Soft systems methodology for personalized learning environment

Abstract

There are two sides to a coin when it comes to implementing technology at universities; on one side, there is the university using technologies via the virtual learning environment that seems to be outdated with the digital needs of the students, and on the other side, while implementing technology at the university learning environment the focus is primarily on the technology more than the learning process students undergo. This paper looks at using soft systems methodology as a 'potential approach' towards (a) bringing the two sides of the coin together by working with different stakeholders at the university and (b) identifying the needs and requirements for a personalized learning environment that would satisfy the learning needs and styles of learners, thereby shifting the paradigm from institution/tutor-centric to a learner-centric approach. This paper also highlights some criticisms towards the existing e-learning system in place at universities, and the role a systems approach could play in the design of online learning environments.

Catchment Area in Health Services: Studies in Kasembon and Pujon Subdistricts, Malang Regency

“…This study uses a qualitative method with a soft system methodology (SSM) approach with the substance of the methodology in the form of a comparison of real facts with several possible state models. Such comparisons provide a better opportunity for understanding the problem situation/state (research) and some ideas for corrective action (Nair, 2015;Williams, 2005). The SSM method starts from an effort to randomly understand issues and problems that occur in the field and define them in the form of a system.…”

“…The definition of problems in the context of health services in Kasembon and Pujon sub-districts is carried out through various statements, arguments, and statements from stakeholders (government authorities) or technical implementers (puskesmas) concerning the provision of health services for the community in Kasembon and Pujon sub-districts. To structure the results obtained, the concept of key elements in the form of customers, actors, transformation, worldview, owner, and environmental constraints is used or popularly abbreviated as CATWOE (Nair, 2015). The descriptions of each include: customer, is the party who benefits or loses in the reciprocal process of interaction of access to health services in terms of transformation and problem solving; actors, are the main organizers and implementers who have responsibility for problem-solving and changes in the context of health services in Malang Regency; transformation, is a process of changing systems and solutions in handling field problem findings to then lead to ideal and normative conditions in the area where the phenomenon applies; worldview, which is the sharpness of multi-perspective understanding of the parties in the context of health services in Malang Regency; owner, who is a party with the capacity to start or end the system and its regulations in the context of health services in Malang Regency, and; environmental constraint, which is the influence of the internal or external environment that can have an impact during health services in Malang Regency.…”

Designing strategy formulation in the midst of uncertainty in digital citizen engagement: A critical reflection of the application of Design Science Research augmented by Soft Systems Methodology to the design of strategy formulation

“…They are simply referred to as analysis 1, analysis 2, and analysis 3 (Checkland & Poulter, 2006). Respectively, these three levels of analysis focus on: varying stakeholder interpretations of an experienced challenge, cultural nuances of the study context, and power relations between stakeholders (Checkland & Poulter, 2006; Nair, 2015), Notably, revelations in all of these aspects are crucial to addressing an unstructured problem.…”

Evaluating lean six sigma implementations in financial services using soft system methodology

“…SSM has found many applications in today's organizations; for instance, in software development, Taylor et al (2001) used SSM to analyze business requirements and Wen and Rajadorai (2013) to analyze stakeholder requirements. In education, Nair (2015) facilitated SSM to prepare curricula, courses, and learning environments. In project management, Joham et al (2009) When the audience asked Checkland (1999), "Where do I start with SSM?"…”

“…used SSM to analyze business requirements andWen and Rajadorai (2013) to analyze stakeholder requirements. In education,Nair (2015) facilitated SSM to prepare curricula, courses, and learning environments. In project management,Joham et al (2009) applied SSM to prepare project conception, Doloi(2011) to estimate exact project costs, whereas Sankaran et al 2009 used to monitor and control different project phases.…”