Research Paper: Literature Review

Introduction of the literature review: This literature review is for my research in GE2023 course. My research topic is university student' VLE possession and its cost. The LR aims to exam the value of the topic trough the past studies.

Introduction of Problem

Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) is applied in education which provides with advanced hardware and software via e-learning technology (Stiles, 2000). Students, faculty or institutions who want to enroll in VLE have a low affordability of VLE because of high cost of VLE devices and service, so that they get low level of quantitative and qualitative access to VLE, which means if the affordability of VLE users is lifted, they probably get a high quantity and quality of access to VLE. The purpose of the research is to identify and analyze the relationship between the affordability of VLE users and access level to VLE. Two research questions are conducted: 1. what are the factors that caused the low affordability of VLE users? 2. What are the benefits to increase high level quantitative and qualitative access to VLE? Choice theory, decision-making theory and motivation theory are applied in theatrical framework.

Introduction of Theoretical Framework

Choice Theory

A choice theory states that human make a choice in order to satisfy their basic and specific needs (Glasser, 1999; Sullo, 2007). In this research, choice theory is adopted to identify the basic needs in VLE that are supposed to satisfy students, faculty or institution who want to enroll in VLE. The choice of the research population contains both individual (students and faculty) and group (education institutions) choice. On the one hand, individual choice is influenced by group choice. In the Jones and Healing (2010)’s research, university students chose to use VLE when their universities were able to provide “high level of computer ownership and access to computers and broadband networks” (Jones et al. 2010). In other words, if universities cannot afford VLE, students may not choose VLE in learning. Clearly, the affordability of institutions is the main factor which affects the choice of individuals in the institutions and institutions per se.

On the other hand, individual choice and group choice are distinguished because of their specific needs. Jones and Healing (2010) also asserted that young generation exposed to new technology probably have different attitude and orientation towards VLE and affect their choice. However, Jones and Healing slight the individual affordability in VLE choice, which will be focused on this research.

In a conclusion, choice theory emphasizes the importance of identifying the factors that caused the low affordability of VLE users. It is related to the first question. Both internal factors, such as personal financial condition or basic needs, and external factors, such as time, place or transportation, can influence or determine the choice of VLE users. Further, every choice has specific purpose and people are motivated by satisfying their needs (Sullo, 2007; Glasser, 1998). If VLE can give positive outcomes, students, faculty or institutions possibly make a positive choice. Therefore, the choice theory demonstrates the significance of the research questions.

Decision-Making Theory

The decision-making theory states that "individuals have transitive preferences choosing from among alternatives in order to … maximize utility or expected utility"(Edwards, 1954). Decision-making theory is used in this research to analyze the factors that determine human decisions. In VLE, students, faculty or institutions decide the different levels of quantitative and qualitative access to VLE in accordance with their preferences and requirements. In this research, the researcher consider the cost is main factor that influence decision of VLE users. Two literatures show VLE conductors tried to change the large cost so that the decision of VLE users can be changed. For example, in study of Scholar Linsey, Katsifli and Gipps (2005), one of the VLE implements Blackboard was chosen as a sample because of its “intuitive interface” and reasonable cost. Their study showed both affordability of VLE users and advantages of VLE affected the decision of VLE users. Additionally, Moran and Myringer (1999) stated that flexible learning, which use mobile devices in VLE, is welcomed and regarded as a new approach in education because of the time, space and cost.

Therefore, decision-making theory is important for data analysis in this research. The researcher try to identify the factors leading to the low affordability of VLE users and the benefit of increase high level access to VLE. Decision-making theory is adopted to evaluate and the select relevant data and acquire a precise conclusion. Decision-making theory is concentrated on the data collecting while motivation theory is used in problem solutions.

Motivation Theory

The motivation theory states that people are motivated because of the relevant benefits of their needs (Dinibutun, 2012). In other words, good outcomes can increase positive actions. In this research, motivation theory is adopted to discuss the problem solutions. Ussiph and Ghana (2015) suggested that VLE has a possibility of effective low cost if the implement and management are proper. There is a chance that VLE users can be motivated to get high level access of VLE. (Ussiph & Ghana, 2015). In addition, Chowdhry, Seiler and Alwis (2014) concluded in their study that high level quantitative and qualitative access to VLE , which should provide with a frequent student participation, online discuss and additional learning materials, can improve student academic performance.

It is clear that motivation theory supports the problem solutions. The second research question is based on the motivation theory, which is to find benefits of increasing high quantitative and qualitative access to VLE. By using motivation theory, the researcher try to figure out the certain relationship between the VLE affordability, availability and relevant benefits and find the possibility to deal with the low affordability and low level access to VLE.

Overview of Problem Causes

The problem of the affordability and the access level to VLE has become an important issue in recent years. It is a “worldwide drive” to integrate technology with traditional education, which can address some traditional pedagogical problems, especially in higher education (Stiles, 2000). However, Scholar Follows (1999) states that although VLE shows its power in education, it is not worldwide practical due to expensive hardware and software. Additionally, according to Researcher Linsey, Katsifli and Gipps (2005), there are both direct and indirect cost of VLE implements, which requests hundred thousand of money per year to support high level quantitative and qualitative access to VLE. Therefore, it should have a clear way to address the low affordability of VLE users and increase the high level quantitative and qualitative access to VLE.

VLE is supported by computing activities and multiply online materials, demanding an expensive cost to VLE users. Scholar Linsey, Katsifli, and Gipps (2005) conducted a study to research the implements cost of VLE in 2005. The background of the study is that the necessity of restructuring infrastructure of VLE is approved while the cost of VLE is not analyzed in former studies. Cost model is created by calculating the direct and indirect cost. The direct cost contains hardware, software, integration, customization as a corporate system and wages for IT service stuff. The indirect cost is related to the overall improvement of VLE learning and teaching service. It is showed that the overall cost is a big number for the most of VLE users. If there are 2, 200 users, including all the students, faculty and stuff, register Bb as its membership, then the total cost for a 5-year access is $160,248 for average. Except the basic needs for hardware and software, Bb demands the cost of Bb license and relational database. If students and faculty look to high quality of database, it also demands of high level maintenance and improvement. It also showed there were 64.6% and 31.4% of students finding contents and external links are useful resources in Bb. Only 14.2% and 38.9% of the students used broad area and email function frequently. The overall Bb usage is 74.5% (Linsey, Katsifli & Gipps, 2005). The research data shows the relationship between expense of Bb and quality of Bb use. The higher level of access to VLE is needed, the higher cost it has. It is a big problem in VLE but it is overlooked by researchers.

Another study given by Scholar Haydrn (2013) investigated the perspectives of teachers or tutors who use Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in VLE. “Several experienced and accomplished tutors noted the commercial pressures on schools and universities to purchase particular hardware and software packages, and one referred to these commercial pressures as a slightly different but just as unhealthy equivalent of the military-industrial complex.” Many teachers and tutors have to pay for advanced teaching method to improve their teaching quality but they are not convinced by the necessity of high cost. Some teachers or tutors question the utility of ICT in improving the learning environment and they request more than “interactive whiteboards, response technology and e-portfolio software.” (Haydrn, 2013).

In tandem with it, Scholar Milankovic –Atkinson and Sadler (2006) showed different statistics in different countries in their study. Their research subject was the Global Campus in London. A typical tuition paid by a student on Global Campus is $28.50 per credit. It is to say, a Master student paid $5000 and a Bachelor student paid $10000 for whole course. Additional charge was required for cover IT and online library access. Conversely, the course outside London took $17000 for the Masters and $50000 for the Bachelors student. Students might prefer to go London to take the course on Global Campus (Milankovic –Atkinson & Sadler, 2006). Although there is a difference between the countries or regions, it is apparent that the overall cost is still high for VLE users.

It is clear that expensive cost is a main characteristic of VLE. It is caused by the basic device and service of VLE. The cyber activities as well as online database need high financial support. Many students, faculty and institutions who want to enroll in VLE cannot afford the high price due to their financial conditions. That is the main factor that cause the low affordability of VLE users.

Furthermore, the relationship between the affordability of VLE users and access level to VLE is still need to be tested. Many studies try to change the situation of the affordability of VLE users to see how the availability of VLE change. For example, mobile learning or flexible learning is put on the stage (ScCrane, Benachour, & Coulton, 2012; OfCom, 2008). In the study of Scholar ScCrane, Benachour and Coulton (2012), they stated that mobile device is becoming popular and used more frequently in teaching and learning, which can increase the flexibility of access to learning materials. Students receive and deliver materials by combining social interaction and communication-based network, which is more flexible than engaging in a corporate system of VLE. However, the limitation of mobile learning is that information delivered may have less credibility, which should be investigated and well-understood. Additionally, “current network access can limit the usage of a mobile virtual learning environment”. The investigation showed that students do not have a dedicated application of mobile VLE. The personal space and extending academic learning practice on the mobile device is also a conflict issue in mobile learning (ScCrane, Benachour & Coulton, 2012). In a conclusion, the study regarded mobile learning as a new approach of VLE which decrease the cost of device and maintenance of VLE. It seems more available for VLE users that they can get VLE in a more cheap and easy way. However, it also showed that high level of quantitative and qualitative access to VLE is not guaranteed in mobile learning. The learning materials are not mature in the mobile networking construction. More financial support is needed to investigate the new VLE, which means a predictable high cost is still waiting for VLE users.

However, some scholars have different opinions. Another study stated that VLE “can attain a wide reach at low cost if implemented and managed properly. It can also be maintained at minimal cost.” (Ussiph &Ghana, 2015) Additionally, a high level access to VLE can be gotten by professional training. There is potential of VLE to offer a high quality of education (Ussiph &Ghana, 2015).

In tandem with it, Scholar Stiles provides a new perspective that teachers are important roles in offering a high level access to VLE instead of a high cost of investigation to VLE. If a teacher fail to engage learners, omit the learning outcome or use didactic method in a traditional way, students cannot get a high quality of education of VLE (Stiles, 2000).

Likewise, Scholar Chowdhry, Sieler and Alwis (2014) demonstrated that users’ participant is the key in high quality VLE. A high quantitative and qualitative access to VLE require many opportunities for VLE users to get online discussion and other computing activities (Chowdhry, Sieler & Alwis, 2014). In this case, the motivation and initiative of VLE users determine the level of VLE access. They can have a chance to get high quantitative and qualitative access to VLE as long as they can find an initiative online learning group with a little cost.

The discussion about the relationship between the affordability of VLE users and access to VLE show different perspectives of scholars. Some scholars agree the high cost of VLE is the main reason that lead to the low affordability of VLE users and low level access to VLE. While other scholars may disagree that the affordability of VLE users are not the dominant factor. In this research, the researcher apply the perspective that low affordability leads to low level access to VLE and high cost is the main cause of the problem. The researchers try to find the certain relationship between the two variables by using quantitative and qualitative methods.

Additionally, other factors which caused the low affordability of VLE users are still need to be identified. Although financial issue is the biggest concern, other reasons, which may include the individual and group conditions in other respects should be considered in this research. Therefore, synthetic and analytic data is required.

Summary and Conclusion

The low affordability of students, faculty or institutions who want to enroll in VLE, which mainly caused by high cost of VLE, leads to the low level of quantitative and qualitative access to VLE. The problem possibly results to the negative development of VLE which should be put attention on. Many scholars have approved and evaluated the problem by relevant studies and research. A topic debate showed in literature review demonstrates the complexity of the problem cause. This research, which based on choice, decision-making and motivation theory, is to identify and analyze the problem by use quantitative and qualitative methodology and find the certain solution of the problem.

Reference

Chowdhry, Sandeep., Sieler, Karlolia., & Alwis, Lourdes. (2014). A study of the impact of technology-enhanced learning on student academic performance. Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice. Vol 2 | Issue 3 (2014) | Pp. 3–15.

Crane, Laura., Benachour, Phillip.,& Coulton, Paul. (2015). Virtual Learning Environments for mobile learning: Constrained by infrastructural and sociological boundaries. Journal Innovation in Teaching and Learning in Information and Computer Sciences. 10:1, 12-21.

Dinibutun, S Revda. (2012). Work Motivation: Theoretical Framework. GSTF Business Review (GBR). Singapore1.4: 133-139.

Edwards, W. (1954). The theory of decision making. Psychological Bulletin. 51(4), 380-417.

Follows, Scott B. (1999). Virtual Learning Environments. Journal of Technological Horizons in Education. Vol. 27, No. 4.

Forsyth, Rachel. (2008). Supporting e-learning: an overview of the needs of users. Journal of New Review of Academic Librarianship. Vol.9, 2003 - Issue 1.

Glasser, W. (1999). Choice theory: A new psychology of personal freedom. New York: Harper Perennial.

Haydn, Terry. (2013). How do you get pre-service teachers to become ‘good at ICT’ in their subject teaching? The views of expert practitioners. Journal of Technology, Pedagogy and Education. Vol. 23, 2014 - Issue 4.

Jones C., Ramanau R., Cross S.J. & Healing G. (2010). Net generation or digital natives: Is there a distinct new generation entering university? Journal of Computers & Education. 54, 722–732.

Jones, C.& Healing, G. (2010). Net Generation Students: agency and choice and the new technologies. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. Doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00370.x.

Linsey, Tim., Katsifli, Demetra., & Gipps, Caroline. (2005). The cost and benefit of implementing a university-wide VLE: Some real data. Journal of Science Education. Pg.27.

Milankovic -Atkinson, Maya. & Sadler, Chris. (2006). Using e-learning to extend access to new populations of students and reduce cost of program delivery. World Conference on e-learning in corporate government health care and higher education.

Moran, L., & Myringer, B. (1999). Flexible Learning and University Change. In K. Harry (Ed,) Higher Education through Open and Distance Learning. (Pp.57-71). New York Routledge.

OfCom. (2008). Communication Market Report.

Traxler J. (2010). Will student devices deliver innovation, inclusion, and transformation?. Journal of the Research Center for Educational Technology. 31 (2) 129-138.

Stiles, M.J. (2000). Effective Learning and the Virtual Learning Environment. The Learning Development Centre, Staffordshire University, UK.

Sullo, B. (2007). Activating the desire to learn. Alexandria. VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Ussiph, Najim., & Ghana, Kumasi. (2015).The potential of VLE in providing access to quality education in rural community schools – myth or reality?. International Journal of Computer Applications. (0975 – 8887) Vol.131 – No.12.