Critical success factors in e-learning – a case study
List of Authors
  • Asliaty Atim , Ercan Kiziltas , Ilidina Mahadi , Nurul Emilia Diyana Abdul Malik

Keyword
  • E-learning, Critical Success Factors, students’ learning preference, students’ participation, students’ understanding, instructor’s technological skills, pedagogical strategies, subject competency

Abstract
  • With the development of the Internet and Information, Communication Technology (ICT), many educational institutions offer a blended education in which students learn via electronic and online media as well as traditional face-to-face teaching. However, the Covid-19 pandemic has made online education or e-learning compulsory in almost all educational institutions globally. This research has been designed to indicate the critical success factors (CSF) for e-learning. This case study focused on an in-depth probing from students’ perspectives on the factors that affect the success of the course in a semester. It involved an IT course for undergraduates involving a 14-week learning about the theory and practical aspects of basic ICT skills. The researchers collected the data using a mixed-method approach via self-constructed questionnaire and semi-structured interview evaluating the students’ perspectives on their learning preference, participation and understanding in the course and the instructor’s technological skills, pedagogical strategies and subject competency in conducting the course. In the findings, the students have shown high agreement in persisting to learn despite Internet interruption or problems. The students have also agreed that they interacted with other students after class time and were able to use their prior knowledge and applied the knowledge learnt from the course to other courses. Other findings included good pedagogical and technological skills demonstrated by the lecturer. The study has contributed to the theoretical aspect of Instructional Design for online learning which anticipates CSF.

Reference
  • 1. Akhmetova, D. Z. (2014). Inclusive Approach to the Psycho-Pedagogical Assistant of Distance Learning. International Education Studies, 7(11), 136-146. doi.org/10.5539/ies.v7n11p136
    2. Bain, J. D., Ballantyne, R., Packer, J. et al (2017). The importance of feedback in developing and maintaining preservice teacher reflection through journal writing.
    3. Baker, R. S. J., D’Mello, S. K., Rodrigo, M. T., & Graesser, A. C. (2010). Better to be frustrated than bored: The incidence, persistence, and impact of learners’ cognitive–affective states during interactions with three different computer-based learning environments. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 68(4), 223–241. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2009.12.003
    4. Banna, J., Lin, M.-F. G., Stewart, M., & Fialkowski, M. K. (2015). Interaction matters: Strategies to promote engaged learning in an online introductory nutrition course. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 11(2), 249–261.
    5. Barkley, E. F., & Major, C. H. (2020). Student engagement techniques: A handbook for college faculty. John Wiley & Sons.
    6. Boud, D. & Molloy, E. (2013). Feedback in higher and professional education: Understanding it and doing it well. New York, NY: Routledge.
    7. Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). E-learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning. John Wiley & Sons.
    8. Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297 – 334.
    9. Erol, K. & Danyal, T. (2020). Analysis of distance education activities conducted during COVID-19 pandemic. Educational Research and Review, 15(9), 536-543.
    10. Garrison, D. R. (2009). Communities of inquiry in online learning. In Encyclopedia of distance learning, Second edition (pp. 352-355). IGI Global.
    11. Graham, C. R., Woodfield, W., & Harrison, J. B. (2013). A framework for institutional adoption and implementation of blended learning in higher education. The internet and higher education, 18, 4-14. DOI: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.09.003 Project: Blended Learning Research.
    12. Helmi, A. (2012). An analysis on impetus of online education Curtin University of Technology, Western Australia. The Internet and Higher Education, 4, 243-253.
    13. Ivanova, M. (2020). E-Learning informatics: From automation of educational activities to intelligent solutions building. Informatics in education - An International Journal, 19(2), 257-282.
    14. Karim, A., Shahed, F. H., Rahman, M. M., & Mohamed, A. R. (2019). Revisiting innovations in ELT through online classes: An evaluation of the approaches of 10-minute school. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 20(1), 248-266.
    15. Laily, N., Kurniawati, A. & Puspita, I. A. (2013). Critical success factor for e-learning implementation in Institut Teknologi Telkom Bandung using Structural Equation Modeling. In 2013 International Conference of Information and Communication Technology (ICoICT), (pp. 427–432).IEEE.
    16. Li, Liang-Yi. (2018). Effect of Prior Knowledge on Attitudes, Behavior, and Learning Performance in Video Lecture Viewing. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction. 35. 1-12. 10.1080/10447318.2018.1543086.
    17. Luscinski, A. (2017). Best practices in adult online learning.
    18. Martin, F., & Bolliger, D. U. (2018). Engagement matters: Student perceptions on the importance of engagement strategies in the online learning environment. Online Learning, 22(1), 205-222.
    19. Meskill, C. & Anthony, N. (2015). Teaching languages online (Vol. 12). Multilingual Matters.
    20. Mishra, P. (2019). Considering Contextual Knowledge: The TPACK Diagram Gets an Upgrade. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 35(2), 76-78.
    21. Moore, M. G. (1989) Editorial: Three types of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1-7, doi:10.1080/08923648909526659
    22. Muhisn, Z., Ahmad, M., Omar, M., & Muhisn, S. (2019). The Impact of Socialization on Collaborative Learning Method in E-Learning Management System (eLMS). International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 14(20), 137-148.
    23. Mynbayeva, A., Zukhra, S., & Akshalova, B. (2017). Pedagogy of the Twenty-First Century: Innovative Teaching Methods. Contribution of Research in Education, Olga Bernad Cavero and Núria Llevot-Calvet, IntechOpen, DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.72341.
    24. Ngubane-Mokiwa, S. A. (2017). Implications of the University of South Africa's (UNISA) shift to open distance e-learning on teacher education. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 42(9), 7.
    25. Omar, R., Ahmad, A. & Hassan, R. (2018). Importance of Teacher’s Competency through Student’s Perception in Relationship between Parental Involvement and Motivation with Student’s Achievement. Sains Humanika, 10(3-3).
    26. Ong Fong Yew & Manimekalai Jambulingam (2015). Critical Success Factors of E-learning Implementation at Educational Institutions, Journal of Interdisciplinary Research in Education (JIRE), 5(1), 17–24.
    27. Ostrom, T. M. (1969). The relationship between the affective, behavioral, and cognitive components of attitude. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 5(1), 12-30.
    28. Papp, R. (2000). Critical success factors for distance learning. AMCIS Proceedings, 104.
    29. Premchaiswadi, W., Porouhan, P. & Premchaiswadi, N. (2012). An empirical study of the key success factors to adopt e-learning in Thailand. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Society (i-Society 2012), London, UK, 333–338.
    30. Qureshi, I. A., Ilyas, K., Yasmin, R., & Whitty, M. (2012). Challenges of implementing e-learning in a Pakistani university. Knowledge Management & E-Learning: An International Journal, 4(3), 310-324.
    31. Raes, A., Vanneste, P., Pieters, M., Windey, I., Van Den Noortgate, W., & Depaepe, F. (2020). Learning and instruction in the hybrid virtual classroom: An investigation of students’ engagement and the effect of quizzes. Computers & Education, 143, 103682.
    32. Reeve, J. & Tseng, C. M. (2011). Agency as a fourth aspect of students’ engagement during learning activities. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(4), 257-267.
    33. Revere, L., & Kovach, J. V. (2011). Online technologies for engaged learning: A meaningful synthesis for educators. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 12(2), 113–124.
    34. Rosenberg, M. J. (2001). E-learning: Strategies for delivering knowledge in the digital age, 3. New York: McGraw-Hill.
    35. Ruiz, J. G., Mintzer, M. J. & Leipzig, R. M. (2006). The impact of e-learning in medical education. Academic Medicine, 81(3), 207- 212.
    36. Sedaghat, M., Abedin, A., Hejazi, E., & Hassanabadi, H. (2011). Motivation, cognitive engagement, and academic achievement. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 2406-2410.
    37. Xie, K., Heddy, B. C., & Greene, B. A. (2019). Affordances of using mobile technology to support experience-sampling methods in examining college students’ engagement. Computers & Education, 128, 183–198. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2018.09.020
    38. Yew, O. F. & Jambulingam, M. (2015). Critical success factors of e-learning implementation at educational institutions. J. Interdiscip. Res. Educ, 5, 17–24.
    39. Young, J. J., Kyu, Y. L., Sang, Y. H., Yoo, K. H., & Aran, K. (2013). The Effects of Self- Determination on Learning Outcomes in a Blended Learning. International Association of the Development of the Information Society.
    40. Youssef, C. M. & Luthans, F. (2007). Emerging positive organizational behavior. Journal of Management, 33(3), 321-349.