Web-Based Virtual Learning Environments: A research framework and a preliminary assessment of effectiveness in basic IT skills training

Introduction Learning industry and Internet technologies. Higher demand for Web-Based courses.

Outline Defining of the VLE concept, identifying its main dimensions, and discussing its advantages and disadvantages. Developing a framework of the determinants of learning effectiveness. Developing the research and reporting its results.

Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) “VLEs are defined as “computer- based environments that are relatively open systems, allowing interactions and encounters with other participants and providing access to a wide range of resources.” VLEs vs. Computer aided instruction (CAI) The six dimensions defining a learning environment: Time Place Space Technology (delivery and communication) Interaction Control

Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) (cont’) Advantages: Better students’ achievement. Better student/teacher interaction. More student centered learning. Elimination of geographical barriers. No time constrains. Higher flexibility, student retention and student feedback. More available resources.

Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) (cont’) Disadvantages: Feeling of isolation, frustration, anxiety, and confusion, and reducing interest in the subject matter. Learner achievement is questioned.

The framework It has two classes of determinants: Human dimension. Design dimension.

The framework (cont’) Human dimension: Students: Maturity. Motivation. Technology comfort. Technology attitudes. Previous experience. Computer anxiety.

The framework (cont’) Instructors: Technology control. Technology attitudes. Teaching style. Self-efficacy. Availability.

The framework (cont’) Design dimension: Learning Model: Technology: Objectivist. Constructivist. Technology: Quality. Reliability. Availability. Learner control: Pace. Sequence. Content.

The framework (cont’) Content: Interaction: Factual knowledge. Procedural knowledge. Conceptual knowledge. Interaction: Timing. Frequency. Quantity.

The framework (cont’) Criteria for measuring effectiveness: Student performance: Component Display Theory (CDT) [rule, example, recall, practice] Self-efficacy: “Individuals’ own belief in their ability to successfully perform a specific behavior.” Satisfaction.

Research and results Research design: The course: an introductory course to MOIS. The subjects 146 undergraduates (70 for VLE and 76 for normal class) Age ≤ 22, 91% 56.8% males, 43.2% females Freshman 18.5%, sophomore 52.1%, junior 17.8%, senior 11% Pretreatment skills, attitudes and experience are homogeneous Procedure and Learning Environments: Two instructors for 4 sections Both versions of the course follow the CDT 139 administrative, 525 content and 34 social messages. Experimental Manipulation. Two weeks of training in the lab, classes for midterm and final Consistent teaching procedures

Research and results (cont’) Variables and Measures Grades on midterm and final to measure performance Self-efficacy and satisfaction measured through validated scale Results Dependent variables Virtual Environment Traditional Environment Midterm Exam Final exam Total Midterm exam total Performance 84.9 80.9 82.5 82.7 76.1 79.4 Self-efficacy 7.118 7.17 6.5528 6.546 6.53 Satisfaction 3.869 3.542 3.7 4.06 3.971 4.016

Data Analysis and Conclusion VLEs are better in terms of convenience and flexibility but their effectiveness remains an open question (comparable levels of performance). High degree of learner control coupled with self-monitoring aids did not lead to higher performance. VLEs need appropriate learning strategies. Most students are familiar with dominant model of classroom education and did not make use of high levels of learner control and flexibility. VLE reported lower levels of satisfaction. Students felt a great shift of responsibility from the instructor to themselves and they could not adjust.

Data Analysis and Conclusion (cont’) Students reported lower levels of satisfaction in the second part of the course (Database) because they were less familiar with the subject. VLE increased self efficacy; they felt that they had learned independently so they can apply what they learned in the future. VLE needs technology quality and reliability. We can not generalize our findings because it is limited to basic computer skills and may not apply in other subject areas.

Data Analysis and Conclusion (cont’) We witnessed higher drop rates in the VLEs sections. This analysis is suitable for medium and large groups differences but not sensitive enough to detect individual differences.

Thank You