Investigating the acceptance of Moodle by LIS students in Kuwait based on UTAUT and WQ

نوع المستند : المقالة الأصلية

المؤلفون

1 College of Basic Education, The Public Authority of Applied Education and Training PAAET, Kuwait

2 School of Medicine, Leeds University, UK

المستخلص

Moodle is not a new concept and has been widely accepted among highly qualified students in different global higher education institutions. However, little is known about the factors that influence the acceptance of Moodle as a learning tool for LIS students in general, and in Kuwait's higher education institutions, particularly in the College of Basic Education (CBE) at the Public Authority for Applied Education and Training (PAAET). Based on the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) and the Website Quality (WQ) model, the present study argues that Moodle can be a highly accepted beneficial learning tool for Library Information Science (LIS) students to develop their professional skills and competencies in a rapidly evolving digital age. This study clarifies the LIS students' behavior toward this learning tool and confirms factors that influence the acceptance of Moodle as a learning tool amongst LIS students. Factors that positively impact the acceptance of Moodle are; Performance Expectancy (PE) and Appearance Quality (AQ) on Behavioral Intention (BI). The effects of Technical Quality (TQ), General Content Quality (GCQ), Specific Content Quality (SCQ), and Effort Expectancy (EF), and Social Influence (SI) on Behavioral Intention (BI) were insignificant. Furthermore, Facilitating Conditions (FC) significantly affected Use Behavior (UB), and BI had a negligible effect on UB.
Purpose: This study aims to investigate the the acceptance of Moodle among LIS students in Kuwait and further identify those factors that influence student's continuous intentions to use Moodle, an exemplar of learning management systems (LMS)
Design/methodology/approach:
This study's theoretical model was primarily drawn from the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) and the Website Quality (WQ) model. A total of 323 Kuwaiti students participated in the study. For data analysis, Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) was carried out.
Findings:
The results confirmed the significant impacts of PE and AQ on BI. The effects of TQ, SCQ, SI, and EF on BI were insignificant. Furthermore, FC had significant effects on UB, and BI had an insignificant impact on UB.
Originality/value: The study introduces a framework that investigates the underlying significant and insignificant factors in the Kuwait context of LIS students' acceptance of Moodle as a learning tool.
 

الكلمات الرئيسية

المراجع

  1. Ahmad, S. A., Chinade, U. B., Gambaki, A. M., Ibrahim, S., & Ala, N. A. (2012). The need for moodle as a learning management system in Nigerian universities: Digesting University Utara Malaysia learning zone as a case study. Academic Research International, 2(3), 444.
  2. Ahn, T., Ryu, S., & Han, I. (2007). The impact of Web quality and playfulness on user acceptance of online retailing. Information & management, 44(3), 263-275.
  3. Aikina, T., & Bolsunovskaya, L. (2020). Moodle-based learning: Motivating and demotivating factors. international journal of emerging technologies in learning (iJET), 15(2), 239-248.
  4. AlAwadhi, S., & Morris, A. (2008, January). The Use of the UTAUT Model in the Adoption of E-government Services in Kuwait. In Proceedings of the 41st annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences (HICSS 2008) (pp. 219-219). Ieee.
  5. Aladwani, A.M., 2006. An empirical test of the link between web site quality and forward enterprise integration with web consumers. Business Process Management Journal.
  6. Aladwani, A. M., & Palvia, P. C. (2002). Developing and validating an instrument for measuring user-perceived web quality. Information & management, 39(6), 467-476.
  7. Al-Ani, W. T. (2013). Blended Learning Approach Using Moodle and Student's Achievement at Sultan Qaboos University in Oman. Journal of Education and Learning, 2(3), 96-110.
  8. Al-Houli, A., Al-Mesad, T., & Al-Kandari, E. (2021). Attitudes of the Faculty Members in the Public Authority for Applied Education and Training in the State of Kuwait towards the Experience of Distance Learning During the Corona Pandemic. Multicultural Education, 7(8).
  9. Al-Qeisi, K., Dennis, C., Alamanos, E. and Jayawardhena, C., 2014. Website design quality and usage behavior: Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. Journal of Business Research, 67(11), pp.2282-2290.

10. Al-Qirim, N., Tarhini, A., Rouibah, K., Mohamd, S., Yammahi, A. R., & Yammahi, M. A. (2018). Learning orientations of IT higher education students in UAE University. Education and Information Technologies, 23(1), 129-142.

11. Amandu, G. M., Muliira, J. K., and Fronda, D. C. 2013. "Using Moodle e-learning platform to foster student self- directed learning: Experiences with utilization of the software in undergraduate nursing courses in a Middle Eastern university," Proceedia Social and Behavioral Sciences (93), pp 677-683.

12. Amarantou, V., Chatzoudes, D., Angelidis, V., Xanthopoulos, A. and Chatzoglou, P., 2021. Improving the operations of an emergency department (ED) using a combined approach of simulation and analytical hierarchical process (AHP). Journal of Simulation, pp.1-18.

13. Arbaugh, J. B., Godfrey, M. R., Johnson, M., Pollack, B. L., Niendorf, B. and Wresch, W. (2009). Research in online and blended learning in the business disciplines: Key findings and possible future directions. Internet and Higher Education, 12(2), 71-87

14. Alrawashdeh, T.A., Muhairat, M.I. and Alqatawnah, S.M., 2012. Factors affecting acceptance of web-based training system: Using extended UTAUT and structural equation modeling. arXiv preprint arXiv:1205.1904.

15. Alsabawy, A.Y., Cater-Steel, A. and Soar, J., 2013. IT infrastructure services as a requirement for e-learning system success. Computers & Education, 69, pp.431-451.

16. Azzi, I., Jeghal, A., Radouane, A., Yahyaouy, A., & Tairi, H. (2020). A robust classification to predict learning styles in adaptive E-learning systems. Education and Information Technologies, 25(1), 437-448.

17. Bai, B., Law, R. and Wen, I., 2008. The impact of website quality on customer satisfaction and purchase intentions: Evidence from Chinese online visitors. International journal of hospitality management, 27(3), pp.391-402.

18. Bauer, H. H., Falk, T., & Hammerschmidt, M. (2006). eTransQual: A transaction process-based approach for capturing service quality in online shopping. Journal of Business Research, 59(7), 866-875.

19. Baskerville, R.L. and Myers, M.D., 2015. Design ethnography in information systems. Information Systems Journal, 25(1), pp.23-46.

20. Benta, D., Bologa, G., and Dzitac, I. 2014. "E-learning Platforms in Higher Education. Case Study," Procedia Computer Science (31), pp 1170-1176.

21. Brandle, K. (2005). Are you ready to Moodle?. Language Learning Technology, 9(2), 16-23. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/vol9num2/review1/default.html

22. Byrne, H.M., 2010. Dissecting cancer through mathematics: from the cell to the animal model. Nature Reviews Cancer, 10(3), pp.221-230.

23. Cabero-Almenara, J., Arancibia, M., & Del Prete, A. (2019). Technical and didactic knowledge of the Moodle LMS in higher education. Beyond functional use. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research (NAER Journal), 8(1), 25-33.

24. Çelik, L. (2010). Evaluation of the views of pre-service teachers taught with Moodle during the course named "instructional technology and material design" on the use of teaching materials. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 9, 1793-1797.

25. Chanjaradwichai, S., Na-Songkhla, J., & Chiasiriphan, T. (2019). A Trackable Augmented Learning Media System for a Higher Education Level. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 14(13).

26. Chau, P.Y. and Hu, P.J.H., 2001. Information technology acceptance by individual professionals: A model comparison approach. Decision sciences, 32(4), pp.699-719.

27. Cheng, Y.M., 2012. Effects of quality antecedents on e‐learning acceptance. Internet Research.

28. Cheng, Y.S., Yu, T.F., Huang, C.F., Yu, C. and Yu, C.C., 2011. The comparison of three major occupations for user acceptance of information technology: Applying the UTAUT model. IBusiness, 3(02), p.147.

29. Costa, C., Alvelos, H., & Teixeira, L. (2012). The use of Moodle e-learning platform: a study in a Portuguese University. Procedia Technology, 5, 334-343.

30. Chootongchai, S., & Songkram, N. (2018). Design and development of SECI and Moodle online learning systems to enhance thinking and innovation skills for Higher Education Learners. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 13(3).

31. Chuang, H. H., Weng, C. Y., & Huang, F. C. (2015). A structure equation model among factors of teachers' technology integration practice and their TPCK. Computers & Education, 86, 182-191.

32. Davis, F.D., 1993. User acceptance of information technology: system characteristics, user perceptions and behavioral impacts. International journal of man-machine studies, 38(3), pp.475-487.

33. DeLone, W.H. and McLean, E.R., 2003. The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: a ten-year update. Journal of management information systems, 19(4), pp.9-30.

34. De Vega, C. A., & McAnally-Salas, L. (2010). Online support for a chemistry course: The opinion of university freshmen. In Proceedings of the International Conference on e-Learning (pp. 36-46).

35. Dwivedi, Y. K., Rana, N. P., Jeyaraj, A., Clement, M., & Williams, M. D. (2019). Re-examining the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT): Towards a revised theoretical model. Information Systems Frontiers, 21(3), 719-734.

36. Ellis, Ryann K. (2009). Field Guide to Learning Management Systems. ASTD Learning Circuits.

37. Escobar-Rodríguez, T. and Carvajal-Trujillo, E., 2013. Online drivers of consumer purchase of website airline tickets. Journal of Air Transport Management, 32, pp.58-64.

38. Estacio, R. R., & Raga Jr, R. C. (2017). Analyzing students' online learning behavior in blended courses using Moodle. Asian Association of Open Universities Journal, 12(1), 52-68.

39. Ethier, J., Hadaya, P., Talbot, J. and Cadieux, J., 2006. B2C web site quality and emotions during online shopping episodes: An empirical study. Information & Management, 43(5), pp.627-639.

40. Fagerberg, J. (2018). INNOVATION AND POLICY: CHALLENGES RATIONALES, LESSONS. Innovation, Economic Development and Policy: Selected Essays, 31(2), 93.

41. Farhan, H.R., 2018, May. LIS Students' Perceptions of the Use of LMS: An Evaluation Based on TAM (Kuwait Case Study). In International Conference on Digital Transformation and Global Society (pp. 175-187). Springer, Cham. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-02846-6_14

42. Foon, Y.S. and Fah, B.C.Y., 2011. Internet banking adoption in Kuala Lumpur: an application of UTAUT model. International Journal of Business and Management, 6(4), p.161.

43. Fornell C, Larcker D (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J Mark Res 18(1):39.

44. Gao, T. and Deng, Y., 2012, June. A study on users' acceptance behavior to mobile e-books application based on UTAUT model. In 2012 IEEE International Conference on Computer Science and Automation Engineering (pp. 376-379). IEEE.

45. Gould, J.D., Boies, S.J. and Lewis, C., 1991. Making usable, useful, productivity-enhancing computer applications. Communications of the ACM, 34(1), pp.74-85.

46. Gefen, D. and Straub, D., 2005. A practical guide to factorial validity using PLS-Graph: Tutorial and annotated example. Communications of the Association for Information systems, 16(1), p.5.

47. Georgouli, K., Skalkidis, I., & Guerreiro, P. (2008). A framework for adopting LMS to introduce e-learning in a traditional course. Educational Technology and Society, 11(2), 227-240. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/61949470?accountid=27575

48. Govender, I. (2009). The learning context: Influence on learning to program. Computers and Education, 53(4), 1218-1230. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/61858935?accountid=27575

49. Goyal, E. (2011). Using Moodle to Enhance Student Satisfaction from ICT. Technology for Education (T4E), IEEE International Conference.

50. Hair, J.F., 2010. Black. WC, Babin. BJ; and Anderson. RE (2010), Multivariate Data Analysis.

51. Hew, T. S., & Kadir, S. L. S. A. (2016). Behavioural intention in cloud-based VLE: An extension to Channel Expansion Theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 64, 9-20.

52. Huda, A.J., 2018. THE IMPACT OF INTEGRATED BLENDED LEARNING TECHNOLOGY IN HIGHER EDUCATION STUDIES.

53. Henderson, J. G. (2010). Learning Through a Disciplined Curriculum Study Approach: Implications for educational leadership. Scholar-Practitioner Quarterly, 4(4), 312-315. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/964183745?accountid=27575

54. Holmes-Smith, P. (2011). Advanced structural equation modeling using AMOS. In Workshop material provided at the ACSPRI.

55. Horvat, A., Dobrota, M., Krsmanovic, M., & Cudanov, M. (2015). Student perception of Moodle learning management system: a satisfaction and significance analysis. Interactive Learning Environments, 23(4), 515-527.

56. Hsu, H.H., 2012. The acceptance of Moodle: An empirical study based on UTAUT. Creative Education, 3, p.44.

57. Im, I., Hong, S. and Kang, M.S., 2011. An international comparison of technology adoption: Testing the UTAUT model. Information & management, 48(1), pp.1-8.

58. Jairak, R., Praneetpolgrang, P., & Mekhabunchakij, K. (2009, December). An investigation of trust in e-learning for instructors and students in private and public universities. In Proc. 6th elearning for knowledge-based society conf., Thailand (pp. 17-18).

59. Jayawardhena, C., & Wright, L. T. (2009). An empirical investigation into e‐shopping excitement: antecedents and effects. European Journal of Marketing.

60. Jiang, B. and North-Samardzic, A., 2015. Acceptance and Use of Moodle by Students and Academics.

61. Kats, Y. (Ed.). (2013). Learning management systems and instructional design: best practices in online education. IGI Global.

62. Kelloway, E. K. (2014). Using Mplus for structural equation modeling: a researcher's guide. Sage Publications.

63. Kim, S. and Stoel, L., 2004. Dimensional hierarchy of retail website quality. Information & management, 41(5), pp.619-633.

64. Kim, K., Trimi, S., Park, H. and Rhee, S., 2012. The impact of CMS quality on the outcomes of e‐learning systems in higher education: an empirical study. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 10(4), pp.575-587.

65. Kerimbayev, N., Kultan, J., Abdykarimova, S., & Akramova, A. (2017). LMS Moodle: Distance international education in cooperation of higher education institutions of different countries. Education and information technologies, 22(5), 2125-2139.

66. Kline, Rex (2011). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling (Third ed.). Guilford. ISBN 978-1-60623-876-9

67. Lai, M.K., McNaughton, S., Timperley, H. and Hsiao, S., 2009. Sustaining continued acceleration in reading comprehension achievement following an intervention. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability (formerly: Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education), 21(1), pp.81-100.

68. Lallmamode, S.P., Daud, N.M. and Kassim, N.L.A., 2016. Development and initial argument-based validation of a scoring rubric used in the assessment of L2 writing electronic portfolios. Assessing Writing, 30, pp.44-62.

69. Lambda Solutions. (2017), What is Moodle? https://www.lambdasolutions.net/resources/what-is-moodle/  [Accessed 17 Nov. 2017]

70. Liu, C. and Arnett, K.P., 2000. Exploring the factors associated with Web site success in the context of electronic commerce. Information & management, 38(1), pp.23-33.

71. Lin, J., Chan, H., & Jin, Y. (2004). Instant messaging acceptance and use among college students. PACIS 2004 Proceedings, 15.

72. Malanga, A. C. M., Bernardes, R. C., Borini, F. M., Pereira, R. M., & Rossetto, D. E. (2022). Towards integrating quality in theoretical models of acceptance: An extended proposed model applied to e‐learning services. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(1), 8-22.

73. Martins, C., Oliveira, T. and Popovič, A., 2014. Understanding the Internet banking adoption: A unified theory of acceptance and use of technology and perceived risk application. International journal of information management, 34(1), pp.1-13.

74. Mitchell, D. ed., 2005. Contextualizing inclusive education: Evaluating old and new international paradigms. Routledge.

75. Motaghian, H., Hassanzadeh, A. and Moghadam, D.K., 2013. Factors affecting university instructors' adoption of web-based learning systems: Case study of Iran. Computers & Education, 61, pp.158-167.

76. Moodle, 2021. https://moodle.com/

77. Mukhametshin, L., Salekhova, L., & Mukhametshina, M. (2019). Using the lms moodle system in the modern educational process. Journal of Philology and Culture, (56), 274-279.

78. Muller, D., Judd, C.M., & Yzerbyt, V.Y. (2005). When moderation is mediated, and mediation is moderated. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 852-863

79. Nickerson, R.S., 1981. Why interactive computer systems are sometimes not used by people who might benefit from them. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 15(4), pp.469-483.

80. Novo-Corti, I., Varela-Candamio, L., & Ramil-DíAz, M. (2013). E-learning and face to face mixed methodology: Evaluating effectiveness of e-learning and perceived satisfaction for a microeconomic course using the Moodle platform. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(2), 410-415.

81. PAAET, 2021. https://e.paaet.edu.kw/AR/Pages/default.aspx

82. Petter, S. and McLean, E.R., 2009. A meta-analytic assessment of the DeLone and McLean IS success model: An examination of IS success at the individual level. Information & Management, 46(3), pp.159-166.

83. Petter, S., DeLone, W. and McLean, E.R., 2012. The past, present, and future of “IS success”. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 13(5), p.2.

84. Psycharis, S., Chalatzoglidis, G., & Kalogiannakis, M. (2013). Moodle as a learning environment in promoting conceptual understanding for secondary school students. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 9(1), 11-21.

85. Rhode, J., Richter, S., Gowen, P., Miller, T., & Wills, C. (2017). Understanding faculty use of the learning management system. Online Learning, 21(3), 68-86.

86. Saba, T., 2013. Implications of E-learning systems and self-efficiency on students outcomes: a model approach. Human-Centric Computing and Information Sciences, 2(1), pp.1-11.

87. Saleem, N.E., Al-Saqri, M.N. and Ahmad, S.E., 2016. Acceptance of Moodle as a teaching/learning tool by the faculty of the department of information studies at Sultan Qaboos University, Oman based on UTAUT. International Journal of Knowledge Content Development & Technology, 6(2), pp.5-27.

88. Saleh, A.M., Haris, A.B. and Bint Ahmad, N., 2014. Towards a UTAUT-based model for the intention to use solar water heaters by Libyan households. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, 4(1), pp.26-31.

89. Sánchez, R. A., & Hueros, A. D. (2010). Motivational factors that influence the acceptance of Moodle using TAM. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(6), 1632-1640. Retrieved from http://ac.els-cdn.com/S0747563210001834/1-s2.0-S0747563210001834-main.pdf?_tid=8aff8420 -8f61-11e3-b23a-00000aacb361andacdnat=1391713666_5b5a3c069afebdacb4a70cf35548388d

90. Shafi, A.S. and Weerakkody, V., 2009, August. Understanding citizens' behavioural intention in the adoption of e-government services in the state of Qatar. In ECIS (Vol. 1, pp. 1618-1629).

91. Šumak, B., Polancic, G., & Hericko, M. (2010, February). An empirical study of virtual learning environment adoption using UTAUT. In 2010 Second international conference on mobile, hybrid, and on-line learning (pp. 17-22). IEEE.

92. Suki, N. M., & Suki, N. M. (2017). Determining students’ behavioural intention to use animation and storytelling applying the UTAUT model: The moderating roles of gender and experience level. The International Journal of Management Education, 15(3), 528-538.

93. Taylor, W.A., 2004. Computer-mediated knowledge sharing and individual user differences: an exploratory study. European journal of information systems, 13(1), pp.52-64.

94. Teo, T., Zhou, M., Fan, A. C. W., & Huang, F. (2019). Factors that influence university students’ intention to use Moodle: A study in Macau. Educational Technology Research and Development, 67(3), 749-766.

95. Then, M., Wallenborn, B., Ianniello, B. R., Vu, D. B., Fuchs, M., & Hemmje, M. (2016). Innovative Authoring Tools for Online-Courses with Assignments. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 11(2).

96. Van Raaij, E. M., & Schepers, J. J. (2008). The acceptance and use of a virtual learning environment in China. Computers & education, 50(3), 838-852.

97. Venkatesh, V., M. G. Morris, G. B. Davis, and F. D. Davis. (2003). "User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View," MIS Quarterly., 27(3) pp., 425-478.

98. Venkatesh, V., Brown, S. A., Maruping, L. M., & Bala, H. (2008). Predicting different conceptualizations of system use: The competing roles of behavioral intention, facilitating conditions, and behavioral expectation. MIS quarterly, 483-502.

99. Wang, H.C. and Chiu, Y.F., 2011. Assessing e-learning 2.0 system success. Computers & Education, 57(2), pp.1790-1800.

  1. Wang, Y. H., Tseng, Y. H., & Chang, C. C. (2013, October). Comparison of students' perception of Moodle in a Taiwan university against students in a Portuguese university. In International Conference on Web-Based Learning (pp. 71-78). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
  2. Weerakkody, V., El-Haddadeh, R., Al-Sobhi, F., Shareef, M.A. and Dwivedi, Y.K., 2013. We are examining the influence of intermediaries in facilitating e-government adoption: An empirical investigation. International journal of information management, 33(5), pp.716-725.

 

  1. Wong, K.T., Teo, T. and Russo, S., 2013. Interactive whiteboard acceptance: Applicability of the UTAUT model to student teachers. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 22(1), pp.1-10.
  2. Wu, J., Tsai, R. J., Chen, C. C., & Wu, Y. (2006). An integrative model to predict the continuance use of electronic learning systems: hints for teaching. International Journal on E-learning, 5(2).
  3. Wu, M.Y., Yu, P.Y., & Weng, Y.C. (2012). A study on user behavior for i pass by UTAUT: Using Taiwan’s MRT as an example. Asia Pacific Management Review, 17(1), 91-111.
  4. Wu, J. P., & Chen, Y. H. (2006). The application of blog in case teaching: An exploratory study. Journal of Information Management-Concepts, Systems, and Applications, 8(2), 65-84.
  5. Wu, H., Sun, D.P., Lu, L., Teng, B., Tang, G.Q. and Song, J.N., 2012. Experimental investigation on the suppression of vortex-induced vibration of the long flexible riser by multiple control rods. Journal of Fluids and Structures, 30, pp.115-132.
  6. Yamin, M. and Lee, Y., 2010, December. Level of acceptance and factors influencing students' intention to use UCSI University's e-mail system. In 2010 International Conference on User Science and Engineering (i-USEr) (pp. 26-31). IEEE.
  7. Zabolotniaia, M., Cheng, Z., Dorozhkin, E., & Lyzhin, A. (2020). Use of the LMS Moodle for an effective implementation of an innovative policy in higher educational institutions. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 15(13), 172-189.
  8. Zhou, Z.H., 2012. Ensemble methods: foundations and algorithms. CRC press.

 

ملفات

شارك

إرسال الاستشهاد إلى

الإحصائيات