The evaluation of human computer interface design of learning management systems: problems and perspectives
-
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ppm.15(3-2).2017.08
-
Article InfoVolume 15 2017, Issue #3, pp. 394-410
- Cited by
- 2112 Views
-
413 Downloads
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
With increasing demand for integrating learning management systems (LMS) into teaching and learning, a well-designed LMS is crucial. User interface evaluation has become a critical quality of interactive LMS intended to meet the requirements of users. This article investigates the effect of the interaction on the user and assesses the extent of system functionality. It further seeks to evaluate the interface’s success within the framework of fundamental human computer interface principles under a constructivist learning approach. Using an LMS assumes that when learners are engaged in a social learning context they actively construct knowledge; therefore, the resource is considered a tool to support learning and not an end in itself. The research investigates use of the LMS by two sets of users: staff members (module creators) and learners (module consumers), using semi-structured questionnaires and interviews. The research indicates that use of an LMS supports collaborative and authentic activities in learning, serving as an intrinsic motivation to most users. Some problems/concerns that were highlighted included; attention should be given to the tools and elements that should be added to the system, for example the image management tools; some users expressed the desire for more autonomy in terms of the peer review window. It is also recommended that the use of graphics should have a purpose that is either purely functional or contributes more subtly to the page content. Finally, there were requests for more customization of the themes, colors and icons in the design of LMS.
- Keywords
-
JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)I23
-
References45
-
Tables6
-
Figures2
-
- Figure 1. Designing by constructivism model created by the author intended for this research
- Figure 2. Proposed model for designing by constructivism, generated from research findings
-
- Table 1. Percentage (rounded) frequencies of users’ responses to design descriptions
- Table 2. A percentage (rounded) frequency scores of users’ responses to statements regarding the learning resource attributes and elements
- Table 3. Percentage (rounded) frequency scores of users’ responses to statements regarding the learning resource attributes and elements
- Table 4. Users’ responses to statements regarding the overall LMS design
- Table 5. Tools and elements that users appreciated, and their contribution towards learning
- Table 6. Various tools and elements that users suggested should be added
-
- Alexander, J. (1999). Collaborative design, constructivist learning, information technology immersion, and electronic communities: A case study. Interpersonal Computing and Technology, 7(1/2).
- Amiel, T., & Herrington, J. (2012). Authentic tasks online: Two experiences. In Informed Design of Educational Technologies in Higher Education: Enhanced learning and teaching, Information Science Reference (pp. 152-165). Taylor Francis.
- Ashford-Rowe, K., Herrington, J., & Brown, C. (2014). Establishing the critical elements that determine authentic assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(2), 205-222.
- Athanases S. Z., & Oliveira LCD (2014). Scaffolding versus Routine Support for Latina/o Youth in an Urban School: Tensions in Building toward Disciplinary Literacy. Journal of Literacy Research, 46, 263-299.
- Austin, B. (2001). Web page design: A site better than the rest in easy steps. Computer step, Austin.
- Brickell, G., & Herrington, J. (2008). Authentic field experiences: The design of complex web-based tasks. UCFV Research Review, 1(3), 36-42.
- Bruner, J. (1990). Acts of meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Clark, R. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology, 42(2), 21-29.
- Cetin-Dindar, A. (2016). Student Motivation in Constructivist Learning Environment. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 12(2), 233-247.
- Creswell, J. W. (2015). Research design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches (3rd ed.). London: Sage.
- Creswell, J. W., & Plano-Clark, L. V. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). California: SAGE.
- Dagar, V, Yadav, A. (2016). Constructivism: A Paradigm for Teaching and Learning. Arts Social Science Journal, 7, 200.
- Dalsgaard, C. (2014). Social software: E-learning beyond learning management systems. EURODL European Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning, 1-7.
- Dix. A. (2016). Human Computer Interaction, foundations and new paradigms. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, special issue in Honour of Stefano Levialdi (in press).
- JVLC-2016-HCI-FNP/Edutechnica (2014). LMS Data – The First Year Update.
- Ellis, R. A., & Calvo, R. A. (2007). Minimum Indicators to Assure Quality of LMS-supported Blended Learning. Educational Technology & Society, 10(2), 60-70.
- Fosnot, C. (1996). Constructivism: theory, perspectives, and practice. New York, Teachers College, Columbia University.
- Gachie, E. W. (2003). Evaluation of a new online learning resource: The Human Computer Interface Design Open Learning System. Durban: University of Kwazulu-Natal.
- Gachie, W. E., & Govender, D. W. (2015). Integrating digital media technologies in the form of learning management systems for an enhanced learning and teaching environment. Journal of Education, 1-30.
- Green, C. K. (2013). Campus IT Officers Affirm the Instructional Integration of IT as Their Top Priority, Offer Mixed Reviews on IT Effectiveness and Outsourcing for Online Education. The National Survey of Computing and Information Technology, 35-70.
- Herrington, J., Reeves, T., & Oliver, R. (2014). A guide to authentic e-learning. Routledge, London.
- Ivankova, N. V., Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2007). Foundations and approaches to mixed methods research. Maree, K. (Ed.), First steps in research. Van Schaik, Pretoria.
- Jonassen, D., Peck, K., & Wilson, B. (1999). Learning with technology: A constructivist perspective. Merill, New Jersey.
- Liebowitz, J., & Frank, M. (2016). Knowledge Management and E-Learning. New York: CRC Press.
- Makewa, L. N., Kuboja, J. M., Yango, M., & Ngussa, B. M. (2014). ICT-integration in higher education and student behavioral change: Observations at University of Arusha, Tanzania. American Journal of Educational Research, 2(11A), 30-38.
- Mathewson, T. G. (2015). Kadenze follows up arts-focused MOOC platform with LMS. New York: Education Dive.
- Marsh, D., & Storker G. (1995). Theory and methods in political science. Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2003 World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunication, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA, June 23-28, 2003.
- McMillan, J. H., & Schumacher, S. (2011). Research in Education: Evidence-Based Inquiry (7th ed.). Boston: Pearson.
- Moore, M., & Thompson, M. (2015). The effects of distance learning: A summary of literature. The American Center for the Study of Distance Education, University Park, Pa.
- Nielsen, J. (2000). Designing web usability. New Riders Publishing, Indiana.
- Nielsen, J. (2013). Users’ pagination preferences and ‘view-all’.
- Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2014). Mixed analysis techniques: Qualitative dominant mixed analysis techniques. Workshop presented to faculty on behalf of the Organization for Social Science Research in Eastern and Southern Africa (OSSREA). Dar Es Selaam, Tanzania: OSSREA.
- Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Benge, C. L. (2014). Standards and guidelines for conducting, reporting, and publishing quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods research studies. Workshop presented to faculty and students at the University of West Indies (pp. 1-10). Trinidad and Tobago: University of West Indies.
- Oulasvirta, A., & Hornb.k, K. (2016). HCI Research as Problem-Solving. ACM Journal, 1-13.
- Oxagile (2016, April 08). History and Trends of Learning Management System [Infographic].
- Reeves, T., Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2008). Design research: A better approach to improving online learning. In The E-Learning Handbook: Past Promises, Present Challenges, Pfeiffer (pp. 463-480).
- Software Advice (2015). Learning Management Systems UserView. New York: Software Advice Inc.
- Stone, D., & Zheng, G. (2015). Learning Management Systems in a Changing Environment. In D. Stone, & G. Zheng, Handbook of Research on Education and Technology in a Changing Society (pp. 60-79). New York: IGI Global.
- Tognazzini, B. (2014). First principles of interaction design (revised and expanded).
- Tuckman, B. (1979). Analysing and designing educational research. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, New York.
- Tuckman, B. W., & Monetti, D. M. (2011). Educational Psychology (International Edition). Wadsworth Cengage Learning, Florida, USA.
- Vassiliou, Y. (1982). Human factors and interactive computer systems. N. J. Ablex Publishing Corporation, Norwood.
- Vygotsky, L. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
- Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
- Young, M. (1993). Instructional design for situated learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 41, 43-58.