Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluating students experiences using a virtual learning environment: satisfaction and preferences

  • Development Article
  • Published:
Educational Technology Research and Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Virtual learning environments (VLEs) are web-based software systems that enable students to interact with their teachers and classmates, access learning resources without restriction of time and place, and use cutting-edge Information and Communication Technologies. Nevertheless, VLEs are costly to develop and maintain. Clearly, many features of VLEs may not be as useful to learners as designers and stakeholders might think, resulting in waste of resources. With this possibility in mind, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the features of the VLE employed at Middlesex University. To that end, first, a scale with 11 items and 3 sub-dimensions was developed and tested through exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses to identify student perceptions of the (1) benefit, (2) satisfaction, and (3) guidance, aiming at identifying student views on how beneficial the system was, whether they were satisfied with it, and how they perceived the guidance provided through it, respectively. Next, the scale was administered to a sample of 278 students to determine whether the perceptions differed depending on campus location, and grade level. Finally, questions were also asked to pinpoint the features of the VLE that the students found most useful and beneficial. Data were analysed through ANOVA, correlation, and rank analyses. Results show that the students’ perception of the VLE did not significantly differ based on campus location or grade level. Two features of the VLE—lecture capture and key concept videos—were the most beneficial resources for the students, whereas “lecture capture with PowerPoint slides and audio only,” discussion forums, and chat rooms, were not preferred. The students were not much enthusiastic to have access to blogs, audio/video conferencing facilities, wikis, or chat either.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ahmed, J., & Morley, G. (2010). VLE a blessing or a curse: VLE use by HE academic staff. Global Learn Asia Pacific 2010—Global Conference on Learning and Technology. Retrieved from http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/8901/.

  • Akritidou, M., & Tsiatsos, T. (2008). Implementing a PLE: A VLE-based approach. Conference ICL2008, 24–26, Villach, Austria.

  • Al Ghamdi, A., Samarji, A., & Watt, A. (2016). Essential considerations in distance education in KSA: Teacher immediacy in a virtual teaching and learning environment. International Journal of Information and Education Technology,6(1), 17–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arbaugh, J. B., & Duray, R. (2002). Technological and structural characteristics, student learning and satisfaction with web-based courses: An exploratory study of two online MBA programs. Management and Learning,33(3), 331–347.

    Google Scholar 

  • Assoodar, M., Vaezi, S., & Izanloo, B. (2016). Framework to improve e-learner satisfaction and further strengthen e-learning implementation. Computers in Human Behavior,63, 704–716.

    Google Scholar 

  • Awang, H., Aji, Z. M., & Osman, W. R. S. (2018, September). Measuring virtual learning environment success from the teacher’s perspective: Scale development and validation. In AIP Conference Proceedings (Vol. 2016, No. 1, p. 020028). AIP Publishing.

  • Bagozzi, R. P., & Youjae, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of Academy of Marketing Science,16(1), 74–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bee, T. (2013). Making the most out of IT: Report to TELWG. Liverpool: University of Liverpool.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergen, A., French, L., & Hawkins, L. (2012). Teaching and learning in a digital world: A developmental evaluation of virtual learning environments in the Upper Grand and York Region District School Boards. Retrieved from http://www.cesinstitute.ca/.

  • Berlanga, A. J., Eshuism, J., Hermans, H., & Sloep, P. B. (2010). Learning networks for lifelong learning: An exploratory survey on distance learners’ preferences. In L. Dirckinck-Holmfeld, V. Hodgson, C. Jones, M. de Laat, D. McConnell, & T. Ryberg (Ed), In Proceedings of the 7th international conference on networked learning 2010 (pp. 44–51). Lancaster: Lancaster University.

  • Bourne, J., & Moore, J. C. (Eds.). (2003). Elements of quality online education: Practice and direction (Vol. 4). Needham: Olin College-Sloan-C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Browne, T., Jenkins, M., & Walker, R. (2006). A longitudinal perspective regarding the use of VLEs by higher education institutions in the United Kingdom. Interactive Learning Environments,14(2), 177–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryman, A., & Cramer, D. (1999). Quantitative data analysis with SPSS release 8 for windows. New York: Routelge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, B. M. (1998). Structural equation modeling with Lisrel, Prelis, and Simplis: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassidy, S. (2016). Virtual learning environments as mediating factors in student satisfaction with teaching and learning in Higher Education. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching,5(1), 113–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, K. W. (2011). The gap between e-learning managers and users on satisfaction of e-learning in the accounting industry. Journal of Behavioral Studies in Business,3, 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chua, C., & Montalbo, J. (2014). Assessing students’ satisfaction on the use of virtual learning environment (VLE): An input to a campus-wide e-learning design and implementation. Information and Knowledge Management,3(4), 108–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad, D. L. (2002). Engagement, excitement, anxiety, and fear: Learners’ experiences of starting an online course. American Journal of Distance Education,16(4), 205–226. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15389286AJDE1604_2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Los Angeles: University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dillenbourg, P., Schneider, D., & Synteta, P. (2002). Virtual learning environments. In A. Dimitracopoulous (Ed). In Proceedings of the 3rd Hellenic Conference Information and Communication Technologies in Education, (pp. 3–18).

  • Dutton, W. H., Cheong, P. H., & Park, N. (2004). The social shaping of a virtual learning environment: The case of a university-wide course management system. Electronic Journal of e-learning,2(1), 69–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Figlio, D., Rush, N., & Yin, L. (2010). Is it live or is it Internet? Experimental estimates of the effects of online instruction on student learning. Cambridge MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research,18(3), 382–388.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2006). How to design and evaluate research in education (6th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frokjaer, E., Hertzum, M., & Hornbaek, K. (2000). Measuring usability: Are effectiveness, efficiency, and satisfaction really correlated? In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ‘00). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 345–352.

  • Giesbers, B., Rienties, B., Tempelaar, D. T., & Gijselaers, W. H. (2013). Investigating the relations between motivation, tool use, participation, and performance in an e-learning course using web-videoconferencing. Computers in Human Behaviour,29(1), 285–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.09.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldman, R., Pea, R., Barron, B., & Derry, S. J. (2014). Video research in the learning sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graven, O. H., Helland, M., & MacKinnon, L. (2006). The influence of staff use of a virtual learning environment on student satisfaction. In 2006 7th International Conference on Information Technology Based Higher Education and Training (pp. 423–441). ITHET.

  • Hair, J. F., Black, B., Babin, B., Anderson, R. E., & Tahtam, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamutoglu, N. B., Gemikonakli, O., Savasci, M., & Gultekin-Sezen, G. (2018). Development of a scale to evaluate virtual learning environment satisfaction. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education,5(2), 201–222.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heaton-Shrestha, C., Gipps, C., Edirisingha, P., & Linsey, T. (2007). Learning and e-learning in HE: The relationship between student learning style and VLE use. Research Papers in Education,22(4), 443–464.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Block Synderman, B. (1967). The motivation to work (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holmes, V., Clark, W., Burt, P., & Rienties, B. (2013). Engaging teachers (and students) with media streaming technology, the case of Box of Broadcasts. In L. Wankel & P. Blessinger (Eds.), Increasing student engagement and retention using mobile applications: Smartphones, Skype and texting technologies (Vol. 6D, pp. 211–240). Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Idemudia, E. C., & Negash, S. (2012). An empirical investigation of factors that influence anxiety and evaluation ın the virtual learning environment. In Proceedings of the Southern Association for Information Systems Conference, Atlanta, GA, USA.

  • Isbulan, O. (2015). Review and development of teacher candidates’ educational Facebook usage according to Technology Acceptance Model, (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Institute of Educational Sciences, Sakarya: Sakarya University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kember, D., & Ginns, P. (2012). Evaluating teaching and learning: A practical handbook for colleges, universities and the scholarship of teaching. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khlaisang, J., & Songkram, N. (2019). Designing a virtual learning environment system for teaching twenty-first century skills to higher education students in ASEAN. Technology, Knowledge and Learning,24(1), 41–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, K. J., Liu, S., & Bonk, C. J. (2005). Online MBA students’ perceptions of online learning: Benefits, challenges, and suggestions. The Internet and Higher Education,8(4), 335–344.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modelling (2nd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, M. C. (2010). Explaining and predicting users’ continuance intention toward e-learning: An extension of the expectation–confirmation model. Computers & Education,54(2), 506–516.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, J., Hong, N. L., & Ling, N. L. (2001). An analysis of students’ preparation for the virtual learning environment. The Internet and Higher Education,4(3), 231–242.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S. J., Srinivasan, S., Trail, T., Lewis, D., & Lopez, S. (2011). Examining the relationship among student perception of support, course satisfaction, and learning outcomes in online learning. The Internet and Higher Education,14(3), 158–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liaw, S. S., Huang, H. M., & Chen, G. D. (2007). Surveying instructor and learner attitudes toward e-learning. Computers & Education,49(4), 1066–1080.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, W. S. (2012). Perceived fit and satisfaction on web learning performance: IS continuance intention and task-technology fit perspectives. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies,70(7), 498–507.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacLeod, J., Yang, H. H., Zhu, S., & Li, Y. (2018). Understanding students’ preferences toward the smart classroom learning environment: Development and validation of an instrument. Computers & Education,122, 80–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mai, M. Y., & Muruges, G. R. (2018). Primary school science teachers’ attitude towards using virtual learning environment (VLE) in teaching science. European Journal of Education,1(3), 155–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maki, R. H., Maki, W. S., Patterson, M., & Whittaker, P. D. (2000). Evaluation of a web-based introductory psychology course: I. Learning and satisfaction in on-line versus lecture courses. Behaviour research methods, instruments, & computers,32(2), 230–239.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martins, L. L., & Kellermanns, F. W. (2004). A model of business school students’ acceptance of a web-based course management system. Academy of Management Learning & Education,3(1), 7–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2002). Aids to computer-based multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction,12(1), 107–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayorga-Toledano, M. C., & Fernández-Morales, A. (2004). Learning tools for Java-enabled phones: An application for actuarial studies. Learning with Mobile Devices, 95–98. Retrieved January 5, 2018 from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.97.4405&rep=rep1&type=pdf#page=104.

  • Mertler, C. A., & Vanatta, R. A. (2005). Advanced and multivariate statistical methods (3rd ed.). Glendale, CA: Pyrzcak Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murray, T. (2001). Characteristics and affordances of adaptive hyperbooks. In WebNet (pp. 899–904).

  • Naveh, G., Tubin, D., & Pliskin, N. (2010). Student LMS use and satisfaction in academic institutions: The organizational perspective. Internet and Higher Education,13, 127–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oblinger, D. D., & Oblinger, J. L. (2005). Educating the net generation educause. Retrieved from. http://www.educause.edu/educatingthenetgen.

  • Ogba, I. E., Saul, N., & Coates, N. F. (2012). Predicting students’ attitudes towards advertising on a university virtual learning environment (VLE). Active Learning in Higher Education,13(1), 63–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paas, F., Tuovinen, J. E., Tabbers, H., & Van Gerven, P. W. (2003). Cognitive load measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory. Educational Psychologist,38(1), 63–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pagram, J., & Cooper, M. (2011). E-learning: An examination of the use and preferences of students using online learning materials. In Proceedings of ICCE (pp. 712–716).

  • Reed, P., & Watmough, S. (2015). Hygiene factors: Using VLE minimum standards to avoid student dissatisfaction. E-learning and Digital Media,12(1), 68–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rienties, B., Giesbers, B., Lygo-Baker, S., Ma, H. W. S., & Rees, R. (2016). Why some teachers easily learn to use a new virtual learning environment: A technology acceptance perspective. Interactive Learning Environments,24(3), 539–552.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, J. C. (2015). Evaluating the effectiveness of lecture capture: Lessons learned from an undergraduate political research class. Journal of Political Science Education,11(1), 45–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/15512169.2014.985104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, P. (2001). Designing instruction for technology enhanced learning. London: IRM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Santana-Mancilla, P. N., Montesinos-López, O. A., Garcia-Ruiz, M. A., Contreras-Castill, J. J., & Gaytan-Lugo, L. S. (2019). Validation of an instrument for measuring the technology acceptance of a virtual learning environment. Acta Universitaria,29, e1796. https://doi.org/10.15174/au.2019.1796.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Šumak, B., Heričko, M., Pušnik, M., & Polančič, G. (2011). Factors affecting acceptance and use of Moodle: An empirical study based on TAM. Informatica,35(1), 91–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sun, P. C., Tsai, R. J., Finger, G., Chen, Y. Y., & Yeh, D. (2008). What drives a successful e-Learning? An empirical investigation of the critical factors influencing learner satisfaction. Computers & Education,50(4), 1183–1202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sweller, J. (2004). Instructional design consequences of an analogy between evolution by natural selection and human cognitive architecture. Instructional Science,32, 9–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). New York: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toni Mohr, A., Holtbrügge, D., & Berg, N. (2012). Learning style preferences and the perceived usefulness of e-learning. Teaching in Higher Education,17(3), 309–322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, R., Voce, J., Nicholls, J., Swift, E., Ahmed, J., Horrigan, S., et al. (2014). Survey of technology enhanced learning for higher education in the UK. Oxford: UCISA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warburton, S. (2009). Second Life in higher education: Assessing the potential for and the barriers to deploying virtual worlds in learning and teaching. British Journal of Educational Technology,40(3), 414–426.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells, P., De Lange, P., & Fieger, P. (2008). Integrating a virtual learning environment into a second-year accounting course: Determinants of overall student perception. Accounting & Finance,48(3), 503–518.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westbrook, V. (2006). The virtual learning future. Teaching in Higher Education,11(4), 471–482.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, M. D. (1996). Learner-control and instructional technologies. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research of educational communications and technology (pp. 957–983). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, A., Birch, E., & Hancock, P. (2012). The impact of online lecture recordings on student performance. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology,28(2), 199–213.

    Google Scholar 

  • Youn, S., Chyung, Y., & Vachon, M. (2005). An investigation of the profiles of satisfying and dissatisfying factors in e-learning. Performance Improvement Quarterly,18(2), 97–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zerihun, Z., Beishuizen, J., & Van Os, W. (2012). Student learning experience as an indicator of teaching quality. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability,24(2), 99–111.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study is not funded by any company or scholarship.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Education, Computer Education and Instructional Technology, Kırsehir Ahi Evran University, Kirsehir, Turkey

    Nazire Burcin Hamutoglu

  2. Middlesex University, London, NW4 4BT, UK

    Orhan Gemikonakli

  3. Faculty of Education, Computer Education and Instructional Technology, Hakkari University, Hakkari, Turkey

    Ibrahim Duman

  4. Department of Computer Technologies, Karasu Vocational Highschool, University of Applied Science, Sakarya, Turkey

    Ali Kirksekiz

  5. Faculty of Education, Computer Education and Instructional Technology, Sakarya University, Sakarya, Turkey

    Mubin Kiyici

Authors
  1. Nazire Burcin Hamutoglu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Orhan Gemikonakli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ibrahim Duman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ali Kirksekiz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mubin Kiyici
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nazire Burcin Hamutoglu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hamutoglu, N.B., Gemikonakli, O., Duman, I. et al. Evaluating students experiences using a virtual learning environment: satisfaction and preferences. Education Tech Research Dev 68, 437–462 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09705-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09705-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation