A Hierarchical Model to Evaluate the Quality of Web-Based E-Learning Systems

Sustainability

Kashif Saleem¹  Ahmed E. Youssef²  Al-Batool Saleh Al-Thnian²  Adnan Akram³  AbdulHafeez Muhammad³  Basit Shahzad⁴  Ansar Siddique⁵ 

[1] Center of Excellence in Information Assurance (CoEIA), King Saud University, Riyadh 12372, Saudi Arabia;College of Computer and Information Sciences (CCIS), King Saud University, Riyadh 11653, Saudi Arabia;Department of Computer Sciences, Bahria University Lahore Campus, Punjab 54600, Pakistan;Department of Software Engineering, National University of Modern Languages, Islamabad 44000, Pakistan;Department of Software Engineering, University of Gujrat, Punjab 50700, Pakistan;

关键词: analytical hierarchical process (AHP);    content;    e-learning;    quality;    usability;   

DOI  :  10.3390/su12104071

来源: DOAJ

【 摘 要 】

The rapid growth of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) —specifically, the Internet—has given emergence to e-learning. Resultantly, web-based e-learning systems are being increasingly developed to enhance the learning process. However, the utilization of such systems is low, mainly owing to poor quality content and overall design problems. To improve usage, it is imperative to identify the factors with the most significant impact on the quality of these systems so that the e-learning industry keeps these factors in consideration while developing e-learning systems. This study focused on the identification and prioritization of factors related to the design quality of e-learning systems through a hierarchical quality model. Thus, firstly, an extensive literature review was conducted to identify the factors that most affect the quality of web-based e-learning systems. Secondly, among the identified factors, only those with the most significant effect were considered. To identify the most important quality criteria, a survey was conducted. An instrument was deployed among 157 subjects, including e-learning designers, developers, students, teachers, and educational administrators. Finally, a second instrument was distributed among 51 participants to make a pairwise comparison among the criteria and rank them according to their relative importance. The identified and prioritized factors were classified into four main categories. Among these four factors, content was identified as the most important factor, whereas design was found to be the least important factor.

【 授权许可】

Unknown