IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijmede/v21y2022i3p263-278.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

User experience of two different LMS: effects on students' performance and recommendations for contents design

Author

Listed:
  • Galena Pisoni

Abstract

The aim of this work is to understand the effects of user experience on students' outcomes in two different learning management systems (LMS), Moodle and Sakai, on the same entrepreneurship education task in both environments. We developed an online learning setting where technical graduate students practice and gain knowledge on innovation and entrepreneurship themes and we evaluate which LMS provided better user experience. The evaluation included 70 students in total, 37 in the Moodle condition and 33 in Sakai condition. Results indicated that the students in the Moodle condition reported to have slightly better learning experience compared to the students in Sakai condition. The follow-up interviews with the students highlighted positive and negative experiences related to features and options of the different platforms, their influence on student learning, and the different ways to organise contents in them. The qualitative feedback suggests learners want an affective connection with the contents and demand for high quality of learning materials. These data provide empirical evidence of the learning gains offered by the two different LMS and provide practical guidelines for education designers on how to design education experiences on both of the platforms.

Suggested Citation

  • Galena Pisoni, 2022. "User experience of two different LMS: effects on students' performance and recommendations for contents design," International Journal of Management and Enterprise Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 21(3), pages 263-278.
  • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijmede:v:21:y:2022:i:3:p:263-278
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=125778
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ids:ijmede:v:21:y:2022:i:3:p:263-278. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=89 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.