Are VLEs still worthwhile?

This opinion piece considers the current value of Virtual Learning Environments (VLEs), and associated technologies such as e-portfolios, from the perspective of both lecturers and learners. Student satisfaction is discussed, and the relationship between VLE engagement and academic performance is considered. The piece concludes by highlighting the need for flexibility in the ways in which universities utilise technologies for teaching and learning.


Introduction
, or 'Learning Management Systems' (LMS) started to appear in Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in the late 1990s. Their uptake was rapid, accelerated by national and international policy (Konrad, 2003) and initiatives such as the Open University's (OU) VLE project (Weller, 2006). By 2007, VLEs had become ubiquitous, and currently include 'Blackboard', 'Moodle', and 'Canvas'.
Back in 2006, Martin Weller from the OU believed that VLEs acted as pioneers, paving the way for many more exciting technological developments in teaching, learning and assessment (Weller, 2006). However, other authors were anxious that VLEs were too traditional in approach, primarily acting as administrative tools (Blin and Munro, 2008), and even having the effect of inhibiting innovation in HEI technology (Stiles, 2007). There was a recognition that online learning, including VLEs, required sound design (Laurillard, Davies Are VLEs worthwhile? Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, Issue 18: October 2020 2 2010), and substantial interactivity (Salmon, 2002). It was also realised that in addition to IT specialists, tutors and librarians had a key role to play in setting up and promoting VLE pages (Markland, 2003). Tutors also needed support and training to help them use VLEs effectively (Comas-Quinn 2012), and this was also the case for technologies that sit within VLEs, such as e-portfolios (e.g. Pebblepad), assignment submission and plagiarism detection software (e.g. Turnitin), and lecture-capture technology (e.g. Panopto).
HEIs continue to invest a great deal of money and time in VLEs and associated technologies, in the hope that they will help them be competitive (Stoller, 2016), and with the implicit assumption they improve teaching and learning. However, assumptions about the pedagogic value of educational technologies are not always correct. Interactive whiteboards, for example, were installed in large numbers in school classrooms across the UK and elsewhere over the last twenty years but are now generally used as if they were merely ordinary (and substantially cheaper) whiteboards (Schnackenberg and Vega, 2016).
Is there a good enough return on investment in the case of university VLEs? Do they help lecturers to teach their subjects and courses? Do they enrich students' learning experience and lead to higher marks?  (Shelton, 2014). He found that around 60% of respondents used their institutional VLE frequently, but there was considerable variation across HEIs in lecturers' levels of confidence in their use. Some of the lecturers responding to the survey commented that they continued to use institutional technologies such as VLEs even though they 'did not consider them to have a positive effect on learning' (Shelton, 2014, p.757), and Shelton

Davies
Are VLEs worthwhile?
Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, Issue 18: October 2020 3 speculated that for some lecturers 'institutional rules or expectations require them to use technology in ways with which they are not comfortable' (Shelton, 2014, p.757). He also noted that barriers to lecturer engagement with institutional technologies such as VLEs included lack of training, and lack of support, but the major barrier, mentioned by 65% of his respondents, was lack of time. This was also found to be the case by other authors such as Farrelly et al (2018).

VLEs and learners
Student satisfaction with VLEs appears to vary by institution (Shelton, 2014) and course (Boulton et al, 2018), though it is not uncommon to have a low frequency of interaction with VLE resources (Agudo-Peregrina et al, 2014; Davies and Harries, 2016), or for students to spend little time engaging with VLE resources (Boulton et al, 2018). Surveys of students have indicated that student satisfaction, and also student retention, increase with the richness of VLE communication tasks (Rienties and Toetenel, 2016), and this reinforces the early work in this area by authors such as Salmon (2002). usage and class of degree in some subjects (e.g. medicine), but not in others (e.g. (2014) found a significant positive association between VLE engagement and performance for online courses, but not for 'blended'

mathematics). Agudo-Peregrina et al
courses where there was some face-to-face delivery in addition to VLE based study. This was also observed by Davies and Harris (2016).
E-portfolios play an important role within VLE usage on several HE courses, particularly those with practice-based components such as nursing. Though not widespread in some countries, for example Ireland (Farrell, 2018), they have been used extensively in regions such as the United States (Kahn et al, 2014; Association of American Colleges and Universities, 2020). However, Kahn et al (2014) noted that within any one US institution usage of e-portfolios was sparse. This ties in with Shelton's (2014) survey of English HEIs which found that less than 10% of tutors used e-portfolios frequently. Technical difficulties appeared to be a barrier to e-portfolio uptake in the case of both academic staff (Andrews and Cole, 2015) and students (Birks et al, 2016).
However, many studies, for example, Roberts et al (2016), have commented that eportfolios help to promote reflective thinking.
Turnitin is another application used widely in conjunction with VLEs. Primarily designed to detect plagiarism, this technology can help students learn about aspects of academic writing (Abrahamson & Mann, 2018). Turnitin also acts as a key portal for uploading and assessing assignments, and a means of providing feedback to learners. On some HE courses, the requirement to submit assignments via Turnitin, or an equivalent VLE component, may be the prime motivator in students' engagement with their institutional VLE (Hampel & Pleines, 2013 et al (2018) noted that the availability of lecture capture on a medical course was associated with a reduction in attendance at lectures, and Edwards and Clinton (2018) also found a negative association between lecture capture and attendance on a UK Davies Are VLEs worthwhile?
Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, Issue 18: October 2020 5 undergraduate science module. Both of these studies found that viewing videos of lectures did not appear to improve student achievement. Edwards and Clinton (2018) held the view that the 'net effect of lecture capture introduction… is generally negative' (Edwards and Clinton, 2018, p.403).

Looking to the future
The evidence of the value of VLEs and associated technologies is clearly mixed and, in many cases, HEIs may be continuing to use them because of past investment rather than their benefits to teaching and learning. Dron and Anderson (2016, p.11) (Educause, 2020). These environments are considered to be 'learning ecosystems' that incorporate some existing features of a VLE, but additionally use learning analytics to give increased flexibility and agility. They may constitute a major improvement on VLEs because of the provision of a more personalised learning experience that includes synchronous and asynchronous elements, advice, collaboration and assessment (Educause, 2015).
The flexibility promised by NGDLE is vital and links to the observations of Orr et al (2018, p.12) who commented that 'there is no 'one size fits all' approach to the implementation of technology'. This translates into a need for a range of technological options and the freedom to choose the tools that best suit specific learners and courses. It also necessitates adequate time and support for lecturers so that they can maintain awareness and understanding of the increasing range of online delivery options.