1. Hoe gebruiken de leerkrachten hun ELO? De Smet Cindy Studiedag afstandsonderwijsHogent Campus Mercator 22/12/2011

2. About Lecturer media, Ghent University College, Faculty of Teacher Training Ph.D.-student, Department of Education, Ghent University The Research Fund of University College Ghent financially supports this research.

3. @drsmetty

4. LMS

5. Bron: Delta initiative

6. LMS Market Lifecycle CurveBron:Sage Road Solutions

7. Bron: Gartner, Hype Cycle for Higher Education 2008

8. LMS market in Flanders

9. Secondary education1) Survey 20092) The educational network mostly determines the LMS used

10. University55% 45% Dokeos/Chamilo Blackboard 1) Data based on the official student numbers (2009). 2) The LMS used is determined by the 6 Flemish associations between universities and university colleges 3) Most LMS are Branded

11. University Colleges 73% 27% Dokeos/Chamilo Blackboard

12. The Flemish teacherDe Smet, C., & Schellens, T. (2009). ELOs in het Vlaamssecundair onderwijs: nieuw of alweer achterhaald. Advies& Educatie, 26, 1214.

13. LMS experienceNo experience 19%1 year 10%2 years 24%3 years 22%4 years 20%5 years or more 15%

14. Blackboard: 1997Moodle: 1999

15. Outside the LMSSecondary education: 69% uses learning objects found on the internet or specialized content sites: (using KlasCement.net, Google.com) 52% uses software and applications outside the the LMS (wikispaces.com, blogsoftware, Google documents, Facebook, Netlog.)

16. LMS Study

17. This study aims to understandthe reasons behind thetechnology acceptation oflearning management systems(LMS) by secondary schoolteachers and investigates theinstructional use of the LMS.

18. Methods

19. Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)Perceived Ease of Use(gebruiksgemak) UsePerceived Usefulness(bruikbaarheid) 1) Beliefs 2) Self-reported use 3) Predicts 40% of a systems use

20. Informational Use Communicational Use

21. Five levels of LMS interaction by Hamuy and Galaz (2010), Silvio et al. (2004)

22. Results

23. Survey (N=505) Construct validity Inf + Com use: measured by 12 items IBM SPSS: exploratory factor analysis AMOS 17: confirmatory factor analysis Other variables: IBM SPSS: exploratory factor analysis Measurement validity Cronbachs alpha & correlation matrix Model testing: AMOS 17

24. Discussion

25. Conclusion 46% of the variance in informational use, 27% in communicational use Instructional use: further explored and refined Focus on secondary school teachers, an understudied group

26. Conclusions Perceived ease of use is the most important factor (in this research) to predict the instructional use of the LMS. As soon as a teacher gets more advanced in using the LMS, perceived usefulness becomes more important. This suggests that when a teacher wants to use an LMS, the ease of use of the system will be the first consideration, probably followed by his or her perception of the systems performance.

27. Conclusion Technical support is important for every LMS- user, regardless his experience level. Positive effect of personal innovativeness on preceived ease of use. Administrative use was expected to be a prerequisite for interactive use and the data confirms this assumption.

28. Limitations Future research should explore other variables that may have an effect on instructional use, as the current models explain maximum 46%. This research did not include software or applications outside the institutions LMS Log files