Location of Repository

Virtual learning environments – help or hindrance for the ‘disengaged’ student?

By Alice Maltby and Sarah Mackie

Abstract

The introduction of virtual learning environments (VLEs) has been regarded by some as a panacea for many of the problems in today’s mass numbers modular higher education system. This paper demonstrates that VLEs can help or hinder student engagement and performance, and that they should be adapted to the different types of learner. A project is described that aimed to investigate whether the introduction of a VLE can assist ‘disengaged’ students, drawing on click count tracking data and student performance. The project took place in the context of two very large undergraduate modules (850 and 567 students) in a Business School of a new university in the UK. In an adaptation of a model of learner engagement in Web-enhanced environments, four distinct learner types have emerged: model, traditionalist, geek and disengaged. There was evidence that use of the VLE exacerbated, rather than moderated, the differences between these learner types

Topics: T Technology (General), LB Theory and practice of education, LC Special aspects of education
Publisher: Taylor and Francis Ltd
Year: 2009
DOI identifier: 10.1080/09687760802657577
OAI identifier: oai:generic.eprints.org:853/core5

Suggested articles

Preview

Citations

  1. (1993). Academic involvement at university. doi
  2. (2003). An outward design support system to increase self-efficacy in online teaching and learning. doi
  3. (1990). Approaches to learning, evaluations of teaching, and preferences for contrasting academic environments. doi
  4. (2007). Comparing dropouts and persistence in e-learning courses. doi
  5. (1979). Discipline and punish: The birth of a prison. doi
  6. (2000). Effective learning and the virtual learning environment. Keynote presented at the 2000 European Universities Information Systems Congress, April 13–14, in
  7. (1999). Engagement theory: A framework for technologybased teaching and learning.
  8. (1999). Enhancing self-directed learning educational technology: When students resist the change. doi
  9. (2006). General and domain-specific influence of prior knowledge on setting of goals and content use in museum websites. doi
  10. (2007). House of Commons Committee of Public Accounts.
  11. (1999). How are doing? Tracking the quality of the undergraduate experience from the 1960s to the present.
  12. (2003). Insomniacs or Hollywood extras? The reality of the Blackboard learning environment.
  13. (2001). Jumping the hurdles – undergraduate student withdrawal behaviour. doi
  14. (2001). Metaphors and models in Internet based teaching. doi
  15. (2007). MLE information pack: Briefing paper 1. Joint Information Systems Committee.
  16. (2006). Next generation learning: Knowledge café. Association for Learning Technology. http://www.alt.ac.uk/docs/gilly_salmon_20060907.ppt Selwyn,
  17. (1962). Panopticon; or the inspection-house.
  18. (2001). Profiling students’ adaptation styles in Web-based learning. doi
  19. (2002). Review of e-learning for education and training. Paper presented at the Networked Learning Conference,
  20. (2002). Screen or monitor? Surveillance and disciplinary power in online learning environments.
  21. (2002). Screen or monitor? Surveillance and disciplinary power in online learning environments. In Improving student learning using learning technology,
  22. (2001). Signs of disengagement: The changing undergraduate experience in Australian universities.
  23. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs,
  24. (2001). Styles of learning and approaches to studying in higher education. doi
  25. (2002). Supporting student group work using the Blackboard virtual learning environment.
  26. (1990). Teaching at a distance: Techniques for tutors. In Teaching at a distance: Techniques for tutors, doi
  27. (1999). Teaching for quality learning and university. doi
  28. (2006). The impact of institutional surveillance technologies on student behaviour.
  29. (1999). The impact of IT on marketing: An evaluation. doi
  30. (2001). The role of technology in servicing students with changing priorities.
  31. (2005). Tracking student behaviour, persistence, and achievement in online courses. doi
  32. (1999). Undergraduate marketing education in the 21st Century: Views from three institutions.
  33. (1993). Victims tired of researchers getting away with murder.
  34. (2006). Virtual teamwork in very large undergraduate classes. doi
  35. (2002). Warp speed or snail’s pace? Pathways into the future of E-learning land.
  36. (2003). We think we can, we think we can, we think we can: The impact of thinking patterns and self-efficacy on work team sustainability. Team Performance Management: doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.