analytic findings with general implications for blended learning. The term “blended learning” is used as an umbrella concept to encompass various preexisting categories that provide less analytic utility as the multiple modalities depicted in Table 1 become increasingly common. Such terms as e-Learning, online learning, web-based learning, and distance learning are increasingly ineffective categories with efforts to distinguish between them rather futile.
[2] Heidi J. Larson provides a useful overview of the Blackboard Learning System on the Training Media Review web site, http://www.tmreview.com/review.asp?id=876&mem=true
[3] Storey, Phillips, Maczewski & Wang (2002) asked students and faculty to compare Blackboard to WebCT’s learning management system on issues of navigation, customization, student management and content creation and noted an overall preference for Blackboard. Further, it is interesting to note that the authors contend that most “usability principles were violated by the tools [Blackboard/WebCT] we evaluated and negatively impacted students and their attitudes towards these tools” (p.92).
[4] It is important to note that the failure of connectivity (i.e., dial-up vs. broadband) to predict the outcomes expected from our hypotheses may result from the fact that the MyGateway system classes do not typically employ rich media as part of the blended learning situation. Thus, as classes increasingly use rich media, such as streaming video and animation, it will remain important to consider access location and connectivity when studying blended learning classes.