Experience beyond knowledge: Pragmatic e-learning systems design with learning experience

With the growing demand in e-learning system, traditional e-learning systems have dramatically evolved to provide more adaptive ways of learning, in terms of learning objectives, courses, individual learning processes, and so on. This paper reports on differences in learning experience from the learner's perspectives when using an adaptive e-learning system, where the learner's knowledge or skill level is used to configure the learning path. Central to this study is the evaluation of a dynamic content sequencing system (DCSS), with empirical outcomes being interpreted using Csikszentmihalyi's flow theory (i.e., Flow, Boredom, and Anxiety). A total of 80 participants carried out a one-way between-subject study controlled by the type of e-learning system (i.e., the DCSS vs. the non-DCSS). The results indicated that the lower or medium achievers gained certain benefits from the DCSS, whilst the high achievers in learning performance might suffer from boredom when using the DCSS. These contrasting findings can be suggested as a pragmatic design guideline for developing more engaging computer-based learning systems for unsupervised learning situations.

[1]  Ping Zhang,et al.  A person-artefact-task (PAT) model of flow antecedents in computer-mediated environments , 2003, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[2]  Daniel L. Dinsmore,et al.  Focusing the Conceptual Lens on Metacognition, Self-regulation, and Self-regulated Learning , 2008 .

[3]  Winslow Burleson,et al.  Developing creativity, motivation, and self-actualization with learning systems , 2005, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[4]  Mike Moore,et al.  What Students Really Want , 2008 .

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

[6]  Peter Brusilovsky,et al.  ELM-ART: An Intelligent Tutoring System on World Wide Web , 1996, Intelligent Tutoring Systems.

[7]  S. Alexander.  E‐learning developments and experiences , 2001 .

[8]  Dowming Yeh,et al.  What drives a successful e-Learning? An empirical investigation of the critical factors influencing learner satisfaction , 2008, Comput. Educ..

[9]  R. Azevedo,et al.  Scaffolding Self-regulated Learning and Metacognition – Implications for the Design of Computer-based Scaffolds , 2005 .

[10]  Brian Everitt,et al.  Cluster analysis , 1974 .

[11]  Donald Clark.  Psychological myths in e-learning , 2002, Medical teacher.

[12]  Brigitte Maier,et al.  Students' expectations of, and experiences in e-learning: Their relation to learning achievements and course satisfaction , 2010, Comput. Educ..

[13]  Walter D. Fisher.  On Grouping for Maximum Homogeneity , 1958 .

[14]  K. Dawson,et al.  Content Analysis in Computer-Mediated Communication: Analyzing Models for Assessing Critical Thinking Through the Lens of Social Constructivism , 2008 .

[15]  Mia Stern,et al.  Curriculum Sequencing in a Web-Based Tutor , 1998, Intelligent Tutoring Systems.

[16]  M. Csíkszentmihályi.  Beyond boredom and anxiety , 1975 .

[17]  Changchun Liu,et al.  Dynamic Difficulty Adjustment in Computer Games Through Real-Time Anxiety-Based Affective Feedback , 2009, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[18]  Buay Choo Tang.  Interactive e-learning activities to engage learners - A simple classification , 2005 .

[19]  Robert D. Macredie,et al.  Hypermedia learning and prior knowledge: domain expertise vs. system expertise , 2005, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[20]  Genevieve Marie Johnson,et al.  Student Alienation, Academic Achievement, and WebCT Use , 2005, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[21]  Hsiao-Ching She,et al.  The impact of multimedia effect on science learning: Evidence from eye movements , 2009, Comput. Educ..

[22]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  Multimedia Learning: INTRODUCTION TO MULTIMEDIA LEARNING , 2009 .

[23]  Ingrid Zukerman,et al.  # 2001 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands. Predictive Statistical Models for User Modeling , 1999 .

[24]  S. Evans.  E-learning and Blindness: evaluating the quality of the learning experience to inform policy and practice , 2009 .

[25]  J. Hair.  Multivariate data analysis , 1972 .

[26]  R. Mayer,et al.  Multimedia learning: Are we asking the right questions? , 1997 .

[27]  Cher Ping Lim.  Engaging learners in online learning environments , 2004 .

[28]  Dennis L. Hoffman,et al.  Marketing in Hypermedia Computer-Mediated Environments : Conceptual Foundations 1 ) , 1998 .

[29]  Janette R. Hill,et al.  Improving online learning: Student perceptions of useful and challenging characteristics , 2004, Internet High. Educ..

[30]  David Heckerman,et al.  Empirical Analysis of Predictive Algorithms for Collaborative Filtering , 1998, UAI.

[31]  Paul Jones,et al.  E‐learning and retention: key factors influencing student withdrawal , 2004 .

[32]  Gina A. Richter.  Beyond engagement: Instructional strategies that facilitate learners' cognitive processes and produce effective and instructionally efficient e -learning , 2008 .

[33]  E. Toms,et al.  What is user engagement? A conceptual framework for defining user engagement with technology , 2008, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[34]  Peter Brusilovsky,et al.  ELM-ART: An Adaptive Versatile System for Web-based Instruction , 2001 .

[35]  Hokyoung Ryu,et al.  To Flow and Not to Freeze: Applying Flow Experience to Mobile Learning , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies.

[36]  Namin Shin,et al.  Online learner's 'flow' experience: an empirical study , 2006, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[37]  Spyros Konstantopoulos,et al.  What Are the Long‐Term Effects of Small Classes on the Achievement Gap? Evidence from the Lasting Benefits Study , 2009, American Journal of Education.

[38]  Theodore J. Kopcha,et al.  Learner preferences and prior knowledge in learner-controlled computer-based instruction , 2008 .

[39]  Natalya A. Koehler,et al.  A design study of a multimedia instructional grammar program with embedded tracking , 2011 .

[40]  Avner Caspi,et al.  Comparing Perceived Formal and Informal Learning in Face-to-Face versus Online Environments , 2010 .

[41]  Martin Ebner,et al.  Successful implementation of user-centered game based learning in higher education: An example from civil engineering , 2007, Comput. Educ..

[42]  Natalia Stash,et al.  AHA! The adaptive hypermedia architecture , 2003, HYPERTEXT '03.

[43]  Hokyoung Ryu,et al.  Am I Extravert or Introvert? Considering the Personality Effect Toward e-Learning System , 2013, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[44]  Tony Becher,et al.  Teaching and Learning in their Disciplinary Contexts: A conceptual analysis , 2002 .

[45]  Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi,et al.  Measuring intrinsic motivation in everyday life , 1983 .

[46]  Frances Deepwell,et al.  On campus, but out of class: an investigation into students’ experiences of learning technologies in their self-directed study , 2008 .

[47]  Geoffrey S. Hubona,et al.  Evaluating system design features , 1996, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[48]  Shu-Sheng Liaw,et al.  Investigating students' perceived satisfaction, behavioral intention, and effectiveness of e-learning: A case study of the Blackboard system , 2008, Comput. Educ..

[49]  Shirley Alexander,et al.  Using Students' Experiences to Derive Quality in an e-Learning System: An Institution's Perspective , 2007, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[50]  Ming-Chi Lee,et al.  Explaining and predicting users' continuance intention toward e-learning: An extension of the expectation-confirmation model , 2010, Comput. Educ..

[51]  Ilya Zitter,et al.  In search of common ground: A task conceptualization to facilitate the design of (e)learning environments with design patterns , 2009, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[52]  J. Webster,et al.  The Dimensionality and Correlates of Flow in Human-Computer Interactions. , 1993 .

[53]  D. Garrison,et al.  Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education , 2001 .

[54]  M. Csíkszentmihályi.  Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience , 1990 .

[55]  Szu-Yuan Sun,et al.  Usability, quality, value and e-learning continuance decisions , 2005, Comput. Educ..

[56]  Hokyoung Ryu,et al.  Risky business or sharing the load? - Social flow in collaborative mobile learning , 2012, Comput. Educ..

[57]  R. Mayer,et al.  Does the modality principle for multimedia learning apply to science classrooms , 2007 .

[58]  Kan-Min Lin,et al.  e-Learning continuance intention: Moderating effects of user e-learning experience , 2011, Comput. Educ..

[59]  M. Allen,et al.  Comparing Student Satisfaction With Distance Education to Traditional Classrooms in Higher Education: A Meta-Analysis , 2002 .

[60]  Eduardo Salas,et al.  Learner Control and Workplace E-Learning: Design, Person, and Organizational Issues , 2005 .

[61]  A. Onwuegbuzie,et al.  Mixed Methods Research: A Research Paradigm Whose Time Has Come , 2004 .

[62]  Robert M. Bernard,et al.  How Does Distance Education Compare With Classroom Instruction? A Meta-Analysis of the Empirical Literature , 2004 .

[63]  Chao-Min Chiu,et al.  Understanding e-learning continuance intention: An extension of the Technology Acceptance Model , 2006, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[64]  Thompson S. H. Teo,et al.  Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in Internet usage , 1999 .