Zahra Shirkhani University, Ilam Branch IslamicA of FacultyAgricultural in Students M.Sc. b Implementation E-learning of Barriers Identifying 1 2 * Corresponding author’s email: [email protected] *Corresponding author’s tion, Barrierstion, educa- Higher E-learning, Keywords: Accepted: 18 June 2016 Received: 25 December 2015, Assistant Professor, Department of Agricultural Ext M.Sc. of Agricultural Extension and Education, Ilam ISSN:2159-5860 (Online) ISSN: 2159-5852(Print) Available on: online www.ijamad.iaurasht.ac.ir International Journal of (IJAMAD) and Management Agricultural Development 1 , Marjan Vahedi

Abstract 2* and Mohamad Bagher Arayesh barriers and educational-skill barriers that these these that variance. barriers total the of 52.53% explained educational-skill and ba barriers barri professional infrastructure technical, as: barriers, e-le such attitudinal of categories barriers five the that included showed analyses factor of 0.9 to equal was value its and questionnaire the of pa expert Cronbach’s an alpha by coefficient was confirmed used to evaluate validity t content its that by census method. were that Instrument Branch) (Ilam of dataUniversity gatheringAzad Islamic of was agricultur the in o students M.Sc. 153 population included study The used. was method survey scriptive Islami of applied was research This faculty Branch. Ilam University, agricultural in Students M.Sc. by study was to identify the barriers of e-learning im society.pu of de The kind this in learning of to quality necessity a is e-learning Therefore, society. the world is experiencing a new phenomenon named in G nologies and their impact on all aspects of human l human of aspects all on impact their and nologies te and information in communication advanced etting ension and Education, Ilam Branch, Islamic Azad Uni Branch, Islamic Azad University, Ilam, Iran 2 plementation questionnaire rpose of this of rpose he reliability r, human ers, versity, Ilam, Iran 6. Findings 6. eo the velop al faculty al formation and a de- a and e. The nel. barriers Azad c studied arning rriers, this f zad ife, ch- y 353 International Journal of Agricultural Management and Development, 6(3): 353-362, September, 2016. 354 International Journal of Agricultural Management and Development, 6(3): 353-362, September, 2016. hog peetn nw ehd o watching of methods new presenting through has not been an exception sd s ln wt taiinl educational traditional methods with along as used be can which tool training complementary a is standard via technologyusers to transferred usingis message computers,text the 2) 3) e-learning information, of distribution and storage dating, n teaching and nificant changes in many areas including learningsig- about brought century,has last the in (IT), n -erig h nt ehooy s sd to used is technology net the e-learning In to improve traditional approaches of education. 2009) (Rezai, rnfrs h mdr euainl structures educational modern the transforms e- 1) up- continuous supply which standards: net a is three learning on based is learning media of full world the in live who young people the attract hardly can exercises doing and texts, reading paper, using like education and learning process and traditional methods of (IT), new revolution has taken place in teaching Technology Information of rise the with days, anytime and anywhere at learning facilitate and present enrich, create, point in this method is that e-learning and class- the knowledge and performance. The significant increasing to lead which extensively formation in- transfer to technology internet using means rvn te costs the proving im- for models some introduces and activities university outside and inside the combines and removed border traditional makes E-learning ferring knowledge for professors and new meth- trans- students, university the for learning and is considered as an effective and efficient tool. efficient and effective an as considered is e-learning and synchronous get methods room tutrs a b inrd y dcto pro- education by ignored be may structures Those institutes that don’t or can’t change their agers. Yet those universities could win in this in win could universities those Yet agers. ods of organizing educational systems for man- grammers in order to mix the distance learning courses. learning distance the mix to order in age of information that changes their structure their changes that information of age The development of Information TechnologyInformation of development The Using e-learning along with classroom training h iprac o elann i agriculture in e-learning of importance The (Czerniewicz and Brown, 2009) INTRODUCTION . E-learning is an alternative way alternative an is E-learning . Jry 2000) (Jerry, Identifying Barriersof E-learning Implementation / Shirkha Hna 2000) (Hanna, (Abdon (Cahill, 2008) Hge education Higher . et al. Technology . , 2007) . Nowa- . . E- o hge euain r raos o increase to online access to education in Iran. reasons Studies show are education higher for applicants of number growing the and mation, infor- updating of ease the resources, ti-media mul- to access education, for place and time of versity uni- the outside people and society to services more perform to chance the have will versities Roushan, 2009) Roushan, n te elw o arclue aut enjoy teaching on faculty facilities more agriculture of fellows the and students the for experiences learning various that acceptance of e-learning for Iranian students professors and students the between communication the 2001; Zhang the information in a more transfer charming can way because faculty agriculture of fellows the 1998) Terr, and ucation opportunities; 4) the communication in- location and employed people can from enjoy the ed- the considering courses without their universities different choose can students 3) et al et Iran in education higher acquiring for demand growing and population youth large uni- and increased be will faculties agriculture lig o n dctoa ne bt lo o a to also but social need. A need lack of classrooms, the flexibility educational an to plying re- only not is e-learning for need the to plying 2006; Report, Education National Iran’s 2012; grams, audible and visual pictures visual and audible grams, dia- texts, of spectrum a is learning of type this than the number of public and private universities rt o criuus n researches and curriculums on erate creases between the fellows and they can coop- web based learning is the solution to this problem.or any other institutions of higher education. The difficult to achieve the effectiveness of verywebis challengesbaseditmany that so facessystem education higher Iranian current theHowever, learning users choose the their favorite allows methods method; learning 2) the of fellows variety the 1) higher education has been emphasized by experts: ever and wherever they want can accomplish their educational activities when- In Iran, the number of students is growing faster ., 2009; Emadzade, 2009; Ghavidel 2009; Emadzade, 2009; ., (Anstead Frbri n bbkr 2011) Abubakar, and (Fariborzi (Asmal, 2003) et al 5 elann peet more presents e-learning 5) ; create a condition wherein re- wherein condition a create ., 2002) et al ., 2004) ; 7) e-learning increases ni . Cooperation between et al (Wilson, 2006) (Wilson, (Broadbent, 2001) . (Broadbent, (Murphy (Araste et al. et The . ;6) ; , by a number of scholars. advantages of e-learning have been put forward h brir o uig -enn aog M.Sc. among e-leaning using of barriers the o n kn o lann wih s mediated is Intranet an and Internet which the of use the through learning of kind any to trn tahn ad erig ciiis Many activities. learning and teaching itoring with high speed, especially in higher education higher in especially speed, high with in comparison to traditional learning is advancing puters and other electroniccom- standalone devices.or networked Morevia recently,chronously asyn- or synchronously and offline or online working groups or individuals by out carried the main question of this research is that what are students. So M.Sc. implementationlearning by wasconducted toidentify the main barriers ofe- Ilam due to numerous problems. The presentusedisveryrarely Islamic in studyAzad university of Internet-based teaching and advanced learning advanced and teaching Internet-based and learning, web-based teaching, web-based and networking electronic computer, devices. visual, audio, employing activities and providing a learning environment for mon- lessons delivering and planning for technology (2007) Hamdi Murthy and Mathur (2008) definition, comprehensive more a In nology. veloping information and communications tech- de- in role significant a plays and dramatically processes learning and teaching changes which learning of kind active an as e-learning views Yaghoobi 2005; (Khan, 2007) (Atashak, (Rabiee students of Islamic Azad University of Ilam Branch? (2004) instance, believes e-learning can help overcome are that activities educational all incorporating r tpcl f rdtoa euainl systems. educational traditional of typical are In other words, by providing off-site educational geographical and individual limitations which limitations individual and geographical study wherever they have access to a computer a to access have they wherever study and the Internet. They can join the discussions the join can They Internet. the and can learners Accordingly, commitments. and constraints imposed by personal responsibilities of flexibility to accommodate the many times- many the accommodate to flexibility of possibility the offers e-learning opportunities, E-learning was first coined by cross and refers E-learningin spite of having an important role, defines e-learning as the set of training of set the as e-learning defines et al ., 2013) defines e-learning as using web using as e-learning defines Identifying Barriersof E-learning Implementation / Shirkha Eape o elann are e-learning of Examples . . Pawlowski Pawlowski (2006) t al., et define e-learning as 08. Cooper 2008). Mayer (2005) , for number –lack one ofmanagement support. This finding was found to be in line with barrier from where they may be living and working. of e-learning in a multicultural circumstances”, of the internet in the e-learning. use to barriers influential most the are factors socio-cultural that showed phase quantitative of prominent findings use; most technology web the to obstacles were factor legal and tools and processes in the rest of the organization almost completely on integrating the e-learning resting emphasis the with ignored, largely was not required to attend lectures in locations away are they since settings educational residential, about collaborative research e-learning his In benefits factors. motivating designing educational educational, educator, students, technology and them to seven factors, including organizational, and impact of some main factors? He has divided education. In his research entitled “the impact “the entitled research his In education. ployed students are less interested in classroom economic, educational, structural, cio-cultural, stages improving and designing planning, The Kuwait. in followed not was grate–improve) (plan–design–inte- cycle development learning e- usual the that was finding key the models, the comparison between the two implementation guage barriers) are specific to lan- Kuwait.and Regardingsupport (management two remaining in The time). common and (technology are countries two western these, Of time. of lack barriers; (3) IT problems; and (4) workload and language (2) support; management of lack (1) are Kuwait in barriers implementation key the education frees distance learners way, from the constraints This of convenient. conventional is the opportunity to study at a time and place that generally adults in full or part-timeare employment,who learners, giving for learning distance the students, the nwegd by ac- knowledged been also has resources and information remotely in chat rooms. Such flexible access to at any hour, or visit withareas discussion classmatesthreaded board bulletin the in and instructo Ali and Magalhaes (2008) Magalhaes and Ali Frazeen (2006) Rabiee et al et Panitz (2008) Panitz . (2013) . ad (2006) Naidu has explained the relationship have concluded that so- that concluded have ni et al stated that the em- the that stated indicated that that that indicated h appreciates he ; rs . 355 International Journal of Agricultural Management and Development, 6(3): 353-362, September, 2016. 356 International Journal of Agricultural Management and Development, 6(3): 353-362, September, 2016. hud e pae i cnitn wt changes with consistent in updated be should nancial, organizational, legal and culturalfi- encouraging- barriercontent, and method between research, make intercultural e-learning inevitable. In their technology can link the countries more and can of use worldwide the increasing that indicated held in China and United States of America and and also he has written about performing new performing about written has he also and which system educational an of foundation the and method e-learning about reported has Rezai (2009) Mohammadi (2008) learning courses mentally, but they havethehighest thelevel oflowestreadiness for taking part ine Tamajian(2008) services. library administrative andconsulting, by support services are educational,of studentgeneral, satisfaction media is not desirable. What mean have been used through distance courses. projects laboratory which in system cational for So impossible. solving this problem, they studied the new is edu- learning distance via nounced that practical and laboratory education an- and engineers electrical of group a studied Gamble (2009) prpit attd twr mtvtn factors. motivating toward attitudeappropriate enjoying of level lowest the have andlearning e- toward attitude appropriate the enjoying of Also, university professors have the highest level of e-learning. logical barriers, access barriers, lack of proporti that individual specification including individual tified barriers of e-learning. of barriers tified iden- and East Middle the in models e-learning nature of virtual education and libraries as the as libraries and education virtual of nature level of being familiar with e-learning technology. ae h hget oe n cetn e-learning. accepting in role highest the interoperability have and norms social periences, ex- individual stresses, computer innovations, and and concluded that the most e-learning students University Shiraz of students course, learning services proportional ofthe toservices needs time. ua ad iaca barriers. financial and human barriers are infrastructure, executive-education, Jokar Jokar and Khasseh (2007) Fathian and Poor-Ghahremani (2009) Farajollahi(2007) Mirza and Abdulkareem (2011) has indicated that the most important has studied an e-learning course Identifying Barriersof E-learning Implementation / Shirkha concludedthat the students have has concludedhas levelthatthe studied the skill and psycho- have have studied the e- Zhai ahd (2004) Farhadi et al et indicated ., (2012) ., , studied on s - t , theirviewpoints concerning aboutbarrierse- of In second section respondents were asked to characteristics. rate individual about was tionnaire literature review. The first section of the ques- the of section first review.The literature a by developed that questionnaire a was search re- this in gathering data of Instrument access. internet and computer personal a have office their in members network. faculty staffand All this have classes all that so network internet wireless a by supported is university this Also, modulation e-learning and traditional education. with association in barriers and infrastructure, financial-encouraging,cultural,access, attitude otd ih w oeaos oe ih Mbps bandwidth 8 and with the other one with 6 Mbps operators, bandwidth. two with ported Azad University (Ilam Branch). Islamic of faculty agricultural in students M.S by implementation e-learning of barriers the ewe mto ad otn, ak f skill, of lack content, and method between seven barriers, including the lack of proportion recognizing to led has analysis data that cated versity. Now university Internet network is sup- uni-this at workshops computer three are there and projector slide a with equipped are classes all now that so improved has infrastructure IT Gradually (512kbps). internet low-speed and computer with equipped has it formation, its of first the Islamic from and 1999 of in University branch Azad a as found has This country.university Ilam Iran of in south west located in was province Branch census by Ilam studied method. were that Branch) (Ilam in Islamic of University college Azad agricultural students M.Sc. 153 included study this of scriptive survey method was used. The population f nomto sucs a lc o tm for time extra reading. of lack was sources information of kinds these use didn’t they that reason portant propriate and related information. The most im- information was the absence of library with ap- In other hand, their basic problem accessing the degrees. university different between also and ages different among differs which use of rate use information sources and they have an average h peet eerh a apid n a de- a and applied was research present The The main goal of this research was to identify MATERIALS AND METHODS Mousavi et al. ni et al (2011) have indi- Table 2: The extracted factors, along with eigenvalues, varia Using computer software Word Using computer software Power point 5 4 3 2 1 Factor No Using computer software Excel Field of study Internet type (atpublic network) Internet type (atoffice) Internet type (athome) Accessto computer Job Thelevel of computer skills Residence Sex Age Variables and coefficient of variation were suchused asfor frequency, analyzin mean scores, methods statistical Descriptivestandard software. SPSS deviation by done was analysis Data 0.96. to equal was questionnairevaluereliabilitytheitsthe andof Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient was used toquestionnairethe evaluateconfirmed expertanbypanel. high,5=very high). Face andcontent validity of type scale (1=very low, 2= low, 3= moderate, 4= five-point-Likert a on implementation learning was used for categorizingforusede-learning barrierswas of Factoranalysisdate.exploratorywith approach Identifying Barriersof E-learning Implementation / Shirkha Eigen value 2.83 3.42 3.49 6.10 6.53 Table 1:Some individualcharacteristic ofresponders Variance percentage No Yes No Yes No Yes Naturalresources Agriculturalextension and education Agriculturalmanagement No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes Self-employed Employee Student Skilled Semi-skilled Beginner Undertraining Village City Female Male Theyoungest 24 year Oldest 46 year Group 12.51 18.26 5.83 7.90 8.03 g test the appropriateness of data for factor analysi to order In used. was analysis factor mentation shown briefly in Table 1. is responders of characteristic individual Other years. 34.1 was variable age of mean The old. years 46 was them of oldest the and old years 24 was respondent youngest the that showed epnet ae hw i Tbe. Findings Table1. in shown are respondents implementation. For categorizing barriers of e-learning imple- e-learning of barriers categorizing For Individual and professional characteristics of nce percent and cumulative variance percent RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Cumulative variance percentage Frequency ni 52.53 46.70 38.80 30.77 18.26 136 139 100 125 152 67 77 91 47 17 89 64 14 53 73 80 37 60 56 73 80 70 83 28 1 9 9 6 et al - Percentage 88.9 58.2 41.8 43.8 50.3 59.6 30.8 99.3 90.8 34.6 65.4 47.7 52.3 24.5 39.2 36.3 47.7 52.3 45.8 54.2 18.3 81.7 11.1 5.9 5.5 3.4 0.7 9.2 - s 357 International Journal of Agricultural Management and Development, 6(3): 353-362, September, 2016. 358 International Journal of Agricultural Management and Development, 6(3): 353-362, September, 2016. * Factor loadings of variables lower than 0.4 have deleted than deleted 0.4 have lower of * variables Factor loadings there were five factors with eigen-value more eigen-value with factors five were there ee ple. codn t Kie Criterion Kaiser to According applied. were KMO (0.714) and Bartlett test (2673.227, p<0.01) skill Educational- Human barriers barriers expertise Technical- barriers Attitudinal barriers Infrastructure Factor barriers Table3:variables loaded toeach factorand the levelof t improving teaching quality Students unfamiliarity with the English language in Not presenting e-learning courses as a teachingclassroom supplement Inadequate fellow members on new educational technologie Lack of necessary education for students with educational techno Lack of planning the human resource to start and pr Lack of skill among managers of education area in u Lack of administrative support for keeping e-learning equipments Lack of supporting the development of e-learning Lack of online responding personnel fast and accurately for stu Lackof independence and autonomy promotion in educationpro Negativeattitude of faculty member and unwillingness towa Instructorspreferring to traditional classes instead ofe-education Lack of interest ine-learning among the students Not acceptinge-learning as a substitute fortraditional cla Lack ofpositive attitude toward e-learning certificatesvalidi Lowaccess chances forall students to e-learning circumstances Lackof belief inindividual interests and need variables i Lack of change in e-learning and its teachingmethods Lackof public readiness forstarting e-learning courses Not sharingthe information and knowledge Lowself-confidence andability totake part ine-learning Lackof belief ine-learning being useful Lack of visual electronic classroomsrelating to educational content Lack of suitable information disseminatingThelowest access to softwareequipments and computer programs in unive No access tocommon e-learning courses withvalid foreign universitie tiontechnology equipments The highcost of updatingrequired blogs andpreparing edu Lack of special budget attribution to faculties ofagricu No opportunityfor Students to experience andexplore Lack of investment required in developing infrastru Lack ofinvestment and required financialfor using e-learning Variable Lackof access todifferent andsuitable curriculummaterials in e teachingmethods Lackof coordination required between thepresented content Professors’lack ofskill in e-learning planning The low qualityof CDand DVD and tutorial packages and Thee-learning low quality ofcurriculum’s content Lowquality ofused software commun using of dimension socio-cultural different in technology benefits the recognize to Inability No access to real individuals to solve the students' problems Low level of commenting andanswering among students Lackof technical consultation on usingthe electronic educati Low levelof e-educationquality Lack ofcoordination between curriculums and e-learning plans Lackof codifyinga successful evaluation systemin e-learning constant ent courses Not usingconsolidating traditionaland onlinemethods in Identifying Barriersof E-learning Implementation / Shirkha from the table. hn (al 2. aia mto ue for used method Varimax 2). (Table 1 than rotation named as follows: after 1) infrastructure Factors bar- study. this in factors of rotation hefactor loadingextracted froma rotation matrix rsities for developing e-learning order to use it in cyberspace sing computer and internet ctures for using e-learning otect e-learning systems ications, information ications, lture n learningprocess educational differ- ssesby students ty etc. cationalinforma- rde-learning s onsystem volumeand ni dents cess -learning logy et al s s ly for loadings Factor 0.403 0.413 0.504 0.532 0.594 0.708 0.476 0.491 0.534 0.561 0.577 0.604 0.419 0.435 0.457 0.466 0.533 0.577 0.608 0.629 0.651 0.727 0.402 0.405 0.426 0.435 0.435 0.440 0.445 0.462 0.470 0.494 0.500 0.528 0.627 0.639 0.408 0.417 0.460 0.539 0.574 0.589 0.625 0.672 0.411 important barriers in this factor. The findings of e-learning low quality of curriculum’s content”, “the software”, used of quality “Low variance. of skill in e-learning planning” were the most the were planning” e-learning in skill of factors. Findings of Findings factors. most important barriers in the above mentioned the were equipments” technology information updating required blogs and preparing educational esoa brir, ) ua brir ad 5) and barriers human 4) barriers, fessional pro- technical- 3) barriers, attitudinal 2) riers, hs atr Tee eut ae osset with findings of consistent are results These factor. this in barriers important most the were methods” and “lack of change in e-learning and its teaching of public readiness for starting “Not e-learning e-learning”, course”“lack knowledge”, and information the sharing in part take to ability and self-confidence “low useful”, being e-learning total variance of the variables. “lack of belief in the faculties of agriculture”, and “high cost of cost “high and agriculture”, of faculties the to attribution budget special of “lack explore”, and experience to students for opportunity “no e-learning”, using for infrastructures veloping de- in required investment of “lack learning”, e- using for financial required and investment of “lack barriers. infrastructural the to loaded ets brir epan .3 o te total the of 8.03% explain barriers pertise Afyooni Khasseh (2007), Rabiee explain 52.53%ofthe total variance. factors five these general, In itself. by variance total the of 18.26% explained factor this Also, factors. other the among (6.531) most eigen-value the had factor This barriers”. “infra- structure called was factor first the 2, Table to According 3). (Table barriers skills-education (2011), Panitz (2008) these results. these (2009) tutorial packages and etc.” and “professors’ lack ad h lw ult o C ad V and DVD and CD of quality low the “and and and Rodrigo (2008) ares xli 79% f h ttl variance. total the of 7.90% explain barriers lc o tcncl oslain n electronic on consultation technical of “lack The third factor that was called technical-ex- called was that factor third The According to Tablebeen According have variables 15 3, tiuia brir epan 25% f the of 12.51% explain barriers Attitudinal h fut fco ta ws ald human called was that factor fourth The confirms these results. et al et Mohammadi (2008), Mousavi . (2013), Frazeen (2006), Ghadah (2006), Frazeen (2013), . Identifying Barriersof E-learning Implementation / Shirkha and Farhadi (2004), Jokar and Jokar (2004), Farhadi , and Soltani (2004) et et al Tammaajiaan (2008) . (2013) and confirm Rezai et al , . . e fmla wt elann i sgetd in suggested is e-learning with familiar get to students for courses training holding regard, this In well. as learn to willingness their crease a in- can and tool supplement as educational useful e-learning to attitude their improve can learning and to e- increase toward the quality attitude of e-learning. student’s improve to order and student’s satisfaction of e-learning education e-learning courses. So encouraging, motivating in part take to ability and self-confidence low are lack of belief in e-learning being useful and mn suet ad t ms iprat items important most its barrier and e-learning students among an as identified is barrier of agriculture. faculty the in infrastructure improving for used rvt sco ptnil ad aiiis a be can facilities and potentials sector Private agriculture. of faculty the in performed be can and Fathian of findings The factor. this to loaded were which variables important most the were structures and access to local informationinfra- telecommunications of networkdevelopment the and software, improving e-learning infrastructure,hardware including university, in e-learning to factor is identified as the most important barriers education for students on educational technology”protect e-learning systems”and start to and planning “lackresource computer”, human of of necessary using “lack in area education of agers credits for preparing facilities and tools relating so it is recommended that the supply of required of e-learning implementation among the students of e-learning barriers. “lack of skill among man- confirm these results. Rezai (2007) oamd (2010) Mohammadi Malek- and Miladi (2007), Khasseh and Jokar percent have been identified as the fifth factor fifth the as identified been have percent results are consistent with consistent are results the most important barriers in this factor. These problems”were their solve to individuals real to access “no and students”, by answering and dcto sse” lw ee o commenting of level low system”, education Also, according to research results, attitudinal According to the research results, infrastructure Educational-skill barriers with 5.83% variance orgaean (09, rze (2006), Frazeen (2009), Poor-gharemaani RECOMMENDATIONS . and ni Rabiee et al Frazeen (2006) Frazeen t al. et (2013) and 359 International Journal of Agricultural Management and Development, 6(3): 353-362, September, 2016. 360 International Journal of Agricultural Management and Development, 6(3): 353-362, September, 2016. while is the using suggested. systems e-learning is recommended as well. To form a form Towell. as recommended is e-learning specialized team consisting of computer and e- and computer of consisting team specialized e-learning among students and its most important erig xet fr iig die o students to advice giving for experts learning and and communication technology in teaching and skill barriers one of the problematic factors in factors problematic the of one barriers skill cation area in using computer and internet and internet and computer using in area cation edu- of managers among skill of lack are items mended. Content designing shouldrecom- is bematerials educational proportionalthe organizing suitable and assessment needs regard, this In ucational packages and tutorial CDs and DVDs. ed- of quality low and software used of quality low are items important most its and students factor is one of the barriers of e-learning among can change their attitude toward e-learning. laborative learning and bilateral communication col- toward students encouraging Also more. e-learning trust can they that so successfully courses e-learning passed have who students those of certificates the conforming for ment arrange- legal necessary provide to ommended and suggested. is learning traditional rec- is it Also, e-learning combining results, better For tody of agriculture education to use information a ta lanr ad eces a measure can their level teachers of learning. This and depends on technical learners that way and learners need and it should be designed in a to abilities, user’s previous learning experiences protect e-learning systems. So training the skilled lack of training the human resource to start and universities and organizations that have the cus- recommended. Proper planning to is empower the e-learning in interested workforce capable skilled, the employing in investing regard, this commenting and answering among students. In of level low and system education electronic the using on consultation technical of lack or items important most its and students, among e-learning in factors problematic the of one is recommended. is experts other with along expert technology of agriculture. To accomplish this, employing a faculty of custodians for education expert and According to research findings, educational- findings, research to According According to research results, technical-expert According to research results, the human factor Identifying Barriersof E-learning Implementation / Shirkha Planning in Higher Education e-learning. of foundations empirical and Theoretical (2007). M. 7- Atashak, 68777 Planning in Higher Education pation in e-learning: A case study of complex facto 9- Cahill, R. (2008). December 2007, 12 from Retrieved http://www.e-learningHub.com. e-learning. for ready is organization 8- Broadbent, B. (2001). Tips to help decide if your w.nogvz/iwDwlafl Action?id= http:// from www.info.gov.za/view/Downloadfile 2009, December 9 Retrieved cation e-edu- on paper white ICT,Draft and through teaching learning Transforming (2003). K. 6- Asmal, in the era of globalization. mlmnig -erig a uat cs study. case Kuwaiti a e-learning: implementing to Barriers (2008). R. Magalhaes, & E., G. 3- Ali, Curriculum Planning, (Isfahan). University Azad e- implementing learning courses in Khorasgan branch of of the Islamic study Feasibility (2013). M. 2- Afyooni, S., ForuqiAbri, A., & Yarmohammadian, tance Learning, Researchof Review Dis- International and Open in Cambodia: the provincial in business debut education its project makes education higher in E-learning 1- Abdon, B.R., Ninomiya, S., & Raab, R. T. (2007). -Aat, . Sbaiea, . & oae R. Homaie, (2009). & Students’ M., evaluation of universities Sobhaninejad, in Teh H., 5- Araste, http://www.bus.umich.edu/. . 20) Uig ehooy o ute te dine the further mission. college to technology Using (2004). R. Belloli, & K., Mike, R., Ginzburg, T., 4- Anstead, 12(1), 36-53. International Journal of Training and Development, Business School students is recommended. Making the necessary literacy of education managers and fellows and and investment in training and promoting digital is also suggested. content and methods) goals, according to learners (restructuring need centers education turing present more flexible education, reforming to and restruc- order in classroom the in changes planning necessary e-learning, of workforce in the study area are greatly acknowledged. The participation and collaboration of students ACKNOWLEDGEMENT . Retrieved 9 December 2009, from 8(1), 1-14. REFERENCES Michigan: University of Michigan of University Michigan: What motivates faculty partici- 2(12), 80-92. ni Journal of Researchand of Journal Journal of Research and Journal of Research in Research of Journal et al , 13(1),135-156. , 14(4),47-66. ran rs. . 22- Institute for research and planning in higher ed- and challenges, education in an era of digital competition: Choices competition: digital of era an in education models: The extended traditional university. the purpose of academic advising of students. 21- Hanna, D. E. (2000). Emerging organizational Emerging (2000). E. D. Hanna, 21- Soft Computing, gn apoc t ifrain utmzto for customization information to approach agent 0 Hmi M S (07. AAA: multi- A MASACAD: (2007). S. M. Hamdi, 20- Higher Education, prospect. prospect. for undergraduate and graduate levels in Iran’s 202 H. (2012). Forecasting of higher education demand education higher of Forecasting (2012). H. Society and Culture, Singapore. IPEDR Study.In Qualitative a via Effectiveness at Looking Iran: in 15- Fariborzi, E., & AbuBakar, K. (2011). E-learning and Processing Management, the information age. I 14- Farhadi, R. (2004). E-learning new paradigm in and Technology, 9-10December. Tehran, Iran. services. student’ssupporte-learningPNU of satisfactionof 8 abe L . (2009). A. L. 18- Gamble, cleid=218 media.com/content/templates/clo.feature.asp?arti- learning Experience. Retrieved from http;//www.Clo- the enhance Technologyto (2006). B. 17- Frazeen, and Technology technology. International Conference on E-learning Study of human factor in accepting virtual educatio (2009). N. Poor-Ghahremaani, & M., 16- Fathiaan 13- Farajollahi, M., & Moinikia, and M. (2009). Research Science Ministry. Technology, of Studies Research Social and Cultural 95-122). (pp. education higher in approaches new on collection Articles private. and government the of concerning education support higher Financial (2009). M. 12- Emadzade, 53(1), 121-131. universities. African 19- Ghavidel, S., Farjadi, G., Razeghi, H., & Badiei Capella University. Technology, and Business of School dissertation, learning in a multicultural environment ganizational culture and e-learning use in four Sou policy,or- institutional between relationship the of study A(2009). C. Brown, & L., 11- Czerniewicz, London, England: Falmer. 10- Cooper, R. (2004). (2004). R. 10- Cooper, St. Paul, MN. Unpublished dissertation, University of St. Thomas, International Conference on Humanities, on Conference International nentoa Cneec o E-learning on Conference International ora o Rsac ad lnig in Planning and Research of Journal 93-116. 9-10 December. Tehran, Iran. 7(3), 746-771. Identifying Barriersof E-learning Implementation / Shirkha 18(1), 43-68. ranian Journal of Information optr ad Education and Computers -erig n h world the in E-learning h efciees f e- of effectiveness The 21(1). 49-66. . Unpublished , 20, 58-63. Evaluation Applied Higher th 5 n , , . Feasibility study of using e-learning in higher edu- higher in e-learning using of study Feasibility (2010). A. MalekMohammadi, & H., 26- Miladi, UK: Oxford 5 ae, . 20) I (2005). R. 25- Mayer, PA: Information Science Publishing. evaluation and implementation delivery, Extension andEducation Research cation using factor analysis. 24- Khan, B.H. (2005). Higher Education University. Shiraz of courses e-learning study,of case students Information sources as a support system in e-learni white paper content2.htm.Jokar. webpages/ A., & Khasseh, A. (2007). www.Kdgonline.Com/ at: able 23- Jerry, B. (2000). The E-learning Potential; Avai Report, Tehran, Iran. Education Higher National Iran’s ucation(2006). of e-learning adopted in the Middle East. 27- Mirza, A. A., & Abdulkareem, M. (2011). Models nlss f ares f s ad eeomn o e- of development and use of barriers and of analysis Identification (2011). Gh. PezeshkiRaad, & M., MohammadzadehNasrabadi, M., 29- Mousavi, Tehran.Resources, Natural of Agriculture, College thesis of Agricultural Extension and Education Fiel applicable education scientific- of Iranin agriculture.system e-learning of components the in Higher Education and Informatics, n Pvry Reduction. Poverty and E-Learning Programs for Rural Social TransformationDesigning (2008). Mathur,G. & 30- Murthy, S., C. learning in PNU. 28- Mohammadi, D. (2008). 31- Murphy, H., & Terry, H. R. (1998). Opportunities jde29/pdf/article_11.pdf 169-179. Retrieved from http://tojde.anadolu.edu.tr education. agricultural in education distance for obstacles and 33- Panitz, T. (2008). Benefits of cooperative learn /en/dokumente/en-e-learning-guidebook.pdf for Asia. Retrieved from http://www.giz.de Center /Themen Media Educational Commonwealth India: Delhi, New practices. and procedures principles, of guidebook A E-learning: (2006). S. 32- Naidu, 28¬-36. 34- Pawlowski, T. (2006). T. 34- Pawlowski, http://home,capecod.net/Ntpanitz/ebook/. from Retrieved motivation. student to relation in 21) A epaain o itre ue obstacles use internet for explanation An (2013). R. Gharibshaeyan, & Z., Nazarian, A., 35- Rabiee, and education. Journal of Agricultural Education ora o Rsac ad lnig In Planning and Research of Journal Leads: Kork. 9(2), 83-93. Journal of Research and Planning , 12(1),90-112. , 17(1),137-154. Managing e-learning: Design, fr education for T nie Submission Online ni Explaining and analyzing Information technology Information Journal of Agricultural et al , 3(1),15-30. Unpublished Computing . Hershey, . Oxford, . , 39(1), 9(1), , /to- ing ng: d, l- 361 International Journal of Agricultural Management and Development, 6(3): 353-362, September, 2016. 362 International Journal of Agricultural Management and Development, 6(3): 353-362, September, 2016. in Open and Distance Learning Open andDistance in in universities China: conventional A case study. at education based Web- (2002). G. Jiang, & J., Niu, W., 43- Zhang, 29, 2975–2979. students. e-learning in higher education from the perspective 36- Rezai, M. (2009). Obstacles of Learning the development Distributed 14(3), 361-376. and Open in Research of Iran. in e-learning concerning Experiment in E-Learning. E-Learning. in Experiment Protection Relay System Power of Development (2012). H. Miao, & Wang,G., Y., L., 42- Zhai, Li, Education Higher 14(1), 159-173. in Planning and Research of in higher education: Students’ perspectives. and faculty members involved in e-learning courses & Ataran, M. (2008). Desirable features of students H., Irvani, I., Malekmohammadi, 41- Yaghoobi,J., ticle/viwArticle/91/90. 9 December 2009, Retrieved from http://journals. 3(4), UK. tdl.org/ Information, jodi/ the Digital in of Journal E-education (2006). R. 40- Wilson, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran. tension and Education Courses, Faculty of AgricultuUniversity. readiness of students and fellows of Tarbiat Modarr (2008). S. 39- Tamajian, University, Beheshti Shahid course, Tehran. Universities Tehranand Beheshti Shahid of fellows of activities research and teaching in technology information (2004). Sh. 38- Soltani, University,Azad Tehran, Iran. Iran. in education (2009). R. A. 37- Roushan, ora fArclua aaeetadDvlpet 6(3),353-362 of andDevelopment, Management Agricultural Journal Islami of faculty agricultural in students M.Sc. by Shirkhani, Z., Vahedi, M., & Arayesh, M. (2016). Identifying barriers of e-learning implementati e-learning of barriers Vahedi, Z., Identifying Shirkhani, (2016). & M. M., Arayesh, URL: How to cite this article: How tocite Scientific Research Journal, http://ijamad.iaurasht.ac.ir/article_523438_c253d0b2d8f2cc2728c4766a57adf09d.pdf Unpublished thesis of Agricultural Ex- Agricultural of thesis Unpublished . Unpublished thesis of adult education adult of thesis Unpublished . Identifying Barriers of E-learning Implementation / Shirkha Barriers/ Implementation E-learning Identifying of International Review of Research euy f eerh Islamic Research, of Deputy Factors affecting the use of use the affecting Factors vlain f e-learning of Evaluation Procedia Engineering Procedia rvtzto o high of Privatization International Review International , 2(2),1-24. 24 (3), 61-76. Journal c Azad university, Ilam branch. Ilam university, Azad c ar- of re, es of , , , . International ni ni etal on