Students' Responses to Learning Management Systems in a Blended Learning Context

Students' Responses to Learning Management Systems in a Blended Learning Context

Samuel NiiBoi Attuquayefio
Copyright: © 2022 |Pages: 17
DOI: 10.4018/IJOPCD.293208
OnDemand:
(Individual Articles)
Available
$37.50
No Current Special Offers
TOTAL SAVINGS: $37.50

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to examine first-year students’ behaviour towards learning management systems in a blended learning environment. The study employed a convenient sampling technique for data collection and SmartPLS3 was used to analyse the data. There were 671 first-year students from the University of Professional Studies Accra who participated in the survey. The findings of the study revealed that social influence, price value and anxiety significantly influence behavioural intention to use learning management systems (LMS). However, the relationship between anxiety and behavioural intention is inverse. Furthermore, anxiety significantly impacts effort expectancy, while effort expectancy also impacts satisfaction. Additionally, the results suggest that satisfaction fully mediates the relationship between effort expectancy and behavioural intention to use LMS. Administrators of higher education must ensure that the performance of the LMS exceeds the expectations of students so as to formulate the intention to use it for learning.
Article Preview
Top

Introduction

During the global spread of Coronavirus, several organizations have relied on technology to supply a variety of services. At all stages of education: primary, secondary, and university, technology is increasingly used to offer lessons. Learning management systems (LMS) have been adopted in the majority of Ghanaian educational institutions to provide classes. These institutions employ a number of approaches to deliver their services. Some institutions used a face-to-face approach, while others used a blended teaching approach. Some universities maintained the existing state of affairs, others permitted one group to be in school learning while the other was on vacation. Some universities used a mixed method in which the semester was divided into two equal-length weeks. One group was learning in person, while the other was learning digitally.

A LMS is a software application designed to help instructors meet their pedagogical goals of delivering learning content to students (Machado & Tao, 2007). It gives the “big picture” of learning objectives, content to be taught, learning activities, required resources, and class management—all within the instructional model chosen for the unit (Metzler, 2017). Despite the fact that many LMS exist around the world, most institutions in Ghana have deployed Moodle's open-source LMS. For example, the University of Professional Studies, Accra (UPSA) uses Moodle while the University of Ghana uses Sakai for online learning. Moodle LMS is a free and open-source LMS that is used by hundreds of millions of students worldwide. Most institutions use it because it is open-source software that provides a flexible learning environment, is easily accessible, is deployed on mobile devices, is accessible to all, and is highly secure.

In order for stakeholders to reap significant benefits from LMS deployment in higher education, institutions must ensure a good mix of hardware, LMS software, high-speed internet connectivity, procedures, and well-trained human resources. When one or more of these components is missing from the mix, students are more likely to experience difficulties using the LMS (Alebaikan & Troudi, 2010).

Asampana et al. (2017) raised the issue of very low LMS acceptance in the Ghanaian context, blaming it on a lack of information technology infrastructure, insufficient training, and the system's relevance to excellent lecture delivery. Similarly, Agormedah et al. (2020) attribute students' lack of interest in LMS use in a Ghanaian setting to a lack of formal orientation and training, a perceived lack of regular internet connectivity, and financial insecurity.

Researchers have conducted a number of studies to better understand the factors that influence Ghanaian students' willingness to adopt LMS in higher education. Buabeng-Andoh and Baah (2020) found that performance expectancy (PE), EE, and institutional support positively impacted students' actual use of a LMS. However, social influence (SI) and infrastructure support were irrelevant to students' actual use. Fianu et al. (2020) looked into the elements that determine how students in Ghana's higher institutions use massive open online courses (MOOCs). They discovered that PE and self-efficacy influence students' behavioural intention (BI). In addition, Essel and Wilson (2017) discovered that perceived challenges and students' perceived usefulness had a substantial link with Moodle use.

Though there are few studies on LMS adoption in the Ghanaian context, none of them specifically investigated first-year students' BI to use LMS. The purpose of this study is to understand the determinants of first-year students' BI to use LMS.

Top

Literature Review

A LMS is a system that creates online courses, organizes the content, delivers the content, and provides interactive tools that supplement courses (Jones & Bartlett, 2019). It allows learners and facilitators to meet together in a virtual world (Hodell, 2015). The LMS has tools for registering students, delivering resources (text, audio, and video), tracking user logins, supporting online chatting, calculating grades, administering assessments, and uploading and storing user submissions (Huang et al., 2019). The features of an LMS vary from one system to another, but generally they include a learner interface and some administrative functions such as course setup, learner registration, course assignment, and reporting of learners’ progress (Khosrow-Pour, 2006).

Complete Article List

Search this Journal:
Reset
Volume 14: 1 Issue (2024)
Volume 13: 1 Issue (2023)
Volume 12: 4 Issues (2022)
Volume 11: 4 Issues (2021)
Volume 10: 4 Issues (2020)
Volume 9: 4 Issues (2019)
Volume 8: 4 Issues (2018)
Volume 7: 4 Issues (2017)
Volume 6: 4 Issues (2016)
Volume 5: 4 Issues (2015)
Volume 4: 4 Issues (2014)
Volume 3: 4 Issues (2013)
Volume 2: 4 Issues (2012)
Volume 1: 4 Issues (2011)
View Complete Journal Contents Listing