710511631039 a study on the effectiveness of learning management system of snapwiz, bangalore

PROJECT REPORT

Submitted by

M.RAMESH

Register No: 710511631039

In partial fulfillment for the award of the degree

of

MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

IN

(FINANCE AND MARKETING)

COIMBATORE INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING AND

TECHNOLOGY

COIMBATORE- 641109

JULY 2013

A STUDY ON THE EFFECTIVENESS OF

LEARNING MANAGEMENT SYSTEM OF

SNAPWIZ

BANGALORE

Department of Management studies and Research

PROJECT WORK

JULY 2013

This is to certify that the project entitled

A STUDY ON THE EFFECTIVENESS OF LEARNING MANAGEMENT

SYSTEM OF SNAPWIZ

BANGALORE

is the bonafide record of project work done by

M.RAMESH

Register No: 710511631039

of MBA (Finance and Marketing) during the year 2013.

------------------------- -----------------------------

Project Guide Head of the Department

Submitted for the Project Viva-Voce examination held on __________________

-------------------------- ---------------------------

Internal Examiner External Examiner

COIMBATORE INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING

AND TECHNOLOGY

COIMBATORE - 641109

DECLARATION

I affirm that the project work titled A STUDY ON THE EFFECTIVENESS OF

LEARNING MANAGEMENT SYSTEM OF SNAPWIZ, BANGALORE being

submitted in partial fulfillment for the award of MBA is the original work carried out by

me. It has not formed the part of any other project work submitted for award of any

degree or diploma, either in this or any other University.

M.RAMESH

Reg. No: 710511631039

I certify that the declaration made above by the candidate is true.

Dr.S.Jaya Bharathi

Professor

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I wish to present my heartiest gratitude in the footsteps of my parents who have taken

intense burden for my successful education career.

I wish to place our profound sense of gratitude to our respected Director

Dr.K.A.Chinnaraju and our beloved Principal Dr.N.Nagarajan for providing us with

excellent facilities without which the project would never has been successful.

The respect we shower would really be no match to describe in these words, for we can

really never forget the faith asserted in us by our esteemed Head of the Department Dr.T.Raju.

I am very thankful for his incredible counseling and encouragement.

I would fail miserably in my duties if I do not mention the service of her guidance

Professor Dr.S.JAYA BHARATHI, for the support and valuable suggestions in completing

this project without which this project would not have become true.

LIST OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER CONTENTS PAGE NO

I INTRODUCTION 1-17

1.1 Introduction to the topic 1-7

1.2 Industry profile 8-14

1.3 Need for the study 15

1.4 Objective of the study 16

1.5 Scope of the study 17

1.6 Limitations of the study 17

II REVIEW OF LITERATURE 18-20

III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 21-24

3.1 Introduction 21

3.2 Research Design 21

3.3 Type of Research 21

3.4 Sampling 22

3.5 Sampling method 22

3.6 Sampling size 22

3.7 Method of Data Collection 22-23

IV DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION 25-65

4.1 Percentage Analysis Tables 25-53

4.2 Charts 25-53

4.3 Chi-square test 54-63

4.4 Rank Correlation 64-65

V FINDINGS AND SUGGESTIONS 66-70

5.1 Findings 66-68

5.2 Suggestions 69

5.3 Conclusion 70

VI BIBLIOGRAPHY 71-72

VII APPENDICES 73-75

LIST OF CHI-SQUARE TABLE

S.NO TABLE PAGE NO

4.3.1 Age group V/S Level after the training 54-55

4.3.2 Educational qualification V/S Satisfaction after the training 56-57

4.3.3 Gender V/S Level after the training 58-59

4.3.4 Course period V/S Use forums 60-61

4.3.5 Educational qualification V/S Level of content 62-63

LIST OF CORRELATION TABLE

S.NO TABLE PAGE NO

4.4.1 Advertisement influenced their decision in choosing

SNAPWIZ V/S use forums in LMS

64

4.4.2 Use forums in LMS V/S Access LMS from home/outside 65

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE NO CONTENT PAGE NO

4.1.1 Table showing age group of respondents 25

4.1.2 Table showing gender of the respondents 26

4.1.3 Table showing educational qualification of the respondents 27

4.1.4 Table showing for which course the respondents joined 28

4.1.5 Table showing who prompted SNAPWIZ for the respondents 29

4.1.6 Table showing attributions considered by the respondent 30

4.1.7 Table showing the respondents influenced by advertisement 31

4.1.8 Table showing majority of classes took by the respondents 32

4.1.9 Table showing the type of LMS used by the respondent 33

4.1.10 Table showing how often do the respondents interact with LMS 34

4.1.11 Table showing the level of ease for the respondents 35

4.1.12 Table showing do the respondents use forums 36

4.1.13 Table showing why the respondents use forums 37

4.1.14 Table showing do the respondents access LMS outside SNAPWIZ 38

4.1.15 Table showing the amount of time used by respondents outside

SNAPWIZ

39

4.1.16 Table showing how do the respondents find the module wise

structuring of the content in LMS

40

4.1.17 Table showing the level of content available towards each topic in

LMS

41

4.1.18 Table showing the recommended changes with regard to the course

content

42

4.1.19 Table showing how do the respondents see themselves after the

training

43

4.1.20 Table showing rating level of respondents opinion towards

announcements

44

4.1.21 Table showing rating level of respondents opinion towards course

documents/resources

45

4.1.22 Table showing rating level of respondents opinion towards online

assignments

46


discussion board/forums

47

4.1.24 Table showing rating level of respondents opinion towards quizzes 48

4.1.25 Table showing rating level of respondents opinion towards my

library

49


scheduling/calendaring

50


storage

51


meeting

52

4.1.29 Table showing rating level of respondents opinion towards tasks 53

LIST OF CHARTS

CHART NO CONTENT PAGE NO

4.2.1 Chart showing age group of respondents 25

4.2.2 Chart showing gender of the respondents 26

4.2.3 Chart showing educational qualification of the respondents 27

4.2.4 Chart showing for which course the respondents joined 28

4.2.5 Chart showing who prompted SNAPWIZ for the respondents 29

4.2.6 Chart showing attributions considered by the respondent 30

4.2.7 Chart showing the respondents influenced by advertisement 31

4.2.8 Chart showing majority of classes took by the respondents 32

4.2.9 Chart showing the type of LMS used by the respondent 33

4.2.10 Chart showing how often do the respondents interact with LMS 34

4.2.11 Chart showing the level of ease for the respondents 35

4.2.12 Chart showing do the respondents use forums 36

4.2.13 Chart showing why the respondents use forums 37

4.2.14 Chart showing do the respondents access LMS outside

SNAPWIZ

38

4.2.15 Chart showing the amount of time used by respondents outside

SNAPWIZ

39

4.2.16 Chart showing how do the respondents find the module wise

structuring of the content in LMS

40

4.2.17 Chart showing the level of content available towards each topic

in LMS

41

4.2.18 Chart showing the recommended changes with regard to the

course content

42

4.2.19 Chart showing how do the respondents see themselves after the

training

43

4.2.20 Chart showing rating level of respondents opinion towards

announcements

44


course documents/resources

45


online assignments

46


discussion board/forums

47


quizzes

48

4.2.25 Chart showing rating level of respondents opinion towards my

library

49


scheduling/calendaring

50


online storage

51


online meeting

52


tasks

53

ABSTRACT

Web-based Learning Management Systems (LMS) and e-learning allow instructors and students

to share instructional materials, make class announcements, submit and return course

assignments, and communicate with each other online. Previous LMS-related research has

focused on which type of LMS would be better for the students. This study investigated to know

the effectiveness of a specific training centre SNAPWIZ in which more than (1000) students are

getting trained for the entrance exams like GRE and GMAT every year.

The main objective of the study quantifies the effectiveness of learning management system

(LMS) of SNAPWIZ in Bangalore. Continuing formal education is essential for distance

learners to improve their learning skills and knowledge to meet the challenge career in modern

competitive world. This study examines the success factors that influence learners' use of the

Learning Management System (LMS) and tests the applicability of the propose model, in the

context of distance learning practices in higher education. A survey was conducted to higher

education learners who involved in training to take their entrance exams like GRE and GMAT.

This study used a set of questionnaire which was adapted from the literatures to examine three

groups of dimensions,

System Design (System quality, service quality, information quality, usefulness and ease of use)

System Usage (System use, behavioral intention to use and user satisfaction)

System Outcome (Whether the students are satisfied after the training).

Method of data collection:

Primary data was collected through questionnaires. The questionnaire consisted of a number of

questions printed in a definite order on a set of forms, the respondents were requested to read

and understand the questions and write dominate reply on the questionnaire itself. The

respondents had to answer the questions on their own. Study covers (211) respondents in 4

different batches. The collected data were analyzed by using Statistical Package for Social

Sciences (SPSS) and various statistical tests were applied based on hypotheses and matching

variables. Appropriate statistical tools were employed to analyze the data viz., Chi-square test

and percentage analysis.

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.1 INTRODUTION TO THE TOPIC:

EFFECTIVENESS:

Doing right things is effectiveness.

The origin of the word "effective" stems from the Latin word EFFECTVUS, which means

creative, productive or effective. It surfaced in Middle English between 1300-1400 A.D.

Effectiveness is the capability of producing a desired result. When something is deemed

effective, it means it has an intended or expected outcome, or produces a deep, vivid

impression.

USAGE IN DIFFERENT LANGUAGE

1. In management, effectiveness relates to getting the right things done. Peter

Drucker reminds us that effectiveness can and must be learned.

2. In mathematics, effective is sometimes used as a synonym of algorithmically

computable.

3. In physics, an effective theory is, similar to a phenomenological theory a framework

intended to explain certain (observed) effects without the claim that the theory correctly

models the underlying (unobserved) processes.

4. In medicine, effectiveness relates to how well a treatment works in practice, as opposed

to efficacy, which measures how well it works in clinical trials or laboratory studies.

5. In humancomputer interaction, effectiveness is defined as the accuracy and

completeness of users tasks while using a system.

DEFINITION

1. The degree to which objectives are achieved and the extent to which

targeted problems are solved.

2. How and why efficiency is only one dimension of overall effectiveness.

3. The degree to which something is successful in producing a desired result .

4. The ability to produce a specific result or to exert a specific measurable influence.

5. The ability of an intervention to produce the desired beneficial effect in actual usage.

LEARNING MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (LMS)

A Learning Management System (LMS) is software that automates the administration of

training events. All Learning Management Systems manage the log-in of registers users,

manage course catalogues, record data from learners, and provide reports to management.

There used to be a distinction between Learning Management Systems and more powerful

Integrated Learning Management Systems. That distinction has now disappeared. The term

Learning Management System is now used to describe a wide range of applications that

track student training and may or may not include functions such as:

Authoring

Classroom management

Competency management

Knowledge management

Certification or compliance training

Personalization

Mentoring

Chat

Discussion boards

A learning management system (LMS) is a software application or Web-based technology used

to plan, implement, and assess a specific learning process. Typically, a learning management

system provides an instructor with a way to create and deliver content, monitor student

participation, and assess student performance. A learning management system may also provide

students with the ability to use interactive features such as threaded discussions, video

conferencing, and discussion forums.

The Advanced Distance Learning group, sponsored by the United States Department of

Defence, has created a set of specifications called Shareable Content Object Reference Model

(SCORM) to encourage the standardization of learning management systems.

DEFINITION

1. A Learning Management System (sometimes also called "Course Management System",

"Pedagogical Platform", "E-Learning Platform") is a software system that

delivers courseware plus e-tutoring over the Internet.

2. An information system that administers instructor-led and e-learning courses and keeps track of

student progress.

3. While there are several versions of definition on what is learning management

system (LMS) both in academic and practical field. There are some consensus on

the core of LMS. Based on ASTD`s definition (Ellis 2009), the basic description

is a software application that automates the administration, tracking, and

reporting of training events.

However, its not that simple. A robust LMS should be able to do the following:

centralize and automate administration

use self-service and self-guided services

assemble and deliver learning content rapidly

consolidate training initiatives on a scalable web-based platform

support portability and standards

personalize content and enable knowledge reuse.

4. Szabo & Flesher defined LMS as the framework that handles all aspects of the

learning process. An LMS is the infrastructure that delivers and manages

instructional content, identifies and assesses individual and organizational

learning or training goals, tracks the progress towards meeting those goals, and

collects and presents data for supervising the learning process of an organization

as a whole (Szabo & Flesher, 2002).

COMPONENTS OF LMS

Course Management, e.g. lists of courses, registration, credit information and syllabus,

pre-requisites.

Teaching Materials, i.e. courseware.

Self-assessment quizzes.

Lessons tools: Authoring for contents (structured XML or HTML) and quizzing/testing

(e.g. Java Script generators) or alternatively ability to import

standard IMS or SCORM packages developed with an external tool (e.g. Dreamweaver).

Asynchronous Communication: email, forums.

Synchronous Communication: chat, whiteboard, teleconferencing.

Student tools: Home page, self tests, bookmarks, progress tracking.

Student Management Tools: progress tracking, on-line grading (assessment).

Learner feedback: course evaluation surveys, test evaluation surveys etc.

Usually LMS are closed circuit platforms (logins, restricted access to classes), so the idea of

sharing contents and reusing products generated during classes does not exist in the world of

"LMSs" (main-stream e-learning).

HISTORY OF LMS

The history of the application of computers to education is filled with generic terms such as

computer-based instruction (CBI), computer assisted instruction (CAI), and computer assisted

learning (CAL), generally describing drill-and-practice programs, more sophisticated tutorials

and more individualized instruction, respectively (Parr & Fung, 2001). LMS has its history in

another term, integrated learning system (ILS) which offers functionality beyond instructional

content such as management and tracking, personalized instruction and integration across the

system (Bailey, 1993; Becker, 1993; Brush, Armstrong, Barbrow, &Ulintz, 1999; Szabo&

Flesher, 2002). The term ILS was coined by Jostens Learning, and LMS was originally used to

describe the management system component of the PLATO K-12 learning system, content-free

and separate from the course-ware.

In an Information Age model of education an LMS will assess learners current knowledge and

skill level, work with teachers and learners to identify appropriate learning goals, identify and

sequence instruction appropriate for the individual learner, assess learner performance products,

store evidence of attainments, support collaboration and generate reports to provide information

to maximize the effectiveness of the entire learning organization.

COMMERCIAL LMS LEADERS:

1. Blackboard/Angel/WEBCT

2. Desire2Learn (1999) http://www.desire2learn.com/clients/higherEducation/

3. Pearsons e-College (2007)

4. Edvance360 (formerly Scholar360)

5. Jenzabar e-Racer (2009)

6. SharePoint LMS by e-learning Force

OPEN SOURCE LEADERS:

1. Moodle (2002) http://moodle.org/sites/

2. Sakai (2004) http://sakaiproject.org/organization-list

3. Canvas by Instructure (2008) Auburn University, BYU, James Madison, Rider

University, University of Mary Washington, University of Utah, Utah State University.

4. Loud Cloud (2010) Stanford, CA Community Colleges, Harvard University Medical

School, Grand Canyon University.

5. OLAT (1999) Switzerland; the main OLAT installation is located at the University of

Zurich(maintained by the Multimedia & E-Learning Services of the University of Zurich) but

used by more universities such as the University of Basel, the University of Bern, the University

of Lucerne, the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich and in Lausanne.

6. Claroline (2001) Columbia School of Law; founding schools in Belgium, Canada, Chile,

France, and Spain LMS Evaluation; Project Summary and Supporting Data DRAFT July 27,

2011.

ADVANTAGES OF USING LMS

1. Centralized Learning Environment to Ensure Consistency

2. Tracking and Reporting for Enhanced Performance

3. Immediate Capabilities Evaluation

4. Continuous Product and Service Proficiency for Employees who Interact with

Customers and Clients

5. Regulatory and Legal Compliance

Centralized Learning Environment to Ensure Consistency

By its nature, an LMS makes all types of training content, developmental content, and

performance content available to individuals 24/7 from any location with web access. Multiple

users can access the LMS at any given point in time.

The LMS ensures consistency in delivery and evaluation since each user sees the exact same

material in the exact same manner and can be evaluated through common pre-testing and/or

post- testing methods.

An LMS allows users to easily design and deploy customized training modules. This feature is

especially important when new equipment is introduced, existing equipment is updated, or

standard operating procedures are significantly modified. This feature also applies to updates to

guidelines and procedures. Employees can no longer say, no one told me that or no one

ever trained me on that.

Tracking and Reporting for Enhanced Performance

The LMS allows organizational users to view a required learning path, track progress against

the learning path, review records of success, and register for additional courses. Employers can

offer these courses through various media including instructor- led training, web-based training,

or webinars.

Management can access the same records of success and can also analyze the records data to

determine areas of success and areas for needed improvement.

Immediate Capabilities Evaluation

The LMS allows users to be evaluated prior to taking a course, while participating in the course,

and upon course completion. Employers can evaluate retention by periodically administering

scheduled assessments via the LMS. They can review the records of results to determine

success levels and actual time taken to complete each course and its components.

Continuous Product and Service Proficiency for Employees who Interact with Customers

and Clients

The LMS provides a central point for organizations to change product descriptions,

specifications, requirements, forms, and to allow easy uploading of new product or service

information. Users will access the same training courses and the same evaluation materials.

Users set predetermined course completion dates and monitor the number of participants

completing the course at any given point in time. An LMS also allows employers to administer

updates and evaluations online and assess knowledge levels and abilities.

Regulatory and Legal Compliance

Most organizations are required to meet some level of legal and regulatory requirements. The

medical field and the pharmaceutical industry are two examples of industries with very stringent

regulatory requirements. Some legal and regulatory requirements are met by onetime events

while others require periodic review or recertification.

Learning Management Systems Provide Advantages to Organizations An LMS is a

comprehensive system that streamlines an organizations needs for both its clients and its

employee.

Organizations using an LMS have a central place to store course material online for access by

specified users. These organizations can track and analyze learning results overtime, and are

able to administer learning evaluations online. An LMS also ensures that organizations are

capable of rapid deployment of updates and additions and have access to learning compliance

data for regulatory and legal purposes.

1.2 INDUSTRY PROFILE

HISTORY

It is a thirteen year old software company which was previously called as VERSABIT

TECHNOLOGIES and in the year 2011 it was changed to SNAPWIZ TECHNOLOGIES

which is running successfully in serving most of the students in and around India and also

Barrons publications.

COMPANY PROFILE

SNAPWIZ is a technology company that uses data analysis and social learning tools to make

education personalized, engaging and fun. SNAPWIZ optimizes the advantages of technology

in order to create and push forward innovative learning solutions. We work closely with

publishers (Barrons) to provide personalized and enriching learning content via tablet, smart

phones or the Internet. Helping students by training them for GRE and GMAT exams.

Mission and vision

SNAPWIZ was founded by entrepreneurs that saw the potential of emerging technologies such

as advanced data analysis techniques, highly scalable cloud infrastructure, mobile devices and

social networking in improving education. Our solution regards each student as an individual

with distinct goals, preferences, learning styles and peer circle. This information is used to

enrich the learning experience through innovative use of technology.

Our solution analyzes the massive amount of learning data that gets generated by activities such

as answering a question, watching a video, reading a text lesson, playing a learning game, liking

a comment, asking a question in the forum, etc., to build a unique learning profile for every

individual student. The learning profile drives the extreme personalization on our platform and

makes courses highly personalized and engaging.

Our Culture

SNAPWIZ relies on shared dreams and working together as a team to improve education in a

fundamental way. Our collective passion is making education effective for every single

individual. We're also passionate about making education interesting and engaging. We work

together as a team everyday to make this passion a reality.

Above all, SNAPWIZ is a place to dream big ideas and working feverishly into shaping them

into reality.

Adaptive Learning

1. Learning Personalization

2. Dynamic Study Plan

3. Adaptive Assessment

4. Personalized Reporting

Collaborative Learning

1. Course Stream

2. Contextual Q&A

3. Live Textbooks

4. Social Sharing

Course Management

1. Course Authoring

2. Learning Widgets

3. Learning Objectives

4. One Click Publishing

Go Mobile

1. Multi-Channel Learning

2. Snap-Sync

Learning Personalization

No two students are the same. They learn differently and study in different ways. Snapwiz

recognizes the uniqueness of each individual and respect their individuality when it comes to

learning. SNAPWIZ offers students a customized and very personal learning experience

including a study plan that reflects each student's individual needs and preferences.

Courses launched on SNAPWIZ platform are not just adapted for some - they're adapted

for each and every individual student.

Smart Recommendations

SNAPWIZ gives every student personalized recommendations on what to study and when. The

recommendations are based on unique skill profile and learning styles of every student.

SNAPWIZ can also deliver adaptive step-by-step tutorials that address specific learning gaps of

an individual student.

Dynamic Study Plan

SNAPWIZ prides itself for personalizing and customizing coursework to suit every students

needs and strengths. Not only does SNAPWIZ accommodate your schedule and preferences, the

online curriculum is also tailored to match each student's learning pace. If a student encounters

difficulty in keeping up with the lessons or exercises, the adaptive study plan automatically

adjust and slows down until the student is able to perform optimally.

SNAPWIZ goes beyond the cookie-cutter approach of a typical course, and fits a unique

schedule and lesson plan for an individual. It's that powerful.

Easily

Adaptive assessment

Unlike a one-time adaptive learning system, SNAPWIZ dynamically adapts to a student's

progress and learning activities in real time and throughout the duration of the course.

SNAPWIZ provides students with a dynamic study plan that is always in sync with their current

skill profile and rate of progress. At any given time, a student's study plan consists of only those

activities that maximize their learning gain.

Practice with "Right" Questions

Only SNAPWIZ can offer each student practice quizzes and mock tests that are suited to their

skills and level of proficiency. The adaptive learning system first assesses the student's

performance and strengths in order to come up with the just the right set of questions. These

tests are carefully designed to challenge the student's thinking and creativity, but at the same

time stay within their skill profiles and learning goals.

The typical practice tests that are either too easy or too difficult are usually ineffective.

SNAPWIZ delivers customized practice quizzes that target specificskills and delivered at

the right level of difficulty.

Optimize Student's Time

Practice tests on the SNAPWIZ platform are dynamically created based on learning objectives

of the student. Every question on the SNAPWIZ platform can be tagged with multiple attributes

such as skills required to answer the question, difficulty as well as multiple statistical

parameters. These attributes are used by SNAPWIZ to craft personalized practice tests that

maximize the student's learning potential.

Personalized reporting

SNAPWIZ continuously monitors student progress to update the skill profile in real-time. This

data is available to student's and course administrators at any given time. The skill report can

also be used by students to access the remediation content for specific areas. In addition, course

instructors can suggest additional learning material and practice content based on this report.

Course Stream View

SNAPWIZ also serves as a collaboration tool between students and their teachers, as well as the

course administrators. With Course stream, the students get access to a course specific social

network that allows them to follow and participate in the course discussion.

Capturing Social Preferences for Learning Content SNAPWIZ allows for an interactive and

engaging learning experience. Course stream enables students and teachers to interact and share

multi-media content such as pictures, PDFs and even YouTube videos. Teachers and learning

administrators can also post announcements of events and special activities to all participants.

More importantly, the SNAPWIZ system allows students to comment and rate the educational

content they receive, providing for a truly customized and interactive experience for everyone.

Context Q&A

The SNAPWIZ course stream is unique as it provides students and teachers context sensitive

learning. This means that unlike other social learning platforms, SNAPWIZ is able to catalogue

all conversations, discussions, questions and answers and relate them to different forms of

educational content

Live text books

Students can enjoy the advantages of online sharing while experiencing traditional learning

through a textbook. SNAPWIZ'S live textbook like interface allow the users to do online

annotation, discussions and engage in other social learning activities. Through SNAPWIZS

unique context-sensitive course stream, all questions and discussions relevant to the course

work are catalogued as referenced content.

Annotate Content

Live textbook feature allows annotation of content so that a student can personalize their

learning experience by entering notes, highlights, discussion points and bookmarks. These

annotations can be optionally shared by the student with some or all of the course participants.

Social Sharing

With SNAPWIZ textbooks are no longer passive repository of content. With tools like course

stream, Q&A and content sharing, textbooks can be transformed into highly interactive and

dynamic courses that evolve and mature as external content gets shared and user generated

content enriches the course.

Course Authoring

SNAPWIZ offers a full-fledged content repository for learning content. The rich media interface

reflects the next generation course authoring environment that allows the course author to

import content from multiple sources, both internal and external to the organization. The course

content may come from one or more text book repositories with capability to link interactive

elements such as YouTube videos, Flash Animations, interactive quizzes, etc. The authoring

environment also offers a WYSWYG tool to create, approve and publish interactive

courseware.

Learning Widgets

Since learning is never one-dimensional, SNAPWIZ has developed a system that can be

expanded and enhanced with various learning widgets. These are modules which can be

plugged into a course to help make it more engaging, interactive and fun for the student. These

widgets allow teachers to weave in videos, flash animation, images, presentations and music

files into the lessons from any social media site or their personal files.

Learning Objectives

SNAPWIZ makes studying fun, engaging and interactive. While our primary goal is to make

each student learn at his or her own pace, we are also aware that learning goals and expectations

must be set with every course. Each lesson, tutorial, quiz or game is assessed and the results are

analyzed using our adaptive learning algorithms. Through this, we are able to continuously map

out coursework that is always in tune with the student's skill set and learning style.

Our Learning objectives system keeps track of the skill category that an individual student has

developed from diverse learning activities such as lessons, step-by-step tutorial, quiz, games

and tests.

One Click Publishing

SNAPWIZ provides content authors and course publishers with reporting tools that allow them

to verify learning content before the course is published. The SNAPWIZ platform has workflow

and status management, which allows for easy tracking, checking and publishing of courses.

Multi-channel learning

SNAPWIZ gives course authors and teachers the opportunity to fully develop and expand their

courses. Through our set of course authoring tools, teachers can truly extend and customize

lessons to match the learning styles and proficiency level of their students. Course

personalization allows teachers to deviate from a standard course and their own learning

materials. Alternatively, coursework can be expanded to suit a students current academic level.

SNAPWIZ offers tremendous opportunity for instructors to customize a standardized course to

better match the pedagogical needs of their students.

One-Touch Learning

Students don't necessarily have to be in school to get an education. SNAPWIZ allows students

the freedom to study and learn from wherever they may be and any time they want. Through

tablets, smart phones and the Internet, a student can download lessons and take tests without

having to leave the comforts of home or the office. SNAPWIZ has invested in a full suite of

apps that allow students and teachers to stay connected at all times. Let your students

learn anywhere, anytime using smart phones and tablets.

Snap Sync with

You can use any one or all of your mobile devices to study and communicate with your peers

and teachers, SNAPWIZ has a patent pending data sync system called Snap-sync which keeps

learning activities and modules in sync. This allows students to take mock tests online, watch a

video lecture on the iPhone, and download test results on the iPad. With SNAPWIZ, you can

carry learning with you wherever you may be!

The beauty of SNAPWIZ Snap-Sync is that students can now take a practice test on the

Internet, watch lesson on their iPhones and take quiz on their iPads. Snap-Sync tracks the

progress and maintains the learning data on the cloud.

1.3 NEED FOR THE STUDY

As per the scenario most of the students in India would like to move across India for the

Engineering and Post graduations for this the candidate should appear for the entrance

examinations to get access to move across for their studies. In this situation most of the training

centres are in progress with their excellent stuff and capacity of their own and to help such

training centres SNAPWIZ is serving with their excellent Leaning management system (LMS).

To give a good suggestion to the company researcher need to know the perception of the

students who are making use of LMS which is being supported by SNAPWIZ, so that the

company can overcome the existing errors and can perform well in the future and to compete

with the co-competitors.

To know the strength and weakness of SNAPWIZ.

To know the perception of students who are being used LMS by SNAPWIZ.

To know what category of the students most use LMS.

To know the satisfaction level of students after the training.

To know whether the students are aware about SNAPWIZ or not.

1.4 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

Primary objectives

To study the effectiveness of Learning Management System of SNAPWIZ in Bangalore

Secondary objectives

To know the performance level of SNAPWIZ

To know how many hours students spend in LMS

To know what are the features an individual uses in LMS

To know the level of ease while using LMS

To know whether the students are using forums in their LMS

To know the LMS quality of SNAPWIZ

To suggest the changes to be followed by SNAPWIZ

1.5 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The top management can use the information obtained through the study in the following areas

To identify the draw backs in SNAPWIZ.

This study acts as a blueprint for further study in Learning management system.

Helps to enhance the opportunities for improvement and development of features of

SNAPWIZ.

To improve the level of students satisfaction.

1.6 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

Different parameters cannot be measured within the short time span.

The study was conducted only with selected students based on the researchers convenience,

so the exact opinion cannot be derived from the data collected.

CHAPTER II

2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE

In 2004 the Interim Tertiary e-learning Framework was published, which outlined a vision for

a networked, flexible education system offering accessible, relevant, high quality learning

opportunities for all New Zealanders. The framework was developed in collaboration

with representatives from the tertiary education sector, and outlined five guiding principles

for e-learning in New Zealand: learner-centeredness; good practice; collaboration;

innovation; sustainability and affordability. The Framework also outlined seven action areas

essential for the development of sector capability to support the development of e-learning in

New Zealand, including the need for professional development; development of communities

of practice; and research.

Building on the Interim Framework, in 2005, the New Zealand e-learning guidelines were

released (NZ E-Learning Group. 2006). The elearning guidelines inform staff of good practice,

help in the design of learning and offer a practical entry to discussing quality teaching using e-

learning (White and Milne 2005:17). They reflect key change measures for tertiary education

priorities, including the need for greater collaboration and rationalisation within the system;

increased quality, performance, effectiveness, efficiency and transparency; and increased

responsiveness to the needs of, and wider access for, learners (Suddaby and Milne 2008).

Focusing specifically on LMS implementation, in 2004 a consortium of New Zealand tertiary

institutions lead by the Waikato Institute of Technology obtained a grant from the Ministry of

Education to support the Open Source Courseware Initiative New Zealand (Barr, Gower et

al. 2007). The project examined whether faculty at three tertiary institutions perceived

Moodle would support e-learning courses which would perpetuate New Zealands tradition of

constructivist learning, meet the needs of Maori and Pasifika students, and students at risk

of failing in the education sector, but be flexible enough to cater to students doing advance

study. Findings indicated that Moodle was considered an effective LMS that readily

Report for AUT University LMS Review group May 2011.

In 2004-05 the Flexible Learning Leaders in New Zealand project was developed, to

consider how staff development programmes and approaches could facilitate effective

adoption of information and communication technology for learning and teaching. The

project involved key informant interviews with university staff involved in academic

development for e-learning across New Zealand, Australia and the UK (Elgort 2005).

Findings revealed that institutional adoption of an LMS was a -key catalyst for supporting the

adoption of e-learning practices among teaching staff. However, respondents expressed

concerns that poorly thought out approaches to using LMS were of serious concern, and

could have significant impact on the ability of e-learning to reach its potential.

Other research undertaken at this time also highlighted concerns about the teaching and

learning aspects of e-learning in New Zealand. Marshall (2005) evaluated the capability

across six (of eight) New Zealand Universities and three polytechnics to sustain and delivery

e-learning. Key institutional capability weaknesses were identified directly relating to the

teaching and learning aspects of e-learning. For example, learning objectives were used

poorly in e-learning papers in most institutions, and there was a lack of focus on learning

objectives relating to analysis, synthesis and evaluation. Marshall (2005) also identified a

lack of clear relationship between e-learning technology deployed by universities and

desired educational outcomes.

In 2006, the Ministry of Education commissioned research to develop a strategic framework

to support professional development for e-learning within the tertiary education sector. The

research was undertaken by a combined team from Otago and Massey Universities

(Shephard, Stein et al. 2008). Although focused on professional development requirements,

the report highlighted concerns among tertiary education organisation staff about the impact

of infrastructural requirements, institutional structures and capability issues on learning and

teaching outcomes, similar to those reported by Elgort (2005).

In October 2010, the AUT University commissioned a literature review of learning management

systems (LMS) as one part of a broader project reviewing LMS at AUT. Includes a brief history

of e-learning in NZ, environmental scan, critical reflections on LMS, and future considerations

for LMS.

In 2007, the Ministry of Education commissioned the development of resources to assist

institutional leaders to plan and manage their use of e-learning more strategically (AKO

National Centre for Tertiary Teaching Excellence. 2008). While focusing on e-learning in

general, the report highlights a series of key questions specific to institutions considerations

of LMS, including:

How should e-learning be managed within the institution who should be responsible

for the management of an LMS?

Resourcing how should a fully functional LMS be resourced, planned and

managed? What will an LMS cost? What are costs likely to be relating to the IT

environment, software, pedagogical support, and professional development for staff

and students? To out-source or not?

Staff development requirements what expertise and training is required for

e-learning?

What guidelines should support this?

Functionality what should an LMS be able to do? Which functions are priority?

The report offers a series of case studies from various tertiary institutions around New

Zealand about the use of e-learning as examples of practice of strategic leadership.

CHAPTER III

3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 INTRODUCTION

Research is defined as a systematized effort to gain new knowledge. Research

comprises defining and redefining problems, formulating hypothesis or suggest solutions,

collecting, organizing and evaluating data, making deductions and reaching conclusions and at

last carefully testing the conclusions to determine whether they fit the formulating hypothesis. It

refers to the systematic method consisting of enunciating the problem, formulating a hypothesis,

collecting the fact the data, analyzing the facts that reach certain conclusion and either in the

form of solution towards the concerned problem or in certain generalization for some theoretical

formulation.

3.2 RESEARCH DESIGN

A research design is a plan that specifies the objectives of the study, method to be

adopted in the data collection, tools in data analysis and hypothesis to be framed.

A research design is an arrangement of conditions for collection and analysis of data in

a manner that aim combines with relevance to the research purpose with economy in

procedure.

3.3 TYPE OF RESEARCH

Here descriptive research has been used for studying the attitude of the students. A

simple descriptive research design is used when data are collected to describe persons,

organizations, settings, or phenomena.

It includes surveys and fact-finding enquiries. The descriptive research is typically

concerned with determining the frequencies with which something occurs or determining the

degree to which variables is associated.

3.4 SAMPLING

Sampling is a statistical method of obtaining representative data or observations from a group,

lot, batch, population or universe.

Sampling is a method of studying from a few selected items, instead of the entire big number of

units. The small selection is called sample. The large number of items of units of particular

characteristic is called population.

Sampling refers to the statistical process of selecting and studying the characteristics of a

relatively small number of items from a relatively large population of such items.

3.5 SAMPLING METHOD

In this study Simple random sampling method was used in selecting samples. In this

method, Each and every item of population has equal chance to be included in the sample.

Random sampling can be done with or without replacement. If it is done without replacement,

an item is not returned to the population after it is selected and thus can only occur once in the

sample.

3.6 SAMPLING SIZE

The universe of the study includes 211 members from students in Bangalore city in

which the particular area is selected as sample for the study which includes only the selected

training centre.

3.7 METHOD OF DATA COLLECTION

The key for useful systems is the selection of the method for collecting data and

linking it to analysis and decision issue of the action to be taken. The accuracy of the collected

data is of great importance for drawing correct and valid conclusion from detailed

investigations. There are two types of data primary and secondary.

PRIMARY DATA

The primary data are those, which are collected afresh and for the first time, and

thus happen to be original in character. There are several methods of collecting primary data,

particularly in survey and descriptive research. This study employed questionnaire to collect

primary data. It included AGE GROUP, GENDER, EDUCATIONAL QUALIFICATION,

ATTRIBUTIONS CONSIDERED WHILE JOINING SNAPWIZ, FEATURES OF LMS,

FREQUENCY OF USAGE, EASE OF USAGE, CHANGES TO BE MADE, etc.

SECONDARY DATA

Secondary data means, data that are already available that is they refer to the data which have

already been collected and analyzed by someone else and which have already been passed

through the statistical process. Secondary data may either be published data or unpublished data

and can be gathered through Internet, books, magazines, manuals, journals etc.

STATISTICAL TOOLS:

The statistical tools used for the study are as follows:

(1) Simple percentage analysis.

Formula for Simple percentage analysis is:

= No of respondents for the particular factor X 100

Total number of respondents

(2) Chi-square analysis

Formula for computing chi-square is:

The 2 test was first used by Karl Pearson in the year1980. The quantity 2 describes the

magnitude of the discrepancy between theory and observation.

Where, Oi refers to the observed frequency & Ei to the expected frequencies

The calculated value of chi-square is compared with the table of chi-square for the given

degrees of freedom at the specified level of significance. If the calculated value is greater than

the tabulated value then the difference between the observed frequency and the expected

frequency are significant. The degrees of freedom is (n-1) where n is number of observed

frequencies and in case of contingency table the degrees of freedom is (C-1)(R-1) where C is

number of columns and R is number of rows.

(3) Rank Correlation

Formula for computing rank correlation is:

6 di r = 1- ___________

n (n-1)

Chi-square () = {(Oi-Ei) 2/ Ei}

CHAPTER IV

4. ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

4.1.1 TABLE

AGE GROUP OF THE RESPONDENTS

AGE GROUP No Of Respondents Percentage (%)

Less than 20 101 48

20 to 25 110 52

26 to 30 _ _

Above 30 _ _

TOTAL 211 100

Inference:

From the above table it inferred that 48% of the respondents belong to Less than 20yrs, while

52% of the respondents belong to 20 - 25yrs, while none of the respondents belong to 26 - 30yrs

and Above 30 yrs of age group.

4.2.1 CHART

AGE GROUP OF THE RESPONDENTS

4.1.2 TABLE

GENDER OF THE RESPONDENTS

GENDER No of Respondents Percentage (%)

MALE 119 56

FEMALE 92 44

TOTAL 211 100

Inference:

From the above table it is inferred that 56% of the respondents belong to Male, and

44% of the respondents belong to Female.

4.2.2 CHART

GENDER OF THE RESPONDENTS

4.1.3 TABLE

EDUCATIONAL QUALIFICATION OF THE RESPONDENTS

EDUCATIONAL

QUALIFICATION

No of Respondents Percentage (%)

Diploma _ _

U.G 89 42

Engineering 122 58

Others _ _

TOTAL 211 100

Inference:

From the above table it inferred that 42% of the respondents belong to U.G, 58% of

the respondents belong to Engineering, while none of the respondents belong to Diploma and

other level qualifications.

4.2.3 CHART

EDUCATIONAL QUALIFICATION OF RESPONDENTS

4.1.4 TABLE

COURSE JOINED BY THE RESPONDENTS

COURSES No of Respondents Percentage (%)

3 Months 17 8

6 Months 179 85

1 Year 15 7

2 Year _ _

TOTAL 211 100

Inference:

From the above table it is inferred that 8% of the respondents have joined 3 months

course, where85% of the respondents have joined 6 months course, while 7% of the respondents

have joined 1 year course and none of the respondents have joined 2 year course.

4.2.4 CHART

COURSE JOINED BY THE RESPONDENTS

4.1.5 TABLE

FROM WHOM WAS THE RESPONDENTS PROMPTED

Prompted by No of Respondents Percentage (%)

Friends & Relatives 33 16

Insisted by college 72 34

Advertisements 106 50

Any Other _ _

TOTAL 211 100

Inference:

From the above table it is inferred that 16% of the respondents was prompted by

Friends & Relatives, while 34% of the respondents was Insisted by college, while 50% of the

respondents are prompted by advertisements and none by any other.

4.2.5 CHART

OCCUPATION OF RESPONDENTS

4.1.6 TABLE

ATTRIBUTIONS CONSIDERED WHILE JOINING SNAPWIZ

ATTRIBUTIONS No of Respondents Percentage (%)

Fees 4 2

Quality of education 171 80

Reputation 1 1

Finance scheme 4 2

All the above 31 15

TOTAL 211 100

Inference:

From the above table it is inferred that 2% of the respondents has attributed fees,

while 80% of the respondents has attributed Quality of education, 1% of the respondents has

attributed reputation, 2% of the respondents has attributed finance scheme and 15% of the

respondents has attributed all the above while joining SNAPWIZ.

4.2.6 CHART

ATTRIBUTIONS CONSIDERED WHILE JOINING SNAPWIZ

4.1.7 TABLE

ADVERTISEMENT INFLUENCED THE RESPONDENTS DECISION IN CHOOSING

SNAPWIZ

ADVERTISEMENT No of Respondents Percentage (%)

Yes 203 96

No 8 4

TOTAL 211 100

Inference:

From the above table it inferred that 96% of the respondents say yes for

advertisement, while 4% of the respondents say no for advertisement as the influencing factor.

4.2.7 CHART

ADVERTISEMENT INFLUENCED THE RESPONDENTS DECISION IN CHOOSING

SNAPWIZ

4.1.8 TABLE

MAJORITY OF CLASSES TOOK BY THE RESPONDENTS

TYPE OF CLASSES No of Respondents Percentage (%)

Face to Face 2 1

Online 4 2

Both Face to Face & Online 205 97

Others _ _

TOTAL 211 100

Inference:

From the above table it inferred that 1% of the respondents took face to face classes,

while 2% of the respondents took online classes, while 97% of the respondents took both face to

face and online classes and none has took any other classes.

4.2.8 CHART

MAJORITY OF CLASSES TOOK BY THE RESPONDENTS

1 2

97

00

20

40

60

80

100

120

Num

ber o

f Res

pond

etns

4.1.9 TABLE

LMS USED BY THE RESPONDENTS OTHER THAN SNAPWIZ

LMS No of Respondents Percentage (%)

Black board _ _

Desire2learn _ _

Moodle _ _

Sakai _ _

Only SNAPWIZ 211 100

Any other _ _

TOTAL 211 100

Inference:

From the above table it is inferred that 100% of the respondents use only SNAPWIZ.

4.2.9 CHART

LMS USED BY THE RESPONDENTS OTHER THAN SNAPWIZ

4.1.10 TABLE

HOW OFTEN DO THE RESPONDENTS INTERACT WITH LMS

PURPOSE OF USAGE No of Respondents Percentage (%)

Daily 195 92

Once a week 3 2

Few times a week 13 6

Few times a month _ _

I like to be logged in as much as

I can

_ _

TOTAL 211 100

Inference:

From the above table it is inferred that 92% of the respondents have interacted daily,

2% of the respondents interacted once a week, 13% of the respondents interacted few times a

week and none of the respondents interacted few times a month & logged in as much as with

LMS.

4.2.10 CHART

HOW OFTEN DO THE RESPONDENTS INTERACT WITH LMS

4.1.11 TABLE

LEVEL OF EASE WHILE DOWNLOADING DOCUMENTS

ADVERTISEMENT No of Respondents Percentage (%)

Always easy 169 80

Mostly easy 35 17

Somewhat easy 7 3

Somewhat uneasy _ _

TOTAL 211 100

Inference:

From the above table it is inferred that 80% of the respondents feels always easy, 17%

of the respondents feels mostly easy, while 3% of the respondents feels somewhat easy and

none of the respondents feels somewhat uneasy.

4.2.11 CHART

LEVEL OF EASE WHILE DOWNLOADING DOCUMENTS

4.1.12 TABLE

DO THE RESPONDENTS USE FORUMS IN LMS

Forums No of Respondents Percentage (%)

Yes 206 98

No 5 2

TOTAL 211 100

Inference:

From the above table it is inferred that 98% of the respondents uses forums, while 2%

of the respondents do not use forums in LMS.

4.2.12 CHART

DO THE RESPONDENTS USE FORUMS IN LMS

4.1.13 TABLE

WHY DO THE RESPONDENTS USE FORUMS

Reason No of Respondents Percentage (%)

To post queries 41 20

To respond to the open question

from trainer

162 77

Any other 3 1

Do not use forums 5 2

TOTAL 211 100

Inference:

From the above table it is inferred that 20% of the respondents use forums to post

queries, while 77% of the respondents use forums to respond to the open question from trainer,

while 1% of the respondents use forum for other purposes and 2% of the respondents do not use

forums.

4.2.13 CHART

WHY DO THE RESPONDENTS USE FORUMS

4.1.14 TABLE

DO THE RESPONDENTS ACCESS LMS FROM HOME/OUTSIDE SNAPWIZ

Access from home/outside No of Respondents Percentage (%)

Yes 208 99

No 3 1

TOTAL 211 100

Inference:

From the above table it is inferred that 99% of the respondents access LMS outside

SNAPWIZ, and 1% of the respondents do not access LMS outside SNAPWIZ.

4.2.14 CHART

DO THE RESPONDENTS ACCESS LMS FROM HOME/OUTSIDE SNAPWIZ

4.1.15 TABLE

AMOUNT OF TIME THE RESPONDENTS ACCESS OUTSIDE

SATISFACTION LEVEL No of Respondents Percentage (%)

Less than 1 hour 33 16

1-2 hours 143 67

2-3 hours 33 16

More than 3 hours _ _

Do not access outside 2 1

TOTAL 211 100

Inference:

From the above table it is inferred that 16% of the respondents use less than one hour,

67% of the respondents use 1-2 hours, 16% of the respondents use 2-3 hours, while 1% of the

respondents do not access outside and none of the respondents use more than 3 hours outside

SNAPWIZ.

4.2.15 CHART

AMOUNT OF TIME THE RESPONDENTS ACCESS OUTSIDE

4.1.16 TABLE

HOW DO THE RESPONDENTS FIND MODULE-WISE STRUCTURING OF LMS

STRUCTURE No of Respondents Percentage (%)

Clear 27 13

Very clear 157 74

Somewhat clear 26 12

Needs improvement 1 1

TOTAL 211 100

Inference:

From the above table it is inferred that 13% of the respondents find it clear, 74% of

the respondents find it very clear, while 12% of the respondents find it somewhat clear and 1%

of the respondent feels need improvement of structure in LMS.

4.2.16 CHART

HOW DO THE RESPONDENTS FIND MODULE-WISE STRUCTURING OF LMS

4.1.17 TABLE

RESPONDENTS RATING THE LEVEL OF CONTENT AVAILABLE


Sufficient 36 17

Good 122 58

Reasonable 52 24

Can be better 1 1

TOTAL 211 100

Inference:

From the above table it is inferred that 17% of the respondents feel it is sufficient,

58% of the respondents feel it is good, while 24% of the respondents find it reasonable and 1%

of the respondent feels content can be better in each topic.

4.2.17 CHART

RESPONDENTS RATING THE LEVEL OF CONTENT AVAILABLE

4.1.18 TABLE

CHANGES RECOMMENDED BY THE RESPONDENTS IN CONTENT

CHANGES No of Respondents Percentage (%)

Course content should be more

extensive

134 63

Course content should be lesser 30 14

Improvement in clarity of course

content

46 22

Any other 1 1

TOTAL 211 100

Inference:

From the above table it is inferred that 63% of the respondents recommend that the

course content should be more extensive, 14% of the respondents recommend the course

content should be lesser, 22% of the respondents recommend there should be improvement in

clarity of course content and 1% of the respondents recommend some other.

4.2.18 CHART

CHANGES RECOMMENDED BY THE RESPONDENTS IN CONTENT

4.1.19 TABLE

RESPONDENTS SEE THEMSELVES AFTER TRAINING

SEE THEMSELVES No of Respondents Percentage (%)

Beginner 2 1

Intermediate 195 92

Advanced 14 7

Professional _ _

TOTAL 211 100

Inference:

From the above table it is inferred that 1% of the respondents see themselves as

beginners, while 92% of the respondents see themselves as intermediates, while 7% of the

respondents see themselves as advanced and none of the respondents sees themselves as

professionals after the training.

4.2.19 CHART

RESPONDENTS SEE THEMSELVES AFTER TRAINING

4.1.20 TABLE

RESPONDENTS RATING LEVEL OF SATISFACTION WITH ANNOUNCEMENTS

IN SNAPWIZ LMS


Highly Satisfied 30 14

Satisfied 116 55

Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 65 31

Dissatisfied __ __

Highly Dissatisfied __ __

TOTAL 211 100

Inference:

From the above table it is inferred that 14% of the respondents belong to highly

satisfied, while 55% of the respondents belong to Satisfied, while 31% of the respondents

belong to neither satisfied nor dissatisfied and none of the respondents belong to dissatisfied and

highly dissatisfied towards the announcements in LMS.

4.2.20 CHART

RESPONDENTS RATING LEVEL OF SATISFACTION WITH ANNOUNCEMENTS

IN SNAPWIZ LMS

4.1.21 TABLE

RESPONDENTS RATING LEVEL OF SATISFACTION WITH COURSE

DOCUMENT/RESOURCES IN SNAPWIZ LMS



Satisfied 48 23


Dissatisfied __ __


TOTAL 211 100

Inference:


satisfied, while 23% of the respondents belong to Satisfied, while 2% of the respondents belong

to neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, while none of the respondents belong to dissatisfied and

highly dissatisfied towards the course document/resources in LMS.

4.2.21 CHART

RESPONDENTS RATING LEVEL OF SATISFACTION WITH COURSE

DOCUMENT/RESOURCES IN SNAPWIZ LMS

4.1.22 TABLE

RESPONDENTS RATING LEVEL OF SATISFACTION WITH ONLINE

ASSIGNMENTS IN SNAPWIZ LMS



Satisfied 66 31


Dissatisfied __ __


TOTAL 211 100

Inference:



belong to neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, while none of the respondents belong to dissatisfied

and highly dissatisfied towards the online assignments in LMS.

4.2.22 CHART

RESPONDENTS RATING LEVEL OF SATISFACTION WITH ONLINE

ASSIGNMENTS IN SNAPWIZ LMS

4.1.23 TABLE

RESPONDENTS RATING LEVEL OF SATISFACTION WITH DISCUSSION

BOARD/FORUMS IN SNAPWIZ LMS



Satisfied 69 33


Dissatisfied __ __


TOTAL 211 100

Inference:




and highly dissatisfied towards the discussion board/forums in LMS.

4.2.23 CHART

RESPONDENTS RATING LEVEL OF SATISFACTION WITH DISCUSSION

BOARD/FORUMS IN SNAPWIZ LMS

4.1.24 TABLE

RESPONDENTS RATING LEVEL OF SATISFACTION WITH QUIZZES IN

SNAPWIZ LMS



Satisfied 33 16


Dissatisfied __ __


TOTAL 211 100

Inference:




highly dissatisfied towards the quizzes in LMS.

4.2.24 CHART

RESPONDENTS RATING LEVEL OF SATISFACTION WITH QUIZZES IN

SNAPWIZ LMS

4.1.25 TABLE

RESPONDENTS RATING LEVEL OF SATISFACTION WITH MY LIBRARY IN

SNAPWIZ LMS



Satisfied 10 5


Dissatisfied __ __


TOTAL 211 100

Inference:




highly dissatisfied towards my library in LMS.

4.2.25 CHART

RESPONDENTS RATING LEVEL OF SATISFACTION WITH MY LIBRARY IN

SNAPWIZ LMS

4.1.26 TABLE

RESPONDENTS RATING LEVEL OF SATISFACTION WITH

SCHEDULING/CALENDARING IN SNAPWIZ LMS



Satisfied 73 35


Dissatisfied __ __


TOTAL 211 100

Inference:




and highly dissatisfied towards scheduling/calendaring in LMS.

4.2.26 CHART

RESPONDENTS RATING LEVEL OF SATISFACTION WITH

SCHEDULING/CALENDARING IN SNAPWIZ LMS

4.1.27 TABLE

RESPONDENTS RATING LEVEL OF SATISFACTION WITH ONLINE STORAGE IN

SNAPWIZ LMS



Satisfied 7 3


Dissatisfied __ __


TOTAL 211 100

Inference:




highly dissatisfied towards the online storage in LMS.

4.2.27 CHART

RESPONDENTS RATING LEVEL OF SATISFACTION WITH ONLINE STORAGE IN

SNAPWIZ LMS

4.1.28 TABLE

RESPONDENTS RATING LEVEL OF SATISFACTION WITH ONLINE MEETINGS

IN SNAPWIZ LMS



Satisfied 113 53


Dissatisfied __ __


TOTAL 211 100

Inference:




and highly dissatisfied towards the online meetings in LMS.

4.2.28 CHART

RESPONDENTS RATING LEVEL OF SATISFACTION WITH ONLINE MEETINGS

IN SNAPWIZ LMS

4.1.29 TABLE

RESPONDENTS RATING LEVEL OF SATISFACTION WITH TASKS IN SNAPWIZ

LMS



Satisfied 104 49


Dissatisfied __ __


TOTAL 211 100

Inference:




and highly dissatisfied towards the tasks in LMS.

4.2.29 CHART

RESPONDENTS RATING LEVEL OF SATISFACTION WITH TASKS IN SNAPWIZ

LMS

4.3 CHI-SQUARE TEST

TABLE 4.3.1

AGE GROUP V/S SEE YOURSELF AFTER THE TRAINING

(USING CHI-SQUARE TEST)

S.NO AGE LEVEL AFTER THE TRAINING TOTAL

Beginner Interme

diate

Advanced Profession

al

1 Less than 20 1 96 4 0 101

2 20 to 25 1 99 10 0 110

3 26 to 30 0 0 0 0 0

4 Above 30 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL 2 195 14 0 211

CHI-SQUARE ANALYSIS:

OBSERVED

FREQUENCY

(O)

EXPECTED

FREQUENCY

(E)

(O-E)2 ( Oi Ei )2 / Ei

1 0.96 0.0016 0.0017

96 93.34 7.0756 0.0758

4 6.70 7.29 1.0881

0 0 0 0

1 1.04 0.0016 0.0015

99 101.66 7.0756 0.07

10 7.30 7.29 0.9986

2.2357

The calculated value is x = 2.2357

DEGREE OF FREEDOM = (c-1) (r-1)

= (4-1) (4-1)

= 3*3 = 9

From the degree of freedom with 5% level of the significant the table value is

=16.919

Hence the Null Hypothesis is accepted.

Null Hypothesis (H0)

H0: There is no significant association between age group and level after the training.

Alternative Hypothesis (Ha)

Ha: There is significant association between age group and level after the training.

INFERENCE

From the above table it is found that the calculated value 2.2357 is less than the table value

16.919. Hence, null hypothesis is accepted. So there is no association between the age group

and see yourself after the training.

TABLE 4.3.2

EDUCATIONAL QUALIFICATION V/S SATISFACTION AFTER THE TRAINING


S.NO EDUCATIO

NAL

QUALIFICA

TION

SATISFACTION AFTER THE

TRAINING

TOTAL

Satisfied Neither satisfied

nor dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

1 Diploma 0 0 0 0

2 U.G 505 385 0 890

3 Engineering 907 313 0 1220

4 Others 0 0 0 0

TOTAL 1412 698 0 2110


OBSERVED

FREQUENCY

(O)

EXPECTED

FREQUENCY

(E)

(O-E)2 ( Oi Ei )2 / Ei

0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0

505 596 8281 14

385 294 8281 28

0 0 0 0

907 816 8281 10

313 404 8281 21

0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0

The calculated value is x = 73


= (4-1) (3-1)

= 3*2

=6


=12.592


H0: There is no significant association difference between educational qualification and

satisfaction after the training.


Ha: There is significant association between educational qualification and satisfaction after the

training.

INFERENCE:

From the above table it is found that the calculated value is 73 less than the table value 12.592.

Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected. There is significant association between educational

qualification and satisfaction after the training.

TABLE 4.3.3

GENDER V/S LEVEL AFTER THE TRAINING


S.NO GENDER LEVEL AFTER THE TRAINING TOTAL

Beginner Interme

diate

Advanced Profession

al

1 MALE 0 111 8 0 119

2 FEMALE 2 84 6 0 92

TOTAL 2 195 14 0 211


OBSERVED

FREQUENCY

(O)

EXPECTED

FREQUENCY

(E)

(O-E)2 ( Oi Ei )2 / Ei

0 1.13 1.2769 1.13

111 110 1.0000 0.0091

8 7.90 0.01 0.0013

0 0 0 0

2 0.87 1.2769 1.4677

84 85.02 1.0404 0.0122

6 6.10 0.01 0.0016

0 0 0 0



= (4-1) (2-1)

= 3*1

=3


=7.815


H0: There is no significant association between educational qualification and level after

the training.


Ha: There is significant association between educational qualification and level after the

training.

INFERENCE:

From the above table it is found that the calculated value is 2.6219 less than the table value

7.815. Hence, the null hypothesis is accepted. So there is no association between educational

qualification and level after the training.

TABLE 4.3.4

COURSE PERIOD V/S USE FORUMS


S.NO COURSE

PERIOD

USE FOURMS TOTAL

YES NO

1 3 months 17 5 22

2 6 months 170 4 174

3 1 year 14 1 15

4 2 year 0 0 0

TOTAL 201 10 211


OBSERVED

FREQUENCY

(O)

EXPECTED

FREQUENCY

(E)

(O-E)2 ( Oi Ei )2 / Ei

17 20.96 15.6816 0.75

5 1.04 15.6816 15.08

170 165.75 18.0625 0.11

4 8.25 18.0625 2.19

14 14.29 0.0841 0.006

1 0.71 0.0841 0.118

0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0

18.254



= (2-1) (4-1)

= 1*3

=3


=7.815


H0: There is no significant association between course period and use of forums.


Ha: There is significant association between course period and use of forums.

INFERENCE:

From the above table it is found that the calculated value is 18.254 greater than the table value

7.815. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected. So there is association between course period and

use of forums.

TABLE 4.3.5

EDUCATIONAL QUALIFICATION V/S LEVEL OF CONTENT


S.NO EDUCATIO

NAL

QUALIFICA

TION

LEVEL OF CONTENT TOTAL

Sufficient Good Reasonable Can be

better

1 Diploma 0 0 0 0 0

2 UG 17 48 23 1 89

3 Engineering 19 74 29 0 122

4 Others 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL 36 122 52 1 211


OBSERVED

FREQUENCY

(O)

EXPECTED

FREQUENCY

(E)

(O-E)2 ( Oi Ei )2 / Ei

17 15.18 3.3124 0.22

48 51.46 11.9716 0.23

23 21.93 1.1449 0.05

1 0.42 0.3364 0.80

19 20.82 3.3124 0.16

74 70.54 11.9716 0.17

29 30.07 1.1449 0.04

0 0.58 0.3364 0.58

2.25



= (4-1) (4-1)

= 3*3

=9


=16.919


H0: There is no significant association between educational qualification and level of

content available.


Ha: There is significant association between educational qualification and level of content

available.

INFERENCE:

From the above table it is found that the calculated value is 2.25 less than the table value

16.919. Hence, the null hypothesis is accepted. So there is no association between educational

qualification and level of content available.

4.4 CORRELATION

4.4.1 CORRELATION ANALYSIS FOR ADVERTISEMENT INFLUENCED THEIR

DECISION IN CHOOSING SNAPWIZ V/S USE FORUMS IN LMS

SPEARMEN RANK CORRELATION AND RANKS

FACTORS X Y S.NO

RANK

OF X

RANK

OF Y

di = (Xi-

Yi)

YES 203 206 1 1 1 0

NO 8 5 2 2 2 0

TOTAL 211 211 Total (Xi-Yi) 0

By substituting the data to the formula,

6 * 0

Formula r = 1- = 1

2(2-1)

Therefore we get r = 1

SOURCE: Primary Data

INFERENCE

6 di

Formula r = 1-

n (n-1)

The value obtained is in Positive. From the correlation analysis it is inferred that

advertisement influenced their decision in choosing SNAPWIZ V/S use forums in LMS.

4.4.2 CORRELATION ANALYSIS FOR USE FORUMS IN LMS V/S ACCESS LMS

FROM HOME/OUTSIDE

SPEARMAN RANK CORRELATION AND RANKS

FACTORS X Y S.NO

RANK

OF X

RANK

OF Y

di = (Xi-

Yi)

YES 206 208 1 1 1 0

NO 5 3 2 2 2 0

TOTAL 211 211 Total (Xi-Yi) 0

By substituting the data to the formula,

6*0

Formula r = 1- = 1

2(2-1)

Therefore we get r = 1

SOURCE: Primary Data

INFERENCE

The value obtained is in Positive. From the correlation analysis it is inferred that,

the respondents use forums in LMS V/S access LMS from home/outside.

6 di

Formula r = 1-

n (n-1)

CHAPTER V

FINDINGS AND SUGGESTIONS

5.1 FINDINGS

48% of the respondents belong to Less than 20 yrs, while 52% of the respondents belong

to 20 - 25yrs

56% of the respondents belong to Male, while 44% of the respondents belong to

Female.

58% of the respondents belong to Engineering, while 42% of the respondents belong to

U.G

85% of the respondents have joined 6 months course, while 7% of the respondents have

joined 1year course

50% of the respondents are prompted by advertisements, while 16% of the respondents

was prompted by Friends & Relatives

80% of the respondents has attributed Quality of education, while 1% of the respondents

has attributed reputation

96% of the respondents says yes for advertisement, while 4% of the respondents says no

for advertisement as the influencing factors.

97% of the respondents took both face to face and online classes, while 1% of the

respondents took face to face classes.

100% of the respondents use only SNAPWIZ.

92% of the respondents have interacted daily, while 2% of the respondents interacted

once a week.

80% of the respondents feels always easy, while 3% of the respondents feels somewhat

easy.

98% of the respondents says yes for forums, while 2% of the respondents says no for

forums in LMS.

77% of the respondents use forums to respond to the open question from trainer, while

1% of the respondents use forum for other purposes.

99% of the respondents access LMS outside SNAPWIZ, while 1% of the respondents do

not access LMS outside SNAPWIZ.

67% of the respondents use 1-2 hour, while 1% of the respondents do not access outside.

74% of the respondents find it very clear, while 1% of the respondent feels need

improvement of structure in LMS.

58% of the respondents feel it is good, while 1% of the respondent feel it can be better in

each topic.

63% of the respondents recommend that the course content should be more extensive,

while 1% of the respondents recommend some other.

92% of the respondents see themselves as intermediate, while 1% of the respondents see

themselves as beginner.

55% of the respondents belong to Satisfied, while 14% of the respondents belong to

highly satisfied towards the announcements in LMS.

75% of the respondents belong to highly satisfied, while 2% of the respondents belong

to neither satisfied nor dissatisfied towards the course document/resources in LMS.

61% of the respondents belong to neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, while 8% of the

respondents belong to highly satisfied towards the online assignments in LMS.


respondents belong to highly satisfied towards the discussion board/forums in LMS.


to neither satisfied nor dissatisfied towards the quizzes in LMS.


to neither satisfied nor dissatisfied towards my library in LMS.


respondents belong to highly satisfied towards scheduling/calendaring in LMS.


to neither satisfied nor dissatisfied towards the online storage in LMS.


highly satisfied towards the online meetings in LMS.


highly satisfied towards the tasks in LMS.

The calculated value 2.2357 is less than the table value 16.919. Hence null hypothesis is

accepted. So there is no association between the age group and see yourself after the

training.

The calculated value is 73 less than the table value 12.592. Hence, the null hypothesis is

rejected. There is significant association between educational qualification and

satisfaction after the training.

The calculated value is 2.6219 less than the table value 7.815. Hence, the null hypothesis

is accepted. So there is no association between educational qualification and level after

the training.

The calculated value is 18.254 greater than the table value 7.815. Hence, the null

hypothesis is rejected. So there is association between course period and use of forums.

The calculated value is 2.25 less than the table value 16.919. Hence, the null hypothesis

is accepted. So there is no association between educational qualification and level of

content available.

The value obtained is in Positive. From the correlation analysis of advertisement

influenced their decision in choosing SNAPWIZ V/S use forums in LMS.

The value obtained is in Positive. From the correlation analysis of use forums in LMS

V/S access LMS from home/outside.

5.2 SUGGESTIONS

By conducting a survey about the effectiveness of learning management system of

SNAPWIZ in Bangalore city, Researcher came to know that engineering students are more in

number who are getting trained to attend the entrance exams who are planning to do their higher

education in abroad, and none of the students are dissatisfied with SNAPWIZ but the only

expectation with the students is that the SNAPWIZ should increase its branches in India and

also if possible it should go I

710511631039 a study on the effectiveness of learning management system of snapwiz, bangalore

Documents