A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF THE TENDENCIES IN THE USE OF LEARNING MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

Year 2021, Volume: 22 Issue: 3, 40 - 54, 01.07.2021

Hakan Altınpulluk , Mehmet Kesım

https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.961812

Cited By: 13

Abstract

In this study, 59 SSCI-indexed articles published between 2012 and 2017 in the Web of Science database were analyzed by systematic review, identified by the keywords “Learning Management Systems / LMS” in their titles. This study aims to determine the current situation and future trends in using LMSs as one of the tools that are getting increasingly popular both in blended and online environments. Accordingly, our study has revealed that the highest number of the articles were published in 2016, Moodle is the most popular LMS, the open-source LMSs are preferred over other types, LMSs are most often used to measure success, South Korea and the United States (US) are the pioneering countries in this field, the quantitative method and questionnaire tool are the preferred methodological approaches in the LMS scientific research, students are more likely to be selected as a sample group, with the 0-100 range as the most common sample size, and that the technology acceptance model (TAM) is the most frequently used model. The findings are visualized with tables, graphs and maps. The study is concluded with some suggestions for researchers and higher education institutions.

Keywords

Learning management systems, blended education, online education, open and distance learning, systematic review.

References

• Adams Becker, S., Cummins, M., Davis, A., Freeman, A., Hall Giesinger, C., & Ananthanarayanan, V. (2017). NMC horizon report: 2017 higher education edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium. Retrieved from http://cdn.nmc.org/media/2017-nmc-horizon-report-he-EN.pdf
• Ain, N., Kaur, K., & Waheed, M. (2016). The influence of learning value on learning management system use: An extension of UTAUT2. Information Development, 32(5), 1306-1321.
• Almarashdeh, I. (2016). Sharing instructors experience of learning management system: A technology perspective of user satisfaction in distance learning course. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 249-255. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.013
• Atkinson, D., & Lim, S. L. (2013). Improving assessment processes in Higher Education: Student and teacher perceptions of the effectiveness of a rubric embedded in a LMS. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 5(2013), 651-666. doi:10.14742/ajet.526
• Barnett, J., McPherson, V., & Sandieson, R. (2013). Connected teaching and learning: The uses and implications of connectivism in an online class. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 29(5).
• Beer, C., Clark, K., & Jones, D. (2010). Indicators of engagement. Paper presented at the Curriculum, Technology & Transformation for an Unknown Future 2010, Sydney, Australia. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/285012845_Indicators_of_engagement
• Bhattacherjee, A. (2001). Understanding information systems continuance: An expectation- confirmation model. MIS Quarterly, 25(3), 351–370. doi:10.2307/3250921
• Chatti, M. A., Agustiawan, M. R., Jarke, M., & Specht, M. (2010). Toward a personal learning environment framework. International Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments, 1(4), 66–85. doi:10.4018/jvple.2010100105
• Clarà, M., & Barberà, E. (2014). Three problems with the connectivist conception of learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 30(3), 197-206. doi:10.1111/jcal.12040
• Conde, M. Á., García-Peñalvo, F. J., Rodríguez-Conde, M. J., Alier, M., Casany, M. J., & Piguillem, J. (2014). An evolving learning management system for new educational environments using 2.0 tools. Interactive Learning Environments, 22(2), 188-204. doi: 10.1080/10494820.2012.745433
• Dabbagh, N., & Kitsantas, A. (2012). Personal learning environments, social media, and self-regulated learning: A natural formula for connecting formal and informal learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 15(1), 3–8. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.06.002
• Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/249008.pdf
• De Moraes, A. (2012). Usability issues in learning management systems (LMS). Work, 41(1), 832-837. doi:10.3233/WOR-2012-0250-832 De Smet, C., Bourgonjon, J., De Wever, B., Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2012). Researching instructional use and the technology acceptation of learning management systems by secondary school teachers. Computers & Education, 58(2), 688-696. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.09.013
• Dias, S. B., & Diniz, J. A. (2013). FuzzyQoI model: A fuzzy logic-based modelling of users’ quality of interaction with a learning management system under blended learning. Computers & Education, 69, 38-59. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.06.016
• Draskovic, D., Misic, M., & Stanisavljevic, Z. (2016). Transition from traditional to LMS supported examining: A case study in computer engineering. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 24(5), 775-786. doi:10.1002/cae.21750
• Duke, B., Harper, G., & Johnston, M. (2013). Connectivism as a digital age learning theory. The International HETL Review, 2013(Special Issue), 4-13.
• Emelyanova, N., & Voronina, E. (2014). Introducing a learning management system at a Russian university: Students’ and teachers’ perceptions. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(1). Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1024359
• Gasaymeh, A. M. (2017). Faculty members’ concerns about adopting a learning management system (LMS): A developing country perspective. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(11), 7527-7537. doi:10.12973/ejmste/80014
• Greenhalgh, T., Robert, G., Macfarlane, F., Bate, P., & Kyriakidou, O. (2004). Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: Systematic review and recommendations. The Milbank Quarterly, 82(4), 581-629. doi:10.1111/j.0887-378X.2004.00325.x
• Han, I., & Shin, W. S. (2016). The use of a mobile learning management system and academic achievement of online students. Computers & Education, 102, 79-89. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2016.07.003
• Islam, A. N. (2015). The moderation effect of user-type (educators vs. students) in learning management system continuance. Behaviour & Information Technology, 34(12), 1160-1170. doi:10.1080/0144 929X.2015.1004651
• Laflen, A., & Smith, M. (2017). Responding to student writing online: Tracking student interactions with instructor feedback in a learning management system. Assessing Writing, 31, 39-52. doi:10.1016/j. asw.2016.07.003
• Mafuna, M., & Wadesango, N. (2012). Students’ acceptance and experiences of the new learning management system (LMS)-wiseup. The Anthropologist, 14(4), 311-318. doi: 10.1080/09720073.2012.11891252
• Meishar-Tal, H., Kurtz, G., & Pieterse, E. (2012). Facebook groups as LMS: A case study. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 13(4), 33-48. doi: 10.19173/irrodl. v13i4.1294
• Mkhize, P., Mtsweni, E. S., & Buthelezi, P. (2016). Diffusion of innovations approach to the evaluation of learning management system usage in an open distance learning institution. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(3). doi:10.19173/irrodl.v17i3.2191
• Moodle (2019). Moodle statistics. Retrieved from https://moodle.net/stats/
• Park, Y., & Jo, I. H. (2017). Using log variables in a learning management system to evaluate learning activity using the lens of activity theory. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(4), 531- 547. doi:10.1080/02602938.2016.1158236
• Pettit, J. (2014). ‘Partly self-made niches’? Student-only spaces in an LMS. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 30(1). doi:10.14742/ajet.493
• Pilli, O., & Sozudogru, O. (2012). Students’ perceptions of using Google Plus as a learning management system. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 12(49), 13-28.
• Rani, M., Srivastava, K. V., & Vyas, O. P. (2016). An ontological learning management system. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 24(5), 706-722. doi:10.1002/cae.21742
• Seluakumaran, K., Jusof, F. F., Ismail, R., & Husain, R. (2011). Integrating an open-source course management system (Moodle) into the teaching of a first-year medical physiology course: A case study. Advances in Physiology Education, 35(4), 369-377. doi:10.1152/advan.00008.2011
• Shin, W. S., & Kang, M. (2015). The use of a mobile learning management system at an online university and its effect on learning satisfaction and achievement. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(3). doi:10.19173/irrodl.v16i3.1984
• Son, J., Jeong-Dong, K., Hong-Seok, N., & Baik, D. K. (2016). A social learning management system supporting feedback for incorrect answers based on social network services. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 19(2), 245. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/ jeductechsoci.19.2.245.pdf
• Soykan, F., & Şimşek, B. (2017). Examining studies on learning management systems in SSCI database: A content analysis study. Procedia Computer Science, 120, 871-876. doi:10.1016/j.procs.2017.11.320
• Tschofen, C., & Mackness, J. (2012). Connectivism and dimensions of individual experience. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 13(1), 124-143.
• Torrisi-Steele, G., & Drew, S. (2013). The literature landscape of blended learning in higher education: the need for better understanding of academic blended practice. International Journal for Academic Development, 1–13. doi:10.1080/1360144X.2013.786720
• Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 425-478. doi:10.2307/30036540
• Wang, Q., Woo, H. L., Quek, C. L., Yang, Y., & Liu, M. (2012). Using the Facebook group as a learning management system: An exploratory study. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(3), 428- 438. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01195.x
• You, J. W. (2016). Identifying significant indicators using LMS data to predict course achievement in online learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 29, 23-30. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.11.003
• Zanjani, N., Edwards, S. L., Nykvist, S., & Geva, S. (2016). LMS acceptance: The instructor role. The Asia- Pacific Education Researcher, 25(4), 519-526. doi:10.1007/s40299-016-0277-2
• Zanjani, N., Edwards, S. L., Nykvist, S., & Geva, S. (2017). The important elements of LMS design that affect user engagement with e-learning tools within LMSs in the higher education sector. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 33(1). doi:10.14742/ajet.2938