Hoe gebruiken leerkrachten hun ELO? Cindy De Smet onderzoekt binnen haar doctoraat het gebruik van de Elektronische Leeromgeving (ELO). In een eerste luik zocht ze een antwoord op de volgende 2 vragen: 1) op welke manier gebruiken leerkrachten de ELO, 2) welke factoren zorgen ervoor dat leerkrachten een ELO gebruiken. Op basis van vragenlijstonderzoek bevroeg ze 505 leerkrachten secundair onderwijs. De resultaten leverden niet alleen antwoorden op de vooropgestelde vragen, maar ook praktische inzichten voor leerkrachten en directies. Het onderzoek werd gepubliceerd in Computers & Education. Download deze paper via: http://hogent.academia.edu/CindyDeSmet

1. Hoe gebruiken de
leerkrachten hun ELO?
De Smet Cindy
Studiedag afstandsonderwijs
Hogent Campus Mercator – 22/12/2011

2. About
• Lecturer media,
Ghent University College,
Faculty of Teacher Training
• Ph.D.-student,
Department of Education,
Ghent University
• The Research Fund of University College
Ghent financially supports this research.

3. @drsmetty

4. LMS

5. Bron: Delta initiative

6. LMS Market Lifecycle Curve
Bron:Sage Road Solutions

7. Bron: Gartner, Hype Cycle for Higher Education 2008

8. LMS market
in Flanders

9. Secondary education
1) Survey 2009
2) The educational network mostly determines the LMS used

10. University
55% 45% Dokeos/Chamilo
Blackboard
1) Data based on the official student numbers (2009).
2) The LMS used is determined by the 6 Flemish
associations between universities and university
colleges
3) Most LMS are “Branded”

11. University Colleges
73%
27% Dokeos/Chamilo
Blackboard

12. The Flemish teacher
De Smet, C., & Schellens, T. (2009). ELO’s in het Vlaams
secundair onderwijs: nieuw of alweer achterhaald. Advies
& Educatie, 26, 12–14.

13. LMS experience
No experience 19%
1 year 10%
2 years 24%
3 years 22%
4 years 20%
5 years or more 15%

14. Blackboard: 1997
Moodle: 1999

15. Outside the LMS
Secondary education:
• 69% uses learning objects found on the
internet or specialized content sites: (using
KlasCement.net, Google.com…)
• 52% uses software and applications outside the
the LMS (wikispaces.com, blogsoftware,
Google documents, Facebook, Netlog….)

16. LMS Study

18. This study aims to understand
the reasons behind the
technology acceptation of
learning management systems
(LMS) by secondary school
teachers and investigates the
instructional use of the LMS.

19. Methods

20. Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)
Perceived Ease of Use
(gebruiksgemak)
Use
Perceived Usefulness
(bruikbaarheid)
1) Beliefs
2) Self-reported use
3) Predicts 40% of a systems’ use

21. Informational Use Communicational Use

22. Five levels of LMS interaction by Hamuy and Galaz (2010), Silvio et al. (2004)

24. Results

25. • Survey (N=505)
• Construct validity
– Inf + Com use: measured by 12 items
• IBM SPSS: exploratory factor analysis
• AMOS 17: confirmatory factor analysis
– Other variables:
• IBM SPSS: exploratory factor analysis
• Measurement validity
– Cronbach’s alpha & correlation matrix
• Model testing: AMOS 17

28. Discussion

29. Conclusion
• 46% of the variance in informational use, 27%
in communicational use
• Instructional use: further explored and refined
• Focus on secondary school teachers, an
understudied group

30. Conclusions
• Perceived ease of use is the most important
factor (in this research) to predict the
instructional use of the LMS.
• As soon as a teacher gets more advanced in using
the LMS, perceived usefulness becomes more
important.
• This suggests that when a teacher wants to use
an LMS, the ease of use of the system will be the
first consideration, probably followed by his or
her perception of the system’s performance.

31. Conclusion
• Technical support is important for every LMS-
user, regardless his experience level.
• Positive effect of personal innovativeness on
preceived ease of use.
• Administrative use was expected to be a
prerequisite for interactive use and the data
confirms this assumption.

32. Limitations
• Future research should explore other variables
that may have an effect on instructional use,
as the current models explain maximum 46%.
• This research did not include software or
applications outside the institution’s LMS
• Log files