The Use Of Moodle In The Adult Centres Of The Canary Islands

Abstract

The purpose of our study was to determine to what extent teachers of adults are trained in information and communication technologies (ICT), as well as whether they have the necessary technological resources in their classrooms in order to use the training acquired in the ICT field with their students. In this article, we shall focus on the teachers' use of the Moodle platform as well as their training in ICT in the adults centres of Canary Islands, Spain. For this purpose, we administered a questionnaire to the teachers with items about the existence and use of the Moodle platform in their centre. The results obtained revealed a body of teachers trained in ICT who use the Moodle platform and the tools available at their centres. Reality shows that most adult centres do not have many resources that teachers can use.

Keywords: Adult educationeducational platformICTmoodleteachers

Introduction

Society currently faces numerous changes, whose most relevant feature is the rapidity with which they occur, which means, as stated by Cabero (2002), that we may not always be aware of all the possibilities, limits, and impact they produce. In educational material, we could observe these changes, especially with the introduction of information and communication technologies (ICT). Technology is constantly changing the way in which we learn, work, and live (Jiao & Miao, 2010). Not only children and youth have seen the changes in the methodology and tools used by their teachers to teach them, to a greater or lesser extent; adults have also been witnesses of this transformation. The teachers of adults have had to adapt their classes to the technological tools available in their classrooms—those who have such tools—and to the use of the educational platform Moodle, in the case of the Canary Islands, Spain.

Currently, we are in the age of information, where technology has played a very important role in diverse sectors of society (Yang, 2012). According to Friedman (2005), Internet has brought greater global interaction and thereby, the globalization mentioned by Estefanía (2002) in “Child, what is globalization?” Giddens (1999) indicates that there are no more frontiers. Therefore, as stated by Yang, schools will have to assume a new role in the construction of knowledge and acknowledge the importance of ICT in this new society. Technology can focus on various aspects. For instance, technology can focus on the student and constructivism, as in the studies of Coupal (2004), technologies that, according to Bruce (2004) enrich learning experiences, and those that transform the syllabus (Jamieson-Proctor, Burnett, Finger & Watson, 2006). The advantages that technologies can contribute to education cannot be denied, but in order to achieve the most from each one, teachers should have adequate initial and continuous formation in ICT (Pombo, Smith, Abelha, Caixinha, & Costa, 2012). Knowing how to use ICT means knowing how to integrate them in their classes so that their students interact with each other and with the teacher, encouraging students to construct their own knowledge (Ramos, Costa, Gewerc, & Moreira, 2007). Therefore, according to studies of Cabero (2005), teachers should change their role, cease being the transmitter of knowledge to become their students' guide, and the students would be the protagonists of their own teaching-learning process, as required by the information and communication society, while not forgetting that it will be necessary to achieve digital literacy to process all the information (Yang, 2012). It is necessary to realize that ICT alone do not provide innovation to our schools nor do they improve the quality of education but instead what we do with ICT, the methodology used by the teachers (Gandol, Carrillo, & Prats, 2012). The main purpose of the use of ICT should be learning, understood as a process to acquire new and different information (Falk & Harrison, 1998), and as much as possible, cooperative learning (Ramos et al., 2007).

Problem Statement

The statement of the problem is that although there is a Moodle platform in all adult centres in the Canary Islands, most students do not know that it exists and therefore do not use it.

Research Questions

The questions that were asked to the students are related to the use that they give or not to the Moodle platform of their study centre.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to know if the students of the centres of adults of the Canary Islands know the existence of the Moodle platform in their centre as well as to know if they use it or not.

Research Methods

Findings

The questionnaire began by asking the teachers whether or not they had a Moodle platform at their centre. Of the teachers, 23.2% assured us that they had no platform at their centre, whereas 76.8% admitted they had one, a total of 159 teachers. The teachers who were unaware of the existence of the Moodle platform did not complete the questionnaire, so only the remaining 76.8% of the surveyed teachers completed it. Out of this total; 21% dedicated 2 weekly hours to the platform; 27% from 3 to 4 hours; 18% dedicated 5 to 6 hours; another 18% dedicated 7 to 10 hours; 9% devoted 11 to 15 hours; and, lastly, 7% of the teachers used the virtual platform for more than 16 hours per week, as shown in Figure 1 .

See Full Size >

With regard to frequency of access to the Moodle platform, Figure 2 presents the results obtained: 3% of the teachers access it less than once a week; 5% open it once a week; 31% access it several times a week; 43% use it almost every day; and 18% use it several times a day.

See Full Size >

We not only wished to determine the frequency of access to the platform but also at what moments of the week the teachers usually open the platform, as shown in Figure 3 . Of the teachers, 30% access the platform on weekdays, in the morning; 18% also access it on weekdays, but in the afternoon; and 17% access it on weekdays, at night. With regard to the weekends, 12% of the teachers open the platform on the weekends in the morning; 13% open it on weekends in the afternoon; and 10% open it on weekends at night. Thus, we determined that the majority of the teachers chose to access the platform on weekdays in the morning.

See Full Size >

We also asked the teachers about how long they were connected to the platform. Figure 4 shows that 8% of the teachers were connected for less than thirty minutes; 38% were connected between 30 and 60 minutes; 39% were connected between one and two hours; and 15% were connected for more than two hours.

See Full Size >

Upon verifying that more than 75% of the teachers have access to a virtual platform, the next question focused on knowing what actions they carry out through the platform. Figure 5 shows that 61% of the teachers use the platform to upload notes and contents of their subject; 30% use it to send official notices; 43% use the platform to clear up student's doubts; 38% use the it to receive and score tasks; 18% establish discussion forums; 10% use the platform to assign tutorship schedules; 18% use it to test their students in various ways.

See Full Size >

It was also necessary to determine the teachers' appraisal of the platform they had at their centre. For 14% of the teachers, the degree of satisfaction with the virtual platform was very low; for 17%, it was low; 49% rated it with a medium degree of satisfaction; for 16%, it was high; and 4% rated it as very high. Thus, almost one half of the teachers considered that the current virtual platform they use at their centre met their expectations to a medium/normal extent.

Finally, the surveyed teachers were asked about the mean percentage of students who usually accesses the virtual platform of their subject. Figure 7 shows that 48% of the teachers believe that more than 10% of the students access the platform; 20% of the teachers think that more than 25% of the students use it; 17% of the teachers state that more than 50% of their registered students use the platform; 10% thinks than more than 75% of the students use it; 4% of the teachers believe than more than 90% of the students use the platform; and only 1% of the teachers state that 100% of the students of their centre use the platform. In general, the teachers think that their students do not access their subject regularly on the Moodle platform.

Conclusion

All the CEPAs have access to a Moodle platform provided by the Council of Education of the Government of the Canary Islands, Spain. However, almost 30% of the centres have not yet activated it, either due to lack of information, lack of time, or lack of the necessary resources to activate it, because some centres from rural populations have greater problems connecting to the internet. As stated by Cabero (2005), social and technological changes have occurred so quickly that, in many cases, we have not been aware of them and some centres still cannot update their technology. It seems clear that nearly 75% of the surveyed teachers states they use the platform at their centre, and they grant an important role to technology (Jiao & Miao, 2010). However, some teachers use the platform internally, that is, to communicate with each other and share information, without opening it to students. But little by little, more and more teachers are using it with their students. It should not be forgotten that, aside from the training the teacher should possess (Pombo et al., 2012), the students should also possess a minimum of technological skills, a digital literacy (Yang, 2012). This task is somewhat more complex, because adults are not as familiar with technology as children and youth, so that digital literacy is indispensable before undertaking any technological activity with them. Teachers who have a subject on the virtual platform use it with their students to upload information about the subject, publish notices of tasks to be carried out, perform self-assessment tests, score their students' tasks, and also use discussion forums so their students will interact with their classmates and teachers, thereby promoting cooperative learning (Clinton & Rieber, 2010). Thus, the students create their own knowledge (Ramos et al., 2007) and relate it to what they had learned before, incorporating it into their knowledge schema. The teachers state that they dedicate between 3 and 4 hours a week to the platform, for the above-mentioned activities. They usually open the platform every day, and most of them do so on weekdays, either in the morning or in the afternoon. Regarding the educational centre, it has become the main workplace for the teachers to use the centre's platform, during their assigned work schedule outside the classroom. According to Jiao and Miao (2010), technology has produced changes in the way people learn, and the teachers must be up to date in these changes and focus on the student and foster constructivism (Coupal, 2004).

Concerning the functioning of the Moodle platform of their centres, the teachers state that it is adequate and meets their expectations, although their satisfaction with it is only medium. It should not be forgotten that the Moodle platform was created to promote cooperative learning, and it is a user-friendly and intuitive system (Amorós, 2007). It was created to support presential teaching in the classroom, and also helping students who cannot come to class to remain in contact with the content taught in class, thus promoting flexible learning (Wilson, 2008). However, according to the teachers, a very low percentage of their students accesses the virtual platform; in many cases because the above-mentioned digital literacy is not yet deeply ingrained in the adult students, often because they have not yet had the opportunity to receive any training in it. Therefore, firstly, the training possessed by the students should be taken into account, so they will then be able to use the resources responsibly. Because, as stated by Gandol et al. (2012), ICT itself does not provide any kind of educational innovation or quality. The teachers and students are the ones who should grant ICT its due importance and give it the place it deserves through the use they make of it.

As discussed in the theoretical framework and as Sangrá (2005) states, the Moodle platform is effective in the learning process for the educational level under study because it favors school performance, favors cooperation among students and helps to diminish the technological difference between students and teachers. Taking into account that we talk about adult education, everything mentioned above is very important, because the Moodle platform not only helps adults to learn, but they do it in a cooperative way, helping to minimize the digital divide and being flexible with the time of each one of the adults, as it has been observed in other studies and in the specifications of the Moodle platform given by Clarenc (2013). For all that, the Moodle platform is a good tool for adult education.

References

1. Amorós, L. (2007). Moodle como recurso didáctico [Moodle as a teaching resource]. Universidad Católica del Maule
2. Ausubel, D. (1963). The psychology of meaningful verbal learning. New York: Grune & Stratton.
3. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. New York: General Learning Press
4. Bello, D. (2008). Moodle como herramienta software sobre Internet para la gestión de cursos en la educación. Educación y futuro digital, 1, 1-5.
5. Boletín Oficial de Canarias, BOC. (2003). Ley 13/2003 de 4 de abril de Educación y Formación permanente de las personas adultas de Canarias [Law 13/2003 of April 4, of Education and Permanent Training of Adults of the Canary Islands]. Retrieved at: http://www.gobiernodecanarias.org/boc/2003/079/001.html
6. Bruce, C. (2004). Information literacy as a catalyst for educational change: A background paper. In P.A. Danaher (Ed.), Lifelong learning: Whose responsibility and what is your contribution? The 3rd International Lifelong Learning Conference (pp. 8–19). Yeppoon, Queensland: Sage.
7. Cabero, J. (2002). Mitos de la sociedad de la información: sus impactos en la educación [Myths of the information society: Their impacts on education]. In Aguiar, et al. (Eds.), Cultura y educación en la Sociedad de la información (pp. 17-37). A Coruña, Spain: Netlibro.
8. Cabero, J. (2005). Strategies for the training of teachers in ICT. Retrieved from: http://www.pucmm.edu.do/RSTA/Academico/TE/Documents/fd/efpt.pdf
9. Castañer, A. (2010). Las TIC en la educación de adultos: nuevos enfoques de orientación, nuevas respuestas educativas [ICT in adult education: New approaches to orientation, new educational responses]. Retrieved from: www.quadernsdigitals.net
10. Castro, J., & Chirino, E. (2011). Teachers’ opinion survey on the use of ICT tools to support attendance-based teaching. Computers & Education, 56, 911-915.
11. Castro, J., & Chirino, E. (2013). Students’ opinion survey on the use of ICT tools. International Journal of Information and Operations Management Education, 5(3), 230-240.
12. Chirino, E. (2009). Estudio del uso e impacto del sistema de gestión de enseñanza aprendizaje MOODLE en la educación superior [Study of the use and impact of the MOODLE learning management system in higher education] (Doctoral dissertation). Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria. Retrieved at: http://www.tdx.cat/handle/10803/35962?show=full
13. Clarenc, C. (2013). Instrumento de evaluación y selección de sistemas de gestión de aprendizaje y otros materiales digitales. Congreso virtual mundial de E-Learning (pp.1-20) Madrid, Spain: Grupo GEIPITE Ed.
14. Clinton, G., & Rieber, L. (2010). The Studio experience at the University of Georgia: An example of constructionist learning for adults. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58, 755–780. Doi:
15. Coupal, L. (2004). Constructivist learning theory and human capital theory: Shifting political and educational frameworks for teachers’ ICT professional development. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35, 587–596.
16. Cubric, M. (2007). Wiki-based process framework for blended learning. Montreal, Quebec, Canada: Wiki- Sym’07.
17. Deitering, A.-M., & Huston, S. (2004). Weblogs and the ‘middle space’ for learning. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 8, 273–278.
18. Ertmer, P. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 25–39.
19. Estefanía, J. (2002). Hijo/a, ¿qué es la globalización? La primera revolución del siglo XXI [Child, what is globalization? The first revolution of the 21st century]. Madrid: Santillana Ediciones Generales.
20. Falk, I., & Harrison, L. (1998). Community learning and social capital: ‘Just having a little chat.’ Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 50, 609–627.
21. Friedman, T. (2005). The world is flat: A brief history of the twenty-first century. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
22. Gandol, F., Carrillo, E., & Prats, M. (2012). Potencialidades y limitaciones de la pizarra digital interactiva. Una revisión crítica de literature [Potentialities and limitations of the interactive whiteboard. A critical review of the literature]. Píxel-Bit. Revista de medios y educación, 40, 171-183. Retrieved at: http://acdc.sav.us.es/pixelbit/images/stories/p40/13.pdf
23. Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. London, UK: Basic Books
24. Giddens, A. (1999). Runaway world: how globalisation is reshaping our lives. London: Profile Books
25. Jamieson-Proctor, R.M., Burnett, P.C., Finger, G., & Watson, G. (2006). ICT integration and teachers’ confidence in using ICT for teaching and learning in Queensland state schools. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 22, 511–530.
26. Jiao, X., & Miao, L. (2010, May). Application of information technology in adult education. In Optics Photonics and Energy Engineering (OPEE), 2010 International Conference on (Vol. 2, pp. 449-452). IEEE.
27. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
28. López, M. (2011). Moodle en el aula [Moodle in the classromm]. Máster de formación del profesorado en educación secundaria. Universidad Internacional de La Rioja. Retrieved at: https://reunir.unir.net/bitstream/handle/123456789/1189/TFM_LOPEZ_FRUTOS_MARIA_DEL_PILAR.pdf?sequence=1
29. Karagiorgi, Y., & Symeou, L. (2005). Translating constructivism into instructional design: Potential and limitations. Educational Technology & Society, 8(1), 17-27. Retrieved at: http://www.ifets.info/journals/8_1/5.pdf
30. Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte. (2013). Estadísticas de Educación [Educational statistics]. Retrieved at: http://www.mecd.gob.es/servicios-al-ciudadano-mecd/estadisticas.html
31. Piaget, J. (1967). Logique et connaissance scientifique. Paris: Gallimard
32. Pombo, L., Smith, M., Abelha, M., Caixinha, H., & Costa, N. (2012) Evaluating an online e-module for Portuguese primary teachers: Trainees’ perceptions. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 21(1), 21-36, doi:
33. Ramos, A., Costa, F., Gewerc, A., & Moreira, A. (2007). The digital and the curriculum. Challenges 2007. Ramos, A., Costa, F., Gewerc, A., & Moreira, A. V International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies in Education (pp. 273–294). Braga, Portugal: Competence Centre Nónio XXI Century, University of Minho.
34. Rodríguez, T. (2002). Valoración del profesorado a un plan de intervención psicoeducativa en la educación de adultos del Departamento de Psicología [Teachers' rating of a psychoeducational intervention in adult education in the Department of Psychology] (Doctoral dissertation). Universidad de La Laguna. Retrieved at: ftp://tesis.bbtk.ull.es/ccssyhum/cs147.pdf
35. Ros, I. (2008). Moodle, la plataforma para la enseñanza y organización escolar [Moodle, the platform for academic teaching and organization]. Ikastorratza, e- Revista de Didáctica, 2(1), 3-12. Retrieved at: http://www.ehu.es/ikastorratza/2_alea/moodle.pdf (ISSN: 1988-5911).
36. Ryberg, T., & Christiansen, E. (2008). Community and social network sites as technology-enhanced learning environments. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 17, 207–219.
37. Sangrá, A. (2005). Educación a distancia, educación presencial y usos de la tecnología. Una tríada para el progreso educativo [Distance education, face-to-face education and uses of technology. A triad for educational progress]. Retrieved from: http://edutec.rediris.es/Revelec2/revelec15/sangra.pdf
38. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge. MA: Harvard University Press.
39. Wilson, G. (2008). Teachers in blended learning environments: Case studies of ICT-enhanced blended learning in higher education. Saarbrucken. Germany: Verlag Dr Muller.
40. Yang, H. (2012). ICT in English schools: Transforming education? Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 21(1), 101-118.