Influence of Learning Management Systems Self-efficacy on E-learning Performance

Florence Martin*, Jeremy I. Tutty**, Yuyan Su***
* Assistant Professor, Dept. of Instructional Technology, University of North Carolina.
** Senior Instructional Technology Consultant, Depaul University , Chicago, IL.
*** Instructional Designer, University of Phoenix, Phoenix, AZ.
Periodicity:December - February'2010
DOI : https://doi.org/10.26634/jsch.5.3.1086

Abstract

Recent advancements in technology have changed the way educators teach and students learn (Wells, Fieger & Lange, 2005). In the last decade, educational trends have progressed towards online and blended instruction. One key in this revolution is the development of the Learning Management System (LMS); software that enables the management and delivery of learning content and resources to students providing students the flexibility for “anytime” and “anywhere” learning.

Research indicates learner self-efficacy with LMS may be a critical factor in e-learner satisfaction (Lee and Hwang, 2007) and performance. The goal of this study was to develop and validate an instrument that measures students’ confidence with LMS, and explore the relationship between LMS self-efficacy and course performance for e-learners. This study was conducted with 68 students enrolled in an instructional technology course.

Student confidence for accessing the course content, tests and grades, asynchronous communication, synchronous communication and using advanced tools were measured. Factor and post-hoc analysis were used to examine instrument dimensionality. The complete paper will discuss the full results of  the study and designs for further validation, particularly with regard to implications for measuring student self-efficacy with LMS technologies.  Patterns of confidence and performance will also be reported and discussed.

Keywords

Learning Management Systems, Elearning Performance, Self-Efficacy, Blackboard.

How to Cite this Article?

Florence Martin, Jeremy I. Tutty and Yuyan Su (2010). Influence Of Learning Management Systems Selfefficacy On E-Learning Performance. i-manager’s Journal on School Educational Technology. 5(3), 26-35. https://doi.org/10.26634/jsch.5.3.1086

References

[1]. Allen, I. & Seamen, J. (2008). Staying the Course. Online Education in the United States, 2008. The Sloan Consortium. Sloan-C. Needham, MA.
[2]. Arbaugh, J.B., & Duray, R. (2002). Technological and structural characteristics, student learning and satisfaction with web-based courses: An exploratory study of two MBA programs, Management Learning, 33, 331- 347
[3]. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
[4]. Beard, L. A., & Harper, C. (2002). Student Perceptions of Online Versus On Campus Instruction. Education, 122, 4, 658-663.
[5]. Breen, L., Cohen, L., & Chang, P. (2003). Teaching and learning online for the first time: Student and coordinator perspectives. Paper presented at the Partners in Learning: 12th Annual Teaching Learning Forum, Edith Cowan University, Perth.
[6]. Bonk, C. J., & Dennen, V. (2003). Frameworks for research, design, benchmarks, training, and pedagogy in Web-based distance education. In M. G. Moore & B. Anderson (Ed.), Handbook of distance education (pp. 331-348). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[7]. Campbell, M., Gibson, W., Hall, A., Richards, D., & Callery. P. (2008). Online vs. face-to-face discussion in a Web-based research methods course for postgraduate nursing students: A quasi-experimental study. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 45(5), 75059.
[8]. Compeau, D., Higgins, C. A., & Huff, S. (1999). Social cognitive theory and individual reactions to computing technology: A longitudinal study. MIS Quarterly,23, 145- 158.
[9]. Dyjur, T. (2008). University of Calgary, Teaching and Learning Centre. Retrieved online from: http:// commons. ucalgary.ca/teaching/programs/itbl/. February 26, 2010.
[10]. Dziuban, C., Hartman, J., Moskal, P., (2004). Blended learning. EDUCAUSE Review, 7(2004).
[11]. Eachus, P, & Cassidy, S. (2002). Developing the computer self-efficacy (CSE) scale: Investigating the relationship between CSE, gender and experience with computers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 26, 2, 133-153
[12]. Hall, J. (2003). Assessing Learning Management Systems. Retrieved online from: http://www. Clomedia. com /content/templates/clo_feature.asp? articleid =91 &zoneid=29. August 26, 2009.
[13]. Keefe, T. J. (2003). Using technology to enhance a course: The importance of interaction. EDUCAUSE Quarterly, 1, 2434.
[14]. Lee, J.K. and Hwang, C.Y. (2007). The effects of computer self-efficacy and learning management system quality on e-Learner's satisfaction. In Cameron, L., Voerman, A. and Dalziel,J. (Eds), Proceedings of the 2007 European LAMS Conference: Designing the future of learning (pp73-79). 5 July, 2007, Greenwich: LAMS Foundation.
[15]. Means, B., Toyoma, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, J. (2009). Evidence of evaluation based practices in online learning: A meta analysis and review of online learning studies. Retrieved online from http://www. Ed. gov /rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-practices/final report.pdf November 12, 2009
[16]. Poirier, C. R., & Feldman, R. S. (2004). Teaching in cyberspace: Online versus traditional instruction using a waiting-list experimental design. Teaching of Psychology, 31(1):59-62.
[17]. Russell, Thomas L. (2001) The No Significant Difference Phenomenon: A Comparative Research Annotated Bibliography on Technology for Distance Education. IDECC, Montgomery, AL.
[18]. Saadé, R. G. & Kira, D. (2009). Computer anxiety in e-learning: The effect of computer self-efficacy. Journal of Information Technology Education, 8, 177-191.
[19]. Watson, J. (2009). Blended learning: The convergence of online and face-to-face education. North American Council for Online Learning. Retrieved online from: http://www.inacol.org/research/docs/ NACOL_PP-BlendedLearning-lr.pdf. February 26, 2010.
[20]. Wells P., Fieger, P., & de Lange, P. (2005). Integrating a virtual learning environment into a second year accounting course: Determinants of overall student perception. Proceedings of the AAA Annual Meeting, San Francisco.
If you have access to this article please login to view the article or kindly login to purchase the article

Purchase Instant Access

Single Article

North Americas,UK,
Middle East,Europe
India Rest of world
USD EUR INR USD-ROW
Pdf 35 35 200 20
Online 35 35 200 15
Pdf & Online 35 35 400 25

Options for accessing this content:
  • If you would like institutional access to this content, please recommend the title to your librarian.
    Library Recommendation Form
  • If you already have i-manager's user account: Login above and proceed to purchase the article.
  • New Users: Please register, then proceed to purchase the article.