Shaibou Abdoulai Haji


The purpose of this study is to explore how the frequent use of Learning Management Systems (LMS) features improve learners’ interactions. In this structural equation, modelling was applied to examine how the regular use of LMS features improve learners’ interactions. The study was a survey that made use of the questionnaire for data collection. A total of 362 students responded to the questionnaires used in the study. The results indicated that the frequent use of LMS features help learners to interact with content as well as the instructor but not with their peers during the learning process. It is hoped that the outcomes of this study can be used in shaping Innovative practices in Higher Education and beyond.

Le but de cette étude est d’explorer comment l’utilisation fréquente des systèmes de gestion de l’apprentissage (SGA) améliore les interactions des apprenants. Dans cette équation structurelle, une modélisation a été appliquée pour examiner comment l’utilisation régulière des SGA améliore les interactions des apprenants. L'étude a porté une enquête à l’aide du questionnaire pour la collecte de données. Au total, 362 étudiants ont répondu été interrogés. Les résultats indiquent que l'utilisation régulière des SGA aide les apprenants à interagir avec le contenu ainsi qu'avec l'enseignant, mais pas avec leurs pairs pendant le processus d'apprentissage. L’on espère que les résultats de cette recherche pourront être utilisés pour améliorer des pratiques innovantes d’enseignement dans l'enseignement supérieur et au-delà.

Article visualizations:

Hit counter


learning management systems, learner-instructor interaction, learner-content interaction, learner-learner interaction, higher education / systèmes de gestion de l'apprentissage, interaction apprenant-enseignant, interaction apprenant-contenu, interaction

Full Text:



Anderson, T. (2003a). Getting the mix right again: An updated and theoretical rationale for interaction. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 4.

Anderson, T. (2003b). Modes of interaction in distance education: Recent developments and research questions. In M. G. Moore & W. G. Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of distance education. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.

Battalio, J. (2007). Interaction online: A re-evaluation. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 8(4), 339–352.

Berge, Z. L. (1999). Interaction in post-secondary web-based learning. Educational Technology, 39(1), 5–11.

Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Borokhovski, E., Wade, C. A., Tamim, R. M., Surkes, M. A., & Bethel, E. C. (2009). A meta-analysis of three types of interaction treatments in distance education. Review of Educational Research, 79, 1243-1289.

Belanger, F., & Jordan, D. H. (2004). Evaluation and implementation of distance learning: Technologies, tools and techniques. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.

Burnett, K. B., Bonnici, L. J., Miksa, S. D., & Kim, J. (2007). Frequency, intensity, and topicality in online learning: An exploration of the Interaction dimensions that contribute to student satisfaction in online learning for Library and Information Science, 48(1),21–35.

Bray, E., Aoki, K., & Dlugosh, L. (2008). Predictors of learning satisfaction in Japanese online distance. International Review of Research in Open & Distance Learning, 9(3), 1–24.

Chejlyk, S. (2006). The effects of online course format and three components of student perceived interactions on overall course satisfaction. (Doctoral dissertation).

Clayton R. Wright, Valerie Lopes, T. Craig Montgomerie, Sunday A. Reju and Seb Schmoller (2014). Selecting a Learning Management System: Advice from an Academic Perspective. EDUCAUSE Review Online article.

Crampton, A., Ragusa, A. T., & Cavanagh, H. (2012). Cross-discipline investigation of the relationship between academic performance and online resource access by distance education students. Research in Learning Technology, 20(0).

Dennen, V. P., Darabi, A. A., & Smith, L. J. (2007). Instructor-learner interaction in online courses: The relative perceived importance of particular instructor actions on performance and satisfaction. Distance Education, 28, 65-79.

Eom, S. (2009). Effects of interaction on students’ perceived learning satisfaction in online university education: An empirical investigation. International Journal of Global Management Studies, 1(2), 60–74.

Eom, S. B., Wen, H. J., & Ashill, N. (2006). The determinants of students’ perceived learning outcomes and satisfaction in online university education: an empirical investigation. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 4(2), 215–235.

Fraenkel, R. J., & Wallen, E. N. (2000). How to design and evaluate research in education (4th ed.). San Francisco: McGraw-Hill.

Garcia, K., & Sophia, R. S. (2008). The Blended Learning Classroom: An Online Instructor Training Program. In M. D. Lytras, D. Gasevic, P. O. de-Pablos & W. Huang (Eds.), Technology Enhanced Learning: Best Practices (pp. 05-256).:. (pp. 57-80). Hershey: IGI Publishing.

Garrison, D. (2007). Online community of inquiry review: Social, cognitive, and teaching presence issues. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 11(1), 61-72.

Gilhooly, K. (2001). Making e-learning effective. Computer World, Vol. 35, No. 29, pp. 52–53,

Gunawardena, C. N. (1995). Social presence theory and implications for interaction and collaborative learning in computer conferences. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications 1 (2/3), 147–166.

Halverson, T. (2009). Distance education and new learning environments: Combining traditional teaching methods and emerging technologies. New York: Cambria Press.

Hsu, J. (2007). Innovative technologies for education and learning: Education and knowledge-oriented applications of blogs, wikis, podcasts, and More. International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education, 3(3), 70-89.

Jochems, W., Merrienboer, J. V., & Koper, R. (Eds.). (2004). An introduction to integrated e-learning. London: Routledge Falmer Tylor & Francis Group Company.

Johnson, S. D., Aragon, S. R., Shaik, N. & Palma-Rivas, N. (2000). Comparative analysis of learner satisfaction and learning outcomes in online and face-to-face learning environments. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 11(1), 29-49.

Johnson, R. D., Hornik, S. & Salas, E. (2008). An empirical examination of factors contributing to the creation of successful e-learning environments. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 66, 356–369.

Lajoie, S. P., and Azevedo, R. (2006). Teaching and learning in technology-rich environments. Handbook of educational psychology (2ed., pp. 803–821). Mahwah, NJ.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Leidner, D. E., Jarvenpaa, S. L., 1995. The use of information technology to enhance management school education: a theoretical view. MIS Quarterly 19 (3), 265–29.

LeRouge C., Blanton, E., & Kittner, M. (2002). The other semi virtual team: Using collaborative technologies to facilitate student team projects. In Proceedings of the international academy for information management (IAIM) 17th annual conference: International conference on informatics education research, Barcelona, Spain.

Lonn, S. & Teasley, S. D. (2008). Investigating Perceptions and Uses of Learning Management Systems: Saving Time or Innovating Practice? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. New York.

Madland, C. and Richards, G. (2016). Enhancing Student-Student Online Interaction: Exploring the Study Buddy Peer Review Activity. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning,17 (3)

Marks, R. B., Sibley, S., & Arbaugh, J. B. (2005). A structural equation model of predictors of effective online learning. Journal of Management Education, 29(4), 531–563.

Mason, R. & Kay, A. (Eds.). (1989). Mindweave: Communication, computers and distance education. New York: Pergamon.

Moore, M. (1989). Editorial: Three types of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1-7

Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (1996). Distance education: A systems view. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.

Morss, D. A. (1999). A study of student perspectives on web-based learning: Web CT in the classroom. Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications and Policy, 9(5), 393–408.

Murray, M., Pérez, J., Geist, D., & Hedrick, A. (2013). Student interaction with content in online and hybrid courses: Leading horses to the proverbial water. In Proceedings of the Informing Science and Information Technology Education Conference (Vol. 2013, No. 1, pp. 99-115).

Murray, M., Perez, J., Geist, D., & Hedrick, A. (2012). Student interaction with online course content: Build it, and they might come. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 11, 126-140.

Navarro, P., & Shoemaker, J. (2000). Performance and perceptions of distance learners in cyberspace. American Journal of Distance Education, 14(2), 15-35.

Northrup, P., Lee, R., & Burgess, V. (2002). Learner perceptions of online interaction. Paper presented at ED-MEDIA 2002 world conference on educational multimedia hypermedia & telecommunications, Denver, CO.

Piccoli, G., Ahmad, R., Ives, B. (2001). Web-based virtual learning environments: a research framework and a preliminary assessment of effectiveness in basic its skills training. MIS Quarterly 25 (4), 401–426.

Shaibou, A., H. (2018). Exploring the frequent Use of the Learning Management Systems (LMS) features as a mediator between Learners’ Interactions, Learners’ Learning Outcomes and Satisfaction in Higher Education. Published PhD thesis, Korea University.

Stavredes, T. (2011). Effective Online Teaching: Foundations and Strategies for Student Success. Available at: http://learn.education.illinois.edu/file.php/1647/LearningTheoryJossey-Bass.pdf

Surowiecki, J. (2004). The wisdom of crowds. New York, NJ: Random House.

Swan, K. (2001). Virtual interaction: Design factors affecting student satisfaction and perceived learning in asynchronous online courses. Journal of Distance Education, 22(2), 306–331.

Umek, L., Aristovnik, A., Tomaževič, N., Keržič, D. (2015). Analysis of Selected Aspects of Students’ Performance and Satisfaction in a Moodle-based E Learning System Environment. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology.

Walker, R., Voce, J., Nicholls, J., Swift, E., Ahmed, J., Horrigan, S., & Vincent P. (2014). 2014 Survey of Technology Enhanced Learning for higher education in the UK. Universities and Colleges Information Systems Association, Oxford, UK.

Walker, R., Voce, J., Swift, E., Ahmed, J., Jenkins, M., & Vincent, P. (2016). 2016 Survey of Technology Enhanced Learning for higher education in the UK. Universities and Colleges Information Systems Association, Oxford, UK.

Wang, M., Ran, W., Liao, J., & Yang, S. J. H. (2010). A Performance-Oriented Approach to E-Learning in the Workplace. Educational Technology & Society, 13 (4), 167–179.

Watts-Taffe, S., Gwinn, C. B. and Horn, M. L., 2003. Preparing preservice teachers to integrate technology with the elementary literacy program. The Reading Teacher, vol. 57, pp.130138.

Woods, R., & Baker, J. (2004). Interaction and immediacy in online learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 5(2).

Yuen, H. K., Fox, R., Sun, A., & Deng, L. (2009). Course management systems in higher education: Understanding student experiences. Journal of Education, 6(3), 189-20.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.46827/ejoe.v5i2.3477


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright © 2016-2023. European Journal of Open Education and E-learning Studies (ISSN 2501-9120) is a registered trademark of Open Access Publishing GroupAll rights reserved.

This journal is a serial publication uniquely identified by an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) serial number certificate issued by Romanian National Library (Biblioteca Nationala a Romaniei). All the research works are uniquely identified by a CrossRef DOI digital object identifier supplied by indexing and repository platforms.

All the research works published on this journal are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).