The learning management system: Variables that determine its use
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32870/Ap.v11n2.1521Keywords:
Higher education, LMS, digital competences, teaching competencesAbstract
Teachers consider the Virtual Learning Environment a technological tool with strong didactic potential. This perception is validated by the frequency of its use both in technical and didactic spheres, which frequently interweave with each other. The main assumption of our research is that those technical and pedagogical competences of the digital tools have promoted the use of the Virtual Learning Environment (AVA) in class causing a change of the methodology used as a result. The study is a non-experimental one but an ex post facto with non-probabilistic sampling. The survey was carried out on a population of 640 teachers of a professional technical higher education institution in Chile. The results showed that, in order to incorporate digital tools into their educational practice, teachers should emphasize the didactic domain of those device over the technical one. In conclusion, it has been highlighted that the teaching staff uses AVA mainly to accomplish administrative tasks to the detriment of the didactic use.
References
Adams, S.; Cummins, M.; Davis, A.; Freeman, A.; Hall, C. G. & Ananthanarayanan, V. (2017). NMC Horizon Report: 2017 Higher education edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.
Alonso, M. (2018). Percepción estudiantil sobre la calidad de un ambiente de aprendizaje mixto apoyado por Moodle. Pixel-Bit. Revista de Medios y Educación, 53, pp. 193-205.
Avello, R.; López, R. y Vázquez, S. (2016). Competencias TIC de los docentes de las escuelas de Hotelería y Turismo cubanas. Universidad y Sociedad, 8(1), pp. 63-69.
Ay, Y.; Karada, E. & Acat, M. (2015). The Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge practical (TPACK Practical) model: Examination of its validity in the Turkish culture via structural equation modeling. Computers & Education, 88, pp. 97-108.
Badia, A.; Garcia, C. & Meneses, J. (2017). Approaches to teaching online: Exploring factors influencing teachers in a fully online university. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(6), pp. 1193-1207. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12475
Brooks, D. C. & Pomerantz, J. (2017). ECAR Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology. Louisville, CO.
Buabeng-Andoh, C. (2012). An exploration of teachers’ skills, perceptions and practices of ICT in teaching and learning in the ghanaian second-cycle schools. Contemporary Educational Technology, 3(1), pp. 36-49.
Cabero, J. & Barroso, J. (2016). ICT teacher training: A view of the TPACK model/ Formación del profesorado en TIC: una visión del modelo TPACK. Cultura y Educación, 28(3), pp. 633-663.
Cabero, J. y Pérez, J. L. (2018). Validación del modelo TAM de adopción de la realidad aumentada mediante ecuaciones estructurales. Estudios sobre Educación, 34, pp. 129-153.
Celik, V. & Yesilyurt, E. (2013). Attitudes to technology, perceived computer self-efficacy and computer anxiety as predictors of computer supported education. Computers & Education, 60(1), pp. 148-158.
Chaljub, J. (2019). La plataforma digital Seesaw: su integración en una clase dinámica. Pixel-Bit. Revista de Medios y Educación, 54, pp. 107-123.
Chávez, V. A. y Verdezoto, R. H. (2018). Importancia de las herramientas y entornos de aprendizaje dentro de la plataforma e-learning en las universidades de Ecuador. EDUTEC Revista Electrónica de Tecnología educativa, 65, pp. 68-92. http://dx.doi.org/10.21556/edutec.2018.65.1067
Del Prete, A.; Cabero-Almenara J. y Halal, C. (2018). Motivos inhibidores del uso del Moodle en docentes de educación superior. Campus Virtuales. Revista científica Iberoamericana de Tecnología Educativa, 7(2), pp. 69-80.
Del Prete, A. y Zamorano-Huerta, L. (2015). Formación inicial del profesorado de educación básica en Chile: reflexiones y análisis sobre las orientaciones curriculares en TIC. Revista de Pedagogía, 36(99), pp. 91-108.
Delgado-García, M.; García-Prieto, F. J. y Gómez-Hurtado, I. (2018). Moodle y Facebook Moodle and Facebook as virtual learning teaching tools of mediation: The opinion of teachers and university students. Revista Complutense de Educación, 29(3), pp. 807-827.
Deniz, L. & Algan, C. (2007). Validity and reliability studies of the Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) self-efficacy scale in education. Journal of Education Sciences, 25(25).
González, F. (2017). De la era de la perplejidad a la era de las oportunidades: finanzas para el crecimiento. En BBVA. La era de la perplejidad. Repensar el mundo que conocíamos, (pp. 8-39). Madrid: Taurus.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2018). E-Teaching in Higher Education: An Essential Prerequisite for E-Learning. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 7(2), pp. 93-97. http://dx.doi.org/10.7821/naer.2018.7.298
Horvat, A.; Dobrota, M.; Krsmanovic, M. & Cudanov, M. (2015). Student perception of Moodle learning management system: A satisfaction and significance. Interactive Learning Environments, 23(4), pp. 515-527. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2013.788033
Inzunza, B.; Rocha, R.; Márquez, C. & Duk, M. (2014). Asignatura virtual como herramienta de apoyo en la enseñanza universitaria de ciencias básicas: implementación y satisfacción de los estudiantes. Formación Universitaria, 5(4), pp. 3-14.
Jenaro, C.; Martín, M. E.; Castaño, R. y Flores, N. (2018). Rendimiento académico en educación superior y su asociación con la participación activa en la plataforma Moodle. Estudios sobre Educación, 34, pp. 177-198.
Kerimbayev, N.; Kultan, J.; Abdykarimova, S. & Akramova, A. (2017). LMS Moodle: Distance international education in cooperation of higher education institutions of different countries. Educ Inf Technol, 22, pp. 2125-2139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-016-9534-5
Kinchin, I. M. (2012). Avoiding technology-enhanced non-learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(2), pp. E43–E48. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01264.x
Leiva, J.; Ugalde, L. y Llorente, M. C. (2018). El modelo TPACK en la formación inicial de profesores: modelo Universidad de Playa Ancha (UPLA), Chile. Pixel-Bit. Revista de Medios y Educación, 53, pp. 165-177. http://dx.doi.org/10.12795/pixelbit.2018.i53.11
López, L.; López, B.; y Prieto, E. (2018). Tendencias innovadoras en la formación on-line. La oferta web de postgrados e-learning y blended, learning en España. Pixel-Bit. Revista de Medios y Educación, 53, pp. 1-15. https://doi.org/10.12795/pixelbit.2018.i53.06
Mateo, J. (2012). La investigación ex post-facto. En Bisquerra, R. (coord.), Metodología de investigación educativa, (pp. 195-229). Madrid: La Muralla.
Matosas-López, L.; Aguado-Franco, J. C., & Gómez-Galán, J. (2019). Constructing an instrument with behavioral scales to assess teaching quality in blended learning modalities. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 8(2), pp. 142-165. http://dx.doi.org/10.7821/naer.2019.7.410
O´Dwyer, L. & Bernauer, J. (2014). Quantitative research for the qualitative researcher. California: Sage.
Park, J. (2014). Course evaluation: Reconfigurations for learning with learning management systems. Higher Education Research & Development, 33(5), pp. 992-1006.
Parsons, A. (2017). Accessibility and use of VLEs by students in further education. Research in Post-Compulsory Education, 22(2), pp. 271-288.
Pettersson, F. (2018). On the issues of digital competence in educational contexts–a review of literature. Education and Information Technologies, 23(3), pp. 1005-1021.
Poitras, E.; Doleck, T.; Huang, L.; Li, Sh. & Lajoie, S. (2017). Advancing teacher technology education using open-ended learning environments as research and training platforms. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 33(3), pp. 32-45.
Pozuelo, J. (2014). ¿Y si enseñamos de otra manera? Competencias digitales para el cambio metodológico. Caracciolos, II(1), pp. 1-21.
Ramos-Pardo, F. J.; Sánchez, P. y Sánchez, J. (2012). Usos pedagógicos de Moodle en la docencia universitaria desde la perspectiva de los estudiantes. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación, 60, pp. 15-38.
Rienties, B.; Giesbers, B.; Lygo-Baker, S.; Ma, H. W. S. & Rees, R. (2014). Why some teachers easily learn to use a new virtual learning environment: A technology acceptance perspective. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(3), pp. 539-552.
Rodríguez, A.; Raso, F. y Ruiz-Palmero, J. (2019). Competencia digital, educación superior y formación del profesorado: un estudio de meta-análisis en la Web of Science. Pixel-Bit. Revista de Medios y Educación, 54, pp. 65-81.
Sabariego, M. (2012). El proceso de investigación (parte 2). En R. Bisquerra (coord.). Metodología de la investigación educativa (pp. 127-163) (3ª. ed.). Madrid: La Muralla.
Siemens, G. & Weller, M. (2011). El impacto de las redes sociales en la enseñanza y el aprendizaje. Revista de Universidad y Sociedad del Conocimiento (RUSC), 8(1), pp. 157-163.
Sinclair, J. & Aho, A. M. (2018). Experts on super innovators: Understanding staff adoption of learning management systems. Higher Education Research & Development, 37(1), pp. 158-172.
Solano, H. y Abella, V. (2017). Factores determinantes de la aceptación de Cisco Netscape: estudio empírico basado en TAM. Pixel-Bit. Revista de Medios y Educación, 51, pp. 211-225.
Umoru, T. (2012). Barriers to the use of Information And Communication Technologies in teaching and learning business education. American Journal of Business Education, 5(5), pp. 575–580.
Vázquez, M. H. y Burrial, A. T. (2017). Factores que influyen en el aprendizaje mixto (blended-learning) y colaborativo en Moodle en didáctica de las ciencias experimentales en el grado de maestro en Educación Primaria. En Propuesta de innovación educativa en la sociedad de la información (pp. 48-60). Eindhoven, NL: Adaya Press.
Yanacón-Atía, R. y Menini. M. (2018). Indicadores colaborativos individuales y grupales para Moodle. Campus Virtuales, 7(1), pp. 125-139.
Published
Issue
Section
License
The copyright belongs to the authors of the text. In case the manuscript is accepted for publication, the Sistema de Universidad Virtual of the Universidad de Guadalajara (UDGVirtual) is authorized to modify the text in the correction of style, translate, fix, disseminate, reproduce, publish and market with this. Likewise, the Universidad de Guadalajara is authorized to carry out the above described jointly or through possible third parties. (See the detailed authorization in the copyright letter.)
The authors guarantee to Apertura the right to be the first means of publication of the work. The reproduction of the texts published in the Apertura is authorized, in whole or in part, as long as it is non-profit, the source is cited and the content or design is not modified. Authors may exclusively distribute the final editorial or postprint version in any medium and at any time.
Apertura, its editors and UDGVirtual dissociate themselves from the information provided by collaborators or advertisers. The articles of the contributors do not necessarily represent the point of view of the publisher or UDGVirtual and the content of the advertisements are the sole responsibility of the contractors.
Apertura is registered in the National Institute of Copyright with the ISSN number: 1665-6180 (printed version) and e-ISSN 2007-1094 (electronic version), and with the Certificate of Reservation of Rights to the Exclusive Use of the Title: 04 -2005-120212472000-102.
It is also certified by the Qualifying Commission for Illustrated Publications and Journals of the Ministry of the Interior with the Licensed Certificates of Title number: 13449; and Content Legality: 11022.
