Advances in E-learning-Experiences and Methodologies
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
The Role of Institutional Factors <strong>in</strong> the Formation of E-Learn<strong>in</strong>g Practices<br />
suggested that although the majority of students<br />
tak<strong>in</strong>g traditional courses favour onl<strong>in</strong>e courses,<br />
they are less likely to enrol <strong>in</strong> them. However,<br />
the majority of students tak<strong>in</strong>g onl<strong>in</strong>e courses<br />
f<strong>in</strong>d that such courses meet their academic needs<br />
<strong>and</strong> improve their technological skills (Leonard<br />
& Guha, 2001). In a study on the effect of students’<br />
perceptions of their receptivity towards<br />
TML, a “distance learn<strong>in</strong>g receptivity model”<br />
was exam<strong>in</strong>ed (Christensen, Anakwe, & Kessler,<br />
2001). In addition to overall attitudes towards<br />
LT <strong>and</strong> various demographic characteristics <strong>and</strong><br />
technology perceptions (perceived usefulness,<br />
technological familiarity <strong>and</strong> technological accessibility),<br />
other perceived categories were explored<br />
<strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g reputation (of the lecturers <strong>in</strong>volved, of<br />
the programme <strong>and</strong> of the school), constra<strong>in</strong>ts<br />
(e.g., commut<strong>in</strong>g time, work dem<strong>and</strong>s, family<br />
responsibilities), <strong>and</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g preferences perception<br />
(towards traditional learn<strong>in</strong>g). The results<br />
reveal significant relationships between many of<br />
these variables <strong>and</strong> LT receptivity. F<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs also<br />
<strong>in</strong>dicate that some traditionally held assumptions,<br />
for example those regard<strong>in</strong>g accessibility, reputation,<br />
<strong>and</strong> constra<strong>in</strong>ts, may not be valid <strong>in</strong> the new<br />
high-tech learn<strong>in</strong>g environment (Christensen et<br />
al., 2001).<br />
Research explor<strong>in</strong>g op<strong>in</strong>ions shared by students<br />
on issues concern<strong>in</strong>g the application of<br />
technology to course <strong>in</strong>struction resulted <strong>in</strong> an<br />
op<strong>in</strong>ion typology. Three op<strong>in</strong>ion types were identified:<br />
(1) time <strong>and</strong> structure <strong>in</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g (i.e., flexible<br />
time management that requires self-discipl<strong>in</strong>e),<br />
(2) social <strong>in</strong>teraction <strong>in</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g (i.e., <strong>in</strong>dividual<br />
work lead<strong>in</strong>g to less enrichment from others) <strong>and</strong><br />
(3) convenience (i.e., commut<strong>in</strong>g factors—time<br />
<strong>and</strong> cost—less <strong>in</strong>terference with work) (Valenta,<br />
Theriault, Dieter, & Mrtek 2001). Similar results<br />
were recently reported by Song, S<strong>in</strong>gleton, Hill,<br />
<strong>and</strong> Koh (2004), <strong>in</strong>dicat<strong>in</strong>g that the ma<strong>in</strong> factors<br />
perceived by students as <strong>in</strong>fluenc<strong>in</strong>g successful<br />
onl<strong>in</strong>e learn<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>clude time management <strong>and</strong><br />
perceived lack of sense of community.<br />
summary <strong>and</strong> critical remarks<br />
A grow<strong>in</strong>g body of research has concentrated on<br />
factors that enhance or <strong>in</strong>hibit the adoption <strong>and</strong><br />
use of learn<strong>in</strong>g technology. Some studies have<br />
focused on factors such as the strategic approach<br />
of the university towards onl<strong>in</strong>e learn<strong>in</strong>g (Boyd-<br />
Barret, 2000) or the development of appropriate<br />
competencies <strong>and</strong> roles with<strong>in</strong> the <strong>in</strong>stitution<br />
(Williams, 2003). The factors of technology<br />
availability <strong>and</strong> access were considered as were<br />
technical stability <strong>and</strong> reliability (Webster &<br />
Hackly, 1997). The <strong>in</strong>hibit<strong>in</strong>g impact of technical<br />
difficulties <strong>and</strong> communication breakdown <strong>in</strong><br />
us<strong>in</strong>g learn<strong>in</strong>g technology was highlighted (Hara<br />
& Kl<strong>in</strong>g, 2000). Instructional factors appear to<br />
be fundamental. Design issues <strong>and</strong> the role of the<br />
<strong>in</strong>structor are considered critical factors <strong>in</strong>fluenc<strong>in</strong>g<br />
students’ participation <strong>and</strong> engagement <strong>in</strong><br />
technology-mediated learn<strong>in</strong>g (Tu, 2000).<br />
The most frequently studied factors relate to<br />
students’ perceptions on learn<strong>in</strong>g technology. A<br />
more detailed review was therefore provided of the<br />
attitud<strong>in</strong>al <strong>and</strong> perceptual factors studied to date.<br />
A critique of the literature on “user perspectives,”<br />
however, concerns the tendency to study perceptions<br />
<strong>and</strong> beliefs as isolated constructs, detached<br />
from action. Studies of users’ perceptions seem<br />
to imply a straightforward, causal relationship<br />
between perceptions (e.g., assumptions about<br />
the technology) <strong>and</strong> action (i.e., actual use of the<br />
technology). Perceptions are therefore exam<strong>in</strong>ed<br />
<strong>and</strong> measured with<strong>in</strong> <strong>and</strong> among themselves. Yet<br />
the ways <strong>in</strong> which perceptions serve to guide<br />
people’s actions may otherwise be viewed as more<br />
complex <strong>and</strong> thorny. For example, Picciano (2002)<br />
po<strong>in</strong>ts out that much of the literature is based on<br />
students’ perceptions of the quality <strong>and</strong> quantity<br />
of their <strong>in</strong>teraction <strong>and</strong> performance. He suggests<br />
go<strong>in</strong>g beyond student perceptions to explore actual<br />
<strong>in</strong>teraction <strong>and</strong> performance. F<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>in</strong>dicate<br />
that while positive relationships between perceptions<br />
of <strong>in</strong>teraction <strong>and</strong> perceived performance<br />
persist, the relationship between actual <strong>in</strong>terac-<br />
00