CANVAS is an open source, cloud based LMS which was released in 2011 by Instructure, an educational technology company based in the US. It is one of the most rapidly expanding LMSs (See Figure 1; Edutechica, 2021) with over 80% of American and Canadian higher education institutes selecting it when negotiating new contracts (Hill, 2016). In addition to its increasing popularity, CANVAS is also regarded as being one of the most stable LMS systems with an uptime reliability rate of 99.9% (Rabah, 2017).

CANVAS offers a number of features and functions which can be used by both teachers and students which allow learners to view pre-recorded lectures, communicate with teachers, download course information, take quizzes online, and submit homework and classwork assignments. In addition, teachers can store class content, prepare and digitally deliver online assignments, create announcements for classes, and manage student grading (Daenos, Endozo & Oluyinka, 2019). The initial splash page presents learners with six tabs and clicking on each tab directs learners to different sections of the LMS depending on what information they require or what they are looking to achieve. Below is a summary of these six tabs, their functions, and how they integrate into the LMS:

CANVAS, along with the other popular LMSs, such as Moodle, Blackboard and Desire2Learn all have a variety of functions and tools. However, there are several features which give Canvas an advantage over its competitors. A comparative functional review shows that CANVAS was preferred by faculty members as it completely dominated in every measure which included usefulness, usability, tool satisfaction, teacher effectiveness, and teacher efficiency (UITS, 2013). In terms of student satisfaction, CANVAS again excelled in all but one of the measures, comprising of: beneficial to learning, student efficiency and tool usefulness. Only Desire2Learn slightly edged out CANVAS in the usability measure. This same review also mentioned that CANVAS was the only platform to connect notification options to not only SMS text, but also to Twitter and Facebook. In addition, CANVAS was the only platform in the review to allow appointment scheduling, whereby the instructor reserves timeslots to allow students to sign up for a conference meeting.

Since the use of LMSs, including CANVAS, has become more prevalent in higher education (Butakov et al., 2013; Hill, 2017; Klobas & McGill, 2010; Paulsen, 2003; Weaver et al., 2008), it is now logical to suggest that they are now an integral part of the modern-day classroom. As a result, there has been a significant amount of research done on how students perceive the use of them as part of their education; however, the results so far have proved inconclusive. Some studies (Dooley et al., 2018; Green et al., 2018; Morton et al., 2016; Riddle and Gier, 2019) have shown that classes solely based on an LMS rather than face-to-face were more satisfying for the students and led to higher levels of academic achievement. Other studies (Krause & Coates, 2008) indicate poor levels of student engagement with course content when classes were conducted online. On the other hand, other research (Pickering & Swinnerton, 2019) shows very little significant difference between classes conducted in a traditional manner and those done online via an LMS.

There have also been several studies conducted which specifically relate to how learners perceive CANVAS as a learning platform. Wilcox et al. (2016) discovered that overall students liked the layout and appearance of CANVAS as well as finding it user-friendly. However, the same study also appeared to indicate some students felt specific functions and technologies offered on CANVAS did not work as well as they expected. In addition, they felt inconsistent organization of course content on the system led to some confusion. A further study by Dang (2020) showed master’s degree students at a university in Sweden had a positive feeling about how CANVAS handled the administrative aspects of a class, such as course overview information, grading, and handling assignments. They also appeared to enjoy the flexibility and mobility offered by CANVAS and the integrated mobile applications. A different study by Kite et al. (2020) of students enrolled at a university in Australia found they considered CANVAS to be very limited in its ability to connect students and teachers and viewed it as more like a database into which teachers could store course content for learners to interact and engage with in their own time.

More specific to this project, other research has investigated how EFL learners feel about using CANVAS as part of their English lessons. One study (Khoeri, Nuraini, Ramdani, & Agum, 2021) looked into how CANVAS functions could be used to improve English education. Through observations and questionnaires, the research showed it enhanced English learning and teaching due to its various features. These included sharing the class materials, creating discussions, allocating learning assignments and quizzes, communicating in online meetings, and collaborating with other platforms. The students who took part in this study enjoyed using the platform and thought it was fun to use. The only setback students had was gaining access to it but that was a network issue and not CANVAS related. In addition, research by Hajan and Padagas (2021) found similar results in a blended learning academic English writing class in the Philippines. The students liked several functions of CANVAS, and it was noted to be “an efficient, practical, convenient, and flexible Learning Management System (LMS) that afforded them social interactions between their peers and teachers.” (p.103). The only issues that some students mentioned with CANVAS were the system interface and lack of training for both students and teachers. Similarly, another study (Soeung, Chaichompoo & Nakanitanon 2020) from Pannasastra University in Thailand looked at how peer feedback using the functions of CANVAS influenced the students’ writing ability in an English intensive course. The findings showed CANVAS functions had overall positive effects in 3 ways; by increasing their motivation, improving awareness with their spelling and grammar, and facilitating classroom management by allowing students a learning space of their own. One other study (Aliah, 2020) revealed the negative perceptions EFL learners had of CANVAS during a writing course due to common system errors and other unspecified technical errors. This study also found that using CANVAS led to a decrease in motivation to learn leading to a disconnect with the course content. Lee and Bailey (2016) examined how Korean students felt about receiving feedback on their work via CANVAS, but they did not cover overall perceptions of CANVAS as an LMS. Furthermore, this study focused on blended learning which involves both online and face-to-face classes. To add to this, a study in Boliva (Tango Rojas, 2020) on blended learning using CANVAS comprised of a comparison group and a treatment group. Both were EFL learners of the same ability, with the comparison group having regular face-to- face classes and the treatment group being a blended learning class integrated with the CANVAS platform. The study looked at students’ improvements in serval English skills between the groups. It showed that there was no considerable difference in improvements between both groups in the case of grammar, vocabulary and reading. In face-to-face classes, students could ask their teacher for a clear explanation if they did not understand. However, with CANVAS, the treatment group could replay and reread the content to help them fully understand. In terms of speaking, listening, and writing the comparison group performed better and improved as they had more opportunities to communicate and practice with classmates and the teacher, whereas the treatment group completed activities based on reading and grammar using the CANAVS tools.

Even though there has been considerable amount of research done in this area, it is logical to suggest that COVID-19 has and will continue to impact how EFL lessons at Korean universities are taught. A potential greater reliance on CANVAS is a clear possibility. Therefore, this study will attempt to add to the data extracted from the previously mentioned studies and answer the following research questions:

The data for this study was collected between June 6th and July 19th, 2021, at a university located in a metropolitan area of South Korea. This university requires all bachelor’s degree students to pass two mandatory English classes in order to graduate. They are referred to as college English (CE) classes and each one focuses on a different skill: writing and presentation techniques.

Eight of these classes were taught by the authors of this research using the same asynchronous approach. A pre-recorded video which explained the class content was uploaded weekly for the students to watch in their own time along with an activity sheet based on concepts and ideas explained in the video. Students were required to submit the completed activity sheet by the end of the week. They were then reviewed by the teacher to ensure all students had understood the lesson. If needed, feedback on the student’s work was provided either via the CANVAS Inbox or the comments box. Student attendance was then recorded based on the timely submission of the activity sheets and the quality of the work. In addition, occasional group activities and discussions were organized, and students were expected to participate in these using the functions provided by CANVAS. Homework, exams, and quizzes were also prepared and assigned on the LMS and given at various stages throughout the course.

Towards the end of the 2021 spring semester, students were asked if they would be willing to help with this project. Participation was voluntary and those who did not wish to help were under no obligation to do so. A survey was written in Korean and English and posted as an announcement on CANVAS to 1 advanced class, 2 basic classes and 5 intermediate classes. These levels were determined by a level test, which was loosely based on the TOEIC test of English proficiency and was administered by the education company YBM prior to the student’s starting university. In total, 129 students responded to the survey and 65 (52.4%) were male and 59 (47.6%) were female. All students were South Korean and 113 (91.1%) were freshmen, 2 (1.6%) were sophomores, 6 (4.8%) were juniors and 2 (1.6%) were seniors. The students’ majors varied from education to engineering to business. 7 (5.6%) students were 19 years old, 69 (55.6%) were 20 years old, 26 (21%) were 21 years old, 12 (9.7%) were 22 years old and 10 (8.1%) were 23 or older. In terms of the student’s levels, 35 (28.2%) were assigned to a basic class, 81 (65.3%) were in intermediate and the remaining 8 (6.5%) were in advanced.

The data for this study was collected in two ways. Initially, the research team used Google Forms to design and write a survey questionnaire (Appendix A) in early May 2021. This method of data collection was chosen for several reasons. Firstly, it allowed for collection of a large set of anonymously submitted data which would develop a clearer understanding of how students felt about CANVAS. In addition, it could be posted online without the need for face-to-face interaction which was critical under the COVID restrictions at the time. Furthermore, according to Young (2016) a survey questionnaire is one of the most effective to establish feelings and perceptions towards certain ideas or objects which was the primary focus of this study. Following the survey creation, it was distributed to 6 colleagues of the research team who were not involved with this project. Comments and feedback from them regarding individual questions assisted in establishing validity prior to data collection. Once any required amendments had been made, it was posted on the announcements section on CANVAS for the participants to voluntarily complete in their own time. There were 34 questions in total with the initial 2 being pre-survey questions, the following 5 were related to demographic information. The remaining questions consisted of a combination of multiple choice, short answers along with 10-point Likert scale questions which the research team felt would reveal a wider spectrum of data which might not have been possible with a 5-point scale. Whilst it was not possible to run a reliability test on every survey question, a Cronbach Alpha test conducted on the Likert scale questions revealed a score of 0.93 indicating excellent internal consistency.

At the end of the data collection period, the results of the survey were automatically collated in an Excel spreadsheet by Google for analysis. The final question of the survey asked participants if they would be willing to be contacted to discuss some of their responses in more detail. Those who agreed were asked to leave their email address. During the data analysis phase of this study, any relevant responses deemed important to the research questions were pursued and discussed via email / online video call.

Once all data were collected, the researchers individually explored and interpreted the participants’ responses to the multiple choice and 10-point Likert scale questions and analyzed them through descriptive statistics, which helped to summarize the 129 respondents’ responses and to identify some common themes and patterns of the data to establish any connections. For the open-ended questions and personal correspondence, content analysis was applied to identify and understand frequent trends in the textual data. Following this, the researchers met on four occasions for approximately 1 hour each time on a Zoom conference call to compare thoughts and concepts. Discussions were held to settle any differences and finalize the overall results.

In order to try and answer research question 1, the participants were asked a number of questions based on how prepared they felt they were with using CANVAS prior to the semester, how long it took them to feel comfortable using the platform, and ultimately how easy they found using the LMS for classes during the pandemic.

Before answering the survey, all participants were asked control questions (Survey Questions 1 & 2) which served two purposes. Firstly, to ensure all students were enrolled in at least one CE class, and secondly to check if those students used CANVAS as part of their classes. 124 of the 129 participants responded affirmatively thus continued to answer the main survey questions. The 5 who responded negatively were not able to access the main survey questions and that data was disregarded.

Given that more than 90% of the participants were freshman, it is possible to suggest they would have had little or no experience using CANVAS prior to beginning university. Consequently, having to adapt to a new LMS and more importantly a new way of taking classes due to COVID could have resulted in frustration or confusion with being forced to use this learning interface. However, the survey data shows mainly positive feelings towards using it as part of their CE course. For survey question 8, over 85% of the participants selected 7 or higher on a 10-point scale when asked about how easy they felt CANVAS was to use (See Figure 2.) When asked to briefly explain in more detail one participant commented, “I would prefer to have class in person. I was not accustomed to using CANVAS at first, but I was able to learn the class material well enough.” Another participant stated, “I really wanted to meet my teacher and classmates offline, CANVAS was ok, but I hope it will be offline next semester.” This theme was reflected in several other comments suggesting that while it will never be able to replace a brick-and-mortar classroom, CANVAS is sufficient as an alternative given the circumstances.

Despite these general positive feelings, there are several interesting data points regarding how prepared the students were, and how quickly they were able to adapt to using CANVAS. When asked about how prepared they were to use this new system (Survey question 10), 38 (30%) participants said they received no training or education prior to the start of the semester. Surprisingly, of those 38, 30 (78%) still answered 8 or higher to survey question 8 and only 3 (0.07%) selected 5 or less. Furthermore, survey question 11 asked the participants how long it took them to get used to using CANVAS. The majority (75.8%) indicated it took less than 4 days with the remaining 30 participants (24.2%) claiming it took longer than 1 week. Out of these 30, 19 (63%) continued by selecting 8 or higher for question 8. In addition, of those 30 who said they received no CANVAS training, only 9 (30%) said it took them 1 week or longer to feel comfortable with using it. These slight anomalies in the data appear to suggest that there is no clear link between either how much training students received and how long it took them to feel confident using the system with their overall satisfaction levels with using CANVAS. Similarly, there is also no identifiable pattern between how student majors, age, and English ability seem to affect their satisfaction levels with using this platform.

To summarize the data in relation to research question 1, even though there appears to be some apprehension towards online learning and a clear desire to return to face-to face classes as soon as possible, Korean university EFL students were generally satisfied with CANVAS as a language learning interface. They were able learn the system relatively quickly and the amount of training they received does not appear affect the adaption rate. These findings appear to mirror those of several studies introduced in the literature review (Hajan & Padagas, 2021; Khoeri et al., 2021; Wilcox et al., 2016) in which students in other countries and learning contexts indicated overall satisfaction with CANVAS. However, the findings of this study on how much training using CANVAS the students received differ greatly from those discovered by Hajan and Padagas (2021) in which a lack of training appeared to significantly affect their perceptions of CANVAS.

Overall, this data adds these studies by demonstrating that even during the unique circumstances created as a consequence of the ongoing global pandemic which has essentially forced learners into using this LMS, satisfaction levels with it remain reasonably high.

For the second research question, this study attempted to establish which features and functions offered by CANVAS were perceived as useful / helpful by tertiary Korean EFL learners. To do this, the participants were asked to respond to survey questions based on their experiences with using the different learning and course management tools built into the system. Survey question 12 asked the participants to select all the default CANVAS tools which they found useful in their CE class. The data collected from that question is collated in Table 1.

Unsurprisingly, the lecture contents, announcements, assignments, and grades sections were the most frequently selected. These four functions were vital to ensure students could keep up to date with the progress of the class, receive any important information, access course videos / materials, and track their progress with exams, quizzes, and assignments. They were also the sections that would have been used most by the teachers and without them it would have been virtually impossible to maintain any normality to online classes. However, the data indicates that there are a number of functions that would have been used a lot by the teachers, yet the students seem to feel they were not particularly useful for their class. For example, it was somewhat surprising how relatively infrequently the comments box, calendar and discussion were selected. Several of the responses to survey question 13 seemed to explain this in more detail. Participants commented on how they felt there were too many functions which they either did not use or did not understand how to use. One participant stated, “I only needed lecture contents and announcements to do most of the work, I don’t know why there are so many other functions which did not get used.” Another participant commented, “Lecture contents contained the videos and other class materials each week, without this I would not be able to keep up with the class, other things I only used three or four times in the semester.”

This trend is also reflected in the questions which asked the participants about functions they found to be the most user friendly (Survey Question 14). Lecture contents and announcements were clearly deemed to be the most user friendly with 72.6% and 53.2% of participants selecting them respectively. Only 10 (8.1%) respondents indicated they found the comments box easy to use, 9 (7.3%) selected the calendar, and 2 (1.6%) felt the discussion section was easy to use. Comments made to elaborate on these choices included: “I used lecture contents many times a week for this class and other classes. After one or two weeks it was very easy and convenient to use.”; “Every Monday I checked announcements from my teacher and then entered lecture contents to complete the lesson for the week, it was very convenient.”

When asked to specify which functions they found the most difficult to use, the most frequently selected answer was ‘none’ with slightly over 40% of participants selecting it. This indicates a large proportion of the participants had little problem using the functions that were provided by CANVAS. However, almost one third selected discussion and the two other most selected functions in this question were Q&A board and open board with almost 20% selecting each one respectively. When asked about this in more detail, many students left comments that indicated they were not confident using online discussion tools like this. They seemed to feel they could not actively engage with other people in the discussion like they would if it was being done in-person. This data appears to indicate the participants found tasks such as questioning, and discussion are both more time consuming and more difficult for students online than they would be in a regular classroom. A selection of comments regarding this question can be seen in Table 2.

Communication between students and teachers in a classroom is an undeniably crucial part of the learning process. Particularly in language classes, learners being able to discuss and ask questions to each other as well as being able to ask the teacher about class content or for help with a specific task is a way to foster learning and improve student knowledge and understanding. In a regular face-to-face setting, this is never really an issue, it is relatively straightforward to ask a classmate a question or request help from the teacher, However, when classes are online, this becomes more difficult. Despite all the students being enrolled in the same online class, they may not have met each other in person before, they have never been introduced and know little if anything about their classmates. Similarly, other than weekly videos, the students will not have had a lot of interaction with their teacher. Survey question 18 tried to examine how easy the participants felt it was to communicate with both classmates via CANVAS while classes were done online. The responses were very mixed, and there is no clear indication as to whether the participants felt positively or negatively about this (See Figure 3). Since there were such a variety of answers to this question, the research team decided to contact some of the participants by email to better understand why they felt this way. Those who felt positively (answered 6 or higher to question 18) responded with comments indicating they felt reasonably comfortable reaching out to their classmates although there does appear to be some hesitation based on the fact, they had not met each other face to face. Comments received by email regarding this question included: “I sometimes contacted other people in the class about the class and homework, but it felt a little rude because I did not know them.” Another participant replied, “It was a little uncomfortable because I didn’t know them, but I wanted ask for some help with my assignment.” There was a somewhat similar theme to the comments made by those who responded negatively to this question. Not meeting face to face or being introduced to each other appears to be a significant barrier to contacting classmates on CANVAS. One participant commented “I really wanted to know my classmates, but it was too uncomfortable to contact them by e-learning.” In addition, several participants said they had no reason to get in touch with their fellow students. Everything they needed to learn was provided directly via e-learning and any question or problems they had could be handled by connecting the teacher directly. When asked about this, one participant commented, “I answered 2 for this question. I didn’t need to contact my classmates and they did not contact me. My teacher prepared the lessons and sometimes I contacted him if I had a problem. Another similar comment, “I think my classmates could not help me with the class, I had no reason to ask them anything. Actually, in all my classes I did not contact my classmates even once.”

Overall, this data appears to show students are willing to contact their classmates although some reluctantly given, they did not really know each other. Also, it appears students do not see any value in doing so. They are focused on learning the lesson content and it seems they feel their teacher is the only person they need to rely on.

However, there is a clearer pattern regarding how easy the participants felt it was to communicate with their teacher. 99 (76%) of the participants answered higher than 7 on a 10-point scale when responding to survey question 20 indicating overall they found CANVAS was helpful. Despite these overall positive feelings, there still appears to be some frustration. Survey question 21 asked participants to briefly explain their answers to question 20. Several participants commented that asking questions to their teacher via CANVAS was a slow and cumbersome process. One participant commented “If you ask questions during an offline class, you can get answers right away. However, when it is an online class, I ask questions through a system such as an email or a note. You may get a quick reply, but when I asked my teachers last year, they all answered late.” A different participant seemed to feel the same, commenting, “I thought it was inconvenient to ask questions that it would take time and not be solved immediately when there was something that I didn’t know or understood.” One of the participants, when contacted via email, expanded on this by saying:

“Also, there is a difference in expression between speaking and writing. There are problems such as writing down English grammar to ask questions using a computer system. That’s why I think it’s more comfortable to ask questions in person and deliver them well. Of course, the system is well established and I think it is enough to ask questions. However, I thought it was difficult to ask questions because it took time to send questions and get answers, and there was some inconvenience to express things that I didn’t understand through chatting.”

This is similar to the findings of a study by Kite et al. (2020). The participants in this research also found communication between classmates and the teacher on the LMS to be limited, as they viewed the LMS as a database for the teacher to upload course content for the students to complete in their own time.

One other aspect of CANVAS which this research attempted to examine was how well students were able to track their progress and receive feedback on their work (Survey questions 22, 23 and 24). Overall, the participants felt CANVAS helped them both in tracking their progress and receiving feedback. The data for questions 22 and 23 seem to mirror each other with exactly 97 (78%) selecting over 7 on a 10-point scale for each question. One participant mentioned “I could see my score immediately after each quiz and after the submission deadline for the weekly work. I could also check my scores in the grades section and my progress rate in the learn status section which was very helpful to track my progress”. Another participant made a positive comment concerning the feedback she received. She explained “I liked it when the teacher gave me feedback in the comments box after each homework and exam. I could see where I needed to improve but also the parts, I’m doing correct”. The participants also appeared to feel any feedback they received via CANVAS was useful with almost 60% selecting higher than nine on a 10-point scale when answering survey question 25 and all participants choosing 5 or higher. There were no identifiable patterns relating to participants age, English level, or major in the data for these three survey items.

In summary, despite some negativity and feelings of frustration, the participants generally felt the functions and features offered by CANVAS were of use and did help them in their CE class. The vast majority (84%) of those who completed the survey selected 7 or higher when answering survey question 26, the results of which can be seen in Figure 4. This is in-line with the comparative functional review mentioned in the literature review (UITS, 2013) that tool usefulness was scored highly by the participants along with other measures such as beneficial to learning and student efficiency of the LMS. In addition, our study mirrors the findings of the study by Soeung, Chaichompoo & Nakanitanon in 2020 in Thailand, showing students overall had positive feelings of CANVAS functions.

The final question of this study was to identify which features and functions of CANVAS the participants found helpful to improve their English. Question 27 asked the participants if they felt the tools used in their CE class enhanced their ability to learn with 103 (82.9%) participants selected 7 or higher on a 10-point scale. Indicating that features provided by the LMS had a positive effect on their learning. Only 10 (8%) responded negatively, with 7 (5.6%) participants selecting 5, 2 (1.6%) selecting 2 and 1 (0.8%) participant selecting 1. Out of these 10 participants, 6 were in the beginning level of English and 4 were in the intermediate level. Although not possible to prove from this data, there is an argument that the participants’ lower level of English contributed to them responding negatively to this question. Further research comparing how students from different levels felt about how effective classes solely based on CANVAS were in improving learning would be needed.

Likewise, there were mainly positive responses to question 28 which asked the participants if CANVAS tools helped to improve their English ability. 99 (79%) participants chose 7 or higher and only 5 respondents choosing 3 or less (See Figure 5). One participant elaborated by saying “The tools I used for this class were simple and easy to use which helped me to study well and improve my ability to learn”. As for question 28, a participant responded negatively. “I don’t think the tools improved my English ability as they were just a method to study an online class, but rather the class content and the teachers’ explanations did.”

Following on from this, survey question 30 examined whether the participants felt CANVAS helped to improve their English grade. 101 (81.4%) participants selected 7 or higher on a 10-point scale with only 17 (13.7%) selecting 5 or lower.

With the ultimate goal of CE classes being to develop students’ English ability and grade, it was of interest as to why students responded negatively to question 28 and 30. As a result, the data from these participants was analyzed in more detail to try and understand their negative feelings. Interestingly, every participant who answered less than 5 for question 28 also answered with less than 5 for question 30 which appears to indicate students correlate English ability with achieving a high score for the class. There were no clear patterns in the data relating to age, English level, or grade for either of these questions.

Participants also respond affirmatively to survey question 31 which asked if feedback received via CANVAS tools help to improve their English ability. Over 80% selected 7 or above with just over one third (33.2%) selecting 10. This data clearly shows that feedback they received was a great source of help and assisted in improving their English. When asked about this in more detail via email, comments from a number of participants confirm this. “I liked getting regular comments from my teacher about my activity sheet and I could do better next class and on the exam.”; “Comments on CANVAS comments box about my homework assignments really helped me to understand where my English is lacking.” This study proves even during an era when more traditional face-to- face feedback was not possible, comments and teacher input on student work appear to be just as important in improving English skills. These findings align with work done by Lee and Bailey (2016). Furthermore, CANVAS allows teachers to provide feedback through a variety of different methods including comments, personal messages, sample answers files and videos. The preferred method of feedback is unclear from this study and further research would be needed to establish this. However, unlike spoken feedback that might happen in physical classrooms, any feedback given on CANVAS can be replayed or re-read multiple times by learners which may help them to better understand the information they are being given and consequently improve as a result. One participant touched on this: “My teacher made an answers / feedback video I could watch after each class. I think it was good because I could take my time and review my answers carefully.” This notion was also discussed by Tango Rojas (2020) and this study confirms that feedback via an LMS should also be considered a worthwhile way of improving student English ability.