Article Preview
TopIntroduction
Technology intervention has drastically changed the higher education teaching landscape (Business standard, 2017). Learning Management System (LMS) is a platform which can be accessed by remote users with the help of internet connection. There is no doubt that the conventional lecture mode of delivery will remain the backbone of any education system, however, the instructor can enhance student learning outcomes in the lecture hall with the integration of new technological tools and pedagogies (Martin et al., 2018). Innovations in teaching pedagogy are complemented by many online learning tools. These new technologies facilitate quality learning and teaching for both in class and beyond the class learning of the students (Sylvester et al., 2019).
The internet provides accessibility of a variety of free of cost educational resources from all over the globe. Teaching and learning can be customized in order to fulfil the need of an individual student. The advancement in technology has increased the demands of innovative teaching methodologies, for the design and deployment of quality and cost-efficient e-learning environments, which can fulfil the learners’ requirements (Khuzzan et al., 2008). The LMS, is an upcoming technology, which has contributed immensely in the creation, delivery and management of various training programs, in corporate sector as well as in academics.
In some cases, the LMS may have in-built e-learning tools, by which one can develop online training courses without spending an extra amount of money on e-learning software. Moreover, one can perform in-depth, comprehensive evaluation of students’ performance with the help of analytics (Newton, 2005). E-learning technologies provide infrastructure to learn anywhere and anytime. This flexibility helps non-traditional learners and encourages their collaboration in teaching learning process. As per (Meenakumari et al., 2013) in the present education system, LMS is the most accepted, trusted and frequently used ICT based learning tool. Learning Management Systems enables exciting, enriching and active learning experience to e-learning.
In any educational institution, the faculty members need to manage teaching material, assignments, quizzes and other educational resources on their laptops, pen drives or on their email ids. The LMS provides them with the functionality of a central repository to store and share the learning resources with their students (Kulshrestha et al., 2013). Costa et al. (2012) carried out a study at a Portugal University to analyse the frequently accessed functionalities and usage patterns of Moodle platform by the students. They also pointed out that certain tools for real time communication were not accessed for the learning process. It was thus suggested that the teachers should be made aware of the tools and should access them for all processes for the effective delivery framework.
Previous studies indicate that knowing and ascertaining the factors influencing the usage of the LMS among faculty will facilitate the design of effective faculty development programmes, enabling self-supporting IT infrastructure, and encourage the use of LMS (Betts, 1998). Empirical studies have proven that imbibing education technology resources like LMS, will facilitate faculty to efficiently manage courses, evaluation, dissemination of necessary information to students and planning academic calendar. This will increase students’ active participation and reduce faculty planning time. It will thus optimize the instructional procedure (Jafari et al., 2005; Ayers & Doherty, 2003). The present study intends to understand faculty perspective in terms of Satisfaction with the LMS. The purpose of the present analysis is to identify the relationship between ease of use, perceived usefulness in terms of relevance for the present job and usage of the LMS intervention. The study also tested the moderation effect of variables like age, gender and city, as they are previously found to be important determinant in the usage of technology (Cai, 2017; Fang, 2018).