1,379
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
INFORMATION & COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY IN EDUCATION

Determinants of e-Learning Services: Indonesian Open University

, , ORCID Icon, , , & show all
Article: 2183703 | Received 05 Jan 2023, Accepted 17 Feb 2023, Published online: 05 Mar 2023

References

  • Abdullah, F., Ward, R., & Ahmed, E. (2016). Investigating the influence of the most commonly used external variables of TAM on students’ Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU) and Perceived Usefulness (PU) of e-portfolios. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 75–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.014
  • 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
  • Akter, S., Fosso Wamba, S., & Dewan, S. (2017). Why PLS-SEM is suitable for complex modelling? An empirical illustration in big data analytics quality. Production Planning and Control, 28(11–12), 1011–1021. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2016.1267411
  • Alalwan, A. A., Baabdullah, A. M., Rana, N. P., Tamilmani, K., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2018). Examining adoption of mobile Internet in Saudi Arabia: Extending TAM with perceived enjoyment, innovativeness and trust. Technology in Society, 55, 100–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2018.06.007
  • Amka, A., & Dalle, J. (2022). The Satisfaction of the Special Need’ Students with E-Learning Experience During COVID-19 Pandemic: A Case of Educational Institutions in Indonesia. Contemporary Educational Technology, 14(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/11371
  • Aristeidou, M., & Cross, S. (2021). Disrupted distance learning: The impact of Covid-19 on study habits of distance learning university students. Open Learning, 36(3), 263–282. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2021.1973400
  • Baber, H. (2020). Determinants of students’ perceived learning outcome and satisfaction in online learning during the pandemic of COVID-19. Journal of Education and e-learning Research, 7(3), 285–292. https://doi.org/10.20448/journal.509.2020.73.285.292
  • Baber, H. (2021a). Modelling the acceptance of e-learning during the pandemic of COVID-19-A study of South Korea. The International Journal of Management Education, 19(2), 100503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2021.100503
  • Baber, H. (2021b). Social interaction and effectiveness of the online learning–A moderating role of maintaining social distance during the pandemic COVID-19. Asian Education and Development Studies, 11(1), 159–171. https://doi.org/10.1108/AEDS-09-2020-0209
  • Benbasat, I., & Barki, H. (2007). Quo vadis, TAM? Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(4), 211–218. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00126
  • Bubou, G. M., & Job, G. C. (2022). Individual innovativeness, self-efficacy and e-learning readiness of students of Yenagoa study centre, National Open University of Nigeria. Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning, 15(1), 2–22. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIT-12-2019-0079
  • Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56(2), 81–105. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046016
  • Chang, C. C., Liang, C., & Chiu, Y. C. (2020). Direct or indirect effects from “perceived characteristic of innovation” to “intention to pay”: Mediation of continuance intention to use e-learning. Journal of Computers in Education, 7(4), 511–530. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-020-00165-6
  • Chicco, D., Warrens, M. J., & Jurman, G. (2021). The coefficient of determination R-squared is more informative than SMAPE, MAE, MAPE, MSE and RMSE in regression analysis evaluation. PeerJ Computer Science, 7, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.7717/PEERJ-CS.623
  • Chuttur, M. (2009). Overview of the technology acceptance model: Origins, developments and future directions. Sprouts: Working Papers on Information Systems, 9(37), 9–37. https://aisel.aisnet.org/sprouts_all/290/
  • Darren, G., & Paul, M. (1999). SPSS for windows step by step: A simple guide and reference. Pearson Education.
  • Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 13(3), 319–339. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
  • Davis, R. S., & Stazyk, E. C. (2017). Putting the methodological cart before the theoretical horse? examining the application of SEM to connect theory and method in public administration research. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 37(2), 202–218. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X17704268
  • Dijkstra, T. K., & Henseler, J. (2015). Consistent and asymptotically normal PLS estimators for linear structural equations. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, 81, 10–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csda.2014.07.008
  • Drigas, A., Dede, D. E., & Dedes, S. (2020). Mobile and other applications for mental imagery to improve learning disabilities and mental health. International Journal of Computer Science, 17(4), 18–23. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3987533
  • Evans, J. R., & Mathur, A. (2005). The value of online surveys. Internet Research, 15(2), 195–219. https://doi.org/10.1108/10662240510590360
  • Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312
  • Franke, G., & Sarstedt, M. (2019). Heuristics versus statistics in discriminant validity testing: A comparison of four procedures. Internet Research, 29(3). https://doi.org/10.1108/IntR-12-2017-0515
  • Gao, H., Ou, Y., Zhang, Z., Ni, M., Zhou, X., & Liao, L. (2021). The relationship between family support and e-learning engagement in college students: The mediating role of e-learning normative consciousness and behaviors and self-efficacy. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.573779
  • Gómez-Ramirez, I., Valencia-Arias, A., & Duque, L. (2019). Approach to M-learning acceptance among university students: An integrated model of TPB and TAM. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 20(3), 141–164. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v20i4.4061
  • Habibi, A., Riady, Y., Al-Adwan, A. S., & Albelbisi, N. A. (2022). Beliefs and knowledge for pre-service teachers’ technology integration during teaching practice: An extended theory of planned behavior. Computers in the Schools, 0(0), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2022.2124752
  • Habibi, A., Yaakob, M. F. M., Mukminin, A., Muhaimin, M., Prasojo, L. D., Yusop, F. D., & Muzakkir, M. (2021). Teachers’ digital technology access to motivation, skills and use: A structural equation modeling study. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 73(4), 543–559. https://doi.org/10.1108/ajim-11-2020-0382
  • Hair, J., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2022). PLS-SEM book: A Primer on PLS-SEM (3rd Ed.). Sage Publication.
  • Hanham, J., Lee, C. B., & Teo, T. (2021). The influence of technology acceptance, academic self-efficacy, and gender on academic achievement through online tutoring. Computers and Education, 172, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104252
  • Hassenburg, A. (2009). Distance education versus the traditional classroom. Berkeley Scientific Journal, 13(1), 7–10. https://doi.org/10.5070/bs3131007609
  • Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modelling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
  • Hsu, H., & Chang, Y. (2013). Extended TAM model: Impacts of Convenience on Acceptance and Use of Moodle. US-China Education Review A, 3(4), 211–218.https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED542974
  • Hwang, S., & Kim, H. K. (2022). Development and validation of the e-learning satisfaction scale (eLSS). Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 00, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.teln.2022.02.004
  • ICEI. (2022). ICE institute. https://icei.ac.id/tracks/about/
  • Jawad, Y. A. L. A., & Shalash, B. (2020). The Impact of E-Learning Strategy on Students’ Academic Achievement Case Study: Al-Quds Open University. International Journal of Higher Education, 9(6), 44–53. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v9n6p44
  • Kabir, K. H., Hassan, F., Mukta, M. Z. N., Roy, D., Darr, D., Leggette, H., & Ullah, S. M. A. (2022). Application of the technology acceptance model to assess the use and preferences of ICTs among field-level extension officers in Bangladesh. Digital Geography and Society, 3, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diggeo.2022.100027
  • Kawaguchi-Suzuki, M., Nagai, N., Akonoghrere, R. O., & Desborough, J. A. (2020). COVID-19 pandemic challenges and lessons learned by pharmacy educators around the globe. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 84(8), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe8197
  • Lang, G., & Hofer-Fischanger, K. (2022). Factors associated with the implementation of health-promoting telework from the perspective of company decision makers after the first COVID-19 lockdown. Journal of Public Health, 00, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10389-022-01717-z
  • Lorah, J. (2018). Effect size measures for multilevel models: Definition, interpretation, and TIMSS example. Large-Scale Assessments in Education, 6(8), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-018-0061-2
  • Lynn, M. R. (1986). Determination and quantification of content validity. Nursing Research, 35(6), 382–386.https://doi.org/10.1097/00006199-198611000-00017
  • Mallya, J., Lakshminarayanan, S., & Payini, V. (2019). Self-efficacy as an antecedent to students’ behavioral intention to use the Internet for academic purposes: A structural equation modeling approach. Library Philosophy and Practice, 3055, 1–13.https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/3055/
  • Manley, S. C., Hair, J. F., Williams, R. I., & McDowell, W. C. (2020). Essential new PLS-SEM analysis methods for your entrepreneurship analytical toolbox. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 17, 1805–1825. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-020-00687-6
  • Md Noor, S., Rasoolimanesh, S. M., Jaafar, M., & Barghi, R. (2019). Inscription of a destination as a world heritage site and residents’ perceptions. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 24(1), 14–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2018.1541183
  • Moore, M. G., & Ve Kearsley, G. (2012). Distance education: A systems view of online learning. Educational Review, 72(6), 800. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2020.1766204
  • Muhaimin, H., Mukminin, A., Pratama, A., Asrial, R., & Harja, H. (2019). Predicting factors affecting intention to use web 2.0 in learning: Evidence from science education. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 18(4), 595–606. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/19.18.595
  • Mutambara, D., & Bayaga, A. (2021). Determinants of mobile learning acceptance for STEM education in rural areas. Computers and Education, 160, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104010
  • Nikou, S. A., & Economides, A. A. (2019). Factors that influence behavioral intention to use mobile-based assessment: A STEM teachers’ perspective. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(2), 587–600. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12609
  • Palos-Sanchez, P. R., Robina-Ramirez, R., & Velicia-Martin, F. (2019). What role does corporate governance play in the intention to use cloud computing technology? Symmetry, 11(10), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11101253
  • Pangarso, A., & Setyorini, R. (2023). The drivers of E-learning satisfaction during the early COVID-19 pandemic: Empirical evidence from an Indonesian private university. Cogent Education, 10(1), 2149226. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2149226
  • Panjaburee, P., Komalawardhana, N., & Ingkavara, T. (2022). Acceptance of personalized e-learning systems: A case study of concept-effect relationship approach on science, technology, and mathematics courses. Journal of Computers in Education, 00, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-021-00216-6
  • Prasetyanto, D., Rizki, M., & Sunitiyoso, Y. (2022). Online learning participation intention after COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia: Do students still make trips for online class? Sustainability, 14(4), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14041982
  • Pregowska, A., Masztalerz, K., Garlińska, M., & Osial, M. (2021). A worldwide journey through distance education—from the post office to virtual, augmented and mixed realities, and education during the covid-19 pandemic. Education Sciences, 11(3), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11030118
  • Racero, F. J., Bueno, S., & Gallego, M. D. (2020). Predicting students’ behavioral intention to use open source software: A combined view of the technology acceptance model and self-determination theory. Applied Sciences, 10(8), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.3390/APP10082711
  • Rejón-Guardia, F., Polo-Peña, A. I., & Maraver-Tarifa, G. (2020). The acceptance of a personal learning environment based on Google apps: The role of subjective norms and social image. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 32(2), 203–233. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-019-09206-1
  • Ritzhaupt, A. (2019). Measuring learner satisfaction in self-paced e-learning environments: Validation of the electronic learner satisfaction scale (eLSS). International Journal on E-Learning, 18(3), 279–299.https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/178466/
  • Rizun, M., & Strzelecki, A. (2020). Students’ acceptance of the covid-19 impact on shifting higher education to distance learning in Poland. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(18). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17186468
  • Romo-González, J. R., Tarango, J., & Machin-Mastromatteo, J. D. (2018). PLS SEM, a quantitative methodology to test theoretical models from library and information science. Information Development, 34(5), 526–531. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266666918795025
  • Sabah, N. M. (2016). Exploring students’ awareness and perceptions: Influencing factors and individual differences driving m-learning adoption. Computers in Human Behavior, 65, 522–533. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.09.009
  • Santoso, H. B., Riyanti, R. D., Prastati, T., Susanty, A., & Yang, M. (2022). Learners’ Online Self-Regulated Learning Skills in Indonesia Open University: Implications for Policies and Practice. Education Sciences, 12(7), 469. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12070469
  • Saxena, C., Baber, H., & Kumar, P. (2021). Examining the moderating effect of perceived benefits of maintaining social distance on e-learning quality during COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 49(4), 532–554. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239520977798
  • Sewandono, R. E., Thoyib, A., Hadiwidjojo, D., & Rofiq, A. (2022). Performance expectancy of E-learning on higher institutions of education under uncertain conditions: Indonesia context. Education and Information Technologies, 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11074-9
  • Shmueli, G., Sarstedt, M., Hair, J. F., Cheah, J. H., Ting, H., Vaithilingam, S., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). Predictive model assessment in PLS-SEM: Guidelines for using PLSpredict. European Journal of Marketing, 53(11), 2322–2347. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-02-2019-0189
  • Sukendro, S., Habibi, A., Khaeruddin, K., Indrayana, B., Syahruddin, S., Makadada, F. A., & Hakim, H. (2020). Using an extended Technology Acceptance Model to understand students’ use of e-learning during Covid-19: Indonesian sport science education context. Heliyon, 6(11), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05410
  • Syahruddin, S., Mohd Yaakob, M. F., Rasyad, A., Widodo, A. W., Sukendro, S., Suwardi, S., Lani, A., Sari, L. P., Mansur, M., Razali, R., & Syam, A. (2021). Students’ acceptance to distance learning during Covid-19: The role of geographical areas among Indonesian sports science students. Heliyon, 7(9), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e08043
  • Teo, T., Sang, G., Mei, B., & Hoi, C. K. W. (2019). Investigating pre-service teachers’ acceptance of Web 2.0 technologies in their future teaching: A Chinese perspective. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(4), 530–546. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1489290
  • UT. (2022a). Perpustakaan digital universitas terbuka. https://pustaka.ut.ac.id/lib/
  • UT. (2022b). e-learning UT. https://elearning.ut.ac.id/
  • UT. (2022c). UT dry lab. https://www.ut.ac.id/drylab/drylab/index.html
  • UT. (2022d). Latihan madiri UT. https://lm.ut.ac.id/
  • 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: Management Information Systems, 32(3), 483–502. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148853
  • Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). 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: Management Information Systems, 27(3), 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
  • Venkatesh, V., & Speier, C. (1999). Computer technology training in the workplace: A longitudinal investigation of the effect of mood. Organizational Behavior And Human Decision Processes, 79(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1999.2837
  • Wang, M., Ran, W., Liao, J., & Yang, S. J. H. (2010). A performance-oriented approach to e-learning in the workplace. Educational Technology and Society, 13(4), 167–179.https://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.13.4.167
  • Zaman, U., Aktan, M., Baber, H., & Nawaz, S. (2021). Does forced-shift to online learning affect university brand image in South Korea? Role of perceived harm and international students’ learning engagement. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, (Online), 0(0), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/08841241.2021.1998285
  • Zardari, B. A., Hussain, Z., Arain, A. A., Rizvi, W. H., & Vighio, M. S. (2021). Development and validation of user experience-based e-learning acceptance model for sustainable higher education. Sustainability, 13(11), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13116201
  • Zaugg, H., Graham, C. R., Lim, C. P., & Wang, T. (2021). Current and future directions of blended learning and teaching in Asia. In C. P. Lim & C. R. Graham. Eds. Blended learning for inclusive and quality higher education in Asia (pp. 301–327). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-4106-7_16