| Literature DB >> 23569595 |
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Several public health education programs and government agencies across the country have started offering virtual or online training programs in emergency preparedness for people who are likely to be involved in managing or responding to different types of emergency situations such as natural disasters, epidemics, bioterrorism, etc. While such online training programs are more convenient and cost-effective than traditional classroom-based programs, their success depends to a great extent on the underlying technological environment. Specifically, in an online technological environment, different types of user experiences come in to play-users' utilitarian or pragmatic experience, their fun or hedonic experience, their social experience, and most importantly, their usability experience-and these different user experiences critically shape the program outcomes, including course completion rates. This study adopts a multi-disciplinary approach and draws on theories in human computer interaction, distance learning theories, usability research, and online consumer behavior to evaluate users' experience with the technological environment of an online emergency preparedness training program and discusses its implications for the design of effective online training programs. .Entities:
Year: 2010 PMID: 23569595 PMCID: PMC3615772 DOI: 10.5210/ojphi.v2i3.3012
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Online J Public Health Inform ISSN: 1947-2579
Factor scores for ‘motivation’
| I registered to gain more knowledge | .922 |
| I registered myself for personal development | .922 |
| I registered myself for professional development | .887 |
| I registered to do something useful/constructive | .810 |
| It was required for other educational programs | .839 |
| It was recommended by someone outside my workplace | .703 |
| It provided continuing education credit | .620 |
| It was required/highly recommended for my job | .588 |
Factor scores for Online Experience
| Scores | |
|
| |
| Valuable/Not Valuable | .938 |
| Practical/Impractical | .918 |
| Relevant/Irrelevant | .915 |
| Informative/Not Informative | .905 |
| Worthwhile/Worthless | .904 |
| Productive/Not Productive | .903 |
| Useful/Not Useful | .893 |
|
| |
|
| |
| Stimulating/Boring | .914 |
| Exciting/Not exciting | .892 |
| Captivating/Not captivating | .872 |
| Fun/Not fun | .856 |
| Satisfying/Unsatisfying | .846 |
| Enjoyable/Not enjoyable | .831 |
| Entertaining/Not entertaining | .809 |
| Deeply engrossing/Not deeply engrossing | .803 |
| Pleasant/Unpleasant | .802 |
|
| |
|
| |
| Inviting/Uninviting | .851 |
| Friendly/Unfriendly | .840 |
| Polite/Impolite | .808 |
| Personal/Impersonal | .799 |
| Social/Unsocial | .748 |
|
| |
|
| |
| Simple/Complicated | .866 |
| Easy/Difficult | .858 |
| Confusing/Not Confusing | .827 |
| Not Tiring/Tiring | .827 |
| Consistent/Inconsistent | .826 |
| Stressful/Not Stressful | .807 |
Means and Standard Deviation of Study Variables
| Variables | Mean | S.D |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Pragmatic experience | 6.1 | 1.12 |
| 2. Hedonic experience | 5.0 | 1.26 |
| 3. Sociability experience | 4.9 | 1.22 |
| 4. Usability experience | 5.6 | 1.15 |
| 5. Intrinsic motivation | 5.4 | 1.96 |
| 6. Extrinsic motivation | 3.8 | 1.52 |
T test results for online experience & course completion
| Experience | Means | N | Std. deviation | DoF | T value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pragmatic | Yes 6.2 | 275 | .96 | 79.9 | 3.89 |
| Hedonic | Yes 5.1 | 274 | 1.15 | 84.9 | 3.67 |
| Sociability | Yes 5.1 | 275 | 1.07 | 81.6 | 3.68 |
| Usability | Yes 5.8 | 275 | 1.04 | 87.3 | 4.92 |
DoF – Degrees of freedom
Yes – Completed all the courses they enrolled
No – Did not complete all the courses they enrolled
p<.001;
p<.01;
p<.05
T test results for Motivation and course completion
| Motivation | Means | N | Std. deviation | DoF | T value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intrinsic | Yes 5.2 | 238 | 2.01 | 106.7 | −3.2 |
| Extrinsic | Yes 3.8 | 213 | 1.45 | 66.7 | −.259 |
DoF – Degrees of freedom
Yes – Completed all the courses they enrolled
No – Did not complete all the courses they enrolled
p<.001;
p<.01;
p<.05
Key strategies for improving course completion rates and overall program success
- make clear what the content of the course is - make it clear upfront who would benefit from the course and who should be taking it. - collect feedback from students at the end of each course on how useful and valuable the course was. |
- will not unnecessarily register for a course that they do not need. |
- will be able to target courses better at the right individuals - will be able to improve the content of the course | |
- Add more interactive elements in the courses - Include video clips made with ‘Second Life’. E.g. Play2train - Include pictures and graphics (pictures speak a thousand words) |
- will capture the attention of students - will improve learning and retention of the material. - will see courses as more fun than as a chore. - will keep student engrossed (time flies when you are deeply engrossed). - will keep them from getting distracted. |
- will improve the success of the overall program. - will improve student ratings - will be able to attract more students (such online programs don’t have any boundaries, so the potential is immense). - will be able to retain students and get them to come back for more courses. | |
- Provide an online community/forum for students to interact - Allow students as well as CPHP staff to interact in the community - Offer some courses in ‘blended format’ – i.e. part online and part in-class. |
- will improve - will improve their social experience - will improve learning and retention (collective learning seems to improve information processing) - will feel part of the CPHP community - will not feel that they are on their own - Blended format offers the convenience of online courses but will provide some f2f time that will enhance sociability experience. However, this will be limited to local students. |
- will improve CPHP’s relationship with students (strong ties). - will be able to attract more students through ‘word-of-mouth’ marketing (which is a potential outcome of such online communities). - will be able to understand student needs by keeping abreast of the ongoing discussions in the community (instant feedback loop). - online communities have been found to improve motivation as well (Huett et al, 2007) - Blended format will allow CPHPs to improve the variety of courses offered. - It will allow CPHPs to get to know their students better. - Will improve student retention in the local region. | |
- Update the websites regularly (at least every 2 years or so if not more frequently) using the latest technologies - Use simple designs (Nielson, 2000) - Remove unnecessary content and avoid clutter. |
- improved usability would make it easier for students to access the course materials and reduce the learning curve related to the course technologies -Convenience would be the biggest benefit for students. - Beneficial for public health workers who are always travelling. - Very beneficial for people who use public transportation and have lot of time while travelling as well as during wait times. |
- improved usability can improve student retention and continued enrollment. - Benefits for CPHP include improving versatility of courses. - Offering courses using more than one platform will improve the reach and enrollment levels - Will improve completion rates and continued enrollment. |