Acceptation of the LMS by the secondary school teacher

De Smet Cindy Acceptation of the LMS by the secondary school teacher

This presentation is a translation of the original Dutch version, as presented on the Surf Onderwijsdagen conference, Utrecht (NL). The research has recently been submitted as a conference proposal. Please do respect the proposed citations.

@drsme'y 

www.slideshare.net/sme/y 

This work is licensed  under a Crea6ve  Commons   A/ribu5on‐ NonCommercial‐ ShareAlike  2.0 Belgium License.  5

About •  Lecturer media,   Ghent University College,   Faculty of Teacher Training  •  Ph.D.‐student,  Department of Educa6on,   Ghent University  •  The Research Fund of University College  Ghent ﬁnancially supports this research. 

My research •  Study 1 aims to understand the  reasons behind the technology  accepta6on of learning management  systems (LMS) by secondary school  teachers and inves6gates the  instruc6onal use of the LMS.   •  Study 2 inves6gates the learning  outcomes of learning paths. 

LMS   The Ugly Duckling? 

Source: Delta ini6a6ve  

Survey Research  What the teacher declares 

Survey data  •  Flemish secondary school teachers.  •  LMS (in this research): soUware used by the learning  ins6tu6on.  •  57,3% of the respondents were female, which is  close to the percentage (61,5%) of the global  popula6on.  •  Teacher age range varied from 22 to 61 years, with  an average age of 40.  •  Teacher experience ranged from 1 to 42 years, with  an average of 15. 

n = 376 

Please cite as De Smet, C., & Schellens, T. (2009). ELO’s in het Vlaams secundair onderwijs: nieuw of alweer achterhaald. Advies & Educatie, 26, 12–14.

LMS market   in Flanders 

Secondary educa6on  14%  Smartschool  4%  72%  Other (Moodle,  10%  Dokeos)  None  elo‐V  (Blackboard)  1)  Survey 2009  2)  The educa6onal network mostly determines the LMS used  

University  1)  Data based on the oﬃcial student numbers (2009).  2)  The LMS used is determined by the 6 Flemish  associa6ons between universi6es and university  colleges  3)  Most LMS are “Branded” 

University Colleges  

Outside the LMS  Secondary educa6on:  •  69% uses learning objects found on the  internet or specialized content sites: (using  KlasCement.net, Google.com…)  •  52% uses soUware and applica6ons outside the  the LMS (wikispaces.com, blogsoUware, Google  documents, Facebook, Netlog….) 

The Flemish teacher 

LMS experience  No experience  19%  1 year  10%  2 years  24%  3 years  22%  4 years  20%  5 years or more  15% 

19% 

15% 

Blackboard: 1997  Moodle: 1999 

Self‐reported skills   Sufficient technical skills: 69%  Insufficient technical skills: 14%  Insufficient didac6c skills: 47% 

Policies    57% doesn’t know where to ﬁnd  addi6onal training   79% of the teachers doesn’t know  about the existence of any policy  concerning the use of the LMS at  school level 

Teacher LMS sa6sfac6on  Sa6sﬁed: 45%  Unsa6sﬁed: 20%  No opinion: 35% 

Conclusions:  –  The LMS is not a new technology, but the teacher  LMS experience stays low.  –  Almost all schools have an LMS at their disposal,  but s6ll 19% of the teachers doesn’t use it.  –  The teacher believes his technical skills are  adequate, but he doesn’t know how to use the  LMS for didac6c purposes.  –  The teacher is not aware of exis6ng training  opportuni6es.  –  Schools lack an LMS‐policy. 

Instruc6onal LMS use 

Survey research  The teacher… declared 

n = 505 

Please cite as: De Smet, C., Bourgonjon, J., De Wever, B., Schellens, T. & Valcke, M. (2010). “Acceptation of the LMS by the secondary school teacher”. Surf onderwijsdagen 2010. Utrecht, Netherlands. 10 Oct. 2010.

Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)1    Perceived Ease   of Use (PEOU)  Use  Perceived Usefulness  (PU)  1)  Beliefs  2)  Self‐reported use  3)  Predicts 40% of a systems’ use 

TAM: 3 examples    Perceived Ease   of Use  Use  Perceived  Usefulness  1)  Secondary school teachers 2 2)  Students (higher education) 3 3)  Engineers (company) 4

More experience  Perceived Usefulness  Use 

Important others    Perceived Ease   of Use  Use  Perceived Usefulness  Important others  (subjec6ve norm)2 

ICT support    Perceived Ease   of Use  ICT  Use  support 2  Perceived Usefulness  Important others  

http://www.flickr.com/photos/alancleaver/2381170336 by Alan Cleaver

Opera6onaliza6on of instruc6onal use into two diﬀerent  constructs: Administra6ve use and Interac6ve use 2  A/I  %  Document publishing   A  82%  Sending announcements   A  75%  Upload or publish excercises   A  51%  Receive assignments   A  51%  Assessment modules   I  18%  Chat  I  9%  Learning path  I  27%  Forum  I  27%  Wiki  I  25%  n=505, A= administra6ve, I = interac6ve; n = 292, experience ≥ 1 (%) 

Research outcomes 2   Perceived Ease   of Use  A  I   Perceived  Usefulness  

Observa6ons2  A  I  TAM (%)  35%  15%  TAM  PEOU (1), PU (2)  PU  Innova6veness  Indirect  Direct  ICT support  Indirect  Direct 

Conclusions   •  Perceived ease of use is the most important  factor (in this research) to predict the  instruc6onal use of the LMS.  •  As soon as a teacher gets more advanced in using  the LMS, perceived usefulness becomes more  important.  •  This suggests that when a teacher wants to use  an LMS, the ease of use of the system will be the  ﬁrst considera6on, probably followed by his or  her percep6on of the system’s performance. 

Conclusion  •  Technical support is important for every LMS‐ user, regardless his experience level.   •  Administra6ve use was expected to be a  prerequisite for interac6ve use and the data  conﬁrms this assump6on. 

Limita6ons   •  Future research should explore other variables  that may have an eﬀect on instruc6onal use,  as the current models explain maximum 36%.  •  This research did not include soUware or  applica6ons outside the ins6tu6on’s LMS 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/raggle/3163752268 by Rachel Carter

References   Note 1  Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of  informa6on technology. MIS Quarterly, 13, 319–340.  Venkatesh, V., Morris, M., Davis, G., & Davis, F.,‐ (2003). User acceptance of  informa6on technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27, 425–478.   Note 2  De Smet, C., Bourgonjon, J., De Wever, B., Schellens, T. & Valcke, M. (2010).  “Accepta6on of the LMS by the secondary school teacher”. Surf onderwijsdagen  2010. Utrecht, Nederland. 10 Oct. 2010.  Note 3  Sánchez, R. A., & Hueros, A. D. (2010). Mo6va6onal factors that influence the  acceptance of Moodle using TAM. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 1632–1640.  Note 4  Ong, C.‐S., Lai, J.‐Y., & Wang, Y.‐S. (2004). Factors affec6ng engineers’ acceptance of  asynchronous e‐learning systems in high‐tech companies. Informa=on &  Management, 41, 795–804. 

Contact •  My proﬁle page Ghent University  •  h'p://twi'er.com/drsme'y  •  h'p://www.drsme'y.com/  •  h'p://www.slideshare.net/sme'y 

http://drsmetty.com	279
http://www.drsmetty.be	4
http://paper.li	2

Acceptation of the LMS by the secondary school teacher

by Smetty on Nov 11, 2010

Accessibility

Categories

Tags

Upload Details

Usage Rights

3 Embeds 285

Statistics

Acceptation of the LMS by the secondary school teacher — Presentation Transcript