5 March 2010 (Friday) | 17:00 - 17:20 | http://citers2010.cite.hku.hk/abstract/41 | LEI, Chunlin, HKU / Shanghai Institute of Foreign Trade

1. Instructors’ Adoption and Implementation of Moodle in Higher Education LEI Chunlin* * Acknowledgements to Sharon Lin, Dr Lu & Dr Jan

2. Structure Background to the research Theoretical literature review Research question Research method Preliminary results Implications and limitations Q&A

3. Background to research * Course Management System (CMS) is widely used in higher education The University in our study has gone through different CMSs, Lotus Dominos, Integrated Virtual Learning Environment (IVLE) and Interactive Learning Network (ILN) Now, faculty shift to Moodle (Modular Object-oriented Dynamic Learning Environment) However higher institutions’ reluctance towards change (West et al. 2007) tried Moodle with instructors in a particular Depart. Goal: understand the experiences of the instructors in the Division of IT Studies as they adopted and implemented Moodle in their teaching

4. Background to research Significance Research studying adoption and diffusion of new technologies in higher educational contexts, (from the faculty’s perspectives), still narrow in scope Knowing the successes and challenges helps administrators adjust policies accordingly and minimize risk See that change is not brought about for the sake of change; change is taken place when research shows that it can improve learning outcome or efficiency of learning (adapted from Malikowski, 2008).

5. Literature review Jackson (1998) suggests three stages in innovative projects about which judgments can be made: intentions, implementation and outcomes Everett Rogers (2003) provides an Innovation Decision Modelfor understanding the decision and adoption of an innovation 5 stages knowledge persuasion decision implementation and confirmation

6. Literature review Technology Adoption Model in explaining individual’s technology adoption process “perceived usefulness” and “perceived ease of use” (Davis, 1989) + more variables “technical support” and “attitude and acceptance of the technology” How technological innovation is being known, adopted, implemented, and confirmed or rejected

7. Research questions Understanding the instructors’ experiences as they adopt and implement Moodle in their teaching. What do they know about Moodle? What do they do with Moodle? What factors enhance / hamper their use of Moodle? What do they see the potentials and challenges of shift from ILN to Moodle in the Faculty?

8. Research method Participants: instructors teaching in ITS, n=10 Procedure and data source: Semi-structured interview with technical manager questionnaire survey 20 multiple choice/Likert scale questions 2 open-ended questions sequenced by a process of “Knowledge – Decision/Adoption – Implementation/ Actual Use – Confirmation” The online Vanguard Vista™Survey System Valid: n=8

9. Preliminary results 1. Knowledge about CMSs and Moodle

10. diversified experiences with CMSs or e-learning Systems Get to know Moodle not only through administrators (37.5%), but also friends (25%), self-interest (25%), or research project (12.5%) Expert Vs. novice users “ran a BBS in 1980s, utilized almost all of the Moodle functions in our survey list, (teaching content such as PPT, forums, chats, messaging, quizzes, grades and scales, assignments, glossaries, Wiki, blogs, surveys and choices, mindmap, brainstorm, non-standard activities)”

11. Preliminary results 2. Decision-making/adoption of Moodle

12. a top-down decision Reasons for adoption management decision (75%) but also colleagues’ recommendation (87.5%) self- efficacy (50% seeing the beauty of Moodle) familiarity with CMSs helps to explain why it works (87.5%) Moodle is overall better than ILN Training: half received 1~2 hrs training before using Moodle, other half had no training at all 62.5% believe that training is “useful”/ “very useful”, others “little use”/ “useless” findings corresponded to the interview with technical manager

13. Preliminary results 3. Implementation /actual use of Moodle

14. Time spent on Moodle 37.5% >5 hrs per week; 25% 3~4 hrs; 12.5% 1~2 hrs; 25%<1 hr Moodle functions utilized Co-related with time, >5 hrs (n=3), used 14, 8, 7 functions <2 hrs (n=3), used 11, 6, 5 functions Most-used functions teaching content such as PPT(100%) assignment (87.5%) and forum (87.5%) survey and choices (62.5%), Wiki (62.5%) (87.5%) expect more functional features from Moodle Time spent on Moodle-discussion (n=5) Participated more or less, in the forum discussion (n=1) did not use the forum-discussion social constructivist pedagogy

15. Preliminary results To what extent do Moodle's functions satisfy your teaching needs? 0% unsatisfied 12.50% moderately satisfied 50.00% satisfied 37.50% fully satisfied 4. Confirmation of Moodle

16. (87.5%) Moodle is “obviously advantageous” or “advantageous” over other CMSs high rate (100%) satisfaction over Moodle (100%) would like to “recommend” / “strongly recommend” Moodle to their colleagues/friends (87.5%) satisfied/fully satisfied teaching needs (87.5%) agreed /strongly agreed Moodle is user friendly & easy to use (75%) thought Moodle is technically stable (25%) reported few slight technical problems with Moodle

18. user friendly – easy to manager, distribute, and present different types of materials. [building quiz question bank, online assignments or grading, better visualization, etc]

19. fulfilling the social constructivist pedagogy – emphasis on tasks, learning by doing, discussion, sharing & collaboration

20. compatibility with applications – ways to embed contents from different sources such as Youtube or Google Docs

22. functions need to be modified by technicians to cater to the needs of specific modules;

23. users’ unfamiliarity with computer technology, for example, the tool system and the html;

24. lack of a development server to do version change;

26. Conclusion and limitations How can training play its role in the technology innovation acceptance process tradeoff in terms of how many functional features should be utilized the importance or impact of colleagues in the innovation adoption process Limitations: sample features; sample size; More in-depth interview with expert/novice users Incorporation of Students’ experiences

27. Q &A Questions?