Category: Background on the Problem

Amanda Hooser

In 2013, OSU launched eLearn@OSU to review, connect and optimize technologies for teaching and learning. This initiative was created due to OSU’s desire to provide students and teachers with a satisfying LMS. According to eLearn@OSU, an effective system was to allow for 24/7 access to course materials, provide a FERPA-compliant format for course delivery and communication, act as a foundation for learning technology, provide a way for OSU to evaluate academic goals and provide students with a consistent framework. OSU values these qualities of an effective system, therefore they used this initiative to conduct an LMS evaluation for the 2014-2015 academic school year.

In December of 2013, OSU submitted a Request for Proposal (RFP) for a new LMS. The request attracted 4 proposals and after a review process, two were selected for evaluation. The final two candidates were an updated version of the current system called Blackboard 14 and a new option called Canvas by Instructure. The evaluation of the two systems was conducted by three major groups: the core project group, OSU students and instructors, and a team of specialists. The core project group was the coordinating team that facilitated the evaluation process. OSU students and instructors had the opportunity to sign up and the core group filtered the candidates to involve all areas of OSU. The team of specialists were subject matter experts that reviewed target areas of the systems to ensure access, security and integration with current OSU systems.

The evaluation was done through a “sandbox” version in which the developers of Blackboard 14 and Canvas allowed the evaluators to experience the features and functionality of the system. The links to these two sandbox systems were provided on the evaluation form that also outlined tasks and pathways that teachers or students should simulate. For instructors these tasks were categorized as communication/collaboration, quizzes/tests and assignments, grading/tracking student performance, and creating a and organizing content. For example, one of the tasks in communication/collaboration was to create a calendar due date. For students, these tasks included submitting a quiz, assignment, discussion post, a message to an instructor and checking a grade in the gradebook. In addition to the evaluation form and sandbox systems, 16 instructors were recruited to teach a course using the systems in Spring 2014. The evaluation results were reviewed by the core project team and supported Canvas by Instructure. The LMS was installed and utilized the following academic year and has been employed since then.

This transition occurred after my freshman year in college. I took two classes online with Blackboard my freshman year and since have taken at least one class per term online with Canvas. It was clear to me my freshman year that Blackboard was not the most effective LMS. This was because I had to save several bookmarks to my browser to take my online hw assignments, reach my course materials, and to access Blackboard. Canvas streamlined this process by  integrating several learning tools, for example adding links to online labs and other resources. In addition, with Blackboard I found that instructors were incredibly textbook dependent. Since the transition, I have found that instructors have taken advantage of the “Modules” tab in Canvas to provide powerpoint lectures and other materials instead of the incredibly expensive textbooks. I think this transition was well executed and resulted in a much higher quality LMS for OSU students.

Amanda Hooser

For instructors to be successful in using LMS, they must feel satisfied with the features of the system. Without this satisfaction, the instructors are less likely to deliver high quality education and instruction. Consequently, for students to be successful in online courses, they have to be offered high quality education and instruction from satisfied instructors. In my experience as an OSU student, teacher satisfaction drives LMS however, this correlation isn’t always present. I have taken over 50 credits of online courses during my four years here, and I have found instructors to be inconsistent with their quality of education and instruction. Why is this? I think that the instructors do not see the benefit of the system to be great enough to put in the work to develop new teaching programs. In order for them to see this, we have to understand how they determine benefit.

In a study conducted by Ibrahim Almarashdeh at the University of Dammam in Saudi Arabia, the factors that most greatly contribute to instructor satisfaction were investigated. It investigated how system quality (SyQ), service quality (SvQ), information quality (InQ), perceived ease of use (PEU), and perceived usefulness (PU) contributed to user satisfaction (SAT). Furthermore, the questionnaire evaluated how SAT contributed to the net benefit (NB). SAT was defined as the evaluation of the user’s experience and NB as the balance of negative and positive impacts on user behavior..

The results closely concentrated which indicated that the instructors shared a similar point of view on the questionnaire topics. This is important because it shows that demonstrating the benefits to instructors as a whole will be effective because they will interpret benefit in similar ways. In addition, the results suggested that the strongest relationship was exhibited between perceived usefulness and user satisfaction. I think this finding would be consistent with the views of instructors at OSU because converting to Canvas already increased SyQ, SvQ, InQ and PEU. Therefore, the only contributing factors to instructor satisfaction that need attention are PU and SAT.

For students to succeed in online courses, instructors have to all be on the same page. It is our job as students to continue to reinforce the usefulness of instructor consistency in quality education and instruction through teacher evaluations and blog posts to hopefully increase their satisfaction with Canvas.

 

Jake Wadleigh

As students, we must put our voices together and provide feedback to Oregon State University on how teachers are utilizing Campus. With the growth of new technology, there are more and more professors struggling to teach online. The problems that professors are facing are different from ones they may have faced in a traditional classroom. Teachers are being forced to come up with innovative ways to create a flexible but productive online experience. In addition, online teachers have to be creative in how they offer a supportive place for questions, resources, and overall help. The majority of us students are taking online classes so that they have the ability to work 24/7 and have flexibility with their instructors.

So, what is a LMS? Learning management systems are what allow online classes to function. In the past few years, Oregon State University switched from Blackboard to Canvas LMS which was ultimately a very positive change. However, professors struggled with the transition as there was little to no training and teachers are expected to learn and use the program efficiently. Many professors struggle with simply setting up the classroom prior to the term. This includes setting up a new syllabus aimed at online learners, inputting assignments, due dates, and more.