A Model of System Re-Configurability and Pedagogical Usability in an E-Learning Context: A Faculty Perspective

Course management systems CMSs enable institutions to engage users efficiently, increase enrollment without major facilities investments, and serve geographically dispersed student markets on an ongoing basis. The full benefits of technology cannot be realized if faculty do not adopt the new technology and use it to achieve their instructional design objectives. From a faculty perspective, pedagogical usability of the software is an important factor affecting technology adoption and effective implementation. Pedagogical usability is measured using Chickering and Gamson's seven principles of good educational practice. In a distance learning context, this paper provides an initial exploratory study of how faculty perceptions of CMS software characteristics like content re-configurability, interaction re-configurability, and modularity design help faculty implement good pedagogical principles. Additionally, a model is presented that links CMS software design characteristics like content re-configurability, interaction re-configurability, and modularity design with the pedagogical usability assessments of faculty. This model is tested using a sample of 56 faculty members using WebCT at a mid-western university.

[1]  Jakob Nielsen,et al.  Designing web usability , 1999 .

[2]  Lois J. Smith Content and Delivery: A Comparison and Contrast of Electronic and Traditional MBA Marketing Planning Courses , 2001 .

[3]  Robert M. O'Keefe,et al.  From the User Interface to the Consumer Interface , 2000, Inf. Syst. Frontiers.

[4]  Joel R. Evans,et al.  Online business education in the twenty-first century: an analysis of potential target markets , 2001, Internet Res..

[5]  Pamela B. Lawhead,et al.  The Web and distance learning (panel): what is appropriate and what is not , 1997, ITiCSE '97.

[6]  Richard T. Vidgen,et al.  An Evaluation of Cyber-Bookshops: The WebQual Method , 2001, Int. J. Electron. Commer..

[7]  Erica Melis,et al.  Lessons for (Pedagogic) Usability of eLearning Systems , 2003 .

[8]  George Puan Loon Teh Assessing Student Perceptions of Internet-Based Online Learning Environments. , 1999 .

[9]  Jakob Nielsen,et al.  Usability engineering , 1997, The Computer Science and Engineering Handbook.

[10]  M. Yi,et al.  The Role of Personal Goal and Self-Efficiency in Predicting Computer Task Performance , 2005 .

[11]  Kirsi Silius,et al.  THE USEFULNESS OF WEB-BASED LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS The Evaluation Tool into the Portal of Finnish Virtual University , 2003 .

[12]  Clyde W. Holsapple,et al.  Defining, Assessing, and Promoting E‐Learning Success: An Information Systems Perspective* , 2006 .

[13]  Mark Pearrow Web Site Usability Handbook with Cdrom , 2000 .

[14]  Eric Tsui,et al.  A Two-Tier Approach to Elicit Enterprise Portal User Requirements , 2007, Encyclopedia of Portal Technologies and Applications.

[15]  A. Chickering,et al.  Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education , 1987, CORE.

[16]  M. Moore Editorial: Three types of interaction , 1989 .

[17]  Thomas Clarke,et al.  Corporate Developments and Strategic Alliances in E-Learning. , 2001 .

[18]  Donna Weaver McCloskey,et al.  The Importance of Ease of Use, Usefulness, and Trust to Online Consumers: An Examination of the Technology Acceptance Model with Older Customers , 2006, J. Organ. End User Comput..

[19]  Wayne D. Gray,et al.  Damaged Merchandise? A Review of Experiments That Compare Usability Evaluation Methods , 1998, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[20]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  Assessing a Firm's Web Presence: A Heuristic Evaluation Procedure for the Measurement of Usability , 2002, Inf. Syst. Res..

[21]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Validating Instruments in MIS Research , 1989, MIS Q..

[22]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  Turning Visitors into Customers: A Usability-Centric Perspective on Purchase Behavior in Electronic Channels , 2006, Manag. Sci..

[23]  Eva R. Fåhræus,et al.  The Web and distance learning: what is appropriate and what is not (report of the ITiCSE '97 working group on the web and distance learning) , 1997, ITiCSE-WGR '97.

[24]  Na Li,et al.  The Intellectual Development of Human-Computer Interaction Research: A Critical Assessment of the MIS Literature (1990-2002) , 2005, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[25]  Raquel Benbunan-Fich,et al.  Using protocol analysis to evaluate the usability of a commercial web site , 2001, Inf. Manag..

[26]  Pratim Datta,et al.  Investigating Technology Commitment in Instant Messaging Application Users , 2010, J. Organ. End User Comput..

[27]  Tim Kilby The direction of Web‐based training: a practitioner’s view , 2001 .

[28]  D. Squires,et al.  An heuristic approach to the evaluation of educational mmultimedia software , 1997 .

[29]  Guglielmo Trentin,et al.  The evaluation of online courses , 2008, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[30]  Stephanie Rosenbaum,et al.  Usability studies of WWW sites: heuristic evaluation vs. laboratory testing , 1997, SIGDOC '97.

[31]  James R. Lewis,et al.  IBM computer usability satisfaction questionnaires: Psychometric evaluation and instructions for use , 1995, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[32]  D. Garrison,et al.  Facilitating Cognitive Presence in Online Learning: Interaction Is Not Enough , 2005 .

[33]  Michael Vallance,et al.  Design and robots for learning in virtual worlds. , 2012 .

[34]  Michael G. Moore Three types of interaction , 1993 .

[35]  Jonathan W. Palmer,et al.  Web Site Usability, Design, and Performance Metrics , 2002, Inf. Syst. Res..

[36]  M. N. Ravishankar,et al.  Rewarding End-Users for Participating in Organizational KM: A Case Study , 2008 .

[37]  Rosemary H. Wild,et al.  A framework for e-learning as a tool for knowledge management , 2002, Ind. Manag. Data Syst..

[38]  Les Gasser,et al.  A Design Theory for Systems That Support Emergent Knowledge Processes , 2002, MIS Q..

[39]  Peter Albion,et al.  Multimedia: , 2020, 'Komt pelgrims, komt hier'.

[40]  S. C. Ehrmann IMPLEMENTING THE SEVEN PRINCIPLES: Technology as Lever , 2004 .

[41]  Venkataraman Ramesh,et al.  Web and Wireless Site Usability: Understanding Differences and Modeling Use , 2006, MIS Q..

[42]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Modularity and Innovation in Complex Systems , 2002, Manag. Sci..

[43]  E. Hippel,et al.  Customers As Innovators: A New Way to Create Value , 2002 .

[44]  John Karat,et al.  Evolving the scope of user-centered design , 1997, CACM.

[45]  Badrul H. Khan,et al.  User Interface Design for Virtual Environments: Challenges and Advances , 2011 .

[46]  Nick Hammond,et al.  Consistency and Compatibility in Human-Computer Dialogue , 1981, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[47]  Fabio Paternò,et al.  Automatic Support for Usability Evaluation , 1998, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[48]  David H. Jonassen,et al.  Supporting Communities of Learners with Technology: A Vision for Integrating Technology with Learning in Schools. , 1995 .

[49]  Sarah Horton Web Teaching Guide: A Practical Approach to Creating Course Web Sites , 2000 .

[50]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction , 1998 .

[51]  Ralph Katz,et al.  Shifting Innovation to Users via Toolkits , 2002, Manag. Sci..

[52]  Chien Chou,et al.  Interactivity and interactive functions in web-based learning systems: a technical framework for designers , 2003, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[53]  David J. Skyrme Capitalizing on Knowledge: From E-Commerce to K-Commerce , 2001 .