MOOCs adoption in higher education: a management perspective

• Autorzy: Khalid Bilal , Chaveesuk Singha , Chaiyasoonthorn Wornchanok

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.17512/pjms.2021.23.1.15

Warianty tytułu

PL

Wykorzystanie “MOOC” w szkolnictwie wyższym: perspektywa zarządzania

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The purpose of this research is to investigate the factors affecting the Behavioral Intention (BI) to use Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) in Thailand. The study adopted the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) Model with an extension to include two variables of Perceived Autonomy (PA) and Absorptive Capacity (AC). The study has also investigated the moderating effects of Culture (CUL) on the relationship between the independent and dependent variables. The study was conducted using primary data collected from 490 respondents, who were university students and intended to use MOOCs. The study used structural equation modelling (SEM) to evaluate the relationship between study variables in AMOS 26. The findings of the study indicated that Perceived Autonomy (PA) was found to have a positive and significant effect on Behavioral intention to use MOOCs (BI); Facilitating Conditions (FCS) has a positive and significant effect on Behavioral intention to use MOOCs (BI). Absorptive capacity (AC) has a positive and significant effect on Behavioral intention to use MOOCs (BI); Social Influence (SI) has a positive and significant effect on Behavioral intention to use MOOCs (BI). However, the results indicated that Performance Expectancy (PE) and Effort Expectancy (EE) have a non-significant effect on BI. Additionally, Perceived Autonomy has a positive and significant effect on Performance Expectancy and Effort Expectancy. The results of interaction between Culture and independent variables (PE, EE, SI, FC, AC, & PA) indicated that CUL does not moderate any relationship with dependent variable (BI). This research is considered very critical during the period of COVID-19 pandemics, where most learning is being conducted online. Therefore, the policymakers in the education sector in Thailand, and the heads and management of institutions of higher learning could benefit from the findings of this research.

PL

Celem tego badania jest zbadanie czynników wpływających na intencję behawioralną (BI) do korzystania z Massive Open Online Courses (MOOC) w Tajlandii. W badaniu przyjęto Model Zunifikowanej Teorii Akceptacji i Wykorzystania Technologii (UTAUT) z rozszerzeniem o dwie zmienne: Postrzeganą Autonomię (PA) i Zdolności Absorpcyjne (AC). W badaniu zbadano również moderujący wpływ kultury (CUL) na związek między zmiennymi niezależnymi i zależnymi. Badanie zostało przeprowadzone na podstawie danych pierwotnych zebranych od 490 respondentów, którzy byli studentami uczelni i zamierzali korzystać z MOOC. W badaniu wykorzystano modelowanie równań strukturalnych (SEM) do oceny związku między badanymi zmiennymi w AMOS 26. Wyniki badania wykazały, że postrzegana autonomia (PA) ma pozytywny i istotny wpływ na behawioralny zamiar stosowania MOOC (BI). ; Warunki ułatwiające (FCS) mają pozytywny i znaczący wpływ na behawioralny zamiar korzystania z MOOC (BI). Zdolność absorpcyjna (AC) ma pozytywny i znaczący wpływ na behawioralny zamiar korzystania z MOOC (BI); Wpływ społeczny (SI) ma pozytywny i znaczący wpływ na behawioralny zamiar korzystania z MOOC (BI). Jednak wyniki wskazują, że oczekiwana wydajność (PE) i oczekiwana nakład pracy (EE) mają nieistotny wpływ na BI. Ponadto postrzegana autonomia ma pozytywny i znaczący wpływ na oczekiwaną wydajność i oczekiwany wysiłek. Wyniki interakcji między Kulturą a zmiennymi niezależnymi (PE, EE, SI, FC, AC i PA) wskazują, że CUL nie moderuje żadnego związku ze zmienną zależną (BI). Badanie to jest uważane za bardzo krytyczne w okresie pandemii COVID-19, kiedy większość nauki odbywa się online. Dlatego decydenci w sektorze edukacji w Tajlandii oraz dyrektorzy i kierownictwo instytucji szkolnictwa wyższego mogą skorzystać z wyników tych badań.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

behavioral intention; performance expectancy; effort expectancy; social influence; facilitating conditions

PL

intencja behawioralna; oczekiwana wydajność; oczekiwany wysiłek; wpływ społeczny

• Wydawca: Czestochowa University of Technology
• Czasopismo: Polish Journal of Management Studies
• Rocznik: 2021
• Tom: Vol. 23, No. 1
• Strony: 239--256
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 38 poz., rys., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Khalid Bilal

• KMITL Business School, Bangkok, Thailand

autor

Chaveesuk Singha

• KMITL Business School, Bangkok, Thailand

autor

Chaiyasoonthorn Wornchanok

• KMITL Business School, Bangkok, Thailand

Bibliografia

• 1.Alkhunaizan, A. M., Love, S., (2012). What drives mobile commerce? An empirical evaluation of the revised UTAUT model. International Journal of Management and Marketing Academy, 2(1), 82–99.
• 2.Baker, R., Evans, B. and Dee, T., (2016). A Randomized Experiment Testing the Efficacy of a Scheduling Nudge in a Massive Open Online Course (MOOC). AERA Open, 2(4), 233285841667400.
• 3.Bing Tan, P., (2013). Applying the UTAUT to Understand Factors Affecting the Use of English E-Learning Websites in Taiwan. SAGE Open, 1-12.
• 4.Cheok, M. L., Wong, S. L., (2015). Predictors of E-Learning Satisfaction in Teaching and Learning for School Teachers: A Literature Review. International Journal of Instruction, 8(1), 75–90.
• 5.Cohen, W. M., Levinthal, D. A., (1990). Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128.
• 6.Fornell, C., Larcker, D. F., (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.
• 7.García-Morales, V. J., Martín-Rojas, R. and Garde-Sánchez, R., (2019). How to Encourage Social Entrepreneurship Action? Using Web 2.0 Technologies in Higher Education Institutions. Journal of Business Ethics, 161(2), 329–350.
• 8.Grebski, W., Grebski, M., (2018). Keeping Higher Education Aligned with the Requirements and Expectations of the Knowledge-Based Economy. Production Engineering Archives, 21(21), 3–7.
• 9.Gupta, A., Dogra, N., (2017). Tourist Adoption of Mapping Apps: UTAUT2 Perspective of Smart Travellers. Tourism and Hospitality Management, 23(2), 145–161.
• 10.Hew, K. F., Cheung, W. S., (2014). Students’ and instructors’ use of massive open online courses (MOOCs): Motivations and challenges. Educational Research Review, 12, 45– 58.
• 11.Hofstede, G., (1980). Culture and Organizations. International Studies of Management & Organization, 10(4), 15–41.
• 12.Jeng, D. J. F., Tzeng, G. H., (2012). Social influence on the use of Clinical Decision Support Systems: Revisiting the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology by the fuzzy DEMATEL technique. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 62(3), 819– 828.
• 13.Joo, Y. J., Park, S. and Lim, E., (2018). Factors Influencing Preservice Teachers’ Intention to Use Technology: TPACK, Teacher Self-efficacy, and Technology Acceptance Model. Educational Technology & Society, 21(3), 48–59. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26458506
• 14.Jung, Y., Lee, J., (2018). Learning Engagement and Persistence in Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCS). Computers & Education, 122, 9–22.
• 15.Karnasuta, S., (2018). MOOCs in Thailand: An Investigation of Its Implication to Thai’s Higher Education. MOOCs in Thailand: An Investigation of Its Implication to Thai’s Higher Education. EEL 2018, Singapore.
• 16.Lakhal, S., Khechine, H. and Pascot, D., (2013). Student behavioural intentions to use desktop video conferencing in a distance course: integration of autonomy to the UTAUT model. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 25(2), 93–121.
• 17.Lathapipat, D., Sondergaard, L. M. & Jithitikulchai, T., (2015, June). Wanted - A Quality Education for All (No. AUS13333). World Bank. http://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/941121468113685895/pdf/AUS13333-WP-3Jun2015-P146230-TH-PUBLIC.pdf
• 18.Mayeh, M., Ramayah, T. and Mishra, A., (2016). The role of absorptive capacity, communication and trust in ERP adoption. Journal of Systems and Software, 119, 58– 69.
• 19.McGill, L., (2010, December 9). Open educational resources (OERs). Https://Www.Jisc.Ac.Uk/Full-Guide/Open-Educational-Resources. https://www.jisc.ac.uk/full-guide/open-educational-resources
• 20.Morosan, C., DeFranco, A., (2016). It’s about time: Revisiting UTAUT2 to examine consumers’ intentions to use NFC mobile payments in hotels. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 53, 17–29.
• 21.Nagy, S., Siemek, J., (2006). Virtual labs in Leonardo da Vinci “CELGAS” e-learning project. Acta Montanistica Slovaca, 11(1), 125–128.
• 22.Nasongkhla, J., Thammetar, T. and Chen, S.-H., (Eds.)., (2015). Thailand OERs and MOOCs country report. In MOOCs and Educational Challenges around Asia and Europe (pp. 121–135). KNOU Press.
• 23.Nordin, N., Norman, H. and Embi, M. A., (2016). Technology Acceptance of Massive Open Online Courses in Malaysia. Malaysian Journal of Distance Education, 17(2), 1– 16.
• 24.Rabaa’i, A. A., (2017). The use of UTAUT to investigate the adoption of e-government in Jordan: a cultural perspective. International Journal of Business Information Systems, 24(3), 285.
• 25.Sam, M. F. M., Baharin, S. N. F., (2018). The Factors Which Influencing Users’ Behavioral Intention Towards Using Online Booking System for Car Service at Car Service Centre in Malacca. COJ Electronics & Communications, 1(4), 1–7.
• 26.Schumacker, R. E., Lomax, R. G., (2010). A Beginner’s Guide to Structural Equation Modeling: Third Edition (3rd ed.). Routledge.
• 27.Scuotto, V., Del Giudice, M. and Carayannis, E. G., (2016). The effect of social networking sites and absorptive capacity on SMEs’ innovation performance. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 42(2), 409–424.
• 28.Sierens, E., Vansteenkiste, M., Goossens, L., Soenens, B. and Dochy, F., (2009). The synergistic relationship of perceived autonomy support and structure in the prediction of self-regulated learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(1), 57–68.
• 29.Sinaga, O., Lis, M. and Razimi, M.S.A., (2019) Education and core skills in the performance with mediating role of employee innovation. Polish Journal of Management Studies, 19(2), 363-373.
• 30.Stuss, M.M., Szczepańska-Woszczyna, K. and Makieła, Z.J., (2019). Competences of graduates of higher education business studies in labor market I (results of pilot cross-border research project in Poland and Slovakia). Sustainability, 11 (18), art. no. 4988.
• 31.Sung, H. N., Jeong, D. Y., Jeong, Y. S. and Shin, J. I., (2015). The relationship among self-efficacy, social influence, performance expectancy, effort expectancy, and behavioral intention in mobile learning service. International Journal of u-and e-Service, Science and Technology, 8(9), 197-206.
• 32.Venkatesh, Morris, Davis and Davis., (2003). User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425.
• 33.Weinhardt, J. M., Sitzmann, T., (2019). Revolutionizing training and education? Three questions regarding massive open online courses (MOOCs). Human Resource Management Review, 29(2), 218–225.
• 34.Yang, Q., (2014). Students Motivation in Asynchronous Online Discussions with MOOC Mode. American Journal of Educational Research, 2(5), 325–330.
• 35.Yi, M. Y., Jackson, J. D., Park, J. S. and Probst, J. C., (2006). Understanding information technology acceptance by individual professionals: Toward an integrative view. Information & Management, 43(3), 350–363.
• 36.Zahra, S. A., George, G., (2002). Absorptive Capacity: A Review, Reconceptualization, and Extension. Academy of Management Review, 27(2), 185–203.
• 37.Zainol, Z., Yahaya, N., Yahaya, N. A. M. and Zain, N. N. B. M., (2017). Factors Influencing Mobile Learning Among Higher Education Students in Malaysia. International Journal of Advanced Scientific Research and Management, 2(8), 86–91.
• 38.Zhenghao, C., Alcorn, B., Christensen, G., Eriksson, N., Koller, D. and E.J.E., (2015, September). Who’s Benefiting from MOOCs, and Why. Harvard Business Review.

Uwagi

Opracowanie rekordu ze środków MNiSW, umowa Nr 461252 w ramach programu "Społeczna odpowiedzialność nauki" - moduł: Popularyzacja nauki i promocja sportu (2021).