The purpose of this study is to investigate quality in Instructional designs and use of Moodle LMS. Southern University Faculty was interviewed to identify current state and perceived challenges as well as helpful components based on their online experiences. Results of this study indicated that most students and faculty needs an open mindset, motivation, standardized course design, time management and comfortableness with online educational technologies to achieve quality.
Introduction
Quality is generally an issue of increasing importance in educational institutions (Ehlers et al., 2004). However there are no general guidelines to attaining quality (Kefalas et al., 2003). Therefore, many obstacles to implement and practice quality can only be discovered during consistent practice. However, institutions have to choose an adequate approach from different existing approaches that suits their requirements and needs. Secondly, successful implementations depends on overcoming typical barriers (Masters, 1996). Despite the numerous quality standards available, educational organizations are yet to adhere owing to its complex task requiring competencies, commitment and resources.
Quality in the area of training, education and learning, and specifically online learning has become an issue of increasing importance in the community of practitioners and researchers. Numerous approaches has been implemented in different sectors, such as higher education (Cruickshank, 2003), schools (Greenwood & Gaunt, 1994), in the online learning sector (SRI, 2003), or the service industry in general (Yasin, Alavi, Kunt, & Zimmerer, 2004; Douglas & Fredendall, 2004). All approaches differ in various aspects such as scope or methodology.
There are various dimensions to quality which includes quality of use, in the field of online learning, quality of use is related to products, services for learning, processes, education and training supported by the use of Information and Communication Technologies.
What makes a student and faculty successful in an online environment? What creates barriers or challenges? Answer to these questions, among others, gain increasing importance as Internet technologies become more readily available and accessible, in formal and informal contexts (Hofmann, 2002). Today, almost all Universities in the United States are offering online degree programs and ranging from criminal justice to business, education to nursing. In addition to this, nearly all Universities in the United States make use of Learning Management Systems and Instructional designs as a tool to aid the successful delivery of regular face-to-face degree programs (Allen & Seaman, 2013).
In addition to courses and programs, all universities now require access to basic course information online (Leonard & Guha, 2001). This includes important information such as the syllabus, resource lists, recommended texts and instructor office hours. For example, at the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA), it is mandatory for all arts and science programs to have websites (Noble, 1998), even if otherwise, educators are increasingly developing online presence for their courses via the internet (Brown, Kirkpatrick & Wrisley, 2003). The increasing online access to programs, courses and course information is interesting. Initial research investigating the worth of online learning has generated some overall insights (Carijo et al., 1999; Conrad, 2002; Hartley & Bendixen, 2001; Hill, 2002).For example, some sources indicate that online learning enables institutions and/or instructors to reach new learners at a distance, increases convenience and expands educational opportunities (Hara & Kling 2001).Research also show that using LMSs possesses numerous benefits for teaching and learning, it enables faculty to shift the focus from content-based learning to process-based learning (Vogel & Klassen, 2001) and helps to “facilitate change from passive to active learning”(Herse & Lee, 2005, p.51).Using LMSs also has the potential to increase student enrollment (Nunes & McPherson, 2003) and to promote interaction between students and faculty members (Lonn & Teasley, 2009; West, Waddoups & Graham , 2007).
Furthermore, it is expedient to note that the movement towards online learning is not grounded in empirical evidence that it is effective and/or beneficial for learning (Hannafin et al., 2003). Most of the studies on online learning remain rather anecdotal coming from the point of view of the faculty member teaching the course or the instructional designer developing the course (Bourne et al., 1997). While the overall perspectives and faculty- based studies are important for understanding the potential value of online learning, few studies have detailed the learners perspectives of online learning (Hara & Kling, 1999). There is a need for continuing research studies related to specific areas to promote students online experience as well as overall perceptions. The constant growth of the web influences and changes how online courses are designed and implemented. This in turn may also change the student’s perception of their online experience. Continued studies of Southern University faculty and students perspectives of online learning and LMS environments are needed in order to build quality, more effective web-based instructions that can optimize the learning experience in this ever-changing technology world.
The purpose of this paper is to describe the current state of instructional designs and use of LMSs using southern university as a case study. Specifically, the researcher sought to explore faculty and students’ barriers to quality of use using a qualitative interview. The discussion of the study begins with a review of literature related to online learning, instructional design and use of LMSs, Next the background of the research followed by the results of the study is described. , Finally, implications and suggestions for further research.
Literature Review
The Literature related to online learning, instructional designs and LMSs has expanded considerably in the last 10 years. The review that follows focuses on literature related to faculty and student’s experience, particularly the students perspectives of strengths and weaknesses related to online learning.
The process of designing instructions is so intense that those engaged lose sight of the overall course landscape through involvement in the details (Kidney et al., 2004). In order to attain quality in instructional designs it must go through team review, staff review and peer review.
A few studies have explored learners’ perspectives of online learning particularly in terms of perceived strengths and weaknesses. In a qualitative study, Petrides (2002) interviewed students to obtain their perspectives on eLearning, results from the interview shows that some students tended to think more deeply about the subject areas when responding in writing as compared to giving verbal responses, another participant indicated that the online technology allowed more reflection than what might occur for some individuals in face-to-face classroom discussions.
One initiative that has achieved high penetration has been the use of LMS. For example, 100% of Spanish universities use an LMS (Prendes, 2009) and 79.5% of large companies use these systems during their eLearning activities. The use of an LMS provides students provides students and faculty with a set of tools for improving the learning process and managing them. However, despite the high level of adoption, they have not resulted in educational improvements which might have been expected. Three principal reasons have been offered for this; The tools provided are not used properly and often are used as mere spaces to publish courses (Sakai-pilot, 2009);LMSs restrict opportunities for collaboration in student and for the promotion of social constructivism which is not limited to a period of time (Wesch, 2009); They are focused on the course and the institution rather than the student and their needs (Downes, 2006).
Research Design
The purpose of this study was to use a qualitative study to determine the current state and investigate quality in instructional designs and use of Moodle Learning Management Systems in Southern University. Three primary research questions guided this research:
- How does the instructor’s approach influence student’s use of Moodle LMSs?
- How could online interactions between Instructor and Students be improved?
- How do students maximize the use of online learning environments?
The study participant that volunteered to participate in the interview was a faculty in the department of Science and Mathematics Education at Southern University. Participant in the study is very familiar with the use of online learning environment and educational technologies. Participant have occupied various roles which includes instructor and educational technology administrator. Participant signed an informed consent form.
Method
In what ways do you think the integration of instructional designs in online environment has influenced interactions between students and teachers? What impact, if any, should Instructional Designs(IDs) have on the way students interact with you and one another?
Interviewee felt “instructional designs are not uniform” she felt “every class is different”, she suggested “every discipline for example science, should work with the same instructional design”. “If IDs are poorly designed, students wont know what to do, if its clearly designed , it makes for better experience ” She stated,
I wish like with instructional designs again will be uniform but its not uniform. If you go into my class and you go to somebody else’s class, with the same topic , I guarantee you , everyone of those classes will be different which is fine , is it the same discipline say science , yes , that’s fine, everyone is science should work with the same instructional design….. Ok, I gat you, ohh I think that there are way that the course is designed really because of how the students interact, if its poorly designed the students wont know what to do, they get confused but if its clearly designed, it makes for better experience for both faculty and students
Conclusion
The current study offers several implications for practice and research. First, there is a need for improving instructional designs for regular and online courses. The design should focus not only on the technological aspects, but also on uniformity on the goal, objectives and expectations for the students. Faculty should continue to explore design models that are most effective for online learning and LMS.
Secondly, there is a need to work with inexperienced faculty and students with respect to necessary training and assistance. Higher education institutions should invest in training and development for educational technology, making them see reasons why they need to embrace educational technologies.
Finally, there is need to work with students to assist then with establishing a community of feelings of connection in online contexts. Integrating strategies for community building into the design of the course may assist with this effort.
The growth of Educational technologies will continue and as indicated in this study , it will come with its own challenges, institutions and individuals may face different challenges but as educators and students become more comfortable to adapt at communicating and learning via LMSs, it will remain imperative that quality practices associated with these learning environments continue to be explored.
References
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2013). Changing Course: Ten Years of Tracking Online Education in the United States. Sloan Consortium. PO Box 1238, Newburyport, MA 01950.
Bourne, J. R., McMaster, E., Rieger, J., & Campbell, J. O. (1997, November). Paradigms for on-line learning: A case study in the design and implementation of an asynchronous learning networks (ALN) course. In Frontiers in Education Conference, 1997. 27th Annual Conference. Teaching and Learning in an Era of Change. Proceedings. (Vol. 1, pp. 245-255). IEEE.
Brown, S. T., Kirkpatrick, M. K., & Wrisley, C. D. (2003). Evaluative parameters of a Web-based nursing leadership course from the learners' perspectives. Journal of Nursing Education, 42(3), 134-137.
Cereijo, M. V. P., Young, J., & Wilhelm, R. W. (2001). Factors facilitating student participation in asynchronous web-based courses. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 18(1), 32-39.
Conrad, D. L. (2002). Engagement, excitement, anxiety, and fear: Learners' experiences of starting an online course. The American journal of distance education, 16(4), 205-226.
Cruickshank, M. (2003). Total quality management in the higher education sector: a literature review from an international and Australian perspective. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 14(10), 1159-1167.
Douglas, T. J., & Fredendall, L. D. (2004). Evaluating the Deming management model of total quality in services. Decision Sciences, 35(3), 393-422.
Downes, S. (2006). Learning networks and connective knowledge. Collective intelligence and elearning, 20, 1-26.
Ehlers, U., Goertz, L., Hildebrandt, B., & Pawlowski, J. M. (2004). Quality in e-learning. VOCATIONAL TRAINING-BERLIN-CEDEFOP-, (29), 3-15.
Greenwood, M. S., & Gaunt, H. J. (1994). Total Quality Management for Schools, cassel.
Hannafin, M. J., & Kim, M. C. (2003). In search of a future: A critical analysis of research on web-based teaching and learning. Instructional Science, 31(4-5), 347-351.
Hara, N., & Kling, R. (2001). Student distress in web-based distance education. Educause Quarterly, 24(3), 68-69.
Hartley, K., & Bendixen, L. D. (2001). Educational research in the Internet age: Examining the role of individual characteristics. Educational researcher, 30(9), 22-26.
Herse, P., & Lee, A. (2005). Optometry and WebCT: a student survey of the value of web‐based learning environments in optometric education. Clinical and Experimental Optometry, 88(1), 46-52.
Hill, J. R. (2002). Overcoming obstacles and creating connections: Community building in web-based learning environments. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 14(1), 67-86.
Hofmann, D. W. (2002). Internet-based distance learning in higher education. Tech Directions, 62(1), 28.
Kefalas, R., Retalis, S., Stamatis, D., & Kargidis, T. (2003, May). Quality assurance procedures and e-ODL, Proceedings of the International Conference on Network Universities and E-Learnig
Kidney, G. W., & Frieden, S. (2004). When the cows come home: A proven path of professional development for faculty pursuing e-learning. The Journal, 31(11), 12-15.
Leonard, J., & Guha, S. (2001). Education at the crossroads: Online teaching and students' perspectives on distance learning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(1), 51.
Lonn, S., & Teasley, S. D. (2009). Saving time or innovating practice: Investigating perceptions and uses of Learning Management Systems. Computers & Education, 53(3), 686-694.
Masters, R. J. (1996). Overcoming the barriers to TQM's success. Quality Progress, 29(5), 53.
Noble, D. F. (1998). Digital diploma mills: The automation of higher education. Science as culture, 7(3), 355-368.
Nunes, M. B., & McPherson, M. (2003). Action research in continuing professional distance education. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19(4), 429-437.
Petrides, L. A. (2002). Web-based technologies for distributed (or distance) learning: Creating learning-centered educational experiences in the higher education classroom. International journal of instructional media, 29(1), 69.
Prendes, M. P. (2009). Plataformas de campus virtual con herramientas de software libre: Análisis comparativo de la situación actual en las universidades españolas. Recuperado el, 7.
SRI Consulting Business Intelligence (2003). Quality and effectiveness in eLearning: Views of industry experts and practitioners. Retrieved May 10, 2007 from http://www.sricbi. com/LoD/summaries/QEelearningViews2003-05.shtml.
Vogel, D., & Klassen, J. (2001). Technology‐supported learning: status, issues and trends. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 17(1), 104-114.
Wesch, M. (2009). From knowledgable to knowledge-able: Learning in new media environments. Academic Commons, 7.
West, R. E., Waddoups, G., & Graham, C. R. (2007). Understanding the experiences of instructors as they adopt a course management system. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(1), 1-26.
Yasin, M. M., Alavi, J., Kunt, M., & Zimmerer, T. W. (2004). TQM practices in service organizations: an exploratory study into the implementation, outcome and effectiveness. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal, 14(5), 377-389.