The Effectiveness of E-LMS on Performance of Indian Rural Schools: A Case from a Developing Country

Year 2012, Volume: 3 Issue: 1, 1 - 16, 01.03.2012

S. Arulchelvan

Abstract

Technologies are available for education in various forms now. One primary task involves determining how best to utilize available technology resources to enhance student learning. Electronic Learning Management System (E-LMS) is one the important strategy for learning. It has the ability to document the academic performance of the individual student. This is highly useful in managing all type of academic and other activities of students by institutions. This study aimed to know the facts and effectiveness of E-LMS among the school students. Survey, comparative analysis and Interview methods were used in this study. Major findings from the study are: E-LMS is significantly influence the students and teachers. The absenteeism ratio has declined. This in turn reflected in the academic performance of the students since they have no other option than sustaining with the learning activities. Overall performance of a student is also significantly increased. The effectiveness of E-LMS may be improved from the points of reporting in regional languages when exist, Web-based reporting, and Interactive communication. Because the system has positive impact among the students, this will prove very effective when implemented in large scale in India.

Keywords

Learning management system, LMS, Electronic learning management system, ELMS, E-Learning, ICT in education

References

• Aydin, C. & Tirkes, G. (2010). Open source learning management systems in e-learning and Moodle. Education and Engineering (EDUCON) (pp. 593-600). Madrid: IEEE.
• Berge, Z. & Collins, M. (1995). Computer mediated communication and the online classroom. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
• Boggs, D. (2010). E-learning benefits and ROI comparison of e-learning vs traditional training. Retrieved from http://knol.google.com/k/E-Learning benefits and roi comparison of E- Learning vs traditional training.
• Brusilovsky, P. (2004, May). Knowledge tree: A distributed architecture for adaptive E-learning. ACM, 1-58113-912-8/04/0005.
• Cavusa, N. & Momania, A. M. (2009). Computer aided evluation of learning management systems. World Conferences on Educational Sciences 2009-Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1, 426-430.
• Clarke-Okah, W. (2009). The impact of learning management systems in universities. Conference on Bridging the Development Gap through Innovative E-Learning Environments. University of West Indies.
• Dalsgaard, C. (2006). Social software: E-learning beyond learning management systems. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning. Available online at: http://www.eurodl.org/? article =228.
• DeLaCruz, S., Englander, C., Jeffrey, T., Takach, E., Wilson, S., & Woodall, J. (2005). Learning management systems comparison. Proceedings of the Informing Science and IT Education Joint Confrence 2005.
• Ellis, R. K. (2009). Learning circuits' - Field guide to learning management systems. Alexandria, VA: American Society for Training and Development (ASTD).
• Hendrikz, O., Prins, G., Viljoen, J.-M., & Preez, C. D. (2009). The use of mobile phones in enhancing academic performance in distance education: An African perspective. Availabe online at: http://www.ou.nl/Docs/Campagnes/ICDE2009/Papers/Final_paper_069hendrikz. pdf
• Kalinga, E., Bagile, B., & Trojer, L. (2006). An interactive e-learning management system (E-LMS): A solution to Tanzanian secondary schools' education. International Journal of Human and Social Sciences 1(4), 252-255.
• Kastelic, M. & Loncaric, T. (2007). A model of introducing e-learning system at vocational college for business secretaries. Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 4, 175-187.
• Kear, L. & Heap, W. (2007). Sorting the wheat from the chaft: Investigating overload in educational discussion systems. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23 (3), 235-247.
• Keengwe, J., Onchwari, G., & Wachira, P. (2008). The use of computer tools to support meaningful learning. AACE Journal, 16 (1).
• Luksic, P., Horvat, B., Bauer, A., & Pisanski, T. (2007). Practical e-learning for the faculty of mathematics and physics at the University of Ljubljana. Interdisciplinary Jounral of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 3, 73-83
• Nicholes, M. & Anderson, B. (2005). Stric e-learning implementation. Educational Technology and Society, 8(4), 1-8.
• OECD. (2005). E-learning in tertiary education: Where do we stand. Paris: OECD.
• Paulsen, F. (2003). Experiences with learning management systems in 113 european institutions. Educational Technology and Society, 6(4), 134-148.
• Paulsen. (2003). Online education and learning management systems: Global E-learning in a Scandinavian Perspective. Bekkestua: NKI Forlaget.
• New Zealand Ministry of Education report. (2010). Report New Zealand Ministry of Education. Retrieved September 30, 2011, from http://www.minedu.govt.nz: NZEducation/ EducationPolicies/Schools/Initiatives/ManagedLearningEnvironments/StudentAttendancean dEngagement/EarlyNotification.aspx
• Rudestam, K. E. (2002). Handbook of online learning: Innovations in higher education (1 ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• School SMS. (2010). Retrieved from www.zipsms.com.
• Spratt, C. & Lajbcygier, P. (2009). E-learning technologies and evidence based assesment approaches. Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.
• Stephenson. (2001). Teaching and learning online: New pedagigies for new technology. London: Routledge.
• Valk, J.-H., Rashid, A. T., & Elder, L. (2010). Using mobile phones to improve educational outcomes: An analysis of evidence from Asia. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 11(1). Available online at: http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/ article/view/ 794/1487
• Correspondence: S. Arulchelvan, Assistant Professor, Department of Media Sciences, Anna
• University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India