Prospects for the Development of E-learning Technologies

Artem Feshchenko, Galina Mozhaeva, Ivan Kulikov and Nadezhda Zilberman

Faculty of Philosophy, Tomsk State University, Lenin Avenu-36, Tomsk, Russian Federation

Keywords: E-learning, Social Networks, Learning Management Systems, Ways of Learning.

Abstract: One of the latest innovations in the technology of e-learning is the use of social networks (SN) for the

creation and distribution of educational content and organization of communication of teachers and

students. Orientation of the younger generation of students in the regular use of the SN in their daily,

academic and professional life casts doubt on the prospects of the development of traditional learning

management systems (LMS). The article examines the attitudes of students and teachers to the possibilities

in learning LMS and SN, compared the advantages and disadvantages of the various e-learning

technologies. The study analyzed the results of the survey respondents from 25 universities of the Russian

Federation, Ukraine and Kazakhstan. For the analysis of the responses were used statistical treatment of data

and content analysis. The study identified features of the application in the training of LMS and SN,

different attitudes of students and teachers to the LMS and SN.

1 INTRODUCTION

In modern education the important place is taken by

e-learning, which development is largely defined by

the evolution of technologies. New information and

communication technologies find applications in

education very quickly, but the efficiency and

effectiveness of their use is not always obvious. One

of the latest innovations in the technology of e-

learning is the use of social networks (SN) for the

creation and distribution of educational content and

organization of communication of teachers and

students. Orientation of the younger generation of

students in the regular use of the SN in their daily,

academic and professional life casts doubt on the

prospects of the development of traditional learning

management systems (LMS) (Dan Pontefract,

Richard Culatta 2009). Various experience in the

usage of SN education has accumulated and

analyzed in recent years in the world (Dabbagh

Kitsantas, 2012; Bogdanov, Limpens, Li, El Helou,

Salzmann, Gillet, 2012; Meishar-Tal, Kurtz,

Pieterse, 2012). But these studies don`t cover the

experience of educational institutions of the CIS

countries in the use of SN in training. Therefore, the

aim of this article - is to identify the relationship of

Russian students and teachers to the possibilities of

use LMS and the SN in learning, the merits of

advantages and disadvantages of these two different

technologies.

2 METHOD

In this study, using survey data on "E-learning

technologies in high school" (May 2014), in which

were 363 participants: 90 teachers and 274 students

from 25 universities of the Russian Federation,

Ukraine and Kazakhstan.

The research includes survey, statistical data

processing, content analysis and comparative

analysis of the results. For data collection were used

Google Forms, and for their processing - specialized

software «Statistica v6.1.Ru». On basis of the survey

results there were constructed table of relative (%)

and absolute (quantity) frequencies, contingency

tables (cross tabulations). The survey results were

compared in MS Excel. To conduct content analysis

was used Wordstat v1.1.

For the research there was developed a survey

with 68 various questions: with single- and multiple

choice, in an open form (essay). The survey was

available on open access and transferred to

respondents through social networks, LMS and e-

mail. The survey was offered to students and

teachers who had learning experience in LMS and /

or SN.

3 RESULTS

First group of questions is directed on gathering

208

Feshchenko A., Mozhaeva G., Kulikov I. and Zilberman N..

Prospects for the Development of E-learning Technologies.

DOI: 10.5220/0005410102080212

In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU-2015), pages 208-212

ISBN: 978-989-758-107-6

 2015 SCITEPRESS (Science and Technology Publications, Lda.)

general information about the respondent (higher

education institution, department, age, gender,

student / teacher), on indication of the experience of

LMS, SN use and on evaluation preferences in the

use of ICT in learning.

Second group of questions is directed on

comparison of various ways of learning process

organization (in a classroom, in LMS, in SN) in 12

criteria. The questions of exactly this group in our

research enable to reveal the relation of students and

teachers to various ways of e-learning organization

and to compare it to traditional face-to-face

education. Despite the fact that learning in the

classroom, in SN and in LMS are different forms of

interaction for students and teachers, we tried to find

common criteria for comparing these different ways

of learning. In the survey, respondents ranked

learning in a classroom, in SN and LMS in each of

12 criteria from 1 to 5 ("1" - low rating, "5" - high

rating). So, in their ranking respondents compared

learning in a classroom, SN and LMS in each

criterion. This approach enable to reveal rating of e-

learning technologies in the context of the

educational experience of the respondents, including

traditional face-to-face education.

In the first group there were analyzed the

answers to the following questions:

1. If in the teaching situation you necessarily

need to use only one of the two platforms,

which one will you choose?

2. If you do not want to use LMS training, what

are the reasons?

3. If you do not want to use SN training , what are

the reasons?

4. Explain your preference for a particular

platform (LMS, SN, other websites)?

To the question " If in the teaching situation you

necessarily need to use only one of the two

platforms, which one will you choose? " are the

following answers (in percentage of the total

quantity of responses in each group):

Table 1: Preferences of students and teachers.

Teachers Students

SN 39% 50%

LMS 39% 19%

Other 11% 6%

No answer 11% 25%

The majority of students made higher evaluation

of SN, but teachers made equal evaluation of both

tools.

Questions are directed to identify the factors

affecting the assessment of users:

• If you do not want to use LMS training, what are

the reasons?

• If you do not want to use SN training , what are

the reasons?

Different answers were offered to both questions.

Respondents could choose several variants. The

answers are given in percentage of the total quantity

of responses in each group.

Table 2: For what reasons do not use LMS.

Teachers Students

You have to learn how to use 7% 9%

Platform is inconvenient / unusual 11% 16%

Use takes time 18% 3%

Use other platform 10% 10%

Classic methods of teaching are enough 10% 14%

No answer 54% 53%

In both groups the majority of the respondents

refused to answer this question. The main reason for

teachers - it takes a lot of time to use this platform. It

is explained by necessity of developing a large

number of materials, including not only the demo,

but also tests, independent tasks and general

evaluation system. For students the most important

factor is the strangeness / LMS inconvenience and

time spending is less significant. Also, there are

differences in the evaluation of classic methods of

teaching: great amount of students adhere to them.

Almost all respondents know this platform: lack of

LMS knowledge or lack of experience in it said only

1% of the teachers and 2% of the students. In the

free response, some teachers pointed less

opportunity of communication, "the students are

used to networking in an informal way (closer to the

logic of MOOC), I'm afraid that Moodle will be

perceived by them only as a checking element of

"accountable" learning experience." In the free

response, students also pointed the lack of

interactivity, "like a dead LJ" (approx. author Blog

Hosting "Live Journal"). Students also pointed

technical problems "cannot always go to the

website" and expressed doubts about its

effectiveness as an educational tool: "Students do

not check themselves, but just looking for answers

on the internet and write down there."

Table 3: For what reasons do not use SN.

Teachers Students

You have to learn how to use 2% 1%

Platform is inconvenient / unusual 2% 2%

Use takes time 4% 12%

Use other platform 8% 10%

Classic methods of teaching are enough 3% 3%

No answer 76% 68%

ProspectsfortheDevelopmentofE-learningTechnologies

209

In both groups the majority of the respondents

refused to answer this question. Teachers did not

identify significant shortcomings of the system

itself, but pointed the self-sufficiency of classic

methods of teaching. Students say about spending a

lot of time on using of this platform. It can be

explained by the fact of inclusion here personal

communications, in which it is necessary to be

involved, inspite of educational process. Teacher`s

comments: "social network focused on free

communication, and are not focused on learning"

and students`: "I want to divide private and

educational space", "I do not want to see me online"

support this hypothesis. In general, both groups

made evaluation of SN use, in the free response 6%

of the respondents pointed the reasons of non-use

instead of use of this system: "I want to use / want

and use", etc.

At the end of the survey it was presented open-

ended questions: Explain your preference for a

particular platform (LMS, SN, and other websites).

This article considers the responses, referring only

the LMS (all answers were given about LMS

«Moodle») and SN (most replies mentioned network

"Vkontakte"). This question was answered by 34

(38%) teachers and 76 (27%) students. In these

responses there were those who are not substantively

relevant, for example, "do not know", ")", "Moodle",

"social network", etc. The method of analysis used

in this step - content analysis. As the unit was

selected a block of text containing one explanation

(reason, merits and demerits) preference of a

particular system. Next units were grouped into

categories according to semantic criteria. The results

are given in percentage of the quantity of responses.

Teachers pointed advantages and disadvantages of

LMS.

Table 4: Advantages of LMS (teachers).

Organization of educational process 32%

Integration of University 6%

No distraction information 3%

Student and teacher communication 3%

Teachers point the great opportunities in

organization of educational process as the most

important advantage of use.

Table 5: Advantages of LMS (students).

Organization of educational process 18%

Student and teacher communication 7%

No distraction information 3%

Ease of use 3%

Students also pointed the advantage of LMS in

the educational process. It should be pointed out that

the semantic categories, in this part of the study, are

virtually identical in both reference groups. In the

group of students is added only one category of

"ease of use".

As disadvantage of LMS Moodle, teachers

complain about binding registration with the help of

an administrator.

Table 6: Disadvantages of LMS (teachers).

Registration with administrator 9%

No integration into the general development

strategy of the University

Can`t be used in several universities as a single

course

Unfriendly interface 3%

Communication student and teacher 3%

Technical problems 3%

Duplication necessity of information in SN 3%

The students pointed lack of system functionality

as disadvantage.

Table 7: Disadvantages of LMS (students).

Shallow functionality 9%

Unfriendly interface 3%

Unusual 3%

Technical problems 1%

Need to use browser 1%

Concurrent categories for students and teachers

are "Unfriendly interface", "Lack of communication

possibilities of the teacher and the student",

"Technical problems in use." Unmatched categories

of teachers are mainly associated with the

organization of educational process: "Need to

registrate with the administrator", "No integration

into the general development strategy of the

University", "Can`t be used in several universities as

a single course", "Duplication necessity of

information in SN (either due to technical problems

or more efficiency of work)." Students pointed

disadvantages of the system: "The lack of

functionality", "The need to use browser" (the

absence of convenient mobile application), "Unusual

platform."

Both groups also commented on the advantages

and disadvantages of the use of SN. In advantages

the teachers say, first of all, the fact that SN - a place

where students are and you should "go for them." It

is also pointed the general availability and user-

friendly interface of SN, a great amount of available

information.

CSEDU2015-7thInternationalConferenceonComputerSupportedEducation

210

Table 8: Advantages of social networks (teachers).

Students environment 29%

General availability 9%

User-friendly interface 6%

More info 6%

More motivation for students 3%

Organization of educational process 3%

Equal rights for students and teachers in the

creation of the content

Efficiency of communication 3%

For students the significant factor is

communication, the benefits of leading is the

category "Efficiency of communication", "The

ability to communicate with other participants," as

advantage is "Convenience" and "Habitualness of

the system."

Table 9: Advantages of social networks (students).

Efficiency of communication 18%

Regularity 15%

Communication with others 13%

Convenience 9%

Mobile applications 7%

Dialogueness 4%

More information 3%

Organization of educational process 3%

User-friendly interface 3%

Upgrade 1%

Availability at any time 1%

Pastime 1%

Categories of teachers and students agree about

more information, more opportunities for the

organization of training activities and efficiency of

communication. At the same time, students are

significant categories of communication, regularity /

convenience and technical capabilities of the

platform. And for the teachers the most important

category - subject-subject communication, that is the

teacher - student (on-line student, increasing the

motivation of students, equal rights for student and

teacher in the creation of content). In this case it is

possible to say about "communicatively oriented"

students and "student-oriented" teachers.

Categories of teachers and students in the

assessment of the shortcomings of social networks

as a tool for the educational process are not the

same. Teachers noted the need to prepare for

working with social networks, as well as openness to

learning materials. Students see the flaw in the

presence of distracting information from school, lack

of proper information and training necessary to be

online, which would require entry into the personal

communication.

Table 10: Disadvantages of social networks (teachers).

Need practice 3%

Public display 3%

Table 11: Disadvantages of social networks (students).

Many distractions 7%

Few educational information 1%

Everyone can see online 1%

Second group of questions is directed on of LMS

and SN in 12 criteria. To get objective assessments

in the analysis, we took into account only the

answers of respondents who had experience in the

LMS and the SN: 36 teachers and 141 students.

Table 12: Evaluation of LMS and SN.

Teachers Students

Higher

(%)

Higher

LMS

(%)

Equal in

SN and

LMS

(%)

igher i

(%)

Higher

in LMS

(%)

Equal in

SN and

LMS

(%)

Motivation

11 56 33 42 16 42

Concentration

11 50 39 41 38 21

Convenience of

the system

50 22 28 55 14 31

Efficiency

50 50 0 63 9 28

Frequency of

communication

78 5 17 57 15 28

Informativeness

22 22 56 45 21 34

Interactivity

39 17 44 47 14 39

Personalization

61 17 22 45 16 39

Convenience of

communication

39 28 33 41 22 17

Cooperation

50 0 50 74 3 23

Understanding

28 0 72 43 14 43

Emotionality

56 0 44 52 11 37

The majority of students made higher evaluation

of SN in 10 criteria and only in the criteria of

"Motivation" and "Understanding" the same quantity

of students think that the possibilities of LMS and

SN are equal. Students made high evaluation of

LMS in the criteria of "Concentration " (38%), but

even here the majority of respondents made higher

evaluation of SN (41%). Evaluation of teachers

differ. They suppose the SN are inferior to LMS

according to motivate opportunities and students`

concentration. For the rest of criteria the teachers

either make higher evaluation of SN, or make equal

evaluation of LMS and SN.

4 DISCUSSION AND

CONCLUSIONS

It should be pointed out that both reference groups

show similar activity in the responses. In their free

responses both teachers and students to a greater

ProspectsfortheDevelopmentofE-learningTechnologies

211

extent presented the advantages of a particular

platform. Thus, teachers equally consider the use of

LMS and the SN as a tool for learning. They

attribute the advantage of this system in the

educational process: the arrangement of materials,

development of tests and tasks, the organization of

students' independent work, preparation of the

assessment system, work with the journal, activities

monitoring, etc. However, they voice concerns

relating for the time-consuming when using this

platform, and do not accept the system of

compulsory registration by the administrator. Social

networks, according to teachers, may be selected as

a learning tool mainly because the platform for

students is usual and every-day. It is also important

the general availability of network and the ease of

use / convenience of interface. There were not

obvious disadvantages of SN which were presented

in the responses.

It is obvious that none of the technologies does

not meet all the requirements of the teacher in the e-

learning process. Some functions (technical,

supervisory, organizational) has been successfully

implemented using LMS, others (communication,

motivation, individualized instruction) - the SN.

Thus, from the teachers` point of view, the prospects

for the development of e-learning technologies are

related, probably, not with the choice of either SN or

LMS` contradistinction, and their hybridization

(appearance of a new technology that combines the

functions of the SN and LMS) or symbiosis

(coexistence of the two systems, with which both

partners or one of them gets benefit from the other).

Students, to a greater extent, prefer to use SN,

considering the main advantage of the

communicative potential of the platform, as well as

its convenience and regularity. In this case

disadvantage is a lot of distractions. Students also

admit the advantage of LMS in the educational

process, but attribute shortcomings of the platform

in its lack of functionality, inconvenience and

strangeness. Thus, the Russian students tend to

attribute the prospects for the development of e-

learning technologies more in social networks than

in traditional LMS.

For further development of the research we aim

to check the data collected in Tomsk State

University using survey and interviewing of students

and teachers from other foreign universities. In our

opinion comparison of students and teachers in their

relation to the e-learning instruments in different

universities and countries enable to examine the

results by interaction of more respondents to the

research, to define perspective directions of e-

learning development taking into account opinions

of its participants.

Conclusions of this study will help us to

understand and improve our use of LMS and SN

tools in educational contexts. Our final goal is to

adapt our teaching strategies to the educational

needs of our students.

REFERENCES

Dan Pontefract, The Standalone LMS is Dead. Available

at: http://www.danpontefract.com/?p=152.

Richard Culatta, The Traditional LMS is Dead: Looking to

a Modularized Future. Available at:

http://www.innovativelearning.com/learning_manage

ment/modular-lms.html.

Dabbagh, N., and 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.

Bogdanov, E., Limpens, F., Li, N., El Helou, S.,

Salzmann, C., and Gillet, D. (2012, April). A social

media platform in higher education. In Global

engineering education conference (educon), 2012 ieee

(pp. 1-8). IEEE.

Meishar-Tal, H., Kurtz, G., and Pieterse, E. (2012).

Facebook groups as LMS: A case study. The

International Review of Research in Open and

Distance Learning,13(4), 33-48.

CSEDU2015-7thInternationalConferenceonComputerSupportedEducation

212