Elsevier

Computers & Education

Volume 53, Issue 3, November 2009, Pages 686-694
Computers & Education

Saving time or innovating practice: Investigating perceptions and uses of Learning Management Systems

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.04.008Get rights and content

Abstract

Learning Management Systems (LMS) are web-based systems that allow instructors and/or students to share materials, submit and return assignments, and communicate online. In this study, we explored the uses and perceived benefits of using a LMS to support traditional classroom teaching as reported by instructors and students at a large American Midwestern university. We examined two years of survey data focusing on specific uses of the LMS that emphasized either efficient communication or interactive teaching and learning practices. We matched aggregate user log data with corresponding survey items to see if system use was consistent with patterns seen in the survey results. Findings suggest that instructors and students value tools and activities for efficient communication more than interactive tools for innovating existing practices. However, survey item analysis reveals that instructors and students also highly value the teaching and learning tools within the LMS.

Introduction

Technology-enabled learning is increasingly important and pervasive in higher education. Called Course Management Systems (CMS) or Learning Management Systems (LMS), web-based systems allow instructors and students to share instructional materials, make class announcements, submit and return course assignments, and communicate with each other online. Recent reports showed that over 90% of all responding American universities and colleges (Hawkins & Rudy, 2007) and 95% of higher education institutions in the UK (Browne, Jenkins, & Walker, 2006) have established one or more LMS-type products for student and faculty use. While the adoption rate for these systems has been rapid, very little is known about when and how these systems benefit learning (Koszalka & Ganesan, 2004) or change pedagogical practice (Becker & Jokivirta, 2007).

Early adopters of LMS in higher education have typically come to these applications because they promise to make teaching more efficient (Morgan, 2003). Although most LMS are used for the distribution, management, and retrieval of course materials, these systems can also incorporate functionality that supports interaction between students and instructors and among students (West, Waddoups, & Graham, 2007) to provide opportunities for enabling institutional innovations in learning and education (Dutton, Cheong, & Park, 2003). Increasingly LMS are providing tools for the kinds of active online engagement preferred by today’s generation of students, such as discussion tools, chat rooms, wikis, and blogs. These tools provide opportunities for using LMS that are consistent with constructivist approaches to learning rather than simple transmission of knowledge models. Specifically, LMS can facilitate a shift from “the transmission of information towards the management and facilitation of student learning” (Coaldrake & Stedman, 1999, p. 7). However, for this shift to occur, both faculty and students will need to recognize the opportunities provided by the system and use them in order to innovate teaching and learning practices.

In this study, we explored the perceived benefits and actual use of a LMS by instructors and students where the system supplements traditional face-to-face classroom instruction. We looked at two years of survey data to learn whether LMS is changing instructors’ pedagogical practice and how students’ preferences for how they learn. Specifically, we investigated survey responses focusing on items relating to efficiency vs. interactive teaching and learning practices. In addition, we examined aggregated log data from the LMS for the most recent academic semester to see if system use was consistent with beliefs shown in the survey results. This study extends the current LMS-related literature by looking at user attitudes longitudinally and by relating system use with instructor and student perceptions about teaching and learning.

A wide variety of LMS-related research has been conducted as the LMS adoption rate has increased in higher education. Much of this work has focused on how instructors and students value various features and functions of the technology when used for distance learning (e.g. Swan, 2001). More relevant to the context of our study, Hanson and Robson (2004) found that both instructors and students found various features of LMS to have strong learning benefits. Specifically, respondents responded more favorably to benefits of LMS that save time over those that improve learning. Similar results were found in subsequent studies where users indicated a preference for LMS tools and functions that help manage materials and information for courses (e.g. Parker et al., 2008, Yohon et al., 2004). However, it is not necessarily the LMS tool by itself that is useful or not useful, but rather the way the tool is used in a given course and if the tool helps the user achieve the desired course goals (Holm, Röllinghoff, & Ninck, 2003).

Web-based systems like LMS, “can be used as a catalyst for self-reflection and to help facilitate change from passive to active learning” (Herse & Lee, 2005, p. 51). However, there is no prescribed method of how this change occurs, or even if the change can be controlled. Within the 15 institutions of the University of Wisconsin system, many instructors reported that after using LMS, they began to rethink and restructure their courses and ultimately their teaching resulting in a kind of “accidental pedagogy” (Morgan, 2003). Although most instructors begin adopting LMS for the distribution, management, and retrieval of course materials, they begin to use more of the interactive features for teaching and learning as they increase familiarity with the technology, which is one way to facilitate active learning (West et al., 2007).

There are several other examples of instructors changing their teaching practices by utilizing the interactive features of LMS. Topper (2003) found that the way he managed face-to-face discussions for his graduate-level course did not translate well in an online, asynchronous environment. Specifically, he had to change his practice by avoiding immediate intervention in online discussions and instead allow students to interact amongst themselves before asserting his control or authority in the conversation.

A similar lesson was reported by Dougiamas and Taylor (2003) who found that without employing a variety of scaffolds to facilitate reflective dialog including writing prompts and instructor-supplied models of “good” messages, the students’ posts did not engender reflection or engaged discussion with each other. There are a number of similar examples in LMS-related literature showing that instructors not only had to learn to use the interactive LMS tools, but also change their practice in order to facilitate students’ learning with those tools (e.g. Bender, 2005, Gaensler, 2004). Ultimately, it is incumbent upon the instructor to use the provided LMS tools in ways that encourage a deeper learning experience in which students are able to “construct their own representations of the new knowledge and share those representations with the instructor or the rest of the class” (Carmean & Haefner, 2002, p. 32).

In the studies described above, the lessons learned about LMS use have not been examined longitudinally and may not be capturing if and how instructors and students come to change their beliefs about the value of LMS and how to best integrate this technology into effective teaching and learning practices. Understanding both instructor and student perceptions is important for evaluating the potential success of the LMS (McGill & Klobas, 2009). Additionally, prior studies have not linked survey responses with actual LMS use, as captured via user logs. Our study aims to fill this gap in the literature by examining the perceived benefits and actual use of a LMS by instructors and students. This empirical approach is necessary for making specific recommendations about system design and about instructional practices to help instructors and students realize the educational potential of these systems.

Section snippets

Setting

We drew our sample from the instructors and students at the main campus of a large American Midwestern university. According to the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education (http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/classifications/), this institution is a large, public, four-year research university with very high research activity and a majority undergraduate enrollment. The university enrolls approximately 26,000 undergraduate and 15,000 graduate and professional students.

Results

Because the university does not require LMS use for every course, we needed to ascertain within the survey how many instructors and students used this technology. We found that the majority of instructor and student respondents used the LMS, and usage increased over time. Table 2 shows that almost every individual student on campus used the LMS, as did most faculty.

Analysis and discussion

When asked generally if information technology (IT) improves teaching and learning, both instructors and students we surveyed responded positively, although the students were less positive about IT’s effect on their instructors’ teaching. Students reported preferring a higher level of IT use than did instructors, and over 50% of students thought that efficiency was the most valuable benefit. By contrast, our analysis showed that when you ask instructors to pick the most valuable benefit of

Future research

In this examination of a LMS, the interactive tools available in the system were not yet as heavily used nor as highly rated, as were the tools that simply pushed out information from instructors to students. In future research, we will investigate how specific instructors are successfully using the more interactive tools to engage their students inside the classroom and out. Case studies can help us better illuminate how the design and structure of LMS tools can support innovative teaching and

Acknowledgements

Many thanks to Jim Lepkowski and Chan Zhang from the Institute for Social Research at the University of Michigan for their review of an early version of this paper and particularly for their statistical guidance and work on the multiyear analysis of the survey items.

References (24)

  • T.J. McGill et al.

    A task-technology fit view of learning management system impact

    Computers and Education

    (2009)
  • C. Romero et al.

    Data mining in course management systems: Moodle case study and tutorial

    Computers and Education

    (2008)
  • Becker, R., & Jokivirta, L., (2007). Online learning in universities: Selected data from the 2006 Observatory survey –...
  • B. Bender

    Learner engagement and success in CMS environments

  • T. Browne et al.

    A longitudinal perspective regarding the use of VLEs by higher education institutions in the United Kingdom

    Interactive Learning Environments

    (2006)
  • C. Carmean et al.

    Mind over matter: Transforming course management systems into effective learning environments

    Educause Review

    (2002)
  • P. Coaldrake et al.

    Academic work in the twenty-first century. Occasional paper series, higher education division, DETYA, no. 99H

    (1999)
  • Dougiamas, M., & Taylor, P. C. (2003). Moodle: Using learning communities to create an open source course management...
  • W.H. Dutton et al.

    The social shaping of a virtual learning environment: The case of a university-wide course management system

    The Electronic Journal of e-Learning

    (2003)
  • Gaensler, I. E. (2004). A study of social constructivist learning in a WebCT-based precalculus course. Unpublished...
  • P. Hanson et al.

    Evaluating course management technology: A pilot study

    Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research, Research Bulletin

    (2004)
  • B.L. Hawkins et al.

    Educause core data service. Fiscal year 2006 summary report

    (2007)
  • Cited by (277)

    • Abrupt academic dishonesty: Pressure, opportunity, and deterrence

      2023, International Journal of Management Education
    • Lecturers' Evaluation of Moodle at the University of Public Service

      2023, ACM International Conference Proceeding Series
    • Outcome-based education through E-Learning pedagogy: A case study

      2023, Handbook of Research on Innovative Frameworks and Inclusive Models for Online Learning
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text