This paper reveals the result of 322 distance learners’ perception towards e-learning program conducted by UiTM. Generally the respondents rated above average for all aspects of distance learning program irrespective of gender, program of studies, income and occupation. Students’ gender also did not show any difference in their perception. Similarly, semester of studies too, did not indicate any significant difference except their perception towards lecturer. However students’ semester of studies showed significant difference towards lecturer, module and physical. Gender, income and semester of studies did not show any relationship to students’ perception towards all aspects of distance learning program. However students’ program of studies showed significant relationship towards their perceptions of the program. Students’ CGPA showed negative relationship with all aspects of distance learning program.

1. 1
An Evaluation of e-Learning Program: A Case Study at Institute of
Education Development
By
Syed Jamal Abdul Nasir, Mohd Rashidee Alwi ,Jamaliah Said
Institute of Education Development (InED)
Universiti Teknologi MARA, Shah Alam.
ssyed_itm@yahoo.com
Abstract
This paper reveals the result of 322 distance learners’ perception towards e-learning program
conducted by UiTM. Generally the respondents rated above average for all aspects of distance
learning program irrespective of gender, program of studies, income and occupation. Students’
gender also did not show any difference in their perception. Similarly, semester of studies too, did
not indicate any significant difference except their perception towards lecturer. However
students’ semester of studies showed significant difference towards lecturer, module and
physical. Gender, income and semester of studies did not show any relationship to students’
perception towards all aspects of distance learning program. However students’ program of
studies showed significant relationship towards their perceptions of the program. Students’ CGPA
showed negative relationship with all aspects of distance learning program.
Keywords: e-Learning and evaluation
Introduction
UiTM being one of the established public universities in Malaysia was formed in 1956 which was
known as Dewan Latehan RIDA. After a few stages of restructuring, on 26 August 1999 finally it
was upgraded into a university status and was known as Universiti Teknologi MARA. The vision
is to become a distinguished university aspiring to promote academic excellence in higher
education. In its effort to assist those who do not have the opportunity to study fultime, UiTM
under one of its department known as Institute of Education Development (InED) offers a variety
of programs conducted via different modes. One of the major modes is distance education which
first started the program in 1990.
Inline with the government vision in encouraging and promoting IT society especially when the
Prime Minister launched Multimedia Super Corridor (MSC) in 1996, UiTM took the challenge by
shifting its distance education program to electronic distance Education Program which known as
Flexible Learning Program (FLP) in January 1998. The Ministry of Education officially launched
the FLP program on 26 April 1999. In December 1998 there were only three (3) subjects being
offered with seven lecturers conducted the programs with only 72 registered students. Today, the
enrollment has increased to 5300 students.
E-Learning Model of UiTM
The e-PJJ/FLP is designed to take advantage of the developments and advancements in distance
learning and education with Information and Communication Technology. These developments
and advancements are harnessed into forms of support for students to enhance their learning.
Thus InED uses the web as an adjunct of on-line learning which consists of eight main
components that are:

2. 2
Figure 1: The Eight Components of Flexible Learning Program (FLP)
Problem Statement
UiTM has conducted the e-learning for almost a decade. It has gone into vast development, issues
and critics. Thus, it leads to the need for in-depth study towards its perception from the views of
adult learners. These perceptions gathered based on feedback derived from studies conducted are
crucial to the enhancement and improvement of e-learning. Guidelines and suggestion for
improvement resulted from empirical study, will be able to be tailored the needs and interests of
the institutions, system providers (servers) and the learners. Therefore several questions need to
be answered such as:-
1. What is the student’s perception towards the program?
2. Are there any differences in perception between genders, program of studies, and
semester of studies?
3. Is there any correlation between students’ perception and genders, program of studies,
semester of studies, age and income?
Research Objectives
The specific objectives of the study are as follows:
1. To determine distance learner’s perception towards e-learning programs.
2. To determine differences in perception between genders, program of studies, and
semester of studies.
Self-
Instructional
material
(SIM)
Support
Services
Face to
face
FacilitatorsLearning
Center
Library
Services
Online
discussion and
Forum,
COMPONENTS
OF FLP /
e-PJJ UiTM
Online and
Supplementary
Learning
Materials

3. 3
3. To determine correlation between students’ perception and genders, program of studies,
semester of studies, age and income.
Methodology
Research Design
This study is a descriptive research carried out among distance learners in the Institute of
Education Development (InED), UiTM. A Self developed questionnaire was used to evaluate
students’ perceptions towards e-learning programs. The data was gathered just once, making the
research a cross sectional study. The secondary data was collected from reviews of prior
researchers, journals, reports, articles relating to this study. The factors being evaluated are
lecturers, the course, modules, IT infrastructure, physical facilities and support services.
Theoretical Framework
The theoretical frameworks explain the relationship between gender, programmes of studies,
semester of studies, income and academic achievement to students perception towards course,
lecturer, module, physical facilities IT infrastructure and support services. The above framework
indicates that the focus of the study is to measure student perceptions towards six aspects of e-
learning programmes those are:-
Lecture. level of lecturers’ commitment, competency and their quality of teaching delivery.
Course: Respondents were asked to evaluate on the quality of the course content and to what
extent they perceived the syllabus content can help them to improve communication skills,
creative skill, problems solving and other knowledge.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
Figure 1: Theoretical Framework
Module: The respondents were asked to evaluate their perception towards quality of module in
term of usefulness, organization, clarity, contents, accessibility and the price charge.
IT infrastructure: Refer to IT training sufficiency, accessibility of information, virtual library
service and accessibility to web-pages.
Physical facilities: Refer to respondent’s satisfaction toward the quality of library facility,
classroom environment, and teaching equipment.
Perception towards:
• Lecturers
• Course Content
• Modules,
• IT Infrastructure
• Physical
Facilities
Support Services
Gander
Semester of studies
Income
Programme of studies
Academic
achievement

4. 4
Support service: Students were asked to assess their perception towards the quality of services
provided by the institute. Among the support service covered in the questionnaire were enrolment
process, quality of services provided by academic staff, administration of examination and
handling of students complaints.
Population and Sample
A total of 500 questionnaires were distributed to the distance learners of InED, UiTM. The
distance learners were from diploma and bachelor level.. The students were randomly selected.
Three hundreds and twenty two returned the questionnaires, which was 64.4 percent.
Reliability and Validity
The Cronbach Alpha values showed more than .07 which means the reliability of the instrument
for each aspect is considered high.
Data Analysis
Three statistical procedures were involved in the data analysis in answering the research
objectives as follow.
1. To determine distance learner’s perception towards e-learning program.
Means scores were used to determine the students’ perception towards six aspects of e-
learning programs.
2. Independent t-Test was executed to determine differences in perception between genders,
program of studies, and ANOVA for semester of studies.
3 To examine the correlation between students’ perception and genders, program of
studies, semester of studies, age and income, Spearman Rank was used.
Research Findings
Distances’ Learners Perception Towards e-Learning Program
Table 1: Students’ Perception in General
Mean_Lectur
er Mean_Course
Mean_Modul
e Mean_IT Mean_facilities Mean_Service
Mean 3.7867 3.8994 3.6372 3.4607 3.34163 3.6810
Rank 2 1 4 5 6 3
Table 1 shows in general, respondents ranked highest for the quality of course content, followed
by lecturer, support services, module and IT facilities. The finding shows that respondents agreed
quality of physical facilities (such as classroom condition, teaching aid and library facilities) is
the lowest in the rank with mean score of 3.34. This perhaps due to unavailability of own building
whereby InED keeps shifting their classroom from one place to another. However the mean score
for every factor indicates that respondents in general were satisfied with the e-learning program.

5. 5
Students’ Perception by Gender
Table 2: Students’ Perception by Gender
Gender
Lecturer Course Module IT Physical Service
male
Mean 3.8348 3.9607 3.7281 3.5225 3.4363 3.7155
female
Mean 3.7548 3.8619 3.5841 3.4198 3.3978 3.6559
Table 2 exhibits students’ perception by gender. Both groups indicate above average means score
for every aspects of distance learning program. However it is interesting to note that male
respondents were more satisfied as compared to female counterparts as indicated by higher mean
score for every item measured in this study. This may be due to different level of expectation of
the two groups as argued by Gurian (2001) that male and female have different set of expectation
in mind.
Table 3 shows students’ perception by program of studies. The mean score clearly highlight that,
degree students showed lower mean scores for every factor measured in this study as compared to
the diploma students. This indicates that higher level students rated lower the services provided
by the institution as compared to the diploma students. This may be due to higher expectation of
bachelor students as the may be holding better position at their work place. Unlike the diploma
students who are generally the supporting staff.
Schedul 3: Students’ Perception by Program of Studies
program
Lecturer course module IT Physical Service
Diploma Mean 3.8289 3.9138 3.7104 3.4769 3.4639 3.6800
Mean 3.6884 3.8615 3.4793 3.4129 3.3033 3.6703degree
Table 4: Students’ Perception by Semester of Studies
Semester
Lecturer course module IT Physical Service
1-2 Mean 4.0159 3.9423 3.7142 3.6438 3.6125 3.7313
3-4 Mean 3.7670 3.9145 3.6122 3.4299 3.3986 3.6158
5-6 Mean 3.8248 3.9462 3.6748 3.4509 3.3659 3.6408
7-8 Mean 3.7124 3.8389 3.6146 3.4522 3.4413 3.7820
>9 Mean 3.4400 3.6154 3.4200 3.2000 2.9600 3.6000
Table 4 shows students’ perception by semester of study. Regardless of which semester they
were, respondents indicated above average mean scores for all aspects of distance learning
program. It is interesting to highlight that junior students seemed to perceive the quality of

6. 6
distance learning program better as compared to their senior in semester 9. Again this may be to
higher expectation of senior students as compared to their junior. All students, irrespective of
their semester of studies ranked course content higher as compared to other factors. The high
quality syllabus offered by UiTM, could explain this phenomenon.
Table 5: Students’ Perception by Income
income
Lecturer course module IT Physical Service
3.7618 3.8601 3.6907 3.4241 3.3773 3.5410
3.7995 3.8853 3.6111 3.4757 3.4714 3.6962
3.7812 3.9678 3.6793 3.4427 3.3284 3.7395
3.7412 3.9690 3.4500 3.5364 3.3455 3.6673
<1000
1001-2000
2001-3500
3501-5000
>5000
3.7778 3.8547 3.6667 3.3889 3.3111 3.9011
Table 5 shows the students’ perception by income. The students from various income
backgrounds showed average perception towards all the six aspects of distance learning program.
The lower income students perceived better towards physical facilities as compared to higher
income students. The higher income would have higher expectation as compared to lower income
group that willing to accept lower quality services.
Table 6: Students’ Perception by Occupations
occupation
Lecturer course module IT Physical Service
3.8186 3.8907 3.6880 3.4643 3.4569 3.7021
3.7664 3.8814 3.5504 3.4195 3.3413 3.6221
3.5950 4.1703 3.7929 3.5429 3.3857 3.8255
3.9068 3.9316 3.9667 3.7444 3.7333 3.9259
3.7944 3.8718 3.7167 3.7833 3.9000 3.9333
Public sector
private sector
own business
not working
others
Irrespective of their type of occupations, the students showed above average mean score for every
service offered to them. This indicates that they are satisfied with the service provided by InED.
The above findings showed that physical facilities were ranked lower as compared to other
factors. This implies that, in order to improve image, number of enrollment and meeting learner’s
expectation, InED needs to carefully investigate the classroom condition, teaching facilities,
library facilities and other physical facilities. One of the factors contribute to this poor physical
facilities perhaps is due to unavailability of own building.
It is important to highlight that respondents agreed that the course contents is high quality as they
strongly felt that the course content is able to enhance their skills at the work place. This could be
the quality of syllabus as UiTM keeps reviewing the syllabus to meet current needs of workforce
market.

7. 7
In general, respondents agreed that the e-learning program is at satisfactory level as the lowest
means score is 3.3413. Likert scale of 1 indicate highly not satisfied and 5 for strongly
dissatisfied. Score of 3 point or above indicate that respondents are satisfied with the services.
Differences in Perception between genders, program of studies, and semester of studies
Table 7: Differences in Perception between genders, program of studies, and semester of
studies
Sig.(2 tailed) Lecturer Course Module IT Physical
Facilities
Service
Gender
(t-test)
.161 .084 .060 .190 .630 .425
Program of studies
(t-test)
.015 .370 .003 .423 .048 .899
Semester of Studies (
ANOVA)
.015 .388 .825 .502 .246 .407
Table 8: Multiple Comparisons Tukey HSD
Dependent
Variable (I) semester (J) semester
Mean
Difference
(I-J) Std. Error Sig.
Lecturer 1-2 3-4 .24886 .09763 .083
5-6 .19103 .10131 .327
7-8 .30342(*) .09975 .021
>9 .57587 .23374 .102
3-4 1-2 -.24886 .09763 .083
5-6 -.05782 .07091 .926
7-8 .05456 .06867 .932
>9 .32701 .22226 .582
5-6 1-2 -.19103 .10131 .327
3-4 .05782 .07091 .926
7-8 .11238 .07382 .549
>9 .38483 .22390 .424
7-8 1-2 -.30342(*) .09975 .021
3-4 -.05456 .06867 .932
5-6 -.11238 .07382 .549
>9 .27245 .22320 .739
>9 1-2 -.57587 .23374 .102
3-4 -.32701 .22226 .582
5-6 -.38483 .22390 .424
7-8 -.27245 .22320 .739
* The mean difference is significant at the .05 level.
Table 7 shows that male and female students have no significant difference in their perception
towards lecturer, course, module, IT, physical and service. The students’ program of studies
indicated significant difference in their perception towards lecturer, module and physical facilities

8. 8
but not towards course, IT infrastructure and service.
The ANOVA shows that students from different semester of studies showed no significant
differences in their perception towards course, module, IT, Physical facilities, and service except
towards lecturer.
The Tukey HSD shows that students between semester 1 - 2 and 7 – 8 have significant difference
in their perception towards lecturer. The students from other semester have not showed any
significant difference.
Ccorrelation between students’ perception and genders, program of studies, semester of
studies, CGPA and income.
Table 9: Results of Spearman’s Rho
Spearman's rho Sig (2 tailed)
Gender Perception .252
Program of Studies .038
income .877
Semester of Studies
CGPA
.176
.023
The result of Spearman’s Rho reveals that there is no significant relationship between students’
gender, income and semester of studies; and perception. However there are significant
relationship between students’ program of studies and CGPA; and perception. The result shows
that students’ perception depends on their program of studies and CGPA. However the
Spearman’s rho does not provide which program and CGPA level have significant relationship to
students’ perception.
The students’ perception towards distance program was found to have negative relationship to the
students’ CGPA. This indicates that the higher achiever students lower perception towards the
distance program.
Conclusion
From the findings of the study three conclusions can be made that are:-
1. Generally the students of InED perceive the e-learning program above average standard.
2. Students’ perception independent of gender, income and semester of studies.
3. Students’ perception depend on their CGPA
1. Generally the students of InED perceive the e-learning program at above average
standard
Obviously all the six elements of the e-learning program rated average by all the respondents.
Adult learners as been mentioned by Roger (1981) go back to school or university with high
expectation. They expect everything is to be taught by the lecturers or everything is nicely in
place. InED with all the limitations such as lack of facilities, like class room, library, computer
labs, etc just couldn’t provide all the students’ expectation as they expected. As consequences
InED receives a lot of complaints from the students with regards to the improper facilities set up.
This could be one of the reasons why the students rated slightly above average of InED e-
learning program.

9. 9
2. Students’ perception independent of gender, income and semester of studies.
Though gender always been claimed to differentiate between male and female perception on
something, but the study found that it did not in line with the claim. This could be the result of an
equality of opportunity or treatment by the Malaysian government to the women. In Malaysia
gender is not a factor of discrimination in education as in some developing countries. Thus, they
have freedom to evaluate things as the male do.
The students from different income background too did not show any significant difference in
their perception. It means that the six aspects of distance learning program have been genuinely
evaluated based on academic perspective regardless of socio-economy background.
Seniority as a student also did not indicate any difference in their perception as compared to the
junior students. Once again the evaluation was done purely based on academic and quality
perspective.
3. Students’ perception depends on their CGPA level
Unlike gender, income and semester of studies, the students’ CGPA level did influence the
students’ perception. It means the students’ academic achievement differentiates their
perceptions. The high achievers showed higher expectation towards the programs as compared to
the lower achievers. Logically, the smart students expect more than less smart students.
Recommendations
Based on the study, several recommendations can be made as follow:-
1. Recommendation for practice
a. Facilities such as classroom, students centers, quality of module, support
service and even the commitment on the part of teaching need to look upon.
b. To improve the Learning Management System (LMS) environment to
provide more structure and guidance to students in learning from interaction
and group activities. Further research and development are needed to refine
the LMS to support and enhance students’ learning using a problem-based
model.
2. Recommendation for further research
a. To use multiple methods of study such as qualitative and
quantitative research to get genuine input.
c. To involve all students from branches in order to get representative
findings.

10. 10
REFERENCES
Abdullah, Szarina. (2003). Understanding Adult Learners. Proceeding on the "Seminar
Memahami & Memudahcara Pelajar-Pelajar dewasa e-PJJ UiTM". Kuala Lumpur
Bourne, J. R., McMaster, E., Rieger, J., & Campbell, J. O. (1998). Paradigms for online
learning: a case study in the design andimplementation of an asynchronous
learning networks course,http://www.aln.org/alnWeb/journal/issue2/assee.htm.
Carswell, L. (2000). Distance education via the Internet: The student experience. British Journal
of Educational Technology, 31 (1), 29-46.
Collins, M. (2000).Comparing Web, correspondence and lecture versions of a second- year
non-major biology course. British Journal of Educational Technology, 31 (1), 21-
27.
Corrent-Agostinho, S., Hedberg, J., & Lefoe, G. (1998).Constructing problems in a Web-
based environment. Educational Media International, 35 (3), 173- 180.
Delling, R.M. (1985, August). Towards a theory of distance education. Paper presented at
the ICDE Thirteenth World Conference in Melbourne, Australia.
Fredericksen, E., Pickett, A., Pelz, W., Shea, P., & Swan, K. (2000). Student satisfaction and
perceived learning with online courses: Principles and examples from the SUNY
Learning Network. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Network, 14 (2),
http://www.aln.org/alnweb/journal/Vol14_issue2/le/Fredericksen/LE- fredericksen.htm
Hislop, G. (2000). Working professional as part-time online learners.Journal of Asynchronous
Learning Networks, 4 (2),
http://www.aln.org/alnweb/journal/vol4_issue2/le/hislop/LE-hislop.htm
Hong, K.-S., Ridzuan, A. A., & Kuek, M.-K. (2003). Students' attitudes toward the use of
the Internet for learning: A study at a university in Malaysia. Educational
Technology & Society, 6(2), 45-49
Ismail, Yusof. (2002). Evaluation of an Internet-Based, Distance Learning: Undergraduate
Business Program. Paper presented on the Seminar on E-Learning Initiatives in
Malaysia, Hotel Pan Pasific, Kuala Lumpur.
Jiang, M., & Ting, E. (1998). Course design, instruction, and students' online behaviors: A
study of instructional variables and student perceptions of online learning. Paper
presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research
Association, April 13-17, 1998, San Diego, CA.
Jurich, Sonia.(2003).Virtual Education: Trends and Potential Uses.
http://www.techknowlogia.org/TKL_active_pages2/SearchCurrent/main.asp?Issu
eNumber=19
Kearsley, G. (2000). Online education: Learning and teaching in cyberspace, Belmont,
California: Wadsworth.
Klco, Bill & Munson, Kevin. (2000). e-Learning: Revolution or Evolution?
www.kmgpinc.com/downloads/kmswp.pdf

11. 11
Kulik, C., & Kulik, J. (1991). Effectiveness of computer-based instruction: An updated
analysis. Computers and Human Behaviour, 7.
Matuga, J. M. (2001). Electronic pedagogical practice: The art and science of teaching and
learning online. Educational Technology & Society, 4 (3),
http://ifets.massey.ac.nz/periodical/vol_3_2001/matuga.html.
Mokhtar, M., Nordin, N. & Ibrahim, M.K. (2002) The Academic Performance of Electronic
Distance Learners: An empirical Evidance from Malaysia. Paper presented at the
Seminar on E-Learning Initiatives in Malaysia, Hotel Pan Pasific, Kuala Lumpur.
Motiwalla, L., & Tello, S. (2000). Distance learning on the Internet: An exploratory study.
The Internet and Higher Education, 2 (4), 253-264.
Muhd Kamil. (2001). How to Study the e-PJJ Way. Proceeding on the Workshop on e-
Learning & e-PJJ, Selangor.
Nakabayashi, Kiyoshi. (2003). E-Learning Initiatives in Japan. Proceeding on the
Seminar on E-Learning Initiatives in Malaysia, Hotel Pan Pasific, Kuala Lumpur.
Oliver, R., & Omari, A. (2001).Student responses to collaborating and learning in a Web-
based environment. Journal of Computer-Assisted Learning, 17 (1), 34-47.
Yunus, A.S.(2003). Emergence of Web-Based Teaching and Learning Culture in Universiti Putra
Malaysia. www.homestead.com/peoplelearn/WebResearch.html
Rosenberg, Marc. (2002). The DNA of e-Learning. www.internettime.com/store/DNA%20-
-%20DRAFT.pdf
Shireen Haron. (2002). Profile of Web-based Learners and Learning Environments in
Universiti Teknologi MARA. Paper presented on the Seminar on E- Learning
Initiatives in Malaysia, Hotel Pan Pasific, Kuala Lumpur
Speck, M. (1996, Spring). Best practice in professional development for sustained
educational change. ERS Spectrum, 33-41.
Syed Othman. (2002). e-LEARNING: A Malaysian Case Study. Paper presented at the Africa-
Asia Workshop on Promoting Co-operation in Information and Communication
Technologies Development, Kuala Lumpur.
Swan, K., Shea, P., Fredericksen, E., Pickett, A., Pelz, W., & Maher, G. 2000).Building
knowledge building communities: Consistencies, contact and communication
in the virtual classroom. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 23 (4),
359-383.
Wegner, S. B., Holloway, K. C., & Gordon, E. M. (1999).The effects of Internet-based
instruction on student learning. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 3
(2),http://www.aln.org/alnweb/journal/vol3_issue2/wegner.htm.

12. 12
.
.

13. 13