Table 1.
ETELM-LP results
| ETELM-LP statement | Median score (on a 7 point Likert scale with 7 as strongly agree and 1 as strongly disagree) | IQR |
| Instructions provided a good introduction to the session. | 6 | 2 |
| Session objectives, expectations and policies were clearly stated. | 6 | 2 |
| The session was well organised. | 7 | 2 |
| Session objectives were relevant to my needs. | 7 | 2 |
| Navigation of the technology-based components of the session was logical, consistent and efficient. | 6 | 2 |
| The session technologies and media supported the learning objectives. | 7 | 1 |
| This session required inappropriately high technology skills. | 2 | 1 |
| I had significant computer/technical problems during this session. | 2 | 1 |
| The educational activities encouraged engagement with session materials/content. | 6 | 3 |
| The educational activities promoted achievement of the session objectives. | 6 | 2 |
| There was a strong instructor presence/personal touch in the session. | 7 | 1 |
| I had sufficient opportunity to assess and reflect on my learning progress. | 6 | 2 |
| I received adequate feedback on my learning progress. | 4 | 2 |
| I had sufficient opportunity to evaluate/provide feedback on the session. | 6 | 2 |
| I received adequate support for any technical issues encountered during this session. | 5 | 2 |
| I received adequate support for any questions or concerns I had about my learning. | 6 | 1 |
| I encountered culture- or language-related problems. | 1 | 0.5 |
| I invested enough time and energy to meet/exceed the session expectations. | 6 | 2 |
| This session will change my practice. | 5 | 3 |
| The overall quality of this session was excellent. | 6 | 1.5 |
| The overall effectiveness of the instructor was excellent. | 7 | 1 |
ETELM-LP, evaluation of technology-enhanced learning materials-learner perceptions; IQR, Interquartile range.