Authors retain the copyright without restrictions for their published content in this journal. HSSR is a SHERPA ROMEO Green Journal.
Publishing License
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of
STUDENT AND TEACHER PERSPECTIVES ON FACTORS TO SUCCESS AND ATTRITION IN ENGINEERING MINI-MOOC USING TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE MODEL (TAM)
Corresponding Author(s) : Gwyneth Ka Yee Lee
Humanities & Social Sciences Reviews,
Vol. 7 No. 1 (2019): January
Abstract
Purpose: To keep abreast of the latest educational development and to enrich student learning. Vocational Training Council (VTC) is among the first vocational institutions in Hong Kong for piloting massive open online courses (MOOCs) (which are being referred as mini-MOOCs here) on various disciplines. This paper examines one of the mini-MOOCs we have developed for the Engineering discipline. The aim of this study is to gather information and investigate the influencing factors that contribute to the success and attrition in the Engineering mini-MOOC.
Methodology: These insights come from the empirical study conducted in a mini-MOOC titled “Unauthorized Buildings Works†(UBWs), which was being implemented as a blended activity in the module. Two groups of second-year students from the higher diploma in construction were selected to participate in non-MOOC (i.e., the control group) and MOOC (i.e., the experimental group) classes over two years. The mini-MOOC subjects were invited to complete questionnaires and attend a focus group interview upon completion of the activity.
Main Findings: The analysis yielded striking results, which led to a discussion on the contributing factors to success and attrition in the Engineering mini-MOOC using Technology Acceptance Model (TAM).
Implications: Due to limited resources in the research, the methods of data collection were different over two years of study. An implication of this is that an enhanced methodology is needed to determine the academic effectiveness of the mini-MOOC and achieve the consistency of the findings.
Novelty/Originality: The present study contributes to significant findings in how TAM factors and external variables influenced the usage of mini-MOOC from the perspectives of both learners and teachers.
Keywords
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)BibTeX
- Ajzen, I. (1991). The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organization Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Academic Press, Inc. 179-211. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
- Are you ready to teach online? readiness surveys aim to help faculty prepare. (June 22, 2015). Retrieved February 22, 2018, from https://onlinelearninginsights.wordpress.com/tag/teacher-readiness-surveys/
- Badri, M., Al Rashedi, A., Yang, G., Mohaidat, J., & Al Hammadi, A. (2014). Technology readiness of school teachers: An empirical study of measurement and segmentation. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, Volume 13, pp. 257 - 275. DOI: https://doi.org/10.28945/2082
- Bagozzi, R. P., Davis, F. D., & Warshaw, P. R. (July 1, 1992). Development and test of a theory of technological learning and usage. Human Relations, Vol 45(Issue 7), pp. 659 - 686. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/001872679204500702
- Carlos, A., Iria, E., Mar, P., Carlos Delgado, K., & Carmen, F. (May, 2017). Understanding learners’ motivation and learning strategies in MOOCs. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, Volume 18(Number 3), pp. 119 - 137. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i3.2996
- Davis, F. D. (September 1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, Vol. 13(No. 3), pp. 319 - 340. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
- Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), pp. 982 – 1003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982
- Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, Mass; Don Mills, Ontario: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.
- Kumar, N., Rose, R. C., & D’Silva, J. L. (2008). Teachers’ readiness to use technology in the classroom: An empirical study. European Journal of Scientific Research, Vol.21(No.4), pp. 603 - 616.
- Lai, P. (Jan/Apr., 2017). The literature review of technology adoption models and theories for the novelty technology. Journal of Information Systems and Technology Management, Vol. 14(No. 1), pp. 21 - 38. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4301/S1807-17752017000100002
- Milligan, C., & Littlejohn, A. (April 2017). Why study on a MOOC? the motives of students and professionals. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, Volume 18(Number 2), pp. 92 - 102. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i2.3033
- Padmavathi, M. (December 2015 - February 2016). A study of student-teachers' readiness to use computers in teaching: An empirical study. Journal on School Educational Technology, Vol. 11(No. 3), pp. 29 - 39. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26634/jsch.11.3.4788
- Rai, L., & Deng, C. (April 2016). Influencing factors of success and failure in MOOC and general analysis of learner behavior. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, Vol. 6(No. 4), pp. 262 - 268. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7763/IJIET.2016.V6.697
- Rogers, E.M. (1995). Diffusion of Innovations. 4th ed., New York: The Free Press.
- Sarkar, N., Ford, W., & Manzo, C. (2017). Engaging digital natives through social learning. Journal of Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, 15(2), pp. 1 - 4.
- Taylor, S. and Todd, P. A. (1995). Understanding Information Technology Usage: A Test of Competing Models. Information Systems Research, 6, 144-176. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.6.2.144
- Venkatesh, V. and Bala, H. (2008). Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions. Decision Science, 39 (2), 273-312. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x
- Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies. Management Science, 46 (2), 186-204. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926
References
Ajzen, I. (1991). The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organization Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Academic Press, Inc. 179-211. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
Are you ready to teach online? readiness surveys aim to help faculty prepare. (June 22, 2015). Retrieved February 22, 2018, from https://onlinelearninginsights.wordpress.com/tag/teacher-readiness-surveys/
Badri, M., Al Rashedi, A., Yang, G., Mohaidat, J., & Al Hammadi, A. (2014). Technology readiness of school teachers: An empirical study of measurement and segmentation. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, Volume 13, pp. 257 - 275. DOI: https://doi.org/10.28945/2082
Bagozzi, R. P., Davis, F. D., & Warshaw, P. R. (July 1, 1992). Development and test of a theory of technological learning and usage. Human Relations, Vol 45(Issue 7), pp. 659 - 686. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/001872679204500702
Carlos, A., Iria, E., Mar, P., Carlos Delgado, K., & Carmen, F. (May, 2017). Understanding learners’ motivation and learning strategies in MOOCs. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, Volume 18(Number 3), pp. 119 - 137. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i3.2996
Davis, F. D. (September 1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, Vol. 13(No. 3), pp. 319 - 340. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), pp. 982 – 1003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, Mass; Don Mills, Ontario: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.
Kumar, N., Rose, R. C., & D’Silva, J. L. (2008). Teachers’ readiness to use technology in the classroom: An empirical study. European Journal of Scientific Research, Vol.21(No.4), pp. 603 - 616.
Lai, P. (Jan/Apr., 2017). The literature review of technology adoption models and theories for the novelty technology. Journal of Information Systems and Technology Management, Vol. 14(No. 1), pp. 21 - 38. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4301/S1807-17752017000100002
Milligan, C., & Littlejohn, A. (April 2017). Why study on a MOOC? the motives of students and professionals. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, Volume 18(Number 2), pp. 92 - 102. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i2.3033
Padmavathi, M. (December 2015 - February 2016). A study of student-teachers' readiness to use computers in teaching: An empirical study. Journal on School Educational Technology, Vol. 11(No. 3), pp. 29 - 39. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26634/jsch.11.3.4788
Rai, L., & Deng, C. (April 2016). Influencing factors of success and failure in MOOC and general analysis of learner behavior. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, Vol. 6(No. 4), pp. 262 - 268. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7763/IJIET.2016.V6.697
Rogers, E.M. (1995). Diffusion of Innovations. 4th ed., New York: The Free Press.
Sarkar, N., Ford, W., & Manzo, C. (2017). Engaging digital natives through social learning. Journal of Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, 15(2), pp. 1 - 4.
Taylor, S. and Todd, P. A. (1995). Understanding Information Technology Usage: A Test of Competing Models. Information Systems Research, 6, 144-176. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.6.2.144
Venkatesh, V. and Bala, H. (2008). Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions. Decision Science, 39 (2), 273-312. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies. Management Science, 46 (2), 186-204. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926