CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 7Online Learning and AnalyticsLearning Styles and Cognitive DifferencesEducational Technology and E-Learning

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Representational model on Moodle’s activity: learning styles and navigation strategies

Open access
Meza-Fernández, Sandra, Sepúlveda-Sariego, Agustín·2017·International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education
DOI 10.1186/s41239-017-0052-3
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This paper attempts to describe the conditions related to the representation of 63 navigational paths carried out on Moodle’s platform. The hypothesis that we advance is that learning styles determine the mode in which users browse through websites. The post-observational notes and the analysis of logs (register of users’ activity) indicate two main facts: on the one hand, the elaboration of a tool that is able to convert log files into graphs that could be visualized as courses of educational browsing. On the other hand, the confirmation of the relation between ways of learning and styles of browsing, giving rise to a method that anticipates choices made by users on the digital platform. There has been stated that assimilative and convergent learning students solve the assigned task consulting, preferably, the content modules on communicative interaction. For their part, accommodating learning students follow precise instructions and rely on his peers’ activity. Finally, divergent learning students tend to prefer collaborative activities and they also help each other. The practical application of the results aims at the usefulness of the findings in university education context, which can be used in the elaboration of quality assessments and the identification of the needs of educational mediation.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s41239-017-0052-3

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Still being checked.

Research works printed but not linked: 17

  1. Alonso, C. M., Gallego, D. J., & Honey, P. (1999). Los estilos de aprendizaje. Procedimientos de Diagnóstico y Mejora. Bilbao: Ediciones Mensajero.
  2. Amadieu, F., & Tricot, A. (2006). Utilisation d’un hypermédia et apprentissage: deux activités concurrentes ou complémentaires. Psychologie Française, 51, 5–23. · DOI
  3. Baccino, T. (2004). La lecture électronique. Grenoble: Presses universitaires.
  4. Bastien, C., & Tricot, A. (2008). L’évaluation ergonomique des documents électroniques. En A. Chevalier and A. Tricot, Ergonomie des documents électroniques. Paris: PUF.
  5. Curry, L. (1990). A Critique of the Research on Learning Styles. Educational Leadership, 48(2), 50–56.
  6. Honey, P., & Mumford, A. (1992). The Manual of learning styles. Maidenhead: Peter Honey.
  7. Jonassen, D., & Grabowski, B. (1993). Individual differences and instruction. New York: Allen and Bacon.
  8. Keefe, J. (1988). Development of the NASSP Learning Style Profile. In Keefe, J. (Ed.). Profiling and Utilizing Learning Style. Virginia: National Association of Secondary School Principals, 1–21.
  9. Kolb, A., & Kolb, D. (2005a). The Kolb Learning Style Inventory, Version 3.1 Technical Specifications. Boston: Haygroup.
  10. Kolb, A., & Kolb, D. (2005b). Learning Styles and Learning Spaces. Acad Manag Learn Edu, 4(2), 193–212. · DOI · Paper page
  11. Lee, Y., Grill, S., Sanchez, A., Murphy-Ryan, M., & Poss, K. (2005). Fgf signaling instructs position-dependent growth rate during zebra fish fin regeneration. Development, 132(23), 5173–5183. · DOI
  12. Le Crosnier, H. (2008). A l’ère de l’«informatique en nuages. Paris: Le Monde Diplomatique.
  13. Meza, S. (2014). Enseigner et apprendre en ligne: vers une sémiotique de la navigation Web. Une étude exploratoire. Sarrebruck: Presses académiques francophones.
  14. Meza, S. (2012). Proceedings of the 10th World Congress of the International Association for Semiotic Studies (IASS/AIS). Universidade da Coruña (España) (pp. 1911–1920).
  15. Saarikoski, L., Salojärvi, S., Del Corso, D., & Ovcin, E. (2001). Un environnement pour le développement de l‘éducation axée sur l’apprenant sur mesure Packages. Kumamoto: ITHET.
  16. Tchounikine, P. (2009). Précis de recherche en ingénierie des EIAH. Grenoble: Laboratoire d’informatique de Grenoble.
  17. Wang, P., Hawk, W., & Tenopir, C. (2000). Users’ interaction with World Wide Web resources: An exploratory study using a holistic approach. Information Processing and Management, 36, 229–251. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 7

Metadata

Authors
Meza-Fernández, S., & Sepúlveda-Sariego, A.
Venue
International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2017-06-01
Volume
14
Issue
1
ISSN
2365-9440 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1186/s41239-017-0052-3
OpenAlex
W2603555851
Cited by
7
References
0
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 3
FWCI
1.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • Redalyc (Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Online Learning and Analytics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Learning Styles and Cognitive Differences
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Educational Technology and E-Learning
Keywords
Moodle, learning styles, navigation strategies, user activity logs, web browsing behavior, VARK learning styles, cooperative learning, online learning platforms, quality assessment in higher education

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Representational model on Moodle’s activity: learning styles and navigation strategies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/s41239-017-0052-3
The paper
Meza-Fernández, S., & Sepúlveda-Sariego, A. (2017). Representational model on Moodle’s activity: learning styles and navigation strategies. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0052-3