Learning Management System (LMS) in Learning Academic Writing: Thematic Analysis of Learners’ Perception

Nurfaizah Sahib; Nurdin Noni; Maemuna Muhayyang; Muliati

doi:10.31605/eduvelop.v9i2.6078

Authors

Nurfaizah Sahib Faculty of Education and Literature, Universitas Bososwa, Makassar, Indonesia
Nurdin Noni English Language Education, Postgraduate Program, Universitas Negeri Makassar, Indonesia
Maemuna Muhayyang Faculty of Language and Literature, Universitas Negeri Makassar, Makassar, Indonesia
Muliati Faculty of Education and Literature, Universitas Bososwa, Makassar, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31605/eduvelop.v9i2.6078

Keywords:

Learning Management System (LMS), SEVIMA Edlink, Academic Writing, Learners’ Perceptions

Abstract

Despite the growing use of Learning Management Systems (LMSs) in higher education, limited research has examined how learners at Universitas Bosowa perceive the use of LMSs specifically for academic writing, particularly in relation to motivation, learning support, usability, and the integration of online and face-to-face instruction. This study explores learners’ perceptions of SEVIMA Edlink in an Academic Writing course at Universitas Bosowa, focusing on their experiences of using the platform as pedagogical support within a blended learning environment. The study employed a qualitative case study design involving 24 learners enrolled in an Academic Writing course. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews and analyzed using a thematic analysis approach. The findings revealed four interconnected themes: enhanced motivation and readiness, learning support through consistent access to materials, Learners' Experience of Blended Learning through EdLink, and learners’ comfort and ease of use. Learners perceived Edlink as supporting their preparation, engagement, and access to learning resources while complementing face-to-face instruction. The study suggests that LMS integration can provide meaningful pedagogical support for academic writing when instructional materials are delivered consistently and digital resources are thoughtfully integrated with classroom learning. These findings highlight the importance of learner-centered LMS integration in developing organized and supportive blended learning environments for academic writing.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abdullah, F., & Ward, R. (2016). Developing a General Extended Technology Acceptance Model for E-Learning (GETAMEL) by analysing commonly used external factors. Computers in Human Behavior, 56, 238–256.

Alias, N., & Zainuddin, A. (2020). LMS in writing instruction. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 15(3), 34–45.

Almaiah, M. A., Al-Khasawneh, A., & Althunibat, A. (2020). Exploring the critical challenges and factors influencing the e-learning system usage during COVID-19 pandemic. Education and Information Technologies, 25, 5261–5280.

Almusharraf, A. I. (2024). An investigation of university students’ perceptions of learning management systems: Insights for enhancing usability and engagement. Sustainability, 16(22)’ https://doi.org/10.3390/su162210037.

Benson, P. (2013). Teaching and researching: Autonomy in language learning (2nd ed.). Routledge.

Boelens, R., De Wever, B., & Voet, M. (2017). Four key challenges to the design of blended learning: A systematic literature review. Educational Research Review, 22, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.06.001

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Kasabova, G., Parusheva, S., & Bankov, B. (2023). Learning management systems as a tool for learning in higher education. Izvestia Journal of the Union of Scientists – Varna, Economic Sciences Series, 12(2), 224–233. https://doi.org/10.56065/IJUSV-ESS/2023.12.2.224

Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.

Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. (2008). Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles, and guidelines. Jossey-Bass.

Garrison, D. R., Cleveland-Innes, M., & Fung, T. S. (2010). Exploring Causal Relationships among Teaching, Cognitive and Social Presence: Student Perceptions of the Community of Inquiry Framework. The Internet and Higher Education, 13, 31-36.

Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001

Horn, M. B., & Staker, H. (2015). Blended: Using disruptive innovation to improve schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Hyland, K. (2016). Teaching and researching writing (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315739540.

Hyland, K. (2019). Second Language Writing (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Sparks, J. R., Song, Y., Brantley, W., & Liu, O. L. (2014). Assessing written communication in higher education: Review and recommendations for next-generation assessment. ETS Research Report Series, 2014(2), 1–52. https://doi.org/10.1002/ets2.12035

Sun, P.-C., Tsai, R. J., Finger, G., Chen, Y.-Y., & Yeh, D. (2008). What drives a successful e-learning? An empirical investigation of the critical factors influencing learner satisfaction. Computers & Education, 50(4), 1183–1202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.11.007

Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of TAM. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204.

Graham, C. R. (2006). Blended learning systems: Definition, current trends, and future directions. In C. J. Bonk & C. R. Graham (Eds.), The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs (pp. 3–21). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer Publishing.

Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy and foreign language learning. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Kukulska-Hulme, A., & Shield, L. (2008). An overview of mobile-assisted language learning: From content delivery to supported collaboration and interaction. ReCALL, 20(3), 271–289.

Keller, J. M. (2008). First principles of motivation to learn and e-learning. Distance Education, 29(2), 175–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587910802154970.

Lai, J. W. M., & Bower, M. (2019). How is the use of technology in education evaluated? A systematic review. Computers & Education. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103907,

Martín-Blas, T., & Serrano-Fernández, A. (2009). The role of new technologies in the learning process: Moodle as a teaching tool in physics. Computers & Education, 52(1), 35–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.06.005.

Pan, Z., Biegley, L., Taylor, A., & Zheng, H. (2023). A systematic review of learning analytics incorporated instructional interventions on Learning Management Systems. Journal of Learning Analytics, 10(3). https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2023.8093

Park, S. Y. (2011). An analysis of the technology acceptance model in understanding university learners’ behavioral intention to use e-learning. Educational Technology & Society, 12(3), 150–162.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15430421TIP4102_2