e-learning readiness - Asia Pacific Region - Open University Malaysia

More documents

Recommendations

Info

espondents) agreed. However, the “other factors” were not stated by therespondents.TABLE 26. Factors Hindering Organisations from Expending E-learning EffortsDescriptionYesn(%)Non(%)Missingvaluen(%)TotalN(%)High Initial Investments 3936075(52.0)(48.0)(0.0)(100.0)High Operating Costs 3341175(44.0)(54.7)(1.3)(100.0)Poor Infrastructure 3441075(45.3)(54.7)(0.0)(100.0)Lack of Content 2154075(28.0)(72.0)(0.0)(100.0)No Necessity for E-learning8(10.7)66(88.0)1(1.3)75(100.0)Others 1758075(10.8)(88.2)(0.0)(100.0)3.3 Perception of ReadinessE-learning providers’ perceptions on the overall readiness of theirrespective organisations were generally positive. Using a ten-point Likertscale (the value “1” being “not ready” and the value “10” being “veryready”), E-learning providers were asked to rate the readiness ofpersonnel, content, technical, environmentad and financial factors.It was found that technical readiness was the highest rated factor amongthe five areas of readiness. This was indicated by a mean score of 6.85 fortechnical readiness, with a standard deviation of 2.44.The second highest rating was on personnel readiness. A mean value of6.52 on the 10-point Likert scale was recorded. The standard deviationvalue recorded for this item was 2.28, indicating a notably divergentspread of scores from the group.Content readiness was ranked third. The group’s average score oncontent readiness was 6.16, on the 10-point Likert scale (mean value =6.16), and the standard deviation was 2.53.Joint Study by MEWC and OUM 41
In terms of financial readiness, the group’s perception was tabulated at amean value of 5.81 and a standard deviation value of 2.447. In theiropinion, organisations were moderately ready to invest in E-learning.The lowest score was recorded for the item on environmental readiness.The group concluded that they have a slightly lower perception about thereadiness of the environment (government policies, mass media and soforth), and the mean score for this item was 4.71, with a standarddeviation score of 1.71, indicating a fair amount of agreement among themembers of the group.To conclude, the E-learning providers who responded to the surveyperceived that they were generally ready to embark E-learning. However,they implied that the environmental factors need to be improved beforethe society/nation can be ready for E-learning.TABLE 27. Mean Score of Overall Readiness among ProvidersArea of Readiness Mean Standard Deviation(N=75)Personnel Readiness 6.52 2.28Content Readiness 6.16 2.53Technical Readiness 6.85 2.44Environmental Readiness 4.71 1.71Financial Readiness 5.81 2.45Overall E-Learning Readiness among ProvidersTo investigate the overall perceptions of readiness among all E-learningproviders who participated in this survey, an eye-ball observation of theoverall data indicated that these providers’ perceptions were in themoderate range of agreement (between values 4 and 7, on a 10-pointLikert scale), for four out of five areas presented in this survey. There areillustrated in Table 28 and in Figures 8 through 13.For personnel readiness, 40 respondents from the group (53.3 percent)indicated a moderate rating. Another 25 respondents (33.3 percent)scored on the higher end (between values 8 and 10, on the 10-point Likertscale), and the remaining 10 respondents (13.3 percent) indicated a lowperception (between values 1 and 3).When asked to rate content readiness, the group continued to respondsomewhere between the moderate and high values (between values 4 and10, on a 10-point Likert scale). There were 39 respondents who had amoderate perception about their content readiness (52.7 percent), whileanother 23 respondents (31.1 percent) indicated a higher perception oftheir organisation’s readiness for E-learning content. The remaining 12Joint Study by MEWC and OUM 42
Page 1 and 2: e-learning readinesse-learningMalay
Page 3 and 4: E-LEARNING READINESSIN MALAYSIA 200
Page 5 and 6: E-learning Readiness in Malaysia 20
Page 13 and 14: application of ICT to pave the way
Page 15 and 16: University College, lecturers are e
Page 17 and 18: 1. The promotion of information flu
Page 19 and 20: 1.4.1 The ELR InstrumentFour instru
Page 21 and 22: 1.4.3 The RespondentsThe respondent
Page 23 and 24: (b) Area of Readiness:Content Readi
Page 25 and 26: 2POLICY MAKERS ANDORGANISATIONSThis
Page 27 and 28: TABLE 2. Demographic Profile of Pol
Page 29 and 30: surveyed (including one policy make
Page 31 and 32: According to the data in Table 8 wh
Page 33 and 34: difference, however, can be observe
Page 35 and 36: Level of Overall Readiness among Po
Page 37 and 38: 2019.616.7Percent1512.813.7106.95.9
Page 39 and 40: 3PROVIDERSThis chapter presents the
Page 41 and 42: adequate for achieving the ideal ba
Page 43 and 44: TABLE 17. Provision of Applications
Page 45 and 46: TABLE 20. Preference for Single poi
Page 47 and 48: expertise to develop content for E-
Page 49 and 50: Finally, it was suggested that step
Page 51: According to a respondent, one of t
Page 55 and 56: TABLE 28. Level of Overall Readines
Page 57 and 58: 2524.02017.315Percent1012.013.310.7
Page 59 and 60: 201516.4415.0716.4415.07Percent1010
Page 61 and 62: 4ENABLERSThis section presents find
Page 63 and 64: month. This shows that, in general,
Page 65 and 66: As shown in Table 33, the top three
Page 67 and 68: learner-centred and therefore learn
Page 69 and 70: addressed. Further, enablers felt t
Page 71 and 72: Although most enablers acknowledge
Page 73 and 74: greater usage for E-learning. In ad
Page 75 and 76: Level of Overall Readiness among En
Page 77 and 78: 2017.518.51514.913.8FIGURE 17. Over
Page 79 and 80: 252020.017.6 17.0Percent1512.612.61
Page 81 and 82: 5RECEIVERSThis section reports the
Page 83 and 84: Refer to Table 48 for data on the t
Page 85 and 86: percent). Other uses of the compute
Page 87 and 88: used it for emailing. The use of th
Page 89 and 90: order to be a successful e-learner,
Page 91 and 92: The open-ended responses yielded a
Page 93 and 94: to the Internet as well as, bandwid
Page 95 and 96: TABLE 66. Receivers’ Perceptions
Page 99 and 100: 2524.620Percent1514.515.5 15.9108.5
Page 101 and 102: 2523.72017.7 17.2Percent1513.7108.8
Page 103 and 104:
6SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONSThis ch
Page 105 and 106:
TABLE 71. Areas of Readiness among
Page 107 and 108:
financial readiness. This may refle
Page 109 and 110:
TABLE 72. Summary of Findings (cont
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
(c) Employ a core team of personnel
Page 117 and 118:
(f) Give incentives to companies th
Page 119 and 120:
h) Recognise qualifications acquire
Page 121 and 122:
AppendixesJoint Study by MEWC and O
Page 123 and 124:
ChairpersonChief Secretary, Ministr
Page 125 and 126:
OUM Committee on E-learning Readine
Page 127 and 128:
Phase I (January - April 2004)Head,
Page 129 and 130:
Rohani IsmailManagerTechnology Assi
Page 131 and 132:
Phase III (August - October 2004)He
Page 133 and 134:
Appendix EList of Major Respondents
Page 135 and 136:
33. Universiti Sains Malaysia34. Un
Page 137 and 138:
A Study on E-learning Readiness in
Page 139 and 140:
D. Environmental Readiness Yes No1.
Page 141 and 142:
A Study on E-learning Readiness in
Page 143 and 144:
Instruction: Please respond to the
Page 145 and 146:
Appendix HSurvey Instrument for Ena
Page 147 and 148:
8. Do you use a computer?ٱNever ٱ
Page 149 and 150:
15. My organisation/institution pro
Page 151 and 152:
Appendix ISurvey Instrument for Rec
Page 153 and 154:
4. I am enrolled/attending an in-se
Page 155 and 156:
13. Do you have Internet connection
Page 157 and 158:
15. Content for E-learning is appro
Page 159 and 160:
Appendix JBiodata of the Working Gr
Page 161 and 162:
Currently Fitri is on study leave a
Page 163 and 164:
project. Currently, her focus is to
Page 165 and 166:
Rohani IsmailRohani Ismail has grad
Page 167:
Prior to that, she was a Curriculum
show all

e-learning readiness - Asia Pacific Region - Open University Malaysia

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?