| Literature DB >> 35464107 |
Abstract
The COVID-19 epidemic has affected most countries across the globe since it was declared in December 2019 and forced most educational institutions to shift from face-to-face learning style to E-learning or distance education. This study aims to analyze and investigate the experiences and perceptions of using Blackboard as a distance learning (online) platform. The study was conducted in one of the top universities in Saudi Arabia and the Middle east. A survey-based study is constructed and distributed among undergraduate students including males, and females in an engineering college. Two hundred thirty-five students participated in this study; males represent (74%) and (26%) for females. Ten phases containing 38 items of advantages and disadvantages are considered in the survey study to understand the advantages, constraints, and difficulties of the Blackboard. Two nonparametric statistical tools of Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis are used for analyzing the survey. The study shows significant results regarding difference perceptions on Blackboard between gender and engineering disciplines. The results of this study can help the educational decision-makers in the ministry of education and universities improve the quality and increase the sustainability of the EL resources. Moreover, the findings reveal that males, females, and engineering disciplines have different perceptions towards the use of virtual learning.Entities:
Keywords: Blackboard; COVID-19 and E-learning; E-learning in engineering education; E-learning technology
Year: 2022 PMID: 35464107 PMCID: PMC9016124 DOI: 10.1007/s10639-022-11054-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Educ Inf Technol (Dordr) ISSN: 1360-2357
Fig. 1Process structure of research design and proposed hypothesis
Previous studies for each hypothesis (advantages and disadvantages) in E-learning
| Hypothesis number | Factors affecting E-learning | Literature |
|---|---|---|
| H1 | Class capacity | Akir et al. ( |
| H2 | Registration flexibility | Albert and Johnson ( |
| H3 | Various E-learning tools | Bhatia ( |
| H4 | Assessment credibility | Jones et al. ( |
| H5 | Communication in group activities | Afshari et al. ( |
| H6 | Different learning styles in E-learning | Kanninen ( |
| H7 | Communication with instructors | Maatuk et al. ( |
| H8 | Technical issues | Alavudeen et al. ( |
| H9 | Motivation in E-learning | Harandi ( |
| H10 | Virtual lab | El Zawaidy and Zaki ( |
Fig. 2Conceptual model – hypotheses of E-learning advantages
Fig. 3Conceptual model – hypotheses of E-learning disadvantages
Results of Mann–Whitney test on testing hypothesis across student gender
| Hypothesis number | Hypothesis statement | U test Statistic | P—Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| H1 | The perceptions of flexibility in scheduling are homogenous across categories of gender | 5698 | 0.285 |
| H2 | The perceptions of class capacity in Blackboard affect in understanding using EL are homogenous across categories of gender | 4240 | 0.019* |
| H3 | The perceptions of flexibility in using various EL tools are the same across categories of Gender | 4743 | 0.235 |
| H4 | The perceptions of results credibility are homogenous across categories of gender | 6352.5 | 0.011* |
| H5 | The perceptions of effectiveness of group interacting are homogenous across categories of gender | 7567.5 | 0.000* |
| H6 | The perceptions of feasibility in providing different teaching styles are homogenous across categories of gender | 7466.5 | 0.000* |
| H7 | The perceptions of ability in communicating with instructor are homogenous across categories of gender | 5833.5 | 0.000* |
| H8 | The perceptions of facing technical issue are homogenous across categories of gender | 5662 | 0.332 |
| H9 | The perceptions of lack of motivation and participations are homogenous across categories of gender | 6148.5 | 0.035* |
| H10 | The perceptions of conducting lab experiments on Blackboard affect in lack of understanding are homogenous across categories of gender | 5484.5 | 0.588 |
* Denotes significant difference p < 0.05
Results of Kruskal–Wallis test on testing hypothesis across engineering disciplines
| Hypothesis number | Hypothesis statement | H (Chi-Square) test Statistic | P—Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| H1 | The perceptions of flexibility in scheduling are homogenous among different engineering disciplines | 12.453 | 0.053 |
| H2 | The perceptions of class capacity in Blackboard affect in understanding using EL are homogenous among different engineering disciplines | 18.472 | 0.005* |
| H3 | The perceptions of flexibility in using various EL tools are homogenous among different engineering disciplines | 10.684 | 0.099 |
| H4 | The perceptions of results credibility are homogenous among different engineering disciplines | 15.980 | 0.014* |
| H5 | The perceptions of effectiveness of group interacting are homogenous among different engineering disciplines | 22.122 | 0.001* |
| H6 | The perceptions of feasibility in providing different teaching styles are homogenous among different engineering disciplines | 16.567 | 0.011* |
| H7 | The perceptions of ability in communicating with instructor are homogenous among different engineering disciplines | 9.487 | 0.148 |
| H8 | The perceptions of facing technical issue are homogenous among different engineering disciplines | 13.981 | 0.03* |
| H9 | The perceptions of lack of motivation and participations are homogenous among different engineering disciplines | 9.009 | 0.173 |
| H10 | The perceptions of conducting lab experiments on Blackboard affect in lack of understanding are homogenous among different engineering disciplines | 2.062 | 0.914 |
* Denotes significant difference p < 0.05
Descriptive statistics on significant hypothesis using Kruskal–Wallis test
| Hypothesis | Discipline | Mean | Median | SD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| H2 | IE | 4.13 | 4 | 0.954 |
| CVE | 4.67 | 5 | 0.577 | |
| AE | 4.33 | 4.5 | 0.816 | |
| CE | 2.9 | 3 | 1.101 | |
| ME | 4.5 | 4.5 | 0.548 | |
| EE | 3.91 | 4 | 0.931 | |
| NE | 3 | 3 | 1.414 | |
| H4 | IE | 3.71 | 4 | 1.035 |
| CVE | 4.67 | 5 | 0.577 | |
| AE | 2.67 | 3 | 1.506 | |
| CE | 3.6 | 4 | 0.843 | |
| ME | 3.17 | 3 | 0.983 | |
| EE | 3.95 | 4 | 1.067 | |
| NE | 2.5 | 2.5 | 0.707 | |
| H5 | IE | 3.64 | 4 | 0.894 |
| CVE | 2.67 | 3 | 1.528 | |
| AE | 2 | 2 | 0.894 | |
| CE | 3.6 | 4 | 0.843 | |
| ME | 3.67 | 4 | 0.516 | |
| EE | 3.89 | 4 | 1.033 | |
| NE | 2.5 | 2.5 | 0.707 | |
| H6 | IE | 3.62 | 4 | 1.036 |
| CVE | 2 | 2 | 1 | |
| AE | 4.17 | 4 | 0.753 | |
| CE | 3.5 | 4 | 0.707 | |
| ME | 3.5 | 3.5 | 0.548 | |
| EE | 3.97 | 4 | 1.075 | |
| NE | 4.5 | 4.5 | 0.707 | |
| H8 | IE | 4.2 | 4 | 0.909 |
| CVE | 3.33 | 3 | 1.528 | |
| AE | 3.5 | 4 | 1.761 | |
| CE | 3.7 | 4 | 0.949 | |
| ME | 2.83 | 3 | 1.169 | |
| EE | 4.28 | 5 | 0.91 | |
| NE | 4 | 4 | 1.414 |