[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-593805-105":59,"doc-detail-593805-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","student-and-staff-perceptions-of-a-learning-management-system-for-blended-learning-in-teacher-education-article-2","Student and Staff Perceptions of a Learning Management System for Blended Learning in Teacher Education - Article 2","","The study examines staff and student perceptions of a Learning Management System (LMS) used to support blended learning in teacher education. Survey responses were collected from 46 staff and 470 students, complemented by interviews and focus groups. The analysis compares views on two main LMS affordances: accessibility and interactivity. Students rate the contribution of online accessibility to their learning higher than staff, while both groups judge LMS tools’ interactivity effectiveness similarly, and results highlight key teaching choices that maximize participation and learning.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/student-and-staff-perceptions-of-a-learning-management-system-for-blended-learning-in-teacher-education-article-2/593805/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/student-and-staff-perceptions-of-a-learning-management-system-for-blended-learning-in-teacher-education-article-2/593805.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"4398046744996","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-21","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":19},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What is the focus of the study on the LMS in teacher education?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"The study focuses on participants’ perceptions of two LMS affordances: accessibility and interactivity.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"How were perceptions data collected for staff and students?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"Perceptions were gathered using surveys from staff (n=46) and students (n=470), supported by interviews and focus groups.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"What differences were found between students and staff regarding LMS accessibility?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"Students rated the contribution of online accessibility to their learning higher than staff.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},593805,1792170802,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":66,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":133,"file_id":134,"file_url":135,"file_type":136,"file_size":137,"view_count":19,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":138,"language":139,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":143,"read_time":144},4398046744996,"Australian Journal of Teacher Education  \n\n| Volume 43 | Issue 3 | Article 2 |\n| --- | --- |\n| 2018\u003Cbr>Student and Staff Perceptions ofa Learning Management System for Blended Learning in Teacher Education\u003Cbr>Kathryn A. Holmes\u003Cbr>Western Sydney University, [k.holmes@westernsydney.edu.au](k.holmes@westernsydney.edu.au)\u003Cbr>Elena Prieto-Rodriguez\u003Cbr>The University of Newcastle, Australia, elena.prieto@newcastle.edu.au |  |\n\nRecommended Citation  \nHolmes, K. A., & Prieto-Rodriguez, E. (2018). Student and Staff Perceptions ofa Learning Management System for Blended Learning in Teacher Education. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 43 (3).  \nRetrieved from [http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol43/iss3/2](http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol43/iss3/2)  \nThis Journal Article is posted at Research Online.  \n[http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol43/iss3/2](http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol43/iss3/2)  \nAustralian Journal of Teacher Education  \nStudent and Staff Perceptions of a Learning Management System for Blended Learning in Teacher Education  \nKathryn A. Holmes  \nWestern Sydney University  \nElena Prieto-Rodriguez  \nThe University of Newcastle  \nAbstract: Higher education institutions routinely use Learning  \nManagement Systems (LMS) for multiple purposes; to organise  \ncoursework and assessment, to facilitate staff and student interactions,  \nand to act as repositories of learning objects. The analysis reported  \nhere involves staff (n=46) and student (n=470) responses to surveys as well as data collected in interviews and focus groups. The research  \nfocuses on participants ’perceptions of two broad affordances of the  \nLMS: accessibility and interactivity. Differences were found between student and staff views in relation to accessibility of online materials, with students rating its contribution to their learning more highly than staff. However, the two groups held similar views with regards to the effectiveness of LMS tools to enable interactivity. Applying interaction  \nequivalency theory (Anderson, 2003), the results reveal the  \nimportance of the key choices made by teaching staff in deciding  \nwhich LMS tools to use in order to maximise student participation and  \nlearning.  \nLearning Management Systems in Higher Education  \nIn recent years the tools available for teaching in university settings have changed dramatically from chalk, blackboards and overhead projectors to learning management systems (LMS) . LMS are now commonplace in higher education for both on-campus and distance students and are broadly defined as information systems that facilitate e-learning by supporting teaching and learning, but that also can perform administrative tasks and facilitate communication between instructors and students (Klobas & McGill, 2010) . However, the corpus of literature dedicated to understanding how its use impacts on pedagogical practices in higher education is still under development (Beetham & Sharpe, 2013; Herrington, Reeves,& Oliver, 2005; Renzi, 2011) . LMS structures have also been criticised for being too instructor-centric because they primarily seem to enable teachers to increase their efficiency in dealing with student assignments and feedback, distribution of teaching resources and various administrative tasks (Mott & Wiley, 2009; Weaver, Spratt, & Nair, 2008) . More recently, LMS have started to incorporate interactive tools such as blogs, wikis, chat rooms and discussion tools; features which have the potential to facilitate constructivist approaches to learning in contrast to traditional transmission models (Lonn & Teasley, 2009) . Rubin et al. (2009) state that at a minimum an effective LMS “must support active engagement, meaningful connections between segments of the course, easy communication, and formative feedback on work that is presented in class discussions or through other venues”(p. 82) . However, for interactivity of this type to occur, so that LMS are used to enhance the learning  \nVol 43, 3, March 2018 21  \nAustralian Journ","cbCaig3YeAZuygPf","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaig3YeAZuygPf","pdf",252863,15,"English","# Abstract\n## Learning Management Systems in Higher Education\n## Research Matching Student and Staff Perceptions of LMS Features\n## Interaction Equivalency Theory and Interactivity Types","[{\"question\":\"What is the focus of the study on the LMS in teacher education?\",\"answer\":\"The study focuses on participants’ perceptions of two LMS affordances: accessibility and interactivity.\"},{\"question\":\"How were perceptions data collected for staff and students?\",\"answer\":\"Perceptions were gathered using surveys from staff (n=46) and students (n=470), supported by interviews and focus groups.\"},{\"question\":\"What differences were found between students and staff regarding LMS accessibility?\",\"answer\":\"Students rated the contribution of online accessibility to their learning higher than staff.\"}]","Student and Staff Perceptions of a Learning Management System for Blended Learning in Teacher Education - Article 2 | PDF",1792077950,38]