FOSTERING LEARNER AUTONOMY VIA MOODLE: REFLECTIONS ON STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS
Keywords:computer collaboration, Moodle, learner autonomy, open and distance learning
Moodle is an open source for e-learning system. Moodle can be used as a tool for delivering contents to students and it can be used to build rich collaborative learning communities. It allows users to be active learners, who actively participate in the online learning process. Based on this background, this study aimed to investigate the students’ views on the use of Moodle in mathematics education. This study gave attention to the variables of perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, attitude and students’ self- efficacy in learning mathematics. Participants of this study consisted of 24 students, who took first and second semester courses at the master's levels in mathematics education in 2018 batch from Open and Distance Education Center (ODEC), TU. There are 21 male and three female students. Four students were chosen for interview including one female representative. Data triangulation between the data of interview, online observation and interview with online teachers were used to analyze and analysis of the data. Three online teachers were chosen for interview purposively. The finding revealed that students had positive perception towards the use of Moodle and were happy to learn mathematics from the online mode rather than face-to-face mode. It was suggested that the Moodle, if used appropriately and systematically, benefits tutors and students equally.
I. Ahmed, Y. & Raheem, A. (2012). Interactions quality in Moodle as perceived by learners and its relation with some variables. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 13 (3),375-389.
II. Angulo, A. J. & Bruce, M. (1999). Students perceptions of supplemental web-based instruction. Innovative Higher Education, 24 (2), 105-125.
III. Ayse, K. (2008). An online social constructivist tool: A secondary school experience in the developing world. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 9 (3), 87-98.
IV. Benson, P. (2000). Autonomy as a learners’ and teachers’ right. In Sinclair, B., McGrath, I. and Lamb, T. (Eds.) Learner autonomy, teacher autonomy: Future directions. pp. 111-117. London: Longman.
V. Benson, P. (2006). Autonomy in language teaching and learning. Language Teaching 40: pp. 21-40.
VI. Benson, P. and Voller, P. (1997). Introduction. In: Benson, P. and Voller, P. (Eds.) Autonomy and Independence in Language Learning, pp. 1-12. London: Longman.
VII. Chewe, P. & Chitumbo, E. M. M. (2012). Moodle adoption at the University of Zambia: Opportunities and Challenges, Science Journal of Sociology and Anthropology, 2012, doi:10.7237/sjsa/289
VIII. Ding, A. (2012) Deconstructing and Reconstructing Teacher Autonomy: A Case Study of Teacher-Learners’ Autonomy on a TESOL MA. Ph.D. thesis, University of Nottingham.
IX. Dougiamas, M. andTaylor, P. C. (2003). Moodle: Using Learning Communities to Create an Open Source Course Management System. EDMEDIA: Honolulu.
X. Grob, A. and Wolff, D. (2001). A Multimedia Tool to Develop Learner Autonomy. Computer Assisted Language Learning 14(3-4): pp. 233-249.
XI. Hanafi, A., Zuraidah, A., Rahman-dan R. & Idrus, M. (2004). Characteristics of the Web-Based Learning Environment in Distance Education: Students’ Perceptions of Their Learning Needs. Educational Media International, 41(2), 103-110. Retrieved from http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
XII. Melton, J. (2006). The LMS Moodle: A usability evaluation. Languages Issues.
XIII. Moodle (2010). Moodle Website. Retrived from, http://moodle.org
XIV. Naqvi, S. (2006). Impact of WEbCT on Learning: An Oman Experience.
XV. Navaporn, S. (2010). The application of a course management system to enhance autonomy in learning English as a foreign language. System 38: pp. 109-123.
XVI. Papastergiou, M. (2006). Course Management Systems at Tools for the Creation of Online Learning Environments: Evaluation from a Social Constructivist Perspective and Implications for their Design. International Journal on E-Learning 5 (4): pp. 593-622.
XVII. Reigluth, C. M. (1999). Instructional design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
XVIII. Reinders, H. and Balcikanli, C. (2011). Learning to Foster Autonomy: The Role of Teacher Education Materials. Studies in Self Access Learning Journal 2(1): pp. 15-25.
XIX. Ryberg, T. and Georgsen, M. (2010). Enabling digital literacy: Development of Meso-level Pedagogical Approaches. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy [online]. 5 (2): 88-100. Available at <http://www.idunn.no/ts/dk/2010/02/art03> [Accessed 26 October 2013].
XX. Sanchez, R. A. & Hueros, A. D. (2010). Motivational factors that influence the acceptance of Moodle using TAM. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 1632-1640.
XXI. Santamaria, J. S., Ramos, F. J. & Antolin, P. S. (2012). The student’s perspective: Teaching usages of MOODLE at University. Proceedings of ICERI 2012 Conference, Madrid, Spain. 19-21 Nov 2012.
XXII. Smith, R. (2008). Learner autonomy. ELT Journal 62 (4): pp.95-397.
XXIII. Tam, M. (2000). Constructivism, Instructional Design, and Technology: Implications for Transforming Distance Learnisng. Educational Teachnology & Society 3 (2). Available at < http://www.ifets.info/journals/3_2/tam.html> Accessed 25th October 2013.
XXIV. Voller, P. (1997) Does the teacher have a role in autonomous learning? In: Benson, P. and Voller, P. (Eds) Autonomy and Independence in Language Learning, pp. 98-113. London: Longman.
XXV. Warschauer, M. (2005). Sociocultural perspectives on CALL. In: Egbert, J. and Petrie, G. M. (Eds.) CALL Research Perspectives, pp. 41-51. New Jersey: Lawrence Earlbaum.
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2022 International Education and Research Journal (IERJ)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.