Exploring the Barriers to the Use of Blackboard Learning System at Arar University College in Saudi Arabia

  • Aliyah Kayyad Hakem Almijlad Faculty of Educational Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM), 43400 Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3794-9098
  • Mohd Mokhtar Muhamad Faculty of Educational Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM), 43400 Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia.
  • Mas Nida MD Khambari Faculty of Educational Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM), 43400 Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia.
Keywords: Blackboarding, Barriers, Technology, Culture

Abstract

The success of lecturers in adopting innovation in this age of digitization has a direct impact on their student's academic performance and, ultimately, institutional goals. However, many teachers have not integrated technological resources into their classrooms, such as the Blackboard learning system. As a result, this article explored lecturers' perspectives on potential obstacles to the use of the Blackboard in teaching. The study was carried out at Arar University College in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in the 2021-2022 academic session. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with nine lecturers. Findings indicate that technological, institutional, and cultural barriers as the main themes that emerged from the lecturers’ interviews. Thus, for effective utilization of the blackboard system, there is a need for technological advancement in both hardware and software infrastructures, continuous technical support, training, and institutional commitments of the government of Saudi Arabia and Arar university college in particular. Moreover, the design and development of software should bridge gender gaps and retain the cultural norms of the kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Al-Fadhli, S. (2008). Students' Perceptions of E-learning in Arab Society: Kuwait University as a case study. E-Learning and Digital media, 5(4), 418-428.

Aljawarneh, S. A. (2020). Reviewing and exploring innovative ubiquitous learning tools in higher education. Journal of computing in higher education, 32(1), 57-73.

Al Meajel, T. M., & Sharadgah, T. A. (2018). Barriers to using the blackboard system in teaching and learning: Faculty perceptions. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 23(2), 351-366.

Choy, K., Hopgood, A. A., Nolle, L., & O’neill, B. C. (2005). Performance of a multi-agent simulation on a distributed blackboard system. Int. Journal of Simulation Systems, Science and Technology, 6, 57-72.

Daniel, B. K. (2019, June). Student experience of the maximum variation framework for determining sample size in qualitative research. In 18th European Conference on Research Methodology for Business and Management Studies (p. 92).

Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 319-340.

DeNeui, D. L., & Dodge, T. L. (2006). Asynchronous learning networks and student outcomes: The utility of online learning components in hybrid courses. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 33(4).

Faisal, P., & Kisman, Z. (2020). Information and communication technology utilization effectiveness in distance education systems. International Journal of Engineering Business Management, 12, 1847979020911872.

Helsper, E. (2021). The digital disconnect: The social causes and consequences of digital inequalities. The Digital Disconnect, 1-232.

Hill, C. E., Knox, S., Thompson, B. J., Williams, E. N., Hess, S. A., & Ladany, N. (2005). Consensual qualitative research: An update. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(2), 196.

Lakens, D. (2022). Sample size justification. Collabra: Psychology, 8(1), 33267.

Kudale, A. E., & Wanjale, K. (2015). Human-computer interaction model based virtual whiteboard: A review. International Journal of Computer Applications, 975, 8887.

Morse, J. M. (2000). Determining sample size. Qualitative Health Research, 10(1), 3-5.

Moonsamy, D., & Govender, I. (2018). Use of blackboard learning management system: An empirical study of staff behavior at a South African university. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(7), 3069-3082.

Scully, G., & Kerr, R. (2014). Student workload and assessment: Strategies to manage expectations and inform curriculum development. Accounting Education, 23(5), 443-466.

Sharifov, M., & Mustafa, A. S. (2020). Review of Prevailing Trends, Barriers and Future Perspectives of Learning Management Systems (LMSs) in Higher Institutions. The Online Journal of New Horizons in Education, 10(3), 166.

Tawalbeh, T. I. (2018). EFL Instructors' Perceptions of Blackboard Learning Management System (LMS) at University Level. English Language Teaching, 11(1), 1-9.

Tsang, E. W. (2013). Case study methodology: Causal explanation, contextualization, and theorizing. Journal of International Management, 19(2), 195-202.

Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS quarterly, 425-478.

Welch, C., Paavilainen-Mäntymäki, E., Piekkari, R., & Plakoyiannaki, E. (2022). Reconciling theory and context: How the case study can set a new agenda for international business research. Journal of International Business Studies, 53(1), 4-26.

Published
2022-08-29
How to Cite
Almijlad, A., Muhamad, M. and Khambari, M. N. (2022) “Exploring the Barriers to the Use of Blackboard Learning System at Arar University College in Saudi Arabia”, Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (MJSSH), 7(8), p. e001673. doi: 10.47405/mjssh.v7i8.1673.
Section
Articles