Web-based collaborative learning information system (WBCLIS)
Collaborative learning has become very popular in higher education, for inculcating critical thinking skills and promoting active learning environment, in which group of students work together to attain a shared common learning objective (Al-Samarraie & Saeed,
2018). Theoretically, collaborative learning is associated with the social constructivism learning paradigm (Elia, Solazzo, Lorenzo, & Passiante,
2019; Mamun, Lawrie, & Wright,
2020; Shuell,
2001; Tennyson & Volk,
2015); in which, information sharing and knowledge building is regarded to be significantly influenced, by collaboration and interaction between group members (Curşeu, Rusu, Maricuţoiu, Vîrgă, & Măgurean,
2020; Hernández-Sellés, Muñoz-Carril, & González-Sanmamed,
2019; Molinillo et al.
2018a; Tan,
2019; Williamson et al.,
2020). In the context of collaborative learning, in-group collaboration is often regarded as an affirmative forte, that aids students in the achievement of their shared common goals, while simultaneously upholding their own individual level learning goals (Lee,
2014).
In this modern age of artificial intelligence and advance technology enabled devices, access to fast speed internet has led to a widespread use and acceptance of collaborative learning, by facilitating the formation of online dialogical interaction between teachers and students (Molinillo et al.,
2018a). More particularly, WBCLIS have been especially developed in recent past, to enhance the overall connotation and meaningfulness of the social interaction, for fostering the presence of an active learning environment (Molinillo et al.,
2018a; Salam et al.,
2019b). WBCLIS refers to a set of tools, that are specifically designed for promoting collaborative learning, through meaningful interaction, expressive knowledge sharing and frequent inter-linked goal oriented group activities (Cheung & Vogel,
2013). Most of the literature (e.g. Cheung & Vogel,
2013; Farrokhnia, Pijeira-Díaz, Noroozi, & Hatami,
2019; Garcia-Sanjuan, Jurdi, Jaen, & Nacher,
2018; Hernández-Sellés et al.,
2019; Liaw et al.,
2008; Reis et al.,
2018), which reviewed the significance and use of CSCL systems, has been built on the fundamentals of cognitive science and social constructivist theory only (Holenko Dlab, Boticki, Hoic-Bozic, & Looi,
2020; Jeong, Hmelo-Silver, & Jo,
2019; Weimer, Parault Dowds, Fabricius, Schwanenflugel, & Suh,
2017; Zheng, Li, Zhang, & Sun,
2019). Thereby, previous studies (e.g. Cheung & Vogel,
2013; Farrokhnia et al.,
2019; Hernández-Sellés et al.,
2019; Liaw et al.,
2008; Shen,
2012) have overlooked various dimensions, important to the functionalities of a WBCLIS system (Garcia-Sanjuan et al.,
2018; Reis et al.,
2018; Salam,
2020).
Specifically, WBCLIS are designed in such a way, that enables them to provide optimum computing functionalities, quality information and internet technologies, that can foster the interaction between students and teachers, for enhancing a seamless flow of information and sharing of knowledge (Liaw et al.,
2008). According to Molinillo et al. (
2018b), WBCLIS provides opportunities for students, to become more responsible and active learner, not only to absorb and exchange information, but also to easily reflect back, and straightforwardly link their previous knowledge, with the newly comprehended information on the subject matter. In recent few years, a rising trend of widespread application of collaborative learning, by means of advance technologies (i.e. WBCLIS and other similar virtual learning systems), has been witnessed, in the world over higher education / academic industry. Thereby, WBCLIS and other similar technologies have become an integral part of collaborative learning, which has been increasingly implemented, as an essential element of service learning pedagogy, in the top ranked institutions of higher education, around the globe (Al-Samarraie & Saeed,
2018; Cheung & Vogel,
2013; Molinillo et al.,
2018a).
With reference to the above discussion, it is pertinent to note that, collaborative learning is mediated by technology, that facilitates a collaborative learning environment, in which necessary pedagogical and social functionalities are provided (Chan & Pow,
2020; Isohätälä, Järvenoja, & Järvelä,
2017; Lin,
2020; Molinillo et al.,
2018b). In a collaborative learning tool, it is crucial to provide social features, that can facilitate and encourage the social interaction among teachers and students (Molinillo et al.,
2018a). So that, students can gain deeper insights, for comprehending the multidimensional aspects of new knowledge, exchange their views and develop their independent opinion, along with cognitive skills, by participating in a socially supportive collaborative learning process (Kreijns et al.,
2007; Molinillo et al.,
2018a). Where many proponents (e.g. Atan, Rahman, Majid, & Dahlan,
2012; Doumanis et al.,
2019; Jan, Chen, & Huang,
2016; Mata-Rivera, Torres-Ruiz, Guzmán, Moreno-Ibarra, & Quintero,
2015; Molinillo et al.,
2018a; Molinillo et al.,
2018b) support the use of WBCLIS, and acknowledge it’s significance, for facilitating the collaborative learning process. Still, some opponents (e.g. Fleaca & Stanciu,
2019; Krishnakumar & Nogales,
2020; Njenga, Garg, Bhardwaj, Prakash, & Bawa,
2019; Pinho, Franco, & Mendes,
2019) argue that, collaboration through WBCLIS, presents some operational difficulties, that must be considered. For instance, with respect to the face-to-face collaboration, collaborative learning through WBCLIS requires certain IT skills and computer knowledge (Doumanis et al.,
2019; Jeong et al.,
2019).
Moreover, students as well as teachers, also have to spend substantial amount of their time, for understanding the operational functionalities of a given WBCLIS (Atan et al.,
2012; Jan et al.,
2016). Further, successful implementation of a WBCLIS do require dedication and candid efforts from both, teachers and students, to actively participate in the collaborative learning activities, for achieving their shared goals, while simultaneously maintaining their individual beliefs through self-learning, comprehension and with a reflection of comparative analysis of their previous acquaintance, with newly acquired information (ChanLin,
2012). Moreover, teachers should clearly define the collaborative learning activities, along with outlining their own role in the planning, execution and evaluation of whole collaborative learning process (Churchill,
2011). Additionally, it is important to enrich a WBCLIS system, with various social features and tools, to facilitate in-group collaboration, social interaction and social presence, which are rationally very important, for the success of whole collaborative learning process (Kreijns et al.,
2007; Kreijns, Van Acker, Vermeulen, & Van Buuren,
2014; Kreijns, Kirschner, & Vermeulen,
2013; Yamada, Goda, Matsukawa, Hata, & Yasunami,
2016).
In this era of fast pace technological advancements, majority of the modern businesses are heavily relying on modern IS systems; thereby, becoming more dependent on IT, for accomplishing their daily routine operations (Farooq
2018; Salam
2020). Moreover, world over various departments of large size corporations, also count on IS, for attaining success in their different organizational goals (Grabowski & Roberts,
2019; Modaresnezhad, Iyer, Palvia, & Taras,
2020; Prys, Krysińska, Janaszkiewicz, Winiecki, & Różewski,
2018; Wang & Zhao,
2020). Therefore, acceptance and use of technology has also remained a subject of interest for many academicians (e.g. Baishya & Samalia,
2019; Farooq et al.,
2017; Oviedo-Trespalacios, Briant, Kaye, & King,
2020; Tao et al.,
2020; Tsertsidis, Kolkowska, & Hedström,
2019). Moreover, previous studies (e.g. Al-Fraihat, Joy, Masa’deh, & Sinclair,
2020; Cheung & Vogel,
2013; Pinho et al.,
2019; Shim & Jo,
2020; Yuan, Chu, Lai, & Wu,
2020) have suggested several factors (i.e. technological, behavioral and organizational etc.), that determine the effective use, acceptance, adoption and success of an information system. Various technology related models (e.g. Davis,
1989; Farooq et al.,
2017; Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis,
2003; Venkatesh, Thong, & Xu,
2012) have only focused on the pre-adoption stage of technology, by putting more emphasis on the acceptance of technology only; thereby, downplaying on the actual outcomes, success and benefits of an information system.
In this context, DeLone and McLean’s (
1992) IS success model and DeLone and McLean’s (
2003) updated IS success model, are commonly used frameworks for explaining the cognitive and behavioral facets, of the system's post-adoption (i.e. after acceptance of system) stage, system use and system success (Aparicio, Bacao, & Oliveira,
2017; Tam & Oliveira,
2017; Veeramootoo, Nunkoo, & Dwivedi,
2018). IS success model, first introduced by DeLone and McLean (
1992) encompasses six major constructs,
“i.e. information quality, system quality, user satisfaction, system use, individual impact and organizational impact”. DeLone and McLean’s (
1992) IS success model is often braced for two main reasons, i.e. (1) it presents an in-depth description of many IS success elements and indicators, in a solo, yet comprehensive theoretical framework, (2) this model suggests a time-based and causal interdependence among different categories of indicators of IS success (Veeramootoo et al.,
2018; Wang & Liao,
2008). In response to the modification in advance IS environment, DeLone and McLean’s (
1992) IS success model was updated, with the inclusion of a new construct,
“i.e. service quality” (DeLone & McLean,
2003).
By introducing the concept of service quality, DeLone and McLean’s (
2003) updated IS success model, has enhanced the researchers’ propensity to measure and analyze the quality of service, provided by IT department, for a particular information system (Tam & Oliveira,
2017). Literature review has revealed that, DeLone and McLean’s (
1992) IS success model and DeLone and McLean’s (
2003) updated IS success model, have been frequently applied, for the evaluation of usage and success of various information systems, in several different contexts. For instance, success of e-learning systems (e.g. Aldholay, Isaac, Abdullah, Abdulsalam, & Al-Shibami,
2018; Al-Samarraie, Teng, Alzahrani, & Alalwan,
2017; Aparicio et al.,
2017; Cidral et al.,
2018; Wang & Chiu,
2011), success of e-commerce systems (e.g. DeLone & McLean,
2004; Tam & Oliveira,
2017) and success of e-government systems (e.g. Finney & Corbett,
2007; Mukred & Yusof,
2018; Rizal, Yussof, Amin, & Chen-Jung,
2018; Veeramootoo et al.,
2018; Wang & Liao,
2008). However, these aforementioned scholars (i.e. Al-Samarraie et al.,
2017; Aparicio et al.,
2017; Cidral et al.,
2018; DeLone & McLean,
2004; Finney & Corbett,
2007; Mukred & Yusof,
2018; Rizal et al.,
2018; Tam & Oliveira,
2017; Veeramootoo et al.,
2018; Wang & Liao,
2008) do not have a unanimous and concerted take, on the dimensions and definition of the success of an information system (Salam,
2020).
The concept of measuring success in the field of IT, is a multidimensional facet, and it’s various dimensions, can be considered, as distinct indicators of success of an information system (Aldholay et al.,
2018; Aparicio et al.,
2017; Mukred & Yusof,
2018; Wang & Chiu,
2011). According to Martins et al. (
2018) the perception of IS success can vary, depending on the different type, purpose (i.e. operational functionality of an information system) and nature of an information system. For example, there are several studies (e.g. Al-Samarraie et al.,
2017; Kim & Malhotra,
2005; Mohammadi,
2015) which have regarded the continuous usage, of a particular system, as a measure of IS success. However, some academicians (e.g. Al-Samarraie et al.,
2017; Martins et al.,
2018; Zolotov, Oliveira, & Casteleyn,
2018) assert that, continuous usage of a system can be a potential outcome of not having any other choice (e.g. a situation in which students have no option, but to register and enroll through a less user-friendly online registration portal). Therefore, continuous usage is not a real indication of the success of an information system (Al-Samarraie et al.,
2017; Martins et al.,
2018; Zolotov et al.,
2018).
According to Zolotov et al. (
2018), real success of an e-participation system, can be measured with the citizens’ overall satisfaction and intention to adopt the particular system, for a longer period of time. Further, Martins et al. (
2018) and Al-Samarraie et al. (
2017) have taken users’ continued satisfaction, as a fomented indication of the success of an e-learning system. While DeLone and McLean’s (
2003) updated IS success model has received much support, and it has been efficaciously applied, for the evaluation of various information systems, since many decades. Still, various scholars (e.g. Aldholay et al.,
2018; Farooq et al.,
2017; Mukred & Yusof,
2018; Salam et al.,
2019b) have called for further research, in the domain of success of information systems. More in-depth studies are warranted, to answer the call for research in this domain (Aldholay et al.,
2018; Farooq et al.,
2017; Mukred & Yusof,
2018; Salam et al.,
2019b). Therefore, this study is aimed to extend the existing DeLone and McLean’s (
2003) updated IS success model, to assess different new aspects, specific to the success of an information system, by incorporating the concept of
“sociability quality”, which is an important element and indicator for assessing the success of a WBCLIS.
This study is grounded on the concept of rationality, and therefore, it is submitted that, different constructs, which are relevant to different situations, should be assessed along with the concept of
“sociability quality” for assessing the significance of a WBCLIS. While convening the assessment of education related information systems, it is essential to consider the concept of sociability and collaboration, along with other factors, that can be effective, for facilitating the teaching and learning processes (Martins et al.
2018,
2019; Salam
2020). Collaborative learning technologies have emerged as a wide set of tools, that offer a flexible and eloquent kind of socially interactive platform for collaborative learning (Chan and Pow
2020; Tan
2019). Although, some social networking websites and purpose built e-learning applications, also provide functional support and tools for online collaboration, still the debate about the importance of WBCLIS, between it’s proponents and opponents cannot be to put to rest, without further in-depth investigation of the subject matter (Atan et al.
2012; Doumanis et al.
2019; Mata-Rivera et al.
2015).
Previous studies have also evaluated different types of education related information systems; for instance, Martins et al. (
2018) have evaluated the success of education management system, and Cidral et al. (
2018) reported the success factors of e-learning system. However, still the significance and success factors of sociability features, offered by WBCLIS, are not completely known to date (Salam,
2020). Therefore, in an effort to address this gap in the IS literature, this study incorporates a new construct of
“sociability quality” (i.e. adapted from Kreijns et al.’s (
2004,
2007, 2002) concept of sociability for CSCL systems) in the DeLone and McLean’s (
2003) updated IS success model, to explore the success factors of a WBCLIS. In this context, this study argues that, sociability component (i.e. sociability quality) is as much important, for a WBCLIS, as are it’s other components, related to system quality or information quality etc. Following section presents more details, regarding major constructs involved in this study, along with hypotheses development and proposed theoretical model, for assessing the sociability quality of a WBCLIS.