Cover not available

Article published In: Information Design Journal
Vol. 27:3 (2022) ► pp.235–277

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
authorization required

The power of information design in enhancing the organization of information and course material in an online Virtual Learning Environment (VLE)

ORCiD logo with link | University of Leeds, UK
 | University of Leeds, UK
ORCiD logo with link | Beijing Institute of Technology
 | Yorkshire Cancer Research
 | Taif University
 | University of Leeds, UK
Published online: 6 December 2022
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/idj.22001.lon
Abstract
The way information is organized and designed on virtual learning environments (VLEs) is poor (e.g., unclear, unattractive and overwhelmingly dense). This study evaluates and redesigns a VLE platform to enhance access to information and course material. A three-stage user-centred mixed-methods research approach was used with students taking part as co-creators of education, researchers, designers and end-users. Results show that performance was significantly better with two layouts designed following information design principles and a user-centred research process, than with the existing layout. Participants’ opinion also reflected this same trend. A set of guidelines to improve the design of VLEs is provided.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Stage 1 | Identification
    • 2.1Survey of existing material
    • 2.2Online questionnaire with tutors
    • 2.3Interviews with students
      • 2.3.1Specific problems and improvements
    • 2.4Co-design with students as co-creators of education
      • Announcements
      • Staff information
      • Module information
      • Module catalogue
      • Learning resources
      • Reading list
      • Assessment
      • Media
    • 2.5Design guidelines
  • 3.Stage 2 | Integration and Development
    • 3.1Rationale for design solutions
      • 3.1.1Design 1 | Redesigned Layout
      • 3.1.2Design 2 | Ideal Layout
    • 3.2Usability testing and iteration
      • 3.2.1Initial design concepts
      • 3.2.2Final design outputs
  • 4.Stage 3 | Evaluation and Validity
    • 4.1Participants
    • 4.2Procedure and materials
    • 4.3Performance results
      • 4.3.1Time
      • 4.3.2Accuracy
      • 4.3.3Eye-tracking
    • 4.4Opinion results
  • 5.Information design guidance for courses on a VLE
    • 5.1How to design the main menu?
      • Guidelines
      • Rationale
    • 5.2How to design an announcement?
      • Guidelines
      • Rationale
    • 5.3How to design the staff information page?
      • Guidelines
      • Rationale
    • 5.4How to design the module information page?
      • Guidelines
      • Rationale
    • 5.5How to design the learning resources page?
      • Guidelines
      • Rationale
    • 5.6How to design the assignment page?
      • Guidelines
      • Rationale
  • 6.Discussion and conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
References (52)
References
Abbad, M. M. and M. Albarghouthi. 2011. Evaluate Students’ Perceptions of the Virtual Learning Environment at Paisley University. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (IJET). 6 (3), pp.28–34. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Al-Badowi, A. 2010. The Design of E-learning Services on Blackboard. IEEE. pp.186–193. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blackboard United Kingdom. 2019. Blackboard for Higher Education.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bodemer, D., Ploetzner, R., Feuerlein, I. and Spada, H. 2004. The active integration of information during learning with dynamic and interactive visualisations. Learning and Instruction. 14(3), pp.325–341. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bursi-Amba, A., Gaullier, A. and Santidrian, M. 2016. Infographics: A toolbox for technical writers? Paris: Diderot University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Conrad, D. L. 2002. Engagement, Excitement, Anxiety, and Fear: Learners’ Experiences of Starting an Online Course. The American Journal of Distance Education. 16(4), pp.205–226. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dirksen, J. 2016. Design for how people learn. Berkeley, Calif: New Riders.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
D’Silva, R. and Reeder, K. 2005. Factors that influence faculty members’ uptake and continued use of course management systems. British Journal of Educational Technology. 36(6), pp.1071–1073. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dyson, M. and Beier, S. 2016. Investigating typographic differentiation. Information Design Journal. 22(1), pp.3–18. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dyson, M., Lonsdale, M., Papaefthimiou, M. 2006. Student perspectives on a Virtual Learning Environment: lessons for instructors. Proceedings of the First Annual Blended Learning Unit’s Conference: Blended Learning – Promoting Dialogue in Innovation and Practice.
Gibeault, M. 2018. Organization of Materials and Accessing the Library in Blackboard: A Learner-centered Usability Study. The Journal of Academic Librarianship. 44(2), pp.190–195. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Green, M. S., Weaver, M., Voegeli, D., Fitzsimmons, D., Knowles, J., Harrison, M. and Shephard, K. 2006. The development and evaluation of the use of a virtual learning environment (Blackboard 5) to support the learning of pre-qualifying nursing students undertaking a human anatomy and physiology module. Nurse Education Today. 26(5), pp.388–395. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grunwald, T. and Corsbie-Massay, C. 2006. Guidelines for Cognitively Efficient Multimedia Learning Tools: Educational Strategies, Cognitive Load, and Interface Design. Academic Medicine. 81(3), pp.213–223. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hanrahan, S., de Pietro, P., Brown, L. H., Haw, A., Malins, J., Milojevic, M., Raevaara, M., Sonvilla, B. and Weckman, J. K. 2009. Interface: Virtual Environments in Art, Design and Education: A report on a conference exploring VLEs in art and design education. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education. 8(1), pp.99–128. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hazlett, R. L., Larson, K., Shaikh, A. D. and Chaparro, C. B. 2013. Two studies on how a typeface congruent with content can enhance onscreen communication. Information Design Journal. 20(3), pp. 207–219. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Istrate, O. 2009. Visual and pedagogical design of eLearning content. Centre for Innovation in Education. E-Learning papers. 171, pp.1–12.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Khlaisang, J. and Songkram, N. 2019. Designing a Virtual Learning Environment System for Teaching Twenty-First Century Skills to Higher Education Students I ASEAN.(Report). Technology, Knowledge and Learning. 24(1), p.41. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Knaflic, C. N. 2015. Storytelling with data: A data visualization guide for business professionals. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koyani, et al. 2006. Research-Based Web Design & Usability Guidelines. Washington, D. C.: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kuzu, E. B. and Ceyla, B. 2010. Typographic properties of online learning environments for adults. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences. 91, pp.879–883. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lapowsky, I. 2015. The Reeducation of Blackboard, Everyone’s Classroom Pariah. Wired [Online]. [Accessed 27 December 2021]. Available from: [URL]
Lee, K. H. and Kim, D. Y. 2014. A Study of Students’ Perceptions of Course Management Systems in Hospitality Programs: A Case of Blackboard System in the United States. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education. 26(2), pp.45–54. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lester, P. M. 2006. Syntactic Theory of Visual Communication. California State University at Fullerton.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Liaw, S. S. 2008. Investigating students’ perceived satisfaction, behavioral intention, and effectiveness of e-learning: A case study of Blackboard system. Computers & Education. 51(2), pp.864–873. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lidwell, W., Holden, K. and Butler, J. 2003. Universal principles of design. Gloucester: Rockport.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lonsdale, M. dS. 2014. Typographic features of text: Outcomes from research and practice. Visible Language. 48(3), pp.29–67.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lonsdale, M., Lonsdale, D. J., Baxter, M., Graham, R., Kanafani, A., Li, A. and Peng, C. 2019. Visualising the terror threat: The impact of communicating security information to the general public using infographics and motion graphics. Visible Language. 53(2), pp.36–71.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lonsdale, M. dS. and Lonsdale, D. J. 2019. Design2Inform: Information visualisation. The Office of the Chief Scientific Advisor, Gov UK.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Limniou, M. M. 2010. Teachers’ and students’ perspectives on teaching and learning through virtual learning environments. European Journal of Engineering Education, 35(6), pp.645–653. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Maybee, C., Bruce, C., Lupton, M. and Pang, M. 2019. Informed learning design:. Teaching and learning through engagement with information. Higher Education Research & Development, 38(3), pp.579–583. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McAvinia, C. 2016. Online Learning and Its Users: Lessons for Higher Education. London: Elsevier.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moore, P. and Fitz, C. 1993. Gestalt theory and instructional design. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 23(2), pp.137–157. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Muilenburg, L. and Berge, Z. 2005. Student barriers to online learning: A factor analytic study. Distance Education. 26(1), pp.29–48. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Norman, D. 2013. The Design of Everyday Things. Massachusetts: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oakman, H. 2016. The next generation VLE. Educational Technology, [Online]. [Accessed 28 December 2021]. Available from: [URL]
Parsons, A. 2017. Accessibility and use of VLEs by students in further education. Research in Post-Compulsory Education. 22(2), pp.271–288. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Peng, J., Tan, W. and Liu, G. 2015. Virtual Experiment in distance education: based on 3D virtual learning environment. 2015 International conference of educational innovation through technology (EITT). pp.81–84. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Peters, D. 2014. Interface design for learning: design strategies for learning experiences. Pearson Education.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pettersson, R. 2010. Information Design – Principles and Guidelines. Journal of Visual Literacy. 29(2), pp.167–182. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pettersson, R. and Avgerinou, M. D. 2016. Information Design with Teaching and Learning in Mind. Journal of Visual Literacy. 35(4), pp.253–267. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reiser, R. 1994. Clark’s invitation to the dance: An instructional Designer’s response. Educational Technology Research and Development. 42(2), pp.45–48. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Richardson, R. T., Drexler, T. L. and Delparte, D. M. 2014. Color and Contrast in E-Learning Design: A Review of the Literature and Recommendations for Instructional Designers and Web Developers. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching. 10(4), pp.657–670.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rogers, P. L. 2000. Barriers to adopting emerging technologies in education. Journal of Computing Research. 22(4), pp.455–472. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schlegel, E. 2020. Designing Online Courses: 12 Tips for Health Professions Educators. MedEdPublish. pp.1–11Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Simoni, M. 2011. Using Tablet PCs and Interactive Software in IC Design Courses to Improve Learning. IEEE Transactions on Education. 54(2), pp.216–221. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Spinuzzi, C. 2005. The Methodology of Participatory Design. Technical Communication. 52(2), pp.163–174.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stoney, S. and Wild, M. 2008. Motivation and Interface Design: Maximising Learning Opportunities. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 14(1), pp.40–50. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Umoru, T. A. 2012. Barriers to the Use of Information and Communication Technologies in Teaching and Learning Business Education. American Journal of Business Education. 5(5), pp.575–580. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Visocky O’Grady, J. and Visocky O’Grady, K. 2008. The Information Design Handbook. Cincinnati, Ohio: How Books.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wongpornprateep, P. and Boonmoh, A. 2019. Students’ Perceptions towards the Use of VLE in a Fundamental English Course: A review of Smart Choice Online Practice and Smart Choice on the Move. Journal of Studies in the English Language (JSEL). 14(2), pp. 91–131.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Li, Gang & Jialing Xu
2023. 2023 11th International Conference on Information and Education Technology (ICIET), ► pp. 34 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 11 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue