1887
Volume 27, Issue 3
  • ISSN 0142-5471
  • E-ISSN: 1569-979X
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

The way information is organized and designed on virtual learning environments (VLEs) is poor (e.g., unclear, unattractive and overwhelmingly dense). This study evaluates and redesigns a VLE platform to enhance access to information and course material. A three-stage user-centred mixed-methods research approach was used with students taking part as co-creators of education, researchers, designers and end-users. Results show that performance was significantly better with two layouts designed following information design principles and a user-centred research process, than with the existing layout. Participants’ opinion also reflected this same trend. A set of guidelines to improve the design of VLEs is provided.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/idj.22001.lon
2022-12-06
2024-03-05
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Abbad, M. M. and M. Albarghouthi
    2011 Evaluate Students’ Perceptions of the Virtual Learning Environment at Paisley University. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (IJET). 6 (3), pp.28–34. 10.3991/ijet.v6i3.1489
    https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v6i3.1489 [Google Scholar]
  2. Al-Badowi, A.
    2010The Design of E-learning Services on Blackboard. IEEE. pp.186–193. 10.1109/ICIW.2010.34
    https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIW.2010.34 [Google Scholar]
  3. Blackboard United Kingdom
    Blackboard United Kingdom 2019Blackboard for Higher Education.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bodemer, D., Ploetzner, R., Feuerlein, I. and Spada, H.
    2004 The active integration of information during learning with dynamic and interactive visualisations. Learning and Instruction. 14(3), pp.325–341. 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2004.06.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2004.06.006 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bursi-Amba, A., Gaullier, A. and Santidrian, M.
    2016Infographics: A toolbox for technical writers?Paris: Diderot University.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Conrad, D. L.
    2002 Engagement, Excitement, Anxiety, and Fear: Learners’ Experiences of Starting an Online Course. The American Journal of Distance Education. 16(4), pp.205–226. 10.1207/S15389286AJDE1604_2
    https://doi.org/10.1207/S15389286AJDE1604_2 [Google Scholar]
  7. Dirksen, J.
    2016Design for how people learn. Berkeley, Calif: New Riders.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. D’Silva, R. and Reeder, K.
    2005 Factors that influence faculty members’ uptake and continued use of course management systems. British Journal of Educational Technology. 36(6), pp.1071–1073. 10.1111/j.1467‑8535.2005.00578.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2005.00578.x [Google Scholar]
  9. Dyson, M. and Beier, S.
    2016 Investigating typographic differentiation. Information Design Journal. 22(1), pp.3–18. 10.1075/idj.22.1.02dys
    https://doi.org/10.1075/idj.22.1.02dys [Google Scholar]
  10. Dyson, M., Lonsdale, M., Papaefthimiou, M.
    2006 Student perspectives on a Virtual Learning Environment: lessons for instructors. Proceedings of the First Annual Blended Learning Unit’s Conference: Blended Learning – Promoting Dialogue in Innovation and Practice.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Gibeault, M.
    2018 Organization of Materials and Accessing the Library in Blackboard: A Learner-centered Usability Study. The Journal of Academic Librarianship. 44(2), pp.190–195. 10.1016/j.acalib.2018.02.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2018.02.008 [Google Scholar]
  12. Green, M. S., Weaver, M., Voegeli, D., Fitzsimmons, D., Knowles, J., Harrison, M. and Shephard, K.
    2006 The development and evaluation of the use of a virtual learning environment (Blackboard 5) to support the learning of pre-qualifying nursing students undertaking a human anatomy and physiology module. Nurse Education Today. 26(5), pp.388–395. 10.1016/j.nedt.2005.11.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2005.11.008 [Google Scholar]
  13. Grunwald, T. and Corsbie-Massay, C.
    2006 Guidelines for Cognitively Efficient Multimedia Learning Tools: Educational Strategies, Cognitive Load, and Interface Design. Academic Medicine. 81(3), pp.213–223. 10.1097/00001888‑200603000‑00003
    https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-200603000-00003 [Google Scholar]
  14. Hanrahan, S., de Pietro, P., Brown, L. H., Haw, A., Malins, J., Milojevic, M., Raevaara, M., Sonvilla, B. and Weckman, J. K.
    2009 Interface: Virtual Environments in Art, Design and Education: A report on a conference exploring VLEs in art and design education. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education. 8(1), pp.99–128. 10.1177/1474022208098305
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1474022208098305 [Google Scholar]
  15. Hazlett, R. L., Larson, K., Shaikh, A. D. and Chaparro, C. B.
    2013 Two studies on how a typeface congruent with content can enhance onscreen communication. Information Design Journal. 20(3), pp.207–219. 10.1075/idj.20.3.02haz
    https://doi.org/10.1075/idj.20.3.02haz [Google Scholar]
  16. Istrate, O.
    2009 Visual and pedagogical design of eLearning content. Centre for Innovation in Education. E-Learning papers. 171, pp.1–12.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Jansen, F.
    2014 How bulleted lists and enumerations in formatted paragraphs affect recall and evaluation of functional text. Information Design Journal. 21(2), pp.146–162. 10.1075/idj.21.2.06jan
    https://doi.org/10.1075/idj.21.2.06jan [Google Scholar]
  18. Khlaisang, J. and Songkram, N.
    2019 Designing a Virtual Learning Environment System for Teaching Twenty-First Century Skills to Higher Education Students I ASEAN.(Report). Technology, Knowledge and Learning. 24(1), p.41. 10.1007/s10758‑017‑9310‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-017-9310-7 [Google Scholar]
  19. Knaflic, C. N.
    2015Storytelling with data: A data visualization guide for business professionals. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.. 10.1002/9781119055259
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119055259 [Google Scholar]
  20. Koyani,
    2006Research-Based Web Design & Usability Guidelines. Washington, D. C.: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Kuzu, E. B. and Ceyla, B.
    2010 Typographic properties of online learning environments for adults. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences. 91, pp.879–883. 10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.253
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.253 [Google Scholar]
  22. Lapowsky, I.
    2015 The Reeducation of Blackboard, Everyone’s Classroom Pariah. Wired [Online]. [Accessed27 December 2021]. Available from: https://www.wired.com/2015/07/blackboard-reinvention/
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Lee, K. H. and Kim, D. Y.
    2014 A Study of Students’ Perceptions of Course Management Systems in Hospitality Programs: A Case of Blackboard System in the United States. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education. 26(2), pp.45–54. 10.1080/10963758.2013.850292
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10963758.2013.850292 [Google Scholar]
  24. Lester, P. M.
    2006Syntactic Theory of Visual Communication. California State University at Fullerton.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Liaw, S. S.
    2008 Investigating students’ perceived satisfaction, behavioral intention, and effectiveness of e-learning: A case study of Blackboard system. Computers & Education. 51(2), pp.864–873. 10.1016/j.compedu.2007.09.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.09.005 [Google Scholar]
  26. Lidwell, W., Holden, K. and Butler, J.
    2003Universal principles of design. Gloucester: Rockport.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Lonsdale, M. dS.
    2014 Typographic features of text: Outcomes from research and practice. Visible Language. 48(3), pp.29–67.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Lonsdale, M., Lonsdale, D. J., Baxter, M., Graham, R., Kanafani, A., Li, A. and Peng, C.
    2019 Visualising the terror threat: The impact of communicating security information to the general public using infographics and motion graphics. Visible Language. 53(2), pp.36–71.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Lonsdale, M. dS. and Lonsdale, D. J.
    2019Design2Inform: Information visualisation. The Office of the Chief Scientific Advisor, Gov UK.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Lonsdale, M. dS., Lonsdale, D. J. and Lim, H.
    2018 The impact of neglecting user-centered information design principles when delivering online information: Cyber security awareness websites as a case study. Information Design Journal. 24(2), pp.151–177. 10.1075/idj.00005.san
    https://doi.org/10.1075/idj.00005.san [Google Scholar]
  31. Limniou, M. M.
    2010 Teachers’ and students’ perspectives on teaching and learning through virtual learning environments. European Journal of Engineering Education, 35(6), pp.645–653. 10.1080/03043797.2010.505279
    https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2010.505279 [Google Scholar]
  32. Maybee, C., Bruce, C., Lupton, M. and Pang, M.
    2019 Informed learning design:. Teaching and learning through engagement with information. Higher Education Research & Development, 38(3), pp.579–583. 10.1080/07294360.2018.1545748
    https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2018.1545748 [Google Scholar]
  33. McAvinia, C.
    2016Online Learning and Its Users: Lessons for Higher Education. London: Elsevier.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Moore, P. and Fitz, C.
    1993 Gestalt theory and instructional design. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 23(2), pp.137–157. 10.2190/G748‑BY68‑L83T‑X02J
    https://doi.org/10.2190/G748-BY68-L83T-X02J [Google Scholar]
  35. Muilenburg, L. and Berge, Z.
    2005 Student barriers to online learning: A factor analytic study. Distance Education. 26(1), pp.29–48. 10.1080/01587910500081269
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01587910500081269 [Google Scholar]
  36. Norman, D.
    2013The Design of Everyday Things. Massachusetts: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Oakman, H.
    2016 The next generation VLE. Educational Technology, [Online]. [Accessed28 December 2021]. Available from: https://edtechnology.co.uk/latest-news/the-next-generation-vle/
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Parsons, A.
    2017 Accessibility and use of VLEs by students in further education. Research in Post-Compulsory Education. 22(2), pp.271–288. 10.1080/13596748.2017.1314684
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13596748.2017.1314684 [Google Scholar]
  39. Peng, J., Tan, W. and Liu, G.
    2015 Virtual Experiment in distance education: based on 3D virtual learning environment. 2015 International conference of educational innovation through technology (EITT). pp.81–84. 10.1109/EITT.2015.24
    https://doi.org/10.1109/EITT.2015.24 [Google Scholar]
  40. Peters, D.
    2014Interface design for learning: design strategies for learning experiences. Pearson Education.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Pettersson, R.
    2010 Information Design – Principles and Guidelines. Journal of Visual Literacy. 29(2), pp.167–182. 10.1080/23796529.2010.11674679
    https://doi.org/10.1080/23796529.2010.11674679 [Google Scholar]
  42. Pettersson, R. and Avgerinou, M. D.
    2016 Information Design with Teaching and Learning in Mind. Journal of Visual Literacy. 35(4), pp.253–267. 10.1080/1051144X.2016.1278341
    https://doi.org/10.1080/1051144X.2016.1278341 [Google Scholar]
  43. Reiser, R.
    1994 Clark’s invitation to the dance: An instructional Designer’s response. Educational Technology Research and Development. 42(2), pp.45–48. 10.1007/BF02299091
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299091 [Google Scholar]
  44. Richardson, R. T., Drexler, T. L. and Delparte, D. M.
    2014 Color and Contrast in E-Learning Design: A Review of the Literature and Recommendations for Instructional Designers and Web Developers. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching. 10(4), pp.657–670.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Rogers, P. L.
    2000 Barriers to adopting emerging technologies in education. Journal of Computing Research. 22(4), pp.455–472. 10.2190/4UJE‑B6VW‑A30N‑MCE5
    https://doi.org/10.2190/4UJE-B6VW-A30N-MCE5 [Google Scholar]
  46. Schlegel, E.
    2020 Designing Online Courses: 12 Tips for Health Professions Educators. MedEdPublish. pp.1–11
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Simoni, M.
    2011 Using Tablet PCs and Interactive Software in IC Design Courses to Improve Learning. IEEE Transactions on Education. 54(2), pp.216–221. 10.1109/TE.2011.2105873
    https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2011.2105873 [Google Scholar]
  48. Spinuzzi, C.
    2005 The Methodology of Participatory Design. Technical Communication. 52(2), pp.163–174.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Stoney, S. and Wild, M.
    2008 Motivation and Interface Design: Maximising Learning Opportunities. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 14(1), pp.40–50. 10.1046/j.1365‑2729.1998.1410040.x
    https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2729.1998.1410040.x [Google Scholar]
  50. Umoru, T. A.
    2012 Barriers to the Use of Information and Communication Technologies in Teaching and Learning Business Education. American Journal of Business Education. 5(5), pp.575–580. 10.19030/ajbe.v5i5.7214
    https://doi.org/10.19030/ajbe.v5i5.7214 [Google Scholar]
  51. Visocky O’Grady, J. and Visocky O’Grady, K.
    2008The Information Design Handbook. Cincinnati, Ohio: How Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Wongpornprateep, P. and Boonmoh, A.
    2019 Students’ Perceptions towards the Use of VLE in a Fundamental English Course: A review of Smart Choice Online Practice and Smart Choice on the Move. Journal of Studies in the English Language (JSEL). 14(2), pp.91–131.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/idj.22001.lon
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/idj.22001.lon
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error