skip to main content

AGE AND GENDER DIFFERENCES IN EVALUATING THE PEDAGOGICAL USABILITY OF E-LEARNING MATERIALS

Vol.5, Issue 2, 2019, pp.169-186 Full text


DOI: https://doi.org/10.33919/esnbu.19.2.0
WoS:

Authors:
Liubomir Djalev https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8016-8051
Affiliation: New Bulgarian University, Bulgaria

Stanislav Bogdanov https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7144-1044
Affiliation: New Bulgarian University, Bulgaria

Contributor roles
Conceptualization: S.B. (lead);
Investigation: L.D., S.B. (equal);
Methodology: L.D.(lead);
Data curation: S.B. (lead);
Formal Analysis: L.D. (lead); S.B. (supporting)
Writing original draft: L.D., S.B. (equal);
Writing – review and editing: L.D., S.B. (equal);

Abstract
The purpose of the study is to examine the pedagogical usability of interactive e-learning materials for foreign language practice. It is based upon two studies of the expected between-group and within-group differences among participants in the educational process. The sample consists of two groups – lecturers and students, a total of 100 participants, each evaluating four materials specifically prepared for this study. Two consecutive repeated measures ANOVA were conducted in which the gender/age, the position of the participants in the educational process, and usability dimensions were the independent variables. Results indicated that all independent variables and their interactions have a significant effects on the evaluations of the pedagogical usability. Women tend to assign higher values than men. Аge groups generally differ in their evaluations, although there is a tendency to give similar ratings for the individual dimensions of pedagogical usability. The 31-40 years age group evaluates the materials higher while the lowest evaluations are given by the groups of 21-30 and 50+ year old participants. Students tend to rate the pedagogical usability systemically higher than the lecturers. Usability dimensions also have a significant effect on evaluations. The most prominent feature of the materials, by a great margin, is their Applicability. The findings corroborate previous research which show age and gender differences in web usability do exist. We conclude that these differences exist as much in pedagogical usability as in technical usability. Further investigations are suggested to explore more deeply the differences in the perceived pedagogical value of e-learning materials as this has implications for instructional designers, teachers and learners alike.

Keywords: pedagogical usability, e-learning, foreign language teaching, instructional design, age differences, gender differences

Article history:
Received: 15 November 2019;
Reviewed: 4 December 2019;
Revised: 6 December 2019;
Accepted: 7 December 2019;
Published: 30 December 2019

Citation (APA):
Djalev, L., & Bogdanov, S. (2019). Age and Gender Differences in Evaluating the Pedagogical Usability of E-Learning Materials. English Studies at NBU, 5(2), 169-189. https://doi.org/10.33919/esnbu.19.2.0

Copyright © 2019 Liubomir Djalev and Stanislav Bogdanov

This open access article is published and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0), which permits non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. If you want to use the work commercially, you must first get the authors' permission.

Open Data
Badge earned for open practices
Data for this study are available under a CC-BY-NC 3.0 license at Mendeley Data.
Also in the References.

Bogdanov, S. (2019). Age and Gender Differences in Evaluating the Pedagogical Usability of E-Learning Materials (v1) ['Data set']. Mendeley Data. https://doi.org/10.17632/tzfdvz366g.2

References:

Astleitner, H., & Steinberg, R. (2005). Are there gender differences in web-based learning? An integrated model and related effect sizes. AACE Journal, 13(1), 47-63. http://www.learntechlib.org/p/18902

Bogdanov, S. (2013). Latent Structures of Teachers and Students in Evaluating the Pedagogical Usability of E-Learning Materials for Language Teaching. In: Innovacionnye Processy v Issledovatel'skoj i Obrazovatel'noj deâtelnosti ['Innovative Processes in Research and Educational Activity'] (pp. 3-6). Perm: Perm National Research Polytechnic University. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.4204866.v1

Bogdanov, S. (2013a). Group differences in the evaluation of pedagogical usability of elearning materials. In: Novye tehnologii v obrazovatelʹnom prostranstve rodnogo i inostrannogo âzyka ['New technologies in the educational space of native and foreign languages'] (pp. 8-16). Perm: Perm National Research Polytechnic University.

Bogdanov, S. (2019). Age and Gender Differences in Evaluating the Pedagogical Usability of E-Learning Materials (v1) ['Data set']. Mendeley Data. https://doi.org/10.17632/tzfdvz366g.2

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Erlbaum.

Council of Europe. (2001). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment (CEFR). Council of Europe. https://rm.coe.int/1680459f97

Cuadrado-García, M., Ruiz-Molina, M.-E., Montoro-Pons, J.D. (2010). Are there gender differences in e-learning use and assessment? Evidence from an interuniversity online project in Europe. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 367-371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.027

Cyr, D., & Bonanni, C. (2005). Gender and website design in e-business. International Journal of Electronic Business, 3(6), 565-582. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijeb.2005.008536

Djalev, L., & Bogdanov, S. (2013). Dve gledni tochki kam pedagogicheskata polzvaemost na elektronni didakticheski materiali ['Two Viewpoints on Pedagogical Usability in eLearning for Languages'].

Hadjerrouit, S. (2012). Investigating technical and pedagogical usability issues of collaborative learning with Wikis. Informatics in education, 11(1), 45–64.

Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1037/10628-000

International Organization for Standardization. (1998). Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs) — Part 11: Guidance on usability (ISO 9241-11:1998). https://www.sis.se/api/document/preview/611299

International Organization for Standardization. (2018). Ergonomics of human-system interaction — Part 11: Usability: Definitions and concepts (ISO 9241-11:2018). https://www.iso.org/standard/63500.html

Jokela, T., Iivari, N. & Tornberg, V. (2004). Using the ISO 9241-11 definition of usability in requirements determination: case studies.

Kukulska-Hulme, A.M. & Shield, L.E. (2004). The keys to Usability in e-Learning Websites. Proceedings of Networked learning conference 2004. Lancaster University, UK, 5-7.04.2004.

Melis, E., Weber, M. & Andrès, E. (2003). Lessons for (Pedagogic) Usability of eLearning Systems. In A. Rossett (Ed.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2003 (pp. 281-284). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. http://www.editlib.org/p/14936

Miles, J., Shevlin, M. (2001). Applying regression and correlation: A guide for students and researchers. Sage.

Nielsen, J. (1990). Evaluating Hypertext Usability. In: Jonassen, D. H. & Mandl, H. (Eds.), Designing Hypermedia for Learning, Springer-Verlag, 147-168. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-75945-1_9

Nielsen, J. (2000). Designing Web Usability: The Practice of Simplicity. Indianapolis: New Riders.

Nokelainen, P. (2004). Conceptual Definition of the Technical and Pedagogical Usability Criteria for Digital Learning Material. In L. Cantoni & C. McLoughlin (Eds.), Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2004--World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications (pp. 4249-4254). Lugano, Switzerland: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/11688

Nokelainen, P. (2005). The technical and pedagogical usability criteria for digital learning material. In P. Kommers & G. Richards (Eds.), Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2005--World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications (pp. 1011-1016). Montreal, Canada: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/20212

Nokelainen, P. (2006). An empirical assessment of pedagogical usability criteria for digital learning material with elementary school students. Educational Technology & Society, 9(2), 178-197.

Okazaki, S., & Renda dos Santos, L. M. (2012). Understanding E-learning Adoption in Brazil: Major Determinants and Gender Effects. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 13(4), 91-106. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v13i4.1266

Ong, C. S. & Lai, J. Y. (2006). Gender Differences in Perception and Relationships among Dominants of E-Learning Acceptance. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(5), 816-826. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2004.03.006

Quesenbery, W. (2001). What does usability mean: Looking beyond ‘ease of use’. Proceedings of the 48th Annual Conference, Society for Technical Communication. http://www.wqusability.com/articles/more-than-ease-ofuse.html

Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257-285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4

Review


1. Reviewer's name: Undisclosed
Review Content: Undisclosed
Review Verified on Publons

2. Reviewer's name: Undisclosed
Review Content: Undisclosed
Review Verified on Publons


Handling Editor: Boris Naimushin
Verified Editor Record on Publons: https://publons.com/p/27865059

Article Metrics