nach oben

Education and Information Technologies

Erschienen in:

11.08.2020

Electrical/electronics technology education teachers attitude, engagement, and disposition towards actual usage of Mobile learning in higher institutions

verfasst von: Taiwo Olabanji Shodipe, Ifeanyi Benedict Ohanu

Erschienen in: Education and Information Technologies | Ausgabe 1/2021

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

The conventional teaching methods like the use of demonstration, lecture and project methods in teaching skilled/trade subjects is still persistent among higher institutions in Nigeria, therefore, this study examined Electrical/Electronics technology education teachers attitude, engagement and disposition towards actual usage of mobile learning in higher institutions. The sample for the study comprised 418 electrical/electronics technology education teachers using cluster sampling technique to select samples from higher institutions in three states in the geo-political zone. Data analysis was done with exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis. The study found out that teacher’s perceived ease of use significantly have positive direct link on actual usage of ML, teacher’s disposition positively linked with perceived ease of use, teacher’s psychological well-being and perceived usefulness positive linked while technical/technology teacher’s training linked negatively with perceived ease of use of ML. Extending TAM robustness, the study affirmed that technical teacher education training and psychological well-being are factors that could influence perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness towards actual usage of mobile learning.

Vorheriger Artikel The effect of E-books on Preservice student teachers’ achievement and perceptions in the United Arab Emirates

Nächster Artikel Pre-adolescents’ digital competences in the area of safety. Does frequency of social media use mean safer and more knowledgeable digital usage?

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Aggelidis, V., & Chatzoglou, P. (2009). Using a modified technology acceptance model in hospitals. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 78(2), 115–126.

Agolla, J. E., Monametsi, G. L., & Phera, P. (2019). Antecedents of entrepreneurial intentions amongst business students in a tertiary institution. Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 13(2), 138–152.

Aldunate, R., & Nussbaum, M. (2013). Teacher adoption of technology. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 519–524.

Aljuaid, N. M. F., Alzahrani, M. A. R., & Islam, A. Y. M. A. (2014). Assessing mobile learning readiness in Saudi Arabia higher education: An empirical study. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Technology, 2(2), 1–14.

Alrajawy, I., Isaac, O., Ghosh, A., Nusari, M., Al-Shibami, A. H., & Ameen, A. A. (2018). Determinants of student’s intention to use mobile learning in Yemeni public universities: Extending the technology acceptance model (TAM) with anxiety. International Journal of Management and Human Science, 2(2), 1–9.

Armentano, M. G., Christensen, I., & Schiaffino, S. (2015). Applying the Technology Acceptance Model to Evaluation of Recommender Systems. Polibits, 51, 73–79. https://doi.org/10.17562/PB-51-10

Arning, K., & Ziefle, M. (2007). Understanding age differences in PDA acceptance and performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(6), 2904–2927.

Baard, P. P., Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2004). Intrinsic need satisfaction: A motivational basis of performance and well-being in two work settings. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34, 2045–2068.

Bech, P. (2004). Measuring the dimension of psychological general well-being by the WHO-5119. Quality of Life Newsletter., 32, 15–16.

Bentler, P. M. (1992). On the fit of models to covariances and methodology to the bulletin. Psychological Bulletin, 112(3), 400–404.

Bhattacherjee, A. (2001). Understanding information systems continuance: An expectation-confirmation model. MIS Quarterly, 25(3), 351–370.

Bozionelos, N. (2001). Computer anxiety: Relationship with computer experience and prevalence. Computers in Human Behavior, 17, 213–224.

Buli, M. B., & Yesuf, W. M. (2015). Determinants of entrepreneurial intentions: Technical-vocational education and training students in Ethiopia. Education+Training, 57(8/9), 891–907.

Byrne, B. M. (2001). Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Chen, H. R., & Tseng, H. F. (2012). Factors that influence acceptance of web-based e-learning systems for the in-service education of junior high school teachers in Taiwan. Evaluation and Program Planning, 35(3), 398–406.

Cher, P. L., & Daniel, C. (2016). Mobile learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(2), 273–276.

Chi-Cheng, C., Chi-Fang, Y., & Ju-Shih, T. (2012). Perceived convenience in an extended technology acceptance model: Mobile technology and English learning for college students. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(5), 809–826.

Chua, S. L., Chen, D., & Wong, A. F. L. (1999). Computer anxiety and its correlates: A meta – Analysis. Computers in Human Behaviour, 15, 609–623.

Chuttur, M, Y. (2009). Overview of the technology acceptance model: Origins, development and future directions. Indiana University, USA. Sprouts: Working Papers on Information Systems, 9(37). http://sprouts.aisnet.org/9-37

Davis, F. (1985). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new and end – User information systems: Theory and results. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, MIT sloan School of Management, Cambridge, MA.

Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–339.

De Smet, C., Bourgonjon, J., De Wever, B., Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2012). Researching instructional use and the technology acceptation of learning management systems by secondary school teachers. Computers & Education, 58, 688–696.

DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (2003). The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: A ten-year update. Journal of Management Information Systems, 19(4), 9–30.

Donaldson, R, L. (2011). Student acceptance of mobile learning. (unpublished doctoral dissertation). Florida State University, USA. Retrieved from http://www.rdonaldson.com/wpcontent/uploads/2011/05/Donaldson_R_Dissertation_2011.pdfretrieved on the 2nd may, 2020.

Dowson, M., & McInerney, D. M. (2003). What do students say about their motivational goals? Towards a more complex and dynamic perspective on student motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28, 91–113.

Ertmer, P. A., & Orrenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs and culture intersect. Journal of Research and Technology in Education, 42, 255–284.

Ertmer, P. A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A., Sadik, A., Sendurur, E., & Sendurur, P. (2012). Teacher beliefs and technology integration practices: A critical relationship. Computers & Education, 59(2), 423–435.

Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.

Gan, C. L., & Balakrishnan, V. (2017). Enhancing classroom interaction via IMMAP – AnInteractive Mobile messaging app. Telematics and Informatics, 34(1), 230–243.

Hair, J, F., Black, W, C., Babin, B, J., Anderson, R, E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis, a global perspective (7th ed.). New Jersey, USA: Pearson Education Inc.

Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2018). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1) 2–24. https://doi.org/10.1108/ebr-11-2018-0203

Honan, E. (2010). Mapping discourses in teachers’ talk about using digital texts in classrooms. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education., 31(2), 179–193.

Hortsch, H. (1999). Analysis the technical teacher training in Ethiopia. A study conducted in Nazareth technical College in Ethiopia. Dresden: Technical University of Dresden.

Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55.

Huang, J. H., Lin, Y. R., & Chuang, S. T. (2007). Elucidating user behavior of mobile learning: A perspective of the extended technology acceptance model. Electronic Library, 25(5), 585–598.

Hulland, J. (1999). Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: a review of four recent studies. Strategic Management Journal, 20(2), 195–204. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199902)20:2<195::aid-smj13>3.0.co;2-7

Johnson, S., Cooper, C., Cartwright, S., Donald, I., Taylor, P., & Millet, C. (2005). The experience of work-related stress across occupations. Journal of Management Psychology, 20, 178–187.

Johnson, A. M., Jacovina, M. E., Russell, D. E., & Soto, C. M. (2016). Challenges and solutions when using technologies in the classroom. In S. A. Crossley & D. S. McNamara (Eds.), Adaptive educational technologies for literacy instruction (pp. 13–29). New York: Taylor & Francis.

Jöreskog, K., & Söbom, D. (2001). LISREL: User’s reference guide. Lincolnwood, IL: SSI Inc.

Kokkinos, C. (2007). Job stressors, personality and burn-out in primary school teachers. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 229–243.

Lai, P. C. (2017). The literature review of technology adoption models and theories for the novelty technology. Journal of Information Systems and Technology Management, 14(1), 21–38.

Lankshear, C., Snyder, I., & Green, B. (2000). Teachers and techno-literacy: Managing literacy, technology and learning in schools. St Leonards NSW: Allen and Unwin.

Liaw, S. S. (2008). Investigating students’ perceived satisfaction, behavioral intention, and effectiveness of e-learning: A case study of the blackboard system. Computers & Education, 51(2), 864–873.

Lomax, R, G., Schumacker, R, E. (2012). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling. Routledge Academic New York, NY.

Lowry, P. B., & Gaskin, J. (2014). Partial least squares (PLS) structural equation modeling (SEM) for building and testing behavioral causal theory: When to choose it and how to use it. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 57(2), 123–146.

Lu, C. S., Shang, K. C., & Lin, C. C. (2016b). Examining sustainability performance at ports: Port managers’ perspectives on developing sustainable supply chains. Maritime Policy & Management, 43(8), 909–927.

Lu, C. S., Shang, K. C., & Lin, C. C. (2016c). Identifying crucial sustainability assessment criteria for container seaports. Maritime Business Review, 1(2), 90–106.

Mac Callum, K. (2010). Attitudes of educators to the introduction of mobile technology. Paper presented at the 1st annual conference of Computing and Information Technology Research and Education New Zealand (CITRENZ2010), Dunedin, New Zealand.

Mac Callum, K., & Jeffrey, L. (2013). The influence of students’ ICT skills and their adoption of mobile learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 29(3), 303–314.

Mac Callum, K., & Jeffrey, L. K. (2014). Factors impacting teachers’ adoption of mobile learning. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research., 13, 141–162.

Mahar, D., Henderson, R., & Deane, F. (1997). The effects of computer anxiety, state anxiety, and computer experience on users’ performance of computer based tasks. Personality and Individual Differences, 22(5), 683–692.

Mao, J. (2017). Digital citizenship: From compliance to culture. The Journal. Retrieved from https://thejournal.com/articles/2017/10/26/digital-citizenship-from-compliance-to-culture.aspx?m=1 on the 7th may, 2020.

McInerney, D. M., Maehr, M. L., & Dowson, M. (2004). Motivation and culture. In C. D. Spielberger (Ed.), Encyclopaedia of applied psychology (Vol. 2). St Louis, MO: Elsevier.

McInerney, D. M., Korpershoek, H., Wang, H., & Morin, A. J. (2018). Teachers’ occupational attributes and their psychological wellbeing, job satisfaction, occupational self-concept and quitting intentions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 71, 145–158.

Namdeo, S. K., & Rout, S. D. (2016). Calculating and interpreting Cronbach’s alpha using Rosenberg assessment scale on paediatrician’s attitude and perception on self – Esteem. International Journal of Community Medicine and Public Health, 3(6), 1371–1374.

National Education Association (2008). Technology in schools: The ongoing challenge of access, adequacy and equity. Washington, DC: NEA policy and practice department. Retrieved from http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/PB19_Technology08.pdf on the 3rd May, 2020.

Ohanu, I. B., & Chukwuone, C. A. (2018). Constraints to the use of online platform for teaching and learning technical education in developing countries. Education and Information Technologies, 23(6), 3029–3045. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9757-8.CrossRef

Ong, C. S., & Lai, J. Y. (2006). Gender differences in perceptions and relationships among dominants of e-learning acceptance. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(5), 816–829.

Park, S. Y., Nam, M. W., & Cha, S. B. (2011). University students’ behavioral intention to use mobile learning: Evaluating the technology acceptance model. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(4), 592–605.

Pillay, H. K., Goddard, R., & Wilss, L. A. (2005). Well-being, burnout and competence: Implications for teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 30(2), 22–33.

Roschelle, J. (2003). Unlocking the learning value of wireless mobile devices. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning., 19(3), 260–272.

Ryan, R. M., & Connell, J. P. (1989). Perceived locus of causality and internalization: Examining reasons for acting in two domains. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 749–761.

Saadé, R. G., & Kira, D. (2009). Computer anxiety in e-learning: The effect of computer self-efficacy. Journal of Information Technology Education, 8, 177–191.

Sam, H. K., Othman, A. E. A., & Nordin, Z. S. (2005). Computer self-efficacy, computer anxiety, and attitudes toward the internet: A study among undergraduates in Unimas. Educational Technology & Society, 8(4), 205–219.

Sánchez-Prieto, J, C., Olmos Migueláñez, S., García-Peñalvo, F, J. (2017). Assessment of the disposition of future secondary education teachers towards mobile learning. In J. M. Dodero, M. S. Ibarra Sáiz, & I. Ruiz Rube (Eds.), Fifth International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality (TEEM’17) (Cádiz, Spain, October 18–20, 2017) (article 27). New York, NY, USA: ACM.

Sandholtz, J. H., & Reilly, B. (2004). Teachers not technicians: Rethinking technical expectations for teachers. Teachers College Record, 106(3), 487–512.

Shahbaz, H., Hafia, H. N., Farrukh, S., Zeeshan, F., & Zainul, A. (2014). An empirical investigation of entrepreneurial intentions among business students of Pakistan. Studia Universitatis Babeș-Bolyai Oeconomica, 59(2), 68–80.

Shroff, R. H., Deneen, C. C., & Ng, E. M. W. (2011). Analysis of the technology acceptance model in examining students’ behavioural intention to use an e-portfolio system. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(4), 600–618.

Sinclair, C. (2008). Initial and changing student’s teacher motivation and commitment to teaching. Asia – Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 36(2), 79–104.

Smith, M., & Bourke, S. (1992). Teacher stress: Examining a model based on context, workload, and satisfaction. Teaching and Teacher Education, 8(1), 31–46.

Sørebø, Ø., Halvari, H., Gulli, V. F., & Kristiansen, R. (2009). The role of self-determination theory in explaining teachers’ motivation to continue to use e-learning technology. Computers &Education, 53(4), 1177–1187.

Stephens, K. R. (2019). Teacher dispositions and their impact on implementation of practices for the gifted. Gifted Child Today., 42(4), 197–195.

Stoeber, J., & Rennert, D. (2008). Perfectionism in school teachers: Relations with stress appraisals, coping styles, and burnout. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping, 21(1), 37–53.

Tabachnick, B., & Fidell, L. (2007). Multivariate analysis of variance and covariance. Using multivariate statistics, 3, 402–407.

Teven, J. (2007). Teacher temperament: Correlates with teacher caring, burnout, and organizational outcomes. Communication Education, 56(3), 382–400.

Tsai, T.-H., Lin, W.-Y., Chang, Y.-S., Chang, P.-C., & Lee, M.-Y. (2020). Technology anxiety and resistance to change behavioral study of a wearable cardiac warming system using an extended TAM for older adults. PLOS ONE, 15(1), e0227270. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0227270.

Tselios, N., Daskalakis, S., & Papadopoulou, M. (2011). Assessing the acceptance of a blended learning university course. Educational Technology & Society, 14(2), 224–235.

Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204.

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.

Wadlington, E., & Wadlington, P. (2011). Teacher dispositions: Implications for teacher education. Childhood Education, 87(5), 323–326.

Wang, M., Shen, R., Novak, D., & Pan, X. (2009). The impact of mobile learning on students’ learning behaviours and performance: Report from a large blended classroom. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(4), 673–695.

Wilfong, J. D. (2006). Computer anxiety and anger: The impact of computer use, computer experience, and self-efficacy beliefs. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(6), 1001–1011.

Wilkerson, J. R., & Lang, W. S. (2007). Assessing teacher dispositions: Five standards based steps to valid measurement using the DAATS model. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press.

Yang, C. S. (2016). Evaluating the use of alternative maritime power in Taiwan. Maritime Business Review, 1(3), 208–224.

Yeung, A. S., Taylor, P. G., Hui, C., Lam-Chiang, A. C., & Low, E.-L. (2011). Mandatory use of technology in teaching: Who cares and so what? British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(6), 859–870.

Yim, J. S., Moses, P., & Azalea, A. (2018). Effects of psychological ownership on teachers’ belief about a cloud – Based virtual learning environment. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning., 13(13), 1–19.

Yoo, S. J., Han, S. H., & Huang, W. (2012). The roles of intrinsic motivators and extrinsic motivators in promoting e-learning in the workplace: A case from South Korea. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(3), 942–950.

Zheng, J., Li, S., & Zheng, Y. (2017). Students’ technology acceptance, motivation and self – Efficacy towards the eSchoolbag: An exploratory study. International Journal for Infonomics, 10(3), 1350–1358.

Titel: Electrical/electronics technology education teachers attitude, engagement, and disposition towards actual usage of Mobile learning in higher institutions
verfasst von: Taiwo Olabanji Shodipe
Ifeanyi Benedict Ohanu
Publikationsdatum: 11.08.2020
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Education and Information Technologies / Ausgabe 1/2021
Print ISSN: 1360-2357
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-7608
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10297-y

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2021

A scoping review of Critical Predictive Factors (CPFs) of satisfaction and perceived learning outcomes in E-learning environments

The effect of computational thinking skill program design developed according to interest driven creator theory on prospective teachers

The effect of E-books on Preservice student teachers’ achievement and perceptions in the United Arab Emirates

A two-phase machine learning approach for predicting student outcomes

To study the impact of Google Classroom as a platform of learning and collaboration at the teacher education level

Development of a Java-based Mobile application for mathematics learning