E-learning adoption: Does the instructional design model matter? An explanatory sequential study on midwifery schools in Uganda

E-learning has become an integral part of mainstream society and hence revolutionizing distance education endeavours. A number of change agents and bureaucrats in Uganda have embraced this pedagogy constructing it as an alternative to the traditional brick and mortar educational systems, which have become difficult to develop and maintain. However, despite the high level of investment on e-learning programs, there is a slow adoption of this new pedagogy amongst students and faculty, and those who do start to use the system opt out later. This trend of slow adoption is likely to constrain government’s efforts of improving the skill mix, competencies and numbers of midwives in the country. This research intended to ascertain whether instructional design was an influencer of e-learning adoption and profile the salient instructional design traits relevant to e-learning adoption in midwifery schools in Uganda. Ten schools were sampled with 224 participants. Data collection was conducted in two phases, the first entailed quantitative data collection and analysis to ascertain whether instructional design played a significant role in e-learning adoption and the second embraced a qualitative data collection and analysis to ascertain the salient traits of instructional design to be relied on by midwifery schools. Simple linear regression analysis established that instructional design had a significant influence on e-learning adoption with p value of (p = 0.016), and it accounted for 38.7% of the variance in e-learning adoption, with a moderate positive relationship and its key salient traits includes: choosing an appropriate instructional design model to guide the entire e-learning process, interactivity of e-learning materials, collaborative working in developing and updating e-learning materials, eliciting feedback on instructional materials, and engaging in more than one e-learning activity. Midwifery schools therefore have to focus on these six traits if they are to improve e-learning adoption.

[1]  A. Strauss,et al.  The Discovery of Grounded Theory , 1967 .

[2]  A. Strauss,et al.  The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research aldine de gruyter , 1968 .

[3]  R. V. Krejcie,et al.  Determining Sample Size for Research Activities , 1970 .

[4]  T. Heberlein,et al.  Factors affecting response rates to mailed questionnaires: A quantitative analysis of the published literature. , 1978 .

[5]  W. Powell,et al.  THE IRON CAGE REVISITED: , 1983, The New Economic Sociology.

[6]  E. Guba,et al.  Naturalistic inquiry: Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, 1985, 416 pp., $25.00 (Cloth) , 1985 .

[7]  H. Brink.  Validity and reliability in qualitative research. , 1993, Curationis.

[8]  Arthur L. Norberg,et al.  Credits for the Information Highway. (Book Reviews: Transforming Computer Technology. Information Processing for the Pentagon, 1962-1986.; Where Wizards Stay Up Late. The Origins of the Internet.) , 1996 .

[9]  Philip Selznick.  Institutionalism "Old" and "New.". , 1996 .

[10]  Margaret Gorts Morabito.  Foundations of Distance Education. , 1997 .

[11]  John F. Chizmar,et al.  Web-Based Learning Environments Guided by Principles of Good Teaching Practice , 1999 .

[12]  L. Harasim.  Shift happens: online education as a new paradigm in learning , 2000, Internet High. Educ..

[13]  R. Phelps,et al.  Staff development for online delivery: a collaborative, team based action learning model , 2000 .

[14]  Osei Darkwa,et al.  Creating Virtual Learning Communities in Africa: Challenges and Prospects , 2000, First Monday.

[15]  Thavamalar Govindasamy,et al.  Successful implementation of e-Learning: Pedagogical considerations , 2001, Internet High. Educ..

[16]  Thomas C. Reeves,et al.  Usability and Instructional Design Heuristics for E-Learning Evaluation , 2002 .

[17]  Andrew Ravenscroft,et al.  Developing and evaluating dialogue games for collaborative e-learning , 2002, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[18]  W. Scott.  Institutional carriers: reviewing modes of transporting ideas over time and space and considering their consequences , 2003 .

[19]  John Yen,et al.  Introduction , 2004, CACM.

[20]  B. C. Donohue,et al.  Faculty and Administrators Collaborating for E-Learning Courseware , 2005 .

[21]  Michael Petty.  Instructional Design for E-Learning , 2005 .

[22]  Andrew R. Brown,et al.  Elements of Effective e-Learning Design , 2005 .

[23]  L. Harasim.  A History of E-learning: Shift Happened , 2006 .

[24]  John Gardner,et al.  E Learning: Concepts And Practice , 2006 .

[25]  M. Leininger.  Theoretical Questions and Concerns: Response From the Theory of Culture Care Diversity and Universality Perspective , 2007, Nursing science quarterly.

[26]  Marcy L. Brown.  Instructional Design for E-Learning , 2007 .

[27]  David Hinds,et al.  Engaging E-Learning in Virtual Worlds: Supporting Group Collaboration , 2008, Proceedings of the 41st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 2008).

[28]  Gavin McArdle,et al.  Virtual reality for collaborative e-learning , 2008, Comput. Educ..

[29]  Paul N. Mbatia,et al.  Education and Information & Communication Technologies (ICT) inAfrica: Using ICT to improve education in Sub-Saharan Africa , 2008 .

[30]  Johan P. Olsen,et al.  Elaborating the “New Institutionalism” , 2008 .

[31]  Hsi-Peng Lu,et al.  The role of experience and innovation characteristics in the adoption and continued use of e-learning websites , 2008, Comput. Educ..

[32]  J. Keller.  The Arcs Model of Motivational Design , 2010 .

[33]  Adem Karahoca,et al.  Roles of teachers in e-learning: How to engage students & how to get free e-learning and the future , 2010 .

[34]  Michele Biasutti,et al.  The student experience of a collaborative e-learning university module , 2011, Comput. Educ..

[35]  Mohammad Issack Santally,et al.  Learning Design Implementation for Distance e-Learning: Blending Rapid e-Learning Techniques with Activity-Based Pedagogies to Design and Implement a Socio-Constructivist Environment. , 2012 .

[36]  Michael F. Frimpon.  A Re-Structuring of the Critical Success Factors for E-Learning Deployment , 2012 .

[37]  G. Wills,et al.  A Model of E-Learning Uptake and Continued Use in Higher Education Institutions. , 2013 .

[38]  M. Simonson,et al.  Institutional Policy Issues , 2013 .

[39]  Christine L. Vandenhouten,et al.  Collaboration in E-Learning: A Study Using the Flexible E-Learning Framework. , 2014 .

[40]  Mark Bullen,et al.  What is Instructional Design , 2014 .

[41]  Rongbin Wu.  Feedback in distance education: A content analysis of Distance Education: An International Journal, 1980-2013 , 2014 .

[42]  C. Skinner.  Probability Proportional to Size (PPS) Sampling , 2014 .

[43]  Joan Condell,et al.  Enhancing PASS leaders’ employability skills through reflection , 2015 .

[44]  Institutional Management of Peer-Led Learning: A Framework for Holistic Integration , 2015 .

[45]  Antoni Meseguer-Artola,et al.  E-learning continuance: The impact of interactivity and the mediating role of imagery, presence and flow , 2016, Inf. Manag..

[46]  E. Amenta,et al.  Institutional Theory , 2019, Freedom to Be.

[47]  K. Taber.  The Use of Cronbach’s Alpha When Developing and Reporting Research Instruments in Science Education , 2017, Research in Science Education.

[48]  D. Omar,et al.  Focus group discussion in built environment qualitative research practice , 2018 .

[49]  M. Yusoff.  ABC of Content Validation and Content Validity Index Calculation , 2019, Education in Medicine Journal.