E-Learning Course Quality Factors: Learner’s Needs Perspective
Airina VOLUNGEVICIENE, Vaiva ZUZEVICIUTE, Edita BUTRIME
Vytautas Magnus University
K. Donelaicio str. 58, LT-44248, Kaunas, Lithuania
ABSTRACT
This paper is based on theoretical and empirical research on elearning course quality dimensions in higher education, in the
context of lifelong learning. The research was performed during
the implementation of eLearning program project (Contract No.
2005-3872/001-001 ELE-ELEB14) aiming at investigation of
cultural issues in the process of e-learning course development.
The aim of this paper is to examine to what extent development
of e-learning courses may contribute to openness to a wider
community of learners in higher education with respect to
growing learner needs and demands. In order to achieve the
aim, the following tasks will be performed: the quality of an elearning course will be discussed with an emphasis on learner
perspective; also importance of learners’ needs analysis will be
discussed, and the results of an empirical study on experiences
in an e-learning course will be presented. Critical course
analysis and qualitative empirical research are used as research
methods in this paper.
Keywords: e-learning quality, learner needs.
1.
INTRODUCTION
Lifelong learning could contribute to the strategic goals of the
development of the EU and its member countries, when lifelong
learning for each individual could become not a rhetorical
possibility, but a real part of life. These objectives can be
achieved only using complex-methodology approach; however,
the objectives for the university studies with regard to lifelong
learning are of paramount importance, i.e. “to guarantee
universal and continuing access to learning for gaining and
renewing the skills needed for sustained participation in the
knowledge society“ and “to develop effective teaching and
learning methods and contexts for the continuum of lifelong and
lifewide learning” (A Memorandum on Lifelong Learning,
2001; p. 4). The necessity to build an inclusive society which
offers equal opportunities for access to quality learning
throughout life to all people is indicated among priority goals.
University studies, as studies providing the most qualified
education service, should be analysed in a broader context, such
as university. No matter how significant it may be, it is only
one of the education institutions which contribute to education
by responding to the needs and requirements of individuals and
the society (Constructing Knowledge Societies, 2002), as well
as to development of learning society.
The aim of this paper is to examine to what extent development
of e-learning courses may contribute to openness of a wider
community of learners in higher education with respect to
growing learner needs and demands. In order to achieve the
aim, the following tasks will be performed: the quality of an elearning course will be discussed with an emphasis on learner
perspective; also the importance of learners’ needs analysis will
be discussed, and the results of an empirical study on
experience in an e-learning course will be presented. Critical
course analysis and qualitative empirical research are used as
research methods in this paper.
2.
DIMENSION OF QUALITY OF AN ELEARNING COURSE
Jarvis (2003) notes that globalization has become one of the
most noticeable features of contemporary world: market at the
global level is as often discussed, as market at national levels,
and, as the author emphasizes, competition is fierce. Society is
often called the knowledge society, because innovations and
competencies make a major impact on its development.
However, it is the people who introduce innovations in various
spheres of life, and it is only possible if they have necessary
competencies. With a longer life span of contemporary people
and their ability to participate in labor market more actively,
and in the context of rapid changes, both, in economy, and in
social/political life, more adults participate in learning activities
provided by tertiary education. One of the basic skills today is
fluency in at least two foreign languages; another basic skill is
proficiency in information communication technologies (ICT).
However, if relationship between languages (or any other
subject) and ICT is analyzed, it should be noted that it is still a
challenge for the communities even within higher education to
employ ICT and to immerse in e-learning as effectively, as
technologies allow.
Technologies provide people with opportunities that enable
flexible learning, learning at a chosen pace, they also enable an
individual to combine work, studies and personal life. Client’s
(that is, students’) needs, on the other hand, influence attitude to
learning in higher education in favor of more adaptable forms,
because institutions face the need to meet clients’ expectations.
Contemporary client is often an individual who either works, or
will work in the world, when ICT comprise a better part of
almost any job. Most often clients/students are aware of their
own needs to improve professional competences, to employ ICT
at work as effectively, as possible (Candy, 1991). And this can
be considered as one of the main dimensions of quality of
studies in higher education.
Here we should discuss the concept of quality. This question
poses a controversy, as there is no universal concept of quality.
As U.D. Ehlers (2004) states, quality can be discussed at several
levels, it may have different meanings, and it could be analysed
from different perspectives.
One of the dominant perspectives today taken as the basis for
further analysis in this paper (both theoretical, and empirical) is
the individual learner’s perspective. In this perspective, quality
is considered as something that adheres to the needs of
individual learner as an active agent in a learning process. This
is especially true when e-learning is discussed, as e-learning is
intrinsically tailored for learners, who have diverse background
and diverse personal, career situations, and, therefore, the
learner’s perspective is agreed by the authors of this paper to be
the focus for the study. E-learning environment is more
individualistically orientated than a traditional learning
environment, and the characteristics that apply to e-learning
should be paid a special attention. This was the case during the
implementation of the project FeCone under the eLearning
program (Contract No. 2005-3872/001-001 ELE-ELEB14).
U.D.Ehlers (2004) enumerates the following components for
quality assurance:
1.
Judgment of the performance (satisfactory or not,
correct or not, etc.).
2. Analysis (why).
3. Regulation or decision to act: e.g. whether or not to
consult reference work, change your learning strategy,
etc.
The presence of these three terms will be noticed in various
authors' definitions, but they are rarely gathered together in the
same definition. They also distinguish three situations in which
the learner may find himself/ herself in order to conduct these
metacognitive activities:
-
Figure 1. Individual learner‘s perspective in
an e- learning
(U.D.Ehlers according to Fricke, 1995, U.-D. Ehlers, 2004).
course
-
However, other authors provide other components of quality in
learning process. As an example, J. M. Juran (Skymark
corportation, 2006) enumerates the following components:
Table 1. Component of quality of an n e-learning course, by J. M. Juran.
Planning
- To identify the client/learner (target
group)
- To identify learner’s learning needs
- To provide a product/service that
meets these needs
- To customise characteristis of
produc/service in order to meet also
the needs of provide
Quality
improvement
- To initiate the process for the
development of product/service
- To monitor the process constantly
Quality
assurance
- To ensure that the process takes place
in a proper way even if the control is
minimal
- To integrate quality assurance into a
product/service development process
While planning the development (and later delivery) of a
qualitative e-learning course, it is necessary to integrate
dimensions of quality at a very early stage. If (and we decided
to rely on this perspective) we ground the quality on the
perspective of an individual learner, it is necessary to consider a
number of factors that constitute quality assurance in later
stages of an e-learning course life span. As M.Thorpe (2002)
states, the adherence to learners‘ needs and expectations is one
of the main indicators of study quality (especially if part of the
studies is organized as e-learning) in higher education.
Learner‘s needs and expectations enable us to choose
meaningful segments of contents that could be delivered on the
basis of e-learning. Being informed about the learner‘s needs
and expectations enable us to choose teaching/learning
methods, as well as general didactics. If teachers (in our case,
representing higher education institutions) think about quality,
they have to have a high level of reflexivity, and, therefore,
metacognitive thinking starts playing a crucial role in all steps
of e-learning course (its planning, development, delivery and
evaluation).
D. Leclercq and M. Poumay (2003) suggested three levels of
the activity of metacognition:
-
Before the performance. This is the case when we
have to make a choice before being confronted with
reality (choosing a course of study, choosing the
subject we want to be examined on, etc.)
During the performance. A typical case of this is the
practice of assigning a degree of certainty to each of
our answers to the questions, i.e. at a moment when
we are familiar with the questions and our own
efforts, but do not yet know the answers deemed to be
correct by the expert (often the teacher) or the
answers given by our peers.
After the performance and after its evaluation by an
expert, or comparison with the performance of peers.
We should mention that one of the most effective
principles of evaluation is participation of the learner himself/
herself in the evaluation process. The learner evaluates his/ her
own competencies (by self-assessment) and gains evaluation
bonuses for self-assessment, also. Scientists suggested adding
extra bonus for the learner on the basis of his/her degree of
certainty for their answers and certainty of correct information
in their answers (Leclercq, Poumay, 2003). The theory is based
on metacognition which is often limited in education with the
learner’s self-cognition. When we speak about metacognition,
we have in mind the activity during which an individual
analyses the learning strategies, finds out and evaluates the
thinking process in retrospective events, evaluates the
performance and results, and analysis overall situation with the
purpose to gain more benefit from the process in the future.
D.Verpoorten, Leclercq et al. (2006) present the model of
online course development that consists of the following
phases:
1. Analysis of the needs (N) and the pedagogical relevance of
your idea.
2. Analysis of Existing (E) that is the phase when the
developers of Curriculum take into account the time and energy
to be invested, as well as the intended pedagogical benefit. It is
important to analyse deeply the existing situation in order to
make sure that a similar educational system, similar experiences
or ideas which could be used totally or partially in your project
do not already exist on the market.
3. Building the Conception of the Curriculum, by:
3.1. Definition of learning objectives (O)
3.2. Selecting the learning methods (M)
3.3. Designing the evaluation strategy (E).
4. Realization (R) of the course online using ICT, once it is
intended to be online. Internet and audiovisuals offer many
possibilities to education, yet, the growing functionality of
technology has to keep serving pedagogy and not the contrary.
5. The first trial of the course is called experimentation (E) in
the model designed by the authors (Verpoorten, Leclercq, et al.,
2006), and this phase is important as an opportunity to test its
various functional aspects in a real situation.
This empirical research presented in this paper was performed
on the basis of metacognitive (reflective) learning needs
analysis (see Fig.2).
Delivery of an e-learning
course: reflections of
participants as needs metaanalysis for a course in the
future
6. Finally, regulation (R) will take part.
The acronym of the model suggested by Verpoorten, Leclercq
et al. (2006) is NECOMERIR. This model was used in a couple
of European projects (EMDEL, www.emdel.org, EVETE,
www.evete.org., etc.), as well as study programs.
S.Kujala et al. (Kujala et al, 2001) suggests that the needs
analysis is performed in a structured way, so that the results of
the user needs analysis are useful for the curriculum authors in
all aspects, but especially, selecting ICT tools. As the authors
state, the results of curriculum design should be clear for the
users themselves, and that both, actors, as well as the authors
have reached common agreement.
Needs analysis help to determine the target, to define the
objective and to compose the image of the final result of an
activity. According to R. Viau (1994), motivation is a dynamic
state arising from the learners self-evaluation and evaluation of
the environment, as well as influencing the choice of activities,
starting its performance and completing it till he reaches the
aim.
C.Delfosse et al. (2003) also analyse the success factors for an
e-learning course. Their ideas are based on a qualitative
analysis, which proved to be productive, and therefore, which
was employed by these authors for their empirical study.
Authors classified factors that influence quality into two groups:
contextual and managerial.
Contextual factors directly influence effectiveness of
develoment of a qualitative e-learning course are as follows:
Lessons learnt: as a
starting point for
development of elearning courses in the
future
Figure 2. Metacognitive (reflective) learning needs analysis
After the first phase is over, the second one starts and the
shortcomings are solved afterwards. The second learning
organization phase starts already with the improved curriculum
or delivery techniques, or choice of methods, after the internal
reflective quality evaluation process.
3.
METHODOLOGY AND RESEARCH FINDINGS
As it was analysed above, sometimes the phase of individual
learner’s needs analysis (even if it comprises one of the crucial
dimension of quality) is not implemented deep enough. The
needs analysis performed in this research is of metacognitive
nature. Participants of two e-learning courses were asked to
share their reflections on advantages and disadvantages of elearning, and these reflections are considered as learning needs
for the courses of such type in the future (Fig. 3):
A qualitative study has been implemented, as participants (38 in
total) were asked to share their opinions in a written form i.e.,
they were asked to complete reflections), and the texts were
later analysed in a search of categories and subcategories of the
ideas shared.
1.
To identify target group and the needs that a target
group has;
2. To analyse the available recourses,
3. To ensure that all participants of an e-learning course
(also the developers, authors) have a minimal level of
competences in ICT.
4. To examine the context of the e-learning course: what
are the managerial and institutional circumstances, and
also, what are the financial considerations.
Managerial factors are esssential for effective organisation of
the deliver of an e-learning course. They are as follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
To ensure good communication channels between
participants;
To encourage active participation and contribution of all
members of an e-learning course;
To provide feedback on a regular basis;
To ensure the primacy of educational decisions over
technological ones,
To provide a follow up for all participants.
Authors emphasize that the development of an e-learning course
is rather a cycle than a row of discrete events, that is, at the end
of each e-learning course, the lessons should be taken into
consideration in order to develop a more qualitative e-learning
course in the future (Delfosse, 2003).
Figure 3. Relations between reflections of learners and learner’s needs
Respondents of the research. The university lecturers and
future adult teachers (students) participated as learners in the elearning courses. Their experience is analysed in this paper. A
qualitative analysis (Content Analysis) on reflections of the
FeConE e-Learning Fundamentals course was applied. The
course was developed and implemented by an internationa team
with Greek and Netherlands distance education professionals.
Lithuanian participants (10 participants, teachers in higher
education) participated in the course. Reflections of the course
on Research of Learning Needs participants (28 participants,
students in higher education) were analysed. Both courses have
been implemented at approximately the same time (Spring –
Autumn, 2007), see Fig.4. However, to both groups of
participants, e-learning course was a novelty, as they had never
studied this way before; from that perspective these two groups
were homogeneous.
1. FeConE e-Learning
Fundamentals course (10
participants). Course
amounted to 92 hours
INTERNATIONAL
COURSE
2. Research of Learning Needs
participants (28 participants).
Course amounted to 100 hours
NATIONAL COURSE
(Lithuania)
Spring – Autumn, 2007
Figure 4. Organisation of the e-learning: similarities and differences
Both of the courses were approximately of the same length, also
both of them were e-learning courses. FeCone (Contract No.
2005-3872/001-001
ELE-ELEB14)
course
Learning
Fundamentals used the system Moodle, and course Research of
Learning Needs used the system WebCT.
FeConE e-Learning Fundamentals. A ddifferent number of
participants came from each participating country. From the
very beginning, there was an impression that the popularity of
e-learning differs in each country. However, later reflections
revealed that an organizational aspect comprises a substantial
part of the perceived ‘quality’ of an e-learning course from a
perspective of an individual learner. In Lithuania, the period
between May and July is extremely busy, when teachers in
higher education are busy virtually 20 hours per day with
students coming to consultations, examinations and the
admission procedure.
The main “problems“ indicated by Lithuanian participants in
this e-learning course were the following:
- communication in English is quite an obstacle, as the
participants, even feeling quite competent, found it
difficult to understand all clearly, or they were unable to
understand some of the metaphors used. It seems that
cultural aspect is very important and should be considered
accordingly in an international e-learning course. For
example, some of the participants provided reference to
movies, or books, or even comics - stories that are not at
all relevant to adult people (teachers in higher education).
Young students might take another position, they do follow
the movies and music trends, and teachers are quite unused
to some of the references made by their international
counterparts. Here is an example (Man, 34 years old):
“The course took place during the most difficult period for
lecturers as there was an examination session and
completion of an academic year. I had examinations and
was working with bachelor and master students, who
seemed to be extremely active as their final thesis deadline
was coming to the end…”.
- There was the lack of time for the discussions and
sometimes for progress analysis.
- At first, there were some technical problems.
- The objectives for group work were not always clear (this
worry was shared by participants in international course,
and the fact may also serve as an example to highlight the
need to consider cultural background of learners.
Sometimes it is quite difficult for learners to organise
themsleves, to share responsibilities, etc.).
- The group work was a failure, and it did not result in the
expected outcome.
- The tasks were not always formulated clearly.
- Learning took much more time than it had been indicated
(especially in the international course. Participants
themselves provided a possible explanation that in such a
course, the level of competence in foreign language should
be higher than in other contextual situations).
Lithuanian participants especially emphasized problems
occurring within the group work. The discussion groups were
formed according to the language they speak.
However, Lithuanian participants had many positive reactions,
as well. The following positive aspects were indicated among
their replies:
- Covenient interface.
- A chance to study in a distance way, as well as to exchange
information with other peers, as one of the participants, 35
year old woman contributed: “I will apply the obtained
knowledge in my work. The course organization on its own
was a lesson.”
And another, 39 year old woman: “I have found a lot of useful
links and information.”, and “I am satisfied and I would like to
thank the whole FeCone team for work and the provided
knowledge. I hope it is not the last time and in the future there
will be a possibility to meet in the virtual environment again,
maybe to participate in other trainings as well.” Some of the
participants noted that learning was fun.
Some of the course participants Research of Learning Needs
(delivered nationally, in Lithuania) were also quite enthusiastic
about the course, and shared very similar ideas, however, there
was one aspect that seemed to be of interest. Namely, 6 out of
28 students noted that communication in such type of a course
is more active than in a traditional course. The explanation was
that mutual support is absolutely crucial in an e-learning course
the, and if you do not understand the task, and a colleague does
not help you in understanding, you are
Relevance of
information
Learning
process
E-learning
environment
Learners’ personal experience and
initial competence
Figure 5. Participants of e-learning courses on their experience in the process
of learning
completely lost. The teacher may not answer your question right
away, or you may be too shy to ask. Therefore, relying on each
other is extremely important. As one 22 year old student (a
man) contributed: “You become cooperative or there is no other
way out…”.
These findings seemed quite interesting, as the lack of social
interaction is constantly reminded by those opposing the
advancement of e-learning. The study shows that the situation
can be perceived by learners from quite another angle. This
aspect is worth further considerations in developing e-learning
courses, both internationally and nationally. The results of the
of study are presented in Figure 5 in a systematic way. They can
be devided and subdevided into the following categories:
- Relevance of information
- Learning process. Subcategories:
- Curriculum
university, a learner, who has a family, as well as career
commitments. For such a learner, e-learning as a more flexible
pattern of learning might be an important and desirable
educational service (provided by a learner-centered university).
Empirical study revealed that e-learning is culturally sensitive
experience, however, learners are quite positive and have a
number of suggestions how to improve e-learning courses in the
future. They all agree that they would be interested in
participating in e-learning courses, and also share the following
thoughts:
- The courses were useful for their professional development
(international course, FeCone (Contract No. 20053872/001-001 ELE-ELEB14).
- The courses were useful for development of general skills,
such as information literacy, cooperation, and devision of
tasks among group members. Members of international
team emphasised that the structure of the course was
particularly useful for learning to master information
search skills.
- Methods of learning
- E-learning environment. Subcategories:
5.
REFERENCES
- Supporting learners
[1]
- Interface
- Learners’ personal experience and initial competence.
Subcategories:
- Competence in foreign language
[2]
[3]
- Previous experience in e-learning
According to all participants, e-learning is either productive or
partly productive way of learning.
Lithuanian participants provided some suggestions to improve
an e-learning course. In this paper, these ideas are perceived as
specific learning needs that should be considered in organising
e-learning courses in the future.
[4]
- Tasks for learning should be formulated very clearly, and
with precision.
- Discussion with learners should be carried out about their
work completed.
[5]
- Best practice examples should be provided to learners.
- Most common mistakes should be analysed.
[6]
- Training should be organized on this type of learning.
4.
CONCLUSIONS
The analysis of dimension of quality of an e-learning course
revealed that certain concepts of quality might be more qualitycriteria-revealing than others. As a contemporary university is
client orientated, and it strives to meet the needs of lifelong
learners, the learners’ perspective on quality might be
considered as most productive while revealing quality criteria
for learning process.
Learning needs comprise a considerable part of quality criteria
of any e-learning course, and this is especially important with elearning course being a useful context of meeting needs of
diverse learners. It is the learner who does not represent
traditional age groups (18 – 24 year old) while entering a
[7]
[8]
[9]
A Memorandum on Lifelong Learning (2001). EC,
Brussels.
Candy, C.P. (1991). Self- Direction for Lifelong
Learning. A Comprehensive Guide to Theory and
Practice. Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Delfosse, C., Harmeling, D., Poumay, M., Leclercq,
D. (2003). Les facteurs de succès dans
l’accompagnement du portage à distance de cours.
Expérience du LabSET. Communication présentée
aux 2e Rencontres du Kirchberg. Colloque
scientifique sur les pratiques de téléformation,
Luxembourg (L).
Ehlers U.D. (2004). Quality in e-Learning from a
Learner’s Perspective. In U.Bernath, A.Szucs (Ed.),
Proceedings of the Third EDEN Research Workshop
(p.p. 130-137). Oldenburg, Germany: Bibliotheksund Informationssystem der Universitat Oldenburg.
Jarvis, P. (2003)) Adult Education for
Employability and Citizenship//Professional
Education. Research and Reality, No. 6, p. 10 -20.
Leclercq D., Poumay M. (2003). Analyses
édumétriques et indices métacognitifs appliqués
aux questions des 10 check-up MOHICAN. In D.
Leclercq (Ed.) Diagnostic cognitif et métacognitif au
seuil de l’université. Liège, les Editions de
l’université de Liège, 181-190, 2003. Retrieved on
June 12th, 2004 from http://www.labset.net.
S. Kujala, M. Kauppinen, S. Rekola, Bridging the
Gap between User Needs and User Requirements.
Retrieved from
http://www.soberit.hut.fi/~skujala/PublicationIV.pdf
on March, 20th, 2006.
Skymark corportation (2006). Retrieved from
http://www.skymark.com/resources/leaders/juran.asp,
on October 10, 2006.
Thorpe M.(2002). Rethinking learner support: the
challenge of collaborative online learning. Open
Learning, 17(2), 105-119. Also retrieved August 31,
[10]
[11]
2003 from
http://www.scrolla.ac.uk/papers/s1/thorpe_paper.html
Verpoorten D., Leclercq, D., Poumay, M., Dupont,
Ch., Hougardy, A., Reggers, T., Georges, F.,
Delfosse, C., Leduc, L. (2006). NE-COME-RIR:
The guiding theme of a learning project, Higher
Education Instructional Development, LabSET-Ulg.
Viau R. (1994). La motivation en contexte scolaire,
Bruxelles, De Boeck, Coll. Pédagogie en
dévelopment. Retrieved on May, 2004, from
http://www.labset.net
NOTE:
The paper was also published
Zuzevičiūtė V., Butrimė E., Volungevičienė A. (2008).Elearning Course Quality Factors: Learner‘s Needs Perspective.
The 2nd International Multi-Conference on Society,
Cybernetics and Informtics. [2008]. – USA, 2008, - Vol.2,
p.78- 83. ISBN-10: 1-934272-45-0 (Collection), ISBN-10: 1934272-47-7 (Volume II) [ISI Web of Knowledge
http://portal.isiknowelde.com/portal.cgi?DestApp=XS_FORM&
FUNC=Frame]