Kourakos Kaouni

8/14/2019 Kourakos Kaouni

1/9

Acceptance Factors for Web based learning under the sustainability issues

Nikolaos Kourakos,

Hellenic Navy, PhD (c), MSc, MScE-mail:snadek@ yahoo.com

Penelope Kaouni,

E-learning consultant, IT Engineer

E-mail:[email protected]

Abstract

The todays economy, the knowledge-based economy has an ever-increase demand

for new ways of delivery education. This issue has led to very dynamic changes in

learning activities. The new K-economy requires people and especially working staffto acquire knowledge and skills in a timely manner and to make decisions under

various circumstances. So the issues of life long learning, adults learning and

continuous training is a major issue. The delivery of instruction and teaching

materials electronically to remote students via internet is what we call web based

learning.

There is a plethora of factors that need to be considered while implementing a web

based learning solution. There is a need to identify the factors that support and boost

sustainability of electronically mediated learning. One of the most critical factors is

the acceptance of the solution from the participants. Performing a literature review,

we found a noticeable number of researches in this area.

This paper makes an exploratory study in the area of web based learning and use the

wide spread TAM model in order to exam the technology acceptance of this solution,

especially by adult learners of KEE.

The investigation of acceptance judged to be useful for both teacher and students

especially under the sustainability issues.

1. Introduction

1.1 Sustainability

According to the dictionary, sustainability is the ability to prolong or to supply withsustenance. The key term Sustainability has been interpreted as keeping things

going in the present and feature in a way that is beneficial to all stakeholders. In

other words sustainability means medium and long-term success.

According to Kruppa et al, (2002, p.6) transferring the term sustainability or the

related term stability to web based Learning means developing stable structures,which are integrated institutionally and the result in fundamental changes in

teaching.Seufert (2007) give us a multi-dimension approach the sustainable web based learning

as follows:

Dimension Context / focus
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


2/9

Economic dimension. The focus here is on efficiency and

effectiveness regarding the use of

available resources.

Pedagogic dimension This perspective focuses on the pedagogic

aspects.

Organizational-administrative dimension. This perspective focuses on efficiency ofstructure and processes.

Technical dimension. The primary goal of this approach is the

stability and functionality of the IT

infrastructure. Nowadays the impact of

ICT stressed too much.

Socio-cultural dimension. This point of view relates with diffusion

effects of web based learning. The

promotion of the electronically mediated

learning is another main principal of this

dimension.

The figure1 below summarizes all these dimensions.

Figure1. Sustainability Approaches for web based learning

In this study we focus on Socio-culture and Technical dimensions. Nowadays the

rapid growth of the available web based learning platforms is a fact. Many technical

approaches, many software products, many new versions probably mean many

technical problems. Further more the pedagogic approach is in many cases a serious

problem. We can describe the situation here as a complex one. If students and

lecturers link the usage of the web based learning (by technical means) with problems,

then a lot of efforts and recourses are being spent on stabilising the web based

learning system which increase the possibility of disconfirmation and finally drives to

rejecting. Seufert (2007) states that in web based learning user friendly and student

(customer) centric environment is a critical success factor for sustainability.

1.2 Quality and satisfaction of web based educational services.

The terms quality and service are wide used and under more often different means. In

this paper we adopt the International Standard Organization (ISO) definition, that

describes quality is a totality of characteristics of an entity (a process, a product, anorganization or any combination) that bear on its ability to satisfy stated and implied

needs (ISO 8402). More specifically in web based learning we can say that is the

ability to reach a specific goal in efficiency, effectively, in safe and/or with

satisfaction at specific user situation that is education learning, etc (ISO/IEC9126-4).

2


3/9

In ISO regulations (ISO9000:2000) service is intangible product that is the result ofat least one activity performed at the interface between the supplier and customer,

e.g. knowledge is a intangible product to be delivered. Finally we can say that

service quality (and specifically educational service quality) is an overall collection of

both, implicit and explicit characteristic that the service can satisfy the customer.

The customer satisfaction in web based learning area is equivalent to studentsatisfaction. Arbaugh (2000a, 2000b, 2000c) identifies five general factors that may

influence the student learning and satisfaction with web based learning:

Perceived usefulness of course

Flexibility

Interaction

Student experience, and

Engagement

The figure2 below summarizes all these dimensions.

Figure2. Factors that influence the student learning and satisfaction

The introduction of a web based learning system can described according to Euler

and Wilbers (2002) as a foreign body is getting implemented in a system. Either it

adapts and will not be regarded as alien or it will continuously be identified as aforeign body and be eventually rejected from the system.So the adaptation and integration of web based learning systems in central process of

an educational provider becomes more and more urgent. Seufert (2007) claims thatacceptance and openness toward web based learning is a seriously helpful factor.According to researcher Attitudes and pre-knowledge, self study competence,

previous negative experiences with computer-based teaching/learning formats affectthe acceptance considerably.

Additional research Harasim et al. (1997) indicates that quality factor of online

programs must be addressed in course planning and developing.

2. The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) as a tool for investigate acceptance

for web based educational services

In this research area there is a slightly wide variety of models that tries to explain the

adoption of information systems. Rogers (1983), give us a general framework of

3


4/9

technology acceptance within the theory of diffusion of innovations (TID). Fishbein

& Ajzen (1977) developed their theory of reasoned action (TRA). As an extension of

TRA, Ajzen (1985) introduced the theory of planned behaviour (TPB). But maybe the

most well-known and widely accepted and cited model is the technology acceptance

model (TAM). Davis (1985) developed the TAM to explain the computer usage and

acceptance of information technology. As Money & Turner (2004) notice, theInstitute for Scientific Information Social Science Citation indexed more than 300

journal citations of the initial TAM paper published by Davis et al. (1989). The

Davis model is shown in Figure3 below:

Figure3. Technology Acceptance Model (Davis, 1989).

According to Davis (1993, p.1) user acceptance is often the pivotal factor determinethe success or failure of a system. The term external variables include all the systemdesign features. These features have a direct influence on perceived usefulness (PU)

and perceived easy of use (PEOU), while attitude toward using has an indirect

influence effect to the actual system use. Davis (1993, p. 477) defines PEOU as thedegree to which an individual believes that using a particular system would be free of

physical and mental effort, and PU as the degree to which an individual believes

that using a particular system would be enhance his/her job performance. As Davis et

al (1989) states, the goal is to provide us with an explanation of the determinants of

systems acceptance. Similar to TRA user beliefs determine the attitude toward using

the information system. This attitude drives to intention behavior to use which lead to

actual system use.

Dishaw and Strong (1999, pp. 9-21) pointed out a weak point of TAM about task

focus. According to them TAM differs from TRA in two keys. The first is that

define PEOU and PU as external variables that determine the intension to use not theactual use. The second key is that TAM does not include subjective norms.

Yi (2005), claims that TAM and IDT have similarities, More specific PEOU and PU

are conceptual similar to relative advantage and complexity (the opposite of easy of

use). As Taylor and Todd (1995) claims, TAM performs slightly better compared

with the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB).

3. The Research Framework

3.1 Profile of respondents

In an attempt to achieve an evaluation process in the academic field of the adults

educational centre (KEE) based on the time pressure and the sorted sources, the

original TAM questionnaire was chosen. Based on the work of Davis, thisquestionnaire is a well known valid and reliable tool.

4

Externalvariables

PerceivedUsefulness

Intention

Behavior


5/9

There has been a distribution of 50 pilot questionnaires to students and 50 of them

have been filled in, that is 100%. The analytical explanation about the way of filling

the questionnaire from the educating staff of the school, led to the respectively high

percentage of usable answers. This high percentage of the trainees participation

could reflect the intense interest of the participants in this subject, while it is also

revealed a positive approach on the participation of the students in the new academicplace.

Our sample consists of 60% males and 40% females. The relevant table of

frequencies analysis follows.

Table1. Gender.

Frequency Percent Valid PercentCumulative

Percent

Valid male 30 60,0 60,0 60,0

female 20 40,0 40,0 100,0

Total 50 100,0 100,0

The next table describes the participants distribution according to level of training

(there are four levels of training scale).

Table2. The population among training levels

Frequency Percent Valid PercentCumulative

Percent

Valid 1 30 60,0 60,0 60,0

2 10 20,0 20,0 80,0

3 5 10,0 10,0 90,0

4 5 10,0 10,0 100,0

Total 50 100,0 100,0

We may observe that for a sample of 50 students, 30 of them that is to say 60% are

1st year students (60%), 10 students of 2nd year (20%), and 5 students for year 3 and

4 respectively.

3.2 Descriptive elements.

The first question examines if the students of the sample believes that Using e-

learning improves the quality of the work I do (VAR_PU_1). The variable can take

5 different values (Likert scale). The value 1 corresponds to not at all; the value 2 to a

little; the third (3) values correspond to moderate; the value 4 corresponds to muchand the value 5 corresponds to very much. The relevant table and its graph of

frequencies analysis follows.

Table3. Question1 (Variable VAR_PU_1).

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 1 1 2,0 2,0 2,0

2 3 6,0 6,0 8,0

3 18 36,0 36,0 44,0

4 22 44,0 44,0 88,0

5 6 12,0 12,0 100,0

Total 50 100,0 100,0

5


6/9

We may observe that from a sample of 50 valid answers 22 students, that is to say

44% percentage, concerned the web based learning has a strong positive impact to

their studies (job). There are also 18 statements for the option moderate, a 50%

percentage, while 6 students, a 12% percentage concerned that web based learning has

a very strong impact. The cumulative percentage of the negative statements a 10%percentage, is not important. However it is clear that the students are positive that web

based learning improves the quality of their studies in a quite high percentage.

The next questions aim at the record of the importance of a series of factors in relation

with the perceived usefulness. These factors are the following:

Greater control over my work (studies)

Enables to accomplish task more quickly

Support critical aspects of my studies

Increase productivity

Improves my performance. Allows to accomplish more work otherwise be possible

Enhances my effectiveness on the jib (studies)

Makes it easier to do my job

Overall, I find web based learning useful in my job.

Each case is recorded in a variable with the name Var_PU_2, Var_PU_3 etc. Each

one of the variables takes values from 1 to 5. The table of the dominant values, the

total observations and the corresponding percentage of each variable, with the

appropriate graph are presented below.

Table 4. Variables related with Perceived UsefulnessVariable Dominant

value

Percentage

Greater control over my work (studies)

(Var_PU_2).

3 44 %

Enables to accomplish task more

quickly (Var_PU_3).

2 34 %

Support critical aspects of my studies

projects (Var_PU_4).

4 46 %

Increase productivity

(Var_PU_5).

3 42 %

Improves my performance process

(Var_PU_6).

3 42 %

Allows to accomplish more work

otherwise be possible Var_PU_7).

3 38 %

Enhances my effectiveness on the job

(studies) (Var_PU_8).

4 54%

Makes it easier to do my job

(Var_PU_9).

4 40%

Overall, I find web based learning

useful in my job (Var_PU_10).

4 60%

6


7/9

3

Graph1 Variables (VAR_PU_2 10)

At this point we may observe the following. The Greater control over my work has

22 observations (44%), with preference 3, in a scale of 1-5, that a medium

importance. For the third question, named Enables to accomplish task more quickly

the dominant choice was 2, that means little effect on quickly completion, with 17answers (34%). For the supporting critical aspects the dominant value is 4, the

second most important, with 23 reports (46%). Students are very impressed with web

based learning in terms of supporting tool. The productivity remains a critical

problem in any case. In our case students believes that web based learning has a

moderate impact on this issue. For the productivity the dominant value is 3, third from

the importance perspective, with 21 reports (42%). The next question related with the

increase of the performance. In this issue the dominant choice was 3, third from the

importance perspective, with 21 reports (42%). It reveals a balanced belief concerning

the increase of productivity web based learning between the members of the students

community. For the ability to accomplish more work using web we also the dominant

value was again 3, a balanced belief and response with 19 reports. The next question

is about effectiveness. At this point an impressive percentage of 54% or in other

words 27 reports prove that students strongly agree with this hypothesis. The easier

way to do my job via web has also become a serious important factor with a

particularly high frequency. The 20 reports that mean a 40% percentage confirm that.

Last of this set of questions was about the overall usefulness of web based learning.

Maybe it was the most critical question. The answers here were very impressive. A

very impressive percentage 60% (in other words 30 students) finds web based

learning overall useful in their studies. The dominant value was 4, second from the

importance perspective. The graph for the crucial last question (question 10) follows:

7


8/9

Pe

r

c

e

n

Graph2. Variable (VAR_PU_10)

3.3 Limitations of the study.

As with all empirical research, this study has a few limitations. Referring to the

limitations of the present study we have to mention the following:

It was not possible to make this research also on other adults educating

institutions of the area, of the same field, in order to compare the students of

different institutions.

It was not extended on students of other fields in the same or different

institution.

There could also be included post-graduate students, in order compare the pre-

graduate and the post-graduate sample groups.

4. Conclusions

However every attempt of building a sustainable web based learning system, apart

from the theoretical knowledge and the technical documentation, also requires the

adoption and the active support of those that it addresses that is the students. The

research that we have done on the students of Adults Centre (KEE) intended to record

a series of factors relevant adoption of a web based learning implementation.

8


9/9

References

1. Kruppa, K. Mandl, H & Hense, J. (2002). Nachhaltigkeit von Modellversuchsprogrammen am

Beispiel de BLK-Programms SEMIK. Munchen: Lehrstul fur Empirische Padagogik undpadagogische Psychologie

2. Seufert, S. (2006).Web based learning Business Models. Strategies, Success Factors and BestPractice. Examples St. Gallen 2003. Accessible athttp://www.idea-

group.com/cases/details.asp?id=243

3. International Standards Organization. (2000). Web site: http://www.iso.og

4. Arbaugh, J.B. (2000). How classroom environment and student engagement affect learning inInternet-based MBA courses.Business Communication Quarterly 63 4, p. 9.

5. Euler, D. & Wilbers, K. (2002). Selbstlernen mit neuen Medien didaktisch gestalten. In D.Euler, C. Metzger (Hrsg.),Hochschuldidaktische Schriften (Band 1). St.Gallen: Institut fr

Wirtschaftspdagogik.Harasim, L.,

6. Hiltz, S.R., Teles, L. and Turoff, M., 1995. Learning networks. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

7. Rogers E.M. (1983). Diffusion of Innovations. 3th edition. Free Press. NY.8. Fishbein, M., Ajzen, I. (1975).Belief, attitude, intension and behavior: An introduction to

theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

9. Ajzen, I. (1985).Form intention to actions: a theory of Planed behaviour. In J. Kuhl & J.Beckmann, Eds. Action Control: From Cognition to Behavior. N.Y.: Springer-Verlag. pp. 11-

39.

10. Fishbein, M., Ajzen, I. (1977). Attitudes and Opinions. Annual review of Psychology, 23,

487-544.

11. Davis, F.D. (1985).A Technology Acceptance Model for Empirically Testing New End-User

Systems: Theory and Results, Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of

Technology.

12. Money, W., Turner, A. (2004). Application of the Technology Acceptance Model to a

Knowledge management System. In Proceedings of the 37th Hawaii Conference on System Science.

13. Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P.R. (1989). User acceptance of computertechnology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35, pp. 982-1003.

14. Davis, F.D. (1993). User acceptance of Information Technology: system characteristics, user

perception and behavioral impacts. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 38, pp.

475-487.

15. Dishaw, M.T. and Strong, D.M. (1999). Extending the Technology Acceptance Model with

Task-Technology Fit Constructs,. Information and Management (36:1), 1999, pp. 9-21.

16. Yi, M.Y., Jackson, J.D., Park, J.S., Probst, J.C. (2005). Understanding information technology

acceptance by individual professional: Toward an integrated view. Information &

Management).

17. Taylor, S. Todd, P.A. (1995).Assessing IT usage: The role of prior experience. MISQuarterly, 19, pp. 561-571.

9
http://www.idea-group.com/cases/details.asp?id=243http://www.idea-group.com/cases/details.asp?id=243http://www.idea-group.com/cases/details.asp?id=243http://www.iso.og/http://www.idea-group.com/cases/details.asp?id=243http://www.idea-group.com/cases/details.asp?id=243http://www.iso.og/

Kourakos Kaouni

Documents

Transcript of Kourakos Kaouni