High school science teachers’ acceptance of using distance education in the light of UTAUT

Ehab Gouda Tolba; Nasser Helmy Youssef

doi:10.29333/ejmste/12365

Full Text (PDF)

Ehab Gouda Tolba ¹ ^* , Nasser Helmy Youssef ¹

More Detail

¹ Curricula and Instruction Department, College of Education, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, Dammam, SAUDI ARABIA^* Corresponding Author

Abstract

This research aimed at developing hypotheses based on the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) model and adopting a proposed model that considers the basic structures (performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, and facilitating conditions) as it represents the technology features “distance education (DE)”, which are independent variables that affect the dependent variables (behavioral intention (BI) to use DE), taking into consideration the moderating factors (gender, experience, and technological self-efficiency). The research adopted a tool to reveal science teachers’ acceptance of using DE in the light of UTAUT, 120 teachers responded online to the tool. The results indicated that the teachers’ acceptance of DE was high. It is possible to predict that teachers have BI to use DE, that gender has no effect on BI, and there are differences between the research model variables due to the teaching experience favoring teachers with less teaching experience.

Keywords

UTAUT
use of technology
use of distance education
science teachers
high school

License

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Article Type: Research Article

EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed, 2022, Volume 18, Issue 9, Article No: em2152

https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12365

Publication date: 16 Aug 2022

Article Views: 1473

Article Downloads: 1036

Open Access References How to cite this article

References

Agarwal, R., & Prasad, J. (1997). The role of innovation characteristics and perceived voluntariness in the acceptance of information technologies. Decision Sciences, 28, 557-582. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1997.tb01322.x
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
Ajzen, I. (2001). Nature and operation of attitudes. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 27-58. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.27
Aliano, A., Hueros, A., Franco, M., & Aguaded, I. (2019). Mobile learning in university contexts based on the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT). Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 8(1), 7-17. https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2019.1.317.
Al-Senaidi, S., Lin, L., & Poirot, J. (2009). Barriers to adopting technology for teaching and learning in Oman. Computers & Education, 53(3), 575-590. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.03.015
Andreatta, P.B. (2003). The effect of affective corrective feedback variation in Web-based instruction on community college student satisfaction and retention [Ph.D. thesis, University of San Francisco].
Azizi, S. M., Roozbahani, N., & Khatony, A. (2020). Factors affecting the acceptance of blended learning in medical education: Application of UTAUT2 model. BMC Medical Education, 20(367), 2-9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02302-2
Babateen, H. M. (2011). The role of virtual laboratories in science education. IACSIT Press.
Bahtiar, B., & Dukomalamo, N. (2019). Basic science process skills of biology laboratory: Improving through discovery learning. Biosfer: Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi [Biosphere: Journal of Biological Education], 12(1), 83-93. https://doi.org/10.21009/biosferjpb.v12n1.83-93
Bauwens, R., Muylaert, J., Clarysse, E., Audenaert, M., & Decramer, A. (2020). Teachers’ acceptance and use of digital learning environments after hours: Implications for work-life balance and the role of integration preference. Computers in Human Behavior, 112, 106479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106479
Baz, E.H. (2016). Attitudes of Turkish EFL student teachers towards technology use. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 15(2), 1-10.
Bergeron, F., Rivard, S., & de Serre, L. (1990). Investigating the support role of the information center. MIS Quarterly, 14(3), 247-260. https://doi.org/10.2307/248887
Chaaban, Y., & Moloney, R. (2016). Educating pre-service teachers in technology use: A study of provision at Lebanese universities. International Journal of Education, 8(2), 14-31. https://doi.org/10.5296/ije.v8i2.9188
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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.protcy.2012.09.037
Crawford, C. M. (2010). Social and political transformation within a university environment framework: The impact of” anytime” and” anywhere” virtual learning expectations upon the professoriate and the altering views of time and effort expectations. International Journal of Technology, Knowledge & Society, 6(1), 199-211. https://doi.org/10.18848/1832-3669/CGP/v06i01/56071
Cutri, R., & Mena, J. (2020). A critical reconceptualization of faculty readiness for online teaching. Distance Education, 41(3), 361-380. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2020.1763167
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Davis, F. D., & Venkatesh, V. (2004). Toward pre-prototype user acceptance testing of new information systems: Implications for software project management. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 51(1), 31-46. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2003.822468
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35, 982-1003. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982
Dede, C. J. (1990). The evolution of distance learning: Technology-mediated interactive learning. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 22(3), 247-264. https://doi.org/10.1080/08886504.1990.10781919
Derilo, R. (2019). Basic and integrated science process skills acquisition and academic in science achievement of seventh-grade learners. European Journal of Education Studies, 6(1), 281-294.
Deshmukh, V., Forawi, S. A., & Jaiswal, A. (2012). The role of e-learning in science education vis-a-vis teacher training institutes in Middle East. US-China Education Review, 2, 142-148.
Durak, H. (2019). Examining the acceptance and use of online social networks by preservice teachers within the context of unified theory of acceptance and use of technology model. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 31, 173-209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-018-9200-6
Falode, O. (2018). Pre-service teachers’ perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, attitude and intentions towards virtual laboratory package utilization in teaching and learning of physics. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Technology, 6(3), 63-72. https://doi.org/10.17220/mojet.2018.03.005
Foon, Y. S., & Fah, B. C. Y. (2011). Internet banking adoption in Kuala Lumpur: An application of UTAUT model. International Journal of Business and Management, 6(4), 161-167. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijbm.v6n4p161
Garrison, D., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (1999). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6
Gong, M., Xu, Y., & Yu, Y. (2004). An enhanced technology acceptance model for web-based learning. Journal of Information Systems Education, 15(4), 365-374.
Gumusoglu, E., & Akay, E. (2017). Measuring technology acceptance level of teachers by using unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. International Journal of Languages’ Education and Teaching, 5(4), 378-394. https://doi.org/10.18298/ijlet.2239
Hackman, M., & Walker, K. (1990). The impact of system design and instructional style on student reactions to distance education. Research in Distance Education, 37, 7-9.
Harsha, T. (2017). Learning science through distance education–A challenge at Karnataka State Open University. The Online Journal of Distance Education and e-Learning, 5(1), 62-65.
Hativa, N., & Lesgold, A. (1996). Situational effects in classroom technology implementations: Unfulfilled expectations and unexpected outcomes. In S. T. Kerr (Ed.), Technology and the future of schooling: Ninety fifth yearbook of the national society for the study of education (pp. 131-171). University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146819609700607
Honeyman, M., & Miller, G. (1993). Agriculture distance education: A valid alternative for higher education? In Proceedings of the 20^th Annual National Agricultural Education Research Meeting (pp. 67-73). National Book Foundation.
Hoque, R., & Sorwar, G. (2017). Understanding factors influencing the adoption of mHealth by the elderly: An extension of the UTAUT model. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 101, 75-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2017.02.002
Kaya, G., & Usluel, Y. K. (2011). Content analysis of factors affecting ICT integration in teaching–learning process. Buca Faculty of Education Journal, 31, 48-67.
Keeton, M. T. (2004). Best online instructional practices: Report of phase I of an ongoing study. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Network, 8(2), 75-100. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v8i2.1829
Kripanont, N. (2007). Examining a technology acceptance model of internet usage by academics within Thai business schools [Doctoral dissertation, Victoria University]. https://doi.org/10.15209/jbsge.v1i2.72
Liu, J. (2013). E-learning in English classroom: Investigating factors impacting on ESL (English as second language) college students’ acceptance and use of the modular object-oriented dynamic learning environment (Moodle) [PhD thesis, Iowa State University].
Maison, M., Darmaji, D., Astalini, A., Kurniawan, D., & Indrawati, P. (2019). Science process skill and motivation. Humanities & Social Sciences Reviews, 7(5), 48-56.https://doi.org/10.18510/hssr.2019.756
Mondal, P., & Das, M. (2015). Acceptability of distance education among students’ society. International Journal of Social Science and Humanities Research, 3(1), 234-239.
Mookkiah, M., & Prabu, M. (2019). Teachers self-efficacy scale: Development and validation. Review of Research, 8(6), 1-8.
Moore, G. C., & Benbasat, I. (1991). Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation. Information Systems Research, 2(3), 192-222. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2.3.192
Moore, M. G., & Thompson, M. M. (1990). The effects of distance learning: A summary of literature (research monograph No. 2). Southern Ohio Telecommunications Consortium. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED330321.pdf
Moorthy, K., Yee, T., T’ing, L., & Kumaran, V. (2019). Habit and hedonic motivation are the strongest influences in mobile learning behaviours among higher education students in Malaysia. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 35(4), 174-191. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.4432
NRC. (1996). National science education standards: Observe, interact, change, learn. National Academy Press.
NRC. (2006). America’s lab report: Investigations in high school science. National Academies Press.
NSTA. (2016). NSTA position statement: The role of e-learning in science education. National Science Teachers Association. https://static.nsta.org/pdfs/PositionStatement_E-learning.pdf
Offir, B., Barth, I., Lev, J., & Shteinbok, A. (2003). Teacher–student interactions and learning outcomes in a distance learning environment. Internet and Higher Education, 6(1), 65-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(02)00162-8
Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A., Glazewski, K., & Newby, T. (2010). Preservice technology integration course revision: A conceptual guide. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 18(1), 5-33.
Padilla-Meléndez, A., del Aguila-Obra, A., & Garrido-Moreno, A. (2013). Perceived playfulness, gender differences and technology acceptance model in a blended learning scenario. Computers and Education, 63, 306-317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.014
Poong, Y. S., Yamaguchi, S., & Takada, J. (2017). Investigating the drivers of mobile learning acceptance among young adults in the World Heritage town of Luang Prabang, Laos. Information Development, 33(1), 57-71. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266666916638136
Radovan, M., & Kristl, N. (2017). Acceptance of technology and its impact on teacher’s activities in virtual classroom: Integrating UTAUT and CoI into a combined model. The Turkish Online Journal of Education, 16(3), 11-22.
Raman, A., & Rathakrishnan, M. (2018). Frog VLE: Teachers’ technology acceptance using UTAUT model. International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology, 9(3), 529-538.
Raza, S. A., Qazi, W., Khan, K. A., & Salam, J. (2021). Social isolation and acceptance of the learning management system (LMS) in the time of COVID-19 pandemic: An expansion of the UTAUT model. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59(2), 183-208. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633120960421
Ritchie, D., & Wiburg, K. (1994). Educational variables influencing technology integration. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 2(2), 143-153.
Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations. The Free Press.
Sadeck, O. G., & Cronjé, J. C. (2017). A continuum of teachers’ e-learning practices. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 15, 395-408.
Saleem, N. E., & Al-Suqri, M. N. (2015). Investigating faculty members’ beliefs about distance education: The case of Sultan Qaboos University, Oman. International Journal of Distance Education Technologies, 13(1), 48-69. http://doi.org/10.4018/ijdet.2015010103
Saleem, N., Al-Saqri, M., & Ahmad, S. (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), 5-27. https://doi.org/10.5865/IJKCT.2016.6.2.005
Sattari, A., Abdekhoda, M., & Zarea, G. (2017). Determinant factors affecting the webbased training acceptance by health students, applying UTAUT model. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 12(10), 112-126. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v12i10.7258
Seiber, J. E. (2005). Misconceptions and realities about teaching online. Science and Engineering Ethics, 11, 329-340. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-005-0002-7
Serevina, V., Sunaryo., Raihanati., Astra, M., & Sari, I. (2018). Development of e-module based on problem based learning (PBL) on heat and temperature to improve student’s science process skill. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 17(3), 26-36.
Stefl-Mabry, J. (1999). Professional staff development: lessons learned from current usability studies. Journal of Information Technology Impact, 1(2), 81-104.
Stone, S. J., & Chapman, D. D. (2006). Instructor presence in the online classroom. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED492845.pdf
Šumak, B., & Šorgo, A. (2016). The acceptance and use of interactive whiteboards among teachers: Differences in UTAUT determinants between pre-and post adopters. Computers in Human Behavior, 64, 602-620. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.07.037
Tarhini, A., Masa’deh, R., Al-Busaidi, K. A., Mohammed, A. B., & Maqableh, M. (2017). Factors influencing students’ adoption of e-learning: A structural equation modeling approach. Journal of International Education in Business, 10(2), 164-182. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIEB-09-2016
Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (1995). Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. Information Systems Research, 6(2), 144-176. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.6.2.144
Threlkeld, R., & Brzoska, K. (1994). Research in distance education. In B. Willis, (Ed.), Distance education: Strategies and tools (pp. 41-66). Educational Technology Publications.
Tolba, E. G., Youssef, N. H., Hassan, H. F., ALsamaloty, A. N., & Alotaibi, N. A. (2020). Investigating teacher’s beliefs about entrepreneurship distance education in light of the demographic variables in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 23(S2).
Triandis, H. C. (1977). Interpersonal behavior. Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.
Tseng, T. H., Lin, S., Wang, Y.-S. & Liu, H.-X. (2019). Investigating teachers’ adoption of MOOCs: The perspective of UTAUT2. Interactive Learning Environments. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1674888
Venkatesh, V., & Brown, S. A. (2001). A longitudinal investigation of personal computers in homes: Adoption determinants and emerging challenges. MIS Quarterly, 25(1), 71-102. https://doi.org/10.2307/3250959
Venkatesh, V., & Davis F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186-204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157-178. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412
Wallace, R., M. (2003). Online learning in higher education: A review of research on interactions among teachers and students. Education, Communication & Information, 3(2), 241-280, https://doi.org/10.1080/14636310303143
Wang, H.-Y., & Wang, S.-H. (2010). User acceptance of mobile internet based on the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology: Investigating the determinants and gender differences. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 38(3), 415-426. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2010.38.3.415
Willis, B. (1992). Effective distance education: A primer for faculty and administrators. Monograph series in distance education, No. 2. Alaska University System, Fairbanks. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED352447.pdf
Woodfield, B. F., Andrus, M. B., Andersen, T., Miller, J., Simmons, B., Stanger, R., Waddoups, G. L., Moore M. S., Swan, R., Allen, R., & Bodily, G. (2005). The virtual ChemLab project: A realistic and sophisticated simulation of organic synthesis and organic qualitative analysis. Journal of Chemical Education, 82(11), 1728-1735. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed082p1728
Wu, J., & Liu, W. (2013). An empirical investigation of the critical factors affecting students’ satisfaction in EFL blended learning. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 4(1), 176-185. https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.4.1.176-185
Yang, S. C., & Huang, Y. F. (2008). A study of high school English teachers’ behavior, concerns and beliefs in integrating information technology into English instruction. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(3), 1085-1103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2007.03.009
Yeou, M. (2016). An investigation of students’ acceptance of Moodle in a blended learning setting using technology acceptance model. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 44(3), 300-318. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239515618464
Yildiz, H., Saritepeci, M., & Seferoglu, S. S. (2013). A study on the contributions of the in-service training activities within the scope of FATIH project to teachers’ professional growth in reference to ISTE teachers’ standards. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, Special Issue, 1, 375-392.
Young, A., & Norgard, C. (2006). Assessing the quality of online courses from the students’ perspective. Internet and Higher Education, 9(2), 107-115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2006.03.001
Zhang, X., & Cui, G. (2010). Learning beliefs of distance foreign language learners in China: A survey study. System: An International Journal of Educational Technology and Applied Linguistics, 38(1), 30-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2009.12.003
Zhou, Z., Fang, Y., Vogel, D. R., Jin, X.-L., & Zhang, X. (2012). Attracted to or locked in? Predicting continuance intention in social virtual world services. Journal of Management Information Systems, 29(1), 273-306. https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222290108

How to cite this article

APA

Tolba, E. G., & Youssef, N. H. (2022). High school science teachers’ acceptance of using distance education in the light of UTAUT. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 18(9), em2152. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12365

Vancouver

Tolba EG, Youssef NH. High school science teachers’ acceptance of using distance education in the light of UTAUT. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2022;18(9):em2152. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12365

AMA

Tolba EG, Youssef NH. High school science teachers’ acceptance of using distance education in the light of UTAUT. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2022;18(9), em2152. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12365

Chicago

Tolba, Ehab Gouda, and Nasser Helmy Youssef. "High school science teachers’ acceptance of using distance education in the light of UTAUT". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 2022 18 no. 9 (2022): em2152. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12365

Harvard

Tolba, E. G., and Youssef, N. H. (2022). High school science teachers’ acceptance of using distance education in the light of UTAUT. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 18(9), em2152. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12365

MLA

Tolba, Ehab Gouda et al. "High school science teachers’ acceptance of using distance education in the light of UTAUT". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 18, no. 9, 2022, em2152. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12365