5.4
This qualitative analysis explored the phenomenon of UX and the factors that influence the UX when using LMS in an ODL institution. As stated in section 4.3.1 in Chapter 4 (Research design and methodology), a convergent parallel design has been applied in this research. This design proposes that the quantitative and qualitative strands should be implemented during the same phase of the
E. de Kock - MSc Dissertation
113 research process. The quantitative and qualitative data were concurrently collected, but the strands were kept separate and independent during the analysis. The collection of the qualitative data was conducted by means of the same instrument, that is the same questionnaire which has been used for the quantitative data collection, but the qualitative data were extracted from the responses from the open ended question, while the quantitative data were extracted from the responses to the questions with 5 point Likert scale ratings. The results of this were only mixed during the overall interpretation at the end of the study (Table 5.18). The convergent parallel design was used in this research in order to augment the data from the same source of collection, during the same phase.
Seventy two participants gave feedback on the open ended question. Feedback was anonymous, so it seems if the participants were not afraid to expose their opinions. The narrative feedback was combined into one document, which was then used as primary document in Atlas.ti ® for coding purposes.
As stated in section 4.3.2 the provisional coding method has been applied (Saldaña, 2009) where a preliminary list of codes was used as the main categories. These categories mainly constituted the components as set out in the analytic framework, (see section 5.2) namely the user, systems and context.
The information obtained in deliberating the open ended question is discussed in sections 5.4.1 to 5.4.3. For the purposes of context and readability, direct quotations from the responses, as well as a summary of the responses are given in this section.
User
5.4.1
In order to understand the user, the user’s needs have to be identified in the real context where the system is used (Roto, 2006). Research has indicated that feelings of autonomy, competence and high self-esteem seemed to correlate with the most satisfying experiences (see section 2.3.1.1).
Figure 5.5 is a presentation of the User category (codes U1, U2 and U3) by way of the network view from Atlas.ti (Version 6.1) Family code manager. The meaning of the description, for example {1-0}: The first number shows the frequency (how often the code has been applied). The second number the density (how many other codes this code is linked to).
E. de Kock - MSc Dissertation
114 Figure 5.5: Codes applicable to the User category
As can be observed from the network view, according to the feedback from the participants, most comments were regarding user needs and user skills. The researcher’s interpretation of the participants’ responses is as follows:
Several participants implied that they need to feel competent (code U1) when they use the LMS and hence suggested as follows that they need more help in order to improve the utilization of the LMS:
o “I don't know where to find some of the tools mentioned in the first section of the questionnaire … myUnisa training is often theory, presented with a power point presentation instead of hands-on training. It will be helpful if each Department (or College) can have a designated person to assist staff with problems in their offices.” o “I would prefer that one person be readily available or even housed in the department to enable me to trouble shoot -at the moment there is no support for me at that level and it’s frustrating -yet I love the blended mode.”
o “I would make much more effective use of myUnisa if I knew how to use some of the more technological tools. I am not always sure how to use some of the advanced features despite attending various training courses”.
E. de Kock - MSc Dissertation
115 These opinions indicated that the academic lecturers need a kind of support on demand, just in time, rather than training in prescheduled groups. It also disclosed that there is still a need for improvement of knowledge and skills so that they can be more competent to use the LMS.
Some participants pointed out that the need of autonomy (code U1) was necessary to use the LMS creatively and effectively:
o “I do not like the fact, that the administrators control linking aspects. It is never done proactively - every year I have begged an administrator to link me for the following year. Why cannot we do it ourselves and the administrator could check and authorize it.”
o “Thus, I look forward to the day that we, as academics, are given the autonomy to run our own module sites”.
o “… the restrictions placed on the use of myUnisa (for example contacting ICT to remove the Discussion Forums tool and replace it with the Discussions tool) is hampering my autonomy to customise and create an exciting virtual learning environment for students”.
o “The option for an external assessment exists on myUnisa, BUT I CAN'T CHOOSE IT!! Please, allow the academics flexibility to use all of myUnisa's functions and options”. o “I feel that I would benefit from being given more ‘rights’ to use myUnisa to its full
potential. I can understand that ICT may have been reluctant to open up access to the full range of functions in the past and this approach may be very daunting to novices, but Unisa has had myUnisa for several years and academics should, at the very least, be familiar with its functions and options by now”.
These comments indicated that the confident user may need more autonomy in order to use the LMS effectively.
The skills of the academic lecturer (code U2) could influence the UX when using the LMS as supported by the following examples:
o “More lessons on how to use myUnisa effectively is required, especially to us the less computer literate.”
o “On the whole myUnisa is a fantastic virtual learning environment. I am now at the stage where I am proficient in the development of study material for online delivery and the use of myUnisa.”
o “I would make much more effective use of myUnisa if I knew how to use some of the more technological tools. I am not always sure how to use some of the advanced
E. de Kock - MSc Dissertation
116 features despite attending various training courses. I find myUnisa an excellent tool for learning but I wish I could do more to integrate it with assessment.”
The academic’s dispositions – such as perspectives and attitudes (code U3) could influence the UX as noticeable in the following examples:
o “My negative perception of the myUnisa system undoubtedly comes from the highly unprofessional way in which it was developed over the last few years -- using both students and instructors to effectively debug what was originally very bad software - - as well as a severe lack of time for academic activities at Unisa, due to many unnecessary administrative duties that I have to perform. Granted, myUnisa has improved somewhat over the years, but I will always regret the way in which it was repeatedly, prematurely implemented. It was a great insult to both the Unisa student body and teaching staff -- one of many!”
o “myUnisa is ugly and inflexible. It exudes a bureaucratic ethos. I do things on it because I have to, not because it inspires me in any way.”
According to these responses all three the proposed factors regarding the user, play a role in the UX of the academic lecturer when using the LMS.