Introduction
Online learning has become an integral component in
many institutions of higher education. Institutions
offer a variety of online learning options,
including complete online degrees, complete online
courses integrated in traditional programs or a wide
range of hybrid (or blended) learning courses.
Online courses, or online elements used in hybrid
instruction, allow academic institutions to overcome
time and location restrictions and offer a number of
other advantages for the institution and the student
(Moore, Sener & Fetzner, 2006). Currently, 58% of
institutions in higher education consider online
education part of their long-term strategy and are
expecting enrollment in online courses to continue
to increase (Allen & Seaman, 2006).
All
online learning environments require the integration
of technology and make it necessary for students as
well as instructors to be familiar with at least
certain aspects of technology. In these settings,
instructors must develop instructional methods which
include technology and related computing tools.
However, many educators in higher education have
little training regarding the potential and
limitations of online learning environments and
their applications. Instructors often have to learn,
through trial and error, how to use these
technologies and tools and how to teach effectively
using these systems (Moore & Kearsley, 2005).
In
addition to serving as a virtual setting where
technology can help support learning, online
learning environments have to fulfill many other
user expectations. They are expected to offer
advanced interfaces and features to suit a myriad of
learners, and at the same time they are also
expected to be flexible and easy to use to suit
various learning styles and educational requirements
(Allen & Seaman, 2006; Pollanen, 2007). The
diversity of course offerings and learning
situations adds further complexity. Each learning
environment is unique and even the same course
taught by the same instructor is never exactly the
same instruction. Instructor facilitation and
student participation add further variables to a
course. Every online course is a combination of
several variables, including the course management
system (CMS), instructional activities, the
students, and the instructor.
The
integration of technology as well as the diversity
of the learning environment and the learner are
factors making assessment of online learning
environments a complex issue and require
re-evaluation of traditional assessment methods
(Moore & Kearsley, 2005). Quality teaching and
learning in virtual environments is often associated
with the pedagogical principles of learner-centered
education, active learning, higher order thinking
skills and team work (American Distance Education
Consortium, 2003). Moreover, technology and tools
used to support online learning are often identified
as significant factors influencing student learning
outcomes in online learning environments (Fredericksen,
Picket, Pelz, Swan & Shea, 1999; Oliver &
Herrington, 2003).
Usability is an element of Human-Computer
Interaction and is a common research practice in the
computer science field. It is used to assess how
well technology and tools are working for users.
Usability measures the quality of a user’s
experience when interacting with a product or system
and is an essential element of web design and
development. It is standard practice for
professional web developers to apply usability
guidelines to improve the user experience with
Internet and World Wide Web technologies and to
evaluate the ease of use and satisfaction of users
with Web-Interfaces. Successful interaction with an
online environment increases user satisfaction and
productivity and strengthens acceptance of the
product (Lazar, 2001; Shneiderman, 1998).
Evaluation of online learning technologies and tools
can benefit from usability research and many
initiatives encourage web developers to increase the
level of usability of web documents (Koohang, 2004;
Shneiderman, 1998; U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services, n.d.). Research has shown that
implementation of usability principles can assist
instructors in enhancing the learning experience for
students in online learning environments, and that
it can influence student learning process and
learner effectiveness (Koohang, 2004).
Current research suggests that evaluation of
learning outcomes in online learning environments
needs to examine the complexity and interconnection
of education and technology by considering
indicators from both fields (Association for
Computing Machinery, 2001; Grice & Hart-Davidson,
2002). However, evaluation often does not include
usability factors, thus making it problematic to
analyze the usefulness and satisfaction with tools
and interfaces of online learning environments
(Association for Computing Machinery, 2001; Nelson &
Wayne, 1999; Zaharias, 2006). Little research has
been done to investigate these relationships between
usability and learning outcomes in online learning
environments (Feldstein, 2002; Quigley, 2002).
This paper presents a research study which examined
the application of usability research in online
learning environments and the effects of usability
on student learning outcomes, including student
achievement, communication and collaboration. A
survey instrument, employing user-based assessment,
was developed and tested for reliability as part of
this study.
Methodology
It
was the purpose of this research to investigate
both, relationships and differences, between student
learning outcomes and usability factors in online
learning environments. Additionally, this research
focused on differences in learning outcomes and
system usability between several selected student
groups, including gender, age, student standing, and
student computer competency scores.
The
participants in this study were 240 students
attending a medium-sized comprehensive university in
the Mid-Atlantic. The course, from which this sample
was drawn, was open to all students and spread
across eight sections. This 15-week, three-credit
course was offered in hybrid format and covered
topics such as computer-based animation, sound
editing, Web-publishing and an extensive term
project. Approximately 50% of class material was
taught using the World Wide Web, and approximately
50% was taught using face-to-face instruction. A CMS
was used to provide online lecture notes, assignment
instructions, to submit and discuss student work,
and to record student grades. Students in all eight
sections were enrolled in the same online class, and
all eight sections were administered by the same
instructor, along with two teaching assistants.
Quantitative data were collected through the use of
a survey, administered during the last week of the
course after students had finished the majority of
class work and had used the online learning
environment for the complete duration of the course.
The research was guided by the following research
questions:
·
Is there a statistically significant correlation (p
< 0.05) between online learning system usability and
student learning outcomes?
·
Is there a statistically significant difference (p
< 0.05) between selected student groups (computer
competency scores) and both student learning
outcomes and online learning system usability?
·
Is there a statistically significant difference (p
< 0.05) between selected student groups (selected
groups were: gender, age, and student standing) and
both student learning outcomes and online learning
system usability?
To
conduct this research, a survey instrument,
integrating usability research and evaluation of
student learning outcomes in online learning
environments, was developed (Meiselwitz & Lu, 2005).
A relationship between system usability and learning
outcomes would demonstrate that when overall system
usability increases, overall student learning
experience also increases or vice versa.
Disaggregated data provides indicators to assist in
identification of possible causes for relationships.
The new questionnaire, the Web-based Learning and
Usability Questionnaire (WLUQ) was constructed based
on two existing questionnaires: the Post-Study
System Usability Questionnaire (PSSUQ) and the
Web-based Learning Environment Instrument (WLEI).
The
PSSUQ is intended primarily for assessment of user
satisfaction with the usability of a system (Lewis,
1995). The
WLEI specifically targets user satisfaction in web-based learning
environments (Chang, 1999).
The
PSSUQ was developed in 1995 for IBM, contains 19
questions and provides opportunity for open-ended
user comments (Lewis, 1995). Items selected from
this questionnaire assess three areas of usability:
(a) system usefulness (4 questions), (b) information
quality (3 questions), and (c) interface quality (2
questions). System usefulness inquires about the
usefulness of the tool for the task. Information
quality addresses system support information and
error handling; interface quality targets the
general quality and functionality of the system
interface.
The
WLEI specifically targets user satisfaction in
web-based learning environments (Chang, 1999). It
consists of 32 questions, provides opportunity for
open-ended comments and targets the effectiveness of
web-based learning environment from a student’s
perspective. Items selected from this questionnaire
address four areas important for learning outcomes:
(a) learner control and self-direction of the
learning process (3 questions), (b) communication
and collaboration (3 questions), (c) student
achievement (3 questions), and (d) structure and
organization of the learning environment (3
questions).
Both instruments have established reliability and
validity. The PSSUQ has a Cronbach alpha of 0.97,
and the WLEI has a Cronbach alpha of 0.87. The
authors of the two instruments were contacted to
obtain copies and permission to use their
instruments.
The
newly created instrument WLUQ consisted of selected
items from both questionnaires and was tested for
reliability in a pilot study and in this study. In
this study, the instrument tested for overall
reliability for all three sections of competency,
usability and learning experience (28 items total)
with a value of 0.9177 (Cronbach alpha).
Results
The
WLUQ is organized in four sections and consists of
40 questions including three open-ended questions.
Section I is designed to collect demographic data,
section II is designed to collect data regarding
computer competency, section III is designed to
collect system usability data, and section IV is
designed to collect data regarding student learning
outcomes.
Description of Subjects
As
noted earlier, the sample for this research study
was taken from an introductory computer science
class at a mid-sized, comprehensive university. Out
of a total of 240 students enrolled in the course,
221 completed the course and 181 students completed
the survey; yielding an 82% response rate. More than
half the participants in this study were female
students (54.7%) and the majority of students were
sophomores and juniors (87.3%). Prior experience
with a CMS was moderate for most students, 76% had
taken between 2 and 5 courses using a CMS.
Participants self-rated their computer competency
level, and on a 5-point scale (1=poor, 5=excellent),
students reported an overall computer competency
score of 4.29. Usability scores were self-reported
on a 5-point scale (1=strongly disagree, 5=strongly
agree), and students rated the overall usability of
the online learning system with 4.27. Scores for
learning outcomes were also self-reported on a
5-point scale (1=strongly disagree, 5=strongly
agree), and students rated their overall learning
outcomes 4.36.
Correlation between Usability and Learning Outcomes
This section reports results pertaining to the
following research question: Is there a significant
relationship (p < 0.05) between online learning
system usability and student learning outcomes? A
relationship between system usability and learning
outcomes would demonstrate that when overall system
usability increases, overall student learning
experience also increases or vice versa. Analysis of
the relationship between usability and learning
outcomes showed a significant positive correlation
(r=0.83). This supported a linear relationship that
when the overall system usability increased, the
overall student learning outcomes also increased, or
vice versa. Intercorrelations between subscales of
the two variables confirmed the correlation between
usability factors and learning outcomes and
displayed significant positive correlations at the
0.01 level. To assess the relevance of the
correlation between usability and learning outcomes,
a stepwise multiple regression was performed.
Learning outcomes was the dependent variable; system
usefulness, interface quality, and information
quality were the predictor variables.
Results confirmed the relevance of the
correlation between system usability and student
learning outcomes and showed adjusted R square =
0.68; F(3,156)=113.46, p<0.005 (using the
stepwise method). This regression model showed that
the measured usability factors system usefulness,
interface quality, and information quality in this
study accounted for approximately 68% of the
variance in student learning outcomes in this
regression model.
Differences between Computer Competency and both Usability and Learning
Outcomes
This section reports results pertaining to the
following research question: Is there a
statistically significant difference (p < 0.05)
between computer competency scores and both online
learning system usability and student learning
outcomes? One-way ANOVAs disclosed significant
differences among the levels of competency for
searching/browsing WWW, email, and word processing
with overall usability. However, no significant
difference among the level of competency for both
electronic discussion boards and web development was
discovered. One-way ANOVAs also disclosed
significant differences among the levels of
competency for searching/browsing WWW and email with
overall learning outcomes. However, no significant
difference among the level of competency for word
processing, electronic discussions, or web
development with overall learning outcomes was
displayed. Table 1 summarizes the results for this
series of one-way ANOVAs.
Results showed that abilities and skills,
such as simple electronic communication and basic
internet knowledge, seemed sufficient to increase a
user’s view of higher system usability and higher
learning outcomes. In this study, advanced knowledge
about online learning environments or web
applications did not increase the ratings of system
usability or learning outcomes.
Table 1.Summary of one-way ANOVA Series among
Levels of Competency
|
Search/browse WWW |
Email |
Word processing |
Electronic discussions |
Webpage development |
Usability |
F=4.81 * |
F=5.91 * |
F=4.66 * |
F=1.88 NS |
F=1.20 NS |
Learning outcomes |
F=2.83 * |
F=4.16 * |
F=1.99 NS |
F=.92 NS |
F=1.49 NS |
Note. * =
Significant at 0.05, NS = Not Significant
Differences between Gender, Age, and Student Standing and both Usability
and Learning Outcomes
This section reports results pertaining to the
following research question: Is there a
statistically significant difference (p < 0.05)
between student gender, age, and student standing
and both student learning outcomes and online
learning system usability? This section reports
results pertaining to the differences between
gender, age, and student standing and both usability
and learning outcomes. A series of one-way ANOVAs
was performed to analyze these differences.
Table 2. Summary of one-way ANOVA Series among
Gender, Age, and Student Standing
|
Gender |
Age |
Student standing |
Usability |
F=0.75 NS |
F=0.03 NS |
F=0.14 NS |
Learning outcomes |
F=3.68 NS |
F=0.23 NS |
F=0.55 NS |
Note. * =
Significant at 0.05, NS = Not Significant
Results showed that no significant differences were
reported among gender, age, and student standing
with regard to both usability and learning outcomes.
Table 2 summarizes the results for this series of
one-way ANOVAs.
However, when evaluating results for these
demographic groups it should be considered that the
student group in this study was relatively
homogeneous. Although 181 students completed this
survey, more than 75% of all students were 20 years
or younger and over 50% of all students were
sophomores.
Discussion
This study showed that usability factors are
important elements in assessment of student learning
outcomes in online learning environments. Students
reported high ratings for both system usability and
learning outcomes. High ratings for learning
outcomes (M=4.37) and further analysis of these
ratings revealed that students clearly emphasized
learner control as well as structure and
organization. Student comments supported conclusions
drawn from the statistical results. Over 30% of all
students remarked how much they liked the online
grade book that was used to provide grade-based
feedback on their work. Through this immediate
grade-based feedback, students felt enabled to
exercise better control over their learning process,
and they felt empowered to take responsibility for
their learning. Students also appreciated the
convenience and availability of online course
material. This finding underscored that students in
this course seemed to be task oriented. They clearly
valued the increased independence of this online
learning environment, especially the asynchronous
nature, allowing for more flexibility in time and
place required to attend class and complete course
assignments.
Overall system usability also showed a high rating
(M=4.35). Further analysis of the system usability
indicators revealed that students were focused on
“getting the job done” and appreciated the
usefulness of the tool for the task, easy
navigation, and the low learning curve. However,
students also readily expressed their
dissatisfaction with error messages, error recovery,
and the online help system, thus supporting
statistical results that identified information
quality as the weakest area of online learning
usability (M=4.0). Students mentioned that the
system was sometimes slow to load, especially when
many students were logged into the system
concurrently. It was also reported that the login
process was slow, cumbersome, and contained too many
screens; it often took too many steps to get to
their destination point.
Correlation
The
significant positive correlation between usability
factors and learning outcomes showed that, when
system usability increased, learning outcomes also
increased, or vice versa. A regression analysis
confirmed the importance of this result and showed
that the student learning outcomes were largely
influenced by system usability. This finding
supported existing research (Fredericksen et al.,
1999; Oliver & Herrington, 2003, Valenta, Therriault,
Dieter & Mrtek R, 2001), confirming that tool design
and use of the tool indeed significantly influence
student learning outcomes and attitudes. It further
supported existing research regarding the demand for
integration of usability research into the
evaluation of online learning environments and
student learning outcomes (Feldstein, 2002; Quigley,
2002).
Competency
Literature investigating the role of computer
competency scores and learning outcomes or usability
in online learning environments is not entirely
consistent. (Fredericksen et al., 1999) reported no
significant differences in learning outcomes among
computer competency levels; however, this was
contradicted by Dutton, Dutton, and Perry (2002) and
Koohang (2004), whose studies found that prior
computing experience improved learning outcomes.
This study discovered differences among certain
areas of computer competency with usability and
learning outcomes. Disaggregated data was evaluated
and confirmed results noted by Dutton et al. (2002)
and Koohang (2004). Students with high competency
levels of basic Internet/WWW tasks, such as
browsing, basic communication tasks such as email,
and basic word processing tasks also reported high
ratings for usability. Students with high competency
levels of basic Internet/WWW tasks, and basic
communication tasks, such as email, also reported
high ratings for learning outcomes.
Interestingly, advanced experience, such as web
design, or advanced communication interfaces, such
as electronic discussion boards, did not show
significant differences for system usability or
learning outcomes. These findings demonstrated that
competency in basic computer tasks is sufficient to
increase perceived system usability and learning
outcomes in this online learning environment.
Advanced knowledge is not necessary to raise
usability ratings or learning outcomes. These
results are important because they not only
discovered the level of basic computer competency
tasks as the cause for perceived higher usability
and learning outcomes, these findings also provided
indicators to possible training or preparation that
could be offered to increase learning outcomes and
system usability for students in online learning
environments.
Gender, Age, and Student Standing
No
significant differences for system usability or
learning outcomes were identified among various
levels of gender, age, or student standing. This
study supported observations of Koohang (2004) and
Dutton et al. (2002) who also reported no
significant differences among gender or age and
system usability. It should be noted that, as
mentioned earlier, the evaluated student group was
very homogeneous (75.7% were 20 years or younger,
87.3% were sophomores and juniors), and that this
may be partially responsible for the results
regarding gender, age, and student standing. Further
evaluation in less homogeneous student groups or
non-traditional learning environments would be
beneficial to strengthen these findings.
Suggestions for Future Research
Results of this study showed a clear connection
between usability and student learning outcomes and
suggest that usability factors must be considered in
online learning environments. Training in usability
and availability of methods and tools for
instructors in these learning environments could
significantly improve the integration usability in
online learning environments.
In
addition to the correlation of system usability and
learning outcomes, this study also revealed
differences among various levels of student computer
competency. This suggests that possible training or
prior competency assessment could assist students in
improving their online learning experience. Further
research could be designed to evaluate the effects
of a pre-assessment or pre-training seminar to
confirm the findings of this study.
Due to the homogeneity of the group,
further studies should be performed with a more
heterogeneous student group or an upper level course
to evaluate correlations and to allow further
conclusions on the correlation of system usability
and online learning environments.
The nature of the course also had a large
focus on skills development and sharing of
individual, creative work. Further research using a
course that is more discussion based, collaborative,
and cooperative may also provide additional insight
into the importance of usability in online learning
environments.
Finally, a longitudinal study considering
instructor input may also be of interest. Data from
this study regarding successful learning outcomes
was self-reported by students and collected at the
end of the course. A study considering
instructor-based (measured) learning outcomes (e.g.
grades) over time could provide additional insight
on the correlation between system usability and
online learning outcome and differences among
certain student groups.
Conclusion
This study in conjunction with existing research
suggests that usability factors are vital elements
in online learning environments. Instructors should
implement usability guidelines when creating content
for online learning environments. The results of
this research study help to provide an understanding
of the importance of system usability and its
relationship with regard to student learning
outcomes. Students clearly valued structure,
organization, and the increased control and
flexibility that these learning environments
provide. Considering the growing presence of online
learning environments and hybrid learning
environments in traditional institutions of higher
education, it is vital to increase awareness about
the role of usability in online learning.
Many instructors have little experience with regard
to web design and development. It is crucial to
provide information and training on how to implement
usability guidelines into the creation of online
educational content, and into the design and
creation of online learning environments. The “Eight
golden rules of interface design” (Shneiderman,
1998) or “Top ten guidelines for homepage usability”
(Nielsen, 2003) could provide easy to use and easy
to implement guidelines that could assist
instructors in enhancing the learning process and
the learning outcome by increasing the system
usability.
Unfortunately instructors often have little
influence on the choice of tool and the design of
the actual shell of the CMS used in online
instruction. However, in most cases instructors can
control the content that is posted within their
classes. As a result, it is even more important to
provide instructors with tools to analyze and
improve the online or hybrid learning environment.
The WLUQ employed in this study can provide an easy
to use tool for instructors to assess relationships
between usability and student learning outcomes in
an individual course, and it considers the
particular modes of presentation and operation of
the course as well as the goals of the course. The
instrument allows for further analysis of
disaggregated data on several factors affecting
system usability and learning outcomes and provides
indicators for improvement of the learning
environment.
This study indicates that integration of usability
factors into online learning environments can assist
in improving learning outcomes for students. Through
the implementation of usability principles in
virtual learning environments, instructors can
support higher levels of usability and improve the
online learning environment.
References
Allen, E., & Seaman, J. (2006). Making the grade – online
education in the United States 2006. Retrieved
November 3, 2007, from
http://www.sloan-c.org/publications/survey/index.asp
American Distance Education Consortium (2003).
Guiding principles for distance teaching and
learning. Retrieved
March 25, 2005,
from
http://www.adec.edu/admin/papers/distance-teaching_principles. html.
Association for Computing Machinery (2001). Notes
from online learning special interest group
discussion at Computer Human Interaction Conference
2001 in
Seattle,
Washington. Retrieved October 28, 2004,
from
http://elearnmag.org/subpage/sub_page.cfm?section=6&list_item=1&page=1.
Chang, V. (1999). Evaluating the effectiveness of
online learning using a new web based learning
instrument. Proceedings Western Australian
Institute for Educational Research Forum.
Retrieved
February 15, 2004, from
http://education.curtin.edu.au/waier/forums/1999/chang.html
Dutton, J., Dutton, M., & Perry, J. (2002). How do
online students differ from lecture students?
Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks JALN,
6(1).
Feldstein, M. (2002, April 8). Ignore usability at
your peril. eLearn Magazine. Retrieved
December 11, 2003, from
http://elearnmag.org/subpage/sub_page.cfm?article_pk=5142&page_number
_nb=1&title= COLUMN.
Fredericksen, E., Picket, A., Pelz, W. Swan, K., &
Shea, P. (1999). State
University of New York student satisfaction and
perceived learning with on-line courses – principles
and examples from the SUNY learning network.
Retrieved April 24, 2004, from
http://SLN.suny.edu/SLN.
Grice, R., & Hart-Davidson, B. (2002). Mapping the
expanding landscape of usability: the case of
distributed education. ACM Journal of Computer
Documentation, 26, 159-167.
Koohang, A. (2004). A study of users’ perceptions
toward online learning courseware usability.
International
Journal on Online learning 3(2),
10-17.
Lazar, J. (2001). User-centered web development.
Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.
Lewis, R.(1995). IBM computer usability satisfaction
questionnaires: Psychometric evaluation and
instructions for use. International Journal of
Human-Computer Interaction
7(1), 57-78.
Meiselwitz, G., & Lu, C. (2005). Questionnaire for
evaluation of usability and learning outcomes in
online instruction. Proceedings of ECEL -
4th
European Conference on online learning,
August, 2005,
Amsterdam, NL.
Moore, J., Sener, J., & Fetzner, M. (2006).
Getting better: ALN and student success. Journal
of Asynchronous Learning Networks 10 (3),
55-84.
Moore, M., & Kearsley, G. Distance education.
(2005).
Belmont,
CA: Thomson
Wadsworth
Nelson, B., & Wayne A. (1999). If you build it, they will
come. But how will they use it? Journal of
Research on Computing in Education, 32(2),
270-287.
Nielsen, J. Usability 101 (2003). Retrieved
March 28, 2004, from
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20030825.html
Oliver, R., & Herrington, J. (2003). Factors influencing
quality online learning experiences. In (G. Davies &
E. Stacey Eds.) Quality education @ a distance.
London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Quigley, A. (2002, April 8). Usability-tested online
learning? Not until the market requires it.
eLearn Magazine. Retrieved
December 11, 2003, from
http://elearnmag.org/subpage/sub_page.cfm?article
pk=3301&page_number_nb= 1&title=FEATURE%20STORY
Pollanen, M. (2007). Improving learner motivation with online
assignments. Journal of Online Learning and
Teaching, 3(2). Retrieved
November 22, 2007, from
https://jolt.merlot.org/vol3no2/pollanen.htm
Shneiderman, B. (1998). Designing the user interface,
3rd ed.
Reading, MA: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (n.d.)
Usability. Retrieved October 22 2005, from
http://www.usability.gov.
Valenta, A., Therriault, D., Dieter, M., & Mrtek R. (2001).
Identifying student attitudes and learning styles in
distance education. Journal of Asynchronous
Learning Networks JALN, 5(2), 111-127.
Zaharias, P. (2006). A usability evaluation method for online
learning: Focus on motivation to learn.
Proceedings of CHI – Conference on Human Factors in
Computing Systems, April, 2006,
Quebec, CA.
|